Quote:

---

thoughts said:
I dont know what it is.
But it's aliens.

---

Quote:

---

thoughts said:
Sorry man, you can't use the water droplets or moth argument on this one.

---

Of course I can't, its the surface of the sun, and those arguments would be illogical.

However, high energy plasma (the stuff that the sun is made of) interacting with extremely strong and constantly changing magnetic field lines can and do produce these types of phenomena on the surface of the sun on a regular basis.

The fact that some person saw a rabbit-shaped cloud and posted a video of it labeled "GIANT WHITE RABBIT JUMPING INTO UPPER ATMOSPHERE", coupled with the fact that you don't have the common sense to realize that its just a cloud, does not make said cloud a giant flying white rabbit.

But then again....maybe

Quote:

---

Show me some proof to back up your claims that it's not a regular, natural occurence.
If it's so uncommon there must be tons of qualified and distinguished individuals in the scientific community who are really worked up about it.

Unless youre just acting like you know wtf you're talking about when youre in fact clueless again.

---

         


You must have forgotten that you are the one making claims that these videos are "evidence" that reality deviates from the majority opinion of the scientific community, the group that is most qualified to determine whether observed phenomena are natural in origin or are resulting from the actions of an alien civilization.

Since it is you who has deviated from the majority opinion, the burden of proof lies with you. If you can prove (even theoretically) that all natural explanations of this phenomena are not sufficient to explain it, and provide strong evidence that an object was actually present in that dark area of the corona and that it is a manufactured object...then maybe you'll get a little more attention.

And "nope" does not hold much weight as a counter-argument among the scientific community. This a classic way to get dismissed from consideration as someone who doesn't know how to formulate a logical argument. Maybe next time you should try taking a few more single words and arrange them into a sentence, and then take a few sentences and arrange them into a paragraph. You can then use this concept (human communication) to argue your point. It's difficult at first, but it's really quite useful.

Quote:

---

Amanita86 said:
That's like seeing someone stop at a gas station and thinking, we'll they must have passed by numerous gas stations to get to that one, why didnt they stop at any number of gas stations they passed before that one?

---

Yeah that hit me to after I posted it.

I'm still with Tyson and Hawking on the whole alien thing. I don't think they have ever been here and if any of the UFO's have ever come from another planet then there satellites or explorers like we have going to Mars just way more advanced. The reason if they go threw the trouble of going at least 8 light years to get here they wouldn't feel the need to hide from us and molest our cattle while making circles in our corn. With our position in the galaxy which is in the middle of fucking nowhere there gonna let us know there here. (I posted where I got that info from in one of Thoughts other threads) Then it isn't most likely going to work out well for us. Kind Of like the Europeans landing here didn't work out well for the Indians. I'm guessing if they visit us it won't be to give any us kind of technology esp if they look at what we use ours for. We put more of our own technology into killing each other then anything else.
Nope if they come here they want something and it won't be to be nice to us. You know the old they used up the natural resources on their planet and want ours type of thing. Either that or we are good ground up between a bun. Who knows what's really true it can be anything but I'll go with what the smartest guys on the planet say till the aliens land here.

Quote:

---

Amanita86 said:
That sounds like what a human would say.. anthropomorphism.  You can't say what they would be here for.  And who's to say anything about technology.. this last century has gotten, "outta this world maaaaan"..

Its ok to say you have no idea what the fuck is going on, is all Im saying.  Because on the grand scheme of things, you don't...  that's the only verifiable fact....

That space shit goes on forever.  Lots of little pockets to have things taking place.  Energy, matter, space...  fuckin trippy man.

---

And this is a form of brain lockup, where the fact that we can never truly verify anything other than our own thoughts causes one to completely ignore any empirical evidence while simultaneously refusing to logically reduce the probability of ludicrous ideas being true.

In order to progress as a species, we all must acknowledge that we can never 100% verify anything outside of the confines of our mind, and thus can never truly prove or disprove anything but the existence of our own thoughts. We must also acknowledge that drawing the conclusion that all future attempts at understanding the world outside of our mind is impossible, based on this fact, is a complete waste. We have proven that this is not the case in most cases outside of the quantum realm. We can analyze empirical data, conceive theories that are accurate enough to build the "out of this world" technology that you speak of, and continue honing our theoretical framework to more accurately match rhe empirical data of the world around us.

To use your argument in the way you are suggesting is technically correct, but IMHO is an excuse used to justify not putting effort into learning about the world around you, and instead directing effort into daydreaming about what could exist based on what we don't know, and then using your argument to convince yourself that we don't know anything.

This is fine for creative endeavors or entertainment, and can even be incorporated into the development of new and novel theories to explain the workings of the universe. But this type of thinking must also be incorporated with a matched effort looking into what is already known, how tightly the scientific community controls its "learning process" to ensure minimal error, and how basic logic and common intuition don't always line up.

It is an error to claim an alternate reality compared to the sum of human knowledge on the single verifiable fact that we can't truly know anything. One must present a logical proof of their opinion, and then provide a repeatable experiment that can back up their claims with empirical data in order to be considered seriously. Basic logic actually makes a lot of sense when you look into it and really think about it.

Sure, it can't 100% prove anything, but it provides a whole hell of a lot more confidence than wild and unsubstantiated claims with little to no logical argument and no evidence.

I'd personally love to find conclusive evidence of life beyond our planet. Conclusive evidence. This is why I learn as much as I can, and apply that knowledge (with a healthy amount of skepticism) to all of these UFO/ET claims.

So I guess I'm in there with Magash on this particular topic.