3 ms·
Let's stick to the facts, because you're speculating here: - There are UNIDENTIFIED flying objects - (it would seem that) the scientific consensus is "we woul
by gattilorenz 8y ago
Let's stick to the facts, because you're speculating here:
- There are UNIDENTIFIED flying objects
- (it would seem that) the scientific consensus is "we would like to investigate this, however we cannot"
- a small percentage of these UFOS are not explainable in conventional ways.
The rest are conjectures and speculations. Non-reproducibility is not the biggest issue, non-falsifiability is a bigger problem.
Scientists are saying: "we don't know, we should investigate, but we can't". You are saying: "they can't investigate, then it's obviously aliens"! I say they are Santa's little elves using camouflaged reindeer (this also explain the "flying lights": it's Rudolph's nose): prove my theory wrong.
TL;DR: if you can't scientifically study a phenomenon, or if no studies are done, science is not telling you what the phenomenon is. You can believe you know what that is, but it still just your belief.
- wefarrell 8y ago> You are saying: "they can't investigate, then it's obviously aliens"! You're putting words into my mouth. Nowhere have I said that scientists should investigate the extraterrestrial explanation of UFOs, they should investigate the phenomena without any preconceptions. > Scientists are saying: "we don't know, we should investigate, but we can't". They aren't saying that. They are saying there's a lack of funding and will. Take the time to read that article that I quoted: https://cosmosmagazine.com/space/why-we-should-take-ufo-sightings-seriously https://cosmosmagazine.com/space/why-we-should-take-ufo-sigh...