5 ms·

> Except you're the one with the extraordinary claim, that's my whole point. That's not a point, that's playground "nuh-uh, you stink" level of debate. >http

> Except you're the one with the extraordinary claim, that's my whole point. That's not a point, that's playground "nuh-uh, you stink" level of debate. >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_reported_UFO_sightings https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_reported_UFO_sightings That page goes on and on Yes. That page lists sighting of Unidentified Flying Objects. The clue is right there in the name. It's things we haven't identified. "We saw some weird lights in the sky" does not by any measure equate to "there is no time or culture in the history of the world where humans have not been in contact with some kind of "otherworldly" intelligence." > Wikipedia is no higher a bar than Youtube. Wikipedia has its problems, but it's an order of magnitude higher a bar than Youtube. Wikipedia has editors and citations.

carapace 6y ago
Let's take a step back. I feel like we're inadvertently trolling each other. > > Except you're the one with the extraordinary claim, that's my whole point. > That's not a point, that's playground "nuh-uh, you stink" level of debate. No, that's my actual point: Your idea that we are totally alone is newfangled. It's new. It's recent. I'm not actually trying to convince you that "UFOs are real" whatever that would mean. (If I had proof I wouldn't share it: as I said originally, I think we're in quarantine. Forcing people to confront their neighbors before we're ready would be inhumane. Thus the "Great Silence" or whatever you want to call it.) And you don't seem at all interested in changing your view anyway. > Wikipedia has its problems, but it's an order of magnitude higher a bar than Youtube. Wikipedia has editors and citations. Wikipedia is not more authoritative than reality. In this case the video in question is of the primary source, the actual guy who interviewed the Major, reporting on what he learned. The Wikipedia entry doesn't include this new information. But again, I'm not actually trying to convince you. I'm just pointing out that the idea that we haven't had interactions with "little green men" of various kinds is a new idea and that it says more about the person who believes that idea, that they believe that idea, than it does about the contents of the real world, where, in fact, lots of people do not believe that idea and many have had experiences that have contradicted that idea.

carapace 6y ago

Let's take a step back. I feel like we're inadvertently trolling each other. > > Except you're the one with the extraordinary claim, that's my whole point. > That's not a point, that's playground "nuh-uh, you stink" level of debate. No, that's my actual point: Your idea that we are totally alone is newfangled. It's new. It's recent. I'm not actually trying to convince you that "UFOs are real" whatever that would mean. (If I had proof I wouldn't share it: as I said originally, I think we're in quarantine. Forcing people to confront their neighbors before we're ready would be inhumane. Thus the "Great Silence" or whatever you want to call it.) And you don't seem at all interested in changing your view anyway. > Wikipedia has its problems, but it's an order of magnitude higher a bar than Youtube. Wikipedia has editors and citations. Wikipedia is not more authoritative than reality. In this case the video in question is of the primary source, the actual guy who interviewed the Major, reporting on what he learned. The Wikipedia entry doesn't include this new information. But again, I'm not actually trying to convince you. I'm just pointing out that the idea that we haven't had interactions with "little green men" of various kinds is a new idea and that it says more about the person who believes that idea, that they believe that idea, than it does about the contents of the real world, where, in fact, lots of people do not believe that idea and many have had experiences that have contradicted that idea.