4 ms·

We absolutely have evidence that Joe Biden is not a pod person (just not absolutely "proof"). No one has ever demonstrated the existence of pod people (assuming

We absolutely have evidence that Joe Biden is not a pod person (just not absolutely "proof"). No one has ever demonstrated the existence of pod people (assuming that by "pod person" you mean 1950's-esque scifi comics pod people), and we've seen lots of evidence that Joe Biden is a human. Since we know humans exist, but we don't have any reason to believe that pod people exists, that does serve as evidence that Joe Biden is not a pod person. I feel like you're purposefully conflating terms here.

WalterBright 5y ago
> I feel like you're purposefully conflating terms here. Not at all. But go ahead and believe those fuzzy blobs (pictures of UFOs are somehow always fuzzy blobs) are aliens if you like. Do you know why the UFO pictures are always fuzzy blobs? Because if they were clear pictures, we'd recognize they are birds/balloons/drones/Venus/whatever.
- tombert 5y ago
  > But go ahead and believe those fuzzy blobs (pictures of UFOs are somehow always fuzzy blobs) are aliens if you like. I think you might have gotten your usernames mixed up. I said I don't think they're aliens. I don't disagree with you, I think every case of "alien" sightings are probably either camera artifacts or experimental aircrafts or people not knowing about how plane lights work.
  - WalterBright 5y ago
    Do you think this merits credulous attention from "serious" news media? Maybe, if they put it in their "Today's Horoscope" section. After all, can't rule out astrology being true, either.
    - tombert 5y ago
      > After all, can't rule out astrology being true, either. It can (and has) actually. Whenever astrology has been tested, it has failed to hold any predictive properties. As such, it can be ruled out. You know this, because if you didn't then you wouldn't have used astrology as an example. > Do you think this merits credulous attention from "serious" news media? "Merits" is a loaded term and I don't think either of us are qualified to know what that means, but I'll take a shot at it. This was an officially requested report by government officials that was requested by congress and a sizable chunk of the public. The report was released. People are interested in what the report has to say. If the news is there to report on what people find interesting, it certainly has met that criteria. Now, what differentiates this from something like "The Weekly World News"? I think mostly who requested and released the report. This wasn't just some quack on Joe Rogan or Twitter or something, this was the United States Military: the most powerful and most-funded military on the planet. I really do not think this is hard to parse, but just to be clear, here's an example: If I broke my leg tomorrow, and CNN reported on it, I would think "jeez, must be a slow news day". If Joe Biden broke his leg tomorrow, it would not be weird at all for CNN to report on it.
      - WalterBright 5y ago
        > it has failed to hold any predictive properties And so has the UFOs are aliens theory. CNN isn't just reporting it, they're reporting it as credible. In fact, a "sizable chunk of the public" being interested in this is precisely because CNN (and some others) are reporting it as credible. Welcome to CNN creating news, not just reporting it.
        gfodor 5y ago
        You do realize that CNN has been ridiculing this stuff for its entire history, right? This isn't really a "fake news" type of situation, since arguably the fake news was the ridicule.
        WalterBright 5y ago
        Not lately, they are not ridiculing it. They are treating it as a credible theory. CNN used to actually run news, too.
        tombert 5y ago
        Again, and I don't mean to be patronizing but this really should not be confusing, it's the source of the data. Is CNN irresponsible for presenting it as credible? I mean, I don't know, maybe, but the source isn't a quack from Twitter, it's congress and the military. What is CNN supposed to do, title their headline as "A bunch of bozos in the military think aliens are real LOLOLOL!!!!"?
        WalterBright 5y ago
        > Is CNN irresponsible for presenting it as credible? Yes. Does CNN brag about following the science? Yes. Is CNN following the science here? Nope. > What is CNN supposed to do, title their headline as "A bunch of bozos in the military think aliens are real LOLOLOL!!!!"? For news that's not credible, yes. That is, if CNN itself wants to have any credibility. For some perspective, CNN pretty much labeled everything the President of the United States said in the last 5 years as a lie. They're hardly afraid of doing that. > I don't mean to be patronizing You shouldn't believe everything authority figures tell you. UFOs are aliens should be pegging your bullshit detector.

WalterBright 5y ago

> I feel like you're purposefully conflating terms here. Not at all. But go ahead and believe those fuzzy blobs (pictures of UFOs are somehow always fuzzy blobs) are aliens if you like. Do you know why the UFO pictures are always fuzzy blobs? Because if they were clear pictures, we'd recognize they are birds/balloons/drones/Venus/whatever.

tombert 5y ago
> But go ahead and believe those fuzzy blobs (pictures of UFOs are somehow always fuzzy blobs) are aliens if you like. I think you might have gotten your usernames mixed up. I said I don't think they're aliens. I don't disagree with you, I think every case of "alien" sightings are probably either camera artifacts or experimental aircrafts or people not knowing about how plane lights work.
- WalterBright 5y ago
  Do you think this merits credulous attention from "serious" news media? Maybe, if they put it in their "Today's Horoscope" section. After all, can't rule out astrology being true, either.
  - tombert 5y ago
    > After all, can't rule out astrology being true, either. It can (and has) actually. Whenever astrology has been tested, it has failed to hold any predictive properties. As such, it can be ruled out. You know this, because if you didn't then you wouldn't have used astrology as an example. > Do you think this merits credulous attention from "serious" news media? "Merits" is a loaded term and I don't think either of us are qualified to know what that means, but I'll take a shot at it. This was an officially requested report by government officials that was requested by congress and a sizable chunk of the public. The report was released. People are interested in what the report has to say. If the news is there to report on what people find interesting, it certainly has met that criteria. Now, what differentiates this from something like "The Weekly World News"? I think mostly who requested and released the report. This wasn't just some quack on Joe Rogan or Twitter or something, this was the United States Military: the most powerful and most-funded military on the planet. I really do not think this is hard to parse, but just to be clear, here's an example: If I broke my leg tomorrow, and CNN reported on it, I would think "jeez, must be a slow news day". If Joe Biden broke his leg tomorrow, it would not be weird at all for CNN to report on it.
    - WalterBright 5y ago
      > it has failed to hold any predictive properties And so has the UFOs are aliens theory. CNN isn't just reporting it, they're reporting it as credible. In fact, a "sizable chunk of the public" being interested in this is precisely because CNN (and some others) are reporting it as credible. Welcome to CNN creating news, not just reporting it.
      - gfodor 5y ago
        You do realize that CNN has been ridiculing this stuff for its entire history, right? This isn't really a "fake news" type of situation, since arguably the fake news was the ridicule.
        WalterBright 5y ago
        Not lately, they are not ridiculing it. They are treating it as a credible theory. CNN used to actually run news, too.
      - tombert 5y ago
        Again, and I don't mean to be patronizing but this really should not be confusing, it's the source of the data. Is CNN irresponsible for presenting it as credible? I mean, I don't know, maybe, but the source isn't a quack from Twitter, it's congress and the military. What is CNN supposed to do, title their headline as "A bunch of bozos in the military think aliens are real LOLOLOL!!!!"?
        WalterBright 5y ago
        > Is CNN irresponsible for presenting it as credible? Yes. Does CNN brag about following the science? Yes. Is CNN following the science here? Nope. > What is CNN supposed to do, title their headline as "A bunch of bozos in the military think aliens are real LOLOLOL!!!!"? For news that's not credible, yes. That is, if CNN itself wants to have any credibility. For some perspective, CNN pretty much labeled everything the President of the United States said in the last 5 years as a lie. They're hardly afraid of doing that. > I don't mean to be patronizing You shouldn't believe everything authority figures tell you. UFOs are aliens should be pegging your bullshit detector.