3 ms·

> We will never find invisible pink elephants secretly using mind control to backseat govern whole human population! Unless we start searching for them! > If 2

> We will never find invisible pink elephants secretly using mind control to backseat govern whole human population! Unless we start searching for them! > If 20% of national gdp is not enough to find them it means we are not searching hard enough and we will keep increasing the funding until we catch those pesky elephants. /s > You are using same logic. What you are doing is called a strawman argument. You spin the other person's words into whichever caricature you find easiest to dismiss, and make fun of them. Instead of, you know, actually trying to understand what the other person may be saying and treating them with some respect and curiosity. If you have something constructive to say, I will be happy to continue this conversation. For now, this will do.

me_me_me 3y ago
its called ad absurdum. I used exactly your position and only replaced 'illusive alien' with 'illusive invisible elephant'. >What you are doing is called a strawman argument As a matter of fact you created a strawman - a UFO. And now you demand that others have to prove you wrong. Or take it seriously. you are also using Pascal Wager - in case UFOs/aliens exists we need to act as if they are real. >If you have something constructive to say I do believe the second part of my reply was constructive. The part that ask serious question (the part you omitted from your response).
- david-gpu 3y ago
  > its called ad absurdum. I used exactly your position and only replaced 'illusive alien' with 'illusive invisible elephant'. It is literally a strawman argument. > As a matter of fact you created a strawman - a UFO. And now you demand that others have to prove you wrong. I have done neither of those two things. > I do believe the second part of my reply was constructive. The part that ask serious question (the part you omitted from your response). You can't ridicule somebody, put words in their mouth, and then expect to have a meaningful conversation with them. You could have approached this conversation in good faith from the beginning and have a sincere exchange of ideas. But just for the sake of turning the other cheek, here's an honest reply. > Also. You are advanced race capable of (at least) interstellar travel. You mastered engineering, physics and biology to survive traveling to distant solar system, however your spacecrafts keep crashing in atmosphere of Earth. And those that dont crash just fly around aimlessly spooking native monkeys. If there were monkeys living in Mars they would also ask themselves: if Earthlings are an advanced race capable of (at least) interplanetary travel, if they have mastered engineering, physics and biology to survive traveling to distant planets, however your spacecrafts keep crashing in the atmosphere of Mars. And those that don't crash just roll around aimlessly spooking native monkeys. This is what an analogy looks like. I did not stretch your words into a caricature. I tried to understand your argument in good faith and presented an alternative. I did not ridicule you or your ideas. I showed respect and curiosity. Now, let's continue. If there are crafts in Earth created by a non-human intelligence, how do we know where they came from? Why jump to the conclusion that they must come from a different star? Next, why assume that if they did come from another star then their craft must be infallible? Our current technology would blow the minds of anybody living a thousand years ago -- but is it flawless? Does your car never break down? Do airplanes never crash? After that is the question of: if there are retrieved craft, did they crash by themselves? Or were they shot down? A stone thrown at a modern helicopter can crash it, why would it be impossible for an air-to-air missile to down a UFO? Were any of the UFOs intentionally left intact to be retrieved? None of the ideas you presented are new. Anybody with an interest in UFOs has asked themselves the same questions, and many others that probably haven't even occurred to you yet. Yet many of us remain curious and open-minded, because while mundane explanations can be found, the more you look into the subject the more evidence you discover and the more questions it brings. We are not imbeciles. It is not possible to learn something new if we start from the assumption that there can't possibly be anything there for us to learn in the first place.
  - me_me_me 3y ago
    wow, just wow. Goodluck with your search pal.

me_me_me 3y ago

its called ad absurdum. I used exactly your position and only replaced 'illusive alien' with 'illusive invisible elephant'. >What you are doing is called a strawman argument As a matter of fact you created a strawman - a UFO. And now you demand that others have to prove you wrong. Or take it seriously. you are also using Pascal Wager - in case UFOs/aliens exists we need to act as if they are real. >If you have something constructive to say I do believe the second part of my reply was constructive. The part that ask serious question (the part you omitted from your response).

david-gpu 3y ago
> its called ad absurdum. I used exactly your position and only replaced 'illusive alien' with 'illusive invisible elephant'. It is literally a strawman argument. > As a matter of fact you created a strawman - a UFO. And now you demand that others have to prove you wrong. I have done neither of those two things. > I do believe the second part of my reply was constructive. The part that ask serious question (the part you omitted from your response). You can't ridicule somebody, put words in their mouth, and then expect to have a meaningful conversation with them. You could have approached this conversation in good faith from the beginning and have a sincere exchange of ideas. But just for the sake of turning the other cheek, here's an honest reply. > Also. You are advanced race capable of (at least) interstellar travel. You mastered engineering, physics and biology to survive traveling to distant solar system, however your spacecrafts keep crashing in atmosphere of Earth. And those that dont crash just fly around aimlessly spooking native monkeys. If there were monkeys living in Mars they would also ask themselves: if Earthlings are an advanced race capable of (at least) interplanetary travel, if they have mastered engineering, physics and biology to survive traveling to distant planets, however your spacecrafts keep crashing in the atmosphere of Mars. And those that don't crash just roll around aimlessly spooking native monkeys. This is what an analogy looks like. I did not stretch your words into a caricature. I tried to understand your argument in good faith and presented an alternative. I did not ridicule you or your ideas. I showed respect and curiosity. Now, let's continue. If there are crafts in Earth created by a non-human intelligence, how do we know where they came from? Why jump to the conclusion that they must come from a different star? Next, why assume that if they did come from another star then their craft must be infallible? Our current technology would blow the minds of anybody living a thousand years ago -- but is it flawless? Does your car never break down? Do airplanes never crash? After that is the question of: if there are retrieved craft, did they crash by themselves? Or were they shot down? A stone thrown at a modern helicopter can crash it, why would it be impossible for an air-to-air missile to down a UFO? Were any of the UFOs intentionally left intact to be retrieved? None of the ideas you presented are new. Anybody with an interest in UFOs has asked themselves the same questions, and many others that probably haven't even occurred to you yet. Yet many of us remain curious and open-minded, because while mundane explanations can be found, the more you look into the subject the more evidence you discover and the more questions it brings. We are not imbeciles. It is not possible to learn something new if we start from the assumption that there can't possibly be anything there for us to learn in the first place.
- me_me_me 3y ago
  wow, just wow. Goodluck with your search pal.