A
Anonymous
Guest
Or should it be skeptic or debunker. I'm always nervous about those terms and when to use them.
Its bugged me for years when we hear about the need for convincing evidence because I have no idea what that would be.
I don't see any piece of video or eye witness accounts ever being convincing. Neither are alleged landing marks etc or other physical traces. People who's story can't be disproved are often described as "well meaning but misguided individuals"
Apart from such a person experiencing it directly for themelves is there anything that would convince such a person.
Surely there is a chance howver slight than someone somewhere might be telling it just as it really happened? (whatever "really is"). I've come to believe that in many instances in many aspects of Forteana (not just UFO's) skeptical investigators are more interested in finding a way to discredit the story and have no intention of ever accepting it as even being capable of being true. When I hear people talking about "accepting someone genuinely believed they saw something or whatever" my heart sinks because it is obvious the mind has already been made up that whatever did happen it wasn't what the witness said it was.
I've no problem with alternative sceptical solutions but I wish I believed the intention was to find the truth as far as possible rather than to explain away at all costs. I guess its the refusal to accept the possibility that rankles.
Its bugged me for years when we hear about the need for convincing evidence because I have no idea what that would be.
I don't see any piece of video or eye witness accounts ever being convincing. Neither are alleged landing marks etc or other physical traces. People who's story can't be disproved are often described as "well meaning but misguided individuals"
Apart from such a person experiencing it directly for themelves is there anything that would convince such a person.
Surely there is a chance howver slight than someone somewhere might be telling it just as it really happened? (whatever "really is"). I've come to believe that in many instances in many aspects of Forteana (not just UFO's) skeptical investigators are more interested in finding a way to discredit the story and have no intention of ever accepting it as even being capable of being true. When I hear people talking about "accepting someone genuinely believed they saw something or whatever" my heart sinks because it is obvious the mind has already been made up that whatever did happen it wasn't what the witness said it was.
I've no problem with alternative sceptical solutions but I wish I believed the intention was to find the truth as far as possible rather than to explain away at all costs. I guess its the refusal to accept the possibility that rankles.