“"Pope Francis is saying, more clearly than ever before, that Christ offered himself as a sacrifice for everyone. That's always been a Christian belief." That's not exactly what the historical record shows...
But, I'm rather pleased by this new pontiff ecumenicalism.”
Richard McRae on May 24, 2013 at 20:04:17
“Since when have they worried about scientific accuracy?”
“Since when the belief in alien life AUTOMATICALLY excludes the belief in God?
If you study the history of the Contactee movement, you'll see that many people claiming to be in contact with the Space Brothers were also deeply spiritual, and followed all sorts of religious practices, both Eastern and Western.
I also happen to agree with Macdonald-Radcliff in that exclusively interpreting the phenomenon with the narrowness of the ETH is problematic, the same way it would be to interpret UFOs and aliens as either angelic messengers or the minions of Satan, I might add”
“>" If, and only if, these three possible explanations can be ruled out, then, and only then, should we bring up the more exotic possibilities."
But who decides when the 'possible explanations' can be ruled out?
Even when you have trained observers like Air Force pilots or military personnel that go on the record with their rendezvous with unknown phenomena that defy conventional explanations, you then hear the 'professional skeptics' reiterate how human perception can be terribly deceptive; and they put so much emphasis on this that a normal individual should be scared forever to get on board a plane, piloted by a bumbling idiot who might mistake a flock of geese with silver-shaped discs, or column of clouds with a mountain.
Pointing out hoaxes are on the rise is just telling one part of the story.”
“You're right. But hoaxes are not the only thing propelling the 'fakelore'. There's also the dismissive attitude of the 'skeptic' community refusing to take seriously any evidence they're presented with. Along with picking on the 'easy catches', while shoving those pesky cases endure the armchair debunking under the rug.
I do believe the dismissive attitude of mainstream Science & government institutions has contributed to the proliferation of hoaxes you point out. If the public were more informed about what constitute good evidence, hoaxers would have less incentives to waste their time trying to fool a few gullible Youtubers.”
“What makes *me* roll my eyes is how easily you deny validity to any kind of Fortean activity by focusing on the hoaxes, while dismissing the many cases where credible witnesses & interesting evidence was gathered.
So Roswell is a 'case closed' eh? Good thing to know! specially since Don Schmitt is still finding witnesses. But picking on Majestic 12 is the easy route. If you bothered to mention the Citizen Hearing on Disclosure, why not include the testimony of the military pilots who admitted to have witnesses anomalous phenomena? or the investigation the Brazilian Military undertook in the 1970s when citizens were scared of being attacked by the objects they called 'Chupas'? Did the people who suffered those attacks fake the injuries?
Tell me, did your hero Radford make the effort to investigate the Chupacabra cases reported *outside* Puerto Rico, and that are still happening to this day --like in Chile?
Of course hoaxes have turned more frequent, as has any distribution of information due to the nature of social networks. But so has the influx of reports that are harder to debunk. The MUFON website received an average of 140 reports on the year 2012 through their website. Oh but I'm sure ALL those reports are fakes, delusions & misidentifications, right?
Thank the Dust we have skeptics to be our gatekeepers of Sanity & Reason on the Interwebz! ;)”
thelousysloth on May 20, 2013 at 10:48:52
“I'm not sure why these options are unreasonable explanations for mysteries to you. We know people pull hoaxes. We know people have unstable mental moments. We know people misidentify things. These should always be the first possible answers we look to. If, and only if, these three possible explanations can be ruled out, then, and only then, should we bring up the more exotic possibilities.”
hp blogger Sharon Hill on May 15, 2013 at 15:25:52
“Defensive much, RPJ?
Someone has to call a hoax a hoax. There is no disputing hoaxes exist.”
“>"Yes a modern-day Galileo may be out there with paradigm-shifting ideas that will at some point overturn huge pieces of existing science. But he or she should expect to face a robust standard of proof before their ideas take hold"
Well, Russell Targ, a physicist who was the co-founder of the SRI ESP study with Hal Puthoff in the 1970s, has amassed a lot of evidence supporting the reality of Remote Viewing —which is the reason why the C.I.A. supported the program for so many years— evidence he collected in his book The Reality of ESP: A Physicist's Proof of Psychic Abilities.
Targ says there's more scientific evidence for ESP than there is of the clinical benefits of aspirin for the treatment of cardiac conditions.
And yet TEDxWestHollywood, who prepared an event next Monday & invited Mr. Targ to speak in it, had their TEDx license revoked by you & your colleagues, Mr. Anderson.
So I think it's plain & clear here that as the TED brand has grown increasingly larger —and presumably more profitable— that you're following the trend of big companies/studios/movements who were once Maverick-like in their beginnings, but figured out that now is better not to rock the boat too much, lest they scare off their respectful sponsors.”
Cole 33 on Apr 22, 2013 at 16:13:28
“"Well, Russell Targ, a physicist who was the co-founder of the SRI ESP study with Hal Puthoff in the 1970s, has amassed a lot of evidence supporting the reality of Remote Viewing —which is the reason why the C.I.A. supported the program for so many years"
And DROPPED the program precisely because it lead nowhere......”
atlfreethinker on Apr 20, 2013 at 09:40:56
“None of this, even if true, means that TED has to support it or spread it. So TED misses out! Whats the big deal? TED doesnt decide what is true or what is verifiable. Remote viewing hasnt gone mainstream because the results cannot be reliably reproduced. If I were a decision maker in the TED organization I would do the same thing they are doing now. Chopra and their ilk make money off these ideas and that make me very suspicious of them.”
taoistpunk on Apr 20, 2013 at 03:14:05
“so your argument is based on the ted talk that promoted aspirin? I guess I missed that one...”