Search results

This was typical of most early jets. The Soviet MiG-15 could fly for only about thirty minutes. And the initial charging process was just about as bad as winding up a rubberband. Likewise, the engine had to be frequently changed. I suspect a lot of it had to do with the poor quality metals...

I don't know, what do you think? Looks to me like the hand of god holding a basketball between his thumb and index finger.

It's quite simple David my man. If you don't have any proof then you have no way of knowing that it exists in the first place. If you can't prove it, then how do you know it's real? You don't. Why, then, do you believe it? Because you want to. Because you have an emotional need to believe...

The world economic situation is very scary and I keep thinking we're just trying various ways to avoid thinking about it. But the bottomline is our system is not working and hasn't been for quite a while. Throwing money at it may only make matters worse. I resist buying into end-of-the-world...

proving it This sort of debate really isn't a waste of time. Wallowing in the mystery is. Let's say you want to prove that you can go back in time. We've already bantered back and forth about that on these boards. Take for instance my post about the need for information/energy storage...

And that proves, what? That there is? And what proof do you have for that? Yeah, but I can find at least some evidence for them on Facebook or Twitter. And so that proves everything else?

No, I think you're right. This HAS got to be studied. But first, rule out the mundane, then move on to the exotic. But I get the sense that people all too readily skip over the more likely, less sexy explanations. And this seems to suggest underlying emotional needs to believe one way...

What civilization is that? You're presupposing that this civilization exists and that it is much older than we are. When was that proven? So, on the basis of this assumed civilization we can now have confidence that just about any whacky idea will ultimately be possible. Why? Because...

How would you propose that a new modality would help clarify the situation? This is a lot like debating a religion. In the end, I think we need to (honestly) ask ourselves why we believe. In the first century, people had: (1) emotional need to believe; (2) common unconscious store of...

Ordinarily, this is exactly what I would look for -- and frequently do in the case of abduction accounts. Is there some information that suggests contact with something beyond human experience? Of course, it depends upon the extent of your source information. In the case of the trinity...

Essentially, it is being said that scientific observation is too limited as a means for questioning the existence of something for which you have little (or no) basis for believing in the first place... Something you are largely proposing on the premise of fantasy or wish-fulfilment (or...

Nice effect! (Can't help but be reminded of that chest buster creature from Alien.) It certainly brings to mind a lot of funny possibilities.

If you spent your career in aviation research (or the like), this is very likely the sort of fish-tale you would tell. Living on a retirement annuity and having someone come along and offer you a public platform for your fish-tale -- one that just might result in a book or movie deal -- why...

Maybe he could interest M. Night Shyamalan in it. Shyamalan certainly needs to start looking at other people's scripts. Speaking of which, what happened to that guy? He was doing so well until he began fixating on Ron Howard's daughter.

That's the problem. You have no "facts on hand." This is why mainstream science generally ignors you. The fact that a minor industry has emerged in (frequently self-published) books on the paranormal does not constitute proof of anything. In another thread, you assured me that you can...

DavidRavenMoon : You are demonstrating a clear emotional need. I'm sorry that you cannot see how that colors your logic and alters your sense of reality. This is, as I said, the formula for religion.

Credible evidence is evidence that in the strongest probability can only be interpretted one way. Eyewitness testimony is the weakest of all evidence (for reasons I've already stated) and especially when that testimony is in conflict with scientific evidence (which I've outlined) that can be...

Really? Can you recall the first moment you became certain? What was it that convinced you?

I get the impression that there is a presumption being made here. :shy: It is assumed that if someone reads what "I" did, then how could they not come to the same conclusions about it -- how could they not also be convinced? So, they must not have read it. I study the subject and arrive at...