Dealing with the Mockers

[Spectre73]

On occasion the subjects discussed in the paracast come up in conversion.

My interest in said topics is not something I hide but it has at times been met with "You believe in UFOs" haha etc. Please ...

I would never mock someone's interests. The last time it was from a guy who was into his "Science" in a big way and proceeded to be condescending for the duration of the conversation

How do you guys deal with such people ?

 

[Gene Lionberg]

Ask them to explain their position in enough detail to illustrate why it disproves your beliefs. I bet they can't do it, it is much more difficult to prove a negative than a positive.

I Love You,
Gene Lionberg

 

[Ron Away]

On occasion the subjects discussed in the paracast come up in conversion.

My interest in said topics is not something I hide but it has at times been met with "You believe in UFOs" haha etc. Please ...

I would never mock someone's interests. The last time it was from a guy who was into his "Science" in a big way and proceeded to be condescending for the duration of the conversation

How do you guys deal with such people ?

I usually ask them what they know about the subject.Generally they know nothing beyond the X-Files and Roswell.The result being they either engage in an interesting discussion or usually (unfortunately)their eyes glaze over they check their phones and wander off to watch the X factor!.

 

[Randall]

On occasion the subjects discussed in the paracast come up in conversion.

My interest in said topics is not something I hide but it has at times been met with "You believe in UFOs" haha etc. Please ...

I would never mock someone's interests. The last time it was from a guy who was into his "Science" in a big way and proceeded to be condescending for the duration of the conversation

How do you guys deal with such people ?

This is a bit unconventional, but it comes from a lot of experience. Like any other battle, you've got to be able to take the punches as well as dish them out, so ya gotta have a thick skin for starters, and that takes exposure, so the first thing is: Be prepared to be mocked and to laugh along to some extent. Learn to let it slide like water off a ducks back. Then when it comes to UFOs and science, the first clean punch to throw back at them is: 1: Readily admit that at the present time there is no publicly verifiable material scientifically valid evidence sufficient to prove the existence of alien visitation, and that most reports turn out to be something other than UFOs. Then point out that at the same time: 2: There is nothing unscientific about the possibility of interstellar travel or extraterrestrial life, and 3: Not all evidence has to be material or scientific in order for a claim to be reasonable or true.

The simple facts above serve three main purposes. First it removes any wind from their sails because you admit to defeat according to conventional scientific standards. Secondly, it removes the argument from the realm of magic and the supernatural. Thirdly, it opens up avenues for considering how reasonable it is to believe the other evidence, which is massive. The next thing they'll typically say is that it's too far for ET aliens to get here, to which you can ask them how far away they think the nearest star system is ( chances are they won't know ), but even if they do, it's still only around 4 light years which means ET aliens might not even need warp drive or really long lifespans.

If the skeptic is actually still interested in continuing the discussion after that, you can discuss the nature of the other evidence and how despite the claims of the skeptics, human perception and memory is not nearly as bad as they claim. That gets a bit complex, but you can start with the stimulus response, which is a scientific fact. Then there are the radar/visual cases, and on and on it goes. The best strategy is to be reasonably well informed about ufology, the related hard sciences, the skeptical arguments, and what the exceptions are to their objections.

Also, don't get caught in the "U in UFO means Unidentified" or the ufology = pseudoscience traps. Those are a cheap tricks by skeptics who try to use their own self serving and inaccurate definitions to confuse and cloud the issues. Bear in mind that the USAF, which created the term, defined the word UFO in AFR 200-2 in such a way as to be reasonably sure that the witness observed or detected the object with sufficient clarity to rule out virtually all known natural and man made objects or phenomena, and that consequently the only remaining possibilities are extremely exotic, and in many cases can be ruled out completely. So for the purpose of discussion and debate, the word UFO is defined simply as: "alien craft", possibly but not necessarily of extraterrestrial origin, and therefore vague lights off in the distance do not qualify as UFOs. So don't try to claim that they do.

Remember that ufology is not a science, it's a field of interest and study, and therefore because you aren't claiming it's a science, it cannot be called pseudoscience. That's because pseudoscience is defined in such as way that the subject matter must first be claimed by its practitioners to be a science, and then fail to meet accepted scientific standards before it qualifies as pseudoscience. By categorizing ufology as a field more closely associated with history and culture than science, the claim that it is science is never made, but the subject matter can still be treated seriously, and science can still be applied when it is appropriate.

And there are of course websites out there devoted to this. Search for and check them out e.g. Introduction

Use their own tactics against them! Skeptical debate is a good tool for exploring topics and ferreting out the truth!

​

 

[Spectre73]

Superb stuff Ufology

 

[Waller]

1: Readily admit that at the present time there is no publicly verifiable material scientifically valid evidence sufficient to prove the existence of alien visitation, and that most reports turn out to be something other than UFOs. Then point out that at the same time: 2: There is nothing unscientific about the possibility of interstellar travel or extraterrestrial life, and 3: Not all evidence has to be material or scientific in order for a claim to be reasonable or true.

Or you could wait until no later than 2018 and have the undeniable evidence that you seek.

http://www.inwardquest.com/question...ncing-evidence-that-alien-civilizations-exist

 

[Mr. Fibuli]

Or you could wait until no later than 2018 and have the undeniable evidence that you seek.

http://www.inwardquest.com/question...ncing-evidence-that-alien-civilizations-exist

Tut tut..what would Corey Goode have to say about this.

 

[Randall]

Or you could wait until no later than 2018 and have the undeniable evidence that you seek.

http://www.inwardquest.com/question...ncing-evidence-that-alien-civilizations-exist

Interesting, and I thought 2018 was the coming zombie apocalypse .

 

[SheaOlmsford]

I suggest that in the popular mind UFO = flying saucer. They equate flying saucer with the funny cartoons they've seen in magazines and newspapers, and all the 'crazy" people (like contactees in the 50's who described beautiful Venusian women with large busts and bee hive hair styles). In other words, the public at large sees an interest in UFOS as synonymous with the most crazy hoaxes and delusional people that the media loves to publicize to degrade the topic.

So you may wish to acknowledge UPFRONT that there is a large amount of nonsense associated with the topic of UFOs. For example, whenever I chance upon the ANCIENT ALIENS TV show, I start yelling at the screen because the show makes so many false equivalencies and is just plain wrong!

Most of the UFO oriented shows your peers may have seen on TV are perhaps predominantly presented as entertainment, and tend to focus on the most extreme and demeaning cases, e.g., "I was told by aliens that I am their Embassador to Planet Earth. I now Channel Qwankor, the leader of the Galactic Federation." I believe that abductions do occur. Unfortunately, I have also heard many abductees in the media who combine this topic with New Age platitudes, astrology, reincarnation, soul walk-ins and channeling. Even I write these people off as non-credible.

You need to verbally distance yourself from all the carnival aspects of Ufology and take control of the conversation. You need to define what you mean by a UFO and divorce this from all the wild conjecture. Then you need to describe what you find interesting about it, being sure to set the boundaries of what you consider legitimate (since the field of ufology is full of crackpots, to be quite frank). Good luck.

 

[Waller]

Waller said: ↑
Or you could wait until no later than 2018 and have the undeniable evidence that you seek.

http://www.inwardquest.com/question...ncing-evidence-that-alien-civilizations-exist

Tut tut..what would Corey Goode have to say about this.

Interesting, and I thought 2018 was the coming zombie apocalypse .

I don't keep up with Mr. Goode but I am aware that the exopolitical groups jump on the next and nearest super secret <insert whatever> bandwagon without the least bit of due diligence. Bashar has a 30+ year history of publicly available material which can be used to check consistency, predictions and sincerity. By percentages, few who are involved in the banter about UFOs, alien withdrawals, mutilations and other related topics ever take that opportunity.

I find zombies insincere.

 

[Mr. Fibuli]

I was just being sassy. My stance on all of this is that I'm agnostic. I enjoy learning about the different predictions, but I'm skeptical about precognition.

 

[Waller]

I was just being sassy. My stance on all of this is that I'm agnostic. I enjoy learning about the different predictions, but I'm skeptical about precognition.

Damn well should be.

The ET community through their channels are delivering very specific, completely accountable information about the future of the human and ET races. IOW, they are telling us X will happen within Y time frame and it will be impossible for anyone on this planet, aside from the criminally skeptical, to deny their input, existence, intentions, first contact, etc.

So the 'truthseeking' Paracast community does what with this? They ignore it and chase infrared images, lights in the sky, and endlessly argue about the validity of such.

 

[Mr. Fibuli]

I agree the information is specific, but how it it accountable? Sure, if X comes true in Y timeframe, or something close (so if ET contacts us, I'm presuming-hell even if the timing is off it'd still be good enough) then anyone who diagreed with the evidence of the ET contact right in front of everyone's noses would be criminally skeptical.
But...being skeptical of this information now is very reasonable because it's not 2018, and one would have to take on faith or believe the information based on the word of the 'ET community'. Especially someone who has never personally had any encounters with evidence pointing to any definite future ET contact being a foregone conclusion.

 

[Waller]

I agree the information is specific, but how it it accountable?

I shall assist you. Let's take this simple statement.

"2015 - 2017 - Humanity, as a whole, will know for a fact that other life exists elsewhere other than Earth"

Accountable? I see 100% accountability.

But...being skeptical of this information now is very reasonable because it's not 2018, and one would have to take on faith or believe the information based on the word of the 'ET community'. Especially someone who has never personally had any encounters with evidence pointing to any definite future ET contact being a foregone conclusion.

Wait and see. Fair?

 

[Mr. Fibuli]

No, totally! That's exactly what I'm saying. It'd be a lot more interesting if that comes true. I just see it as possible not probable. Just based on my own perspective.

 

[Spectre73]

What do we make of statements from those held in high esteem such as stephen hawking?

I'm paraphrasing here.

UFOs appear only to cranks and weirdos...??

Micah Hanks mentioned this in the last episode in fact

 

[Mr. Fibuli]

What do we make of statements from those held in high esteem such as stephen hawking?

I'm paraphrasing here.

UFOs appear only to cranks and weirdos...??

Micah Hanks mentioned this in the last episode in fact

That sounds like pomposity to me. And it feels really good on a base level to talk crap about someone else. Just because I've never seen a UFO or whatever, I don't presume that I'm mighty and wise enough know and therefore discount peoples' experiences. If there's no evidence, I think reservation of judgement is the best course. Or, if everyone is ok with it some good old-fashioned ridicule can be fun. But only if it's in the spirit of fun.

 

[Mr. Fibuli]

PS Sorry, I'm not as erudite as a lot of posters on the forum. Sometimes I read my posts and I wonder if anyone can read through my half-baked writing. Also I can be very silly and I don't mean to bring down the tone of the threads which I take seriously, I just try to have fun. I act the same way IRL and I know people find me annoying sometimes.