• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

"I have proved an alien UFO landed on earth, claims scientist

Logic and reason is logic and reason.

If you're going to throw that out of the window, you're not going to convince anybody.

Because that's just being delusional.

This is not a philosophical or academic debate.

Simply because you're just arguing from belief or emotion.

If you want to be listened by the scientific or academic community, then you have to not trigger their immune response.

One of the ways you don't trigger their immune response is by not shifting the burden of proof away from yourself.

If your assertion is that aliens are here, then prove it. You can't.

All you can prove is that unknown things are witnessed in the sky.

Photobucket.com now wants money for hosting embeded images, so I had to move them to flickr.com.

36161271945_80622feef8_b.jpg

study of 448 cases in MUFON's database, by Mark Rodeghier​

36161124725_c2ab309231_z.jpg


Yeah, you say LOGIC, I say the DATA.

Use any LOGIC you like, but explain the above two sets of statistical evidence. How can 448 witnesses in Mark Rodeghier's study, from 7 countries on the globe, over span of 80 years, before the age of internet communication, collectively agree about their car ignition disruption that fits inverse square law of electric field attenuation?

By "logic and reason" you mean "YOUR logic and reason"! "Logic and reason" are not much more than questions of taste. In science "logic and reason" are called "hand waving arguments" or better, "qualitative arguments" meaning: the weakest arguments. Logic of Confederates insists that slavery is justified. Or logic and reason of 19th century's British Academy of Science president, Lord Kelvin insisted that heavier than air machine flight was impossible. Than two bicycle mechanics, with no academic education whatsoever, came in and flew 100 yards.

You can see "logic and reason" in action, every day, on corporate media and in state propaganda. Every political side 24/7 throws around arguments supported by "logic and reason". If you slice up the context and than do selective reporting on the "slice" all "logic and reason" are gone out of the window.

You said you've seen UFO. => You are grown up and responsible adult. => That means you've seen UFO. Can one explain that as a swamp gas, Venus or Mars etc.? No, nobody can. => According to UN 150millon people had seen UFOs => UFOs exist.

Or you can have it bent another way. Beside the "crisp" logic of reason, which is easy to manipulate, there is a "soft" logic of statistics which is much harder to bend. Everything we know about QM is strictly statistical. Nobody ever has seen an atom, at least until recently. One does 1,000,000 experiments with 1,000,000 atoms and than draws conclusions. And these statistical truths gave us all the wanders of QM and modern world.

Statistics from Blue Book proves that UFOs are here, because thousands of responsible observers, like yourself, had seen one. Not to mention all the physical trace evidence, which is abundant.

The essence of the problem is that as humans, we have very small brains that, to make things worst, can only work in a serial mode. That's why we can only process reality one slice at a time. Anybody doing computers will tell you that serial communication is the slowest and most prone to errors. And to top it all, serial communication heavily depends on memory, which is with us pathetically feeble and full of confabulations. If we had brains that can do parallel processing and stronger memory, we would be able assess the whole contexts at once, not slice by slice.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, by "logic and reason" you mean "YOUR logic and reason"! "Logic and reason" are not much more than questions of taste. In science "logic and reason" are called "hand waving arguments" or better, "qualitative arguments" meaning: the weakest arguments. Logic of Confederates insists that slavery is justified. Or logic and reason of 19th century's British Academy of Science president, Lord Kelvin insisted that heavier than air machine flight was impossible. Than two bicycle mechanics, with no academic education whatsoever, came in and flew 100 yards.

You can see "logic and reason" in action, every day, on corporate media and in state propaganda. Every political side throws around 24/7 arguments supported by "logic and reason". If you slice up the context and than do selective reporting on the "slice" all "logic and reason" are gone out of the window.

You said you've seen UFO. => You are grown up and responsible adult. => That means you've seen UFO. Can one explain that as a swamp gas, Venus or Mars etc.? No, nobody can. => According to UN 150millon people had seen UFOs => UFOs exist.

Or you can have it bent another way. Beside the "crisp" logic of reason, which is easy to manipulate, there is a "soft" logic of statistics which is much harder to bend. Everything we know about QM is strictly statistical. Nobody ever has seen an atom, at least until recently. One does 1,000,000 experiments with 1,000,000 atoms and than draws conclusions. And these statistical truths gave us all the wanders of QM and modern world.

Statistics from Blue Book proves that UFOs are here, because thousands of responsible observers, like yourself, had seen one. Not to mention all the physical trace evidence, which is abundant.

The essence of the problem is that as humans, we have very small brains that, to make things worst, can only work in a serial mode. That's why we can only process reality one slice at a time. Anybody doing computers will tell you that serial communication is the slowest and most prone to errors. And to top it all, serial communication heavily depends on memory, which is with us pathetically feeble and full of confabulations. If we had brains that can do parallel processing and stronger memory, we would be able assess the whole contexts at once, not slice by slice.
Lol.

Ya, I've seen things. A few times. A couple times I wasn't alone, but I was a child at the time.

And I don't know what they were at all.

And I'm one guy with zero evidence. Pragmatically it would be easier to say I was delusional than to require an outside force to make it be true.

And yet I'm the guy it happend to so I say it happened and it wasn't me creating it.

But I'm not delusional enough to know it was space aliens or brothers of love and light or anything but a weird experience.

UFOs are here. Unidentified Flying Objects are every object we see flying - until we identify them. That doesn't mean that they are any given thing.

I know computers. I've designed VLSI (badly) from SiGe all the way to logic gates and processors, written real time kernels (again, badly), and there's even chunks of my code in some places that might surprise you (sorry about that).

And what I will tell you is that humans are not serial processors at all. If we were, we'd be dead, because to exist we need to do things massively in parallel. In fact, if you believe bioscience, that's what your brain is doing right now - it's a massively parallel computation engine. That runs exceptionally slow with chemicals.

And speaking of terrible non-deterministic memory... again, being pragmatic and objective, wouldn't it be easier to say I'm misremembering my experience?

There is zero evidence any extraterrestrial intelligence has been in contact with mankind at any time, in any way, ever.

And I fully recognize the irony in directly experiencing things that I believe were most likely exactly that.
 
Lol.

Ya, I've seen things. A few times. A couple times I wasn't alone, but I was a child at the time.

And I don't know what they were at all.

And I'm one guy with zero evidence. Pragmatically it would be easier to say I was delusional than to require an outside force to make it be true.

And yet I'm the guy it happend to so I say it happened and it wasn't me creating it.

But I'm not delusional enough to know it was space aliens or brothers of love and light or anything but a weird experience.

UFOs are here. Unidentified Flying Objects are every object we see flying - until we identify them. That doesn't mean that they are any given thing.

I know computers. I've designed VLSI (badly) from SiGe all the way to logic gates and processors, written real time kernels (again, badly), and there's even chunks of my code in some places that might surprise you (sorry about that).

And what I will tell you is that humans are not serial processors at all. If we were, we'd be dead, because to exist we need to do things massively in parallel. In fact, if you believe bioscience, that's what your brain is doing right now - it's a massively parallel computation engine. That runs exceptionally slow with chemicals.

And speaking of terrible non-deterministic memory... again, being pragmatic and objective, wouldn't it be easier to say I'm misremembering my experience?

There is zero evidence any extraterrestrial intelligence has been in contact with mankind at any time, in any way, ever.

And I fully recognize the irony in directly experiencing things that I believe were most likely exactly that.

Well, I've learned a short-while ago that octopuses have 9 brains. That's some parallel processing.

Octopuses have one brain for each of their legs. You can clearly see how they move each of their arms/legs behaves completely differently to the others. What I meant was, when we communicate and when we learn hard abstract concepts, we are definitely forced in a serial mode. We only process very small amount of info in parallel mode, like side vision and some instinctive reactions.

And to make things worst, we are fiercely territorial and consider thoughts as territory. Which is a huge impediment to learning and openhandedness.

Yeah, you say LOGIC, I say the DATA.

What you said "There is zero evidence" is just not true. Those two graphs above are the evidence.

Use any LOGIC you like, but explain the above two sets of statistical evidence (in the previous post). How can 448 witnesses in Mark Rodeghier's study, from 7 countries on the globe, over a span of 80 years, before the age of internet communication, collectively agree about their car ignition disruption that fits inverse square law of electric field attenuation?
 
Last edited:
Well, I've learned a short-while ago that octopuses have 9 brains. That's some parallel processing.

Octopuses have one brain for each of their legs. You can clearly see how they move each of their arms/legs behaves completely differently to the others. What I meant was, when we communicate and when we learn hard abstract concepts, we are definitely forced in a serial mode. We only process very small amount of info in parallel mode, like side vision and some instinctive reactions.

And to make things worst, we are fiercely territorial and consider thoughts as territory. Which is a huge impediment to learning and openhandedness.

Yeah, you say LOGIC, I say the DATA.

What you said "There is zero evidence" is just not true. Those two graphs above are the evidence.

Use any LOGIC you like, but explain the above two sets of statistical evidence (in the previous post). How can 448 witnesses in Mark Rodeghier's study, from 7 countries on the globe, over a span of 80 years, before the age of internet communication, collectively agree about their car ignition disruption that fits inverse square law of electric field attenuation?
Logic and data are two different things.

Use any LOGIC you like, but explain the above two sets of statistical evidence (in the previous post). How can 448 witnesses in Mark Rodeghier's study, from 7 countries on the globe, over a span of 80 years, before the age of internet communication, collectively agree about their car ignition disruption that fits inverse square law of electric field attenuation?

That's easy. Here's some ideas.

One: they all made it up. Humans tend to make up similar things because we're human. Evidence: every religion mankind has invented.

Two: over 80 years, ignition systems tended to fail a lot. Especially with spark plugs. Funny you don't hear much about that any more.

Three: there was an EMR source concurrent with the ignition failures and the experiences: tectonic stress, not ET.

Four: the ignition failure caused a secondary effect - hallucinations. Similar mechanism as the above, see 'the god helmet.'

Five: the Philip experiment demonstrated that it may be possible to will a consensual hallucination or shared paranormal experience into existence. Once critical mass was reached, this was simply willed into experience.

And that's just the BS off the top of my head. An actual physicist, biologist, psychologist, or social scientist could dish out a lot more.

Listen man, all of that could be leakage from a Pliedian EM drive. Or it could be something totally different. I wish back engineering this stuff was easy, because then we could get off this rock and meet whatever it is on our own terms.

But it isn't. And one of the biggest problems with this field is people running around like anything's concluded to begin with. If it were that easy, it would be solved by now. Stanford would have a Nobel prize and we'd be bringing Bush style 'democracy' to the Zeta Reticulans.

But we're not and this is more complicated than that.

And you being irrational isn't helping. Nobody needs to explain those things. You need to explain why it's evidence of ET.

It's called a logical fallacy for a reason - because you trying to shift the burden of proof doesn't actually do anything.

All you have is a belief system. One that doesn't stand up to replication.
 
Logic and data are two different things.

Exactly. Science is logic based on the data. That's currently accepted definition of Rational. Theory based on repeatable experimental evidence.

Logic based on Logic, or theory based on theory, is politics, culture, art, psychology, economics, love, hate etc. That's what's refereed to as irrational. You are actually calling your irrational choices 'rational' and even you admit that that is 'irony'. You wouldn't be calling your own views 'ironic' if they were rational.

That's easy. Here's some ideas.

Lets see.

One: they all made it up. Humans tend to make up similar things because we're human. Evidence: every religion mankind has invented.

Argument #1 - If they made it up, how comes the shape of the graph fits inverse square law, which is the exact law that describes the attenuation of electric field? Important point here is that observations of some random people fit one of the most solid laws of physics.

Argument #2 - Lets not ignore the fact that this is repeatable evidence, exactly as science wants it. This situation was consistently repeated 448 times.

Probability that individual estimates of a group of 448 unrelated people will fit inverse square law is infinitely small.

So you loose this one. Unless you have a solid scientific explanation, lets do the next one.


Two: over 80 years, ignition systems tended to fail a lot. Especially with spark plugs. Funny you don't hear much about that any more.

Of course, ignition systems fail. But normally people who's ignition failed don't state that it failed because there was an UFO. These 448 people were exception.

Lets note that this is purely "elegant logic" on your part. You provide no hard Data. I think you owe to support your opinion with data in a respect to huge amount of work that Mark Rodegheir put into this 80 pages study.

Back to the Argument #1 & #2: How comes ignition failures in 448 cases, fit to mathematical law that describes electric field attenuation?


Three: there was an EMR source concurrent with the ignition failures and the experiences: tectonic stress, not ET.

Thanks a lot. Do you have any data?

Is there a scientific study confirming that trend? There were quite a few earthquakes of magnitude 4-8 Richter scale in the last 50 years in a heavily populated areas. How many cases were reported that car engine stopped because earthquake related EM effects?

Nice try. But you easily loose this one. Next ...

Four: the ignition failure caused a secondary effect - hallucinations. Similar mechanism as the above, see 'the god helmet.'

Very quick thinking. Again, can you please provide any data ;-).

Nice try. You know, logic without measurements counts for very little.

Five: the Philip experiment demonstrated that it may be possible to will a consensual hallucination or shared paranormal experience into existence. Once critical mass was reached, this was simply willed into experience.

Sure. Sorry, I don't know who the Philip is. But I'll use the 'elegant logic' of my own.

If consensual hallucinations were possible, than telepathy would be possible as well. Although there is some scant evidence that some very weak telepathy exists in all mammals, there is nothing to suggest existence of an elaborate method of communication needed to exchange full detailed description of an event surrounding UFO appearance and car engine failure.

And that's just the BS off the top of my head. An actual physicist, biologist, psychologist, or social scientist could dish out a lot more.

Not the Argument #1 & #2. Psychology and Sociology are only sciences by name. Science makes predictions.

And you being irrational isn't helping. Nobody needs to explain those things. You need to explain why it's evidence of ET.

Irrational means ignoring the experimental evidence. Here, I am not the one who is ignoring the Data! Rodegheir's data is the evidence.

You are the one who is calling 'pier pressure' rational. That's like a rule of a mob. You are simply counting on strength in number of supporters, rather on logic and rationality.

Why is this explaining the ETH? ETH can not be proven decisively, only statistically. There is not a single medicament in modern medicine whose benefits are proven decisively 100%. Our lives depend every day on these medicaments, although we only have statistical proofs.

Rodegheir's angle is one of many independent facets, like:
  • trace evidence,
  • highly credible witnesses,
  • multiple independent witnesses,
  • partial compliance with accepted scientific knowledge
  • strong and weak scientific predictions (Element 117 by Bob Lazar, Expanding Universe by Daniel Fry , Gravity out of Rotating Magnetic field by Wilbert Smith), etc.
When all the facets are put together, using science as a backdrop, ETH hypothesis is overwhelming the non-ETH.

It's called a logical fallacy for a reason - because you trying to shift the burden of proof doesn't actually do anything.

You are calling purely apriori cultural and social pressure 'logic'. But that's just mob pressure. I've amply proven here that these are non-rational and non-scientific views.

All you have is a belief system. One that doesn't stand up to replication.

OK, I have a belief system. I am human. Its more a question how the balance of probabilities is seen.

For me weight of evidence is on ETH side. Your critique of Rodegheir's graph was purely qualitative and based on cultural pressure, not on the data and logic.

You are reasoning more like a lawyer, than like a scientist.
 
Last edited:
Do you understand that it's not up to anyone else to disprove your ideas, it's up to you to prove them?

I don't have to prove that any of those possibilities happened. All I have to do is assert that they're possible.

For the first one, simple mimetic transmission or mass hysteria. Or grandstanding.

For the tectonic stress one, seismometers aren't everywhere, and at any rate they don't measure stress, they measure motion.

You need to prove your idea. It's on you. By your reasoning, I can assert that invisible unicorns that only talk to me live in my anus. You can't prove me wrong, therefore I'm right.

This is one of the reasons science ignores this field. It's so easy to refute and the conclusions are so wild... and the logic is lacking.

Form a hypothesis. A clear simple one.

Test it. Show how it fits your data, and how you got the data, and how others can replicate it.

Then ask others to do the same.

But I suggest you start with thinking about the anomalies themselves (like em events) and not entities that don't have to exist for that event to happen.

Because shifting the burden of proof about something unprovable has a word: faith.

And while faith may make you feel good, it's not science.
 
And now to your actual thinking.

Exactly. Science is logic based on the data. That's currently accepted definition of Rational. Theory based on repeatable experimental evidence.

The data set you provided itself is not replicable. That's a core problem with 'UFOlogy.'

Tell me how I can go and get a new data set that conforms to the one you have.

Logic based on Logic, or theory based on theory, is politics, culture, art, psychology, economics, love, hate etc. That's what's refereed to as irrational. You are actually calling your irrational choices 'rational' and even you admit that that is 'irony'. You wouldn't be calling your own views 'ironic' if they were rational.

Wait, logic is illogical now? Are you talking about logical axioms or something else? I have no idea what you are saying.


Lets see.



Argument #1 - If they made it up, how comes the shape of the graph fits inverse square law, which is the exact law that describes the attenuation of electric field? Important point here is that observations of some random people fit one of the most solid laws of physics.

Again, I don't have to prove it happened, I'm asserting it's possible that it did happen. One person could have reported it, and then everybody else started saying the same thing. Look at the contactee BS. Do you think they were all telling the truth about getting sexed up by hot Venusians?
Argument #2 - Lets not ignore the fact that this is repeatable evidence, exactly as science wants it. This situation was consistently repeated 448 times.
A data set that conforms to your hypothesis is great. But it's one data set. Show how someone else can go replicate the data themselves. Since they don't show up at will, or consistently, you can't.

Probability that individual estimates of a group of 448 unrelated people will fit inverse square law is infinitely small.

Based on what?

So you loose this one. Unless you have a solid scientific explanation, lets do the next one.
Lol, I like you, you're fun.

Of course, ignition systems fail. But normally people who's ignition failed don't state that it failed because there was an UFO. These 448 people were exception.

That's my point. My shoelace comes untied sometimes. A bunch of times it happened while I was thinking about the invisible unicorn living in my anus.

OMG - the invisible unicorn living in my anus must have caused it!

Correlation is not causation and you know it. You might have some good data showing there might have been an EM field present, but that's all you have. EM fields don't imply aliens.

Lets note that this is purely "elegant logic" on your part. You provide no hard Data. I think you owe to support your opinion with data in a respect to huge amount of work that Mark Rodegheir put into this 80 pages study.

I don't have to.

Back to the Argument #1 & #2: How comes ignition failures in 448 cases, fit to mathematical law that describes electric field attenuation?




Thanks a lot. Do you have any data?

Sigh. I don't have to. Do you want to know why you're ignored by science or not?

Is there a scientific study confirming that trend? There were quite a few earthquakes of magnitude 4-8 Richter scale in the last 50 years in a heavily populated areas. How many cases were reported that car engine stopped because earthquake related EM effects?

Nice try. But you easily loose this one. Next ...

Lol.


Very quick thinking. Again, can you please provide any data ;-).

Nice try. You know, logic without measurements counts for very little.



Sure. Sorry, I don't know who the Philip is. But I'll use the 'elegant logic' of my own.

Philip experiment - Wikipedia

he experiment was conducted by the mathematician A. R. G. Owen and overseen by psychologist Dr. Joel Whitton. The test group consisted of A. R. G.'s wife Iris Owen, former chairperson of MENSA in Canada Margaret Sparrows, industrial designer Andy H., his wife Lorne, heating engineer Al Peacock, accountant Bernice M, bookkeeper Dorothy O’Donnel, and sociology student Sidney K.

Their goals were to create a fictional character through a purposeful methodology and then "attempt" to communicate with it through séance. The character created and agreed upon was named "Philip Aylesford", referred to as Philip during the test. His fictional history partially coincided with actual events and places, but with multiple contradictions and errors. He was born in 1624 in England, had an early military career and was knighted by the age of sixteen. He was involved in the English Civil Warand became personal friends with Charles II, working for him as a spy. Philip was unhappily married to a woman named Dorothea and later fell in love with a Gypsy girl who was accused of witchcraft and burned at the stake. In despair, Philip committed suicide in 1654 at the age of thirty.

The group was seated around a table with initial séances yielding no contact, no communication, and no phenomenon. Owen changed test conditions by dimming lights and changing the environment to mimic that of a more “traditional” séance. Participants began feeling a presence, table vibrations, breezes, unexplained echoes, and rapping sounds which matched responses to questions about Philip's life. At one point the table tilted on a single leg. Despite these claims neither apparition nor unexplained phenomena were documented.

If consensual hallucinations were possible, than telepathy would be possible as well. Although there is some scant evidence that some very weak telepathy exists in all mammals, there is nothing to suggest existence of an elaborate method of communication needed to exchange full detailed description of an event surrounding UFO appearance and car engine failure.

Um, no. Mass hysteria and consensual hallucinations happen.
Mass hysteria - Wikipedia

Notable cases[edit]
Cat nuns (France, Middle Ages)[edit]
A nun of a French convent inexplicably began to meow like a cat, shortly leading to the other nuns in the convent also meowing.[7] Eventually all the nuns would meow together for a certain period every day, leaving the surrounding community astonished. This did not stop until the police threatened to whip the nuns.[8]

Europe (15th century)[edit]
A nun in a German convent began to bite her companions, and the behavior spread through other convents in Germany, into Holland and as far as Italy.[8]

Dancing Plague of 1518[edit]
The Dancing Plague of 1518 was a case of dancing mania that occurred in Strasbourg, Alsace (then part of the Holy Roman Empire) in July 1518. Numerous people took to dancing for days without rest, and, over the period of about one month, some of the people died from heart attack, stroke, or exhaustion.[9]

Irish Fright of 1688[edit]
The Irish Fright took place in England and parts of Wales in December 1688 during the Glorious Revolution. False reports that Irish soldiers were burning and massacring English towns prompted a mass panic in at least nineteen counties, with thousands of people arming themselves and preparing to resist non-existent groups of marauding Irishmen.[10]

Salem witch trials (1692–93)[edit]
Adolescent girls Abigail Williams, Betty Parris, Ann Putnam, Jr., and Elizabeth Hubbard began to have fits that were described by a minister as "beyond the power of Epileptic Fits or natural disease to effect."[11] The events resulted in the Salem witch trials, a series of hearings leading to the executions of 20 citizens and the deaths of five citizens of Salem Village, Massachusetts (present day Danvers, Massachusetts) and nearby towns accused of witchcraft.[12] The episode is one of America's most notorious cases of mass hysteria, and has been used in political rhetoric and popular literature as a vivid cautionary tale about the dangers of isolationism, religious extremism, false accusations and lapses in due process.[13]

Würzburg (1749)[edit]
An outbreak of screaming, squirming, and trance in a nunnery led to the execution of a suspected witch.[14]

Basel and Gross-tinz "Writing Tremor Epidemic" (1892,1904)[edit]
The right hand of a ten-year-old girl in Gross-tinz began trembling, which developed into full-body seizures that spread to nineteen other students.

That same year, a similar epidemic affected 20 in Basel, Switzerland. Twelve years later, the Basel school experienced another outbreak that affected 27 students. Legend of the first outbreak was said to have played a role.[15]

Montreal (1894)[edit]
Sixty students at a ladies' seminary suffered an outbreak of fits and seizures, some for as long as 2 months.[15]

Meissen "Trembling Disease" (1905-6)[edit]
An estimated 237 children were afflicted between October 1905 and May 1906.[15]

Halifax Slasher (1938)[edit]
The Halifax Slasher was the name given to a supposed attacker of residents, mostly women, of the town of Halifax, England in November 1938. The week-long scare began after two women claimed to have been attacked by a mysterious man with a mallet and "bright buckles" on his shoes.[16] Further reports of attacks by a man wielding a knife or a razor followed. The situation became so serious that Scotland Yard was called in to assist the Halifax police.[17]

On November 29 one of the alleged victims admitted that he had inflicted the damage upon himself for attention. Others soon had similar admissions, and the Yard investigation concluded that none of the attacks had been real. Five local people were subsequently charged with public mischief offenses, and four were sent to prison.[16]

Bellevue, Louisiana (1939)[edit]
A girl developed a leg twitch at the annual homecoming high school dance. Attacks worsened and spread to friends over the next several weeks.[15]

Tanganyika laughter epidemic (1962)[edit]
The Tanganyika laughter epidemic began on January 30, 1962, at a mission-run boarding school for girls in Kashasha, Tanzania. The laughter started with three girls and spread haphazardly throughout the school, affecting 95 of the 159 pupils, aged 12–18.[18][19] Symptoms lasted from a few hours to 16 days in those affected. The teaching staff were not affected but reported that students were unable to concentrate on their lessons. The school was forced to close down on March 18, 1962.[20]

After the school was closed and the students were sent home, the epidemic spread to Nshamba, a village that was home to several of the girls.[20] In April and May, 217 people had laughing attacks in the village, most of them school children and young adults. The Kashasha school was reopened on May 21, only to be closed again at the end of June. In June, the laughing epidemic spread to Ramashenye girls’ middle school, near Bukoba, affecting 48 girls. Another outbreak occurred in Kanyangereka and two nearby boys schools were closed.[18]

June Bug Epidemic (1962)[edit]
A well-known example of hysterical contagion affecting sixty-two employees at a US textile factory.

Welsh, Louisiana (1962)[edit]
With students' sexual activity under close scrutiny by school officials, and following rumors of mandatory pregnancy tests, twenty-one girls and one boy in grades six to eleven were affected by seizures and other symptoms over six months.[15]

Blackburn, England (1965)[edit]
In October 1965 at a girls' school in Blackburn, several girls complained of dizziness.[21] Some fainted. Within a couple of hours, 85 girls from the school were rushed by ambulance to a nearby hospital after fainting. Symptoms included swooning, moaning, chattering of teeth, hyperpnea, and tetany.[21]

A medical analysis of the event about one year later found that outbreaks began among the 14-year-olds, but that the heaviest incidence moved to the youngest age groups.[21] There was no evidence of pollution of food or air.[21] The younger girls proved more susceptible, but disturbance was more severe and lasted longer in the older girls.[21] Using the Eysenck Personality Inventory, those affected had higher scores for extroversion and neuroticism.[21] It was considered that the epidemic was hysterical, that a previous polio epidemic had rendered the population emotionally vulnerable, and that a three-hour parade, producing 20 faints on the day before the first outbreak, had been the specific trigger.[21]

London (early 1970s)[edit]
Eight girls and a teacher began to have falling and fainting spells. The class was sent home early for spring break, and a pregnancy scare followed years later when one of the victims had been admitted to a psychiatric hospital, claiming to be pregnant. This then became the belief of several other patients, resulting in a domino-effect of pseudocyesis.[15]

Mount Pleasant, Mississippi (1976)[edit]
School officials suspected drug use after fifteen students fell to the ground writhing, but no drugs were found and hysteria is assumed to be culprit. At one point, one third of school's 900 students stayed home for fear of being "hexed".[15]

Malaysia (1970s–1980s)[edit]
Mass hysteria occurred in Malaysia from the 1970s to the 1980s. It affected school-age girls and young women working in factories. The locals have explained this outbreak as "spirits" having possessed the girls and young women.[22][23][24]

Hollinwell Incident (1980)[edit]
Around 300 people, mostly children, but including adults and babies, suddenly suffered fainting attacks, nausea and other symptoms. The Hollinwell incident remains one of the prime examples of mass hysteria.

West Bank fainting epidemic (1983)[edit]
The 1983 West Bank fainting epidemic was a series of incidents in March 1983 in which 943 Palestinian teenage girls, mostly schoolgirls, and a small number of IDFwomen soldiers fainted or complained of feeling nauseous in the West Bank. Israel was accused of using chemical warfare to sterilize West Bank women while IDF sources speculated that a toxic substance had been employed by Palestinian militants to stir up unrest,[25] but investigators concluded that even if some environmental irritant had originally been present, the wave of complaints was ultimately a product of mass hysteria. This conclusion was supported by a Palestinian health official, who said that while 20% of the early cases may have been caused by the inhalation of some kind of gas, the remaining 80% were psychosomatic.[26]

San Diego (1988)[edit]
The US Navy evacuated 600 men from barracks; 119 were sent to San Diego hospitals with complaints of breathing difficulty. No evidence of toxins, food poisoning, or any other cause was found.[27]

Kosovo (1990)[edit]
Main article: Kosovo student poisoning
Zoran Radovanović, a professor in the Faculty of Medicine in Kuwait argues in an article for the European Journal of Epidemiology that the "Kosovo Student Poisoning" that affected at least four thousand, mostly ethnic Albanians, was a product of mass hysteria.

Monkey-man of Delhi (2001)[edit]
The Monkey-man of Delhi is a monster which was reported roaming Delhi in mid-2001.[28]

North Carolina (2002)[edit]
Ten girls developed seizures and other symptoms at a rural high school in North Carolina. Symptoms persisted for five months across various grade levels. Incidents tended to happen outside of class, with half of all incidents estimated to have occurred around lunch hour. Half of the affected were cheerleaders or former cheerleaders.[29][30]

"Strawberries With Sugar virus" (2006)[edit]
In May 2006, an outbreak of the so-dubbed Morangos com Açúcar Virus (Strawberries With Sugar virus) was reported in Portuguese schools, named after the popular teen girl's show Morangos com Açúcar (Strawberries With Sugar). 300 or more students at 14 schools reported similar symptoms to those experienced by the characters in a then recent episode where a life-threatening virus affected the school depicted in the show.[31][32] Symptoms included rashes, difficulty breathing, and dizziness. The belief that there was a medical outbreak forced some schools to temporarily close. The Portuguese National Institute for Medical Emergency eventually dismissed the illness as mass hysteria.[31][32]

Mexico City (2007)[edit]
In 2007 near Chalco, a working-class suburb of Mexico City, mass hysteria resulted in a massive outbreak of unusual symptoms suffered by adolescent female students (600) at Children's Village School, a Catholic boarding-school.[33][34] The afflicted students had difficulty walking and were feverish and nauseated.

Vinton, Virginia (2007)[edit]
An outbreak of twitching, headaches and dizziness affected at least nine girls and one teacher at William Byrd High School. The episode lasted for months amid other local public health scares. [29]

Afghanistan (2009–)[edit]
Starting around 2009, a spate of apparent poisonings at girls' schools across Afghanistan began to be reported, with symptoms including dizziness, fainting, and vomiting. The United Nations, World Health Organization and NATO’s International Security Assistance Force carried out investigations of the incidents over multiple years, but never found any evidence of toxins or poisoning in the hundreds of blood, urine, and water samples they tested. The conclusion of the investigators was that the girls were suffering from mass psychogenic illness.[35][36] Despite these findings, Afghan officials often blame the incidents on the Taliban, accusing them of contaminating the school's water supply or using poison gas.[36]

Brunei (2010)[edit]
In April and May 2010, incidents of mass hysteria occurred at two all-girls secondary schools in Brunei.[37] The most recent notable event happened on the 24th of April 2014 in a public secondary school. The phenomenon caused a wave of panic among many parents, educators, and members of the community. Some of the students affected by the phenomenon claimed to have been possessed by spirits, or jinn, displaying histrionic symptoms such as screaming, shaking, fainting, and crying.

LeRoy, New York (2011–12)[edit]
In late 2011, 12 high school girls developed Tourette-like symptoms. Their school was tested for toxins, and all other factors for their symptoms were ruled out. The case, and some of the girls and their parents, gained national media attention. In January 2012, several more students and a 36-year-old adult female came forward with similar symptoms. They were all diagnosed with conversion disorder.[38][39]

Sri Lanka (2012)[edit]
From November 15–20, 2012, incidents of mass hysteria occurred at 15 schools in Sri Lanka. More than 1,900 school children of 15 schools in Sri Lanka and five teachers were treated for a range of symptoms that included skin rashes, vomiting, vertigo, and cough due to allergic reactions believed to be mass hysteria. It originated at the Jinaraja Balika Vidyala in Gampola, Central Province on November 15, 2012 when 1,100 students were admitted to hospital with a range of symptoms that included skin rashes, vomiting, vertigo and coughing. Later, authorities had to close down the school for 3 days. After that on November 16-19 there were more reports of students from other parts of the country showing similar symptoms.[40][unreliable source?]

Charlie Charlie Panic (2015)[edit]
Four teens in Tunja, Colombia were hospitalized, and several in the Dominican Republic were considered "possessed by Satan" after playing the Charlie Charlie Challenge viral game.[41]

Clown Sightings (2016)[edit]
Main article: 2016 clown sightings
Sightings of people in evil clown costumes in the United States, Canada, and 18 other countries were dismissed as a case of mass hysteria, stating that a fear of clowns (which is common in children and adults) may be an underlying cause.[42] Vox likewise claimed that "The Great Clown Panic of 2016 has been perpetuated by pretty much everyone except actual clowns."[43]



Not the Argument #1 & #2. Psychology and Sociology are only sciences by name. Science makes predictions.

I'm not going to touch how wrong that one is.

Irrational means ignoring the experimental evidence. Here, I am not the one who is ignoring the Data! Rodegheir's data is the evidence.

You are the one who is calling 'pier pressure' rational. That's like a rule of a mob. You are simply counting on strength in number of supporters, rather on logic and rationality.

Why is this explaining the ETH? ETH can not be proven decisively, only statistically. There is not a single medicament in modern medicine whose benefits are proven decisively 100%. Our lives depend every day on these medicaments, although we only have statistical proofs.

Rodegheir's angle is one of many independent facets, like:
  • trace evidence,
  • highly credible witnesses,
  • multiple independent witnesses,
  • partial compliance with accepted scientific knowledge
  • strong and weak scientific predictions (Element 117 by Bob Lazar, Expanding Universe by Daniel Fry , Gravity out of Rotating Magnetic field by Wilbert Smith), etc.
When all the facets are put together, using science as a backdrop, ETH hypothesis is overwhelming the non-ETH.



You are calling purely apriori cultural and social pressure 'logic'. But that's just mob pressure. I've amply proven here that these are non-rational and non-scientific views.



OK, I have a belief system. I am human. Its more a question how the balance of probabilities is seen.

For me weight of evidence is on ETH side. Your critique of Rodegheir's graph was purely qualitative and based on cultural pressure, not on the data and logic.

You are reasoning more like a lawyer, than like a scientist.

I like that last one. What's your training in science?
 
That's my point. My shoelace comes untied sometimes. A bunch of times it happened while I was thinking about the invisible unicorn living in my anus.
OMG - the invisible unicorn living in my anus must have caused it! Correlation is not causation and you know it. You might have some good data showing there might have been an EM field present, but that's all you have. EM fields don't imply aliens...
lol that is one strange analogy...
 
lol that is one strange analogy...
Lol, I can't even take the credit for creating it.

Unfalsifiability



(also known as: untestability)

Description: Confidently asserting that a theory or hypothesis is true or false even though the theory or hypothesis cannot possibly be contradicted by an observation or the outcome of any physical experiment, usually without strong evidence or good reasons.

Making unfalsifiable claims is a way to leave the realm of rational discourse, since unfalsifiable claims are often faith-based, and not founded on evidence and reason.

Example #1:

I have tiny, invisible unicorns living in my anus. Unfortunately, these cannot be detected by any kind of scientific equipment.

Explanation: While it may actually be a fact that tiny, invisible, mythological creatures are occupying this person’s opening at the lower end of the alimentary canal, it is a theory that is constructed so it cannot be falsified in any way; therefore, should not be seriously considered without significant evidence.
Unfalsifiability
 
Back
Top