• SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY A PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, five years young! For a low subscription fee, you will be able to download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive After The Paracast 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! For a limited time, you can save up to 40% on your subscription. Long-term susbcribers will receive a free coupon code for the James Fox UFO documentary "The Phenomenon," which includes 3 hours of extras, while supplies last. It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

diny

Paranormally Abled
"Absence of proof is not proof of absence." William Cowper, Carl Sagan and many others. Phil Alderson, Associate Director of the UK Cochrane Centre, Oxford, U.K. wrote a scientific journal article, published by the U.S. National Institute of Health, entitled "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" while other people argue that this reasoning is sometimes called the argument from ignorance and is "considered a fallacy in informal logic".

Edzard Ernst, formerly Professor of Complementary Medicine at the University of Exeter, U.K. also wrote an article entitled "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" in the BMJ. BMJ started out as the publisher of a single medical journal in 1840. BMJ states "Now, as a global brand with a worldwide audience, we help medical organisations and clinicians tackle today’s most critical healthcare challenges." Back to Professor Ernst's article. He states in the article that although "it is succinct and elegant. In fact, it is also entirely logical", "the fallacy arises not from the argument itself, but from the way it is often used in the promotion of quackery." That is the point. Not having evidence does not prove that something is not true. However, some things that are not true are evident as falsehoods. I have heard the phrase be open-minded but do not be so open-minded that your brains fall out.

There is a happy medium there somewhere. To me, the absence of evidence is often evidence that is not accepted by mainstream scientists. There is evidence for many things that are simply not accepted. One of my best examples is the Seti I temple in Abydos, Egypt. It has images of modern vehicles that are stated by archaeologists to be accidental renderings by the people who created the images. They slipped with their chisels. If so, this is extremely coincidental. They accidentally created four vehicles (most people say three), a helicopter, a boat or submarine, an airplane, blimp or UFO, and a different type of airplane at the bottom right. All of these slips which are identical to modern vehicles are together in one location on the walls of Seti I. What is the statistical probability that this could happen? One in a million? One in a billion? Even higher? To anyone who is not entirely skeptical, it is obvious that this was not a chisel slip but actual depictions of modern vehicles. This is physical evidence.

Seti I is only one example of how skeptical, closed-minded scientists refuse to accept evidence. They say that there is no evidence but, in doing so, they are being dishonest. They are misleading others by denying the evidence presented to them. The evidence is there. They just refuse to admit it.
 

Attachments

  • Seti Heiroglyphics.jpg
    Seti Heiroglyphics.jpg
    423.7 KB · Views: 3

Randall

J. Randall Murphy
Staff member
I'm not sure the Egyptian carvings are of technology that Ancient Astronaut theorists might believe they are, but I 100% agree that there is a scientific bias when it comes to the issue of evidence, particularly the accounts of firsthand witnesses or experiencers. Is that bias justified? In some cases it probably is. Even as a general rule of caution, it might be wise to be skeptical of extraordinary claims, but let's not for a second think it isn't bias.
 

Peacekeeper

Skilled Investigator
"Absence of proof is not proof of absence." William Cowper, Carl Sagan and many others. Phil Alderson, Associate Director of the UK Cochrane Centre, Oxford, U.K. wrote a scientific journal article, published by the U.S. National Institute of Health, entitled "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" while other people argue that this reasoning is sometimes called the argument from ignorance and is "considered a fallacy in informal logic".

Edzard Ernst, formerly Professor of Complementary Medicine at the University of Exeter, U.K. also wrote an article entitled "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" in the BMJ. BMJ started out as the publisher of a single medical journal in 1840. BMJ states "Now, as a global brand with a worldwide audience, we help medical organisations and clinicians tackle today’s most critical healthcare challenges." Back to Professor Ernst's article. He states in the article that although "it is succinct and elegant. In fact, it is also entirely logical", "the fallacy arises not from the argument itself, but from the way it is often used in the promotion of quackery." That is the point. Not having evidence does not prove that something is not true. However, some things that are not true are evident as falsehoods. I have heard the phrase be open-minded but do not be so open-minded that your brains fall out.

There is a happy medium there somewhere. To me, the absence of evidence is often evidence that is not accepted by mainstream scientists. There is evidence for many things that are simply not accepted. One of my best examples is the Seti I temple in Abydos, Egypt. It has images of modern vehicles that are stated by archaeologists to be accidental renderings by the people who created the images. They slipped with their chisels. If so, this is extremely coincidental. They accidentally created four vehicles (most people say three), a helicopter, a boat or submarine, an airplane, blimp or UFO, and a different type of airplane at the bottom right. All of these slips which are identical to modern vehicles are together in one location on the walls of Seti I. What is the statistical probability that this could happen? One in a million? One in a billion? Even higher? To anyone who is not entirely skeptical, it is obvious that this was not a chisel slip but actual depictions of modern vehicles. This is physical evidence.

Seti I is only one example of how skeptical, closed-minded scientists refuse to accept evidence. They say that there is no evidence but, in doing so, they are being dishonest. They are misleading others by denying the evidence presented to them. The evidence is there. They just refuse to admit it.
Proof is used in math or theoretical science. Like 1+1=2 and 1 1 would be undefined without sufficient rules.

The abidos helicoper and 13000 year old black knight satellite proves nothing. I have explained in 2 threads what "knowledge" is.
 

Randall

J. Randall Murphy
Staff member
Proof is used in math or theoretical science.
A mathematical proof is one type of proof. Another type of proof is evidence that is sufficient to justify belief in a claim. However that sort of proof is subjective. Some people require more evidence than others.
The abidos helicoper and 13000 year old black knight satellite proves nothing.
It proves somebody did some low-relief rock carving, but that's about all.
I have explained in 2 threads what "knowledge" is.
You may find that multiple threads or posts that promote your own ideas will be merged into fewer threads, or perhaps a single or preexisting thread. This is to prevent haphazard forum content, as well as improve the readership of your content. None of the content itself will be removed unless it is inappropriate. Before starting a new thread, please do a search to see if your topic already exists. We prefer to avoid multiple threads with identical topics.

If you would like to refer a reader to one of your posts, you can use a link to that post. Your personal thread is here: Axel Shark's Thread
Here is the link to your post about what you think knowledge is to you: Axel Shark On Knowledge

To create a link to a specific post, right-click the post's number at the top right hand side of the post and select "Copy link address", then paste it into the post you want to link to it from. It's that simple.
 
Last edited:

diny

Paranormally Abled
Proof is used in math or theoretical science. Like 1+1=2 and 1 1 would be undefined without sufficient rules.

The abidos helicoper and 13000 year old black knight satellite proves nothing. I have explained in 2 threads what "knowledge" is.
Proof is used in math or theoretical science. Like 1+1=2 and 1 1 would be undefined without sufficient rules.

The abidos helicoper and 13000 year old black knight satellite proves nothing. I have explained in 2 threads what "knowledge" is.

The sun does not go around the earth. Driving over 30 miles an hour will not stop our hearts. There is no missing link, just an evolution of human beings. There are three or four fertile crescents. Above all else, Stephen Hawking may not have had all of the answers. Google "Physicists Debate Hawking’s Idea That the Universe Had No Beginning". You will see that physicists now dispute his belief in this.

I liked your post "Science can only be as good as the people allow it as I once said. Science means seeker for knowledge/truth. So yeah, it is the only way I can tell.

But I also said that you only know if you tested it yourself, only your trust in science doesn't make you smarter! And it also doesn't support science!"

Am I misunderstanding your reply to my post?

Math is exacting. Science is not. There is bias. There is limited knowledge which is passed off as absolute knowledge. Math is infinite. Science changes.
 

bdoon

Paranormal Novice
The sun does not go around the earth. Driving over 30 miles an hour will not stop our hearts. There is no missing link, just an evolution of human beings. There are three or four fertile crescents. Above all else, Stephen Hawking may not have had all of the answers. Google "Physicists Debate Hawking’s Idea That the Universe Had No Beginning". You will see that physicists now dispute his belief in this.

I liked your post "Science can only be as good as the people allow it as I once said. Science means seeker for knowledge/truth. So yeah, it is the only way I can tell.

But I also said that you only know if you tested it yourself, only your trust in science doesn't make you smarter! And it also doesn't support science!"

Am I misunderstanding your reply to my post?

Math is exacting. Science is not. There is bias. There is limited knowledge which is passed off as absolute knowledge. Math is infinite. Science changes.
Xlent Post .
The recent official release of USN UFO videos already is impacting long held rigid notions. Science does indeed constantly change which is okay except for the rigidity of the minds of too many scientists. "This is the box you must fit into today " Yet the box is constantly changing.

What is the arrogance of man that he believes this little lump of matter in his skull is capable of comprehending the vast unknown.?..yes the attempt is admirable but those who think we can explain all ? Actually kind of funny that the DOD UFO vids brought out all the so-called "experts". There are no experts....not on earth , at least.
 

diny

Paranormally Abled
Xlent Post .
The recent official release of USN UFO videos already is impacting long held rigid notions. Science does indeed constantly change which is okay except for the rigidity of the minds of too many scientists. "This is the box you must fit into today " Yet the box is constantly changing.

What is the arrogance of man that he believes this little lump of matter in his skull is capable of comprehending the vast unknown.?..yes the attempt is admirable but those who think we can explain all ? Actually kind of funny that the DOD UFO vids brought out all the so-called "experts". There are no experts....not on earth , at least.

My problem is not that "experts" do not exist. My problem is that people claim to be experts then impart their "knowledge" on other people. This particularly bothers me when the other people believe them.
 

Randall

J. Randall Murphy
Staff member
My problem is not that "experts" do not exist. My problem is that people claim to be experts then impart their "knowledge" on other people. This particularly bothers me when the other people believe them.
There are experts, and then there are "experts" :p
 

Top