Randall
J. Randall Murphy
OK this is definitely where we diverge. Your educated, so until you decide to apply some critical thinking supported by specific examples, your objections are groundless, and words like "bafflegab" carry no weight as counterpoint.Where we disagree is on your characterization of what you've set out as precise, and your self-view as accurate. I read your entire website, much of which reads like bafflegab to me.
Simply denying my statements are sincere also carries no weight as counterpoint, and surely you can't be serious about the notion that "it" ( "it" being the UFO Phenomenon ) amounts to nothing; because if you are, then that implies that you think that all the evidence could be "nothing", which isn't possible because evidence exists and therefore it cannot be "nothing".But based on the totality of what is written there, I have no doubt that you're an ardent ETFer, no matter how much you try to claim otherwise by saying it could be this, or it could be that. The one thing you won't admit is that it could all just be nothing really.
My personal views are as I have described them and those are more complex than you want to accept. The reasoning and evidence, and me in-person is available for you to understand it, but you choose not to. That makes any evaluation you make largely unsubstantiated.That leap makes you a believer, not a skeptic or an agnostic. That's fine, but that's not the kind of straight-talking, objective research I was looking for. I honestly think you lack a true self-awareness about your own belief system. As a result, I stand by what I said in the episode.
I make no bones about the views I have, but that doesn't mean they are based on wishful thinking or lack objectivity. I also readily admit that there are other possibilities and that verifiable scientific evidence sufficient to prove alien visitation is real, is not readily available. So you are reading your own interpretation into what I'm saying, arbitrarily excluding the idea that my views may be accurate because they're based on reasonable analysis of the evidence. Yours on the other hand seem to be based on an ideology of denial that you attempt to justify as reasonable ( when it's not ).In your bio page, you write: "Now, having followed the progress of ufology and science for over 40 years, I remain more convinced than ever that UFOs are extraterrestrial in origin, and operate on technology beyond our means."
Well, you'd have to think harder, and you don't seem to want to do that.Like I said, I don't know how that is open to any interpretation other than the one I put forward.
Before we part ways, just let me say a few words about "my path". It has involved a lot of study, cross referencing, analysis of case files, talking to people, and personal experience, in an effort to determine the truth about what has been going on with respect to UFO experiences. In that process, via the application of critical thinking, a most probable answer has naturally emerged that is supported by sound reasoning, not wishful thinking. So until I'm given logical reasons backed by sound reasoning and reasonable evidence to change that path, I see no reason to abandon my views or my path. If however you think you can convince me to do so, then I invite you to try, because I would sooner be proven to be in error and adapt than refuse to change.Accordingly, the solution to the "problem" is for you to keep doing what you're doing, and me to keep doing what I'm doing, because we're on two very different paths, and I know from experience there is no point of real intersection between them. C'est la vie. No hard feelings on my end.
Now perhaps you might help me understand just what path you're on, because if I'm missing something important I'd like to know about it? So let's have it.
Last edited: