Can't take off my tin foil hat....

[jobo]

It does, considering that's what the thread and topical discussion is about

It's not the same at all. The pokeball is fictional, while the craft itself is real, and the magnetic drive is real. That doesn't mean the magnetic drive is the actual propulsion of the craft. The magnetic drive was an example to clear up a scientific misunderstanding

are you taking about extracting power from the earths magnetic field? That would produce a 3 billionth of a volt per metre of collector, that apart from the fact it more or less disappears at the equator,

 

[Martial D]

Where is the crossover point 'twixt fiction and speculation?

Evidence.

 

[Martial D]

It does, considering that's what the thread and topical discussion is about

Not so much. The problem is that the subject of discussion can't/hasn't shown itself to even exist. This would be identical to speculating on the biological origins of Bigfoot without evidence of Bigfoot.

It's not the same at all. The pokeball is fictional, while the craft itself is real, and the magnetic drive is real. That doesn't mean the magnetic drive is the actual propulsion of the craft. The magnetic drive was an example to clear up a scientific misunderstanding

First, the premise that "the craft is real" hasn't been shown to be true.

Second, the technology to slowly move something via the earth's magnetic field is nothing like a spaceship that can zip around in any direction. You are making a huge stretch in support of something that is already a huge stretch. Mr fantastic would be impressed.

 

[Anarax]

First, the premise that "the craft is real" hasn't been shown to be true.

I don't understand. What did you base your statement below off of then?

No lift source, no propulsion source,, physics defying maneuverability and an acceleration rate that would turn pilots into pattee

Second, the technology to slowly move something via the earth's magnetic field is nothing like a spaceship that can zip around in any direction. You are making a huge stretch in support of something that is already a huge stretch. Mr fantastic would be impressed.

You're misunderstanding the point. The magnetic drive was an example of how a craft with "no propulsion", or more specifically, a craft with no observable external propulsion could move. I used the example to prove a concept, not to state the actual propulsion of the craft.

The problem is that the subject of discussion can't/hasn't shown itself to even exist.

So by that logic no one on the forum should talk about it? It's safe to say not every single video of a UFO is fake, thus the subject/topic exists.

This would be identical to speculating on the biological origins of Bigfoot without evidence of Bigfoot.

No it wouldn't. The existence of UFOs isn't questionable, what they are is. Unless you're saying every single eyewitness account is a lie and every video is photoshopped?

First, the premise that "the craft is real" hasn't been shown to be true.

Again I ask what you based your statement below off of?

No lift source, no propulsion source,, physics defying maneuverability and an acceleration rate that would turn pilots into pattee

 

[Martial D]

My statement vis a vis lift source etc was in reference to the claims made in a video posted here. I didn't state I agreed with the veracity of the stated claims.

Secondly, the evidence in support of UFOs(the videos/pictures available) are very much in doubt. People have been faking things like this at least as long as history has been recorded, and so far on this front nothing has really stood out as convincing to those that do not already believe.

As I've stated here twice before, I'll withhold judgement until real evidence hits the floor, but you'll have to excuse me if I don't turn blue holding my breath.

 

[pdg]

Evidence.

We have evidence...

Someone sees a UFO, you can speculate about what it might be. Their story is evidence.

Now, if they made it up, their story is fiction - but saying whether they made it up or not is purely speculation...

So, again, we have evidence - discussing the validity or source of said evidence isn't fiction, it's speculation.

 

[pdg]

Further...

The other night, I saw a light in the sky that tracked from horizon to horizon.

That's evidence, I saw it.

I can speculate as to what it was. It could be aliens. It could be a satellite. It could be the ISS.

Without further information it remains speculation. It's not fictitious.

As it happens, I know it was ISS. Because I looked it up prior to the event and awaited it's arrival.

Had I taken that knowledge and disregarded it in favour of saying "aliens!", that's fiction.


So, stating that something could be 'experimental military equipment' is speculation. Saying it must be is fiction.

 

[pdg]

the evidence in support of UFOs(the videos/pictures available) are very much in doubt. People have been faking things like this at least as long as history has been recorded, and so far on this front nothing has really stood out as convincing to those that do not already believe.

And that supports my earlier post.

You've seen so much fake stuff (some of which is quite convincing until very closely scrutinised) that you're desensitised to it.

The burden of proof is so much higher than if it was the first time you'd seen it.

So, one person provides one real image, unfortunately there has been some processing/degredation.

Agency X releases 5,000 images with a bewildering array of fakery and manipulation.

The real image is taken to be altered due to degredation artifacts or similar.

Objective achieved...

 

[jobo]

Further...

The other night, I saw a light in the sky that tracked from horizon to horizon.

That's evidence, I saw it.

I can speculate as to what it was. It could be aliens. It could be a satellite. It could be the ISS.

Without further information it remains speculation. It's not fictitious.

As it happens, I know it was ISS. Because I looked it up prior to the event and awaited it's arrival.

Had I taken that knowledge and disregarded it in favour of saying "aliens!", that's fiction.


So, stating that something could be 'experimental military equipment' is speculation. Saying it must be is fiction.

there's a difference between speculation, ie it could be several things, all of which are rational conclusion for the available evidence, AND wild speculation, , ie irrational conclusions based on little or no evidence, you have no evidence that its experimental military equipment, so that would be WILD

 

[pdg]

there's a difference between speculation, ie it could be several things, all of which are rational conclusion for the available evidence, AND wild speculation, , ie irrational conclusions based on little or no evidence, you have no evidence that its experimental military equipment, so that would be WILD

Pretty much, yes.

Suggesting it could be military as an option is normal speculation.

Even if you go wild and say it can only be military (based on the available evidence of someone saw something), it's still not fiction though...

 

[Martial D]

Wild claims != "Evidence", else we have evidence of every off the wall claim ever made about anything.

As per your conspiracy theories, I'll just leave you right to them, as I return this subject to the heap of other non verifiable claims with the resurrection of so and so and faked moon missions and the like.

 

[jobo]

Pretty much, yes.

Suggesting it could be military as an option is normal speculation.

Even if you go wild and say it can only be military (based on the available evidence of someone saw something), it's still not fiction though...

no, something is either fact or its fiction, there isn't a halfway house, if you saw a flying thing, , that's a fact, your conclusion that it may be advanced technology being tried out by the military is fiction, unless you have some evidence that that is so. Evidence that it is one thing, can not reasonably be gained from the fact you have no other explanation for what you saw

 

[pdg]

I return this subject to the heap of other non verifiable claims with the resurrection of so and so and faked moon missions and the like

Moon missions then...

You believe they happened?

Held a moon rock in your hand have you?

If so, how do you know it's genuine? Did you go and collect it yourself?

There's not a telescope in existence that can resolve the lander or the flag, so you can't look at them yourself.

All we have for evidence is photos, personal accounts and records - all of which could be faked...

All of the evidence is what various government agencies have chosen to release


Oh, much like whether there's an alien craft in storage...

(Personally, I use a balance of probability - the moon missions probably happened so I choose to accept they did. There's probably not an alien craft in storage.)

 

[pdg]

no, something is either fact or its fiction, there isn't a halfway house, if you saw a flying thing, , that's a fact, your conclusion that it may be advanced technology being tried out by the military is fiction, unless you have some evidence that that is so. Evidence that it is one thing, can not reasonably be gained from the fact you have no other explanation for what you saw

But I could fabricate a fictional account of seeing something.

Anything based on that evidence (even though it's false/fictional) is speculation.

 

[Martial D]

Moon missions then...

You believe they happened?

Held a moon rock in your hand have you?

If so, how do you know it's genuine? Did you go and collect it yourself?

There's not a telescope in existence that can resolve the lander or the flag, so you can't look at them yourself.

All we have for evidence is photos, personal accounts and records - all of which could be faked...

All of the evidence is what various government agencies have chosen to release


Oh, much like whether there's an alien craft in storage...

(Personally, I use a balance of probability - the moon missions probably happened so I choose to accept they did. There's probably not an alien craft in storage.)

Yes yes very creative. Show me something to discuss.

 

[jobo]

But I could fabricate a fictional account of seeing something.

Anything based on that evidence (even though it's false/fictional) is speculation.

no again, unless you have evidence to speculate with and a logical method to analysis that evidence then your conclusions are guessing.

any thing that runs along the line of,,,, i can't explain that,, therefore it must be,secret advanced technology incorporating anti gravity and a magnetic hyper drive, is GUESSING and fiction.

the only logical conclusion to i can't explain that,,,, is its something you don't understand, and that's it, to most people things they don't understand includes very nearly all established physics,

 

[pdg]

Yes yes very creative. Show me something to discuss.

Well, I have.

If you choose not to see it, that's up to you.

any thing that runs along the line of,,,, i can't explain that,, therefore it must be,secret advanced technology incorporating anti gravity and a magnetic hyper drive, is GUESSING and fiction.

Guessing and fiction are two separate things.

Guessing is a mild form of using available evidence to speculate on possibilities.

Fiction is making something up entirely.

Go back to an earlier post where I outlined the difference between "must" and "could".

 

[jobo]

Well, I have.

If you choose not to see it, that's up to you.



Guessing and fiction are two separate things.

Guessing is a mild form of using available evidence to speculate on possibilities.

Fiction is making something up entirely.

Go back to an earlier post where I outlined the difference between "must" and "could".

well no AGAIN, fiction is just that which can't be demonstrated to be a fact. Guessing is reaching a conclusion with out the required evidence to prove that conclusion true.
saying it may or could be something is still a conclusion, a conclusion you have reached by guessing and us therefore fiction

 

[TMA17]

Third-party evidence for Apollo Moon landings - Wikipedia


How Our Maxwell GPUs Debunked the Apollo 11 Conspiracy Theory [Updated with Video] | The Official NVIDIA Blog

 

[pdg]

well no AGAIN, fiction is just that which can't be demonstrated to be a fact. Guessing is reaching a conclusion with out the required evidence to prove that conclusion true.
saying it may or could be something is still a conclusion, a conclusion you have reached by guessing and us therefore fiction

Back to pigeon chess again I see...

Saying something must be something based on scant evidence is an incomplete conclusion.

Saying something may/could be something based on scant evidence is speculation (or guessing if you will).

Just because something isn't proved beyond reasonable doubt doesn't make it fiction. It makes it a degree of speculation.

Just like Michael Jackson, it's not black or white.