cardero
Citizen Mod
But all that changed in 1972 when J. Allen Hynek introduced UFOlogy to a new system of classification in his book The UFO Experience: A Scientific Inquiry.
Close encounter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
They're everywhere! Cardero's excellent evidence ...
- Thread starter Jayhawker Soule
- Start date
- Status
But all that changed in 1972 when J. Allen Hynek introduced UFOlogy to a new system of classification in his book The UFO Experience: A Scientific Inquiry.
Close encounter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
Yes... I wouldn't think, however, that this made a dramatic impact on the scientific community.
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
Hey - I just remembered!
Patrick, have you waded through all the recently de-classified evidence that the British released to the public last year?
note: UFO files from The National Archives
Patrick, have you waded through all the recently de-classified evidence that the British released to the public last year?
note: UFO files from The National Archives
Last edited by a moderator:
Guitar's Cry
Disciple of Pan
Hence, my creative and completely original use of quotations when using it.
Thing is, it isn't scientifically untestable. It's just scientifically unpopular.
mrscardero
Kal-El's Mama
Maybe you could help me understand, but what is your concern with the links I have provided?
Last edited:
cardero
Citizen Mod
To be honest, I have just only reacquainted myself with the phenomenon from a 4 year absence. I wasnt even aware of the Larry King Interview on Steve Romanek until you posted it. It would be interesting to see where that goes. I will also check out the link to the UFO National Archives.
I'm not at all concerned ... other than to see what others swallow as informative evidence.
I understand. Given my own personal experiences (and I've had multiple ghost sightings/experiences and a single UFO sighting in my repetoire), it would groovy to see someone verify what I've seen.
The problem is that so much of what has been presented isn't falsifiable. I can tell my story over and over again 'til I'm blue in the face, and then other people can tell their similar stories over and over again, and more people can tell their stories.......but rarely will science be able to refute ANYTHING we say or theorize by their own observations and analysis of evidence.
Guitar's Cry
Disciple of Pan
In other words, Mrs. Cardero, he doesn't want to help you understand, thus perpetuating the scientific elitism that stands like a wall over this "fringe."
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
Ah, Mystique-Heath'er you were merely observing me during an out of body sequence.
This may be the birth of a new kind of religion, so the only scientific inquiry suitable would likely be from departments of psychiatry.
I do agree that we should keep an open mind in regards to this subject, however that opening should not be too large, lest out brains roll out.
Last edited:
Guitar's Cry
Disciple of Pan
I understand. Given my own personal experiences (and I've had multiple ghost sightings/experiences and a single UFO sighting in my repetoire), it would groovy to see someone verify what I've seen.
That's really neat. I've only seen a couple of things out-of-the-ordinary.
This is true, if stories were all there were. But there are certainly other forms of evidence available, something the Carderos have been trying to get across.
And if it were only stories, the stories at least represent that something is going on for them to be repeated. This is within the realm of scientific inquiry, and evidence can be gathered to support the claims.
Ah, Mystique-Heath'er you were merely observing me during an out of body sequence.
Yeah!!! WHOOT!!!!
unk:I have to say, Paul, you looked rather odd as a dark-colored shiny saucer. If you were going to reveal yourself in this way, why didn't you choose an image that looked like Hugh Jackman? :flirt:
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
Perception is always in the eye of the beholder, so you might want to ask yourself this question.
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
Sounds good. I looked through the British files when they first became available and didn't find anything even remotely interesting. They were formatted differently when I saw them, so I'm not sure if I gave you the correct link...
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
Guitar's Cry
Disciple of Pan
There isn't in this case?
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
Anecdotal "evidence" doesn't generally get much of a "rise" out of the scientific community, Weeping Axe.
I claim that I had an out of body experience. (I did, too )
I claim that rebirth/reincarnation has happened innumerable times in our phenomenal existence.
I claim that doing the Green Tara puja ritual on certain auspicious days will bring great fortune and happiness.
Now........how can science possibly disprove my claims? It can't. I may have had some profound experiential moments in my life that have shaped my worldview, but how scientific are my experiences? They simply aren't, and that's OK.
)I claim that rebirth/reincarnation has happened innumerable times in our phenomenal existence.
I claim that doing the Green Tara puja ritual on certain auspicious days will bring great fortune and happiness.
Now........how can science possibly disprove my claims? It can't. I may have had some profound experiential moments in my life that have shaped my worldview, but how scientific are my experiences? They simply aren't, and that's OK.
Guitar's Cry
Disciple of Pan
Unfortunately, you're right. Though, it does raise the eyebrows of those on the scientific fringe.
The thing is, a couple of stories are odd, and will probably be dismissed as hoax or hallucination. A couple of more, and some people may start to wonder. A whole bunch more, and suddenly there's a phenomena that can either be studied or rejected as mass hallucination or a pop-culture fad. Either way, it's empirical.
And it can be studied. And it has. The point is whether one accepts the evidence or not, not whether it is scientific or part of a "lunatic fringe."
I should also add, my inclusion in this lunatic fringe should have no say on the ideas I present.
Magic Man
Reaper of Conversation
I claim that I had an out of body experience. (I did, too
I claim that rebirth/reincarnation has happened innumerable times in our phenomenal existence.
I claim that doing the Green Tara puja ritual on certain auspicious days will bring great fortune and happiness.
Now........how can science possibly disprove my claims? It can't. I may have had some profound experiential moments in my life that have shaped my worldview, but how scientific are my experiences? They simply aren't, and that's OK.
Which is fine. The only problem is the people here telling others what they should and shouldn't believe and calling certain things others do believe "garbage".
- Status