It is not your "facts" that bother me. Rather, it is your continual obsession to make negative comments towards several individuals in an attempt to demean their credibility and their honesty. Most likely, they have acquired critical thinking skills as good if not better than yours. Also, I suspect that this quote from William James might soften your attitude. James once remarked that "you only need to find one white crow to prove that all crows are not black." Finally, this recent report in the news might challenge your famous debunking skills. "The Chilean Navy has admitted it can't explain a video taken by one of their pilots showing a UFO in the country's airspace. A military copter captured the incredible footage during a routine patrol, filmed with an infrared camera."
I really, really hope you're teasing about the Chilean UFO. After the Chilean UFOlogists couldn't solve it in *two years* and made the data public, it was solved in 5 days by Mick West's team at Metabunk:
I’ve spent many years studying the UFO phenomenon and I believe there is no solid evidence that extraterrestrial vehicles have ever visited earth. The most inter case, in my opinion, is the Lonnie Zamora sighting in 1964 in Socorro, New Mexico. That I believe was a hoax perpetrated by some college students at New Mexico Tech (NMT).
I noticed that you seem to ignore the first half of my post. I agree with you that a heated debate does not automatically prove anything. However, from your past writings you seem to take great delight in impugning the character of highly educated individuals by claiming that they are deeply in love with pseudo-science ideas. Thus, the natural corollary of your putdown is that YOU are the superior one, YOU are realistic and they are all terribly misguided in their thinking. Wow, if only these people such as Dr. Travis Taylor would listen to you, then they would finally wake up and acknowledge your superior critical thinking skills. Sadly, there is a big difference between being an open-minded skeptic and being an arrogant or a negative cynic. Question: which one are you? Are you sure?
Please, if you've found any errors or problems in my content, point them out. If you can't find any problems so have to resort to insults and ad hominems and how many degrees in aeronautics your favorite TV ghost hunters have, those are very old and tired arguments and I'd prefer you take them elsewhere.
It never ceases to amaze me that Brian often seems to present himself as a smarter, more realistic, more rational person that ALL the scientists and researchers who are more open minded about the UFO or UAP experience. Wouldn't you just love to see a well publicized debate with Brian and some of these individuals that he just LOVES to put down? I would. My guess is that it will never happen.
You are correct, it would never happen. I've written somewhat extensively agreeing with the overwhelming majority of scientists who say that science should never "debate" pseudoscience. Facts are not determined by who is persuasive on a debate stage. Merely holding the debate communicates that there are two equally valid sides to a question, which when you're talking about reality vs bullshit, there aren't.
It is not your "facts" that bother me. Rather, it is your continual obsession to make negative comments towards several individuals in an attempt to demean their credibility and their honesty. Most likely, they have acquired critical thinking skills as good if not better than yours. Also, I suspect that this quote from William James might soften your attitude. James once remarked that "you only need to find one white crow to prove that all crows are not black." Finally, this recent report in the news might challenge your famous debunking skills. "The Chilean Navy has admitted it can't explain a video taken by one of their pilots showing a UFO in the country's airspace. A military copter captured the incredible footage during a routine patrol, filmed with an infrared camera."
I really, really hope you're teasing about the Chilean UFO. After the Chilean UFOlogists couldn't solve it in *two years* and made the data public, it was solved in 5 days by Mick West's team at Metabunk:
https://skeptoid.com/episodes/4838
West, M. "Curated Crowdsourcing in UFO Investigations." Skeptical Briefs. 29 May 2017, Volume 27, Number 1.
This has been widely published and any serious honest effort to learn about this case would have come across the explanation.
I’ve spent many years studying the UFO phenomenon and I believe there is no solid evidence that extraterrestrial vehicles have ever visited earth. The most inter case, in my opinion, is the Lonnie Zamora sighting in 1964 in Socorro, New Mexico. That I believe was a hoax perpetrated by some college students at New Mexico Tech (NMT).
I noticed that you seem to ignore the first half of my post. I agree with you that a heated debate does not automatically prove anything. However, from your past writings you seem to take great delight in impugning the character of highly educated individuals by claiming that they are deeply in love with pseudo-science ideas. Thus, the natural corollary of your putdown is that YOU are the superior one, YOU are realistic and they are all terribly misguided in their thinking. Wow, if only these people such as Dr. Travis Taylor would listen to you, then they would finally wake up and acknowledge your superior critical thinking skills. Sadly, there is a big difference between being an open-minded skeptic and being an arrogant or a negative cynic. Question: which one are you? Are you sure?
Please, if you've found any errors or problems in my content, point them out. If you can't find any problems so have to resort to insults and ad hominems and how many degrees in aeronautics your favorite TV ghost hunters have, those are very old and tired arguments and I'd prefer you take them elsewhere.
It never ceases to amaze me that Brian often seems to present himself as a smarter, more realistic, more rational person that ALL the scientists and researchers who are more open minded about the UFO or UAP experience. Wouldn't you just love to see a well publicized debate with Brian and some of these individuals that he just LOVES to put down? I would. My guess is that it will never happen.
You are correct, it would never happen. I've written somewhat extensively agreeing with the overwhelming majority of scientists who say that science should never "debate" pseudoscience. Facts are not determined by who is persuasive on a debate stage. Merely holding the debate communicates that there are two equally valid sides to a question, which when you're talking about reality vs bullshit, there aren't.