NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus 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! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!
I still say this looks like swamg gas, to me.
(Just kidn! I guess,...oo...errr..mm)
The Belgian UFO sightings of 1989/90 don't have any similarities with the Arkansas bird deaths. In fact, the Belgian Air Force and Government were very interested in investigating the situation and their official report says that they found no explanation for the sightings (I've studied the case carefully and concur with such assessment). I see that there are some people here who seem to dislike views that go against conspiratorial/supernatural explanations. That's fine with me, but any serious investigation on what happened with those birds can ever be done with preconceptions such as those I've seen mentioned in this thread, with connections to doubtful sources and information clearly manipulated by persons or groups to benefit their own take on the subject.
To dismiss something solely on the grounds that it is a "conspiracy theory" (an overused and misused term) is a severe intellectual bias. While I think such things require a great deal of skepticism they can't simply be dismissed because they fit some "profile" of a "conspiracy theory." To ignore data because it doesn't fit into your preconceived notions (Run Ethel! It's a conspiracy theory!) isn't the same as ignoring the data after you've reviewed it and found it to be questionable on other grounds. One is an irrational reaction as opposed to a reasoned response.
Which sounds a great deal like the, "You people who think you know the truth are annoying those of us who actually do!" assumptive attitude.
Take a lap!
Are you really someone who for whatever reason, wants to assume the pretense of doubt, rejection of belief, and unbiased inquiry while simultaneously and willing harboring preconceived notions that regulate what data and conclusions you will even entertain? That isn't skepticism or the spirit of science as I understand it.
I wasn't talking about specific sites but the dismissive attitude you display toward "conspiracy theories" as if by that very label (applied by ?) you know all you need to know about it.
Maybe you should include faux skeptic
While many things that fall under the umbrella of "conspiracy theories" are indeed bunk not all of it is. The application of the label and the attitude that accompanies it are only useful in obfuscation and distraction and not honest inquiry into truth. Or at least that is my take on it, Nancy, uh I mean Shela.
I disagree - Anything that comes from those types of sites is garbage.
Also, I was saying exactly what you rephrased, but i was trying to be nice.
But I'll be more blunt - yes, they think they know the "truth" but they are wrong. I'm a secular, elitist, educated, liberal asshole. Call me a SEELA!
It's just an observation.
Angel your a good guy but I'm afraid Trained made some valid points. Now, he and I certainly have our differences and so do you and I at times. I respect both of you but I gotta tell ya. You come across as a "born again" atheist/skeptic/secular dude. It's kind of like a born again anything else. I'll give an example but please don't think that I think I'm sure of what I'm saying.
I get the feeling that if Trained Observer did ever decide that his atheism is bunk he would gladly and maybe even with a little bit of relief toss it to the side. He's not likely to do that since I think he is about my age (50's) and those of us who form opinions and walk around with em with that much life expereince (although he and I have formed very different world views) don't shed em lightly.
You however, remind me of a born again Christian. You might say you are simply searching for the truth. But, the truth is you are very much married to your worldview. You would just as soon follow Jimmy Randi into that dark void of nothingness as to find there really is a light at the end of the tunnel.
Generalzations? Yep! And no where near the total truth of either one of you. But, just an observation from a very limited view called a public forum. I started not to post this...but, then again I think will. I do enjoy civil and respectful back and forth. I even learn things from it.
Peace.