When is absence of evidence, evidence of absence?

[PCarr]

I wrote this up in the context of SETI, but I think it applies equally well to UFOs. Not much actual math:

Dream of the Open Channel: When is absence of evidence = evidence of absence?

 

[Randall]

I wrote this up in the context of SETI, but I think it applies equally well to UFOs. Not much actual math:

Dream of the Open Channel: When is absence of evidence = evidence of absence?

A good article. It illustrates how important context is in a discussion. In the case of UFOs, we're not talking about a context similar to a "tiger in a small room" that nobody has seen. Rather we're talking about a planet sized container upon which many thousands of people have reported seeing UFOs. In this context it's not reasonable to assume that absence of evidence is evidence of absence, mainly because there is evidence by way of direct observation and/or instrumented detection. Plus, there is no scientific reason that should prevent alien craft from existing.

 

[PCarr]

The problem with nearly all of the UFO evidence is the likelihood ratio is poor, especially when our primary instrument is human memory, with which there are so many problems.

 

[manxman]

nonsense, theres millions of hours of pre photoshop footage of ariel phenomena if it was all collated.

 

[manxman]

Millions of hours, huh?

Yes millions of hours of footage world wide, ever since cameras were invented.

You might want to look up the word, "millions".

Why ?

I can't think of of one second of non ambiguous footage and indeed, as I recently showed in relation to one classic bit of crappy footage, the stories surrounding even the low quality stuff that does exist often get bigger with time.

Another logical fallacy ridden sentence, for a smart guy you are pretty dumb, how many hours of footage have you viewed approx ?, what percentage of all anomalous footage do you think that accounts for ?, do you think you have viewed more than 100th of a percentage point of all anomalous footage ever shot ?, do you even want to try and claim you have watched one 10,000th of one percentage point of all anomalous footage ever shot ?.

Not a million times bigger usually...but believers make their Saucer Jesus as big as they need him to be.

And some self-proffessed skeptics, wrap themselves in sketicism to disguise the fact they are nothing more than publicity seeking debunkers, your just another wannabe phil klass, but without the psychosis.

You probably think klass was a fine skeptical mind, a grand-daddy of skepticism.
whereas any person truly not blinded by their bias can see he was a sick man.
a sick psychotic, debunk and destroy the opposition at any cost, by any means, and forever man.


Your a winner you lancy lad, but all your hand-waving sweeping statements, and your constant stream of unverified, unlinked claims mean jack sh1t around here.




i will give anyone odds of 10/1, that lancy boy cannot reply without labelling me, either directly applying my tag or by inference, it will be beyond him, him and the pr1ck known as tim printy are peas in a pod,..,,, well except lancy boy is more cuddly and just nice.

 

[manxman]

For those who might be as mathematically challenged as the above saucer buff (if that is even possible) 1 million hours is 114 years of continuous footage.

we have a winner, im a saucer buff.

were the 3 questions too hard lancy lad ?, is that question to hard lancy lad.

For those who might be as mathematically challenged as the above saucer buff (if that is even possible) 1 million hours is 114 years of continuous footage.

Big numbers lancy lad, heres some more big ones
70yrs of hand held cameras atleast, theres easy a billion cameras at peoples disposal now alone any cheap mobile has one, not counting surveillance cameras etc etc etc, so over 70yrs an average of 18 months worth of footage needed to be shot when amalgamated from 5/6/7 billion people, not that ive claimed nor ever have that one second of it is mork out for a burn-up around mother earth, because i am skeptical about that, im slightly less skeptical about extraterrestrial long life long distance drones/scientific probes, but still skeptical, but open to the possibility.

See how this works lancy lad, my minds not made up, because for me its impossible to close it to that possibility, considering mankind in a few short years has already got primitive probes out into deep space, see how skepticism works lancy lad.

Not sure how to respond to such a statement. But good luck to you (and hey, nice command of the language--I would respond in kind but skeptics get banned for that sort of thing).

Awe you are so sweet.

 

[exo_doc]

Lance we've had this discussion before about what constitutes evidence.
You keep everyone honest on here at least.
But I have to disagree with your pre-pc photos and films(I don't know about millions) being useless.(To paraphrase you)Not all of them are fuzzy messes. Rex Heflins photos and the Trents photos come to mind.
And there is physical trace evidence that several researchers have. Ted Phillips claims to have over a thousand samples.
So none of them conclusively prove an ET/Interdimensional/time traveling visit......that's ok........I think there is still enough material and evidence to show something worth investigating is happening, whether in the final analysis it turns out to be a psycho-social mass hysteria deal, or natural phenomena, or actual visitors.

Personally, I hope it turns out to be something unheard of before, something we had no idea was out there. Although ET wouldn't make me sad either.

 

[PCarr]

nonsense, theres millions of hours of pre photoshop footage of ariel phenomena if it was all collated.

How about show me 20 minutes of the best? Sincerely, would, love to see it, so long as chain of custody is established and a quality investigation has been documented.

 

[manxman]

wouldnt we all.

 

[Randall]

For those who might be as mathematically challenged as the above saucer buff (if that is even possible) 1 million hours is 114 years of continuous fantastic footage. Ever wonder why you haven't seen any of it?

Ooooh ... nice slam. Like I always say, it's amazing what a little math can do .

 

[Christopher O'Brien]

...i will give anyone odds of 10/1, that lancy boy cannot reply without labelling me, either directly applying my tag or by inference, it will be beyond him, him and the pr1ck known as tim printy are peas in a pod,..,,, well except lancy boy is more cuddly and just nice.

Let's try and keep it civil folks... Please refrain from name calling, thanks.

 

[trainedobserver]

nonsense, theres millions of hours of pre photoshop footage of ariel phenomena if it was all collated.

I'd settle for 60 seconds of something that is not a fuzzy point of light in the distance.

 

[manxman]

you should of done some maths yourself randal, before kissing azz.


there are currently 6.8 billion mobile phones in use on this planet.
List of countries by number of mobile phones in use - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

there are over 3 billion cctv/surveillance/security cameras on this planet currently in operation.

if just one of those devices in a 1000, was pointed at the sky, just once in a year, thats 10 million devices.
if just one of those devices in a 100, caught some ariel strangeness, thats 100,000 examples of footage in one year alone.

and ofcourse theres literally billions of lesser used camera equipement not mentioned.

 

[exo_doc]

Lance, Manxman,.......if I may be intrusive,...........what do you guys think all of the photos, films, eyewitnesses accounts, and physical trace evidence are?
Hoaxes? Stupid people? Mistaken natural phenomena?
With all of the massive ..."stuff"...about UFO's, aliens, abductions, .....I mean decades and centuries of recorded data.
All that is just, ...what? Nothing? Irrelevant?

 

[PCarr]

Lance, Manxman,.......if I may be intrusive,...........what do you guys think all of the photos, films, eyewitnesses accounts, and physical trace evidence are?
Hoaxes? Stupid people? Mistaken natural phenomena?
With all of the massive ..."stuff"...about UFO's, aliens, abductions, .....I mean decades and centuries of recorded data.
All that is just, ...what? Nothing? Irrelevant?

Can you elaborate on what you mean by "all" the photos and films? I know of very few worth even considering. If you have some you've been keeping from us, this would be a good time to come clean.

For a photo or film to count as any sort of evidence, there have to be at least three conditions met:

1 - There must be a clear provenance. Ideally, you would have the camera(s) and the negatives or SD cards right out of the camera. This is rare enough. I am investigating a photo case now (with two cameras, which is even rarer), and the photos are pretty impressive, but I am unable to establish the chain of custody adequately. It's unfortunate, but unless I can do this, I have only pixels on the screen (or more precisely, JPEG files).

2 - There must a be a thorough and careful investigation to rule out all the usual culprits, from lens flares to birds to models to Photoshopping.

3 - independent corroboration.

 

[exo_doc]

Can you elaborate on what you mean by "all" the photos and films? I know of very few worth even considering. If you have some you've been keeping from us, this would be a good time to come clean.

For a photo or film to count as any sort of evidence, there have to be at least three conditions met:

1 - There must be a clear provenance. Ideally, you would have the camera(s) and the negatives or SD cards right out of the camera. This is rare enough. I am investigating a photo case now (with two cameras, which is even rarer), and the photos are pretty impressive, but I am unable to establish the chain of custody adequately. It's unfortunate, but unless I can do this, I have only pixels on the screen (or more precisely, JPEG files).

2 - There must a be a thorough and careful investigation to rule out all the usual culprits, from lens flares to birds to models to Photoshopping.

3 - independent corroboration.

So, there are no photos or films that pass the acid tests above? None? There's not even one that makes you scratch your head?
Do eyewitness accounts mean anything, even by seemingly sincere and honest people?

 

[PCarr]

So, there are no photos or films that pass the acid tests above? None? There's not even one that makes you scratch your head?
Do eyewitness accounts mean anything, even by seemingly sincere and honest people?

There maybe some. I'm on the fence on the Trent photos - there is alot about them that strikes me it would require an expert to fake.

I have investigated two compelling photo cases myself. One of them is pretty much rock, although it's a small image. Unidentified, IMO. The second is much better image quality but I can't establish chain of custody.

 

[exo_doc]

@exo_doc:

Well, its a lot of different things. As I said, almost all of it is inconclusive on the face of it: lights in the sky, vague "landing impressions", worthless collections of stories, etc. There are very few daylight disks with clear structure, very few saucer pieces, etc. Of those, I can't think of a single item that is really compelling (and I think I know all of the famous ones pre-1985). A sad axiom is that the better a UFO photo is, the more likely it will be shown to be a hoax.

The biggest mistake UFO believers make is pointing to the vast pile of, forgive me, shit and thinking that it means something because of volume. It doesn't. Each case must be considered separately. And there is where it all falls apart. I have mentioned elsewhere how invariably the UFO top 10 lists are overrun with dubious cases. And these are supposed to be the best of the best!

Is there something mysterious in all that stuff? Maybe. But haven't you ever felt disappointed as you turned the pages of a UFO book and realized that they were never going to actually get to the good stuff? Did you ever wonder if that was because there really isn't any good stuff?

No I haven't. BUT, that is because we see things differently.
(I think) you look at this from a nuts and bolts concrete problem to solve. Sort of like if a completely disassembled Ferrari was spread out in front of you.
A bolt doesn't make a car.
A cam shaft doesn't make a car.
A muffler doesn't make a car either.
But, if you put them all together -in the correct way- there's a car.
And you are absolutely correct. A bunch of parts do not make a car. It's when seen how they go together, you get a car.

I prefer to see it as a mystery with a buttload of clues, but I like to keep options open.
And I'll be honest, I lean toward the ETH. I said lean, not it must be. I think that kind of attitude is severely counter productive.
But I also take into account eyewitness events too, which you seem to discount- which is ok.
Like I said before, you keep a lot of people on here honest. Me included.

 

[PCarr]

Here's a hearthbreakingly close case:

More "Anonymous" Chicago UFO images, page 1

The woman who took the photographs did not want to be interviewed. The chain of custody stopped with her son. They look really convincing to me, but I don't know how much investigation you can do under these circumstances.

 

[exo_doc]

Here's a hearthbreakingly close case:

More "Anonymous" Chicago UFO images, page 1

The woman who took the photographs did not want to be interviewed. The chain of custody stopped with her son. They look really convincing to me, but I don't know how much investigation you can do under these circumstances.

Hmmm...it looks like a classic saucer. Nice closely taken series of pics. It looks worthy of study to me. Too bad it's anonymous. And they appear to be seven years old. Is that correct?