A Week in a Haunted House

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Not the same thing and as a "supoosed" law student, you know this.

Me saying I saw a UFO is not evidence that UFOs are real. Its just evidence that I said I saw a UFO. Lear the difference.

I don't take kindly to references to my law school days. Please do not go there. Its a personal attack. I don't like where this is going...

evidence that you saw the UFO is evidence of UFO's existing... now you can lower the weight of the evidence by attacking credibility or specifics of the sighting or by alleging that it never happened but its evidence of existence nevertheless

It's really no more evidence as me mistaking a cellphone tower's blinking lights for UFOs.

Evidence of existence is not really seeing it, as most UFO sightings are at night, when there is low visibility and you cannot really tell whether the thing you are looking at is an UFO or not, kinda like what has happened when the military has tested prototype aircraft and the people around the base mistakenly thought they were UFOs.

[Infected Mushroom]

I shall have to ask you not to bring up law school again, my law school past has got nothing to do with this topic

For someone not wanting his past brought up, you keep bringing it up. Are you going to address my points?

I have not brought it up. You brought it up. I do not talk about law school. I do not invite such conversations.

It is your post that brings in my law school past and makes this personalised. There was absolutely no reason to bring it up; you could have argued your point without referencing a personally traumatic experience.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

For someone not wanting his past brought up, you keep bringing it up. Are you going to address my points?

I have not brought it up. You brought it up. I do not talk about law school. I do not invite such conversations.

It is your post that brings in my law school past and makes this personalised. There was absolutely no reason to bring it up; you could have argued your point without referencing a personally traumatic experience.

Again, are you going to address my points or are you going to keep bringing up “that which shall not be named”?

[Infected Mushroom]

I don't take kindly to references to my law school days. Please do not go there. Its a personal attack. I don't like where this is going...

evidence that you saw the UFO is evidence of UFO's existing... now you can lower the weight of the evidence by attacking credibility or specifics of the sighting or by alleging that it never happened but its evidence of existence nevertheless

It's really no more evidence as me mistaking a cellphone tower's blinking lights for UFOs.

Evidence of existence is not really seeing it, as most UFO sightings are at night, when there is low visibility and you cannot really tell whether the thing you are looking at is an UFO or not, kinda like what has happened when the military has tested prototype aircraft and the people around the base mistakenly thought they were UFOs.

I mean, any and all evidence must be taken with a grain of salt. But to dismiss all of the sightings out of hand though? I am sure at least some of them can be explained... perhaps you can even throw a blanket general explanation for all of it but I highly doubt it would cover every single case.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

For someone not wanting his past brought up, you keep bringing it up. Are you going to address my points?

I have not brought it up. You brought it up. I do not talk about law school. I do not invite such conversations.

It is your post that brings in my law school past and makes this personalised. There was absolutely no reason to bring it up; you could have argued your point without referencing a personally traumatic experience.

TIL dropping ambitions to be an attorney is a "traumatic experience".

[Soldati Senza Confini]

It's really no more evidence as me mistaking a cellphone tower's blinking lights for UFOs.

Evidence of existence is not really seeing it, as most UFO sightings are at night, when there is low visibility and you cannot really tell whether the thing you are looking at is an UFO or not, kinda like what has happened when the military has tested prototype aircraft and the people around the base mistakenly thought they were UFOs.

I mean, any and all evidence must be taken with a grain of salt. But to dismiss all of the sightings out of hand though? I am sure at least some of them can be explained... perhaps you can even throw a blanket general explanation for all of it but I highly doubt it would cover every single case.

Not all evidence carries the same weight, though.

Sight-seeing something you think is an alien spacecraft is not, in itself, evidence that alien spacecraft exist.

[Infected Mushroom]

I mean, any and all evidence must be taken with a grain of salt. But to dismiss all of the sightings out of hand though? I am sure at least some of them can be explained... perhaps you can even throw a blanket general explanation for all of it but I highly doubt it would cover every single case.

Not all evidence carries the same weight, though.

Sight-seeing something you think is an alien spacecraft is not, in itself, evidence that alien spacecraft exist.

but when millions of sightings are put together... there is a weight much greater than zero

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Not all evidence carries the same weight, though.

Sight-seeing something you think is an alien spacecraft is not, in itself, evidence that alien spacecraft exist.

but when millions of sightings are put together... there is a weight much greater than zero

Millions of sightings can be wrong, too.

Just because millions of people think putting chicken shit on your face cures acne, does not, in fact, mean applying chicken shit to your face cures acne.

There are more convincing arguments to alien spacecraft (such as the law of really big numbers, essentially, because the universe is uncountably big, there is a chance greater than zero that there is sapient life in the universe besides us, we just have not been able to communicate with them) than millions of sightings.

[Infected Mushroom]

but when millions of sightings are put together... there is a weight much greater than zero

Millions of sightings can be wrong, too.

Just because millions of people think putting chicken shit on your face cures acne, does not, in fact, mean applying chicken shit to your face cures acne.

There are more convincing arguments to alien spacecraft (such as the law of really big numbers, essentially, because the universe is uncountably big, there is a chance greater than zero that there is sapient life in the universe besides us, we just have not been able to communicate with them) than millions of sightings.

millions of people thinking something doesn't make something true, but millions of people seeing something is evidence (though not necessarily perfect existence) for something's existence

a million people thinking that chicken droppings can cure acne is not evidence for it... but a million people have seen or witnessed the event occurring is evidence for it...

there are indeed arguments that can be made in addition to eyewitness testimonies but that's not grounds for the complete out of hand dismissal of the latter

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Millions of sightings can be wrong, too.

Just because millions of people think putting chicken shit on your face cures acne, does not, in fact, mean applying chicken shit to your face cures acne.

There are more convincing arguments to alien spacecraft (such as the law of really big numbers, essentially, because the universe is uncountably big, there is a chance greater than zero that there is sapient life in the universe besides us, we just have not been able to communicate with them) than millions of sightings.

millions of people thinking something doesn't make something true, but millions of people seeing something is evidence (though not necessarily perfect existence) for something's existence

a million people thinking that chicken droppings can cure acne is not evidence for it... but a million people have seen or witnessed the event occurring is evidence for it...

there are indeed arguments that can be made in addition to eyewitness testimonies but that's not grounds for the complete out of hand dismissal of the latter

Millions of people can misinterpret visual feedback to think it's an alien spacecraft.

Our eyes are really not that great at distinguishing stuff at night, which is why we're daytime creatures. Knowing that our eyesight is not that great at night, it is far easier to conclude people are seeing something and misinterpreting as aliens because they don't know what it is and the brain is filling the gaps for them than it is that they have seen actual alien spacecraft, particularly at the millions mark.

[Infected Mushroom]

millions of people thinking something doesn't make something true, but millions of people seeing something is evidence (though not necessarily perfect existence) for something's existence

a million people thinking that chicken droppings can cure acne is not evidence for it... but a million people have seen or witnessed the event occurring is evidence for it...

there are indeed arguments that can be made in addition to eyewitness testimonies but that's not grounds for the complete out of hand dismissal of the latter

Millions of people can misinterpret visual feedback to think it's an alien spacecraft.

Our eyes are really not that great at distinguishing stuff at night, which is why we're daytime creatures.

but its very likely that at least some of those millions of people saw the real thing no? Literally all it takes is for a single person to be right for the thing to exist.

I would agree that some of those millions were mistaken.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Millions of people can misinterpret visual feedback to think it's an alien spacecraft.

Our eyes are really not that great at distinguishing stuff at night, which is why we're daytime creatures.

but its very likely that at least some of those millions of people saw the real thing no? Literally all it takes is for a single person to be right for the thing to exist.

I would agree that some of those millions were mistaken.

It is a possibility, but the possibility, considering the other 7 billion plus of us have not seen it nor do we have further evidence of it other than finite amounts of data, is not that great, if anything at such a low number of sightings it is far more acceptable to conclude that they have misinterpreted what they saw as opposed to believing there's alien spacecraft out there.

The number of sightings are not, in itself, a proof that it exists. As there are literally thousands of things going on at night that could explain what they saw, and as I said, our eyesight is not all that great for starters at nighttime.

[Infected Mushroom]

but its very likely that at least some of those millions of people saw the real thing no? Literally all it takes is for a single person to be right for the thing to exist.

I would agree that some of those millions were mistaken.

It is a possibility, but the possibility, considering the other 7 billion plus of us have not seen it nor do we have further evidence of it other than finite amounts of data, is not that great, if anything at such a low number of sightings it is far more acceptable to conclude that they have misinterpreted what they saw as opposed to believing there's alien spacecraft out there.

The number of sightings are not, in itself, a proof that it exists. As there are literally thousands of things going on at night that could explain what they saw, and as I said, our eyesight is not all that great for starters at nighttime.

it makes sense that the other 7 billion haven't seen ghosts because the number of haunted locations is low relative to the entire human population

the sightings are not "proof" (in that they conclusively demonstrate anything) but they do constitute some weight of evidence in favour for the existence of ghosts... I find it improbable that tricks of the light/hallucinations do explain every single instance without fail.

Think about it, only one person needs to have seen the real thing (out of all the millions/billions of sightings) for ghosts to be real. I find that there is substantial probability... the alternate requires that literally all of them are wrong

[Soldati Senza Confini]

It is a possibility, but the possibility, considering the other 7 billion plus of us have not seen it nor do we have further evidence of it other than finite amounts of data, is not that great, if anything at such a low number of sightings it is far more acceptable to conclude that they have misinterpreted what they saw as opposed to believing there's alien spacecraft out there.

The number of sightings are not, in itself, a proof that it exists. As there are literally thousands of things going on at night that could explain what they saw, and as I said, our eyesight is not all that great for starters at nighttime.

it makes sense that the other 7 billion haven't seen ghosts because the number of haunted locations is low relative to the entire human population

the sightings are not "proof" (in that they conclusively demonstrate anything) but they do constitute some weight of evidence in favour for the existence of ghosts... I find it improbable that tricks of the light/hallucinations do explain every single instance without fail.

Think about it, only one person needs to have seen the real thing (out of all the millions/billions of sightings) for ghosts to be real. I find that there is substantial probability... the alternate requires that literally all of them are wrong

One person claiming to have knowledge we don't seems to me enough reason to be skeptical of their claim.

It might be true, but until we don't have evidence that proves it beyond "I saw it" it is healthy to have skepticism over it.

[The Foxes Swamp]

Or another one, ghosts are real.

But that's a ridiculous claim. The least plausible possibility doesn't have equal weight to the most plausible ones.

personally i always come back to Harry Martindale's experience of seeing roman soldiers and the back story of historians asking about the soldiers descriptions and them telling him he must have been mistaken and 40 years later they learned that the description he gave was correct which says to me he most definitely seen something and the evidence for that is his description of the soldiers.

[Constitutional Technocracy of Minecraft]

It's really no more evidence as me mistaking a cellphone tower's blinking lights for UFOs.

Evidence of existence is not really seeing it, as most UFO sightings are at night, when there is low visibility and you cannot really tell whether the thing you are looking at is an UFO or not, kinda like what has happened when the military has tested prototype aircraft and the people around the base mistakenly thought they were UFOs.

I mean, any and all evidence must be taken with a grain of salt. But to dismiss all of the sightings out of hand though? I am sure at least some of them can be explained... perhaps you can even throw a blanket general explanation for all of it but I highly doubt it would cover every single case.

Practically all reported UFO sightings are one of these things: unusual atmospheric events, meteors, weather balloons, (often experimental) military aircraft, radar echoes, or deliberate hoaxes (the classic "flying saucer" was actually a modified chicken feeder)

[The Supreme Magnificent High Swaglord]

*snip*
Your friend will give you 10,000 USD if you stay one of the most haunted houses in the United Kingdom for a week.
*snip*

Oh, I'd gladly enter the haunted house, for I am not afraid of ghosts or the possibility of ghosts; the problem is that, well, I like money. As such, I would demand far more than $10,000; perhaps $10,000,000?

[Galloism]

I don't take kindly to references to my law school days.

Interesting. Past tense?

Couldn’t hack it, eh?

[Infected Mushroom]

I don't take kindly to references to my law school days.

Interesting. Past tense?

Couldn’t hack it, eh?

Back off

[Galloism]

Interesting. Past tense?

Couldn’t hack it, eh?

Back off

No hostility intended. Law school is really hard. I’m sure you did your best.

[Infected Mushroom]

Back off

No hostility intended. Law school is really hard. I’m sure you did your best.

I am going to tell you what I should have told the last person in real life who used this disgusting tactic on me:

You do not get to assume ANYTHING. And I have NO OBLIGATION to confirm or deny any of your unfounded assumptions. For the record, I do not confirm nor deny. Now, BACK... OFF.

Do not talk about my law school experience, it is a sensitive topic.

Stop derailing this thread and stay out of my personal affairs.

[Huntpublic]

idk about anyone else but I have a small feeling that sooner or later a mod is going to lock this thread. Atleast if it keeps heading in this direction

[Infected Mushroom]

I mean, any and all evidence must be taken with a grain of salt. But to dismiss all of the sightings out of hand though? I am sure at least some of them can be explained... perhaps you can even throw a blanket general explanation for all of it but I highly doubt it would cover every single case.

Practically all reported UFO sightings are one of these things: unusual atmospheric events, meteors, weather balloons, (often experimental) military aircraft, radar echoes, or deliberate hoaxes (the classic "flying saucer" was actually a modified chicken feeder)

Perhaps but literally all it takes is for ONE SIGHTING to be correct and UFOs exist. That's an incredibly low threshold.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Practically all reported UFO sightings are one of these things: unusual atmospheric events, meteors, weather balloons, (often experimental) military aircraft, radar echoes, or deliberate hoaxes (the classic "flying saucer" was actually a modified chicken feeder)

Perhaps but literally all it takes is for ONE SIGHTING to be correct and UFOs exist. That's an incredibly low threshold.

An incredible claim requires incredible evidence tbh.

If one sighting is true, then I am sure that person has an extraordinary level of evidence that proves, beyond doubt, that this sighting is true.

[Infected Mushroom]

Perhaps but literally all it takes is for ONE SIGHTING to be correct and UFOs exist. That's an incredibly low threshold.

An incredible claim requires incredible evidence tbh.

If one sighting is true, then I am sure that person has an extraordinary level of evidence that proves, beyond doubt, that this sighting is true.

If one sighting is true, then I am sure that person has an extraordinary level of evidence that proves, beyond doubt, that this sighting is true.

Hmmmm... Not really?

You can have a true sighting of something without anything else to back it up. It doesn't make it not true, it would just be disbelieved (and incorrectly so).

For example, maybe the truth is XYZ. I come up with a completely wrong and nonsensical equation that shows truth = XYZ. I am disbelieved... but the truth is still XYZ.

Truth =/= there is excessive proof for it