|
|
Post by bear on Feb 9, 2021 6:42:56 GMT -7
Thanks for another cherry picked example to justify your perspective and willful ignorance of the larger analysis.
Please read and update your knowledge base. There is more contained in those 100 pages than you will ever find on gaiagargle and collectivecuntiousness.
|
|
|
|
aLiEnS
Feb 9, 2021 6:46:44 GMT -7
via mobile
Post by bear on Feb 9, 2021 6:46:44 GMT -7
this contains the strong case for no visitation. Check it out. |
|
|
|
aLiEnS
Feb 9, 2021 7:16:04 GMT -7
Post by lordkundalini on Feb 9, 2021 7:16:04 GMT -7
|
|
|
|
aLiEnS
Feb 9, 2021 7:22:47 GMT -7
Post by Don Swifty on Feb 9, 2021 7:22:47 GMT -7
Nobody has ever accused your links of creating straw man arguments. Just you, when you fall back on the whole "those ancient civilizations must all be lying," among other straw man arguments you´ve created in the past to argue against when you chose to ignore what others are actually saying.
We get it. It´s a hell of a lot easier to argue against a straw man than to address the actual points made to your posts.
|
|
|
|
aLiEnS
Feb 9, 2021 7:25:05 GMT -7
Post by lordkundalini on Feb 9, 2021 7:25:05 GMT -7
this contains the strong case for no visitation. Check it out. i see no strong evidence. Just some opinions. so what evidence to you is strong.
lets hear it!
|
|
|
|
aLiEnS
Feb 9, 2021 7:27:29 GMT -7
via mobile
Post by bear on Feb 9, 2021 7:27:29 GMT -7
Read the book you fucking donkey
|
|
|
|
Post by higs on Feb 9, 2021 7:35:05 GMT -7
I'm not even sure what lork's point is anymore. I'm not sure if he does either.
|
|
|
|
Post by Don Swifty on Feb 9, 2021 8:13:37 GMT -7
Read the book you fucking donkey  |
|
|
|
Post by Don Swifty on Feb 9, 2021 8:35:07 GMT -7
I'm not even sure what lork's point is anymore. I'm not sure if he does either. Something about you can´t prove what lork´s suggesting is not possible, therefore he believes it´s highly probable, and he doesn´t go for that whole concept that the person who makes a claim has the burden of proving their argument, instead prefering to shift the burden of proof to any skeptic for them to prove that his arguments are false - pretty much the exact opposite of how the legal system and scientific method work when it comes to burden of proof. "Aliens built the´first In ´n´Out Burger in Egypt ten thousand years ago." "Really? Do you have any evidence that that is true?" "I read on the internet where some guy said that an ancient scroll had a symbol that looked very similar to the In ´n´Out logo and there was another symbol that looked like a double-double. That´s good enough for me." "uh....... that´s not really proo -" "Do you have evidence that aliens didn´t build the first In ´n´Out Burger in Egypt?" "No, but I´m not the one claiming they did, so the burden of proof isn´t on me to -" "Since you can´t prove that aliens didn´t build an In ´n´Out Burger in Egypt it´s highly probable that they did." "That´s not how the burden of proof and the scientific method work." "So you think those ancient Egyptians were lying then."  |
|
|
|
Post by bear on Feb 9, 2021 8:53:33 GMT -7
“The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him.” - Leo Tolstoy
|
|
|
|
Post by Don Swifty on Feb 9, 2021 8:58:22 GMT -7
|
|
|
|
Post by Don Swifty on Feb 9, 2021 8:59:22 GMT -7
|
|
|
|
aLiEnS
Feb 9, 2021 11:44:15 GMT -7
Post by lordkundalini on Feb 9, 2021 11:44:15 GMT -7
Read the book you fucking donkey so you are unable to present a powerful argument for non visitation.
I didnt think you could. lol
|
|
|
|
aLiEnS
Feb 9, 2021 11:45:08 GMT -7
via mobile
bear likes this
Post by deadphishbiscuits on Feb 9, 2021 11:45:08 GMT -7
I guess to that same question, where is your presentation of a powerful argument on that they HAVE visited?
|
|
|
|
aLiEnS
Feb 9, 2021 12:00:26 GMT -7
Post by lordkundalini on Feb 9, 2021 12:00:26 GMT -7
I guess to that same question, where is your presentation of a powerful argument on that they HAVE visited? nothing will be proved.
just a lot of data from thru out time, from many different sources.
no one data set is the smoking gun, but when you combine them all, it becomes robust and makes the case for non-visitation look weak comparatively
thats why Bear dont post any data. he just link books, post memes and name calls to deflect. understandable. its all he got. a weak case.
|
|
|
|
aLiEnS
Feb 9, 2021 12:19:32 GMT -7
Post by lordkundalini on Feb 9, 2021 12:19:32 GMT -7
oh and you have to keep in mind. you only need 1 data point to be correct of the thousands of data points available to look at.
so essentially, every claimed sighting thru out time wrong
every whistle blower is lying.
ancient civs made up seeing craft land and making contact, thats alot of ancient civs to get it wrong.
I find it highly unlikely
|
|
|
|
aLiEnS
Feb 9, 2021 12:31:52 GMT -7
via mobile
Post by bear on Feb 9, 2021 12:31:52 GMT -7
Read the book you fucking donkey so you are unable to present a powerful argument for non visitation.
I didnt think you could. lol
read The Book Then Come Back And Refute The Vast Mountain Of Evidence |
|
|
|
aLiEnS
Feb 9, 2021 12:35:14 GMT -7
via mobile
Post by bear on Feb 9, 2021 12:35:14 GMT -7
I guess to that same question, where is your presentation of a powerful argument on that they HAVE visited? nothing will be proved.
just a lot of data from thru out time, from many different sources.
no one data set is the smoking gun, but when you combine them all, it becomes robust and makes the case for non-visitation look weak comparatively
thats why Bear dont post any data. he just link books, post memes and name calls to deflect. understandable. its all he got. a weak case.
read the book. It has the data. Click it. Open it. Peruse. Absorb. Know. Then come back and disprove it. It's in there but you're ignoring it because you're a fucking donkey. |
|
|
|
aLiEnS
Feb 9, 2021 12:53:45 GMT -7
Post by lordkundalini on Feb 9, 2021 12:53:45 GMT -7
so you are unable to present a powerful argument for non visitation.
I didnt think you could. lol
read The Book Then Come Back And Refute The Vast Mountain Of Evidence so you still cant present a coherent argument against visitation. I didnt think you could. lol |
|
|
|
aLiEnS
Feb 9, 2021 12:56:59 GMT -7
Post by lordkundalini on Feb 9, 2021 12:56:59 GMT -7
nothing will be proved.
just a lot of data from thru out time, from many different sources.
no one data set is the smoking gun, but when you combine them all, it becomes robust and makes the case for non-visitation look weak comparatively
thats why Bear dont post any data. he just link books, post memes and name calls to deflect. understandable. its all he got. a weak case.
read the book. It has the data. Click it. Open it. Peruse. Absorb. Know. Then come back and disprove it. It's in there but you're ignoring it because you're a fucking donkey. calling me a donkey . thats the best you got. couldnt you just post your argument,, weak as it may be!!! lol
. I scanned thru it. saw nothing all that powerful.
keep deflecting!! I await you argument for non visitation
if you have the mental capability to present one. at this point, i have to assume you dont.
so in your mind whats the most powerful evidence Sagan provides. simple thing for a smart guy like you right? lmfao
|
|
