No, I don't mean people are illiterate or unskilled, but as with a soldier, one has to be educated and trained to look for tell-tale signs of an enemy and to act accordingly. Meaning, that most folks don't have what it takes in proper training and specific education to separate a distorted view of a common object from that of a truly mysterious object. We can take all the pictures with cameras we want, but even the best picture in this digital age can be easily dismissed and rightly so. However, coupled with several witnesses testimony, specific sensor data, then those images gain a greater importance. All this takes proper training and specialized education.
This is not for self satisfying ones' own abiding curiosity, since for most people that is easily achieved through simple belief in what they've seen. Although some might suffer doubt, having a image on hand to remind them of what they saw usually serves to quell their uncertainties. Too many. however, to those that didn't experience the sighting, to the doubters and skeptics, the proof they require is unattainable without having extraordinary irrefutable proof slap them in the face a few dozen times before they can even think of considering the reality of UFOs and their occupants. And some will deny that sort of reality with their last breath.
It becomes more and more difficult to adhere to the science behind a sighting, when that sighting begins to be attacked on a regular basis. Usually, those doing the attacks are less versed in the sciences than the average person. These people use as much pseudo-science as claimed by skeptics of believers. And, if all else fails then the demand is made for extraordinary proof.
The phrase, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" was popularized by Carl Sagan, although there have been different version of the same meaning throughout the last several hundreds of year, yet this sort of thinking, by some so called skeptics, leads to what is known as pseudo-skepticism.
Marcello Truzzi who was a skeptic -and founding co-chairman of the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP), a founder of the Society for Scientific Exploration,[1] and director for the Center for Scientific Anomalies Research-, also stated, "An extraordinary claim requires extraordinary proof.", attributed the following characteristics to pseudo-skeptics:
- Denying, when only doubt has been established
- Double standards in the application of criticism
- The tendency to discredit rather than investigate
- Presenting insufficient evidence or proof
- Assuming criticism requires no burden of proof
- Making unsubstantiated counter-claims
- Counter-claims based on plausibility rather than empirical evidence
- Suggesting that unconvincing evidence provides grounds for completely dismissing a claim
Truzzi also characterized true skepticism as:
- Acceptance of doubt when neither assertion nor denial has been established
- No burden of proof to take an agnostic position
- Agreement that the corpus of established knowledge must be based on what is proved, but recognizing its incompleteness
- Even-handedness in requirement for proofs, whatever their implication
- Accepting that a failure of a proof in itself proves nothing
- Continuing examination of the results of experiments even when flaws are found
The problem with pseudo-skeptics is they usually end up trying to prove a person wrong, and in doing so defeat the purpose they claim to adhere to.
A inexplicable event is witnessed by several people, or perhaps by several hundred people, photographs and video are taken, and even some radar and other sensor data supports what was observed, but in the end, we don't have anything we can touch, smell, or taste, hence we have no defining proof that explains what was seen. Despite the visual and sensor evidence, it remains an unknown. Yet, the pseudo-skeptics are out in force denying the existence of what was seen, and offering very little in return. Actually, nothing in return.
The drab explanations of the pseudo-skeptic are so tired and so contrived that even they must feel some shame and embarrassment at their own nonsensical explanation. One can only hope, however.
On the other side of the pseudo coin is another one just as bad as the pseudo-skeptic and that's the true believer.
I won't go too deeply into the issues with true believers, suffice to say that they are the exact opposite of the pseudo-skeptic, in that their belief is that every sighting is a UFO crewed by extraterrestrials from Pluto, or people from another dimension, or from the future, or the past, or an alternate universe. Their belief system becomes wholly problematic without any recourse to sound logic.
Now, after that long and winding road, I'll return to the main thrust of this post; training and education.
In order to properly address the skeptics (forget the pseudo-skeptics) on their own turf, so to speak, one must be ready to battle with the logic of science and the perseverance of facts, to capture and hold the attention of these skeptical science types. This requires a tune up of the brain and knowledge centers. One must be versed, and soundly understand, the science that is used to provide intellectual consideration by people who don't normally venture beyond the gates of speculation.
Naturally, no one is actually seeking to be a scientist just to prove a point, but to gain any purchase into the scientific world you do have to wear the garb of a scientist- to think like a scientist, talk like a scientist, so to be understood and accepted by scientists.
Menu
Birthdays
Clock
Search
Attachments
Top Posters
Newest members
Link to us