Why do non believers put their opinions out as facts?
I see numerous answers that are just a person's opinion and are presented as unequivocal fact. You know, ghosts don't exist, PSI is fake, UFOs are all hallucinations or fakes.
2010-12-05T05:12:43Z
I am not talking about religions. I am talking is a strictly secular sense.PSI was recently proved by a Cornell University researcher. He did an experiment to test the theory of precognition. He did the tests with several different groups, He came to the conclusion that it is indeed real. His results were published in a psychology magazine. As for UFOs, there are more believers in the idea than there are nonbelievers. Most governments around the world freely admit UFOs are real. I am not suggesting people can't have their own opinions, just don't present i as the absolute truth.
2010-12-05T05:23:09Z
Most nonbelievers present themselves as scientists, but show no scientific curiosity. Why is this happening:? After all. isn't science about discovering new infomation?
2010-12-05T05:41:48Z
The Cornell results are irrefutable evidence of precognition. HIs methods meet every standard of science. About 3 to 4 % of UFO reports are irrefutable according to Project Blue Book, the most intensive study of UFOs ever. Even Edward Condon (the ultimate nonbeliever) admitted in his study that there are genuine reports of UFO activity that cannot be disputed. That is my complaint. You NEVER study the phenomena before answering. That is what makes your answers just opinions. Wish, you did just what I'm saying, you state there is no evidence to back up believers, yet I just presented you with the proof. Now, the question becomes, are you going to read these reports?
Tom2010-12-05T16:48:24Z
Favorite Answer
Science is about approaching a theory and reproducing it in order to validate or invalidate it. In many of the things of a paranormal nature the methods that have shown to provide answers in other areas are assumed to be valid for things that are not applicable. Being that paranormal activities by nature are not normal occurrences they are difficult to understand and develop new methods in order to provide testing. To do the testing one would need to be able to control the event but without even understanding the occurrence, it is not likely that the event can be controlled to reproduce, thus providing failed testing. It is not only possible but probable that the methodology used is partially responsible for the failure to provide any commonly accepted evidence. Being that evidence is unavailable many who base their assumptions on the lack of evidence will claim to use Occam's Razor which attempts to rationalize with the minimal amount of assumptions based on what is already known. This not only still makes use of assumptions but makes use of the assumption that what is already known is applicable for the basis of the assumptions made.
Another ideology of those who claim science as a basis is to quote that it is up to the person who makes the claim to provide evidence in a manner that is acceptable by scientific methodology to verify the claim. This would mean that the non-scientist would be required to provide the scientist with the evidence within the scope of tried and tested failed methods to validate something that has shown the inability to be tested in the desired manner. If scientists are them self unable to come up with new theories for things that can not be explained without assumptions, how do they expect non-scientists to do what they are not competent enough to do in their own field? When someone does come up with new theories and results that do not follow traditional methodology the results and the theory are disregarded by many because they cannot successfully apply the former methods to test the new methods.
It is not that science is not able to make advancements and correct itself but rather it takes accepting new approaches that do not fit the comfortably accepted methods. It is true that there have been advancements in various areas of the paranormal with new theories and methods but until understanding progresses to the point where new theoretical methods can become common there are many who will remain in their comfort zone of denial.
I think your selection of the phrase "non believers" is a good one, as the "The New International Webster's Comprehensive Dictionary" has as one definition for the word believe (number 6) as "To have religious faith". So therein lies your answer, belief in all manner of paranormal phenomena requires a faith, that is, a complete suspension of skepticism and critical thinking so that the individual can accept, without regard to contradictory evidence of mundane explanations for their experiences, any and all apparently supernatural events.
The thing is, you "believers" have latched onto things which occur naturally (but don't recognize them as natural), and then spout off that there is something beyond the norm going on. You have no evidence for any of it, so you simply use anecdotal evidence, fuzzy photos, and incomprehensible audio recordings (i.e., EVP's) as evidence that provides nothing concrete. Always with UFOs there is someone who interviewed some guy that knows some unnamed person that has some artifact from an alien ship, but won't let anyone see it to find out if the mythical object is really of extraterrestrial origin.
Are we just supposed to "believe" you people on the face of such flimsy evidence? You should stop complaining about we doubters unless you can present us with something tangible and irrefutable.
We don't want to believe, we want to KNOW!
EDIT: "PSI was recently proved by a Cornell University researcher. He did an experiment to test the theory of precognition. He did the tests with several different groups, He came to the conclusion that it is indeed real. His results were published in a psychology magazine." -Proved? Nothing is ever "proven" (except in mathematics), this shows just how little you know about science, as you criticize skeptics for their lack of scientific curiosity! So, how many other researchers have duplicated the results this Cornell guy achieved? We usually discover the methodological flaws of the myriad of other such research that has shown positive results, this example you provide here will likely meet the same fate.
"As for UFOs, there are more believers in the idea than there are nonbelievers. Most governments around the world freely admit UFOs are real. I am not suggesting people can't have their own opinions, just don't present i as the absolute truth." -The majority is often wrong, there was a time when most everyone believed in witches, and many an innocent person was executed for being one, do you believe in witches? True, everyone can have an opinion, why is it that you, and other "believers" present your opinions as absolute truth?
"Most nonbelievers present themselves as scientists, but show no scientific curiosity. Why is this happening:? After all. isn't science about discovering new Information?" -How do you know this? I think you are using purely anecdotal evidence for this. That is, only what you read here on Y!A, in this section. And yes, science is about discovering new information, but it IS NOT about jumping to premature conclusions.
"The Cornell results are irrefutable evidence of precognition. HIs methods meet every standard of science. About 3 to 4 % of UFO reports are irrefutable according to Project Blue Book, the most intensive study of UFOs ever. Even Edward Condon (the ultimate nonbeliever) admitted in his study that there are genuine reports of UFO activity that cannot be disputed. That is my complaint. You NEVER study the phenomena before answering. That is what makes your answers just opinions. Wish, you did just what I'm saying, you state there is no evidence to back up believers, yet I just presented you with the proof. Now, the question becomes, are you going to read these reports?" -See my earlier comments on this study. When the results are duplicated by unbiased researchers under properly controlled conditions, you may have something. As for UFOs, what evidence? The best photos and video the proponents have to offer are not good enough. Gives us an alloy which cannot possibly be of terrestrial origin, a tool, an ashtray, a book, something. Why is it that the evidence that supposedly exists, NEVER is available for independent examination? Answer that, or stop crying about the naysayers! I.ve read the reports, and so have people with far greater knowledge than I have, and they have come to the same conclusion: its all a bunch of BS!
This is the science section so lets look at things in a scientific fashion. We know that hallucinations exist, and how they can occur. We know that there are many things in the sky that create lights that most civilian viewers can't immediately identify, but are not necessarily unexplainable objects. We know that no psychic or telekinetic, or any person claiming to have paranormal abilities has come forth and empirically (meaning that they can mathematically beat someone without the ability) proven their abilities exist.
All these things we know about for certain.
However, we have no hard evidence (evidence that isn't easily disputed) that ghosts exist, Aliens are visiting earth, or that anyone has psychic abilities.
These statements are fact, not opinion. Stating that you believe Aliens are here, ghosts exist, or that psychic abilities exist is an opinion, regardless of whether its true or not. Whats more, such a belief takes a lot of faith since its not supported by any hard evidence, and in fact, its a stretch to believe such things since they violate all our knowledge of the world.
I have to ask you this. Do you really think we should all take all this information without question? No other branch of science requires that. Naysayers, and non-believers are just as abundant in any other field of science, and they are part of the scientific structure and necessary if we ever want to know the truth about anything. Even in fields like geology and biology there are those who challenge and fight new discoveries and ideas. Why is it in the paranormal field, they poo-poo progressive thinking?
I really enjoy Yahoo Answers. I come and go from this site when work is slow. I left for a couple of months while working 50 plus hour weeks. I come back to this section and find the same people here, day after day, year after year posting the same narrow minded negative crap. I cant believe these people do this day after day. For example I find UFOs and the stories behind them hard to believe. I couldn't imagine spending years, every day coming to a site and rambling how much I do not believe in it. What I am saying is: why would someone put some many hours into something they do not like or believe in? What is the logic?
It is the responsibility of the one with claims to back them up with evidences. So far, no one, ever, has been able to bring up evidences (that is, things that are not blatant forgeries, miss-interpretation by someone lacking the knowledge and expertise to recognize things for what they are, etc.) of ghosts, ESP and alien visits.