There is plenty in Leslie Kean's recent book on UFOs. Credible eye witnesses as well as government documents showing that they take the subject very seriously.
Every self-respecting UFO believer thinks there's such a thing as a "credible eye witness" and government documents supporting their fantasies. It's standard fare.
Again, I yet have no idea what you mean by UFOs. There's the actual definition, which means unidentified flying object, which nobody should object to. Then there's the woo definition, wherein unidentified flying objects are identified as alien spacecraft and what have you. It's one thing to say, "I don't know what that was." It's quite another to claim, "Look, aliens!"
FWIW, eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable.
Richard Dolan's books cover the same ground.
Every "UFO" woo book covers essentially the same ground as all others.
For whatever reason, you seem to be assuming I'm not familiar with Kean and Dolan.
You can find their articles on the Internet as well.
Yes. Unfortunately, the mass availability of information doesn't make it true. I've yet to see a purported "UFO" photograph or video that allowed anything like unambiguous observation and interpretation. We're always exposed to a blurry mess, or someone's imagination hard at work over a blob of something blown up to grain, or a point of light in the distance, or ignorance of radar technology (ala Leslie Kean), or something like the obscenely fake "orbs" in the Jerusalem videos that hit the Internet recently. For a phenomenon supposedly so common and far-reaching, some people sure have a hard time producing coherent, clear evidence. Even worse, a significant percentage of "UFO" proponents seem more than happy to draw amazing conclusions from these anemic sets of data (again ala Kean, Dolan, et al.).
I hope this addresses your points.
My point is that 1) I'm familiar with the arguments of UFO proponents in general, and 2) I don't have to refute a proxy argument. You can't say, "Bob provides good evidence," and thereby consider your case made. Maybe you aren't trying to argue, but are just pointing me toward information that you think mirrors your own views on the subject. If so, that's fine, but you aren't pointing me toward anything that I haven't seen many times before.
I'll discuss this with you until the cows come home, if you're so inclined. However, let's do so in the Off-Topic section. I think your OP here has been dealt with.
Cognitive Dissident (guest) 19 Mar 2011 05:49
