Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    alt.conspiracy    |    How big is your tinfoil hat?    |    97,877 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 96,890 of 97,877    |
|    JTEM to All    |
|    Youtube Video: The Real Story Behind the    |
|    22 Oct 25 15:47:03    |
      XPost: sci.skeptic, alt.atheism, alt.alien.research       XPost: alt.paranormal       From: jtem01@gmail.com              DISCLOSURE: I included alt.paranormal because for some reason       or another, and nobody ever explained it to me, aliens/UFOs       are grouped with the paranormal.                            https://youtu.be/uNix0UImPpo?si=MEvWa0y-GKFOp67R              One massive complaint is their example of the scientific process.              Nope.              A hypothesis explains the evidence AND is the basis for predictions.              These predictions are subject to scientific experimentation.              IT'S THESE PREDICTIONS WHICH CAN BE FALSIFIED! The experimentation,       if it fails to produce the predicted result, FALSIFIES the       hypothesis.              NOTE: This is why Gwobull Warbling is fake. DECADES of falsified       predictions yet the conclusions are still clung to like a drowning       man holding a life preserver...              Now, the "Science" they describe tries to "Prove" alternative       explanations for the evidence of life on Mars -- explanations that       do not require life. They failed. These alternatives they tested       were falsified, or so the video tells us. That those can't possibly       "Prove" that there's life on Mars. To do that you need to make       some "Sound Scientific Inferences," i.e. predictions, and then test       THOSE!              NOTE II: I'm on record stating that NASA isn't looking for life       on Mars. Or they're lying to us. And you know this for a fact because       I just told you, of course...              Okay, so NASA actually stated that they were avoiding the areas they       viewed as most likely to support life. Their reasons, as they explained,       was that they were afraid of contaminating those places with life from       earth that maybe clung to the rover. "Contamination." KEEP THIS IN MIND.              NASA's optics can't see most bacterial life on earth, and it it can't       possibly see the structures in the famous "Mars Rock" that are believed       by many to be fossilized life.              Put the two together -- avoiding places most likely to support life       right now, optics that can't see the vast majority of earth microbes --       and either NASA isn't searching at all, or they're searching for       something very specific.              Go back to NASA's excuse for avoiding the most promising locations:              They're worried about seeding them with earth contamination on the       rovers.              Ive got news for you: We are *Way* better at decontaminating our       space missions today than we were in the past, and we're not really       great at it today. So if it is an issue now, earth contamination, it       has been an even bigger issue over the past 60 years or so...              Look. Even missions never intended to land on Mars were likely       sources of contamination. How? SOME WERE LOST! For all we know they       crashed on Mars! And if they were a lot worse at decontaminating       their vehicles back then than we are now, and we're not great at it       now, there is a very real possibility that Mars has been contaminated.              What do you do?              Well you assume that Mars has been contaminated. So if we want Mars       life, what we really need to find is NOT microbial life but macrobial.              If we found something large enough to see with NASA's shitty optics,       that points to indigenous life. If we found multicellular life, that       would be VERY powerful evidence! But, also...              If we found FOSSILIZED life, that would point towards indigenous       life on Mars... the older the better.              The older the life, the more complex, the stronger the case for       indigenous life... A SEPARATE ORIGINS!              Well. Not really. We couldn't rule out a Martian origins for life       on earth, now could we? A volcanic eruption or asteroid strike       could have sent life bearing material hurling towards earth... Mars       could have seeded the earth!                            --       https://jtem.tumblr.com/tagged/The%20Book%20of%20JTEM/page/5              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca