UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2008 > Oct > Oct 16

Re: Kumburgaz Turkey UFO Videos

From: Dick Hall <dh12.nul>
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 12:45:51 -0400
Archived: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 22:34:40 -0400
Subject: Re: Kumburgaz Turkey UFO Videos 


>From: Ray Dickenson <r.dickenson.nul>
>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 21:21:25 +0100
>Subject: Re: Kumburgaz Turkey UFO Videos

>>From: Dick Hall <dh12.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 08:38:19 -0400
>>Subject: Re: Kumburgaz Turkey UFO Videos

>>From: Steven Kaeser <steve.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 08:59:25 -0400
>>Subject: Re: Kumburgaz Turkey UFO Videos

>>From: Martin Shough <parcellular.nul>
>>To: <ufoupdates.nul>
>>Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 14:02:07 +0100
>>Subject: Re: Kumburgaz Turkey UFO Videos

>Hello All, have to lump you together since you're now arguing
>'rationality', 'economy' and 'lack of resources'.

I refuse to be lumped. This is not my argument at all, though it
has merit from the standpoint of pragmatism. I argue that the
failure to screen raw data leads to wasted time and contaminated
databases. Not to mention publicity and attention for
charlatans.

Further, everyday life provides many examples of what I am
talking about. If you have a serious medical condition, I am
sure you don't consult just any alleged doctor, or include
reputed quacks among your choices. You assess their credentials.

Sure, the "scientific investigaton" (experiment) might pick up
on a quack, the hard way.

>>From earlier stuff you should've seen that it doesn't matter if
>'bad cases' get on the data-set:

>www.perceptions.couk.com/methods.html#reality

> - a scientific investigation will pick them up. Indeed they can
>make for useful comparisons.

>The point of this argument is that any exclusion of data - and
>many/most investigators can be guilty of this if they 'edit'
>witness statements to make them more acceptable - is a potential
>loss of vital clues. And, if you think about it, it's a vote for
>the status quo - no real progress.

Here again it comes down to your rather broad-minded, open-ended
definition of "data." Of course you don't exclude valid data,
but you damn well better distinguish between genuine data and
garbage. Not to do so makes a travesty of science.


Dick




Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast

See:

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/subscribers/


[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp


Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com