THC> RT> No, but it must be available to and testable by the existing 
scientifi
   > RT> community.  Otherwise, yes... the claims are without validity.
THC>Just because a claim is not immediately testable does not mean it is not 
va
   >It simply means it can't be tested at present.  Future testing, when 
finall
   >available, may or may not show the claim's validity.
Ok... I'll grant you that.  It is conceivable that within all the UFO
hype, there are some valid ET encounters... conceivable, but IMO, highly
improbable .  But those claims do nothing to reach a conclusion until
they are validated, substantiated, and shown to be proof of alien
presence.  As long as the claimant holds the evidence away from the
public and just _talks_ about it, it is without value to the rest of us.
THC>   >> The "skeptics" do not have to provide any
   >   >> special evidence to back up their own claims (e.g. "I won't do your
   >   >> researc for you.")
   > RT>
   > RT> I think that is fair...  the believer is the one making the claim.  
He
   > RT> should be the one backing it up.  Convenient for the skeptic, no 
doubt
   > RT> but nevertheless, thats the way the world works.
THC>The believer is making a claim when he says that a UFO he saw was an 
lien
   >spacecraft.  However, the skeptic is ALSO making a claim when he says 
that 
   >the UFO was a weather balloon.
Again, I have to agree.  If the debunker claims an absolute alternative
to the ET hypothesis, it is up to him to substantiate that position.
The problem we have here is that in many cases, the event can be easily
explained by mundane events... events that happen every day, but to
prove that this particular event is ordinary is impossible because the
debunker has no more physical evidence than the witness. This is were
we use the balance sheet, the preponderance of the evidence, to reach an
opinion.
Where, IMO, the fallacy of the true believer comes in is that he rejects
all the possibilities of mundane events in favor of the one explanation,
aliens... just because he can't explain the event.  It seems that he
WANTS to believe in ET so he isn't willing to accept the sensible (IMO
) alternatives.  I don't understand that.
---
 þ QMPro 1.02 42-7029 þ This tagline guaranteed against defects in 
workmanship.
---------------