-=> Quoting George Jiri Opletal to Paul Andinach <=-
 PA> That is the world view that skeptics are supposedly striving to
 PA> achieve. Anything is possible, in theory, so we have to look at
 PA> what's more probable.
 GJO> Within the laws of physics.
   Skeptically speaking, we don't actually *know* that the laws of physics 
are true. We just make that assumption because we've never seen them go 
rong.
   But, yes, the alternative that stays within the laws of physics is 
considered more likely than the alternative that doesn't.
 PA> For example, UFOs. It is possible that they're alien spacecraft.
 PA> It is also possible that they're ghosts,
 GJO> No likely, it brings in far more complexity into the problem.
   I know. That was part of my point.
 PA> interdimensional travelers,
 GJO> How is that possible?  No one yet knows.
   If no-one yet knows, then no-one knows it's impossible.
   So it remains a possibility. It's not very probable, but it is possible.
 GJO> If these are not human time travelers, they are ETs anyway,
 GJO> though I would think a more down to earth method of transportation
 GJO> would be employed.
   "down to earth"? 
   I note in self-defense that none of the alternatives I suggested 
originated with me (except the glowing ducks); they have all been seriously 
suggested by other people (except the glowing ducks).
 PA> stars,
 GJO> The high maneuverability is not supportive of this theory.
   Not all UFOs have been reported to have exhibited high maneuverability.
 PA> balloons,
 GJO> same as above.
   Ditto.
 PA> normal aircraft,
 GJO> documented characteristics are beyond human aircraft capability at
 GJO> this time.
   Not for all UFOs.
 PA> meteors,
 GJO> again like stars.  They have very predictable parabolic paths.
   Again, not all UFOs have been reported to have unpredictable movements.
   And even some that were turned out to be meteors.
 PA> satellites,
 GJO> again the simplistic paths, do not fit what government documents say.
   I'm getting tired of repeating myself here.
 PA> or ducks covered with Glowzone stickers.
 GJO> well, the movement would be more realistic, however, observed
 GJO> altitudes are a limit.
   Ah well, it wasn't all that great a contender anyway.
   (Mind you, some observed altitudes have turned out to be wrong...)
 PA>  Based on the verifiable
 PA> evidence currently available, alien spacecraft are more likely
 PA> than ghosts, interdimensional travellers, and glowing ducks. But
 PA> they're still less likely than stars, balloons, misidentified
 PA> aircraft, meteors, and satellites.
 GJO> correct Paul....the fact is the skeptic do NOT have an alternativ
 GJO> explanation, I have actually never heard one, that explains what some
 GJO> of these documents talk about.
    For instance?
Paul
... I'd write more often if these darn aliens would stop abducting me.
--- Blue Wave/Max v2.30 [NR]
---------------