In news:1154145987.333701.161950@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com,
riplin@Azonic.co.nz <riplin@Azonic.co.nz> typed:

Amanda Angelika wrote:

In a way. But "belief" suggests something supernatural which is
wholly reliant on faith.

No. While 'supernatural' requires belief because it isn't 'naturally
occuring', the reverse is not true.  I can believe that cavemen
reached the south pole, or that vikings sailed to china, neither of
which is 'supernatural'.

Belief in the religious sense or in something supernatural often requires no
evidence at all.

 The idea that aliens have been visiting the Earth is a
theory based on scientific evidence and the possibilities it
presents. E.g our knowledge of the Universe itself and awareness of
the laws of physics.

You mix up 'have' and 'possibly'. Even if it were possible, that does
not imply that it has happened, ever.

But it increases the probability. It also allows one to reinterpret existing
evidence.

It's also based on anecdotal evidence, witness testimony and to some
extent even physical evidence.

There is anecdotal 'evidence' that Thor makes the thunder and
lightning.

But Thor is a supernatural being. ETs are not supernatural.

In order to remain sceptical in the face of such evidence, means one
has to maintain an idea that all the evidence is totally worthless.

No. Only that it is not convincing. It is possible, as you say, but
possible does not mean that it has happened.

True, but absence of evidence only has any value if one has an existing
alternative belief structure, preconception or theory which the absence or
inconclusiveness of evidence serves to support. E.g one might believe we are
alone in the Universe, or believe Man is the centre of creation, which of
course largely rules out ET involvement in human affairs, in which case one
may interpret certain events as miraculous and supernatural and having a
religious significance, rather than as being evidence of ET involvement,
which will be seen as heresy, in much the same way that Galileo and
Copernicus were seen as heretics for their theories, until they were proven
correct. Although there are still people who believe the World is flat, and
doubt humankind has ever really ventured into Space LOL

If OTOH one doesn't have an alternative believe structure then the evidence
is just evidence on which one may base a theory. And if you interpret
evidence in support of a theory eventually the weight of amassed evidence is
sufficient for one to reasonably assume the theory is correct and use that
as a working model in terms of one's understanding of the universe. This is
called Science :)

So basically if you are interpreting evidence according to a pre-existing
irrational belief system, based on religion or on ridged philosophical
ideology. The evidence is going to be meaningless in any case. Because one
has what amounts to a blind faith and a closed mind. This is not Science.

However in
order to do that one has to have an alternative theory, belief or a
particular view of the Nature of the Universe. So until there is
conclusive evidence one way or another it's all a matter of
conjecture and belief.

There yer go, you do agree that it is a matter of conjecture and
belief.

No the evidence exists. if you approach the evidence with an open mind
without preconceived ideas, the truth really is out there and is open to any
one who care to seek it out.

But at the end of the day there is more evidence supporting the
possibility than there is of the impossibility. So IMO it is more
rational to base ones theories on possibility because the
alternative is impossible.

It's possible that a volcano may errupt under my house, but it would
be irrational to base my actions on this happening in the next five
minutes.

Well if you feel hot, hear rumblings and see cracks appearing in the floor
through which one can smell sulphur it might make some sense to move house,
regardless of whether it's definitely going to happen or not the weight of
evidence should, in that situation be indicative of the possible danger.
Evidence doesn't have to be 100% conclusive to form a sensible theory as to
what it all means and what one should do. Ignoring the evidence or
approaching it with preconceived ideas would in that situation be madness.
E.g putting a saucer of milk out to appease the Devil is not going to stop a
volcano erupting in your livingroom. LOL  But unfortuately in many
situations that's exactly how most people behave.
-- 
Amanda