Amanda Angelika wrote:
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.
Belief in natural things, it seems, also often requires no evidence at
all.
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.
Possibility and probabity are not the same thing.
There is anecdotal 'evidence' that Thor makes the thunder and
lightning.
But Thor is a supernatural being. ETs are not supernatural.
Maybe Thor is an ET.
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,
First of all there is no actual evidence _at_all_ that there is any
life, of _any_ sort, beyond the Earth. It requires a belief based on
zero evidence to hold the view that there is.
Now statistically, based entirely on guesses, it is entirely likely
that _IF_ there is life beyond the Earth then there will be huge
numbers of it. Some of this life may have been able to develop into
higher organisms, and even into intelligent one. There may be millions
of advanced civilisations.
However there is another step and that is they have to travel from
where they are to here. In particualar they have to have a reason and a
mechanism. All our knowledge of actual natural laws show no such
mechanism is usable.
Belief in a 'star trek' or 'flying saucer' style of travel is a belief
in supernatural.
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
Well actually I see the 'alien abductions' supporters as being the
superstitious and miracle seekers.
I was very interested to see a documentary on sufferers of catatonia.
These people fall asleep at any time and have difficulty distinquishing
between dreams in sleep and being awake. When dreaming in sleep
everyone has an induced form of paralysis to stop the acting out of
dreams. In cataonic attacks the paralysis may stay through a waking
dream state. The person described people/creatures coming into the room
in the dream state while being unable to move. These people happen to
have the problem sufficiently advanced enough to be a disability, but
everyone has this to some extent.
Given that there is a great deal of equivalence between the catatonics
and the 'alien abductees' it seems likely that they are actually the
same thing.
That is, I am finding a _natural_ explanation for evidence that you may
attribute to 'supernatural miracles'. A belief that ET could use
mechanisms of travel that are unknown in nature puts it into the 'super
(ie above) natural'.
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 :)
Evidence that there is _any_ life, in _any_ form outside of earth does
not exist. Evidence that travel over distances of hundreds of light
years is possible does not exist.
You may believe that 'star trek', ET, and flying saucers are real, but
it ain't 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.
OTOH some people have such 'open minds' that their brains fell out.
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.
Excuse me, but you did say "it's all a matter of conjecture and
belief", now you say "No."
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.
Isn't it strange that the religionists use exactly the same wording
when trying to get people to believe in their 'gods'.
There may be lots of 'evidence', but tales of 'alien abductions' is no
more compelling than others who are 'embraced by gods', there are
perfectly good natural explanations.