Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here Our Bookstore is OPEN Over 5000 new & used titles, competitively priced! Topics: UFOs - Paranormal - Area 51 - Ghosts - Forteana - Conspiracy - History - Biography - Psychology - Religion - Crime - Health - Geography - Maps - Science - Money - Language - Recreation - Technology - Fiction - Other - New Search... for keyword(s)   in Page Titles in Book Title/Author in Contents of Pages ---other searches--- Metacrawler Yahoo FAST Search Google Altavista Dogpile Inference Find Northern Light IWon.com MSN Search Las Vegas Sun Location: Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1999 -> Apr -> Re: Friedman vs. Krauss Debate

UFO UpDates Mailing List

From: Serge Salvaille <sergesa@connectmmic.net>
Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 21:23:24 -0500
Fwd Date: Fri, 02 Apr 1999 05:11:39 -0500
Subject: Re: Friedman vs. Krauss Debate


>Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 15:13:35 -0800 (PST)
>From: Scott LeGrand <varelse@best.com>
>To: updates@globalserve.net
>Subject: Re: Friedman vs. Krauss Debate

>>From: Joe Murgia <Ufojoe1@aol.com>
>>Date: Sun, 28 Mar 1999 23:53:15 EST
>>To: updates@globalserve.net
>>Subject: Friedman vs. Krauss Debate

>>On Tuesday March 30th at 10:00pm EST, Sightings on the Radio and
>>Jeff Rense will be hosting a debate between Stanton Friedman and
>>Lawrence Krauss. Stanton needs no introduction but many of you
>>may not be aware of who Krauss is.

>One short comment: isn't it possible that some of these scientists
>that looked at the evidence, actually did so in an objective way,
>and concluded that it was lacking?  Why is it the minute someone
>expresses skepticism about the reality of UFOs, they're accused
>of losing their objectivity?  That doesn't sound very objective
>to me...

>Scott

Hello Scott,

To express skepticism towards the existence of UFOs generally
implies ignorance of the data available during the last 50 years
or so.

All, and I mean ALL, the 'skeptical' opinions I have ever read
or heard regarding the reality of UFOs presented one or all of
the following flaws:

1. Ignorance of the data at hand;

2. Deliberate ignorance of the data at hand.

Can an opinion based on ignorance (deliberate or not) be
considered objective?

No.

Can it be considered scientific?

No.

Of course, we are not talking here about specific cases, or the
Strieber show.