Alien Abduction

Ninjamonkey · 30-04-2012 5:54pm

al28283 wrote: »

well personally I've never heard of sleep paralysis happening like mentioned there, and I don't believe it would be possible as I understand it. but I would have to question the source of that report as its clearly from a pro-UFO standpoint and is going to great lengths to discredit science.

Of course, and a healthy skepticism, is what is needed. We can never believe blindly, and must question,question, research and question. But if so much as one in all the many thousands of reported accounts are in fact true, then it blows away the paradigm that Extraterrestrial or interdimensional existance is ridiculous and unreasonable.

King Mob · 30-04-2012 6:18pm

Ninjamonkey wrote: »

Hmm..

So how do we have sleep paralysis while driving, or while a police officer is on duty, or driving a tractor .... and not lying asleep in bed.

http://www.intrudersfoundation.org/junk_science_paralysis.html

Again, the now mandatory disclaimer : - i am not offering explanations, simply accepting other possibilities.

None of us are using the idea of sleep paralysis to explain every single claim regardless of circumstance. Suggesting that anyone is, like the article does is a very silly, dishonest strawman.

To use the example of the Hill abduction quoted in the article, skeptics do not suggest sleep paralysis as an alternative explanation. We suggest other things such as them embellishing their report or them being influenced while they were "remembering" under hypnosis.

However the Op was in bed and asleep, exactly like in every instance of sleep paralysis.

Ninjamonkey · 30-04-2012 6:34pm

King Mob wrote: »

None of us are using the idea of sleep paralysis to explain every single claim regardless of circumstance. Suggesting that anyone is, like the article does is a very silly, dishonest strawman.

To use the example of the Hill abduction quoted in the article, skeptics do not suggest sleep paralysis as an alternative explanation. We suggest other things such as them embellishing their report or them being influenced while they were "remembering" under hypnosis.

However the Op was in bed and asleep, exactly like in every instance of sleep paralysis.

I think it is slightly disengenuous of you to suggest the article "does is a very silly, dishonest strawman". In the context of the NYT article, the headline was

ALIEN ABDUCTION? SCIENCE CALLS IT SLEEP PARALYSIS

This was attributing that all reported alien abduction cases are sleep paralysis. the reference to the Hill case among others, was simply to point out that not all cases CAN be attributed to that explanation. But like so many other debunkers, the key points are always omitted.

Also the Travis Walton case, i am sure the explanation there is delusional, embelishment, hallucination . Along with the other thousands of cases. If 10,000 more cases are reported, the debunkers (*note I dont use skeptics) will attribute them to another 10,000 explanations of delusion, embelishment, & hallucination.

King Mob · 30-04-2012 6:41pm

Ninjamonkey wrote: »

I think it is slightly disengenuous of you to suggest the article "does is a very silly, dishonest strawman". In the context of the NYT article, the headline was

ALIEN ABDUCTION? SCIENCE CALLS IT SLEEP PARALYSIS

This was attributing that all reported alien abduction cases are sleep paralysis. the reference to the Hill case among others, was simply to point out that not all cases CAN be attributed to that explanation. But like so many other debunkers, the key points are always omitted.

And none of us, nor even the article your article is attacking makes the claim that all instances can be explained with sleep paralysis.

Ninjamonkey wrote: »

Also the Travis Walton case, i am sure the explanation there is delusional, embelishment, hallucination . Along with the other thousands of cases. If 10,000 more cases are reported, the debunkers (*note I dont use skeptics) will attribute them to another 10,000 explanations of delusion, embelishment, & hallucination.

And you seem to have forgotten and left out the other explanations I pointed to that can lead people to believe something that isn't true.

It doesn't matter how many cases they are, they have to be judged on their own merits. And each time they are, they've all had much more likely more reasonable explanations.

Lefticus Loonaticus · 30-04-2012 8:53pm

King Mob wrote: »

So since they all held "very high level positions" I should just believe them without question?
Do these positions somehow make these people immune to the stuff that can make other people believe in something that isn't true?

And what, other than the unsupported assumptions that aliens abduct people connect those guys with the OP?

Your argument is assuming that alien abduction is ridiculous and unrealistic on the basis that such 'aliens' or other things related simply dont exist.

I was pointing out that theres plenty of credible evidence and research to show that such things do exist.

Alien abduction is only one issue in the broader field of ufology. All the different issues in ufology are related in some way.

Alien abduction does sound ridiculous, i do admit. But when 'ufos' have been proven beyond most reasonable doubt to both exist and to have been interacting with us, then the issue of alien abduction being possible is a greatly increased likelyhood.

Sleep paralysis is defo one of the contributing factors. But this still does not explain why thousands(dont know what the real figures are) of people from across the globe have reported some sort of interaction with what are called the 'grays'.

I doubt these people are all coincidently having the exact same dreams/nightmares.

I dont believe anything at face value and niether should you, but niether should we be ignorant of credible information when theres nothing dodgy about the people divulging it and they appear to be very genuine and without any agenda.

If i was a researcher of potential alien abductions, and i was of a '50/50' 'maybe real / most likely not real' persuation, and i subsequently came across information such as the national press club conferences and other info that has been coming out over the last ten years, i would be daft not to consider that because if this information, a whole lot more weight has been added to the stories of so-called abductees.

Torakx · 30-04-2012 8:58pm

How many of these coinciding stories are amongst populations without media where they may not be influenced by these ideas?
Its rhetorical in a sense, unless you actually have a rough number.

I just think its more likely the mind is creating these things to explain a terrifying experience.

Now if there were villagers in brazil rainforests and somewhere in africa that had no contact with civilisation, and i mainly mean tv's radios etc then i would be more likely to believe that theory has some merit.

enno99 · 30-04-2012 9:19pm

King Mob wrote: »

And something very similar has happened to me, though my reaction was somewhat less dramatic.
What you are reporting has been reported by many other and has been studied quite thoroughly. And it sounds exactly like you were experiencing sleep paralysis.

So could you have been abducted

And are just misremembering. misrecalling what happened etc

Ninjamonkey · 30-04-2012 9:28pm

King Mob wrote: »

And none of us, nor even the article your article is attacking makes the claim that all instances can be explained with sleep paralysis.

And you seem to have forgotten and left out the other explanations I pointed to that can lead people to believe something that isn't true.

It doesn't matter how many cases they are, they have to be judged on their own merits. And each time they are, they've all had much more likely more reasonable explanations.

I would suggst this is simply not the case. Again you generalise, with "they've all had much more likely more reasonable explanations." This simply is not the case. There are many cases which defy any rational explanation, and no matter how hard the debunkers try to pigeon hole them into a "reasonable explanation", they simply do not fit.

It is precisely these cases which simply " do not compute" for a certain percentage of the population. they are fundamentally incapable of grasping the concept that they may not be able to explain away everything. its almost akin to a quasi religious fundamentalism of denial.

True skeptics approach each case, with no prejudice, investigate, and research to find the most logical, and rational conclusion. In most cases a logical, rational conclusion is reached, which can adequately explain the phenomenon in question.However, when no logical conclusion is reached, the case is deemed "unsolved", or "unexplained".

A true skeptic does not fear to reach a conclusion that leads them out of their comfort zone. Dr. J Allen Hynek was such a man.

He was originally a skeptic, who went into his investigations ready to disprove the existance of UFO's. Instead he found there was overwhelming evidence to support their existance, and he let the evidence lead him to a conclusion.

King Mob · 30-04-2012 10:57pm

Lefticus Loonaticus wrote: »

Your argument is assuming that alien abduction is ridiculous and unrealistic on the basis that such 'aliens' or other things related simply dont exist.

No, my argument is based on the fact that there is no evidence to support the existence of aliens or that they abduct people.

Lefticus Loonaticus wrote: »

Alien abduction does sound ridiculous, i do admit. But when 'ufos' have been proven beyond most reasonable doubt to both exist and to have been interacting with us, then the issue of alien abduction being possible is a greatly increased likelyhood.

So how specifically do you know that aliens abduct people?
Even if they exist, this is a different and separate matter to what their behaviour does. And the only things you can provide to support this connection is a baseless assumption or a useless logical loop.

King Mob · 30-04-2012 10:59pm

enno99 wrote: »

So could you have been abducted

And are just misremembering. misrecalling what happened etc

Yes, but there's no reason for me or you to conclude that.
There's nothing about my story (or the OPs) that isn't explained by sleep paralysis and there's nothing that requires there to be anything fantastical present.
So barring other evidence, the most likely conclusion is that it was sleep paralysis.

King Mob · 30-04-2012 11:06pm

Ninjamonkey wrote: »

I would suggst this is simply not the case. Again you generalise, with "they've all had much more likely more reasonable explanations." This simply is not the case. There are many cases which defy any rational explanation, and no matter how hard the debunkers try to pigeon hole them into a "reasonable explanation", they simply do not fit.

And I've yet to see a single claim that withstood any level of scrutiny or provided anything that would convince any rational person.

But you're drifting away from the point.
The idea of sleep paralysis being the root of some abduction stories are only used in stories where it is a plausible (typically the most plausible) explanation.
Claiming that it is used else where, or that it is the only explantion skeptics provide is a dishonest strawman.

Again, I'm finding some of your posts hilariously hypocritical.
Your claiming that anyone who doesn't agree with you are somehow mentally deficient while you are desperately trying to argue that UFO claimants aren't and that skeptics are unwilling to consider other explanations, while you are doing the same.

dyer · 01-05-2012 12:07am

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21kW39IcLKA

enno99 · 01-05-2012 12:35am

King Mob wrote: »

Yes, but there's no reason for me or you to conclude that.
There's nothing about my story (or the OPs) that isn't explained by sleep paralysis and there's nothing that requires there to be anything fantastical present.
So barring other evidence, the most likely conclusion is that it was sleep paralysis.

Ah so you think alien abduction is possible
but anyone who thinks it might have happened to them are just believing in magical creatures or aliens or things to that effect are being unreasonable and ridiculous

King Mob · 01-05-2012 1:30am

enno99 wrote: »

Ah so you think alien abduction is possible

Yes, in the strictest sense of the word. Just as it's "possible" that there's a banana orbiting Mars, I can't say for 100% certain that it's not there but it's improbable and not reasonable to assert that it is probable.

enno99 wrote: »

but anyone who thinks it might have happened to them are just believing in magical creatures or aliens or things to that effect are being unreasonable and ridiculous

No I did not say that. That's a dishonest twisting of my words, which would make you unreasonable and ridiculous.

I stated that the idea of alien visitation is unreasonable and ridiculous.

Monty Burnz · 01-05-2012 1:58am

Covered in the Daily Wail today:

Our close encounters: Meet the alien abductees - and the pictures they drew to prove they weren't imagining it all...

enno99 · 01-05-2012 2:00am

King Mob wrote: »

Yes, in the strictest sense of the word. Just as it's "possible" that there's a banana orbiting Mars, I can't say for 100% certain that it's not there but it's improbable and not reasonable to assert that it is probable.

No I did not say that. That's a dishonest twisting of my words, which would make you unreasonable and ridiculous.

I stated that the idea of alien visitation is unreasonable and ridiculous.

No, I'm saying that explanations that rely on magical creatures or aliens or things to that effect are unreasonable and ridiculous.
Doubly so when there is a much more plausible, supported and mundane explanation that fits the bill.

that is what you said

Now the banana is just a cop out

Because if you say no you have to apply the misremembering bullsh*t you like to trot out to yourself
And that puts you in a position of being exempt from something that you think everyone else is prone to

King Mob · 01-05-2012 2:30am

enno99 wrote: »

that is what you said

Which is not what you claimed I said.

enno99 wrote: »

Now the banana is just a cop out

Because if you say no you have to apply the misremembering bullsh*t you like to trot out to yourself
And that puts you in a position of being exempt from something everyone else you think is prone to

It's not a cop out, it's an illustration of how basic logic works.
Neither you or I can show with a 100% certainty such a banana does not exist. This means there's some possibility it could exist we've just yet to discover it.
If you can show with 100% certainty that the banana orbiting Mars does not exist, then please do.
However we can both agree that it is improbable that such a banana does not exist. So improbable it's practical to assume that it does not exist. And we both make this judgement based on the same idea that there is no evidence to support the existence of this fantastical thing.

Now I told you that I'm not exempt from the same stuff everyone else is. And I could be misremembering my experience, but there's no reason to suggest that I was. Sleep paralysis fits the available facts, just as it does with the OP's story and as it does with the thousands of other instances and claims.

dyer · 01-05-2012 2:50am

I stated that the idea of alien visitation is unreasonable and ridiculous.

It's unreasonable and ridiculous until you see a UFO for yourself, after that, you're on your own because most people cannot fathom that experience. And of course.. will lead to them telling you it's a meteor or a planet or a secret military aircraft or chinese lantern or something. It's great that such experts exist on things of which they have never seen.

King Mob · 01-05-2012 3:34am

dyer wrote: »

It's unreasonable and ridiculous until you see a UFO for yourself, after that, you're on your own because most people cannot fathom that experience. And of course.. will lead to them telling you it's a meteor or a planet or a secret military aircraft or chinese lantern or something. It's great that such experts exist on things of which they have never seen.

And people say the same thing about God and fairies and ghosts and any other supernatural entity, but this does not make their claims true.

Further you implying that people who don't believe only do so because they are ignorant is the exact same type of close mindedness you are accusing them of.

dyer · 01-05-2012 3:56am

I'm not saying you or anyone else is ignorant or close minded. There was such a time when i hadn't had those experiences.. and was one of those people who wholeheartedly believed life in the universe was possible 'out there somewhere', just never really imagined i would have found it 'here'. For what it's worth, i immerse myself in science and critical thinking.

What i implied was, that people who have not seen a UFO, cannot seem to make that leap of faith, and that's fine, because i wouldn't expect anyone could do it unless they could see it for themselves. We're not talking about deities or faeries or fauna, we're talking about real physical objects that are flying around in our atmosphere doing whatever it is they are doing, and i'm not going to speculate on that because i don't have the faintest clue what they're doing either.. but i do know that they are here. This is not about fairy tales or religious dogma, it's about questioning the reality that so many people are observing.

Whether you want to believe it or not is up to you, and if you don't that is perfectly fine, but please don't pretend to know what you're talking about just because your belief system and your experiences won't allow you to see any further. Science doesn't help either, because this is a question which hasn't been answered yet, and paradoxically, one that is largely ignored because of the stigma that is attached to it.

So, if you asked an alien... they would probably say.. yes, 'they' really are stupider than they look, and probably have a good laugh over it.

King Mob · 01-05-2012 5:04am

Your post is wonderfully self contradictory.
You say:

dyer wrote: »

I'm not saying you or anyone else is ignorant or close minded.

And then say:

dyer wrote: »

because your belief system and your experiences won't allow you to see any further.

Then you claim:

dyer wrote: »

i immerse myself in science and critical thinking.

Then you say these:

dyer wrote: »

that people who have not seen a UFO, cannot seem to make that leap of faith,
....
Science doesn't help either, because this is a question which hasn't been answered yet

Which indicate that you understand neither.

You also say:

dyer wrote: »

it's about questioning the reality that so many people are observing.

But you don't at all seem interested or willing to question your reality.

dyer · 01-05-2012 5:36am

But you don't at all seem interested or willing to question your reality.

i'm quite capable, comfortable, and very well able to question my reality.. perhaps you should do the same! you're not asking me to question mine, you're asking me to question yours.

i give up anyway this is obviously not a conversation i can have with you, but no hard feelings

good luck on your endeavor.. i don't even know what you're saying, it's just semantic spaghetti.. perhaps you should try listening once a while, you might actually learn something.

King Mob · 01-05-2012 6:00am

dyer wrote: »

i'm quite capable, comfortable, and very well able to question my reality.. perhaps you should do the same! you're not asking me to question mine, you're asking me to question yours.

i give up anyway this is obviously not a conversation i can have with you, but no hard feelings good luck on your endeavor.. i don't even know what you're saying, it's just semantic spaghetti.. perhaps you should try listening once a while, you might actually learn something.

Lol. So much self contradiction, hypocrisy and irony and in IMO, a very good example of how both are rampant in the UFO community.

dyer · 01-05-2012 6:03am

well, if you ever happen to see a spaceship floating above you.. maybe you can come back to me and i'll gladly pick up this conversation where we left off.

King Mob · 01-05-2012 6:06am

dyer wrote: »

well, if you ever happen to see a spaceship floating above you.. maybe you can come back to me and i'll gladly pick up this conversation where we left off.

You'll have to explain the definition of "open minded" you use can includes the idea that you only discuss things with people who already agree with you.

Cause that seems to be exactly the charge leveled at the non-believers.

dyer · 01-05-2012 6:14am

How can you explain this to anyone who hasn't experienced it themselves? The experience is what opens your mind. It's not about just finding people who already agree with you, it's about being able to share it with someone who has had a similiar experience. There is no disrespect, but imagine if you will, how hard it is to communicate this to people who just simply cannot believe it, in short, the whole world doesn't believe it. I have to live with that, just like so many others do, but it's not going to annoy me anymore, i just count myself lucky that i experienced something so extraordinary. Any true scientist worth their salt would look for answers, despite what the world or anyone else thinks of them.. i dont think science or maths or philosophy or any other subject would develop without the people who are willing to walk those paths alone.

King Mob · 01-05-2012 6:31am

dyer wrote: »

How can you explain this to anyone who hasn't experienced it themselves? The experience is what opens your mind. It's not about just finding people who already agree with you, it's about being able to share it with someone who has had a similiar experience. There is no disrespect, but imagine if you will, how hard it is to communicate this to people who just simply cannot believe it, in short, the whole world doesn't believe it. I have to live with that, just like so many others do, but it's not going to annoy me anymore, i just count myself lucky that i experienced something so extraordinary. Any true scientist worth their salt would look for answers, despite what the world or anyone else thinks of them.. i dont think science or maths or philosophy or any other subject would develop without the people who are willing to walk those paths alone.

Because if you're claiming something that you can't show to another person, it looks exactly like it's fictional.
And believing something in spite of this is religious belief.

You show your misunderstanding of how science works by pretending that this predetermined, unmoving, irrational belief is acceptable in science.

Everything you just wrote shows that you are unwilling accept or even consider the possibility that you are wrong, and this is the definition of being closed minded.
Yet you still love to throw that accusation out at anyone who you disagree with.

TheRiddler · 01-05-2012 6:32am

This is the fckin stupidest thing ever

dyer · 01-05-2012 7:03am

If you think it's a religious belief, you obviously haven't studied ufology very much King Mob, and i'm not talking about the sensationalist sh!te most people have been educated with. There is no burden of proof on anyone but yourself if you can't come to terms with it, if you want to be a skeptic, by all means do, but at least be a real one and not a sideshow of clichés. All the information is there, go look at it, find it, research and digest it and come up with your own opinion, all your arguments have been iterated a thousand times before, it's like a bad record playing itself to death. Why do i need to accept that i'm wrong? I'm not wrong, i don't need you or anyone else to tell me that. Is it close minded of me to believe that you simply cannot understand me or many others because you haven't experienced anything like what we've been talking about? No, that's just common sense. It's just a pity that it's gonna take humanity so long to undertand or accept any of it. You're parading science as the very thing you seem to abhor, a religion in itself, a doctrine or a mandate by which you describe your logic, there's nothing admirable about that, any kid who can read a book can come to the same conclusions that you have. You just don't seem to get the point i'm making! and as i've said, many times ovvvvvverrrrr, it does not matter to me whether or not you believe it, because i believe it myself, because i have seen it, and it was every bit as real as the light of day, so i don't need to spend my time debating with people about it, because seriously, what is the point? if i wasn't drunk right now i probably would not have bothered with this at all.. but there you go.. time for bed.. god speed and all that

King Mob · 01-05-2012 7:43am

dyer wrote: »

. Is it close minded of me to believe that you simply cannot understand me or many others because you haven't experienced anything like what we've been talking about? No, that's just common sense.

Yes, it's very closed minded because you are going to flat out refuse to even consider different view points to yours.
This makes you pseudo-philosophical rambling hilariously hypocritical.

Alien Abduction

Comments