Solumbran @ Solumbran @lemmy.world Posts 4Comments 436Joined 2 yr. ago
Ok boomer
Oh dear.
People still make those pathetic "wife bad" jokes?
Yep, because the only way to teach kids is through physical abuse apparently.
That's bullshit. A guy saying "I'm not a nazi, I just have nazi friends" is never going to be punishable by law, but if you decide to be friends with him or defend him then I'm sorry but you're a nazi too.
Siding with pieces of shit just because there is no material evidence of their crimes is demented.
Oh and if one of your parents or siblings or kids or friends comes to you saying that they've been raped, you're going to tell them "if you don't have proof shut up"?
Ah yes, the famous people who want to be humiliated publicly, accused of false allegations, and for most of the time absolutely no result.
People who side with potential rapists (yes, that's what you do because you are assuming that it's likely that the victims are lying) are always a delight.
Oh and you can't punish someone legally for being only a potential rapist. Cutting off someone off your company or friend circle or whatever because they are likely a rapist is completely fine, legal methods were never meant to be applied to individuals.
None of your comments were a complex issue, that's the problem.
Your hole point is basically "pictures exists so aliens are proven", I'm not going to waste my time debating with you if that's the extent of your "reasoning".
Still hoping that you're a troll, but have a good day.
It has to do with your inability to form a coherent conversation.
The rest of your reply proved my point.
Are you high?
Radars and pictures work and exist, that's pretty far from proving aliens are here.
Are you really not a troll? That's hard to believe.
Wow, you're actually unable to form a coherent answer at this point.
Also just a little thing, you're the one with unfounded beliefs having the burden of the proof, not me. I can't and don't have to prove that your beliefs are not facts, you're the one having to prove what you claim, and all you've been doing is telling me that pictures and videos are an existing technology as if it ever was in question.
If someone questioning your beliefs makes you go completely haywire then you should probably see with a professional, this is out of the scope of a discussion on lemmy.
How exactly is ignoring the scientific protocol and interpreting random things as "scientific evidence" something reasonable? Random readings that are absolutely not proof, testimonies, those are your proofs?
None of those hold to scientific standard and that's exactly why apart from a few clues of microbial life possibly existing, nothing else is admitted scientifically. It has nothing to do with Galileo or made-up statistics.
I thought you would try to give evidence of life being detected from organic molecules on asteroids or whatever, not that you would fully go on the conspiracist line of aliens in spaceships taking a trip to earth and being recorded, with the records then discredited by science as if it was all a big scheme.
Not a single record on earth made it past the scientific protocol, at most reaching the point of "we don't know but have no reason to believe it came from aliens". Because you know what? If it did, it would be admitted by science.
Okay, there's definitely no point in debating with such a bad faith argumentation.
You didn't compare the situation to Galileo's, but were just pointing out the similarities between the situations? That's some mental gymnastics.
I didn't admit being ignorant about evidence, I said that I am not aware of any because there is none that is valid.
You talk a lot about evidence, what is it? Show me you scientific, non-belief evidence that is so strong and reliable and yet rejected by all scientists. Instead of fighting with wordplay and theatrics, repeating endlessly your "buzzwords", "evidence", "blind masses" and whatnot, it's time to back your claims of the evidence being so overwhelming because as I said, the maximum I've found is a few people saying "we detected some particles that are similar to some we have on earth so maybe there could be some microbial life out there but we don't have proof of it" which is pretty far from your extremely reliable (yet rejected by everyone) evidence.
How is it incorrect? You quote Galileo as a way to support the idea that despite no consensus on the existence of alien life, you are convinced that you know better. Are you really so dishonest that you'll now argue that you mentioned him out of nowhere, and not to compare your situation to his?
And all you manage to do is pile some random bullshit to try to discredit me? I don't even know how you managed to insert gaslighting into this, but it does cast even more shadows on your intentions.
Once again not what I said.
Here, have a good read: https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Galileo_gambit
I have admitted no such thing, I said that I couldn't find any evidence strong enough to serve as a rational proof.
And did you really casually throw in a Galileo gambit right now? You went from looking like an angry irrational person to a full-on conspiracy theorist in such a few words.
Yeah ok, if your level of argumentation is "you're like an anti-vaxxer" (which is funny considering they are people believing that the consensus is wrong and that they know better than science, seems ironic to see it from your side), then there's no point in trying to reply to you.
You kept on trying to alter my argument to try to ridicule it, you're obviously not debating in good faith so there's no point.
And also, I looked at what the "evidence" is and there's nothing but clues saying "it's possible". If you think that it is enough to conclude to the existence of something, then you have no clue what scientific reasoning is.
Enjoy considering your beliefs as a scientific truth, and consider calming down on the fallacies if you want to be taken seriously.
I'm not saying that you didn't see anything or that it was the moon. I'm simply saying that it's not as binary as either aliens or hallucinations. There are other possibilities, from atmospheric events to aircrafts or other.
My "made-up stat" was to point out that it's absurd to try to make one, to which you replied by making one.
We don't have proof of microbial life outside of earth, or it would be a consensus. The consensus is that it's possible but we don't know.
It's not about intelligent life occurring to me, but about basing assumptions on proof, which doesn't exist yet.
And your argument is circular. You are saying that foreign life exists because we have evidence of it, which means that statistically it has to exist ; I have yet to see such evidence and if it existed, the need for a statistical proof of existence would be none. You are already convinced of its existence and are operating within that scope, which once again is how beliefs work.
But you're still making up a stat from nowhere. What if the probability is 10e-30 ? Then earth would statistically be the only one with life on it. And it could be even lower and earth would be a statistical miracle.
There is no proof that alien life doesn't exist. There is no proof that god doesn't exist. There is no proof that if you try to eat a candle from your eye while dancing on your head it won't grant you immortality. You can't prove the inexistence of something so the argument is void. That's why I called it a belief, as opposed to science that is about what can be proved wrong.
And your comparison is inaccurate. What I'm saying is equivalent to not believing that a subspecies of humans with gills live under the sea because we never found one. Which I think is a reasonable assumption until proven wrong.