I am of two minds about Facebook. It has its uses and can be fun, and I know a lot of people use it as their primary means of keeping track of friends, but I find the interface and messaging system clunky, and the constant barrage of app invites makes me stabby.
But the sponsored ads are über irritating (and I don’t mean just the blatantly sexist ones). I saw a Facebook ad today for the upcoming movie "The Fourth Kind", about aliens coming to Earth to um, probe humans (and I mean, seriously? If we finally develop warp drive and travel to other planets, will we get all hot and bothered by the indigenous six-legged slimy malodorous gelatin bags that live there?*). Here’s the ad:
See the poll? It asks, "Do you believe in alien encounters?", and the answer choices are "Yes, I believe", "I have seen one", and "Not sure".
Um, Facebook/Universal Pictures, how about a more realistic choice, like one that says: After years of seeing UFOlogists collecting nothing but anecdotal evidence without a single shred of actual y’know, tangible evidence, there is no reason to think this is anything but a psychological phenomenon and not a physical one, and should be treated that way.
Or better yet, how about simply:
No.
I usually enjoy movies about aliens, monsters, flying saucers, and the like, but this kind of advertising leaves me cold, and plays into the public’s misconceptions about the UFO phenomenon. So I’ll probably skip this movie and take a nap instead. Someone please wake me up when we have real evidence.
* I suppose the aliens could be coming here for medical testing and such, but really, estimates are that given the number of "sightings", they’d have to be abducting upwards of a million people per year. A million. Maybe it’s just me, but I’m thinking that if that many people were being whisked away, we’d get more evidence then hazy dreams that seem to change over the years to follow media trends in what aliens look like and how they behave.
October 23rd, 2009 at 12:16 pm
you know… you can easily disable app invites from specific apps. your stabbiness is your own fault.
October 23rd, 2009 at 12:17 pm
Wait, there are people still browsing the internet without adblock?
Why?
I turn it off for sites I wish to support, but I’ve never even SEEN an ad on Facebook.
October 23rd, 2009 at 12:18 pm
Already had no interest in that movie – since they’re going with the “This story is based on actual events and the stories of people who were ACTUALLY ABDUCTED by aliens” angle – and their FB ads make me actively hate the movie, site unseen.
October 23rd, 2009 at 12:19 pm
Well, it’s also the studios’ poll. Written specifically so they can use it in future ads as well I would guess. *headdesk*
October 23rd, 2009 at 12:20 pm
Love the tv ad that states “based on actual events” really?
October 23rd, 2009 at 12:22 pm
Caught that this morning, wrote about it on the Austin Skeptics site ( http://austinskepticalsociety.org/?p=90 ). Some seriously unhinged people on facebook, it would seem: over half of them were saying “Yes!” when I first saw it.
Sigh.
October 23rd, 2009 at 12:25 pm
I had the same problem with that ad this morning. I’m sure someone skeptical can tell you how the movie is.
Seems like “Based on actual events” has come to mean “based on the actual event of the moviemakers listening to crazy people and assuming every word they say as cold hard fact”.
October 23rd, 2009 at 12:27 pm
These bug the crap out of me too, every time I see one of those I click the X and choose Offensive or Misleading.
October 23rd, 2009 at 12:29 pm
Facebook is bloated and unintuitive. It grew too fast for its own good.
I, too, was flummoxed by the choices in that “poll”. My mouse hovered for a moment around where the No choice should have been.
Oh well. They’re pushing their movie, which I initially hoped would be a spiritual successor to that movie about mashed potatoes as a modern art, but once I saw that Milla Jovovich was involved that hope fizzled.
October 23rd, 2009 at 12:29 pm
Hey Phil,
There is a way to block the game spam, but it’s not obvious, and drove me insane for a long time (I don’t like it either). On the right hand side, there’s a button which says “Hide”. You can only see it for the latest article, but you can hide older articles as well by putting your mouse over the top right hand corner of the article box. One of the Hide options is to hide all future notices of this sort. All the Mafia Wars and Farmland junk will be gone forever within 5 minutes of applying this methodology.
As for aliens, I’ll get pedantic on you. You can’t prove a negative! Carl Sagan, who got me hooked on astronomy, and clearly wanted to believe said “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.” Clearly, this proof has heretofore not been forthcoming. So while we can say that there hasn’t been enough evidence for a scientist to say “yes” or even “maybe”, can you really say “no”, or just “not yet”?
Best,
Jeremy
October 23rd, 2009 at 12:29 pm
I was in Las Vegas, and one of those guys on the street handed me a stripper/hooker card. Our fingers touched for a second. I’m pretty sure that was an illegal alien encounter.
Once, I saw a bright light in the sky. It was moving very slowly towards the earth. A fireball of some sort. I never did positively identify what it was, but it was certainly flying. So to me, it was an Unidentified Flying Object.
October 23rd, 2009 at 12:32 pm
Unfortunately movie advertising is taking a rather sinister edge recently. Take 2012 for example — the viral campaign is more famous than the world-doom-cgi-gasm of a John Cusack snooze-fest. Although this kind of thing was done for the likes of the Blair Witch Project, it seems that peddling disinformation in the aid of marketing “harmless” entertainment is getting increasingly popular.
October 23rd, 2009 at 12:39 pm
Jeremy @#10:
Open-mindedness is wonderful, and I won’t rule out the possibility of future encounters (no matter how unlikely I find it to be). But the question in the ad boils down to, “do you believe that people living on Earth today have been abducted by extra-terrestrial visitors?” to which the only reasonable answer is a straight-up unadorned “No.” To imply that Carl Sagan would answer anything but “No” to the question as presented is borderline slanderous. Sagan certainly believed that extra-terrestrial life exists, but never made any statement that could possibly be interpreted in any way, shape or form to say that he believed that extra-terrestrial life was visiting Earth at all, much less visiting and kidnapping the local fauna.
October 23rd, 2009 at 12:40 pm
I agree! I click the little X and say “no I don’t like this ad, don’t show me more.” I did that with the 2012 ads and some other crap I saw that I preferred not to see.
I have seen quite a few ads which had no choice except to agree in some fashion. Very annoying.
At least facebook let’s you tell them you don’t like those kind of ads!
October 23rd, 2009 at 12:42 pm
Wait until Christmas. It will be advertised with Santa hats on the aliens.
October 23rd, 2009 at 12:45 pm
Hey Phil, why not create your own facebook poll?
Do you believe in alien encounters?
* After years of seeing UFOlogists collecting nothing but anecdotal evidence without a single shred of actual y’know, tangible evidence, there is no reason to think this is anything but a psychological phenomenon and not a physical one, and should be treated that way.
* No.
* Yes, I suffer from that particular delusion.
October 23rd, 2009 at 12:46 pm
@ #10. Jeremy Anderson
I think the point Phil was making was that there is zero evidence (and by “evidence” I don’t mean the “but I DID see a big flashy light last night when I was down the pub” kind of evidence) for there ever being an alien visitation, let alone aliens pushing probes up people’s behinds.
As for that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” quote, it is up to the folks that believe they’ve been probed to provide the extraordinary evidence. So far, there has been zero tangible evidence for any kind of alien visitation (of the “UFO” kind or the “I’m going to fondle you while you sleep” kind).
October 23rd, 2009 at 12:47 pm
I felt the same way when I saw these ads this morning. I listed them as offensive and blocked them. If enough of us do this it might make a difference?
October 23rd, 2009 at 12:48 pm
As a writer, I have to emphasize that this poll is very poorly written. The question “do you believe in alien encounters?” could be interpreted in two ways. It could mean do you believe alien encounters have taken or are taking place, but it also could mean do you believe alien encounters are possible. That doesn’t even begin to address issues such as assuming “alien” or “unidentified” as in unidentified flying object mean the same thing as extraterrestrial. If we have only one case of an observed flying object that no one can identify, we have a UFO; that doesn’t mean it’s a ship of extraterrestrial visitors, just that we cannot identify it.
October 23rd, 2009 at 12:51 pm
10. Jeremy Anderson Says: “On the right hand side, there’s a button which says “Hide”. One of the Hide options is to hide all future notices of this sort. All the Mafia Wars and Farmland junk will be gone forever within 5 minutes of applying this methodology.”
Thank you, thank you, thank you!
I use FB to keep up with my family (spread all over the globe) and rocket buddies. I’ve almost stopped logging in due to the avalanche of “Mafia Wars” and “Farmland” notifications. I don’t really care what games you’re playing!
- Jack
October 23rd, 2009 at 12:52 pm
quoting Jeremy #10: “As for aliens, I’ll get pedantic on you. You can’t prove a negative! Carl Sagan, who got me hooked on astronomy, and clearly wanted to believe said “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.” Clearly, this proof has heretofore not been forthcoming. So while we can say that there hasn’t been enough evidence for a scientist to say “yes” or even “maybe”, can you really say “no”, or just “not yet”?”
The question, though, is what do you believe. I will believe ‘no’ until evidence is presented that requires reassessing that. You can argue that you can’t prove it’s never happened, but my belief is based on if there’s reliable evidence that it has occurred, which there is not.
I can’t PROVE that there is no such thing as mermaids, but I CAN say that I don’t believe in them because I’ve yet to see evidence in favour of them. If someone finds one tomorrow, well, then my belief can change.
October 23rd, 2009 at 12:55 pm
It has Milla. I am biologically compelled to watch it, regardless of subject matter. It can’t be helped.
October 23rd, 2009 at 12:56 pm
Grrrrr….
My astronomy students were showing each other that trailer last night after tutoring when the question of aliens came up. “Look it says it’s real!” I always try and give my skeptical take on UFOs when asked, but me yapping is way less interesting than a flashy movie trailer.
October 23rd, 2009 at 12:58 pm
It’s an ad, not a poll. It’s not supposed to collect any actually data. It’s supposed to make you aware of the movie.
Congrats Phil, you’re giving them free advertising by making a big deal about it on your blog.
October 23rd, 2009 at 1:02 pm
There is also an ad that I’ve seen for that 2012 movie that says something like “Do you believe the world will end in 2012?” and the answers were basically “Yes,” “There might be some truth to it,” and “No but I’m still in denial”
October 23rd, 2009 at 1:03 pm
I agree with #2 Jeremy.
I’ve never seen an ad on Facebook. I extol the usefulness of adblock
October 23rd, 2009 at 1:06 pm
Thanks for the comments!
@Dan: I think it has to do with the reading. I took probably the most liberal reading of the question: “Has the earth been visited by flying saucers”? That’s a maybe. I’m still waiting for proof.
The reading you took was much more specific: “Do you think any of the abduction/probe stories so far are legitimate?”. Yep. Right with you there. That would be a solid no.
@Mike: Maybe I’m credulous, but I look at it this way. We have explored the ocean, and have ~5000 years of collective sailing experience. We have a solid, if incomplete knowledge of taxonomy. There is nothing in the collective experience of the scientific community during that time to give even the slightest bit of credence to the idea of a half-fish, half-human hybrid, a vast preponderance of evidence against it, and a plausible alternative in the form of the manatee, which I guess could look like a woman with a fish tail if you’re far away and haven’t seen the flesh-and-blood version for a while.
With regard to flying saucers, little green men, etc., I would just say that there aren’t enough data points to say much one way or the other, except that none of the current data points to a yes.
October 23rd, 2009 at 1:06 pm
I’m really not sure I’d want to make ‘unscientific poll invented by guys trying to sell a movie’ the hill I die on. Of *course* it’s unscientific and misleading. They’re selling a movie. About alien abductions. In a paid ad on facebook. Gallup this ain’t. Getting riled up about this is the equivalent of seeing one of those “tooth whitening secrets dentists won’t tell you” ads and being outraged that they don’t include a placebo control group.
October 23rd, 2009 at 1:08 pm
This movie makes me sick. I saw a preview for it for the first time about a month ago and wanted to spit on the screen. If it wasn’t for the daunting climb back up the aisle stairs to my back row seat, the lack of lighting (and thus I’d almost surely trip in my rage-infused state), and the fact that the movie I came to see was about to start, I might’ve. I’m hoping this movie flops as badly as blair witch did when moviegoers realize that they fabricated all the supposed documentary evidence.
October 23rd, 2009 at 1:11 pm
I think there should be an option for “I am an alien” and “yes, I believe, and no, my tinfoil hat is not on too tight”.
October 23rd, 2009 at 1:18 pm
Alien medical testing is just insurance companies outsourcing….
October 23rd, 2009 at 1:25 pm
That’s the first ad on Facebook that actually irritated me enough to go out of my way to disable it. I chose the ‘misleading’ option (when you hit the ‘x’).
October 23rd, 2009 at 1:31 pm
@Jeremy
“With regard to flying saucers, little green men, etc., I would just say that there aren’t enough data points to say much one way or the other, except that none of the current data points to a yes.”
The default position in science, statistics, and probably other fields, is to say “no” until given enough evidence otherwise. Saying it can “go either way” is not the same thing. I certainly don’t think that your position is credulous at all, though.
However, the fact that most UFO sightings have been given a mundane explanation, that would fit in the “no” category as well. (Yes yes I know the rest were “not enough data.”)
October 23rd, 2009 at 1:36 pm
Here’s a cleaner interface to facebook with most of the annoying things removed from your feed.
http://lite.facebook.com/
October 23rd, 2009 at 1:41 pm
First off, I also must extol the virtues of AdBlock Plus.
Second, a social networking site catering to the unhinged crowd since there seem to be so many of them and so few others? SAY IT AIN’T SO, JOE – er, Phil.
October 23rd, 2009 at 1:49 pm
Paul (24) nailed it. It’s just an ad, not a poll. And if it was a poll it was written by a 6th grader. Look at the first two choices. They both mean “Yes”, the third choice is “not sure”. Loaded be the die.
October 23rd, 2009 at 1:49 pm
I don’t see why you’re blaming Facebook for this. They sell ad space, just like Discovery does for this blog, and aren’t responsible for every annoying feature that advertisers place on the page. I’m surprised that so many people bother responding to these sponsored polls anyway. They don’t care about your opinions, folks, they’re just trying to sell the movie.
October 23rd, 2009 at 1:55 pm
I saw the ad for the first time on TV last night and when I heard the line “based on actual events” I broke out laughing so hard I missed the rest of the ad….. Definitely a movie on my don’t bother to go see list, which seems to get longer every year….
October 23rd, 2009 at 2:00 pm
“Last week I was in Virginia. Grayson County. I interviewed a sixteen-year-old girl who’d been assaulted by a bar hade.”
“A what?” “A bear head. The severed head of a bear. This bar hade, see, was floating around on its own little flying saucer, looked kind of like the hubcaps on cousin Wayne’s vintage Caddy. Had red, glowing eyes like two cigar stubs and telescoping chrome antennas poking up behind its ears.” He burped.
“It assaulted her? How?” “You don’t want to know; you’re obviously impressionable. ‘It was cold’ ” he lapsed into his bad southern accent ” ‘and metallic.’ It made electronic noises. Now that is the real thing, the straight goods from the mass unconscious, friend; that little girl is a witch. There’s just no place for her to function in this society. She’d have seen the devil, if she hadn’t been brought up on ‘The Bionic Man’ and all those ‘Star Trek’ reruns. She is clued into the main vein. And she knows that it happened to her. I got out ten minutes before the heavy UFO boys showed up with the polygraph.”
October 23rd, 2009 at 2:02 pm
Mr. Plait;
In fact, they do provide the scientifcally correct answer: “Not sure”.
They have no hard evidence to prove their assertions. You have no hard evidence to disprove their assertions. Therefore, their assertions remain neither proven nor disproven. Your last line was correct enough: “Wake me up when we have real evidence”. But to say that their assertions are false, without any hard evidence to prove it, is as fallacious as to say that their assertions are true without any hard evidence to prove it.
Also, extraordinary claims do not require extraordinary evidence. That is injecting human emotion into the scientific method. Every claim requires an equal amount of evidence – an amount that either proves it, or doesn’t.
So far the alien abduction people have not met that standard. So far there’s no reason to believe their claims. But again, “I have no reason to believe your claim” is a very, very different animal from “I know that your claims are false”.
October 23rd, 2009 at 2:07 pm
You never know. Warp drive is not well understood. It may have strange side effects. After all, isn’t that exactly what happened to Captain Kirk and Commander Riker?
October 23rd, 2009 at 2:17 pm
@Eric at #9: “where the no option should be” … You mean anywhere/everywhere in that poll then
October 23rd, 2009 at 2:19 pm
So, they finally have documented proof of extraterrestrials visiting Earth. Excellent; I look forward to reading the details on the front page of every newspaper in the world.
October 23rd, 2009 at 2:22 pm
You do not understand the meaning of that statement.
October 23rd, 2009 at 2:34 pm
Viral ads have gotten out of hand, there’s an ad for some low budget alien movie doing the rounds on Youtube that purports to show a UFO crashing into the sea, and since it has no credits, voiceover, etc. people have taken it to be real, one even thought the ‘making of’ clip that followed it later was a disinfo effort!
October 23rd, 2009 at 2:39 pm
I’ve seen flying objects that I couldn’t identify (I used to live in Las Vegas, fairly close to Nellis AFB where the Stealth planes were tested), but that doesn’t mean the objects are UFOs. It just means I couldn’t identify them.
October 23rd, 2009 at 2:44 pm
“You do not understand the meaning of that statement.”
Sure I do. Science is about logic reason, and proof, not emotion. Assigning the label “extraordinary” to a claim – any claim – is emotion, not logic. Any claim is either proven true, proven false, or not proven either way.
If someone walks onto the set of the Today Show arm-in-arm with a real, live extraterrestrial, then his claim is proven. What am I going to do – demand “extraordinary evidence” by demanding that he produce *two* extraterrestrials? He’s either proven his claim or he hasn’t. There’s no such thing as “extraordinary evidence”.
October 23rd, 2009 at 3:01 pm
Two words: “AdBlock Plus”.
October 23rd, 2009 at 3:28 pm
“If we finally develop warp drive and travel to other planets, will we get all hot and bothered by the indigenous six-legged slimy malodorous gelatin bags that live there?”
You haven’t watched many episodes of Star Trek, have you, Phil? It turns out that the inhabitants of other planets all look like Hollywood actors and actresses with bits of latex attached to their heads. They’re almost all quite attractive, and we will indeed get all hot and bothered by them. In fact, we’ll be able to marry them and have children.
October 23rd, 2009 at 4:23 pm
It’s sad to see B.A. owned by Universal Pictures marketers.
I mean really, why would a marketing promotion put “No” on a “poll” designed to promote an abduction movie?
And their marketing is effective. Mentioning the poll here got me to watch the web trailer. That was a waste of 30 seconds.
Don’t feed the stupid.
October 23rd, 2009 at 4:25 pm
“Sure I do. Science is about logic reason, and proof, not emotion. Assigning the label “extraordinary” to a claim – any claim – is emotion, not logic. Any claim is either proven true, proven false, or not proven either way.
If someone walks onto the set of the Today Show arm-in-arm with a real, live extraterrestrial, then his claim is proven. What am I going to do – demand “extraordinary evidence” by demanding that he produce *two* extraterrestrials? He’s either proven his claim or he hasn’t. There’s no such thing as “extraordinary evidence”.”
Your lengthy explanation there proved beyond a doubt that you really don’t understand.
October 23rd, 2009 at 4:27 pm
To quote Feynman:
I think that it is much more likely that the reports of flying saucers [or alien abductions] are the results of the known irrational characteristics of terrestrial intelligence than of the unknown rational efforts of extra-terrestrial intelligence.
October 23rd, 2009 at 4:29 pm
“Stylish” Firefox add-on + any of a variety of “user styles” for Facebook = NO ADS! This has saved my sanity.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/2108
http://userstyles.org/styles/browse/site/facebook?sort=popularity&sort_direction=desc
October 23rd, 2009 at 4:50 pm
correction: “than” hazy dreams.
If it flies and I can’t recognize then it it must be full of sex-crazed aliens.
October 23rd, 2009 at 4:51 pm
I allredy said what I thought some ufos were in my coment about the clouds (I said I think some were top secret aircraft for example the rash of triangle ufos reports in the late 80s I think were F117s being deployed to nato airbases the F117 looks triangeler and was flying since 1983 but not shown to the public untill 1989 and not seen widely untill news coverage of the 1st gulf war) is this movie a sequel to close ecounters of the third kind? Last I heard Spielbergs plans for a sequel called the night skys turned into ET
October 23rd, 2009 at 5:07 pm
@ Nergol-
“There’s no such thing as “extraordinary evidence”.”
definition: extraordinary- 1 a : going beyond what is usual, regular, or customary
I would have to say that arriving on the set of the today show “arm in arm” with an extraterrestrial would be quite extraordinary, by definition, being that it IS unprecedented and would be evidence of the existence of E.T.’s on earth (extraordinary claim).
October 23rd, 2009 at 5:07 pm
My current health plan requires that I be visited by aliens. Unfortunatly they are horrible physicians and frequently get which human oraface is the mouth. On said “Say ‘ahhh’” and OOMPH! boy did that hurt. Did you know they believe in homeopathy and alternative herbal medicines too? Do you know how embarassing it is to be abducted by little grey beings chasing you around some weird taurus shapped space ship trying to shove irradiated bat guano up your nose? Then they had the nerve to tell me I had to go see Dr. Mercola and drink Extract of Zombie Rat and Ginsing.
October 23rd, 2009 at 5:12 pm
I just found out this is not a sequel to close encounterss of the third kind . I find one thing about abductions that abductes say the aliens use painful probes you would think that advanced tecnolgy aliens would have something like an x-ray or an mri in fact I question why they they even have to do any of this why not just monitor our educational brodcasts that way they learn everything without haveing to even land
October 23rd, 2009 at 5:59 pm
@ Mike #29:
I’m hoping this movie flops as badly as blair witch did when moviegoers realize that they fabricated all the supposed documentary evidence.
Actually, Blair Witch Project made a boatload of profit, basically because it was produced for only a few tens of thousands of dollars. The marketing campaign cost more than the movie.
This one has anally probed turkey written all over it.
October 23rd, 2009 at 6:01 pm
Oh, yeah, one more thing:
Billy Meiers predicted viral marketing. And Blair Witch Project. And the Bad Astronomer’s stabbiness.
So there.
October 23rd, 2009 at 6:40 pm
“Based on actual events” – They have tons of anecdotal evidence that there are people on the planet Earth, they sit down, stand up, talk to each other, drive cars, go in and out of buildings, and all kinds of other things that appear in the movie. Since 99.99% of it is based on actual events, why should anyone quibble about a few small historical inaccuracies?
BTW, I think Kurt #31 nailed it…
October 23rd, 2009 at 7:08 pm
Did anyone see the Penn and Teller BullSh*t episode where they dealt with this? It was hilarious. They interviewed a woman that was ummm, probed. They showed her a, ahem, ‘probe’ of a, well, lets just say, fun type… if you’re into that. She was convinced the buzzing vibrating probe Penn and Teller showed her was a genuine alien artifact!
October 23rd, 2009 at 8:51 pm
What? You mean you haven’t seen the photographic evidence of strange creatures wielding probes?
October 23rd, 2009 at 11:22 pm
The dreaded double post. Dang.
October 23rd, 2009 at 11:22 pm
Dude, UFO’s are SO real. I’ve been dating a gelatin creature from Marcab VII for a few weeks now, and I have to admit that what they say is true “Once you go gelatin, you won’t miss the skeleton”.
October 24th, 2009 at 2:32 am
I think you are taking this a bit too seriously
October 24th, 2009 at 3:12 am
I’ll be skipping this movie simply because I’m getting really sick of this brand of film-making (see: fake-documentary) and how Hollywood is cashing in on it at the expense of our intelligence. Also, Milla Jovovich, ’nuff said.
As for alien encounters… Wouldn’t rule it out. There are just too many fascinating stories/eyewitness accounts/hypnosis reports for it to be one big psychological manifestation. And I’m not sure what you mean, Phil, by “no tangible evidence”; I’m sure the countless thousands left physically and emotionally scarred by these experiences would convey confusion at that. Do you also scoff at rape victims on a daily basis?
As we know, enough anecdotal evidence put together = proof, so that pretty much rules out your abrasive hand-waving dismissal of UFOlogists like myself. I mean, we have entire institutes of people who specialize in this stuff. Your fascination with the stars is cute at best but it would take a real cave-dweller to not notice that much more interesting phenomenon are occurring in our closer skies.
October 24th, 2009 at 10:03 am
[...] the Bad Astronomer mentioned one of those ads in his blog. Universal Pictures is trying to get your money with a movie called The Fourth Kind. Apparently [...]
October 24th, 2009 at 10:31 am
There have been so many reports for decades that I think the phenomena warrants a comprehensive investigation — a serious one where eyewitness accounts are documented along with who the person is, how they live, etc. I think it will uncover some fascinating insights into the human mind and collective thinking.
I too await ghhekjxkxiuis’s landing on White House lawn.
October 24th, 2009 at 9:33 pm
Sorry kids. There are no aliens, we’re all alone,,,for now.
With all the probing going on in folks,,,back yards,,,I wonder if we’re just seeing evidence on how much of the populace are secretly of an alternate personal orientation? Maybe they just want to be politicians???
Gary 7
October 24th, 2009 at 9:41 pm
41. llewelly
Kirk was just an oversexed egalitarian with delusions of gender.
Riker was just a free thinker. I can’t recall the first Trek officer to nail an alien babe, but from the original pilot, the captain(name: only known to a chosen few) was in prison and we all know how hard that can be.
Gary 7
October 25th, 2009 at 2:10 am
The 4th Kind bots flyered the campus and spray-painted the streets & sidewalks here at UA Tucson.
Of note, CFI recently held a UFO conference (skeptical of UFO claims, of course) in said city; and James McGaha will be speaking on campus next fark’n week.
October 25th, 2009 at 8:57 am
I was irritated with the survey choices as well. In fact, I made a status update mocking the survey and added the addition option of “no, because you’re too full of yourself to think aliens would travel several light years just to observe YOU.”
Well, people start responding to my status choosing option (A) which was yes.
Then a friend of mine posted this gem:
“I hope that everyone knows that “alien life” is really demonic apparitions…..the sad thing is that the only people that can see them are those that are on their way to a devil’s Hell(Sheol)! People wake up and get saved before it is too late!!”
So I replied back saying “hey, it was a joke… I’m mocking the survey” and that was the final word. So I was hit from the one angle of people believing in alien visits/abductions and from another about how aliens are demons and we’re all going to hell.
Thanks Facebook for reviving my faith in humanity.
October 25th, 2009 at 9:31 am
I agree that abductions and other types of contacts have most likely not happened. But I am not sure what I should think about all the UFO sightings. I’m sure that most of them have natural explainations, but I can’t really be sure that not a single one of them was an unmanned probe.
If there is an alien civilization out there, it is certainly not unthinkable that they have launched unmanned probes to other solar systems. That’s what we will do ourselves in the future. They may only travel at (let’s say) 10% of the speed of light, but if the manufacturing costs are low enough, we might send them off to benefit future generations.
Even without the Star Trek engines, you can cover a lot of distance traveling at sub light speeds for 10.000 years. With the (possible) introduction of nanobots that can self-repllicate, they could have sent millions of probes to interesting planets.
October 25th, 2009 at 10:44 am
Phil, they are warping in from the future and stealing our Whales.
I watched documentary about it YEARS ago!
tut tut
October 25th, 2009 at 10:54 am
Good grief. There MUST be name for fallacy “so many people talks about it so must be something in it”. Reminds me of these fancy times, when you could be accused of witchcraft and everyone knew about witches flying naked on brooms to Sabbath to copulate with Devil or something like this.
In fact, I think that UFO stories, abductions etc. are modern equivalents of witch stories from past. Times changes, but humanity needs and idiocy are same as ever.
Yeah, STUPID BURNS. Really. :/
October 25th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
76. MaDeR Says:
Good grief. There MUST be name for fallacy “so many people talks about it so must be something in it”.
Yep, Bandwagon:
Description of Bandwagon
The Bandwagon is a fallacy in which a threat of rejection by one’s peers (or peer pressure) is substituted for evidence in an “argument.” This line of “reasoning” has the following form:
1. Person P is pressured by his/her peers or threatened with rejection.
2. Therefore person P’s claim X is false.
This line of “reasoning” is fallacious because peer pressure and threat of rejection do not constitute evidence for rejecting a claim. This is expecially clear in the following example:
Joe: “Bill, I know you think that 1+1=2. But we don’t accept that sort of thing in our group. ”
Bill: “I was just joking. Of course I don’t believe that.”
It is clear that the pressure from Bill’s group has no bearing on the truth of the claim that 1+1=2.
It should be noted that loyalty to a group and the need to belong can give people very strong reasons to conform to the views and positions of those groups. Further, from a practical standpoint we must often compromise our beliefs in order to belong to groups. However, this feeling of loyalty or the need to belong simply do not constitute evidence for a claim.
J/P=?
October 26th, 2009 at 2:08 am
@40. Nergol,
Apparently, reading comprehension is not one of your strong points. Neither is logic, but why rush things.
the scientifcally correct answer: to “Do you believe in alien encounters?” is “Not sure”. ?!?!?
The scientifically correct answer is that you do not know what you believe?
OK. For you, maybe you are just explaining that for you confusion is the normal state of affairs. That you believe so much nonsense, that you no longer can figure out what you believe. In your case, that might be scientifically accurate. Just don’t try to apply your confusion to everyone else.
And you later explain with this –
Appearing on a TV show with some being you claim is a real, live extraterrestrial would require extraordinary proof that the being is a real, live extraterrestrial. Anything less than extraordinary evidence will not be satisfactory. For a first person perspective on this, read The Man Who Fell To Earth, by Walter Tevis.
If I claim that some being is a dolphin, I do not have to do much to satisfy the scientific community that the being is a dolphin. If I claim that a dolphin is a new species of dolphin, then the claim is more unusual, less regular, and less customary (from @56 Art – definition: extraordinary- 1 a : going beyond what is usual, regular, or customary). The proof needs to be more than the ordinary proof. I expect that you will claim that the ordinary proof for an extraordinary claim is ordinary for that type of claim, which is exactly what Carl Sagan stated. Extraordinary proof is required for an extraordinary claim.
Your lack of reading comprehension does not mean that you have just been successful at disproving Carl Sagan. It just means that you need to work on your reading comprehension. Perhaps you should read The Demon-Haunted World, by Carl Sagan. He takes pains to make himself clear to those, who disagree with him.
If I claim that some being is a real, live extraterrestrial, I have to demonstrate why the evidence I am presenting is in any way appropriate for showing that the being is from another planet, not someone in a costume, or someone with extraordinary mutations, or something else.
You are claiming to prove something that is very far outside the ordinary for the scientific community. You may have a true real, live extraterrestrial. They may be very common in other parts of the universe, therefore the modifier extraordinary is going to depend on where you are. However, on Earth the claim is extraordinary, so the proof absolutely needs to be extraordinary.
Any groundbreaking proof requires extraordinary evidence to persuade the scientific community. Once the proof is replicated many times, it is no longer extraordinary, and with each replication, it loses some of its extraordinary quality, but it started out as an extraordinary claim and making it without extraordinary proof invites ridicule.
If you wish to convince me of something that has no proof, such as abduction by extraterrestrials, or extraterrestrial TV guests, you will need to provide extraordinary evidence. Proof may be a yes or no proposition, but the route to get to proof of the extraordinary is nothing like the proof needed to convince scientists of extraordinary claims.
One bank account and another bank account are both bank accounts. One contains a lot of money, while the other is overdrawn. Are they the same thing? Yes, they are both bank accounts, but not all bank accounts are the same thing. This is like as claiming that the theory of evolution is the same as the theory, but with a different definition, because it is something entirely different of Intelligent Design. One is a scientific theory, the other is a legal excuse to destroy the US Constitution.
Not at all the same thing, unless you believe.
October 26th, 2009 at 2:25 am
That should not be but the route to get to proof of the extraordinary is nothing like the proof needed to convince scientists of extraordinary claims.
Instead, but the route to get to proof of the ordinary is nothing like the proof needed to convince scientists of extraordinary claims.
October 26th, 2009 at 2:39 am
@67 Damon,
Damon you go beyond stupid, to stupid and incredibly rude.
There is plenty of evidence of rape by humans. I do not know of any statements by Dr. Plait to the contrary.
There is no evidence of rape by extraterrestrial beings. If you know of some tangible evidence, then provide it. In the absence of anything tangible, you should apologize for your insane claim.
No. You are claiming that there is no difference between quantity and quality.
You are full of hot burning stupid.
Entire institutes of hot burning stupid just means more stupid.
Prove it.
I double dog dare you.
Not being able to tell the difference between coincidence and proof is not something you should brag about, but that is probably how you pay for your institute of gullibility. You brag about your cluelessness to the even more clueless and they give you money for allowing them to believe in magic.
October 26th, 2009 at 4:04 am
Wait, there are people still browsing the internet without adblock?
Why?
I turn it off for sites I wish to support, but I’ve never even SEEN an ad on Facebook.
This.
October 26th, 2009 at 4:11 am
But again, “I have no reason to believe your claim” is a very, very different animal from “I know that your claims are false”.
Logic fail.
Since their claims are supposedly based on “evidence”, of which they decide the type and the veracity. They are absolutely, and demonstrably false.
October 27th, 2009 at 8:42 pm
“If we finally develop warp drive and travel to other planets, will we get all hot and bothered by the indigenous six-legged slimy malodorous gelatin bags that live there?”
Have you seen some of the things on the internet?
If we ever find alien species, somebody, somewhere is going to what to get it on with them…. There are some strange folks out there.
October 28th, 2009 at 11:11 pm
“After years of seeing UFOlogists collecting nothing but anecdotal evidence without a single shred of actual y’know, tangible evidence, there is no reason to think this is anything but a psychological phenomenon and not a physical one, and should be treated that way.”
Mmmm, now this is simply not fair for so many reasons. Think about that statement few a few minutes and I think the irony will sink in and become obvious.
The assumptions in this thread about the description of aliens changing throughout history to “match public perception” is also completely wrong; our mysterious abductors have always been tall, skinny grays with large black almond eyes, etc. with only slight variations. Which is interesting enough evidence on its own.
Your closed-minded assumptions about UFOs and Aliens are usually pretty humorous, but this one is downright transparent, Phil. If it wasn’t apparent before, now it’s pretty much set in cement: Phil is on a government payroll. Based on the shallowness of this tripe, I hope it’s not a hefty wage.
November 2nd, 2009 at 7:48 am
@84. Damon,
That is a funny satire of the way that UFOist reinforce their beliefs by attempting to twist logic in illogical ways.