Jump to content

Time Travel verses the Paranormal


KerrTexas
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hey Rainman,

 

Got another story to tell you, and since no one got injured, actually is kind of funny. I sometimes drove the truck to deliver the doors to the job sites, and was waiting across the street from a new building under construction while an air-conditioning system was being lowered via a helicopter onto the roof of the building.

 

Once the unit was placed onto the roof-top, and the straps were released, the air conditioner vanished from sight in a tremendous roar and cloud of dust.

 

Apparently, the air-conditioner was too heavy and not only fell through the roof, but we all could hear it falling through each and every floor, until it finally came to rest on the ground floor of the building.

 

Bet there were some red faces as a result of that incident.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 81
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

but because it does not conform to your standards of testing only proves it is either unearthly or beyond mans (science) understanding.

It proves nothing of a sort. The lack of evidence for the existence of extra-terrestrial "flying saucers" cannot be interpreted to mean that they exist. The lack of evidence simply means that they have not been detected. It does not rule out other possibilities but it offers no evidence at all that logically and rationally "proves" what such other possibilities might be or that they even exist.

 

If we were to delude ourselves into accepting that sort of evidence as proof of something then what sort of evidence might we also accept in, for example, a court of law? Fred is accused of murdering John. During trial no evidence is offered that shows the jury that Fred killed John. In closing the DA argues that the lack of evidence proves that Fred killed John using means either unearthly or beyond mans (science) understanding.

 

There's no real difference between the two arguments - yours and the DA's. Both reject rational standards of proof and jump to the same illogical conclusion - UFO's exist because we can't prove they exist and John killed Fred because we can't prove that he killed him (by accepted standards of proof as to both propositions).

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL, Darby your tactics amuse me :D

 

Maybe you should be an attorney or politician if you like to take half statements and present them as a full representation of what somebody stated.

 

The statement which you quoted was followed by:

 

until a flying saucer lands on the white house lawn they will be nothing more than a docudrama on the science fiction channel

and was in reference to the fact that at this point in time, paranormal experiences people claim to have, just as UFO claims can NOT be substantiated at this point in time using the scientific method because of repeatability issues, but that it also does NOT rule out the possibility in the future.

 

As to the courts in the US, I wouldn't put it past some attorneys to try exactly what you suggested...lol

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe you should be an attorney or politician if you like to take half statements and present them as a full representation of what somebody stated.

On the contrary, it was a presentation not of a half statement but a complete synopsis of your position given the totality of the context of all the posts on the thread. Your position clears appears to be, based on the context of the thread, that lack of proof equates to the presence of proof.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the contrary, it was a presentation not of a half statement but a complete synopsis of your position given the totality of the context of all the posts on the thread. Your position clears appears to be, based on the context of the thread, that lack of proof equates to the presence of proof.

Actually I have said no such thing. We can go back and forth forever if you would like, but what my clear position has always been, and will forever be is that these are my own personal BELIEFS, that there are some things which can at this time neither be proven nor disproven by science. That given this science, should not pass something as fact if it has not been disproven. I believe you addressed this in your rant about paying to much in taxes. In normal American mathematics 2+2=4, that is a fact. That people have or do not have paranormal abilities is not.

 

Ohhh...which reminds me

 

It is the actual tax paying public that funds these projects. Spending money for to-date failed experiments becomes a matter of public policy and not a subject of the whim of alt-sci opinion

I'm sure glad drug makers don't stop looking for cures for diseases after a test drug fails. I'm pretty sure the Government pours money into grants for them. I guess you prefer the government funding research such as the 1.2 million dollar study on the mating preferences of woodchucks, or the 1.4 million dollar study on why people don't ride their bikes to work? You know, the ones where they can actually work with things that cooperate with them.

 

Like I said though, who am I to judge, and if you Want to hold these as your beliefs , then more power to you.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the case of the problem that you encountered in Colorado, it seems that there was failure at several points in the process. With what happened to you, seems that the same would have happened to others, as well. I am surprised that you didn't refuse the windows, and demand the appropriate sized windows to be ordered, as would be your right.

Yup. But as always, there are many factors at work in any problem. The contractor decided to walk away from the job before the roof was on and the garage door was installed. He must have clearly seen he could not complete the job within the $ value he had bid (and his signature was on a contract with that $ amount). Meanwhile, I was staring down the oncoming winter with no roof and not even 4 complete walls.

 

It would be very difficult to convince a contractor who has already walked away to tear-down the windows (esp. since the exterior steel wall cladding was already in place behind them). The funny part is that this contractor thought he was going to sue me for the last $1000 I held back for completion! He actually filed suit in Montezuma County Court against me. Clearly, he was bluffing and I did not need a lawyer to tell me that, but I paid one for advice anyway. So I countersued, and I showed-up for court on the designated day. Surprise, surprise... he called me the day before court just as I got into town. I decided to let it roll to voicemail. Seems NOW he wanted to try and work things out. Too late. We are headed to court. Another surprise: He did not show. Judge dismissed case against me. Told me that I would have to re-file against him if I wanted to pursue. While I should have done so, I did not have time, much less spare $, to monkey around with a guy who has performance issues.

 

I immediately brought in a new contractor, and told him to leave the windows as-is, and just get the roof on, the garage door installed, and the building closed for the winter. As it turns out he went the extra mile to build the steel cladding around the windows per the drawings. So even though the cheesy wood 2x4s are still installed, at least the windows are properly sealed from the weather.

 

I was able to extract some monetary compensation from the steel building company, even though there was nothing wrong with their drawings. Apparantly, the contractor who walked away had contacted them asking them to join his lawsuit against me! (Can you believe that?) They knew he had no chance in hell, so I guess they decided throwing some good will money at me was not bad insurance to protect them against future legal actions.

 

Such decisions are never easy. And some people thought I should have gone after the original contractor for "everything he's got." Well, he ain't got much, because he has built up a reputation in the courts for filing these kinds of "scare them" lawsuits, and regularly not showing up when his target decides to go to court instead of settle with him. He will suffer more from his own reputation than I could ever extract from him in a court of law.

 

RMT

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...