Video as an acceptable form of evidence

[Shadow_self]

5 minutes ago, Iliketurtles said:

 

We can only do the best we can do.  

 

Recording events occur on video with professionals present to do their best to rule out fraud, unfortunately is the best we can do. 

 

Maybe in the future when AI takes over it will study and record in minute detail every angle of every human experience and interaction and be able to settle debates for us. 

 

 

 

Not really...most scientists cant even do their own jobs correctly (replication crises anyone?). A large portion of them derive both their income and form their entire belief system on the basis of personal testimony (journal articles).

 

You are often so critical of this fact regards science...yet you would place faith in these same people as legitimate, when it is known that they literally manipulate their own results to get what they want??

 

Please think about that very carefully...it makes no sense

 

This was why I said to you, it is a matter of competence, not title. I know people who have no formal training in the sciences that could design an experiment better than some "distinguished" professors of experimental psychology

 

But I know If I am there, and I apply the controls and exclude the confounders as much as humanly possible, then I know all that can be done has been done...there is no faith involved (unlike the scenario you laid out) 

[Iliketurtles]

I think there is some disconnect here. 

 

I am not saying that the best we can do is good. 

 

I am simply saying it is the best we can do. 

 

Does that make sense?

 

You cannot beam your memories and experiences to other people, they are valid only for you.

 

If the goal here is to make evidence that can be widely distributed then video is the only option available besides written personal testimony. 

 

The human mind filters what sees, and distorts memories of events with biases, human memory is falliable and apt to error.  

 

Video helps record what happened as it happened, without bias. 

 

This is why police wear body cams to protect themselves, why banks and businesses use cameras, and why people buy dashcams. 

 

Edited April 15, 2022 by Iliketurtles

[Shadow_self]

7 minutes ago, Iliketurtles said:

I think ultimately what this argument boils down to is nothing proves anything.  

 

If someone doesn't accept the evidence available to to them, nothing gets proven. 

 

Considering the alternatives, video is as good as it gets, despite its drawbacks. 

 

Just my $0.02

 

It comes down to a matter of confounders and controls

 

In none of the videos above, do I see stringent, sufficient controls being applied without any editing whatsoever...This in and of itself creates the possibility of so many confounders, its  somewhat impossible to trust it.

 

So....by not being able to reduce those....I think any given individual would be perfectly justified in not accepting what they see

[Iliketurtles]

2 minutes ago, Shadow_self said:

 

It comes down to a matter of confounders and controls

 

In none of the videos above, do I see stringent, sufficient controls being applied without any editing whatsoever...This in and of itself creates the possibility of so many confounders, its  somewhat impossible to trust it.

 

So....by not being able to reduce those....I think any given individual would be perfectly justified in not accepting what they see

 

You can always argue video has been edited or tampered with.  

 

It's still the best we can do.

[Iliketurtles]

23 minutes ago, Shadow_self said:

 

It comes down to a matter of confounders and controls

 

In none of the videos above, do I see stringent, sufficient controls being applied without any editing whatsoever...This in and of itself creates the possibility of so many confounders, its  somewhat impossible to trust it.

 

So....by not being able to reduce those....I think any given individual would be perfectly justified in not accepting what they see

 

 

As to my question earlier, how if you were required to do so by law, how would you provide better evidence of UFO/UAPs that you were witnessing on a regular basis?

 

Me personally I guess I would get a team of astronomers and professionals to come check it out and record everything on video. 

 

I mean I can't think of anything more I possibly could do to document it.

 

Do you have better ideas?

Edited April 15, 2022 by Iliketurtles

[Nungali]

48 minutes ago, Iliketurtles said:

As a question if you were able to spot what appeared to be real UFOs or UAPs  on a regular basis, how would you gather evidence to support your and others personal testimony?

 

If not video then what other options would you have available to you?

 

There IS a reason some people that think they have seen UFOs  will gather their friends or interested parties to do a 'UFO watch' .

 

I guess with all your focus on    suggestive 'evidence' on how valid  a video is  ( motivated by we all know what  )   ... you missed this obvious bit .

[Nungali]

What I like best about the empty force  Starjumper video  is his excellent  control of  his own energy ..... especially when he stumbles to the right  in his 'empty force stance '   ... but that is probably due to his lacky ... I mean student   who, no doubt has an imbalance on his right side , and  as  Steve's 'empty force'   surges towards him,, some is defected to one side , casuing a backlash, reverberation in Steve's chi cosmos  ...

 

Besides , as Bart Simpson says ;  ' Well, there is bound to be some splashback ." 

 

 

 

 

[Nungali]

45 minutes ago, Iliketurtles said:

 

We can only do the best we can do.  

 

Recording events occur on video with professionals present to do their best to rule out fraud, unfortunately is the best we can do. 

 

Maybe in the future when AI takes over it will study and record in minute detail every angle of every human experience and interaction and be able to settle debates for us. 

 

 

 

 

     'Us' .

 

Its already 'settled' for 'us'  .

 

[Shadow_self]

49 minutes ago, Iliketurtles said:

 

If you were required to do so under law, and were not given a choice.

 

How would you provide better evidence?

 

 

The answer I gave was for a good reason. I dont think there is "better" in this case

 

You tell someone you seen something  " Youre a liar"

You show them a video of something " Thats fake"

 

In both scenarios there is no proof of anything, and you  cant win

 

Do you believe Bob Lazar from example?

 

 

 

Reasons like this are why I wouldn't use a video.

 

If you were clever enough, you would tell them to go to the location at the time said things appear, and make their own judgement...that's honestly what I would do.

 

Pretty sure thats what Bob Lazar did as well

 

 

Edited April 15, 2022 by Shadow_self

[Iliketurtles]

2 minutes ago, Shadow_self said:

 

The answer I gave was for a good reason. I dont think there is "better" in this case

 

You tell someone you seen something  " Youre a liar"

You show them a video of something " Thats fake"

 

In both scenarios there is no proof of anything, and you  cant win

 

Do you believe Bob Lazar from example?

 

 

 

Reasons like this are why I wouldn't use a video.

 

If you were clever enough, you would tell them to go to the location at the time said things appear, and make their own judgement...that's honestly what I would do.

 

Pretty sure thats what Bob Lazar did as well

 

 

 

 

"I dont think there is "better" in this case"

 

I agree with you 1000%. 

 

We can only provide the best evidence we have and that's it. 

 

At the moment until AI takes over and can record all angles of all interactions in minute detail and settle arguments and debates documenting things on video with professionals present to make a best case effort is the best we can do.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Nungali]

46 minutes ago, Iliketurtles said:

 

So gathering a team of scientists and doctors who do their best to rule out fraud, and recording the event on video.

 

Could you create better evidence personally if required to do so?

 

If so how?

 

Doctors  ?  What ? Someone with a doctorate in video editing  ?

[Shadao]

55 minutes ago, Iliketurtles said:

Could you create better evidence personally if required to do so?

What you mean with "you create better evidence personally"?

 

I'm assuming you mean myself making evidence to show (for)something?...

[Iliketurtles]

Just now, Shadao said:

What you mean with "you create better evidence personally"?

 

I'm assuming you mean myself making evidence to show (for)something?...

 

Pretend you know where to find some paranormal phenomenon, and your job is to document it as best as you possibly can. 

 

I would grab a team of professionals, have them make a best case effort to rule out fraud, and record the whole thing on video. 

 

I don't know of better options.

 

[Nungali]

Since 'we' all know that a stage illusionist (or even one on the street )  can fool a whole bunch of people , in real time / life , all this discussion on  believing what we see in a video - which has MUCH more potential for fooling us , is rather defunct , isnt it ?

[Iliketurtles]

That is why it is so important to have professionals present to make a best case effort to rule out fraud. 

 

The video is only important because it is superior to their personal testimony of what occurred. 

[Nungali]

1 minute ago, Iliketurtles said:

 

Pretend you know where to find some paranormal phenomenon, and your job is to document it as best as you possibly can. 

 

I would grab a team of professionals, have them make a best case effort to rule out fraud, and record the whole thing on video. 

 

I don't know of better options.

 

 

 

 

Sure there is a better option   for  such people as have a job like that  ..... make a TV series . . . ( with catchy theme music )

 

 

 

 

 

[Shadow_self]

5 minutes ago, Iliketurtles said:

I would grab a team of professionals, have them make a best case effort to rule out fraud, and record the whole thing on video. 

 

You still dont see the problem with this?

 

Quote

Not really...most scientists cant even do their own jobs correctly (replication crises anyone?). A large portion of them derive both their income and form their entire belief system on the basis of personal testimony (journal articles).

 

You are often so critical of this fact regards science...yet you would place faith in these same people as legitimate, when it is known that they literally manipulate their own results to get what they want??

 

Please think about that very carefully...it makes no sense

 

This was why I said to you, it is a matter of competence, not title. I know people who have no formal training in the sciences that could design an experiment better than some "distinguished" professors of experimental psychology

 

But I know If I am there, and I apply the controls and exclude the confounders as much as humanly possible, then I know all that can be done has been done...there is no faith involved (unlike the scenario you laid out) 

 

 

Please reread this...I did not write it without reason...it is a literal summary of what really happens

 

Can you not trust yourself to rule out fraud?

 

Perhaps that is easy for me to say as someone with training in experimental design...but given what I have seen in the field...One would be foolish to trust an academic to do that for them. The vast majority literally lie through their teeth to get the results they want, to get the promotions they want, to get the grants they want...and so forth...tweak here, P hack there..omission of data...fabrication of other data....it goes on and on

 

Do you have a way to screen for that?  If not, I think you are sorely mistaken trusting anyone to do that for you...Its actually gullible if im being honest to trust someone based on a title. I get the attraction towards it...but if you lived that reality for a while..you'd see exactly why Im saying it

 

Quote

 

[Iliketurtles]

We just established there are no better alternatives. 

 

 

[Nungali]

2 minutes ago, Iliketurtles said:

That is why it is so important to have professionals present to make a best case effort to rule out fraud. 

 

The video is only important because it is superior to their personal testimony of what occurred. 

 

What type of professionals ?

 

 

Oh wait ... this is where we where several weeks back and you  neglected to answer  . 

 

And I find it kind of funny
I find it kind of sad
...
When people run in circles it's a very, very
Mad world, mad world ....

 

 

 

[Shadow_self]

5 minutes ago, Iliketurtles said:

We just established there are no better alternatives. 

 

I think that @Nungali and I both had better alternatives...Have them go see for themselves

 

The point is you cannot trust documentation...it is that simple...Irrelevant of the medium

 

Therefore, from a logical perspective the only rational choice is to experience the phenomena in question for oneself..be it alone, or in the presence of the person making the claim ( as in the case of UFO watch parties)

 

This way there is no faith required..at all.

 

What you suggested not only requires faith...but puts it in the hands of people who  reside in a field which is known to have an exponentially high percentage of liars and frauds...and that is a really big problem now.

 

Especially when you have no reliable gauge of competence. It is, how would one say, not too unlike placing your faith in a religion...

[Shadao]

1 minute ago, Iliketurtles said:

Pretend you know where to find some paranormal phenomenon, and your job is to document it as best as you possibly can. 

Ah, got it.

As english isn't my native language sometimes I have issues understanding what people mean, even if a phrase is written with proper grammar.

 

Well I personally would go this way(and let's suppose that things like money, location, technology and personnel are not an issue):

1. I would first do my due diligence and search all about said phenomenon, maybe try to speak to people that have seen/done/went through it.Get a certain number of "subjects" per say, and then try to speak to those around/near them to see if there is something in common/a validity of sorts.I would also try to seek documents and moments in history that might've been recorded about this(even if they were mere myths or folk tales) and cross references until there was a common ground for it all.
2. I would try to think how I would be able to record such thing(to make this easy, let's say that I would have to document a case of someone claiming to be able to levitate, so in this case it would be a case of a "person" and "able to do 'x'", so that would be something that isn't spontaneous nor a happening that one cannot control or know when/where it will happen.), I would have to first try to make contact with the said person, ask if they would be willing to demonstrate their alleged power and have it on record for all to see.And also set some conditions such as "to be considered valid you'll have to levitate at least this much".If they said "No" or had some "conditions" about it, well this would be the end for me.If they accepted then I would go to....
3. Find an enclosed space, preferably without any furniture around, and spacious, without a thing on the walls, floor or ceiling.Set cameras to cover all "hidden spots" and put the person in the middle of it all(the cameras would have to be able to cover all of their body and the surrounding area to prove that there are no mechanisms around them) and good light conditions, the person themselves would have to wear a simple, form fitting, clothing of one single color, preferably for guys it would be just pants and for girls pants and a tank top or a sports bra, just so it can be seen that there isn't any threads on their bodies nor hidden mechanisms under their clothes.And we can see clearly if they would be levitating or not as the clothes wouldn't be hidding them.
4. Set it to go live, and then leave the person on the room by themselves(so the "presence of others" would not be able to be used as an excuse for them being unable to do it), accompany the livestream and let it go for a while, either until some hours went by or the person gave up.
5. Let the person rest, eat something, feel more comfortable, then ask if they would be up to try again.

Most likely, the end result would be a failure on their part and an inability to admit that they are fake, because at the end of the day most of these said masters and such just wouldn't be able to re-create their alleged miracles even when given the best chance to prove it.

[Iliketurtles]

4 minutes ago, Shadow_self said:

 

I think that @Nungali and I both had better alternatives...Have them go see for themselves

 

The point is you cannot trust documentation...it is that simple...Irrelevant of the medium

 

Therefore, from a logical perspective the only rational choice is to experience the phenomena in question for oneself..be it alone, or in the presence of the person making the claim ( as in the case of UFO watch parties)

 

This way there is no faith required..at all.

 

What you suggested not only requires faith...but puts it in the hands of people who  reside in a field which is known to have an exponentially high percentage of liars and frauds...and that is a really big problem now.

 

Especially when you have no reliable gauge of competence. It is, how would one say, not too unlike placing your faith in a religion...

 

 

That may not be an option.  

 

In the case of John he's passed now.

 

If you can't trust any evidence what-so-ever, you'll be hard pressed to exist in our world.

[Shadao]

21 minutes ago, Nungali said:

Since 'we' all know that a stage illusionist (or even one on the street )  can fool a whole bunch of people , in real time / life , all this discussion on  believing what we see in a video - which has MUCH more potential for fooling us , is rather defunct , isnt it ?

I remember some videos of street "magicians" doing their tricks and there are some that if you look closely you can see how their tricks are done or at least what happened before the trick "happened".

 

I remember one of Dynamo doing a "vanishing coin" trick and making it appear on a guy's shoulder but...here's the kicker...when you see the video again you'll see clearly that while he is directing the attention of the guy and his friends towards him, he is putting his hand on the guy's shoulder and when he takes his hand away you can see the coin, then he makes him look at it and they all go "O.O".

 

 

[Nungali]

4 minutes ago, Shadao said:

I remember some videos of street "magicians" doing their tricks and there are some that if you look closely you can see how their tricks are done or at least what happened before the trick "happened".

 

I remember one of Dynamo doing a "vanishing coin" trick and making it appear on a guy's shoulder but...here's the kicker...when you see the video again you'll see clearly that while he is directing the attention of the guy and his friends towards him, he is putting his hand on the guy's shoulder and when he takes his hand away you can see the coin, then he makes him look at it and they all go "O.O".

 

 

 

 

Yup !    I wonder sometimes if some of 'us'  want to be fooled  ?

 

I guess, if you are stuck in a rut of 'sameness'   every day and removed from natural life and nature .

 

Me ?  I am amazed nearly every day by  natural life and nature  . . . the really magical stuff , I  appreciate , but have no need to 'prove' it to others .   I might even deny it  ;

 

Some think / have noticed   ' strange things ' occur around me  , sometimes they will ask " Did you do that ? "

 

My answer is ' Of course  not ! It was a 'coincidence ' .   

 

( the wise will know why this is a good response )

 

 

 

[Nungali]

... I remember once doing tarot , a woman asked me at the end of the reading , how much money she could give me . My answer was , "If you are a struggling single Mum , then nothing , but since you are a very wealthy woman .... $50 . "  She laughed and handed it over  - pulling it out of a  bunch of $50 s .

 

The woman on the next stall, who was spying on us ,  said to me ; " Wow , your psychic ability is in good form today ! "

 

DUDES!   -  The woman was wearing diamonds , gold ......       

Edited April 15, 2022 by Nungali