(March 22, 2016 at 12:20 am)scoobysnack Wrote:(March 22, 2016 at 12:10 am)AFTT47 Wrote: Occam's Razor, for starters. Tremendous logical inconsistencies for another.
I don't know if occams razor can be thrown into this debate, because essentially it means using preconceived notions to formulate conclusions.
No it doesn't. All Ockham's razor says is that when we've two or more competing claims for a phenomenon the one with the least explaining to do is most likely to be correct.
So in your case we've got a group of people stating that secret documents the can't show you, but which they saw in jobs they largely can't prove they ever had, show aliens exist and control large parts of the world. This is likely to be the most complicated explanation possible, with the most explaining to do, therefore without any preconceived notions about the explanation it fails William of Ockham's little test.
If you want to see how to prove a government cover up, google wikileaks, Chelsea Manning or Edward Snowden. They all provided evidence which proved the veracity of their claims. With your crowd of idiots and conmen if what they say is true, then at some stage they had ample opportunity to take or copy documentary evidence to prove their claims, yet they don't have any evidence, just assertion.
Urbs Antiqua Fuit Studiisque Asperrima Belli
Home
Home