If ufology went to court

[oskar]

Could a case be proven for the existence of alien/ufos many thousands of credible eye witness's worldwide many hundreds of thousands of official documents thousands of hours of film footage yes we have no ufo's or bodies but how many murderer's have been found guilty without weapons or bodies anyway what do you think? I look forward to your comments cheers Oskar

[Carol Nistri]

Oskar your a man after me own heart,I feel so strongly that if there were a way to get ufos into a court of law the world would listen as one,it would make the O.J.Simpson case small potatoes by comparrison.

[Darrell]

if I may, I would like to offer a comment about "observations/claims."

In science, one does not usually put the microscope onto uncontrolled observations. Observations can be misinterpretations, misunderstandings or even special circumstances that are of coincidental nature. The basic idea is that observations noted by sources considered credible sometimes inspire those of scientific bent to investigate for causal relationships. This is where the scientific method is applied, btw. Postulates and predictions are made and then tested. When all is said and done, uncontrolled (casual) observations have very little to do with science.

For example, does it really matter if sir Issac Newton actually observed an apple falling from a tree? NO! What matters are the postulates, predictions and classical dynamics theory he developed due to his observations in nature inspiring his curiosity. No one need investigate the story of the falling apple because nothing is gained either by believing or disbelieving it.

By the same token, does it really matter if what one witnesses moving in our skys in ways we do not understand via our knowledge of the laws of physics is an alien spacecraft or some yet to be discovered natural phenomena that exhibits intelligence? One need not prove anything about it. It is merely an observation which might have been properly or improperly perceived. What is important about such observations, should they occur more than once and be reported by seemingly credible sources, is the science which might follow via postulates, predictions and testing that the observations have inspired.

IMHO we tend to get all caught up in whether any particular observation by witnesses can be "PROVEN." What is far more important is if such reports from different credible peoples and places seem to indicate that indeed something is afoot that bears watching. Going on the assumption that everyone isn't crazy should lead us to increased vigilence by serious investigators. To do less is irresponsible.

[dr wu23]

Not the old ufos in court thing...again....

[Jurgen]

What is a court to determine? That ufology is a real thing we have yet to understand or that the phenomenon is caused by space aliens or some other intelligence? How can a court possibly determine that without a smoking gun? A court ruling in this case is always based on an assumption. What makes a judge's expertise more usefull as the next layman's opinion?
I also think you can't find a true unbiased judge and thus I will use the right of substitution to get me another one.

[Carol Nistri]

Why this doenst appeal to you Dr.Wu will forver have me scratching me head.Ill bet if word got out that this was headed to a court of law the interest would be world wide.Im betting that people we have never heard of before would come forward with both their credentials and stories and the world would no longer be able to ignore this.Of course it would attract the kooks and those that enjoy making fun of those that claim theve encountered these entities,but truth will win out,at the very least doubt amongst the doubters would be cast,thats important but by now either people have seen these things or they know of someone who has.

[jk1961]

the truth never wins carol not in a court of law even if a true to life grey was in the witness box telling his all. anybody with a half ounce of common sense knows that and no matter what credentials we ave would be carried home between our legs

[Carol Nistri]

I dont believe that jk,not for a minute,you wait and see someone somewhere is going to pop this thing wide open. If the case is allowed to unfold you can bet it will have people demanding an answer.

[Carol Nistri]

I can picture this in my minds eye,two lawyers one of which took the case because he had nothing else to do. I really cant see a top notch lawyer taking this case because of the stigma that used to be attached to it.We just have to think of a reason for it all to go to court.

[dr wu23]

Originally Posted by Carol Nistri

Why this doenst appeal to you Dr.Wu will forver have me scratching me head.Ill bet if word got out that this was headed to a court of law the interest would be world wide.Im betting that people we have never heard of before would come forward with both their credentials and stories and the world would no longer be able to ignore this.Of course it would attract the kooks and those that enjoy making fun of those that claim theve encountered these entities,but truth will win out,at the very least doubt amongst the doubters would be cast,thats important but by now either people have seen these things or they know of someone who has.

I think many things about ufos have you, and the rest of us, scratching our heads.....but it is an enigma.



I think Jurgen's answer summed it up....but if you were to have a court with scientists from various fields as jury members and then let various ufology 'experts' and witnesses present their case , it might be interesting to see what the jury of scientists thinks.