Bignose Posted September 23, 2008 Share Posted September 23, 2008 The only difference between us is that I expect all claims to be backed by some kind of proof. It's not enough to cry "fake" as to me that is making a claim. You want to make a claim, fine, now back it up. (emphasis yours) Seriously though, I write off claims of invisible things as rubbish instantly. My comments referred only to the proof or disproof of things like video footage, photographs and casts, physical things. So, somewhere between these two statements, there is some middle ground. Because 1st all statements have to have some proof, and yet you dismiss some things as rubbish instantly. There are some statements which even you don't require proof for. Basically, all this comes down to is, your standards are some things are different that others. That's perfectly fine. I think that we all do this to a certain extent. I accept the word that Penn and Teller faked a video, because as was mentioned above, that is exactly the kind of thing they would do. I don't need any further substantiation. Science is like this too. You give a talk at a conference, and there will be people in the audience who go along exactly with what you say. And there will be some audience members who will ask questions, or will need further evidence to be convinced. This happens everywhere, you just want more proof on hoax claims, and that's fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!Register a new account
Already have an account? Sign in here.Sign In Now