So... it's offensive, because if it were anti-Semitic, which it's not, it would be offensive?

I find it hard to believe, that the US government isn't guilty of covering things up. Only they're more prosaic things like, they have an interest in keeping certain wars going on so arms companies can sell weapons and make money; or they don't really want people to lower their consumption of sugar because the sugar barons pay their campaign costs, or whatever. Well, I guess they don't cover this stuff up very well, but it's not like they admit to it either?

Lyra wrote:

QUOTE:
So... it's offensive, because if it were anti-Semitic, which it's not, it would be offensive?

No, that was just a critique of the "It's only fiction" defence.

I'm not saying governments don't lie, either.

(Or, indeed, that it's "offensive". I'm not "offended".)

UFO stuff on a par with Creationism, in terms of harm? Not sure about that. I don't see how it's such a serious threat to science, in any way that really matters. It's just a hobby for silly buggers, and while it's obviously a bad thing overall, and not great that (some) people outside the hardcore take it (sort of) seriously, I'm not sure it's remotely as frightening as something like Creationism, which is a direct, deliberate assault on rationalism, appealing to a huge base, backed by some powerful interests. At least a guy in a T-shirt with a "grey" on it is going to be thought of, primarily, as a twat.

Still - Lyra, you should be cautious with that "they do cover things up" stuff. It's a fallback argument for conspiracists generally. They'll tell you that because the US Government doesn't always tell the truth, clearly their own pet ideas about Area 51 / the World Trade Centre / governments practicing population control via poison gas in jet fuel (one of my favourites, for its heroic resistance to logic and science) must therefore be true.

i read a stupid thriller recently which was all about vaccine testing and drug companies covering up the deadly results and causing epidemics of diesases in order to make millions. I am predisposed to believe that this level of thing happens more than we know. I don't think it quite goes as far as Roswell was real, but I wouldn't be able to put much past them, out of cynicism rather than anything else. They are fully prepared to fuck with our environment to the point of catastrophe or manufacture a concept of "terror" and they get away with it because no one cares/self-interest prevails. In this kind of climate (hah) it's hard to believe that there is anything they won't do.

It's interesting to equate Creationism with "UFO stuff", as there does seem to be an element of almost-religious fervour to it.

I've read of Psychologists interviewing hundreds of people who claimed to have been alien abductees, and it was evident that they really, really believed it themselves. i.e regardless of the fact that they knew it sounded mental, and that they couldn't back any of it up, they certainly weren't trying to deceive other people.

Personally, I think that's the interesting part about these UFO cases; how these otherwise-rational people manage to convince themselves so completely of something so crazy.

Wyatt, out of interest, what's your opinion of Close Encounters Of The Third Kind?

Yeah, I feel similarly--at least about that element of the backplot that deals with the scepticism issue.

It's kind of unavoidable though, up to a point. If your plot involves alien invasion - specifically one bloke saying "I know it sounds crazy, but..." - you kind of have to show rational people saying "well, yes, it does sound crazy," because they haven't seen any evidence yet. Anything else would be unrealistic. And ultimately, they have to be wrong, or there's no film.

It's just become such a common cliche - the loner shouting "you have to believe me!" and everyone in the audience feeling for him because they've been shown the aliens, and grouching at the closed-minded so-called scientists who have seen no aliens or evidence of aliens yet, and so (quite rightly) remain sceptical. I'm not sure anyone would really want the scientific establishment to leap in the air and run around shouting "oh my God! Alien invasion!" every time some bloke just showed up and told them they'd seen a UFO. But there are always those for whom movies and TV makes more sense than real life, who will genuinely "want to believe", and honestly think the world should go on red alert every time some dude from Montana sees a meteorite.

Right well I think I might actually take myself to see this tonight. I might become a bit giddy with anticipation.

This is what I call a conspiracy theory.

That's quite sweet really. When I worked in a local authority housing department I met a few people just like that.

I didn't go last week. I am determined to go this week. That's if it isn't off everywhere already. I think it may have tanked.

Ginger Yellow wrote:

QUOTE:
This is what I call a conspiracy theory.

I think the worst characteristic of "our side"--of us hardcore rationalist types--is this kind of mocking of the daft, which a lot of self=appointed crusaders for Science go in for. Give the woman a break, she's a loony. It's not as if she was Gillian McKeith or someone.

Poor old Dr Gillian.

Right. I am going to have another attempt at seeing this tonight. Wish me luck.

I don't know - I mean clearly she could be, but she could also just be really ignorant and prone to conspiracy theories. A lot of people are, especially on the internet. Steve Novella, a neurologist, discussed the video on the most recent Skeptic's Guide , and he said that he she wasn't displaying any of the hallmark speech indicators that distinguish paranoid schizophrenics from sane conspiracy types (although obviously you can't do a proper diagnosis on that basis). Besides, you've got to marvel at someone with the wherewithal to post a video like that on the internet, but not to look up rainbows on Wikipedia.