Lflank
Well-Known Member
Exactly. We believe that since we're the most advance species on earth and we created such wonders, that an advanced species would want to contact us. I believe that they would study us for an extended period of time, if they come here.
How do we tell whose "belief" is true? That is the essential core to the whole "debate".
Notice how often the word "believe" enters the discussion. Which exactly illustrates my point. This whole discussion is religious in nature, not scientific. it's about "beliefs", not about evidence. That is precisely the difference between "science" and "pseudoscience".
Science doesn't care about what anyone "believes". Science only cares about testable repeatable independently-verifiable evidence and data--and pseudoscience doesn't have any. What pseudoscience does have is belief--lots of it. Whether it's people who say they have seen this or that, can't explain it or determine what it is, but "believe" that it's this or that, or "investigators" who "believe" that all the unconfirmable stories actually demonstrate something. And then we get to hear all their "beliefs" about what the unknowable space aliens might or might not be doing.
It's no different than medieval scholars debating the nature of the gods, or the characteristics of angels or demons. And no more helpful to anyone.
It's the most important difference between the reality-based community and the faith-based community. The reality-based community talks about what it can (or can't) measure. The faith-based community talks about what it "believes".
And what they "believe" simply doesn't matter. It's no more infallible or better than what anyone else "believes". People "believe" a dozen different things, and there's simply no way to tell whose "beliefs" are true and whose are not. One holds one's "beliefs" solely and only by faith.
That's why "belief" is useless to science.