Let me explain what i meant: Person A sees coulour normally. Person B sees them in negative(maybe because his brain manages colours differently). For him red is blue and blue is red, but because he was raised to call what he sees as red, blue, he keeps calling it blue and thinks that everyone sees them the same way as he does. Or maybe those negative colours are actually the proper colours!

Humans are exceptionally fallible creatures.

my reply to that question in my previous post addresses it

Probably. It would not be the first time in history that such a thing had happened, and it probably won't be the last. Humans are exceptionally fallible creatures.

Yes, I did. I looked at your links and I examined every picture closely. Just like I always do. And I reported to you what I saw. An equally valid question would be did you actually read everything I wrote?

I'm sorry you feel that way. If you're sure that this is the truth, then its arguments should stand on their own merits. I think I'm being very open about it, but perhaps I'm not. If I am being closed minded, could you please explain to me how I am? I really do care about the truth more than anything, so if there's something that I'm missing then help me out.

Prove that there was nothing in the air. Prove it if you can.

Prove that there was nothing in the air. Prove it if you can.

The burden of proof is not in saying I don't think there was anything. The burden of proof is for those who say there was/is something, you must provide the evidence.

The burden of proof is not in saying I don't think there was anything. The burden of proof is for those who say there was/is something, you must provide the evidence.

Prove that there was nothing in the air. Prove it if you can.

You just adapted an extraordinary event to a more ordinary explanation like, it's just a weather balloon or since they were shooting for more than an hour therefore they were shooting at nothing.

Your argument is insulting the people's intelligence. You are basically saying that these people didn't realize that they were shooting at nothing, So why were they using these beam lights pointing at the object?. They just were hallucinating. were the pictures faked?. News papers, testimonies?.

I think you haven't even got minimally informed about what really happened that night.

Why are you treating people like if they were all stupid.

Edit: Anyway this is starting to sound like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWsH6GO6PIA

therefore let's treat these people like if they were idiots.

we can't just debunking and discrediting people who have experienced/seen things

You watch The Atheist Experience?

You watch The Atheist Experience? You are awesome

And please nobody start a religious debate on this thread. If you'd like to discuss religion or atheism please make a new thread and i'll be happy to discuss those matters.

Those discussions never end well.

I brought this up a couple pages back when I kept seeing jtmedina bring up not believing in God as a defense mechanism or as a means of defending an argument.

Personally I'd prefer religion not to be brought up at all anywhere, or whether or not someone believes or disbelieves in God. Those discussions never end well.

I was about to say the same thing.

No one is suggesting they were idiots. We are simply supplying an idea that they were doing what any average human would do in the situation.

I thought that jtmedina had said that he didn't believe in God, and it was j0KeR that was critical of it? I didn't really know who was saying what so I may be mistaken.