Extraordinary Evidence

Generate New Template

public (1567) , uap (1561) , disclosure (1383) , ufo (1296) , transparency (1220) , government (1066) , information (1011) , disinformation (943) , ufos (919) , campaign (862) , congress (769) , people (678) , phenomena (648) , national (632) , urge (586) , regarding (565) , issue (565) , unidentified (561) , security (538) , truth (506) , american (506) , support (503) , potential (498) , know (477) , trust (469) , uaps (467) , writing (462) , accountability (461) , time (424) , scientific (410) , intelligence (381) , understanding (370) , act (363) , rep (357) , members (354) , defense (331) , action (314) , efforts (311) , research (310) , committee (309) , objects (302) , related (301) , legislation (297) , house (290) , secrecy (288) , oversight (286) , template (283) , ndaa (282) , concern (280) , being (274) ,

​

We’ve all heard it. “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” Carl Sagan said it. The problem with this statement is that “extraordinary evidence” is not defined.

Pascal’s Wager does the same thing. Pascal basically said that the upside to believing in God (if you are correct) is much greater than the downside either way (if God exists or doesn’t) and so the rational choice is to believe. The problem with his argument is that Pascal never said which God you should believe in.

So my question is, what exactly is “extraordinary evidence”? Does video count? We have that. What about witness testimony? We also have that. Imagery? Check.

What kind of evidence exactly counts as “extraordinary”?

submitted by /u/Commercial-Nature-64
[link] [comments] 

​Read More