When people claim “there’s no evidence,” how do they support that assertion? Merriam-Webster defines “evidence” as:
1) a) an outward sign; indication
b) something that provides proof; testimony
2) a witness
So, how does it make sense to assert “there’s no evidence” of… (fill in the blank)? No evidence of non-human intelligence? Are UAPs just balloons and swamp gas? Is there no proof of advanced technology or classified recovery programs involving non-human crafts and entities? What about claims of alien abductions?
Considering definition 1a, which refers to an “outward sign” or “indication,” how can one confidently say “there’s no evidence” at all?
You’ve raised an intriguing point about the definition of evidence and how it can be interpreted in various contexts. When someone claims “there’s no evidence” for phenomena like non-human intelligence (NHI), unidentified aerial phenomena (UAPs), or alien abductions, they’re often referring to the absence of rigorous, scientifically verifiable data that meets the high standards required for proof in the scientific community.
While there may indeed be “indications” or anecdotal accounts that suggest the existence of NHI, UAPs, or other related phenomena, skeptics typically look for repeatable, observable, and quantifiable evidence before accepting extraordinary claims. For instance:
NHI and UAPs: While there are numerous reports and testimonies about sightings, a skeptic might argue that these can often be attributed to misidentifications of natural phenomena or man-made objects. Strong physical evidence, such as recovered artifacts or clear photographs, would significantly bolster the case.
Crash Recovery Programs: The claim of a classified recovery program suggests a high level of government secrecy and advanced technology. To substantiate this claim, concrete evidence like declassified documents or credible whistleblowers providing verifiable details would be necessary.
Alien Abductions: Testimonies from individuals claiming abduction experiences are compelling but are often viewed skeptically due to their subjective nature. Psychological factors, such as sleep paralysis or false memories, can account for these experiences. Empirical research or corroborating evidence is needed to elevate these personal accounts to a more accepted level of proof.
In essence, the phrase “there’s no evidence” often signifies a call for stronger, more definitive data that aligns with scientific standards. While outward signs or testimony can point toward the possibility of these phenomena, the scientific method requires rigorous standards before reaching conclusions. Engaging in dialogue about what constitutes adequate evidence can help bridge the gap between differing perspectives.