Areas where you'd respectfully disagree with Chuck

This forum is for discussing Chuck's videos as they are publicly released. And for bashing Neelix, but that's just repeating what I already said.
Dragon Ball Fan
Captain
Posts: 3160
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 10:40 pm

Re: Areas where you'd respectfully disagree with Chuck

Post by Dragon Ball Fan »

I get the inherent problem it has but I'm not sure hypnotherapy is always wrong and there is never a real repressed memory. I know going straight to alien abduction is weird but it's the only one I can think of. Betty Hill said she was shown a map by one of the aliens of their home solar system and it exactly matched the Zeta Reticuli system long before it was discovered. doesn't automatically prove anything but it's still compelling, I think.
Artabax
Officer
Posts: 269
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2018 11:03 pm

Re: Areas where you'd respectfully disagree with Chuck

Post by Artabax »

How precise is that Prophecy?

Ifn the Prophecy says small planet, medium planet, HUGE planet, I aint impressed.

Ifn the Prophecy says planet#1 30M miles, planet#2 60M miles, planet#3 90M miles, I would be impressed.
Self sealing stem bolts don't just seal themselves, you know.
User avatar
drcakey
Redshirt
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2019 4:26 pm

Re: Areas where you'd respectfully disagree with Chuck

Post by drcakey »

Since he has so many videos and it's hard to watch them in chronological order, I'm not sure how much he's changed on this over the years, but maybe the biggest place where we diverge is that I'm a major Doylist. I mainly see a story and characters as a bunch of choices made by the creators. For example, when Dr. Pulaski says...anything, I'm not enraged about what an awful person she is, I just think how gruesomely overdone all her anti-Data dialogue is, and why the writers thought it was reasonable. So whenever Chuck, or anyone else, goes off on a character for being evil or stupid or whatever, I'm just like "wtf dont blame them the man behind the curtain's right over there".
i am not, and have never* been, a car
User avatar
Deledrius
Captain
Posts: 1965
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2017 3:24 pm

Re: Areas where you'd respectfully disagree with Chuck

Post by Deledrius »

Dragon Ball Fan wrote: Tue Apr 16, 2019 4:17 pmI get the inherent problem it has but I'm not sure hypnotherapy is always wrong and there is never a real repressed memory.
It's bunk and has a pretty terrible history. Memory doesn't work the way pop television or pseudo-therapists wants to believe it does, and things like repressed memory recall don't tend to recover hidden memories so much as manufacture them, often due to poor methods such as leading questions. Whether it's done by malice or incompetence, it's wrong enough that there's a good reason to shun dangerous pseudo-science "medicine" that hurts real people.

Carl Sagan wrote quite a bit about this in The Demon-Haunted World if you want to know more about some very specific examples.

It's easy to understand why this notion could be appealing and seem reasonable if you're completely unfamiliar with it and how much it's been examined and found wanting, or if your only exposure is through the very inaccurate portrayals in media, but the reality is there isn't much real there; the things that are real about it are the opposite of helpful. It has failed to produce anything reliable and effective despite a lot of research.

For more information:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recovered-memory_therapy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypnotherapy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repressed ... #Criticism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confabula ... e_memories
https://www.popsci.com/accurate-memorie ... ewitnesses
Dragon Ball Fan
Captain
Posts: 3160
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 10:40 pm

Re: Areas where you'd respectfully disagree with Chuck

Post by Dragon Ball Fan »

Deledrius wrote: Mon Apr 29, 2019 2:02 am
Dragon Ball Fan wrote: Tue Apr 16, 2019 4:17 pmI get the inherent problem it has but I'm not sure hypnotherapy is always wrong and there is never a real repressed memory.
It's bunk and has a pretty terrible history. Memory doesn't work the way pop television or pseudo-therapists wants to believe it does, and things like repressed memory recall don't tend to recover hidden memories so much as manufacture them, often due to poor methods such as leading questions. Whether it's done by malice or incompetence, it's wrong enough that there's a good reason to shun dangerous pseudo-science "medicine" that hurts real people.

Carl Sagan wrote quite a bit about this in The Demon-Haunted World if you want to know more about some very specific examples.

It's easy to understand why this notion could be appealing and seem reasonable if you're completely unfamiliar with it and how much it's been examined and found wanting, or if your only exposure is through the very inaccurate portrayals in media, but the reality is there isn't much real there; the things that are real about it are the opposite of helpful. It has failed to produce anything reliable and effective despite a lot of research.

For more information:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recovered-memory_therapy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypnotherapy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repressed ... #Criticism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confabula ... e_memories
https://www.popsci.com/accurate-memorie ... ewitnesses
what about the example I gave of the Betty and Barney Hill abduction case having a detail of a star map that matched EXACTLY a star system that wouldn't be discovered for decades?
TrueMetis
Officer
Posts: 204
Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2017 11:45 pm

Re: Areas where you'd respectfully disagree with Chuck

Post by TrueMetis »

Dragon Ball Fan wrote: Mon Apr 29, 2019 2:23 am
what about the example I gave of the Betty and Barney Hill abduction case having a detail of a star map that matched EXACTLY a star system that wouldn't be discovered for decades?
From what I can tell it didn't. The person who who made this discovery had to alter the original drawing for it to fit.

http://www.morethanpassingstrange.com/b ... ve-pearse/
Fish cut out nearly all of the space between the stars pictured. (If Betty Hill’s rendition of the star map is accurate – as claimed by her niece Kathleen Marden – there is no legitimate reason to manipulate the spatial distance between the two large nickel sized stars.) Even worse is the fact that the ZR route to Sol/Earth is off by light years in the wrong direction. Fish also assumed that the background stars of Betty Hill’s star map were just added for affect – she eliminated them to make her theory fit: “The background stars, with the exception of the triangle which has relatively bright stars near the surface of the map, were put in just to show there were background stars. These probably do not represent individual stars.” The triangle feature that Betty Hill had described as “quite prominent” in her star map, was essentially eliminated by Marjorie Fish’s Z-R theory. To make her theory fit, Marjorie Fish also made the assumption that the star map was to be viewed from an unknown slice of space looking vertically up, which means she had to use stars in multiple constellations to recreate the pattern of Betty Hill’s star map.
This isn't exactly high level science, but quite frankly this shit doesn't deserve more than that.

Want to impress me with how "exact" this map was, it should have included the planets around those stars that had them (82 G. Eridani is looking to have three), and their companion stars (Alpha Mensae has a dwarf star companion all of 30 AU away).
Dragon Ball Fan
Captain
Posts: 3160
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 10:40 pm

Re: Areas where you'd respectfully disagree with Chuck

Post by Dragon Ball Fan »

TrueMetis wrote: Mon Apr 29, 2019 4:00 pm
Dragon Ball Fan wrote: Mon Apr 29, 2019 2:23 am
what about the example I gave of the Betty and Barney Hill abduction case having a detail of a star map that matched EXACTLY a star system that wouldn't be discovered for decades?
From what I can tell it didn't. The person who who made this discovery had to alter the original drawing for it to fit.

http://www.morethanpassingstrange.com/b ... ve-pearse/
Fish cut out nearly all of the space between the stars pictured. (If Betty Hill’s rendition of the star map is accurate – as claimed by her niece Kathleen Marden – there is no legitimate reason to manipulate the spatial distance between the two large nickel sized stars.) Even worse is the fact that the ZR route to Sol/Earth is off by light years in the wrong direction. Fish also assumed that the background stars of Betty Hill’s star map were just added for affect – she eliminated them to make her theory fit: “The background stars, with the exception of the triangle which has relatively bright stars near the surface of the map, were put in just to show there were background stars. These probably do not represent individual stars.” The triangle feature that Betty Hill had described as “quite prominent” in her star map, was essentially eliminated by Marjorie Fish’s Z-R theory. To make her theory fit, Marjorie Fish also made the assumption that the star map was to be viewed from an unknown slice of space looking vertically up, which means she had to use stars in multiple constellations to recreate the pattern of Betty Hill’s star map.
This isn't exactly high level science, but quite frankly this shit doesn't deserve more than that.

Want to impress me with how "exact" this map was, it should have included the planets around those stars that had them (82 G. Eridani is looking to have three), and their companion stars (Alpha Mensae has a dwarf star companion all of 30 AU away).

okay, but there was still other things to suggest they had a repressed memory, weather it was aliens or not. like the missing time they experienced.
User avatar
clearspira
Overlord
Posts: 5587
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 12:51 pm

Re: Areas where you'd respectfully disagree with Chuck

Post by clearspira »

Dragon Ball Fan wrote: Mon Apr 29, 2019 4:36 pm
TrueMetis wrote: Mon Apr 29, 2019 4:00 pm
Dragon Ball Fan wrote: Mon Apr 29, 2019 2:23 am
what about the example I gave of the Betty and Barney Hill abduction case having a detail of a star map that matched EXACTLY a star system that wouldn't be discovered for decades?
From what I can tell it didn't. The person who who made this discovery had to alter the original drawing for it to fit.

http://www.morethanpassingstrange.com/b ... ve-pearse/
Fish cut out nearly all of the space between the stars pictured. (If Betty Hill’s rendition of the star map is accurate – as claimed by her niece Kathleen Marden – there is no legitimate reason to manipulate the spatial distance between the two large nickel sized stars.) Even worse is the fact that the ZR route to Sol/Earth is off by light years in the wrong direction. Fish also assumed that the background stars of Betty Hill’s star map were just added for affect – she eliminated them to make her theory fit: “The background stars, with the exception of the triangle which has relatively bright stars near the surface of the map, were put in just to show there were background stars. These probably do not represent individual stars.” The triangle feature that Betty Hill had described as “quite prominent” in her star map, was essentially eliminated by Marjorie Fish’s Z-R theory. To make her theory fit, Marjorie Fish also made the assumption that the star map was to be viewed from an unknown slice of space looking vertically up, which means she had to use stars in multiple constellations to recreate the pattern of Betty Hill’s star map.
This isn't exactly high level science, but quite frankly this shit doesn't deserve more than that.

Want to impress me with how "exact" this map was, it should have included the planets around those stars that had them (82 G. Eridani is looking to have three), and their companion stars (Alpha Mensae has a dwarf star companion all of 30 AU away).

okay, but there was still other things to suggest they had a repressed memory, weather it was aliens or not. like the missing time they experienced.
Here's the thing: when half something has been proven to be complete BS, that automatically casts severe doubt over the rest of it regardless of its substance. If I bought a diet book telling me to eat ten pounds of bacon a day it doesn't matter how accurate the rest of the book is as it is completely smeared by that one piece of crap.
So yeah, you COULD ask about things such as the missing time, but as they have already been caught in one massive lie then it is easy to dismiss the rest as just more lies.
Dragon Ball Fan
Captain
Posts: 3160
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 10:40 pm

Re: Areas where you'd respectfully disagree with Chuck

Post by Dragon Ball Fan »

clearspira wrote: Mon Apr 29, 2019 7:58 pm
Dragon Ball Fan wrote: Mon Apr 29, 2019 4:36 pm
TrueMetis wrote: Mon Apr 29, 2019 4:00 pm
Dragon Ball Fan wrote: Mon Apr 29, 2019 2:23 am
what about the example I gave of the Betty and Barney Hill abduction case having a detail of a star map that matched EXACTLY a star system that wouldn't be discovered for decades?
From what I can tell it didn't. The person who who made this discovery had to alter the original drawing for it to fit.

http://www.morethanpassingstrange.com/b ... ve-pearse/
Fish cut out nearly all of the space between the stars pictured. (If Betty Hill’s rendition of the star map is accurate – as claimed by her niece Kathleen Marden – there is no legitimate reason to manipulate the spatial distance between the two large nickel sized stars.) Even worse is the fact that the ZR route to Sol/Earth is off by light years in the wrong direction. Fish also assumed that the background stars of Betty Hill’s star map were just added for affect – she eliminated them to make her theory fit: “The background stars, with the exception of the triangle which has relatively bright stars near the surface of the map, were put in just to show there were background stars. These probably do not represent individual stars.” The triangle feature that Betty Hill had described as “quite prominent” in her star map, was essentially eliminated by Marjorie Fish’s Z-R theory. To make her theory fit, Marjorie Fish also made the assumption that the star map was to be viewed from an unknown slice of space looking vertically up, which means she had to use stars in multiple constellations to recreate the pattern of Betty Hill’s star map.
This isn't exactly high level science, but quite frankly this shit doesn't deserve more than that.

Want to impress me with how "exact" this map was, it should have included the planets around those stars that had them (82 G. Eridani is looking to have three), and their companion stars (Alpha Mensae has a dwarf star companion all of 30 AU away).

okay, but there was still other things to suggest they had a repressed memory, weather it was aliens or not. like the missing time they experienced.
Here's the thing: when half something has been proven to be complete BS, that automatically casts severe doubt over the rest of it regardless of its substance. If I bought a diet book telling me to eat ten pounds of bacon a day it doesn't matter how accurate the rest of the book is as it is completely smeared by that one piece of crap.
So yeah, you COULD ask about things such as the missing time, but as they have already been caught in one massive lie then it is easy to dismiss the rest as just more lies.
I'm still not sure since stuff like the Betty Barney Hill case and the Travis Walton Case, are considered the more believable cases by ufologists and the ones I know of are in fact, cautious of the more far fetched alien related theories. like they are skeptical the idea that all modern technology was reverse engineered from the Roswell UFO but still think the more well known abduction cases may be legit despite them involving hypnotherapy.
User avatar
MithrandirOlorin
Captain
Posts: 753
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2017 12:06 am
Contact:

Re: Areas where you'd respectfully disagree with Chuck

Post by MithrandirOlorin »

When it comes to the Star Wars Prequels I am incapable of Respectfully disagreeing. My desire to respect certain people who's openly trashed the Prequels requires to just pretend they don't talk about Star Wars at all.

In my opinion people who claim to like Star Wars but don't like the Prequels are the children of the father of lies.
Call me KuudereKun
Post Reply