It seems a lot of people simply dismiss the possibility of alien involvement based on nothing more than the fact that there is no direct evidence for them.
I completely disagree. People who refuse to believe it's happening AND have looked deeply into the issue. ALL consider the distance too far.
There are people who don't look too deeply into the topic. They might fall into your category.
But smart people who have looked deeply into the issue... They know that there is an incredible amount of direct evidence. Eyewitness testimony is not considered circumstantial or indirect evidence. It is direct evidence.
These words are clearly defined for us. Yet, the pressures of the media force us to use words for their unintended uses.
So IMO your sentence is better written in truth as "It seems a lot of people simply dismiss the possibility of alien involvement, even though there is mountains of direct evidence for them."
The truth is... there is mountains of direct evidence... it's simply that no one accepts that evidence.
Eyewitness testimony from a policeman about a murder plot can get you the electric chair. Eyewitness testimony from a policeman about a first hand encounter with a UFO, and it's labelled what now....? Circumstantial? Under what definition?
Highly educated people who know how to do honest research and have looked into this issue..... in the end are left with.... The distance for interstellar travel is too far. That is their conclusion. The 'no direct evidence' was a media line from the 80's. That didn't pan out, the evidence kept piling up. There is little to do when faced with a mass sighting, all completely alike with very little deviation from the other....
They turn away from the mountains of evidence even in favor for things like mass hysteria. Their honest answer in the end isn't that there is no direct evidence. Their honest answer is it's too far.
Yet, there must be a way, because they are here.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01-Apr-16 14:40 by Anomalies.