Now, those with a goal of proving existence, have said that anecdotal evidence, and testim

Now, those with a goal of proving existence, have said that anecdotal evidence, and testimonies of eyewitnesses and abductees, are not ENOUGH to prove existence. But all of this data is a wealth of information to be CONSIDERED by those who wish to communicate with the aliens. This anecdotal evidence can be analyzed to answer the questions: Who are the aliens? Why are they here? What do they want? Where are they from? How do their craft travel? In attempting to answer these questions, we might find a methodolgy to use to contact and/or communicate with aliens. By studying sightings, crop circles, and abduction reports, we might develop guidelines for experiments that could result in contact. We also need to consider looking at this phenomenon from the alien's standpoint. What if you were one of them? How would you communicate with humans? Why would you NOT stage a mass landing on the Whitehouse lawn? We need to look at the possible psychologies of the aliens. We need to ask questions, based on the anecdotal evidence, to give us a view to the psychology of why we have yet to make full contact. For example, if an alien race is abducting human females and developing hybrid infants, then their reason for being here explains why they havent made full contact with all humans. That is just one possible consideration, with a view to looking at the aliens' intentions, and how THEY might view US. Here again, my point is, that with the goal of proving existence, all the wealth of anecdotal evidence is virtually thrown out as useless to reaching that goal. But, with the goal of contact and communication, the anecdotal evidence is most useful for both understanding the phenomenon and developing useful strategies for reaching the goal. In recent months, on UFO conferences, people have divided themselves into two main camps, now being labeled as BELIEVERS and SKEPTICS. The believers are said to believe in the existence of aliens, and the skeptics are said to not believe because there is no PROOF that aliens exist. In my arguments above, I see the skeptics as those who wish to prove that aliens exist, and the believers as those who wish to contact/communicate with aliens. Both groups have made assumptions. BELIEVERS SKEPTICS | | | | Assume aliens exist Assume aliens dont exist | since there is no proof | | | | desire contact and desire proof of existence communication Look carefully at the chart. The believers HAVE NO PROOF that aliens exist, because if they did, then the skeptics would have the proof that they desire, and the two groups would unite and pursue the next logical step of making contact and communication. This chart keenly explains how significantly different the two goals are. The skeptics' goal of proving the existence of aliens, has an assumption that does not lead to realizing their desired proof. Whereas the believers' assumption that aliens exist, allows them to consider all the anecdotal evidence to develop useful strategies to reach their desired goal of contact and communication. The believers are called such, only because they need to ASSUME that aliens exist, in order to study the phenomenon in a way that will lead to a WORTHWHILE goal. It is obviouse that the believers do not have the PROOF that the skeptics need. Therefore, since the believers do not have the PROOF that the skeptics require, then the skeptics should consider the believer's approach as one of taking the ASSUMPTION that aliens exist, in order to consider the phenomenon, BASED ON that assumption. In light of this analysis, I see no reason why skeptics cannot, also, make the same ASSUMPTION, in order to broaden the scope of their approach to their desired goal. Keeping in mind, that, when the believers reach their goal of making contact and communication, then, by definition, they will also have obtained the skeptics' desired goal of PROOF that aliens exist.