Two of my coworkers frequently mention shows like “Encounters” or “Ancient apocalypse” or whatever. I’m not the best at debating or forming arguments against these though I do feel strongly that bold claims require better evidence than a blurry photo and an eyewitness account. How do you all go about this?
Today I clumsily stumbled through conversation and said “I’ll need some evidence” and was hit with “there’s plenty of evidence in the episode ‘Lights over Fukushima’”. I didn’t have an answer because I haven’t watched it. I’m 99% sure that if I watch it it’s gonna be dramatized, designed to scare/freak you out a little and consist of eyewitness accounts and blurry photos set to eerie music. But I’m afraid I just sound like a haughty know-it-all if I do assert this before watching.
These are good people and I want to remain on good terms and not come across as a cynical asshole.
(Sorry if language is too formal or stilted. Not my native tongue)
Just ignore and avoid the topic the best you can. Don’t confront. Just go, “ohh ok” and move on. Pretend you need to go to the toilet or that you have something else to do if you can’t break free from the conversation.
It’s about as futile as trying to convince a religious fanatic that their views may not be ideal for everyone; you just don’t. Ignore and avoid.
Ignoring is so hard 😅 I never bring it up.
I don’t think they’re fanatics. I just think their curiousity, with inexperience in healthy skepticism, has found a very easy outlet.
But I guess you’re right. The current state of astrobiology isn’t as exciting and people want to wonder. Maybe hard science is too difficult to sell in this case.
