Suppositions at Play, Backed by Numbers?

Greetings. Green cows on the Moon. A physical reality? Obviously not. 

The UFO subculture, and the general public, places a good deal of importance on sheer numbers. If a claim, or claims, are made often enough, over a long enough period of time, and by enough individuals, the claim in question is often taken as a confirmed fact, as reality. But is this a logical assumption to make? 

Let's undertake an experiment. Let's suppose that thousands of people, over the course of several decades, have made a similar set of claims and declarations that are void of physical evidence that would definitively corroborate the claims. Let's also suppose that researchers have spent a huge amount of time examining the claims, and have believed many of the people, and their unsupported testimonials. Finally, let's assume that the claims have nothing to do with unidentified flying objects, but have everything to do with green cows, bovines on the Moon. 

Should we believe the claims? Should we believe that green cows live on the Moon? Yes we should, and why not? After all, unsupported claims and declarations are made about unidentified flying objects all the time, and they are believed by many in the UFO subculture. Of course I am being facetious, but I am also being quite serious. When such claims are made by so many people around the planet, does that necessarily mean that something anomalous is occurring? Absolutely not. It is certainly a possibility, but without a proper understanding of the situation, and without a legitimate investigative effort, we are left with opinions and nothing more, and that is simply not good enough. We cannot arrive at a place where we make the injudicious choice to abandon our critical thinking skills and just formulate our individual belief structures based solely on the words and opinions of UFO celebrities and personalities. 

Unfortunately, that's exactly where we are. UFO researchers often make the choice to believe witnesses, despite having no physical evidence on hand to scrutinize. Abduction researchers John Mack, Budd Hopkins, Peter Robbins, and David M. Jacobs have made the same ill-advised jump, putting aside the scientific method in favor of opinions and speculations. Statements like "I found him credible," or "She is telling the truth," or "His testimonials held up under hypnosis," are thrown all about the UFO room. Opinions all. Not good enough, and potentially damaging to alleged witnesses and the entire research endeavor. 

We need to steer the UFO research community back to a place where the investigative exercise, and its conclusions are what guide the "field," not unsubstantiated claims and potentially biased and erroneous opinions. 

Thank you for your time and consideration.