warpus
Sommerswerd asked me to change this
What Al said was that it's impossible to prove "ufos" which means that it is not a falsifiable hypothesis. If it were possible to determine the truth of "ufos" in a yes/no fashion then it would be a falsifiable hypothesis. So we have the case of someone asking "Do you believe in "ufos" although they are not a falsifiable hypothesis" which is exactly what Russel's teapot was about.
The thread is about asking about the ufos visiting Earth, which is the same as asking if you believe in god, satan, Odin, invisible pink unicorns, life in the other end of universe, etc... It's not falsifiable, yet the poster is asking the reader to commit to an opinion.
The difference is that we already have evidence of one intelligent civilization existing. We don't have any evidence for gods existing.. or invisible teapots.
But that's really just a tangent. The main difference is that if aliens did visit the Earth, you'd hope to find some evidence of this. If gods exist, there might not be any evidence.. same with the teapot.
And still, what he said to me sounds more like he was equating invisible teapots, with gods, with aliens, with any other hypothesis without any proof as viable truths rather than dismissing them all as improbable possi-truths.