snake river rufus
Registered Senior Member
And yet you took the time to post those wordsMeanwhile said:
aliens i think not
- Thread starter terpinator72
- Start date
I think that the situation is more nuanced than that. Sensationalistic claims to the contrary, any "credible" UFO evidence currently available basically boils down into two forms: surveillance and biological recordings. Both forms have severe, but not insurmountable, problems of verification associated with them.
Surveillance evidence are radar, camera, video, acoustic - anything - where some Joe Schmoe recorded an anomaly whose existence could be explained by an object moving in a fashion that exceeds the parameters of Terrestrial science, or otherwise demonstrating some characteristic that renders alternative hypotheses redundant. The problem is that any media is fakable, and so creates a powerful circular argument:
Because UFO's don't exist, and because media can be fabricated, therefore all forms of surveillance evidence purporting to show an alien craft must have been faked.
With modern special effects and the state of photographic analysis, I'm under the impression that there just isn't anything that recorded media can ever produce that will break the 'circular' defenses outlined above.
Previously, I've pointed out that if UFO's are alien, then part of their design criteria will be that of penetrating an air defense network. And that, since surveillance radar existed before we had stealth technology, there may be photographs of objects from the 1950's, 60's and 70's which exhibit stealth characteristics. If so, then the notion of a fake would become incredulous: Mr. 1957 Joe Blow, lacking a supercomputer and a team of elite engineers, can't possibly know how to model his hubcap to defeat J-band radars.
Next, for biological evidence I'm not referring to FOX network 'Alien Autopsy', or similar crap. From my casual understanding of the topic, the human brain is a biological computer which analyzes, prioritizes, and stores sensory data stemming from various life experiences. It is merely a more sophisticated version of the types of machines in category #1 above. However - and this is the golden caveat - what will make this particular DVD eventually definitive to 'the question' is that the processes by which the mind records and stores information is unfakeable.
That is to say, regardless of how manipulative, deceptive, cunning, ruthless and amoral a person is, at some cellular level their brains automatically record and store sensory input. And therefore that within a UFO claimant's physical brain tissue there will be some form of chemical structure - a biological marker utterly incapable of being falsified - that can eventually be accessed to allow a scientist to verify or prove null the veracity of the claims said witness is making.
With the right technology (beyond our present means, of course) not only should it be possible to tell with 100% certainty whether a person is truthful or not, it also will be possible for doctors to process this stored biochemical data and examine the information as a media recording. Therefore, I reject the notion of a 'UFO curse'. At some point it will either be determined with acceptable statistical certainty that UFO claimants are all liars, or otherwise defective, or that their brain chemistry confirms (by devastatingly scientific processes) that they're telling the truth. The investigating team will be able to review the subject's visual, audio and olfactory memory recordings directly - allowing experts to evaluate 'sightings' using the raw biological data, as if they themselves had been present at the incident in question.
Traditionally, governments tend not to be enthusiastic about anything which undermines authority. Ideology has proven to be a destabilizing influence in the past, and it's not inconceivable that the certain knowledge our entire planet's existence hangs by an alien thread might just make the masses of the world, shall we say, just a tad more susceptible to leftist internationalistic drivel.
If people truly believed and understood that the earth was being watched by a force that could destroy it effortlessly, IMO this would impair the ability of national governments to conduct foreign policy. What should happen is that the perception of this peril would cause a universal groundswell of resistance to most forms of military adventure - no matter how critical or necessary. A movement not supported by leftist nutbar anti-establishment types, but the most dangerous opponents of all; mothers and fathers. The calculus of self-interest - by which all measures of policy are evaluated -would be forever altered.
Because if a sighting remains unexplained, then they don't know the answer. The government cannot 'divulge' the mystery of something which remains mysterious.
This vastly overstates our capability to detect such faint signals. There are sights on the web that can calculate SETI detection ranges depending on a host of variables. Suffice it to say that at cosmic distances a signal has to be unfeasibly powerful to be seen by us here. For instance, a Russian S-300 Grumble air search radar (a very powerful transmitter here on earth broadcasting in a detection-friendly wavelength) could not be detected even if transmitting at us from the nearest star.
My favorite conspiracy was back in 1990 when the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador posed as a nurse claiming to have witnessed Iraqi troops disconnecting incubators and killing pre-term babies in Kuwait City. The diplomatic community in Washington is small. The daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador was known to this community; therefore, the story must have been known at the time to be questionable. And yet, strangely, one will search high and low in vain for any peep from the mainstream media prior to the Gulf War that the story she conveyed might be bogus.
Do recall that a 'trip' to earth might not be that 'long' to our alien friends. According to Einstein, as an object approaches unity with C, time slows down. We here on earth, aware of a ship approach from a nearby star, might experience the passing of 10 years before it arrives. But for the passengers on the vessel, the voyage might only take a week.
Certainly not. Mankind is a political animal with an ingrained sense of hierarchy. All a government has to do to exorcise from the mainstream such undesirable things as the potential 'existence' UFO's is to ignore it. If a democracy 'brought down the hammer' and actively tried to suppress such discussion, then they'd virtually be proving that UFO's exist. For why would they do such a ridiculous thing? At the absolute most, I could see a government hostile and fearful of the matter working to discredit the public phenomena.
Silly isn't it? That aliens would come all the way here to earth and make no attempt at communication. IMO, there are two explanations for this:
1) The aliens aren't here.
2) The aliens are here and they are not friendly.
Either one handily explains a government reluctance to discuss the matter, by the way.
Because last time I checked, the galaxy we live in is one giant cesspool of material capable of building the basic blocks of life, and this 'factory' has probably been manufacturing biomass for billions of years before Earth contributed her first tiny, crude product to the galactic total. You might choose to dismiss the possibilities inherent to this, but do understand that this has no bearing whatever on the current state of matters in the galaxy.
snake river rufus
Registered Senior Member
Let me try another way. If you were ill would you rather see a M.D. who uses hard data and scientific means to find a cure? Or a faith healer who uses silly superstition? Because you are asking us to believe in something that there is absolutely no evidence for!Meanwhile said:
snake river rufus
Registered Senior Member
Glenn239 posted
Do recall that a 'trip' to earth might not be that 'long' to our alien friends. According to Einstein, as an object approaches unity with C, time slows down. We here on earth, aware of a ship approach from a nearby star, might experience the passing of 10 years before it arrives. But for the passengers on the vessel, the voyage might only take a week.
And what else does Einstein tell use about an object with mass as it approaches C? Gain or lose mass? Require more or less energy to move at that speed.
But all of that begs the question, How did they find us in the first place?
Do recall that a 'trip' to earth might not be that 'long' to our alien friends. According to Einstein, as an object approaches unity with C, time slows down. We here on earth, aware of a ship approach from a nearby star, might experience the passing of 10 years before it arrives. But for the passengers on the vessel, the voyage might only take a week.
And what else does Einstein tell use about an object with mass as it approaches C? Gain or lose mass? Require more or less energy to move at that speed.But all of that begs the question, How did they find us in the first place?
Last edited:
snake river rufus
Registered Senior Member
As someonme else pointed out space is really big!lsufos said:
Do you have any idea how much space they would have to shift through? Or how long such a search would take?
That was an awesome post Glenn. Very detailed and informative!
Huh??snake river rufus said:And yet you took the time to post those wordsrolleyes?:
I now suspect I wasted my time posting anything creative in this thread in this subforum in this forum thinking it might make a difference. Big deal, right? You people will still be groping around for a handle in the dark regardless: <em>that's your legacy.</em>
Huh??snake river rufus said:
Oh I see. You're attempting to save face.
I am asking you to believe in something that has no evidence?? God. It's like talking to a bunch of bricks.
snake river rufus
Registered Senior Member
Why should anyone believe in something sans evidence? That is just stupid. Have you met duendy? I think that you would have a lot in common.Meanwhile said:
To move at near-light velocities, stupendous amounts of energy are required.
For instance, IIRC something the mass of the battleship Bismarck would need
in and around 3-4 seconds of the total energy output of the sun to achieve
over .9 C. However, I'm not particularly interested in the fact that such a feat would be difficult, merely that it is not impossible according to the rules as we understand them. You can rest assured that ET, if he exists, is a rather clever chap who's had a few million years to ponder such things.
My guess? Well, on the Internet you get what you pay for..
If they're here, then they found us because they've searched the entire
galaxy looking for the likes of us. Which in turn would mean either they are awfully curious, or had a reason to do so.
Yes it is. But the galaxy is really old too, meaning that if we assume ET also to be ancient, then he'd have had plenty of time to scout every star
in the galaxy.
Well, let's assume the galaxy to be 100,000 light years across and with 200
billion stars, and our intrepid little green meanies wish to search every
star from the galactic core out to the fringes. That means, at an absolute
minimum, a completed search by 200 billion .99c capable probes would not finish a preliminary sweep and report back to Greenie Central for around
100,000-200,000 years, depending on HQ location. Fewer probes would take longer - but given the fact that they should be able to map out an efficient search pattern for each probe, I'd suggest that the delay incurred wouldn't be even an order of magnitude. I'm thinking even slowpoke sweepers could search every star and report back to a central base within, say, 10 million years of the program starting.
The galaxy is over 10 billion years old.
Thanks. Obviously I don't agree that the situation is as straightforward as
some make it out to be. If you think of the galaxy as simply an inefficient biomass factory that’s been ‘online’ for X billion years, then we’ve got one heck of a lot of snooping to do before we can conclude anything about being alone in this dump they call the Milky Way.
Because it's possible. When the answer to something is unknown and a variety of explanations are available, a rational actor will try to assign
probabilities to the possibilities and not make an absolute, binary yes/no choice.
What the situation requires for UFO’s to be here today is that ET would exist, systematically search for us over the course of the last X years, find us, come here, spy on us, not talk to us, be seen by us on occasion, and our own government(s) not ‘fess up to any of these facts. Fortunately (or otherwise) all of these prerequisites have certain inherent symmetry, don’t they? That is, if ET considered things like us to be such a threat as to warrant all this effort, then he’d have strong motive to find us, spy on us, and not talk to us. And were he doing so, our governments would have motive not to admit that it’s happening; ET could wipe us out in an instant, and the voters might not be entirely comfortable with that fact.
Ophiolite said:
Certainly is, BUT, the purpose of exploration, is surely to deliver some news, or return some benefit to the faring organisation within it's lifespan? Unless the community in question has discovered limitless, free energy, and wants to share this to avert cataclsym on other planets, and it is driven purely through altruism, in which case, why would they spend all that effort getting here, and then conspire with governments, and not fulfill their the objectives?
Every twist and turn opens an unresolved question, ....
Ophiolite
Valued Senior Member
If your intelligent ET has a lifespan measured in millenia, then that will not be a problem.phlogistician said:
If your intelligent ET has no cultural or biological interest in news, but actually likes olds, then that will not be a problem. [And if you really force me I can construct a reasoned and reasonable argument as to why interest in olds would be an evolutionary advantage.]
Again, lifepsans may be very different. Aristocrats in England used to send their children of on the Grand Tour of Europe to benefit their offspring, not to benefit themselves. (Remember they had never heard of the Selfish Gene.)phlogistician said:
It may not be much effort. To travel to the Americas when colonisation began cost the equivalent of $250,000, took months, and a large proportion of those going died on en route.phlogistician said:
Today, you can fly to New York for a long weekend, take in a Broadway Show, do some shopping in Saks, and be back in time for the Tuesday edition of Coronation Street. Don't assume it isn't analogous for ET.
Ah, well. I don't think they are here. I don't think they are conspiring with governments.phlogistician said:
I just think using - "the universe is big, and it takes a long time to get anywhere" - as an argument against UFOs, is fundamentally flawed.
ET is out there. (Just subscribing, for now.)
(Just subscribing, for now.)Einstein's Relativity demands that ET's lifespan must be huge to us - to get here in a timely fashion ET has to approach the speed of light. By doing so, ET's ship effectively becomes a time machine. His 'travel week' might look more like 5,000 years to us. So, even without speculating on million-year life spans, if ET is merely a 'frequent flyer' he'll live for hundreds of thousands or even millions of our years, just to commute between point A and point B.
If one supposes they came here to talk to us, this then demands there be something to talk about. If they've come here and not talked to us, then it follows ET thinks there is no reason to talk to us. No 'conspiracy' necessary. Anything we'd ever say to ET would be an attempt by us, in some guise, for ET to improve our situation materially or technologically. In exchange, we can offer ET precisely: jack squat. Not really an attractive deal for ET then, is it?
'Not fulfilling their objectives' implies that ET's intention in coming here is some form of interaction with us; I must suggest that it has to be painfully obvious that, if he's here, his motives are plainly otherwise.
glenn239 said:
Well, if they are coming, I agree with your here. I think they would be more likely to just observe, and gather information, BUT there are those that support the 'abducted and anally probed' mythos, which is far from mere observation.
I doubt that a race with the technology to concquer the immense distances involved, would crash their vehicles, not have excellent stealth capabilities, need to conspire with a puny world power, or need to capture and probe humans.
So, yes, their motives would be 'otherwise', but as the myth merchants try and sell us otherwise, they need to come up with some reasons. The cop out oft used here is that aliens, being alien, think differently, and we could not undersyand their motives, but that is ridiculous, as life is about controlling and utilising resources. All animals have territory, and therefore, an alien race exploring space would have a recognisable reason for doing do, even it were mere observation, to something more economic.
I came up with a reasoning this morning why perhaps if there were aliens they might conspire. (Please realise that my point being raised here is just speculation and of course a great dose of fiction)
Simply if an alien race is move advanced and they developed radio technology 500 years prior to us, it causes a problem. The problem is a mixture of economics and intellectual property. For instance we say Marconi created radio, this means that an entire company has been running for years on the stock market and that the entire planet has been filled with radio technology. We assume Marconi had rights to the intellectual property since he was the one that filed the patent.
An alien planet light years away might have discovered radio technology sooner, which means that they might have some alien that claims to have the intellectual property for radio technology centuries previously. Suggestibly if such an alien corporation could prove their technology existed centuries before Marconi's it might cause alsort of legislative concerns and problems.
Afterall if it was ruled in the favour of those that had the technology first, the company in question would lose share value quickly while some alien corporations value would climb.
Admittedly I don't believe the world would rule in their favour, however would it mean compensation. For instance if we said "You had plenty of time to file your patent", but at that time 500 years ago we didn't have a patent office, or their ability to travel light years in distance, would it mean compensation for their loss?
(remember this is a fictional, but yet potential problem)
Simply if an alien race is move advanced and they developed radio technology 500 years prior to us, it causes a problem. The problem is a mixture of economics and intellectual property. For instance we say Marconi created radio, this means that an entire company has been running for years on the stock market and that the entire planet has been filled with radio technology. We assume Marconi had rights to the intellectual property since he was the one that filed the patent.
An alien planet light years away might have discovered radio technology sooner, which means that they might have some alien that claims to have the intellectual property for radio technology centuries previously. Suggestibly if such an alien corporation could prove their technology existed centuries before Marconi's it might cause alsort of legislative concerns and problems.
Afterall if it was ruled in the favour of those that had the technology first, the company in question would lose share value quickly while some alien corporations value would climb.
Admittedly I don't believe the world would rule in their favour, however would it mean compensation. For instance if we said "You had plenty of time to file your patent", but at that time 500 years ago we didn't have a patent office, or their ability to travel light years in distance, would it mean compensation for their loss?
(remember this is a fictional, but yet potential problem)
Then Stryder, what is need is the 'Cosmic Anti Trust Organisation' to come and save us!
I see all you intellectual SPOOKS are back on this thread.
Looking for what explanations, why if the aliens where like
you boys/girls with no belief then like you lot they would
not go looking.
You got to believe in what you look for or there is no need
to search.
Scientists will find alien lifeforms some bizarre lifeforms and
some with advanced intelligence then we will have to ask
ourselfs are they friend or foe?
But for you spooks life may always be empty holding on to
your outdated Belief.
Anyway never heard what you SPOOKS believe in, could
you let the rest of know so we can get a right GOOD LAUGH.
Your belief Please
http://lsufos.com
Looking for what explanations, why if the aliens where like
you boys/girls with no belief then like you lot they would
not go looking.
You got to believe in what you look for or there is no need
to search.
Scientists will find alien lifeforms some bizarre lifeforms and
some with advanced intelligence then we will have to ask
ourselfs are they friend or foe?
But for you spooks life may always be empty holding on to
your outdated Belief.
Anyway never heard what you SPOOKS believe in, could
you let the rest of know so we can get a right GOOD LAUGH.
Your belief Please
http://lsufos.com
Ophiolite
Valued Senior Member
Our beliefs have been clearly stated. Do you have problems reading? We know you have problems writing. The Scottish Executive have a number of programs available for those with learning difficulties. You should seriously consider taking advantage of one or more of them.
Are you actually capable of responding intelligibly to any of the points raised in this thread? If not then, ignorant child, please bugger off.
Are you actually capable of responding intelligibly to any of the points raised in this thread? If not then, ignorant child, please bugger off.