Well Documented UFO Case

[Reiku]

That's Robert Zubrin's interpretation of how the Kardashev scale should be used, how far our ability to travel has progressed. Kaku uses the original definition of power capability, and Sagan has used a modified one as well to base the power on communication ability.

I was watching a program the other day with Carl Sagan and a panel of other scientists who were saying, they found it highly probably life is elsewhere and perhaps also highly probable they will be vastly more intelligent then ourselves.

If this scale means anything, we can be sure if aliens have not visited Earth yet, they will eventually.

 

[Rhaedas]

Or us them. Assuming that one of us finds a way to travel beyond action-reaction. That won't get you to the nearest stars in even remotely reasonable time.

 

[Reiku]

Or us them. Assuming that one of us finds a way to travel beyond action-reaction. That won't get you to the nearest stars in even remotely reasonable time.

There are three main ways they could:

1) Alcubierre Drive

2) Wormhole Technology

3) Or by a scientific means we are yet to discover

3) seems most likely. This is because, on the scale of things, our intellect is... infant.

 

[Rhaedas]

1 and 2 fall under 3. They are theoretical ideas, they aren't anywhere near the realm of possible.

How can there be a scale of intellect when we're the only ones we know of?

 

[Reiku]

1 and 2 fall under 3. They are theoretical ideas, they aren't anywhere near the realm of possible.

How can there be a scale of intellect when we're the only ones we know of?

Everything that is good in physics, is theoretical. And a theory in general can never be proven per se.

As for a scale of intellect, we may measure intellect by potential. For instance, what is the potential for the development of intellectual growth for a civilization? The Drake equation attempts to measure two things of importance here:

$$f_i$$ = the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop intelligent life
$$f_c$$ = the fraction of civilizations that develop a technology that releases detectable signs of their existence into space

So how do you measure intelligence?

Using Earth as a basis for this talk, intelligence which is capable of extraterrestrial communication occurs in 4 billion years. Generalizing this means only old planets may have intelligent life capable of extraterrestrial communication. Take into consideration we may round up the universe to 14 billion years old, we may state that there is around 10 billion years free in the universe to develope intelligent life since galaxies had already formed 4 billion years after the big bang, according to observations. That's a lot of room (time-wise) and a lot of space (vacuum wise) to allow an intellect far greater than our own to probe the deep regions of the universe and stumble across other intellects.

For a civilization to find us however, if we and this other civilization are the only life out there, makes it unlikely they will ever find us. That is like looking for a needle in a infinitely large haystack. So to believe there is an intellect visiting Earth, we must be reassurred that the universe is in fact teeming with life as this would exponentially increase the ability for life to communicate with other life.

 

[Balerion]

You're not gonna pin that tag on me.

But… I can understand your jumping to conclusions over this, and thereby believing you've figured out my character—all because of my ill-prudently jointless jaunts about our inestimable ET. You conjecture that I'm a wide-eyed and vacant philistine, correct? Fair enough—I forgive you. But only because I never gave you reason to doubt otherwise.

No, I wouldn't call me a "believer". Nor would I call me a "sympathizer".

Perhaps… perhaps a conjuring conjecturer. That sounds about right.

But being a drop-out is probably most accurate. Anyway, it's all very simple really: I propose a scenario, then I live it.

By that I mean I give it authenticity—by lending it my logic and reasoning, my circumspection, my ethics—my aimless mortality. And then I just watch the interplay unfold and accrue between realities—your humdrum reality and a projected semblance of how things could appear from an otherwise splendid "what if" reality. —ET, the muse, has provided me with abundant alternative perspectives to assume and consider. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Feels good to get out into the wild, though.

Fair enough. At least you admit you're fantasizing. That's all I ask.

But, what if? What if?

Would you be prepared to meet the ramifications of an ET? Or can't your precisely scientific imagination wrap itself around such conjectural concepts? Too petite? Too prudent? Too barricaded? Too grandiose?

But, hey, it's not my problemo.

I am a huge science fiction geek, and an amateur hack of a writer, so trust me when I say I can dream with the best of them. I even participated in the "Let's Be Serious" alien invasion thread several days ago, just to show that I'm as big a daydreamer as anyone else--and more than most, given some of the bland responses--but the context of this discussion was not "What if," but "Here's what it is".

 

[Ripley]

Fair enough. At least you admit you're fantasizing. That's all I ask.

No—it's not fantasy. Silly.

I am a huge science fiction geek, and an amateur hack of a writer, so trust me when I say I can dream with the best of them. I even participated in the "Let's Be Serious" alien invasion thread several days ago, just to show that I'm as big a daydreamer as anyone else--and more than most, given some of the bland responses--but the context of this discussion was not "What if," but "Here's what it is".

Bullshit.

I was simply challenging your conscience—as it is.

 

[Balerion]

No—it's not fantasy. Silly.

Of course it is. You admitted as much in your last post. Oh, okay, you called it "conjecture," but when you're conjecturing about a phenomenon (alien visitation) that doesn't exist, you're simply fantasizing.

Bullshit.

I was simply challenging your conscience—as it is.

My conscience? Girl, please. Let's begin the slow climb down Mt. Pretentious and remember that you were just geeking out over the motivations of imaginary aliens with the forum's resident troll. You're not at the Battlestar Galactica forums, so no one had any reason to assume you were playing make-believe.

And for whatever it's worth, neither of you had any interesting or original ideas. Just cookie-cutter sci-fi BS that wouldn't make the cut in a pulp magazine, let alone an actual discourse on the possibility of extra-terrestrials. No use deluding yourself by thinking you said anything profound.

 

[Ripley]

Oh, okay, you called it "conjecture," but when you're conjecturing about a phenomenon (alien visitation) that doesn't exist, you're simply fantasizing.

Well then, if I'm, quote, fantasizing, unquote, then so too is any science "person" who initiates a query with a proposal, a speculation, a conjecture—before acting upon it. You missed that part, huh? I said that I had proposed the validity of ET's existence as a premiss to further speculation—further focal pointing. Hence, if I think—does it therefore follow that I am? Or: if ET exists, does it follow that ET thinks? And the answer was clear: ET thinks. Lol.

My conscience? Girl, please. Let's begin the slow climb down Mt. Pretentious and remember that you were just geeking out over the motivations of imaginary aliens with the forum's resident troll. You're not at the Battlestar Galactica forums, so no one had any reason to assume you were playing make-believe.

And where does fracking reality end? And where might it begin—again? Of course, we're all caught-up in an organismic pocket of a system-wide "reality", aka as thinking—being—in the box. But what lies outside the fracking box?? Aaah… and that's when ET stepped in. Or. rather, for the benefit of your xenophobia, that's when, quote, ET, unquote, stepped in.

But you know, it really doesn't matter to me whether or not ET is "fantasy" —what counts in the end, and what continues to matter, are the results—the payoffs—of perceiving "reality" from different perspectives. Who wants to be permanently anchored at port?

And for whatever it's worth, neither of you had any interesting or original ideas. Just cookie-cutter sci-fi BS that wouldn't make the cut in a pulp magazine, let alone an actual discourse on the possibility of extra-terrestrials. No use deluding yourself by thinking you said anything profound.

Do I detect… an itch?

 

[Pincho Paxton]

I don't believe this case. First the eye witness accounts are all different. Second, when the police men talk they hold their jaw rigidly to stop themselves from smiling. This makes them talk in fast jaw movements, similar to a naughty child. The policemen want to smile from embarrassment, and they are trying hard not to do so. It is so subtle that I'm not sure if you will all be able to pick up on it.

 

[Balerion]

Well then, if I'm, quote, fantasizing, unquote, then so too is any science "person" who initiates a query with a proposal, a speculation, a conjecture—before acting upon it. You missed that part, huh? I said that I had proposed the validity of ET's existence as a premiss to further speculation—further focal pointing. Hence, if I think—does it therefore follow that I am? Or: if ET exists, does it follow that ET thinks? And the answer was clear: ET thinks. Lol.

Scientists hypothesize, but they do so within the context of the available evidence. Conversely, there is no evidence for ET, so you are simply building upon the mythology.

And where does fracking reality end? And where might it begin—again? Of course, we're all caught-up in an organismic pocket of a system-wide "reality", aka as thinking—being—in the box. But what lies outside the fracking box?? Aaah… and that's when ET stepped in. Or. rather, for the benefit of your xenophobia, that's when, quote, ET, unquote, stepped in.

Word salad. ET did not step in. A New Mexican newspaper mistakenly reported the crashing of a weather balloon as that of a "flying saucer" in 1947, and that has caused fame-seeker, conspiracy nut, bumpkin, and yokel to mistake the lights they see in the sky to be something otherworldly. Human imagination is what stepped in, nothing more than that.

But you know, it really doesn't matter to me whether or not ET is "fantasy" —what counts in the end, and what continues to matter, are the results—the payoffs—of perceiving "reality" from different perspectives. Who wants to be permanently anchored at port?

For one, yes, it very much matters to you how ET is perceived. If you did not mind it being perceived as a fantasy, then you would not have reacted so harshly to me pointing out that you were essentially playing make-believe with Reiku.

Secondly, stop kidding yourself. You aren't doing anything intellectual here. You're not seeing reality from different perspectives, you're just circle-jerking with your Believer buddies, because you like to think that there's some unknown quality to the universe that's within our grasp but we just haven't wrapped our eager little digits around it. Your insistence that what you're doing is important, as opposed to the masturbation it truly is, speaks to your solipsism.

Do I detect… an itch?

Do I detect...someone who uses vagueness to cover up for their lack of intellectual integrity?

 

[river]

I was watching a program the other day with Carl Sagan and a panel of other scientists who were saying, they found it highly probably life is elsewhere and perhaps also highly probable they will be vastly more intelligent then ourselves.

If this scale means anything, we can be sure if aliens have not visited Earth yet, they will eventually.

in Ancient History they already have

 

[mrblackhole]

You know, back then it was acceptable that no one could produce evidence of "sightings." That's because digital cameras and smartphones back in the day didn't even exist yet (or weren't as mainstream as they are today). Now that practically everyone in the world (even people in India) own smartphones, I see no reason why no one could capture photographic evidence of sightings.