My expectation is that the first example of interstellar travel will be robotic probes; in theory the least difficult mission would be an undecelerated fly by probe.
- Join Date
- May 2007
- Posts
- 6,368
My expectation is that the first example of interstellar travel will be robotic probes; in theory the least difficult mission would be an undecelerated fly by probe.
Originally Posted by Eric the Green
Giving your argument-opponents the benefit of the doubt in this case is the wiser course (of course you don't need to apply that to me, I know that would be a stretch for you). Firm realities in physics today are not so firm; there is so much they don't understand and is subject to counter-theories.
Contact to some degree for sure, but assuming "radio waves" is not necessary. Would SETI receivers be able to receive point-to-point microwave communications in all frequencies, and thus know about these cyber-beings? And anyway such cyber-contact would also have to be faster than light. So even the cyber-astronauts would not be robots as we understand them here today.
Line of sight communications would never work in deep space.
Let's be honest, the civilization of social apes is probably the galactic equivalent of the overly friendly guy who doesn't understand personal space.
HEY GUYS WHATS UP IM HAVING A GREAT DAY I JUST FIGURED OUT RADIO WANT TO TALK THATD BE GREAT IM KINDA LONELY OVER HERE
[galactic silence...]
It seems that our solar system is an outlier, very atypical. So there may be many planets in the universe...but Earth like planets may be very rare.
Hypothetical mini-me planetary system
Scroll down; size comparisons of Earth, Jupiter, brown dwarf, low mass star....
That is nature's way. She's very prolific, and needs to be. How many fruits and seeds grow up to be big trees? There are still lots of trees. How many humans grow up to be Mozart or Einstein? How many suns give birth to Earth like planets? Very few, but there's lots and lots of suns, so that there will be lots and lots of rare Earth-like planets. And going out from here in our galaxy, you don't have to go too far, relatively speaking, to find some of them.
Indeed, many, many seeds, so to speak. And there is the sheer diversity that has discovered in recent years-the old assumptions were simplistic.
True, but the limited number of earth like planets means a limited array of options when it comes to them ever coming into contact with us. I think science fiction has dulled our senses to the magnitude of distance that space travel actually involves. A 30 light year distance, not so bad. Unlikely we'll ever establish trade, but hey, a few carepackages could happen. A pen pal you write 3 times, tops, in a life time.
100 light years, though? The knowledge kinda becomes irrelevant. There's just no way we could ever benefit from one another, because by the time a message is received, the recipient is likely dead in our case, and there's a good probability that the department he was working in has been restructured and had focus shifted at least 3 times in that time span.
Beyond that, infathomably pointless.
To be imprisoned in 20th century physics, as if human minds could determine the nature of the universe, is extremely naive and narrow-minded. Our earthling science knows diddly-squat, and to be so impressed by it to think it has given us all knowledge of reality in the last 100 years is to be "infathomly" deceived and confined. If you don't even know that telepathy is instant communication between spirits, how could you accept the possibility that FTL travel is the norm among aliens who might be millennia more advanced than we are after a mere 1 or 2 hundred years of an as-yet merely-materialist science? Or accept the multitude of evidence that ETs are and have been visiting us already?
If 20th century physics is so feeble, where are the aliens? If they're buzzing around at FTL flying through the universe, shouldn't they be somewhat more right here right now than Ancient Aliens or Sightings have offered up? The only evidence I've seen provided by paranormal research that's irrefutable is Giorgio Tsoukalas's hair. The rest of it is extremely suspect.
When it comes to matters of religion and spirituality, it's fine to consider things which are miraculous and inexplicable. However, we're talking about space aliens. Living, intelligent, biological entities from another planet. They're not magic, and if they're interacting with the physical world then there will be firm physical evidence of them (and I'm not talking about some American Indian sculpture that vaguely resembles a space ship).
The "mountain" of suspect evidence, either way, would become null and void if an actual extraterrestrial showed up stuck around for long enough to be verified as an extraterrestrial. The absense of this data speaks more in regards to the idea that extra terrestrials have visited earth than anything else. There just simply are not aliens verifyable near us, which of course implies strongly there are no aliens nearby, even in a relativistic, time oriented context.
Oh, and science was more or less founded in the 1200's in Europe and as early as the 1000's more or less there was a similarly objectively based methodology existing in the Middle East. So it's been around a pretty decent amount of time.
Last edited by Kepi; 05-25-2013 at 03:58 AM.
Just because you suspect it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Lots of MUFON folks collect it every day.
There is evidence. But there's no reason we would find much in the way of hardware. Advanced aliens would not be crashing and leaving their stuff behind. But apparently even that did happen at Roswell.When it comes to matters of religion and spirituality, it's fine to consider things which are miraculous and inexplicable. However, we're talking about space aliens. Living, intelligent, biological entities from another planet. They're not magic, and if they're interacting with the physical world then there will be firm physical evidence of them (and I'm not talking about some American Indian sculpture that vaguely resembles a space ship).
Alternative #3 which I voted for, speaks to that issue. In their right mind, why would aliens trust us enough to make themselves known to us, knowing how primitive and insane we are? If even you think our congress should be locked up at Gitmo, imagine what advanced aliens might think about how we behave and govern ourselves? Of course, there is the testimony that some aliens have kidnapped humans, and others have made contacts which the government keeps secret.The "mountain" of suspect evidence, either way, would become null and void if an actual extraterrestrial showed up (and) stuck around for long enough to be verified as an extraterrestrial. The absense of this data speaks more in regards to the idea that extra iterrestrials have visited earth than anything else. There just simply are not aliens verifiable near us, which of course implies strongly there are no aliens nearby, even in a relativistic, time oriented context.
It's not just me that suspects it, it's everyone with an ounce of credibility on the issue. It's called a healthy sense of self skepticism. It's that thing people develop so they don't get taken for fools. Very useful.
These is no direct evidence. There's no aliens, there's no space ships, there's nothing on this earth that exists that absolutely must have come from an extra terrestrial lifeform's source. We have a bunch of unverifiable silliness.
Most of the people who were Roswell researchers have come out as claiming Roswell was not an alien crash, or ultimately their credentials have been shown as forgeries. The evidence stacks to there being no aliens at Roswell by most credible researchers, including those who were big proponants of the conspiracy theory, have withdrawn their belief in the existance of extraterrestrial craft or beings at Roswell.
According to you, they're so unbelievably powerful, what do they have to fear from us? I mean, granted, I don't hang around with bears. However, that's not because I'm afraid of bears. Modern technology has afforded be a variety of ways to deal with bears in varying levels of force.
I dunno, usually when I see someone suffering, I try, if I'm able, to provide a means by which I can alleviate their suffering. You know, because I realize that I'm not better than other people and that usually their problems are the result of a significant external problem. If some alien species shows up and they are advanced as all that, I'd more or less expect they'd do the same.
I want Congress gitmo'd because they're morons. Alien intelligence would be a huge benefit to this cause. They'd be a huge benefit to medical science. They'd be a huge benefit to any number of problems we face everyday.
Yet by your estimation, they fail to materialize out of fear? Then why show up at all?
Eyewitness testimony is the most unreliable and flawed form of testimony, especially when dealing with singular witnesses as these cases almost always turn out to be. It's not just science that finds the case of extraterrestrial life on earth lacking, it's investigation as a whole that finds it so. When, say, the catholic church investigates miracles, right? They aren't looking to conduct a purely scientific exam. They're conducting an investigation to see what holds under scrutiny.
I'm surprised you did not bring up the now-established fact that alien UFOs do not at present exist. The very idea of UFOs did not arise out of nothing. It resulted from people claiming to have seen things in the sky, but without documentation such observations could never been verified. Recently we have seen a startling phenomenon (a huge meteorite) suddenly appear in the sky where it was seen by thousands of people. This time it was captured on video, and not just by one camera but by many. The fact that hundreds of millions of image-capturing devices are now routinely carried by people all over the world means that anything witnessed by more than a tiny number of people will automatically have associated photographic or video documentation. Anything novel that happens today is recorded and shortly afterward appears on the internet. If UFO existed we all would know this. This hasn't happened, so they aren't out there. Case closed.
Teleological thinking raises its useless head once again.
I think some skepticism about science and what it can do is healthy too.
They just haven't verified it sufficiently to convince materialist scientists who have an ideological block against accepting it.These is no direct evidence. There's no aliens, there's no space ships, there's nothing on this earth that exists that absolutely must have come from an extra terrestrial lifeform's source. We have a bunch of unverifiable silliness.
That's not what I hear. It just depends on which circle of friends you hang out in.Most of the people who were Roswell researchers have come out as claiming Roswell was not an alien crash, or ultimately their credentials have been shown as forgeries. The evidence stacks to there being no aliens at Roswell by most credible researchers, including those who were big proponants of the conspiracy theory, have withdrawn their belief in the existence of extraterrestrial craft or beings at Roswell.
Why assume that I was referring to fear? They don't fear us. They are just wise enough to know we cannot handle the information. And we would attack them, because it is WE who are afraid. And some (e.g. vandal) are afraid just to have their scientific ideology/meme questioned! The ETs understand that in their attack on us, we would bring harm to ourselves.According to you, they're so unbelievably powerful, what do they have to fear from us? I mean, granted, I don't hang around with bears. However, that's not because I'm afraid of bears. Modern technology has afforded be a variety of ways to deal with bears in varying levels of force.
You think you're better than all Boomers.I dunno, usually when I see someone suffering, I try, if I'm able, to provide a means by which I can alleviate their suffering. You know, because I realize that I'm not better than other people and that usually their problems are the result of a significant external problem. If some alien species shows up and they are advanced as all that, I'd more or less expect they'd do the same.
If they solve all our problems for us, then we learn nothing. The galactic federation imposes limits on how much aliens can interfere on Earth.
You punish people for life because they're morons? Lock up people with low IQ then? If congress is full of morons, it's because the people who voted for them are morons. The enemy is ourselves. If we tolerate the system as it is-- where money buys office and favors, where legislators draw their own districts, where parties can impose tribal uniformity-- then that is no-one's but our own damn fault.I want Congress gitmo'd because they're morons. Alien intelligence would be a huge benefit to this cause. They'd be a huge benefit to medical science. They'd be a huge benefit to any number of problems we face everyday.
Yet by your estimation, they fail to materialize out of fear? Then why show up at all?
The "out of fear" is your idea. Noone in the UFO community supports that theory on why they supposedly don't "show up." Many people say that have shown up and are benefitting us, but can't make themselves known officially because of the fear it would arouse within earthlings. And they are seen so often, and contact us so often already, that it is practically meaningless by now to wonder why they haven't materialized or shown up. They have.
Those who are not prejudiced by ideological blinders, investigate evidence for aliens and find mountains of it. It is best to keep an open mind.Eyewitness testimony is the most unreliable and flawed form of testimony, especially when dealing with singular witnesses as these cases almost always turn out to be. It's not just science that finds the case of extraterrestrial life on earth lacking, it's investigation as a whole that finds it so. When, say, the catholic church investigates miracles, right? They aren't looking to conduct a purely scientific exam. They're conducting an investigation to see what holds under scrutiny.
Last edited by Eric the Green; 05-25-2013 at 04:23 PM.
There are millions of such photos and videos.
I agree, but this 1) isn't purely an issue of science and 2) is within the realm of science.
There are certain things science just doesn't deal in, but when it comes to observable phenomenon in the natural world, the scientific method is more or less king.
No, it's not a legion of materialist scientists that's preventing alien life from materializing. It's a lack of aliens. If they were there, there'd be evidence. Hard, physical evidence. Fact is, there's just no physical evidence.
Beyond physical evidence, there's no good, solid investigative work on UFO's that shows that the phenomenon is more likely to be aliens than not. That's really all it takes. The body of evidence, instead, shows explainable evidence and highly questionable, uncredible, singular eye witness accounts. The existence of aliens on earth argument just doesn't pass muster as more likely than not.
Yeah, I guess if you're hanging out with a bunch of people still stuck in the 60's Roswell sounds extremely plausible, but since the large amount of data released from freedom of information act requests really strongly suggests otherwise. Did something out there happen? Absolutely. It was probably an experimental aircraft crash as that is what happens at Area 51 (the experimental aircraft part, the crashing part is significantly less common).
That was a great episode of The Twilight Zone, but it simply doesn't pass muster in a real world context. People can be violent and do a lot of dumb things, but generally we're pretty peaceful on average. It takes particularly bad and personal circumstances to incite violence. I don't doubt there'd be distrust at first, but trust is earned, and that's going to be true of anything new.
What, do you think Boomers would be particularly inclined to lob missiles at at benevolent aliens? I think that's more telling of your esteem for your own generation than anything I could have ever said. I mean, it's true I think that Boomers have failed their archetype and, in aggregate, have behaved more like the locusts of prophecies past than the prophets that spoke them. I think they're childish, prone to hysterics, and completely and utterly unfit to rule. I think this because it's backed and supported by... You know... Life here in 2013.
But one thing I don't think is that they are violent on a personal level. I don't think they're particularly inclined to pick fights with an advanced life form trying to share the secrets of the universe. That's just sheer insanity.
Who said anything about all? You don't think extraterrestrials have problems? Everybody has problems. Biggie has problems. Jay Z has problems. Against Me! has problems. I'm absolutely sure everybody has problems, that includes Aliens, that includes Big Foot.
However, when it comes to basic physical needs, food, cures for disease, these aren't great "learning experiences". That's like saying that if I get an immunization then I'm cheating my body of the learning experience of how to cope with the disease or if I let my child have a toy she didn't build on her own that I'm depriving her of the experience of learning to make her own toys or if I send food to a drought starved region I'm depriving them of learning how to make their own food. Yes, there are absolutely things that people need to manage on their own and learn to deal with on their own. However, outright refusing basic aid when it is needed is inhumane. It's inhumane when we do it, it's inhumane were aliens to do it.
I'm well versed in the Prime Directive, and just took J.J. Abrahms refresher course this week. And even though Kirk likes to play fast and loose with the rules, it doesn't mean that it changes the rules. The Federation of Planets prohibits any interaction with alien species which would give them knowledge beyond what they already have, including, but not limited to seeing space craft.
But those are TV shows and movies. Do you have any evidence, what so ever such a federation exists in the real world? If not, how do you know this information? If so, why do you have it when there is such glaringly little evidence of extraterrestrials at all when there you are with knowledge of their political structure. Doesn't that violate their nonintereference clause?
Actually, I punish noone. If I was in a position of power, I'd remove dangerous morons from decision making positions. I wouldn't "punish" anyone, but I would keep stupid from putting pen to ink and generating stupid laws. People can be as dumb as they want, as long as they're not harming all the other morons out there subjected to them. Congress is dangeous morons. I'd remove them from the equation if I could.
Yet evidence suggests that they don't "show up" at all. Nobody credible suggests there's no extraterrestrial life. However, nobody credible suggests there is extraterrestrial life here on earth. The obvious conclusion is "they are nowhere nearby, and either do not have the ability or initiative to visit."
Those people say that without any proven physical evidence.
Seen by who, exactly? I've handled my fair share of "strange lights in the sky calls" and it's usually us launching a satalite into orbit. Sometimes it's a meteor shower. Occasionally it's a helicopter. Usually within 20 minutes, I have an answer. So far, I have more "absense of evidence" evidence racked up for werewolves than I do for aliens, and I wouldn't hang my hat on the existence of werewolves either (that lady was crazy).
Except there's no plausible evidence that suggests this to be true.
It's best to keep a mind that is open, but not so open your brain falls out. No evidence means no evidence. I mean, if we were talking about angels or God, I'd be like "evidence is out of the realm of reasonable expectation on this issue", but these are alien life forms. They're life. They exist or existed at one point bound to the same physical reality. They're bound into the realm of reality and must follow some physical set of standards or laws.
Last edited by Kepi; 05-26-2013 at 04:04 AM.
As for UFOs, I regard as an unsolved mystery that small percentage of cases that seem to defy conventional explanations.
Last edited by TimWalker; 05-26-2013 at 03:00 PM.
Seems a rather contradictory statement.
Science as we know it, is not king, because all we have is today's theories.
Why would they leave physical evidence?No, it's not a legion of materialist scientists that's preventing alien life from materializing. It's a lack of aliens. If they were there, there'd be evidence. Hard, physical evidence. Fact is, there's just no physical evidence.
Beyond physical evidence, there's no good, solid investigative work on UFO's that shows that the phenomenon is more likely to be aliens than not. That's really all it takes. The body of evidence, instead, shows explainable evidence and highly questionable, uncredible, singular eye witness accounts. The existence of aliens on earth argument just doesn't pass muster as more likely than not.
Science cannot investigate something it starts out by denying, based on its current theories. If you decide the evidence doesn't pass muster, you have closed your mind-- that's all.
People stuck in the 60s are stuck in the future. The years since have been nothing but a regression.Yeah, I guess if you're hanging out with a bunch of people still stuck in the 60's, Roswell sounds extremely plausible, but since the large amount of data released from freedom of information act requests really strongly suggests otherwise. Did something out there happen? Absolutely. It was probably an experimental aircraft crash as that is what happens at Area 51 (the experimental aircraft part, the crashing part is significantly less common).
People cite evidence that Roswell happened. I know personally someone who wrote a whole book about it (actually it's about another more-recent incident). I haven't read it yet; maybe I'll read it and report back.
http://youtu.be/CfdLod8j5I0
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1602640130/
(Ruben is the guy I know)
That was indeed a great episode, but it does not speak to my point. It does not take much to incite violence among earthlings. Just look at all the gun nuts on this very page. Earthlings are very violent and fearful. It does take time to earn trust, and that's exactly what's happening IMO.That was a great episode of The Twilight Zone, but it simply doesn't pass muster in a real world context. People can be violent and do a lot of dumb things, but generally we're pretty peaceful on average. It takes particularly bad and personal circumstances to incite violence. I don't doubt there'd be distrust at first, but trust is earned, and that's going to be true of anything new.
I dunno, usually when I see someone suffering, I try, if I'm able, to provide a means by which I can alleviate their suffering. You know, because I realize that I'm not better than other people and that usually their problems are the result of a significant external problem. If some alien species shows up and they are advanced as all that, I'd more or less expect they'd do the same.Since you think you are better than boomers, your following sentence above does not exactly follow.What, do you think Boomers would be particularly inclined to lob missiles at at benevolent aliens? I think that's more telling of your esteem for your own generation than anything I could have ever said. I mean, it's true I think that Boomers have failed their archetype and, in aggregate, have behaved more like the locusts of prophecies past than the prophets that spoke them. I think they're childish, prone to hysterics, and completely and utterly unfit to rule. I think this because it's backed and supported by... You know... Life here in 2013.
But one thing I don't think is that they are violent on a personal level. I don't think they're particularly inclined to pick fights with an advanced life form trying to share the secrets of the universe. That's just sheer insanity.
That's a good point. The aliens should have provided the social safety net we refuse to provide for ourselves. On the other hand, maybe we DO need to learn that lesson. Obviously we haven't. Just ask any Republican or Libertarian here. They haven't learned it at all. How can we expect aliens to know it then? Someone would have had to teach them, and so on back to God. Maybe they think we should learn the lesson. And again that ignores the possibility that they have provided some help. You can say there's no evidence, but others report it.Who said anything about all? You don't think extraterrestrials have problems? Everybody has problems. Biggie has problems. Jay Z has problems. Against Me! has problems. I'm absolutely sure everybody has problems, that includes Aliens, that includes Big Foot.
However, when it comes to basic physical needs, food, cures for disease, these aren't great "learning experiences". That's like saying that if I get an immunization then I'm cheating my body of the learning experience of how to cope with the disease or if I let my child have a toy she didn't build on her own that I'm depriving her of the experience of learning to make her own toys or if I send food to a drought starved region I'm depriving them of learning how to make their own food. Yes, there are absolutely things that people need to manage on their own and learn to deal with on their own. However, outright refusing basic aid when it is needed is inhumane. It's inhumane when we do it, it's inhumane were aliens to do it.
I've heard plenty of reports over the years. Some of them may be fanciful, but in the circles I hang around in, a lot of knowledge filters through about what contactees have experienced and learned, and the idea that there is "glaringly little evidence" seems the opposite of the truth. Science-fiction or myth has a way of becoming fact sometimes.I'm well versed in the Prime Directive, and just took J.J. Abrahms refresher course this week. And even though Kirk likes to play fast and loose with the rules, it doesn't mean that it changes the rules. The Federation of Planets prohibits any interaction with alien species which would give them knowledge beyond what they already have, including, but not limited to seeing space craft.
But those are TV shows and movies. Do you have any evidence, what so ever such a federation exists in the real world? If not, how do you know this information? If so, why do you have it when there is such glaringly little evidence of extraterrestrials at all when there you are with knowledge of their political structure. Doesn't that violate their nonintereference clause?
I would too. That's called voting. But you would remove them by instituting an age requirement that no-one born between 1943 and 1960 be allowed in congress. That is not going to fly. The party label, while inaccurate, is a much better gauge.Actually, I punish noone. If I was in a position of power, I'd remove dangerous morons from decision making positions. I wouldn't "punish" anyone, but I would keep stupid from putting pen to ink and generating stupid laws. People can be as dumb as they want, as long as they're not harming all the other morons out there subjected to them. Congress is dangeous morons. I'd remove them from the equation if I could.
Your worldview is too limited, and you don't listen to the folks who have the evidence. You decide someone is not "credible," based only on your world view. Or maybe you ignore them because they are boomers, I dunno. That is your choice, but others choose to be more open minded and consider the evidence as it actually exists.Yet evidence suggests that they don't "show up" at all. Nobody credible suggests there's no extraterrestrial life. However, nobody credible suggests there is extraterrestrial life here on earth. The obvious conclusion is "they are nowhere nearby, and either do not have the ability or initiative to visit."
Those people say that without any proven physical evidence.
Seen by who, exactly? I've handled my fair share of "strange lights in the sky calls" and it's usually us launching a satalite into orbit. Sometimes it's a meteor shower. Occasionally it's a helicopter. Usually within 20 minutes, I have an answer. So far, I have more "absense of evidence" evidence racked up for werewolves than I do for aliens, and I wouldn't hang my hat on the existence of werewolves either (that lady was crazy).
Maybe and maybe not. We don't know what the physical laws are. We just have our current best estimates. There is no such "physical set of standards or laws" that come from anywhere but our own earth-limited, early-21st century minds. They are subject to revision, and are frequently revised. To believe otherwise, is not to "keep a mind that is open." Wise folks know there's no distinction between physical and spiritual anyway; it is an outmoded way of thought. And we don't know if the aliens may not actually be from some angelic realm either. Or some of each.It's best to keep a mind that is open, but not so open your brain falls out. No evidence means no evidence. I mean, if we were talking about angels or God, I'd be like "evidence is out of the realm of reasonable expectation on this issue", but these are alien life forms. They're life. They exist or existed at one point bound to the same physical reality. They're bound into the realm of reality and must follow some physical set of standards or laws.
Last edited by Eric the Green; 05-26-2013 at 11:13 PM.
My world view is not limited, unless we're going to say it's held down by... You know... Reality.
For example, when you look at the majority of Roswell documents, they don't pass muster when it comes to document verification. Almost every single one which perpetuates the conspiracy theory that there were aliens at Roswell are obvious forgeries, and appear to have been produced over 10 years too late. Even some of the more subtle forgeries show strong signs of tampering, especially when it comes to signatures. It doesn't matter what the prerequisit theories are, if the documents are shown to most likely be fakes then we're back to the bare bones facts of the case: something shiny crashed in Roswell, New Mexico.
Moreover, physical evidence would be left behind because of the exchange principal. Say a person is abducted by ET's (which is a rather nafarious passtime for a friendly species in a Galactic Federation, by the way), right? So the Aliens take them up to this ship, which is made of molocules, and then they drop him back off, the guy is going to be covered in foreign molocules. So if you have these repeated abductees, a really simple forensic analysis will prove whether or not they've been abducted because even if they're not using unique or unidentifyable alloys, a guy covered in alluminum molocules who otherwise would have to be at home, presumably in bed, would add credibility, yet we don't see this kind of documentation from the UFO crowd even now when forensic investigation is common knowledge. Why?
Obviously because this is a hoax. And it's not just the metal from the ship. There'd be alien skin cells, possibly food if any was served or eaten around the person, alien clothing fibers, etc, etc, etc. It's just an inescapable reality that a little bit of everything we're close to sticks to us.
No matter how you shake it, any phenomenon absolutely must leave behind physical evidence. Physical evidence of UFO's and ET's just doesn't exist. So there's a bunch of obviously forged documents and lacking information on one side and the otherside pointing it out is wrong because they just... must be? Yup, that's irrational.
You have already demonstrated that your worldview is limited, as revealed by your views on telepathy.
I know that people who know about Roswell are still talking about it. You haven't given any sources for your opinions.For example, when you look at the majority of Roswell documents, they don't pass muster when it comes to document verification. Almost every single one which perpetuates the conspiracy theory that there were aliens at Roswell are obvious forgeries, and appear to have been produced over 10 years too late. Even some of the more subtle forgeries show strong signs of tampering, especially when it comes to signatures. It doesn't matter what the prerequisite theories are, if the documents are shown to most likely be fakes then we're back to the bare bones facts of the case: something shiny crashed in Roswell, New Mexico.
Moreover, physical evidence would be left behind because of the exchange principal. Say a person is abducted by ET's (which is a rather nafarious passtime for a friendly species in a Galactic Federation, by the way), right? So the Aliens take them up to this ship, which is made of molocules, and then they drop him back off, the guy is going to be covered in foreign molocules. So if you have these repeated abductees, a really simple forensic analysis will prove whether or not they've been abducted because even if they're not using unique or unidentifyable alloys, a guy covered in alluminum molocules who otherwise would have to be at home, presumably in bed, would add credibility, yet we don't see this kind of documentation from the UFO crowd even now when forensic investigation is common knowledge. Why?
Obviously because this is a hoax. And it's not just the metal from the ship. There'd be alien skin cells, possibly food if any was served or eaten around the person, alien clothing fibers, etc, etc, etc. It's just an inescapable reality that a little bit of everything we're close to sticks to us.
There is no physical evidence from most UFOs; they just fly by and disappear. Some evidence occured in contactees, such as physical changes in their bodies for which there is testimony, but that's all you can get for that too. Apart from the few crashes, alien craft is not likely to leave any evidence behind. They don't even leave contrails.No matter how you shake it, any phenomenon absolutely must leave behind physical evidence. Physical evidence of UFO's and ET's just doesn't exist. So there's a bunch of obviously forged documents and lacking information on one side and the other side pointing it out is wrong because they just... must be? Yup, that's irrational.
About the idea that they should have helped us, what should they have done? They don't have food for us; our food must be grown on Earth. Most aliens may not be able to mingle with us without danger to them or ourselves. It is a political problem. Short of taking over our government and dictating to us, they can't change our political system or our free-market ideology. I don't think the galactic federation allows aliens to engage in neo-colonialism. That is primitive earthly behavior.
You mean the view that in order for a person to experience any sensation there must be a corresponding response from the brain? Yeah, you'll be hard pressed to find anyone but you who doesn't believe that. It's more of that reality thing: human beings as living human beings process all things through their brains. If their brain can't process something, it may as well not exist. This is why brain damage is a significant issue.
[QUOTE=Eric]I know that people who know about Roswell are still talking about it. You haven't given any sources for your opinions.[/QUOTE=Eric]
Yeah, there are also still people that believe the world is flat, it doesn't mean they're relevant. I haven't provided them because you never read them. Check wikipedia, I'm sure it's got it because when a lot of that stuff was coming out it was in the news.
Again, exchange principal, if they're flying in the earth's atmosphere, you will likely find something in the area surrounding where they flew.
There's testimony, which is faulty and usually the "physical changes" are diseases or maladies indistinguishable from ailments people would get here on earth. The evidence is going to be a forensic exam. There are more than enough pay labs out there and there are probably more than enough skeptic groups willing to foot the bill. The fact that one has never been done is dubious.
Our food can really be grown anywhere provided the necessary resources are available. However, giving food is unnecessary, advanced farming technology (and not even the technology, just the information on how to make it would be fine), or maybe something regarding terraforming so we can get rid of some of these life killing and expanding desert environments. Also, medical information, chances are in some very basic ways we're the same. Helping us develop antibiotics that can't be resisted or adapted to would kinda help everybody out and really wouldn't provide too many drawbacks.
Because otherwise, when all the information couples together, this more or less looks to be another pseudoreligious narrative, not one that is grounded in reality in any sense. Fantastical, magical beings which really have more in common with elves or fairies than any factual living organisms who travel impossible distances via magical means who show up and not only can be bothered with humans, but choose to interact with them with promises of a bright future or by tormenting them... This is a very human centric kinda story, which tends to mirror the common narratives of the day (especially when you add in the spooky black helicopter, CIA, Men in Black angle). It's just too in trend with our present day metanarrative to be anything but.
Come on, any mystic knows that. It is not a matter of belief. Sensations being processed through the brain, does not mean that what is not processed through the brain might as well not exist. Since we are souls, not bodies, not everything in our awareness is dependent on physical senses. If you don't know that, your worldview is limited.
I don't think wikipedia is very good yet on these kinds of things. They are close-minded too. If you don't provide sources, you can't use me as an excuse. I am just one poster here.Yeah, there are also still people that believe the world is flat, it doesn't mean they're relevant. I haven't provided them because you never read them. Check wikipedia, I'm sure it's got it because when a lot of that stuff was coming out it was in the news.
I don't see how that follows. UFOs don't even use fuels that give off a residue. Even airplanes don't leave anything that doesn't disappear quickly.Again, exchange principal, if they're flying in the earth's atmosphere, you will likely find something in the area surrounding where they flew.
Skeptic groups are not reliable or unprejudiced.There's testimony, which is faulty and usually the "physical changes" are diseases or maladies indistinguishable from ailments people would get here on earth. The evidence is going to be a forensic exam. There are more than enough pay labs out there and there are probably more than enough skeptic groups willing to foot the bill. The fact that one has never been done is dubious.
If I remember correctly, there were physician reports.
I think that would likely take a lot of cooperation with earthlings over many years to develop all that. Our life forms would certainly be different. It doesn't seem to be the policy for ETs to get that much involved here, as if they were residents and directors of our affairs.Our food can really be grown anywhere provided the necessary resources are available. However, giving food is unnecessary, advanced farming technology (and not even the technology, just the information on how to make it would be fine), or maybe something regarding terraforming so we can get rid of some of these life killing and expanding desert environments. Also, medical information, chances are in some very basic ways we're the same. Helping us develop antibiotics that can't be resisted or adapted to would kinda help everybody out and really wouldn't provide too many drawbacks.
Show biz narratives, and evidence for sightings and contacts, are not the same thing.Because otherwise, when all the information couples together, this more or less looks to be another pseudoreligious narrative, not one that is grounded in reality in any sense. Fantastical, magical beings which really have more in common with elves or fairies than any factual living organisms who travel impossible distances via magical means who show up and not only can be bothered with humans, but choose to interact with them with promises of a bright future or by tormenting them... This is a very human centric kinda story, which tends to mirror the common narratives of the day (especially when you add in the spooky black helicopter, CIA, Men in Black angle). It's just too in trend with our present day metanarrative to be anything but.
We don't know all of what is possible in this universe; magical beings might be real too. I am not willing to deny it. I don't have to believe it either.
