How angry pilots got the Navy to stop dismissing UFO sightings

[cjcride]

It's stands to reason there 'could' be life out there in some distant galaxy. It could be just moss on some lonely planet.

Yet if that life is super advanced compared to us then they could home in on our radio transmissions NDB style. Our radio signals have been transmitted through deep space at the speed of light for over a century.
Stephen Hawking felt this could have been a fatal mistake, for whatever it attracts will not have to play nice with us.

Also if they can make it here without us even detecting them they certainly won't have to hide or run from us.

 

[emg]

Originally Posted by cjcride
Also if they can make it here whithout us even detecting them they certainly won't have to hide or run from us.


Yeah. One of the big issues I've always had with the 'alien flying saucer' thing is that they don't act like aliens, they act like our idea of aliens at the time the stories happen. So the Roswell, aliens, for example, are able to reach us from light-years away, but then crash their flying saucer in the desert like a gang of drunken frat-boys on a joy-ride in their Corvette. In fact, with the number of flying saucer crashes over the years, we'd have to guess that aliens are some of the worst drivers in the universe.

Then in the 70s they got all into hippy stuff, and... etc.

 

[KrisZ]

This isn't Hollywood when one can cross from a marvel universe into a DC one at will. So let's not go into the whole multiverse idea.

Which brings me to my next point, these type of threads come up every once in a while and to me at least, it seems most people look at this through their exposure to various sci-fi movies and TV shows.
That is why it is so hard to have a serious conversation. One can try a and bring some facts, math etc. into the discussion and then all of the sudden someone will throw in a curve ball taken straight from some sci-fi culture. Because, hey it COULD be true.


It's like in an old thread about Dyson spheres, all sorts of posters were arguing how it could be possible to built one by self replicating drones or something like that and when I mentioned that the energy needed could be harvested from a black hole, all of the sudden they demanded logic and reason to explain my position, as if their Dyson sphere was a feasable reality.

 

[Astro14]

Originally Posted by buster
Quote
The probability of a more advanced civilization than human beings is very low


That's a very naive and arrogant way of thinking, no offense to you. Even from the scientists that try so hard to prove that mathematically.


Well, presuming something exists without any evidence is called faith.

So, since your position is a matter of faith, differing positions cannot be naive, nor are they arrogant.

It's too bad that your "religious" sensibility is so easily offended.

 

[talest]

Originally Posted by emg
Originally Posted by cjcride
Also if they can make it here whithout us even detecting them they certainly won't have to hide or run from us.


Yeah. One of the big issues I've always had with the 'alien flying saucer' thing is that they don't act like aliens, they act like our idea of aliens at the time the stories happen. So the Roswell, aliens, for example, are able to reach us from light-years away, but then crash their flying saucer in the desert like a gang of drunken frat-boys on a joy-ride in their Corvette. In fact, with the number of flying saucer crashes over the years, we'd have to guess that aliens are some of the worst drivers in the universe.

Then in the 70s they got all into hippy stuff, and... etc.


It truly can be hard to differentiate based on certain things. Take the TR3-B for example. There are some that feel the sightings in the 90s over Upstate NY for example (there was an Unsolved Mysteries show devoted to this, the lead-in to that episode) were in fact TR-3B and we just did not know it. Why, then, were they spotted over Denmark. Or over that mountain range. Or any one of why there and not the other there. Or why did it fly in to lonely folks on a lake. Or come from under the water. We just can not know these things. I like the testimony of airline pilots back before the days of CGI, videos on the Internet, worldwide comunication as fast as your fingers can type, all realities now. Back before these things, people were still seeing UFOs. It may be easier to say what is what in today's world, however we don't even know every experience as some keep their mouth shut.

Now, if one sees a military convoy of helicopters and planes before and after an object flying at reasonable speed, this could so much more easily be identified as terrestrial, or of this earth. I want to believe that a human can discern from what could be possible from manned flight, and something that is outerwordly. Please remember that even in War Of The Worlds, it was bacteria from our planet that killed of the monstrous machines that were harvesting humans for fuel for their machines.

 

[vavavroom]

Originally Posted by buster
The distances are so far between planets it would have to be incredibly advanced technology.


Unless they have been in or near our solar system all along or for a long time. Just saying it's a possibility, even if extremely remote, and not saying I believe that.

 

[buster]

Originally Posted by Astro14
Originally Posted by buster
Quote
The probability of a more advanced civilization than human beings is very low

a
That's a very naive and arrogant way of thinking, no offense to you. Even from the scientists that try so hard to prove that mathematically.


Well, presuming something exists without any evidence is called faith.

So, since your position is a matter of faith, differing positions cannot be naive, nor are they arrogant.

It's too bad that your "religious" sensibility is so easily offended.



It's too bad you've offered nothing in your reply that I don't already know. I wasn't offended at all, so try reading before reacting. There hasn't been anything said here that I haven't heard before. I'm aware of what faith and science are. I'm a science guy. I know that we don't know nearly as much as we think we do. We could be in a simulation, there could be multiple universes, states of consciousness and dimensions we are unaware of. As someone that loves science and thinks we need more of it, we need to also be humble. Years ago so many in the physics world thought there was '"nothing" before the big bang. Now there is debate whether the big bang ever had a beginning and we also may have found that prior to the big bang, "something" did come from "nothing" and that "nothing" actually had mass to it. So don't kid yourself thinking what can or can't be done through the lens of our still primative minds.

You can use the Drake equation if you want. Let's look at that.

https://futurism.com/life-universe-scientist-drake-equation-study

Created by astronomer Frank Drake in 1961, Drake Equation is as follows: N=(R*)(fP)(ne)(fL)(fi)(fc)(L). Let's break that down real quick:

N is the number of civilizations we might someday contact
R* is the rate at which stars are formed in our galaxy
fP is the fraction of stars that are orbited by planets
fL is the fraction of planets that could potentially sustain life
fi is the fraction of planets that could potentially support intelligent life
fc is the fraction of civilizations that go on to build technology that we (or another civilization) might be able to detect from space
L is the length of time that such a civilization would spent transmitting signals into space


"When they ran the numbers with these ranges in mind, the researchers found that there's anywhere from a 53 to a 99.6 percent chance that ours is the only civilization in the galaxy, and a 39 to 85 percent chance that we're the only intelligent life in the universe. But still, as New Scientist reported, most of the coverage of this study clung to the most pessimistic end of that range, even though the other numbers in those ranges are just as likely to be true."

F: The big question: Do you think there's life, civilized or not, out there? Did your research change your mind?

AS: I think there is life and intelligence out there. The universe looks like it is infinite. But this research made me think it is likely far, far away.

 

[Uphill_Both_Ways]

Originally Posted by talest
Science once believed the world rode on the back of a turtle, amongst many other things.
No it didn't. An old lady said so in a joke told by, amongst others, Carl Sagan and Neil deGrasse Tyson.

 

[talest]

Originally Posted by Uphill_Both_Ways
Originally Posted by talest
Science once believed the world rode on the back of a turtle, amongst many other things.
No it didn't. An old lady said so in a joke told by, amongst others, Carl Sagan and Neil deGrasse Tyson.


Science also believed the world was flat.

Quote
amongst many other things.

 

[Uphill_Both_Ways]

Originally Posted by talest
Science also believed the world was flat.

Quote
amongst many other things.
No, it didn't. The ancient Greeks knew the world isn't flat, as did the ancient Romans, amongst many others not born as peasants and slaves, working the fields and not knowing how to read. Like today's flat-earthers.

Anyway, science was never wrong until the 18th century; before that the word didn't exist and the concept, natural history, hardly at all.

 

[Vuflanovsky]

I think the reality is that we don't know the origins of these craft, anomalies, etc. and if they're indeed real, we're almost presupposing the method of conveyance here as if we can technologically or operationally understand it. The possibility of some form of "worm hole", dimensional travel, etc. would probably make as much or more sense than talking about how their origins must be far away. The sanest people that I've listened to regarding UFOs seem to think in those terms as much as these craft suddenly "discovering" us after traveling 40 light years in space on the mother ship and Earth being a needle in a cosmic haystack.

When I see something like the 'tic-tac" UFO from Nimitz / Princeton incidences, I think not only of what technology that we might have that can drop from 50,000 feet to 20 feet and hover above the water in 2-3 seconds as I do "why is this information being released / allowed to be released ??" No conspiracist here, but I'm a consumer of information at the same time...and beyond the science, I think content analysis of media can tell us a lot.

My view is that I think science has a 51% or greater chance of defining the situation incorrectly and I don't think I need an equation for that.

 

[UncleDave]

Originally Posted by madRiver
I try to keep my my mind open on this but its hard without any real tangible evidence.

Religion and ufo's fall into the same category in my mind.


We've got

Pilot sightings
Astronaut sightings
Military sightings
Law enforcement sighting
Nuclear base sightings (check out Robert Hastings work)
ATC sightings
We've got billionaires on 60 minutes telling you this real and they are here.
Thousands of docs released in the FOIA act - all saying the same thing

We've got the military now out in the open now sharing gun cam footage and talking about objects defying known physics.

We are simply swimming in mountainous evidence piles of not only existence - but intentional cover up and subterfuge.


We've got about as much chance at catching one as a caveman would have bringing down an F15 with a spear.

UD

 

[talest]

Originally Posted by Uphill_Both_Ways
Originally Posted by talest
Science also believed the world was flat.

Quote
amongst many other things.
No, it didn't. The ancient Greeks knew the world isn't flat, as did the ancient Romans, amongst many others not born as peasants and slaves, working the fields and not knowing how to read. Like today's flat-earthers.

Anyway, science was never wrong until the 18th century; before that the word didn't exist and the concept, natural history, hardly at all.


Science used to believe the sun revolved around the earth.

Or, if scientific changed theory about the position and shape of the earth does not do it for you, or opposing ideas - same thing, really, they don't even agree within science - here https://www.unbelievable-facts.com/2018/11/crazy-things-scientists-used-to-believe.html

2. Before the widespread acceptance of the theory of plate tectonics, scientists believed that there existed large, prehistoric, intercontinental "land bridges" spanning thousands of miles of deep ocean.

4. Mercury was once considered safe and used as a disinfectant, laxative, cure for syphilis, and even as a pill for immortality.

5. Before the invention of railways, it was believed that people would suffocate if they traveled faster than 30 mph as they would not be able to breathe due to the surrounding air rushing past them.

6. Prior to discovering oxygen and its role in combustion, scientists proposed that a substance called "phlogiston" did exactly the opposite—was released by burning fuel, squelched fire when it saturated airtight spaces, and was even expelled from the body through breathing.

7. Before the concept of vacuum came into existence, physicists believed that there was no empty space in the universe, and light traveled through a medium called "aether." It was considered a fifth element along with earth, wind, fire, and water.


8. In the 19th and early 20th centuries, benzene was used as an after-shave because it smelled nice. Also, it is one of the best organic solvents, so organic chemists used to wash their hands with benzene even though it is actually highly carcinogenic.

9. Until recently, it was a popular scientific belief that different sections of your tongue react to different tastes.

10. Up until the mid-19th century, it was commonly believed that placing dirty underwear in a bucket with wheat grains would "generate" mice. This was called "spontaneous generation," the idea that life could be created from nonliving objects.

 

[emg]

Originally Posted by UncleDave
We are simply swimming in mountainous evidence piles of not only existence - but intentional cover up and subterfuge.


Everyone knows Unidentified Flying Objects exist, pretty much by definition. I could probably look out the window any day and see something I can't identify flying around, even it's just a species of bird I don't recognize.

But odd, isn't it, that the number of Alien Flying Saucer sightings collapsed around the time everyone started carrying a camera around with them all day?

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted by talest
Science used to believe the sun revolved around the earth.

You're forgetting what some called science back then wasn't actually what we'd call science today. With respect to the sun going around the earth, people who challenged that were threatened by something that wasn't science. Also, it has taken many centuries for the scientific method to be appropriately refined, and much of what I'd call the best practices of historical scientists wasn't properly codified until Karl Popper came around last century.

Many would do themselves very well to read his take on falsifiability. If you can't couch a statement in a way that it can be disproved, then it's not science, folks.

 

[Al]

Originally Posted by emg

But odd, isn't it, that the number of Alien Flying Saucer sightings collapsed around the time everyone started carrying a camera around with them all day?

lol..yea..never thought of that.
The other thing is if you listen to the Radio Shows like "Coast to Coast: with George Noory its non stop with this kind of crap. Any sane person listening to about 15 minutes of the show would conclude that the wierdows that call in are ..well..wierdos.

 

[Cujet]

Originally Posted by emg
Originally Posted by Cujet
As an amateur astronomer, I'd agree. The numbers are beyond staggering.


But that's meaningless when we have no idea how unlikely intelligent life is.

I'm pretty sure there's other life out there, because basic life seems to arise easily here on Earth. But I don't see any reason to believe there's any other life like us, at least in this galaxy; there are odd things happening in other galaxies that could be some kind of mega-engineering going on.

Quote
Many people don't understand that even nuclear power is insufficient for rapid interstellar travel.


You don't need rapid interstellar travel. 1% of the speed of light is enough to colonize the galaxy in ten million years. In fact, the ease of interstellar travel is one of the reasons to believe we are alone; our galaxy is about thirteen billion years old, so it could have been colonized in roughly 0.05% of its lifetime if anyone else did exist out there.

In fact, you could say that the size of the numbers gives us good reason to believe we are alone, rather than the opposite. Colonizing the galaxy is trivial on those kinds of timescales.


Let's assume something akin to panspermia is responsible for the spread of life, powered by exploding stars. Then the millions of years travel time required necessitate dormant, microscopic life. As all life will be similar in nature, subject to the ravages of time. Only bacteria seem capable of withstanding the rigors of space.

So, rapid travel would be required for seemingly random, intelligent, UFO visitors. UFO's are not "bacteria on the solar wind" which then multiply, build spaceships and torment astronauts orbiting in the ISS.

 

[UncleDave]

Originally Posted by emg
Originally Posted by UncleDave
We are simply swimming in mountainous evidence piles of not only existence - but intentional cover up and subterfuge.


Everyone knows Unidentified Flying Objects exist, pretty much by definition. I could probably look out the window any day and see something I can't identify flying around, even it's just a species of bird I don't recognize.

But odd, isn't it, that the number of Alien Flying Saucer sightings collapsed around the time everyone started carrying a camera around with them all day?


What you or I cant recognize is of little to no consequence.

What trained observers, astronauts, pilots, law enforcement and military see, report and observe is.
What gets filed and marked top secret - and later revealed (thanks to FOIA) speaks volumes.

There are more sightings than ever- check mufon or nuforc and see yourself.

Do you really think the nimitz carrier battle group chased venus, birds, or swamp gas around the waters of San Diego?

Her aegis escort cruisers spy 1 radar systems were tracking locusts?


Even when the military themselves lay it out in front of people they still dont want to believe.



UD

 

[Shannow]

https://www.sciencealert.com/researchers-just-found-a-second-dyson-sphere-star

 

[Uphill_Both_Ways]

Originally Posted by Garak
Originally Posted by talest
Science used to believe the sun revolved around the earth.
You're forgetting what some called science back then wasn't actually what we'd call science today.
Quoted for emphasis.

Originally Posted by talest
Science used to believe the sun revolved around the earth. . . .
What was it that changed all the mistaken beliefs in your list and at your link?

Not opinion, politicos, theologians or anything else. It was and is science that changes wrong-headed beliefs and mistakes and corrects them and forces them to be discarded. That's what science does. That's its reason for being.

Science is not immutable. It changes all the time with new evidence, new proofs. Holding up old, outdated beliefs, especially those without a shred of evidence to back them up, and laughing at and blaming science for them is mistaking the meaning of science. If something science said is good but new evidence proves it wrong, science will discard it. It happens all the time, 24/7.

If it were not so you'd still be living in the preindustrial world earning a ha'penny a month making candles and burning witches for your half-day-off-after-compulsory-church-attendance (where you'd lose your ha'penny anyway) entertainment.

Instead, you're sitting in a chair or lying back, reading electrons from around the world and in relaxed air-conditioned or heated comfort, in effect turning the seasons upside down. Thanks to what, if not science?