Ever seen a UFO?

[Nauticus]

I must be thick as a brick. I hear UFO and I'm looking in the water for whatever I'm about to hit, hoping it doesn't make me a submarine.
Aliens? Really? [emoji11]

[Cadence]

Originally Posted by Nauticus

I must be thick as a brick. I hear UFO and I'm looking in the water for whatever I'm about to hit, hoping it doesn't make me a submarine.
Aliens? Really? [emoji11]

It took me a minute because I'm as thick as a brick.

[skipmac]

Originally Posted by Don C L

one thing is for sure, when the aliens land, the first question I'm going to ask... the biggest mystery in the universe... which anchor do they have?

Just don't ask them what kind of guns they're carrying.

[Dave_S]

I'm not sure if it's considered fact but there is a belief that all multi-cell life on earth have evolved from a single event where two single cell organisms joined and divided creating the potential for what life on earth is today.

This would make it more likely that the presence of multi-cell organisms throughout the universe (and beyond), is an extremely rare event.

However.

Given the incomprehensible size of the universe and more incomprehensible number of planets, the possibility of hidden dimensions, long/divergent periods of time, and the likelihood that something extends beyond our universe I believe there is life in almost any state imaginable and unimaginable scattered about.

I don't think that means we are near any intelligent life or that we will ever be aware of their presence.

I do think there is a good chance we will find evidence of single cell organisms in our own solar system.

[pdjb]

Did anyone remember the movie the day the earth stool still, and the revised one, their is a lesson in both movies, what is it, ?

[Russian007]

Originally Posted by jimbunyard

Would like to see how some of these 'unknown' laws of physics translate into 'space beings', as well as how they (both the beings and the laws) morph back and forth between the two.

And why.

The only thing the belief in 'ET' demonstrates is the irrational ability of the human mind.

And, perhaps counterintuitively, a paucity of imagination.

If something is "unknown" it's pretty hard for it to "translate" into anything. That's the point of something being unknown.

[Russian007]

Originally Posted by pdjb

Did anyone remember the movie the day the earth stool still, and the revised one, their is a lesson in both movies, what is it, ?

Lesson #1 Klaatu Barrada Nictu
Lesson #2 Keaanu Canna Notta Act

[OldManMirage]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Hey, don't get me wrong. I'd love it if an alien intelligence was visiting us. Although, much like the coming AI revolution, I suspect 'First Contact' won't end well for us. I'm with Hawking and Musk. I think it's better for us to stay quiet and not invite space-faring travellers to come here.

But it's nice to dream about a benevolent, thoughtful Vulcan species who just wants to help us take the next technological steps.

This is why I adhere to the Fermi Paradox. If there are aliens out there - where are they ? If you accept the universe is as old as we think, there has been more than enough time for them to show up.

There are really only 3 likely scenarios.

One - the "good" one - is the Vulcan style, where they come to help.

Two - the "bad" one - is the Independence Day style, where they come to hurt us.

Three - the most unlikely, because either aliens One or Two would already be in charge of "things" - they just ignore us. Or at most just watch.

IMHO.



Three - they simply

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by OldManMirage

This is why I adhere to the Fermi Paradox. If there are aliens out there - where are they ? If you accept the universe is as old as we think, there has been more than enough time for them to show up.

There are really only 3 likely scenarios.

One - the "good" one - is the Vulcan style, where they come to help.

Two - the "bad" one - is the Independence Day style, where they come to hurt us.

Three - the most unlikely, because either aliens One or Two would already be in charge of "things" - they just ignore us. Or at most just watch.

IMHO.



Three - they simply

What makes you think they are not..???
Our little scuffles on earth are their Gladiator Games..

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by OldManMirage

This is why I adhere to the Fermi Paradox ...

The Fermi paradox isn't a hypothesis, one can adhere to - it's a question.

Where are they? The Italian physicist Enrico Fermi famously posed that question in 1950, and the question is now known as the Fermi Paradox, or The Great Silence. Fermi asked: if other civilizations exist, on other planets in our Milky Way galaxy, and if some have spread through the galaxy, as both science fiction and scientists have conjectured, why haven’t we heard from them?

Scientists gather to contemplate The Great Silence
To try to help answer these questions, the METI [Messaging Extraterrestial Intelligence] group held another one-day workshop in Paris on March 18, 2019.
➥ https://earthsky.org/space/meti-work...great-silence/

I rather like David Brin’s 1983 quip:
"Aversion to an idea, simply because of its long association with crackpots, gives crackpots altogether too much influence."
“The Great Silence - the Controversy Concerning Extraterrestrial Intelligent Life” ~ by G.D. Brin
➥ 1983QJRAS..24..283B Page 299
➥ 1983QJRAS..24..283B Page 283

“On the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI)” ~ Cambridge University Press
➥ https://www.cambridge.org/core/journ...E68588824636B1

“Fermi's Paradox Is a Daunting Problem – Under Whatever Label” ~ by Milan M. Dirkovid
➥ https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1609/1609.09801.pdf

[jimbunyard]

Originally Posted by jimbunyard

Would like to see how some of these 'unknown' laws of physics translate into 'space beings', as well as how they (both the beings and the laws) morph back and forth between the two.

And why.

The only thing the belief in 'ET' demonstrates is the irrational ability of the human mind.

And, perhaps counterintuitively, a paucity of imagination.

Originally Posted by Russian007

If something is "unknown" it's pretty hard for it to "translate" into anything. That's the point of something being unknown.

Playing word games doesn't advance your argument there, Donald (that's Rumsfeld, not the Trumpster)...

'Translate' in this case means 'to be operative'. Perhaps a clumsy choice of words, but it apparently (at least almost) gets the point across.

Spinoza makes the same point when he says god doesn't 'truck' in 'miracles', because to do so would be operating outside the 'Earthly plain'...if I've got the right philosopher and gross interpretation of his meaning.


Until any of the professed believers here offer any answer to the pertinent questions already set out;

Time

Distance

Goal of imagined 'ETs'

Physical evidence ('captured aliens', 'space ships', etc. [no, fuzzy pictures and unverifiable or reproducable electronic 'signatures' don't count])


'alienists' will forever remain in the same category as the involved-god religionists, antivaxxers, flat-earthers, moon-landing hoaxers, CC deniers, Q-anoners, young-earth 'creation'ists, cryptozoologists, etc., ad nauseam, and apparently, nearly ad infinitum; at best, unreliable witnesses, at worse, predatory, manipulative charlatans.


None whose beliefs have any reason to be taken seriously (beyond the effort to refute them), because those beliefs 'lobby' quite directly against at least several hundred million years of successful sensory evolution.

It is quite interesting that, for the most part, the 'sophistication' of the supposed 'aliens' mirror quite closely the 'sophistication' of the culture of those doing the delusory 'observing' (though the actual capabilities of the parent culture may not equal those in the minds of those convinced of the accuracy of their observations).


As has been said earlier, the onus of supporting extra-ordinary claims requires extra-ordinary evidence, and relies on those making those extra-ordinary claims.

'Belief', 'faith', 'desire', or any other magical-thinking excuses don't cut it in the real world; it's only our extraordinarially affluent society that allows such cultmemberships to flourish.

Perhaps that fact will eventually work to self-correct such an existential travesty...

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by jimbunyard

Playing word games doesn't advance your argument there, Donald (that's Rumsfeld, not the Trumpster)...

'Translate' in this case means 'to be operative'. Perhaps a clumsy choice of words, but it apparently (at least almost) gets the point across.

Spinoza makes the same point when he says god doesn't 'truck' in 'miracles', because to do so would be operating outside the 'Earthly plain'...if I've got the right philosopher and gross interpretation of his meaning.


Until any of the professed believers here offer any answer to the pertinent questions already set out;

Time

Distance

Goal of imagined 'ETs'

Physical evidence ('captured aliens', 'space ships', etc. [no, fuzzy pictures and unverifiable or reproducable electronic 'signatures' don't count])


'alienists' will forever remain in the same category as the involved-god religionists, antivaxxers, flat-earthers, moon-landing hoaxers, CC deniers, Q-anoners, young-earth 'creation'ists, cryptozoologists, etc., ad nauseam, and apparently, nearly ad infinitum; at best, unreliable witnesses, at worse, predatory, manipulative charlatans.


None whose beliefs have any reason to be taken seriously (beyond the effort to refute them), because those beliefs 'lobby' quite directly against at least several hundred million years of successful sensory evolution.

It is quite interesting that, for the most part, the 'sophistication' of the supposed 'aliens' mirror quite closely the 'sophistication' of the culture of those doing the delusory 'observing' (though the actual capabilities of the parent culture may not equal those in the minds of those convinced of the accuracy of their observations).


As has been said earlier, the onus of supporting extra-ordinary claims requires extra-ordinary evidence, and relies on those making those extra-ordinary claims.

'Belief', 'faith', 'desire', or any other magical-thinking excuses don't cut it in the real world; it's only our extraordinarially affluent society that allows such cultmemberships to flourish.

Perhaps that fact will eventually work to self-correct such an existential travesty...

What a load of self important Bollox..
UFO's have been seen throughout history and long before your claimed 'level of sophistication'...
What is the 'Real World'.. do you even know outside your sheltered existence..???
Its those large parts of the sphere you likely studiously avoid.

[capn_billl]

Originally Posted by Russian007

I cannot get a consistent answer on that. I know plasma is proposed as a stealth technology, though one physicist said plasma IS visibile to radar. Maybe some of the engineers here can weigh in. If we do in fact have that technology, #1 we've apparently had it since 2004-- when Cmdr Fravor reported his sighting and #2 what a goofy way for the government to reveal new technology.

Engineer here.

RADAR does see any conductive object large enough to reflect enough energy for receiver.

Plasma does conduct, and not only that emits RF in a wide band of frequencies.

I've personally seen RADAR pick up lightning strikes, St Elmo's fire (plasma balls from lightning). Hail, heavy rain, a bird flying close to antenna, large waves, a tangle of nets with metal foil, and other odd objects floating.

Satellites have picked up a lot of odd atmospheric phenomena like sprites, and other vortex, electrical discharges.

Some of these would look extremely strange from a close aircraft, or ground observer.

[capn_billl]

Originally Posted by jimbunyard

Playing word games doesn't advance your argument there, Donald (that's Rumsfeld, not the Trumpster)...

'Translate' in this case means 'to be operative'. Perhaps a clumsy choice of words, but it apparently (at least almost) gets the point across.

Spinoza makes the same point when he says god doesn't 'truck' in 'miracles', because to do so would be operating outside the 'Earthly plain'...if I've got the right philosopher and gross interpretation of his meaning.


Until any of the professed believers here offer any answer to the pertinent questions already set out;

Time

Distance

Goal of imagined 'ETs'

Physical evidence ('captured aliens', 'space ships', etc. [no, fuzzy pictures and unverifiable or reproducable electronic 'signatures' don't count])


'alienists' will forever remain in the same category as the involved-god religionists, antivaxxers, flat-earthers, moon-landing hoaxers, CC deniers, Q-anoners, young-earth 'creation'ists, cryptozoologists, etc., ad nauseam, and apparently, nearly ad infinitum; at best, unreliable witnesses, at worse, predatory, manipulative charlatans.


None whose beliefs have any reason to be taken seriously (beyond the effort to refute them), because those beliefs 'lobby' quite directly against at least several hundred million years of successful sensory evolution.

It is quite interesting that, for the most part, the 'sophistication' of the supposed 'aliens' mirror quite closely the 'sophistication' of the culture of those doing the delusory 'observing' (though the actual capabilities of the parent culture may not equal those in the minds of those convinced of the accuracy of their observations).


As has been said earlier, the onus of supporting extra-ordinary claims requires extra-ordinary evidence, and relies on those making those extra-ordinary claims.

'Belief', 'faith', 'desire', or any other magical-thinking excuses don't cut it in the real world; it's only our extraordinarially affluent society that allows such cultmemberships to flourish.

Perhaps that fact will eventually work to self-correct such an existential travesty...

WOW, pretty broad brush you are using there.

Technically a UFO "believer" falls in the same category as a cryptozoologist.

And also technically there isn't "zero" evidence, just not enough to convince the majority of people.

As far as cryptozoology in general, several "extinct" species have been found, after decades of ridicule heaped on those who claimed to have seen one.

You remind me of a bushman I met once, he fell on the ground laughing after I told him I flew to his country. He immediately asked me to flap my arms to prove it.

Others refuse to believe in things they aren't familiar with even if it is put in front of their face.

Chinese proverb. The closed mind sees nothing.

UFO means (U)Nidentified (F)lying (O)bject. If it flies, and you can't Identify it, then it is a UFO as per definition.

Anything else is speculation, and one theory is as good as another until we learn more about them.

[jimbunyard]

Originally Posted by boatman61

What a load of self important Bollox..
UFO's have been seen throughout history and long before your claimed 'level of sophistication'...
What is the 'Real World'.. do you even know outside your sheltered existence..???
Its those large parts of the sphere you likely studiously avoid.

The only "self important Bollox" consistently displayed here come from you, with your constant, 'I've seen more things, been more places, and have more awareness-of-the-real-world' arrogance (in the colloquial sense of the word).

Ever looked at the 3000+ year old 'UFO reports' (or at least the proposed translations of them)? Or are you relying on your own eyes. Or the eyes of such 'credible experts' as Graham Hancock (or whichever UFO populizer-du-jour you prefer).

Anyone who denies that the 'level of sophistication' within a culture directly influences it's members perceptions is living in a fantasy world that reflects neither logic nor any understanding of neurological function.

That you can't provide any answers to any of the 4 'queries' only verifies where your opinion should be categorized.

That you seem unaware of the contextual usage of simple concepts such as 'real world' and their limits, and attempt to use them in yet another display of somewhat sophmoric arrogance only confirms what has been evident for quite awhile...


But I appreciate the categorization of my "bollox" as "important", self or otherwise...though, coming from such an "unreliable witness", such appreciation, I fear, says more about my vanity than about your sincerity.