can we talk about the aliens

[136or142]

Even though he now lives in Canada, the best expert on this topic for the United States is probably Stanton Friedman.  For the United Kingdom it's probably Nick Pope.

[136or142]

i want to meet the aliens tbh they might be cool

You might even fall in love with one of them .....

Call Me by Your SETI Case Number

Stanton Friedman refers to SETI as 'Silly Effort to Investigate.'

MUFON, the Mutual UFO Network does better work
http://www.mufon.com/

Las Vegas investigative journalist George Knapp is also an excellent resource.

[136or142]

A subject I'm most passionate about, so I'm glad to see it receiving some mainstream attention.

I'm not sure if there are aliens visiting us. It seems like a very unlikely scenario, or at least not the most likely one, and I don't want to immediately jump to that. But there's a lot of unexplained stuff out there, and if someone like Reid did know what this stuff was, that speaks volumes. It does make me wonder if anyone in the government or military does know, or if we're dealing with a situation where they're as much in the dark as the rest of is. There have been theories about MAJESTIC-12 and similar collaborating entities for years, but the general consensus even amongst ufologists seems to be that they were disinformation campaigns.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majestic_12#History_and_analysis

I'm inclined to think most "genuine" sighting that are not misidentification are of top secret government projects rather than anything extraterrestrial. But examples like the one linked in thread are hard to fit into that description. I found it interesting that Commander Fravor’s superiors did not investigate the object further after the encounter. This seems exactly like the sort of situation that would warrant further study, especially only a few years after 9/11. So it seems to me that someone in the government had to be in the know about what this thing was.

Well, don't want to turn this forum into Above Top Secret or CoastToCoastAM, but to me it's a very interesting subject, and I hope we're reaching a point where a lot more information and credible sightings emerge.

(As a side note, I've never liked Reid, but him doing this is enough to make a FF out of him for me. I welcome pandering to my niche fascinations!)

If you're looking for Republican politicians who had an interest in UFOs and your not already familiar, former New Mexico Congressman (U.S Representative) Steven Schiff followed the topic.  I believe he tried to advance legislation that would have promoted further investigation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Schiff

[136or142]

My big problem with this is the idea that there are aliens that technologically advanced enough to get here, clearly wish to remain secret, and yet get themselves seen repeatedly. It's a weird combo.

That said, now that we're in an era where pretty much everyone has a HD camera in their pocket, I think sightings will be harder to dispute when they happen.

The best way to look at this is to not assume that there is just one alien race.  If there are two, for instance, it could be that one of them wishes to remain secret and mostly has, while the other one doesn't care, and is the reason for nearly all of the sightings.

[136or142]

My big problem with this is the idea that there are aliens that technologically advanced enough to get here, clearly wish to remain secret, and yet get themselves seen repeatedly. It's a weird combo.

That said, now that we're in an era where pretty much everyone has a HD camera in their pocket, I think sightings will be harder to dispute when they happen.

The best way to look at this is to not assume that there is just one alien race.  If there are two, for instance, it could be that one of them wishes to remain secret and mostly has, while the other one doesn't care, and is the reason for nearly all of the sightings.

Or that the aliens like us, are variable in their competence, and every pilot that let's themselves be seen are swiftly assigned to space latrine duty.

Yes, that too.  Or that the aliens did not have omniscient awareness of human capabilities and initially allowed themselves to be seen despite their best efforts not to. 

[136or142]

Holy hell, how many "true believers" do we have here?

I try to go wherever the evidence goes.  As far as I'm concerned, the "true believers" are those who automatically believe the UFO debunkers even when the claim from the debunkers is 'weather balloons.'

[136or142]

Holy hell, how many "true believers" do we have here?

I try to go wherever the evidence goes.  As far as I'm concerned, the "true believers" are those who automatically believe the UFO debunkers even when the claim from the debunkers is 'weather balloons.'

sometimes it is just a weather balloon, as in Roswell.  I strongly suggest reading Demon Haunted World by Carl Sagan.

The old television comedy program Gilligan's Island did an episode where the castaways (except for the Professor) thought they saw a space ship but it turned out to be a weather balloon.  That was either series creator Sherwood Schwartz mocking those who believe in UFOs or mocking Carl Sagan (and J Allen Hynek.)  Of course, Hynek ended up believing in the 'UFOs are real and they are space aliens theory.'

I'm actually not sure why you are so quick to dismiss the possibility of UFOs and space aliens.  There are some theoretical physicists who believe that faster than speed of light travel is possible, and if that is true, there is zero reason why space aliens flying UFOs around earth could not be real.

The only thing left is the propaganda from the government (especially the U.S military) that has turned believing in UFOs into a joke.  But, as we see from this, the U.S military has a vested interested in debunking UFOs because to admit their reality means admitting U.S air space is being infiltrated and the U.S military can't do anything to prevent it.

Obviously there are other questions like 'why would visitors from another world be interested in earth.'  But, as Stanton Friedman has pointed out, there could be dozens of logical explanations for that, including simply 'it's part of their high school classes.'

On the possibility of faster than light travel
1.An old article: http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SpeedOfLight/FTL.html

2.A recent article: https://www.sciencealert.com/warp-speed-travel-is-theoretically-possible-according-to-top-astrophysicist

[136or142]

Holy hell, how many "true believers" do we have here?

I try to go wherever the evidence goes.  As far as I'm concerned, the "true believers" are those who automatically believe the UFO debunkers even when the claim from the debunkers is 'weather balloons.'

sometimes it is just a weather balloon, as in Roswell.  I strongly suggest reading Demon Haunted World by Carl Sagan.

The old television comedy program Gilligan's Island did an episode where the castaways (except for the Professor) thought they saw a space ship but it turned out to be a weather balloon.  That was either series creator Sherwood Schwartz mocking those who believe in UFOs or mocking Carl Sagan (and J Allen Hynek.)  Of course, Hynek ended up believing in the 'UFOs are real and they are space aliens theory.'

I'm actually not sure why you are so quick to dismiss the possibility of UFOs and space aliens.  There are some theoretical physicists who believe that faster than speed of light travel is possible, and if that is true, there is zero reason why space aliens flying UFOs around earth could not be real.

The reason why people dismiss the possibility that UFOs are space aliens is because it's based on deeply flawed reasoning.

The way actual learning, science, investigation, etc works is that you find something, and then examine it in detail. You make testable hypotheses and then follow through. You accumulate evidence.

What you DO NOT do is make a baseless conclusion like jumping from  "there are things in the sky we can't identify" to "they must be space aliens!" and then twist every bit of data in support of the preconceived conclusion. It's as ludicrous as saying, "we don't completely understand geophysical processes" and then using every earthquake as evidence that Cthulhu is real.

Except there are many genuine scientists like J Allen Hynek, Stanton Friedman and Jacques Vallee who have done precisely that (although Vallee now argues that UFOs are inter dimensional).  The claim that serious 'UFOlogists' argue 'there are things in the sky we can't identify so they must be space aliens' is the false propaganda I'm referring to.  

It is actually the UFO debunkers who are unscientific in that they don't look at the actual evidence but just dismiss every case and every claim out of hand.  

[136or142]

There are some theoretical physicists who believe that faster than speed of light travel is possible,

No there aren't. Or at least not in the way you mean.

Someone found a solution to the Einstein equations (of general relativity/gravity) that allow for a spacetime wave or bubble to propagate faster than light. In theory, a spacecraft could reside within the bubble and effectively travel faster than light while not actually moving. But this hardly allows for faster than light travel given that the energy needed to create and stabilize a macroscopic bubble of this nature would be more than the energy that is found in the observable universe, and furthermore that energy would also have to be negative. It is probably impossible for negative energies to exist in such large quantities, but in any case it cannot be harnessed due to the sheer amount needed.

Some physicists have tried worked on the problem to try to get around these requirements, but none have said they believe it will possible.

The astrophysicist quoted in that article, Geraint Lewis, says he believes it's possible.  At least he did at the time of the article, approximately 2 years ago.  So, it seems, despite what you write here, the scientific community may not be in complete agreement with you.

More recently:  
https://twitter.com/Cosmic_Horizons/status/751917399755005953

Geraint F. Lewis‏
@Cosmic_Horizons
Following Following @Cosmic_Horizons
More
Remember kids, there is nothing in physics that rules out time travel & faster than light travel. Don’t stop looking!

[136or142]

The astrophysicist quoted in that article, Geraint Lewis, says he believes it's possible.  At least he did at the time of the article, approximately 2 years ago.  So, it seems, despite what you write here, the scientific community may not be in complete agreement with you.

There's nothing in that article that disagrees with what I said. I said myself it's theoretically possible. In your article, he makes all the same points about the energy requirements and negative energy. Which makes it infeasible and thus impossible from a practical standpoint.

Remember kids, there is nothing in physics that rules out time travel & faster than light travel. Don’t stop looking!

He's right about that. Nothing in physics that is currently known rules out faster than light travel (although it does rule out ordinary matter achieving faster than light speeds). That doesn't mean it's possible or that he thinks it's possible.

Except in the article Geraint Lewis made no such comment about it being theoretically possible but practically impossible.  Lewis said it was theoretically possible AND potentially practically possible.

[136or142]

Except in the article Geraint Lewis made no such comment about it being theoretically possible but practically impossible.  Lewis said it was theoretically possible AND potentially practically possible.

To the extent you're trying to stretch this, anything is practically possible. It's potentially practically possible that I could spontaneously morph into an elephant. In fact, quantum mechanics specifically allows that to happen. All we have to do is figure out how to make it more likely and shape shifting will be a reality.

The issue, I suppose, is the likelihood of the practicality.  Your dismissing it out of hand I would argue is completely unscientific.

[136or142]

Your dismissing it out of hand I would argue is completely unscientific.

Well you would be arguing that incorrectly.

Not according to Geraint Lewis.

[136or142]

According to him:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

But yeah, I guess those quotes aren't inconsistent with him thinking that it is "potentially practically possible", as you put it.

Unscientific would be refusing to do an experiment because you've pre-judged the outcome, or throwing out data from an experiment because it does not align from your hypothesis. There's no experiment to do here.

1.Nowhere though, for instance, does Lewis make the claims you did about faster than light travel, that, for instance, it would require more negative energy than is probably available.

This is what you wrote: "It is probably impossible for negative energies to exist in such large quantities, but in any case it cannot be harnessed due to the sheer amount needed.

Some physicists have tried worked on the problem to try to get around these requirements, but none have said they believe it will (be) sic possible."

You did not express this in terms of likelihood.  You implicitly wrote straight out 'it's (practically) impossible.'

2.Unscientific is also refusing to look at the actual evidence because 'we know it's just not (practically) possible.'

[136or142]

I'm actually not sure why you are so quick to dismiss the possibility of UFOs and space aliens.

well let me tell ya, it's because every freaking one of them so far has been BS.  It's like the "world is going to end soon" people (no matter if they are climate doomsayers, Jesus doomsayers, tech doomsayers, or whatever), every one of them has been wrong before, it makes sense to question the next guy making the same always wrong claims.  Or bigfoot/yeti believers, ghosties, telekawhatever, horoscopes, tarot, mind reading, copper bracelets and low fat diets...all woo all new claims about them should be heavily examined.  Like somebody said upthread, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and we never EVER get it.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I have no idea what this has to do with anything.  FTL travel being possible might make aliens visiting us slightly more likely, but the odds are still ridiculously small and more importantly, it's not evidence that we've been visited.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't know if the DoD has encouraged UFO kooks or not, but it wouldn't surprise me.  Makes it slightly easier to hide things during testing if all UFO enthusiasts are kooks.  They really don't need much help looking like kooks though.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

but again, a thing being possible doesn't mean it's happened.  This is not evidence.


But please, don't stop looking.  It would be pretty cool (assuming they didn't instantly kill us or put us in zoos) if there were aliens out there.  Just like it would be super cool if big foot existed or mind reading was possible.  But there is no good evidence for any of it.

So, what would count as evidence to you?

I suspect for you it would require actually personally seeing a UFO on the ground with the aliens outside it with the aliens having to do something humans can't do even as magic tricks.

This is why I'm personally completely dismissive of those who use this B.S line of 'extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.'  There is no such thing as extraordinary evidence, just regular evidence, and those who use the line are merely being completely dismissive while lying that they are open to claims.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11406-016-9779-7
Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence?

[136or142]

I suspect for you it would require actually seeing a UFO on the ground with the aliens outside it yourself with the aliens having to do something humans can't do even as magic tricks.

For me, that would probably be enough. If that's all that happened, I would consider other possibilities as well. But I cannot deny if this happened I would most likely find myself leading strongly to an alien hypothesis.

Exactly.  So, that's basically my point with with and (probably) dead0man here.  Virtually nothing would convince you that aliens exist and are visiting earth.  The issue then becomes: is there any point in having a discussion with a person who will simply end up replying to everything either 'that doesn't prove anything' or 'that isn't sufficient evidence.'?

[136or142]

No, that's not true that virtually nothing would convince me that aliens are visiting Earth. You just laid out a scenario that would convince me. And if they were visiting Earth, I imagine that, and a whole lot more undeniable evidence would materialize very quickly. There might not be any point, from your perspective in discussing it with us. The reason I'm discussing it with you is I want to knock all this down as best I can for the benefit of others, particularly those who may be on the fence. Otherwise, there's little point in me arguing with someone who's convinced that an anecdotal story about strange lights in the sky mean aliens are visiting earth, despite the fact that far more plausible explanations are available.

I never said any such thing.

Eye witness evidence of unexplained physical crafts (not just strange lights) is one source of evidence, but there is also physical evidence.

I can certainly understand that a person who doesn't believe in UFOs isn't going to look heavily into the data, but I think it's fair to expect a person who engages in debate on the topic is going to have at least a passing knowledge of the evidence that actually exists.

http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/chasing-ufos/articles/five-good-reasons-to-believe-in-ufos/

In regards to the physical evidence.  These were claims that people saw space craft on the ground and this was then matched by physical evidence showing that something unusual had affected (effected?) the ground.

This obviously isn't evidence itself that UFOs are driven by space aliens from some far distant planet, but it certainly is evidence of UFOs, and almost certainly not 'UFOs' from the U.S military.

(The people who claim U.S air force never want to acknowledge that logical holes exist in their theory as well. For instance, what is the point of the U.S air force having 20-40 year advanced technology if it never publicly uses it?   Or, how exactly did the U.S air force invent this advanced technology when there is no evidence of any physics or engineering theories to back it up?)

So, again.  I would be curious what reply you could give to me other than 'that doesn't prove anything' or 'that isn't enough evidence.'

[136or142]

Ok, I apologize for putting words in your mouth then.

As to your latter point, I'm reminded of a Richard Dawkins quote. Something to the effect that you don't need a degree in leprechology to argue leprechauns don't exist.

No, but blind dismissal isn't contrary evidence or an argument either.

[136or142]

So, what would count as evidence to you?

certainly more than what was shown in the OP.  If the majority of scientists said aliens were real and here, I'd except that it was likely that aliens were real and here.  I'd be more apt to believe it that way than if I saw a "ufo" land and "aliens" got out of it and did some "magic".  If I saw that I'd KNOW somebody was playing a trick on me (or I was seeing someone else have a trick played on them and I was a lucky witness).  There needs to be a lot of evidence, in the hands of REAL scientists that don't have a history of being ufo enthusiasts that can do repeatable science on the evidence that proves the case you're trying to make.  Anything less than that just isn't enough.


I'd like to add that I'd be shocked if we were the only life in the universe.  It's just too big.  But that's the problem with "visits", it's just too big.  Why, other than to visit us for the sake of visiting us, would any alien come here?  There is nothing (other than our life forms and the stuff our life forms create) in our solar system that doesn't exist everywhere else in the universe/galaxy and they're not going to know we exist because why would they?  Because of our "radio signals" flying away from us in every direction?  IF (and that's a big "if") they make it more than a few light years away from Earth, they've still only gone at max, a hundred light years.  That's just a tiny speck of the Milky Way.  (granted there are more than a few stars in that sphere.....as many as 512 it seems)  The chances that there is a space traveling life form in that 512 is slim, the odds they've noticed us are slimmer and the chances they've already traveled here slimmer still.

There are a number of problems with this
1.How do you know the aliens are from all that far away relatively speaking?

2.If the universe is anything like the earth, different alien species living on different planets would communicate with each other and would have maps of the parts of the universe they've each charted and would combine them together.  They may have sensors to detect life forms on relatively close planets, unless such a thing is impossible according to physics.

3.If the space aliens are cyborgs, for instance, it's possible they would have a limitless life span, so maybe traveling the universe is just the hobby of those creatures.

I think you certainly bring up some good questions here, but you seem to be guilty of the opposite of what you claimed I was doing earlier: in your case here, that raising doubts is the same thing is providing proof that it can't be happening.  I can't find the exact quote, but former prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi said something like "there are always unanswered questions about a criminal case, but if you know somebody is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, then you know there have to be rational explanations to those questions."  Bugliosi on this was speaking about the questions raised about the guilt of Lee (Harvey) Oswald.

Ultimately I think the questions you raise are not necessarily evidence that aliens visiting in space craft don't exist, but may be nothing more than evidence of your lack of imagination.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Also, just to point out, I have never said I believe that what people are seeing are aliens in space crafts, just that:
1.There is credible evidence that people are seeing aliens in space craft.

2.Those who claim otherwise are not aware of this credible evidence and their dismissals are based on ignorance.  

3.The desire to dismiss out of hand is based on the U.S government having successfully convinced their population that those who believe in UFOs (or the possibility of UFOs) are kooks and this dismissal is not actually based on anything rational.

I personally have no idea what is going on here, other than that there are very credible cases of people seeing Unidentified Flying Objects and that these people deserve to be taken seriously.

[136or142]

Clear and detailed images of a craft demonstrably not of human origin.

And this is not that?

no, not even close.  Do you know what clear and detailed means?

There are a number of problems with this
1.How do you know the aliens are from all that far away relatively speaking?

I don't

You must be logged in to read this quote.

k

You must be logged in to read this quote.

k

You must be logged in to read this quote.

imagination has nothing to do with science

You must be logged in to read this quote.

no there isn't

You must be logged in to read this quote.

ok, show me this credible evidence, 'cause I've never seen it.  And if your evidence is a video or involves ufo enthusiasts making claims about a video, don't bother wasting your time.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

perhaps, but it doesn't help the pro-UFO's side that every claim so far has been total BS

You must be logged in to read this quote.

yep, they do.  At least the first time.



Again, all I want is evidence, mountains of it.  And grainy video isn't evidence.  Reasons aliens might exist isn't evidence.  Appeals to authority isn't evidence.

1.Imagination and 'strokes of genius' have a great deal to do with scientific discovery and understanding.

2.http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/chasing-ufos/articles/five-good-reasons-to-believe-in-ufos/

That is a start.  Ultimately what you personally choose to believe or not believe is not my concern or interest.

[136or142]

Just going to throw this out there (more background from the fighter pilot incident reportied earlier). Read it all before you make a judgement but understand that all of these were professional pilots, fire control, and other assigned US Navy personnel.

https://fightersweep.com/1460/x-files-edition/

yes, we noticed the appeals to authority earlier.

Edited: There is NOTHING logically wrong with appeals to authority.  The logical fallacy is the misplaced appeal to authority, like using a baseball player to advertise coffee machines.

[136or142]

PROOF!



...that rocket launches can make some really cool and strange light shows.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/nation-now/2017/12/22/mysterious-bright-light-stuns-californians-after-spacex-rocket-launch/978546001/

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I see space people. Come to think of it, if M. Night Shyamalan isn't proof of space aliens, I don't know what is.

[136or142]

Just going to throw this out there (more background from the fighter pilot incident reportied earlier). Read it all before you make a judgement but understand that all of these were professional pilots, fire control, and other assigned US Navy personnel.

https://fightersweep.com/1460/x-files-edition/

yes, we noticed the appeals to authority earlier.

Edited: There is NOTHING logically wrong with appeals to authority.  The logical fallacy is the misplaced appeal to authority, like using a baseball player to advertise coffee machines.

there is when the authority isn't an expert in the field you are claiming he is.  Navy pilots aren't extraterrestrial experts.  Pilots, like all people, see things wrong all the time.  Them seeing something they can't explain isn't proof of aliens.

It's evidence (not proof) of UFOs.