96 replies to this topic

[Essan]

OverSword, on 13 April 2012 - 02:31 PM, said:

People refuse to see that this is how "disclosure" is done.

Disclosure as in revealing that what most people on the planet have beleived to be true most of their lives - that Earth is not the only place in the entire universe where life exists - really is true?

Exciting though it might be, it's like revealing that the guy who we saw lap all the other competitors in the race twice won the race ...

Disclosure as in revealing that in fact there not, never has been, and ever will be, any life anywhere else in the universe - now that really would be a mind boggling thing!

But I'm not expecting such disclosure any time soon.  Humans just aren't ready to deal with the enormity of what they would truely mean!


Meanwhile, back to Mars, what we have is one group of scientists who on reassessing data from Viking think they have found evidence that, as many have long suspected, micro-organisms dod still exist on the red planet.   Though I'm not sure I'm convinced it's conclusive evidence at this stage.

Edited by Essan, 13 April 2012 - 03:36 PM.

[OverSword]

To clarify what I meant about disclosure, is that although higher ups may have been aware for some years that there is water, or living bacteria on Mars, they will only let the general public in on that information in very small doses over long periods of time, to minimize the effects on society.  I know it seems stupid but I truly believe that is the reason they do this.  I can't remember the name of the think tank the US government hired to come up with the protocols but I'm sure someone on UM knows.

[Archimedes]

Yes, I imagine there would be global chaos if it was revealed that there is water or bacteria on Mars.  I would personally be out looting and rioting in the wake of such news.

[Essan]

OverSword, on 13 April 2012 - 03:38 PM, said:

To clarify what I meant about disclosure, is that although higher ups may have been aware for some years that there is water, or living bacteria on Mars, they will only let the general public in on that information in very small doses over long periods of time, to minimize the effects on society.

What effects?

Why send so many probes there looking for evidence of life is you're not going to announce it if you find it (and are certain you've found it)?

As I say, most people assume there is ife on other worlds.  It's if there absolutely isn't life elsewhere that we'd be in shock (along with potentially profound impacts on religion etc as the majority who don't consider Earth to be unique start to wonder and question their long held convictions)

[OverSword]

Archimedes, on 13 April 2012 - 04:00 PM, said:

Yes, I imagine there would be global chaos if it was revealed that there is water or bacteria on Mars.  I would personally be out looting and rioting in the wake of such news.

I'm not trying to justify thier means of disclosure, I'm just noting how they do it.  You are young enough not to have this be traumatic.  Remember what happened when War of the Worlds was originally broadcast?  People actually killed themselves.

[OverSword]

Essan, on 13 April 2012 - 04:50 PM, said:

What effects?

Why send so many probes there looking for evidence of life is you're not going to announce it if you find it (and are certain you've found it)?

As I say, most people assume there is ife on other worlds.  It's if there absolutely isn't life elsewhere that we'd be in shock (along with potentially profound impacts on religion etc as the majority who don't consider Earth to be unique start to wonder and question their long held convictions)

The key is that now most people assume thereis life on other planets.  At one point you could be excomunicated and burned at the stake for making a statement like that.  Disclosure done properly seems seamless to those who are being diclosed to.

[Archimedes]

People panicked during the War of the Worlds broadcast because they were listening to a genuine news report of a malevolent alien force was invading Earth.

Why would people panic because they learn there is bacteria on Mars?  There's just no comparison.

[OverSword]

Archimedes, on 13 April 2012 - 05:15 PM, said:

People panicked during the War of the Worlds broadcast because they were listening to a genuine news report of a malevolent alien force was invading Earth.

Why would people panic because they learn there is bacteria on Mars?  There's just no comparison.

So are you stating that you don't believe that there are protocols in place for gradual disemination of life on other worlds.

I bet they will announce primitive plant life on Mars in the next 15 years.

And yes, people wouldn't panic because they found bacteria.  That is the whole point in doing it this way.

Edited by OverSword, 13 April 2012 - 05:20 PM.

[grendals_bane]

OverSword, on 13 April 2012 - 05:04 PM, said:

I'm not trying to justify thier means of disclosure, I'm just noting how they do it.  You are young enough not to have this be traumatic.  Remember what happened when War of the Worlds was originally broadcast?  People actually killed themselves.

Much of that has actually been exaggerated, some people did panic but it was nothing like the extent to which it was reported.

[Mentalcase]

The point OverSword is making, is small doses. I highly doubt he thinks people would have ever over-reacted with mundane data. It's the principle of the situation as a whole.



Ok, I'll eat my foot a bit.

Edited by Mentalcase, 13 April 2012 - 05:30 PM.

[the L]

Archimedes, on 13 April 2012 - 05:15 PM, said:

People panicked during the War of the Worlds broadcast because they were listening to a genuine news report of a malevolent alien force was invading Earth.

Why would people panic because they learn there is bacteria on Mars?  There's just no comparison.

Agreed.

[Archimedes]

OverSword, on 13 April 2012 - 05:19 PM, said:

So are you stating that you don't believe that there are protocols in place for gradual disemination of life on other worlds.

No, it's just that you have provided no evidence that 1) such a protocol exists other than your say-so and 2) if such a protocol exists, the news we hear from NASA about what they have discovered on Mars is part of this protocol being put into action.

What makes you think that the news we hear from NASA about Mars is part of this protocol and not just what it appears to be at face value?


Do you have some actual information or evidence that this is happening?

[Yellow Jacket]

Viking Robots would be cool!

[Slave2Fate]

highdesert50, on 13 April 2012 - 12:39 PM, said:

Does one presume the voyage from earth to mars is sufficient to destroy earth borne bacteria? Or, are we actually in the process of seeding or bio-forming mars with simple robust organisms that might have paralleled the early introduction of life on earth.

Great thought!

I doubt that is happening on Mars however the implications of us 'contaminating' another planet during exploration only to have it spring to life a few million years later is quite intriguing. I hadn't thought of that before.

[OverSword]

Archimedes, on 13 April 2012 - 06:13 PM, said:

No, it's just that you have provided no evidence that 1) such a protocol exists other than your say-so and 2) if such a protocol exists, the news we hear from NASA about what they have discovered on Mars is part of this protocol being put into action.

What makes you think that the news we hear from NASA about Mars is part of this protocol and not just what it appears to be at face value?


Do you have some actual information or evidence that this is happening?

What year did the viking lander, land on Mars?  How long have they have this evidence that now suddenly, miraculously they have a new way of examining.  I remember they announced this and then recanted back when the viking lander was new (yes, I am old enough to have very clear memories of the event). And no, of course I have no evidence this is happening, I don't work in the upper echelons of NASA.

Edited by OverSword, 13 April 2012 - 06:29 PM.