125 replies to this topic

[SwampgasBalloonBoy]

psyche101, on 24 January 2013 - 08:58 AM, said:

If spaceships were indeed common, it would not be taboo. People are there to talk about astronomy, not spaceships. If someone had a picture of a spaceship, and it was genuine, and if that was indeed the case, then it would be relevant  Never happened either as far as I know. If such did happen, it is highly likely that more than one person would have a photo, and many would know "where to look" or what to look for.  A great many people have cameras attached to their scopes. If is was a regular occurrence as purported, then I do not see how the best eyes in the sky are missing all the action.



We look at many spectrums what you seem to be describing sounds more like Star Treks Sub Space. Even so, the alleged invisible mother ship is till sending scout ships to earth that are photographed, and seen if UFO's are indeed ET. It strikes me as having it both ways to claim that we cannot see them, but people report them.




Or proof of visual inaccuracies. I suspect the UFO's that largely exhibit outlandish manoeuvres are more likely natural phenomena. Aliens still have to obey physics, if it will kill a human, it will kill an organic alien.

What you're saying is that Human have figured out everything there is to know about the laws of physics. The UFOs that make outlandish maneuvers cannot be done by anyone anywhere in this universe because Human are the ultimate specie in the universe? Why the hell are physicists still doing research for if its all been figured out. For a man with "no bs" as his av....

[SwampgasBalloonBoy]

psyche101, on 24 January 2013 - 07:34 AM, said:

No it is not ambitious at all. The only thing I can suggest is to immerse oneself in astronomy and become aware of the community. It's bigger than most realise.

Yes, indeed it would be spotted. How come if we can see them on RADAR we cannot track them leaving the atmosphere on RADAR?

Maybe the US should hired you to watch the border with Mexico. Maybe you and your telescope could spot the drug smugglers

[badeskov]

SwampgasBalloonBoy, on 25 January 2013 - 01:05 AM, said:

What you're saying is that Human have figured out everything there is to know about the laws of physics. The UFOs that make outlandish maneuvers cannot be done by anyone anywhere in this universe because Human are the ultimate specie in the universe? Why the hell are physicists still doing research for if its all been figured out. For a man with "no bs" as his av....

No, you are falling into a very common trap, one that is  common not only to UFOlogy, but elsewhere too. A prime example of this is the Lord kelvin quote: "Heavier than air flying machines are impossible." There was nothing whatsoever in physics at the time that disallowed air planes, but he let his belief convince him that was so. The big difference from his conviction to now is that we actually have laws of physics that state things that are disallowed, so to speak. Thus, we have a set of boundary conditions that not one we, but also ET would have to be within. Among them, how physical objects move.

It has nothing to do with being superior or knowing it all.

Cheers,
Badeskov

[Chrlzs]

For me, I rather like science's approach.  After all, it's the same science that gives all this technology that we are using as we speak.  It's the same approach that has allowed us to put mankind on a celestial body other than our own, has landed amazingly complex robotic craft onto other planets and asteroids/comets, and has even put spacecraft beyond our solar system.  I'd say that suggests that we may not know everything, by a long shot, but we've got a pretty good grasp on the important stuff.

Is science fallible? - yes.
Are there sometimes radical new developments? - yes.  But they are getting much less common nowadays.

The thing is, science always uses - and progresses from - the known.  The unknown (eg from this thread - anti-gravity, 'inertia dampeners' and the like) is not accepted until it is tested and verified.  What's more, if you allow all ideas, then everything is fair game - elves, faeries, pink unicorns, infinite multiple universes where all things are not only possible but inevitable, the 'matrix' theory that renders everything invalid anyway.. and so on..

Plus, there are some major issues with some of these ideas, eg anti-gravity and inertia dampeners are prime examples..  IF (and that's an enormous IF) these things have been mastered, then by definition, the owners are able to generate free energy.  Now you really need to think about that - if that's true, then why haven't they launched huge radio transmissions outwards?  Why bother coming here unless to examine us primitives and perhaps give us a helping hand - we could not possibly be a threat nor could they need anything from us..  And why clumsily and accidentally reveal themselves in ways that are generally indistinguishable from distant aircraft, RC's etc (or swamp gas and balloons )..?

I'm afraid the logical side of me can't accept the logic of aliens being here ... and hiding.    I stopped doing that when I was a kid..

BTW, I'd be happy to look in detail at whatever case that shows compelling evidence of 'outlandish maneuvers'.  Let's get specific, shall we?

[SwampgasBalloonBoy]

badeskov, on 25 January 2013 - 01:44 AM, said:

No, you are falling into a very common trap, one that is  common not only to UFOlogy, but elsewhere too. A prime example of this is the Lord kelvin quote: "Heavier than air flying machines are impossible." There was nothing whatsoever in physics at the time that disallowed air planes, but he let his belief convince him that was so. The big difference from his conviction to now is that we actually have laws of physics that state things that are disallowed, so to speak. Thus, we have a set of boundary conditions that not one we, but also ET would have to be within. Among them, how physical objects move.

It has nothing to do with being superior or knowing it all.

Cheers,
Badeskov

Could you please state clearly what exactly is disallowed? Why do we still have scientists that dream of traversing space? are they crazies that going down a dead end? If they are scientists, shouldn't they know what is disallowed or not? why even bother since men have figured all out.

[badeskov]

SwampgasBalloonBoy, on 25 January 2013 - 01:55 AM, said:

Could you please state clearly what exactly is disallowed?

A perfect 90 degree turn is disallowed, for instance. That would require an infinite amount of energy. Traversing space faster than the speed of light is to the best of our knowledge disallowed. That also requires an infinite amount of energy. And E=mc² has indeed withstood the test of time (and numerous attempts to break it).

Quote

Why do we still have scientists that dream of traversing space? are they crazies that going down a dead end? If they are scientists, shouldn't they know what is disallowed or not? why even bother since men have figured all out.

Again, who has ever said that man has figured it all out? Again, a very common misconception and nobody is claiming that it is so. E.g., there are solutions to the Theory of General Relativity that in theory allows us to circumvent Einstein's light speed barrier by means of worm holes or the like. In theory. Maybe we can, maybe we can't - we just don't know yet. But we are pretty certain that travelling faster than light is simply not possible - and it's not like scientists haven't tried.

Cheers,
Badeskov

[SwampgasBalloonBoy]

Chrlzs, on 25 January 2013 - 01:45 AM, said:

For me, I rather like science's approach.  After all, it's the same science that gives all this technology that we are using as we speak.  It's the same approach that has allowed us to put mankind on a celestial body other than our own, has landed amazingly complex robotic craft onto other planets and asteroids/comets, and has even put spacecraft beyond our solar system.  I'd say that suggests that we may not know everything, by a long shot, but we've got a pretty good grasp on the important stuff.

Is science fallible? - yes.
Are there sometimes radical new developments? - yes.  But they are getting much less common nowadays.

The thing is, science always uses - and progresses from - the known.  The unknown (eg from this thread - anti-gravity, 'inertia dampeners' and the like) is not accepted until it is tested and verified.  What's more, if you allow all ideas, then everything is fair game - elves, faeries, pink unicorns, infinite multiple universes where all things are not only possible but inevitable, the 'matrix' theory that renders everything invalid anyway.. and so on..

Plus, there are some major issues with some of these ideas, eg anti-gravity and inertia dampeners are prime examples..  IF (and that's an enormous IF) these things have been mastered, then by definition, the owners are able to generate free energy.  Now you really need to think about that - if that's true, then why haven't they launched huge radio transmissions outwards?  Why bother coming here unless to examine us primitives and perhaps give us a helping hand - we could not possibly be a threat nor could they need anything from us..  And why clumsily and accidentally reveal themselves in ways that are generally indistinguishable from distant aircraft, RC's etc (or swamp gas and balloons )..?

I'm afraid the logical side of me can't accept the logic of aliens being here ... and hiding.    I stopped doing that when I was a kid..

BTW, I'd be happy to look in detail at whatever case that shows compelling evidence of 'outlandish maneuvers'.  Let's get specific, shall we?

"The thing is, science always uses - and progresses from - the known"<-------This, I have to disagree. Are there no such case that scientists researching one thing and accidentally discovered another? Sometime it actually does come from the unknown

[SwampgasBalloonBoy]

badeskov, on 25 January 2013 - 02:05 AM, said:

A perfect 90 degree turn is disallowed, for instance. That would require an infinite amount of energy. Traversing space faster than the speed of light is to the best of our knowledge disallowed. That also requires an infinite amount of energy. And E=mc² has indeed withstood the test of time (and numerous attempts to break it).



Again, who has ever said that man has figured it all out? Again, a very common misconception and nobody is claiming that it is so. E.g., there are solutions to the Theory of General Relativity that in theory allows us to circumvent Einstein's light speed barrier by means of worm holes or the like. In theory. Maybe we can, maybe we can't - we just don't know yet. But we are pretty certain that travelling faster than light is simply not possible - and it's not like scientists haven't tried.

Cheers,
Badeskov

No one is asking men to go faster than the speed of light. Just get close to it first would ya.

As for the 90 degree turn. The two crafts that I saw did exactly that! You think I was born believing in some fairy tale aliens?
I saw two silvery round object in the afternoon. One flying behind the other going from west to east. no sound, flying in a straingt line slowly about the speed of regular airline. all of a sudden they both zig zagged. turning left-right-left-right...at much, much faster speed than when they fly straight. they both were in perfect synchronization when they does the maneuvers. Then they fly straight up and out of sight. That's why I though ET is possible. since according to people like you, it's not possible for men to create such things. And no, I wasn't hallucinating. My brother was there, we both saw its.

[Slave2Fate]

SwampgasBalloonBoy, on 25 January 2013 - 02:17 AM, said:

No one is asking men to go faster than the speed of light. Just get close to it first would ya.

As for the 90 degree turn. The two crafts that I saw did exactly that! You think I was born believing in some fairy tale aliens?
I saw two silvery round object in the afternoon. One flying behind the other going from west to east. no sound, flying in a straingt line slowly about the speed of regular airline. all of a sudden they both zig zagged. turning left-right-left-right...at much, much faster speed than when they fly straight. they both were in perfect synchronization when they does the maneuvers. Then they fly straight up and out of sight. That's why I though ET is possible. since according to people like you, it's not possible for men to create such things. And no, I wasn't hallucinating. My brother was there, we both saw its.

So if it would require infinite energy to maneuver like that and such maneuvers would kill any occupants without some sort of tech to overcome inertia, both of which we aren't even sure are possible, why would your first thought be aliens? Honest question by the way, I would just like to know.

[Esoteric Toad]

Until there IS a way to rule out everything except 'aliens in zig-zaggy flying ships of questionable navigation/flight skills' OR one lands/crashes/fails a sobriety test and cannot make bail and is seen, poked, and probed in public for all the world to be examined/entertained by; ET's in UFO's are speculation at best and scary critical thinking killers at worst.

For the same reason some can say "just because we (us humans) do not know everything" I would think "we do not know everything so why the leap to lights, balls, blips, blurs, blobs and shiny things equals, 'I dunno what that wuz, must be aliens! '?"

Just my 2¢.

Edited to fix spelling and likely further bad grammar.

Edited by Esoteric Toad, 25 January 2013 - 02:50 AM.

[SwampgasBalloonBoy]

Slave2Fate, on 25 January 2013 - 02:38 AM, said:

So if it would require infinite energy to maneuver like that and such maneuvers would kill any occupants without some sort of tech to overcome inertia, both of which we aren't even sure are possible, why would your first thought be aliens? Honest question by the way, I would just like to know.

Because like you and others have said, I haven't seen men in those type of machine. I am not 100% sure it's ET, never have. But many on here saying it's impossible for such thing to exist. Then I'll have to keep ET in play. It's there, I saw what it does. If it's not possible for men, then what sort of creature could have done it? That's why I pay attention to this sort of thing. If I haven't seen its, I wouldn't pay attention to this subject.

[Slave2Fate]

SwampgasBalloonBoy, on 25 January 2013 - 02:58 AM, said:

But many on here saying it's impossible for such thing to exist.

I'm not sure anyone has said ET visitation is impossible, just fairly unlikely and are just trying to come up with alternatives. Nothing inherently wrong with that per se.  I think the ETH is a possibility, although slim, however I find the evidence to be shall we say, less than definitive. And honestly, without an experience of my own, evidence is the only thing I have to make a determination with. The reason I look so intently at the evidence is to make sure I have the best evidence available with which to make said determination. I try not to be an 'evil skeptic' however some claims are just so silly that I can't help myself. Not that your claims are silly however even you must admit that some claims really don't deserve even cursory examination. My $0.02 anyway...

[badeskov]

SwampgasBalloonBoy, on 25 January 2013 - 02:17 AM, said:

No one is asking men to go faster than the speed of light. Just get close to it first would ya.

That would be nice and we know that is possible, we just don't have the practical means to do so yet with the technology we currently posses. However, you would be wrong on nobody asking man to go faster than the speed of light - just look around at this forum and you will see people asking/wishing for man to go faster than the speed of light. And that, or a way around it, will most likely be the prerequisite for us to explore other stars.

Quote

As for the 90 degree turn. The two crafts that I saw did exactly that! You think I was born believing in some fairy tale aliens?
I saw two silvery round object in the afternoon. One flying behind the other going from west to east. no sound, flying in a straingt line slowly about the speed of regular airline. all of a sudden they both zig zagged. turning left-right-left-right...at much, much faster speed than when they fly straight. they both were in perfect synchronization when they does the maneuvers. Then they fly straight up and out of sight. That's why I though ET is possible. since according to people like you, it's not possible for men to create such things. And no, I wasn't hallucinating. My brother was there, we both saw its.

I am not saying that you were hallucinating. Nor do I insinuate that you believe in fairy tales - by birth or later. I am simply questioning whether your interpretation of what you saw is correct or not. Seeing something in the air with no frame of reference leaves the possibility for a huge margin of error.  

Cheers,
Badeskov

[Sweetpumper]

SwampgasBalloonBoy, on 25 January 2013 - 02:17 AM, said:

No one is asking men to go faster than the speed of light. Just get close to it first would ya.

As for the 90 degree turn. The two crafts that I saw did exactly that! You think I was born believing in some fairy tale aliens?
I saw two silvery round object in the afternoon. One flying behind the other going from west to east. no sound, flying in a straingt line slowly about the speed of regular airline. all of a sudden they both zig zagged. turning left-right-left-right...at much, much faster speed than when they fly straight. they both were in perfect synchronization when they does the maneuvers. Then they fly straight up and out of sight. That's why I though ET is possible. since according to people like you, it's not possible for men to create such things. And no, I wasn't hallucinating. My brother was there, we both saw its.

I'm assuming this was during the day since you said they were 'silvery', correct?  How far away were they from you and could you estimate how big they were?  And by 'round', do you say they were perfect spheres?

Edited by Sweetpumper, 25 January 2013 - 04:42 AM.

[SwampgasBalloonBoy]

badeskov, on 25 January 2013 - 04:14 AM, said:

That would be nice and we know that is possible, we just don't have the practical means to do so yet with the technology we currently posses. However, you would be wrong on nobody asking man to go faster than the speed of light - just look around at this forum and you will see people asking/wishing for man to go faster than the speed of light. And that, or a way around it, will most likely be the prerequisite for us to explore other stars.



I am not saying that you were hallucinating. Nor do I insinuate that you believe in fairy tales - by birth or later. I am simply questioning whether your interpretation of what you saw is correct or not. Seeing something in the air with no frame of reference leaves the possibility for a huge margin of error.  

Cheers,
Badeskov

Fair enough, witnessing something is not an exact science. Notice I haven't mention the size because I can't really guess or the height. I can only compare its to the speed of commercial airliner because i have watch them often. Can someone explain how flying objects can do such thing? And what interpretations do you see I made? I only describe what I saw.