129 replies to this topic

[Frank Merton]

If we are being visited, it's being kept secret.  As the message above points out, it is unlikely that this is a government secret: governments are just no good at keeping stuff that important secret.

So the aliens are hiding for some reason.  Are they afraid of us?  That seems preposterous.  Are they highly ethical beings who are concerned for our well being and so conceal themselves for our good?  That too seems preposterous.  Beings of such ethical standards would be compassionate and in here helping us with our diseases and poverty and so on.

I have to say that those who suppose we are being visited have a huge amount of explaining to do, and they have not done it successfully.  All they offer is a few glib rationalizations.

[Paxus]

Slave2Fate, on 04 February 2013 - 12:06 PM, said:

Both camps have their theories on that. Some skeptics think that since aliens have likely not been here then there would be little to no evidence to acquire, while some ETH'ers like to employ the super duper stealth technology argument or the infamous government cover up. Either way, the lack of verifiable evidence is a veritable thorn in the side of the ETH. On the other hand, if proof does exist, it will see the light of day eventually. I'm fairly certain that alien visitation isn't the kind of thing that can be kept secret for long, certainly not 60+ years.

I'd have to agree with your assesment!

[bison]

We have no experience in contacting civilizations on other worlds.  It seems unwise to insist that those who presumably have such experience follow what we imagine to be the correct ethical course in such matters. The option of allowing us grow on our own for a time, and to learn to care for ourselves, rather than swooping in and solving all our problems for us, making us dependent upon them may seem to extraterrestrials to be the superior ethical alternative.
The secret of an extraterrestrial presence at Earth has scarcely been kept for over sixty years. if it had been kept we wouldn't have as many indications of an extraterrestrial presence as we do. That we do not have what most of a scientific bent are inclined to accept as proof should not be too surprising. It is unlikely that Earth governments would be eager to tell all they know of such matters. It would be a dreadful admission for them to make, that a superior civilization can come and go, doing as it pleases on this planet, and we are powerless to prevent or control this. Extraterrestrials may allow the current ambiguous situation to continue, at least for the time being, for reasons suggested in the first paragraph.

Edited by bison, 04 February 2013 - 06:10 PM.

[psyche101]

bison, on 04 February 2013 - 06:07 PM, said:

We have no experience in contacting civilizations on other worlds.  

No, I agree, we do not, but if ET is here and colluding with the Government, than this stament must be wrong.

Is ET here, and in contact with higher ups? I say no, he is not, and if that is the case, the above stament rings true. Do you agree with this?

bison, on 04 February 2013 - 06:07 PM, said:

It seems unwise to insist that those who presumably have such experience follow what we imagine to be the correct ethical course in such matters.

Why would convergeant evolution be specific to this planet? Considering we are looking for "Life as we know it" on earth like worlds" it seems first contact might well be somewhat recognisable?

bison, on 04 February 2013 - 06:07 PM, said:

The option of allowing us grow on our own for a time, and to learn to care for ourselves, rather than swooping in and solving all our problems for us, making us dependent upon them may seem to extraterrestrials to be the superior ethical alternative.

And they might never have heard of us.

If this is the case, guidance would still be in order, if a benevolent species, they could at least point out some dead ends, and save us some time, if they are advanced and hostile, then the entire things does not make sense, as "they" would have no reason to hide. What is even a million primates going to against one pathogen in the atmosphere? Die and decompose.

bison, on 04 February 2013 - 06:07 PM, said:

The secret of an extraterrestrial presence at Earth has scarcely been kept for over sixty years. if it had been kept we wouldn't have as many indications of an extraterrestrial presence as we do.

We do not have indications on earth, we have some suspicions about space yet to be confirmed. I agree that there is real work on ET, but it has never been covered up. Sagan Drake Fermi, Hawking, Kaku, all of them are very open about ET life, always have been, and are at the very forefront of the phenomena. I am more of the opinion than ever that the military BS was just a bunch of war games.

bison, on 04 February 2013 - 06:07 PM, said:

That we do not have what most of a scientific bent are inclined to accept as proof should not be too surprising. It is unlikely that Earth governments would be eager to tell all they know of such matters. It would be a dreadful admission for them to make, that a superior civilization can come and go, doing as it pleases on this planet, and we are powerless to prevent or control this. Extraterrestrials may allow the current ambiguous situation to continue, at least for the time being, for reasons suggested in the first paragraph.

Because it is not proof, There is a definition of proof, and what has been presented as "ET evidence" does not cut the mustard. If we had proof, the Sagans, Hawkings and all other listed above would not be keeping it secret, and they would be over the moon to have something like that to study. What scientist does not want to announce "We have found Extra Terrestrial Life"?????? It's a history making statement. Did they hide exoplanets? the AH1 rock? the WOW! signal? Or anything that even might qualify as life??
Some Government would be over the moon to see the US in that position!!! And every one of them can monitor space.
No one country does it all. Exports are what this globe survives upon. We trade, and each country is better at something. Japan is known for high tech, America for big cars and cutting edge technology, Germany for machinery, and Australia for Athletes . We are used to someone being better at something, that is how we roll.

Edited by psyche101, 05 February 2013 - 05:04 AM.

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

psyche101, on 04 February 2013 - 09:27 AM, said:

Again, yes.



You have protested many times before, you have never covered off on the subject. You said that "they" Could hide in the asteroid field, but you have been shown that's not doable because we analyse it and scan it all the time. A mothership has to have a significant power signature. If it runs of fairy dust, and it only 6 inches across, I'll say OK to that one. You also claim magical cloaking tech, which they do not seem to use when spotted hovering over Belgium or the Whitehouse, which is apparently a ridiculous thing for black ops to do, but just fine for aliens to do, that have been doing their darndest to hide from us for over 60 years. Not much logic in there LV.

I think the closest you have come is plagiarising the idea of self replicating Robots. which is I agree a plausible concept, but no proof we have even seen anything like it, and the intelligence you imply above for secrecy does not factor to Robots. And I do not approve of re-writing what every small records we do have just to shoehorn ET into the picture. I really do not understand what that is supposed to accomplish.



We are talking first contact are we not? How is spying contact? Do you put any rationale behind your proposals lately?

And not, it is not anthropomorphic, it is logical. I said signal all the time, and not because of your spy on us "Prime Directive" from Star Trek, that the captains broke every other week anyway!!! So much for the Prime Bloody Directive!!!

You're doing it again. I don't know whether you do do it deliberately. (Just like the 'robots' at Rosewell that you keep insisting I'm talking about). I'm not talking about anything to do with Star trek. I'm talking about pricniples of scientific research, and a principle of scientific research is that you don't interfere with what you're studying, since that will inevitably influence what you're studying.

Quote

Of the top of my head, some points "for" communications:

Little power required.
Failure is a small setback
No risk to life
No risk to equipment (as in you do not have to build a billion dollar spaceship to get there)
Travel at the speed of light
Small resources required
No risk to environments
Any hostile contact can be considered at a distance
Fast
Easy to build
Little training required
First contact could be initiated with many worlds at once, which would otherwise literally take centuries to reach by ship - so volume
Time is not a factor. You can send a signal that take 100 years to reach it's destination, and wait for a reply.


Now there is over a dozen points, just straight up. What advantages does space travel provide over and above this?

Are you talking, just so we can get this straight, about specifically communicating with Earth, or a generic kind of "is anyone out there?" signal that they'd send out in all directions in case some likely planets hear it?(Like the WoW signal, perhaps). That might be a way to intiate contact if you wanted to specifically contact new worlds & new civilisations, but if you were primarily interested in exploring and studying new planets for their own interest, then nothing would beat going there and seeing for yourself, would it? They could just ask us to provide them with everything we know, as you've suggested before? No, because they'd be studying us along with everything else. And you wouldn't do that very objectively if you estbalished a 'special relationship' with them, would it? That wouldn't be objective.

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

And I just noticed you said
I think the closest you have come is plagiarising the idea of self replicating Robots
Well, that's just downright rude. I don't know why you get so angry and upset.

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

In fact, there's no point trying to talk to you any more, because you deliberately misunderstand everything I'm trying to say, accuse me of plagrirising, and keep on endlessly acbout Star trek and spaceships full of Robots. I'm sure you're just doing it deliberately.

[psyche101]

Lord Vetinari, on 05 February 2013 - 08:25 AM, said:

You're doing it again. I don't know whether you do do it deliberately. (Just like the 'robots' at Rosewell that you keep insisting I'm talking about). I'm not talking about anything to do with Star trek. I'm talking about pricniples of scientific research, and a principle of scientific research is that you don't interfere with what you're studying, since that will inevitably influence what you're studying.

So please, inform me, where is the prime directive listed as a scientific principal/ It does not exist outside of Star Trek!

Your doing it again. You are making stuff up, and quoting it as fact. It's not. I pointed out that our history does not show spying on creatures that are intelligent. Never. Only behavioural patterns are studied in stealth, and that is because we cannot talk to them. What is the precedent for a prime directive?

Lord Vetinari, on 05 February 2013 - 08:25 AM, said:

Are you talking, just so we can get this straight, about specifically communicating with Earth, or a generic kind of "is anyone out there?" signal that they'd send out in all directions in case some likely planets hear it?(Like the WoW signal, perhaps). That might be a way to intiate contact if you wanted to specifically contact new worlds & new civilisations, but if you were primarily interested in exploring and studying new planets for their own interest, then nothing would beat going there and seeing for yourself, would it? They could just ask us to provide them with everything we know, as you've suggested before? No, because they'd be studying us along with everything else. And you wouldn't do that very objectively if you estbalished a 'special relationship' with them, would it? That wouldn't be objective.

I am talking about contact with an alien species, nothing more, nothing less. The WOW! signal would be a good way of scanning for other people, but the best way to go would be to try and detect life via a Kepler style operation and send out a directed signal constantly.

If you were exploring new uninhabited planets, or violent planets, then you would use a Robot, if the planet exhibited smething interesting enough to expend such resources upon. Like we have with Mars. But mich information can be gathered from a distance, I imagine it would have to be something intensely curious to expend so much resource upon.

[psyche101]

Lord Vetinari, on 05 February 2013 - 08:26 AM, said:

And I just noticed you said
I think the closest you have come is plagiarising the idea of self replicating Robots
Well, that's just downright rude. I don't know why you get so angry and upset.

Why do you think I am angry and upset? Good God man you are sensitive! I am not upset. I am just pointing it out. Heck, I personally have given you links to Von Nueman probes way back, and do not tell me  you have never heard this:

Quote

History of the concept
The general concept of artificial machines capable of producing copies of themselves dates back at least several hundred years. An early reference is an anecdote regarding the philosopher René Descartes, who suggested to Queen Christina of Sweden that the human body could be regarded as a machine; she responded by pointing to a clock and ordering "see to it that it reproduces offspring."^[5] Several other variations on this anecdotal response also exist. Samuel Butler proposed in his 1872 novel Erewhon that machines were already capable of reproducing themselves but it was man who made them do so,^[6] and added that "machines which reproduce machinery do not reproduce machines after their own kind".^[7]
In 1802 William Paley formulated the first known teleological argument depicting machines producing other machines,^[8] suggesting that the question of who originally made a watch was rendered moot if it were demonstrated that the watch was able to manufacture a copy of itself.^[9] Scientific study of self-reproducing machines was anticipated by John Bernal as early as 1929^[10] and by mathematicians such as Stephen Kleene who began developing recursion theory in the 1930s.^[11] Much of this latter work was motivated by interest in information processing and algorithms rather than physical implementation of such a system, however.

LINK


Come off of it. Are you trying to tell me you came up with self replicating robot's yourself??????

[psyche101]

Lord Vetinari, on 05 February 2013 - 08:29 AM, said:

In fact, there's no point trying to talk to you any more, because you deliberately misunderstand everything I'm trying to say, accuse me of plagrirising, and keep on endlessly acbout Star trek and spaceships full of Robots. I'm sure you're just doing it deliberately.

I see that as a 2 way street, I think it is your deliberately avoiding reading my posts, and just repeating yourself, and then getting upset when I answer your repeat reply. How many times must we go over the C3PO thing? How many times have I given you Alien Planet as an example of your proposed concept, and how many times have you agreed with that as an example, only to pull this same crap again? How many times do I have to tell you that it is not the type of robot that is not working out here, it's the simple fact that the robot idea is not supported by any account, or any evidence? No tech remember. That is pretty important stuff in machinery not to mention you feel we can just re-write each and every account, none of which speak of anything remotely robotic. We have some bendy metal, that is it. How is it possible that you keep missing this most basic, and most important information?????? That no tech exists  and no accounts match you claim????

I simply do not agree with throwing every single scrap of information about a case in the bin, and starting with imagination. Never have, and you know that, so why keep trying to get me to do that??