73 replies to this topic

[Wookietim]

scowl, on 07 February 2012 - 04:57 PM, said:

But if you want to apply the ET hypothesis to this case, you must take it to its conclusion: aliens are traveling across the galaxy to harass small planes then fly away.

Unless aliens are teenage pranksters, this makes no sense.

It doesn't stop there. One has to posit some for of interstellar travel using a new form of physics... and one has to assume a technology that is capable of picking the Earth out of the vastness of space in order to travel to it...

In other words, the number of "Well, here is how they do it - I am grabbing it out of my butt" explanations multiply the more you look at it. It's almost easier and more elegant to suggest other dimensions or time travel or an advanced race on earth than it is to keep adding more and more randomly suggested technology to the mix...

[Sky Scanner]

Wookietim, on 06 February 2012 - 10:36 PM, said:

What if we look at the data and try to connect the pieces of the puzzle into whatever picture they result in rather than trying to make the picture we decide on first?

That is what I was suggesting, that's my angle on it anyway....but be prepared because you might just end up with thousands upon thousands of pictures!

Wookietim, on 06 February 2012 - 10:36 PM, said:

Let's face it - if we decide that ETH is correct then we have to discount anything that doesn't represent physical spaceships or we need to create more and more wild technologies just to incorporate everything...

I don't agree with this, you don't (well I wouldn't anyway) approach any case from the stand point of fathoming if the technology needed is possible....and even if you could determine that such a technology is possible it still adds no weight whatsoever to any case being extraterrestrial in origin. Infact, you're more likely to lead yourself down a blind alley that way.

[Sky Scanner]

Wookietim, on 07 February 2012 - 05:07 PM, said:

It's almost easier and more elegant to suggest other dimensions or time travel or an advanced race on earth than it is to keep adding more and more randomly suggested technology to the mix...

No it's not, at all, what is required to jump from one hypothetical dimension to another then? you would need to bring totally unknown and fabricated technology into this either way....similarly with time travel, infact, that would be even harder to use as an example...what technology are you going to mention to explain time travel and all it's associated conundrums.....i'd go with the idea of traversing space over vast distances in a heart beat rather then time travel...

[Wookietim]

The Sky Scanner, on 07 February 2012 - 05:14 PM, said:

I don't agree with this, you don't (well I wouldn't anyway) approach any case from the stand point of fathoming if the technology needed is possible....and even if you could determine that such a technology is possible it still adds no weight whatsoever to any case being extraterrestrial in origin. Infact, you're more likely to lead yourself down a blind alley that way.

Here's the thing though - in order to support the ETH one has to constantly just produce new possible technology out of thin air. Space travel, sensing which planet to go to, how to create craft to maneuver in space as well as in an atmosphere, fuel, food, medicine to protect against disease that is here but not on the home planet... Those are just things I can think of off the top of my head...

When I see a theory that requires more and more suppositions in order to buttress it, I tend to wonder if perhaps it is a rather invalid theory.

[Sky Scanner]

Wookietim, on 07 February 2012 - 05:18 PM, said:

Here's the thing though - in order to support the ETH one has to constantly just produce new possible technology out of thin air. Space travel, sensing which planet to go to, how to create craft to maneuver in space as well as in an atmosphere, fuel, food, medicine to protect against disease that is here but not on the home planet... Those are just things I can think of off the top of my head...

When I see a theory that requires more and more suppositions in order to buttress it, I tend to wonder if perhaps it is a rather invalid theory.

If somebody reported a new type of animal, in a certain part of the world, you wouldn't start your investigation off from looking at the likely hood of an animal living there, it's habits, what it eats, etc...you start with finding out if it exists first, and you do that by accessing reports, and going to find it. We're gradually looking for it in out space exploration, and accessing cases....the idea it might not be happening on the grounds you have listed don't resonate with me. We're either being visited or we're not, only then can we decide what questions are valid and which aren't....fuel, food, medicine, there is nothing to say that they are even needed yet.e

[Wookietim]

The Sky Scanner, on 07 February 2012 - 05:17 PM, said:

No it's not, at all, what is required to jump from one hypothetical dimension to another then? you would need to bring totally unknown and fabricated technology into this either way....similarly with time travel, infact, that would be even harder to use as an example...what technology are you going to mention to explain time travel and all it's associated conundrums.....i'd go with the idea of traversing space over vast distances in a heart beat rather then time travel...

Actually, we have evidence of the concept of other universes right now (There is roughly a nine billion light year rip in our universe that physicists say can only be explained by a collision with another universe. I tried following the logic and my eyes crossed so I am just taking their words for it). So we have some evidence that other universes not only exist but that they can physically interact with our own.

There is evidence (On the quantum level) that we can send sub-atomic particles between them. So we have evidence that travel between them might be possible.

And we have math that tells us that there are all kinds of this stuff going on in nature. I have to admit - I can't follow the math personally, but the math comes from people who know what they are talking about so I will just hit the "I believe" button that the math is right.

So, actually, there is no reason to discount that idea out of hand in favor of another theory that requires things we have no actual evidence for and require new technology and laws of physics to be created just to buttress...

[Wookietim]

The Sky Scanner, on 07 February 2012 - 05:24 PM, said:

If somebody reported a new type of animal, in a certain part of the world, you wouldn't start your investigation off from looking at the likely hood of an animal living there, it's habits, what it eats, etc...you start with finding out if it exists first, and you do that by accessing reports, and going to find it. We're gradually looking for it in out space exploration, and accessing cases....the idea it might not be happening on the grounds you have listed don't resonate with me. We're either being visited or we're not, only then can we decide what questions are valid and which aren't....fuel, food, medicine, there is nothing to say that they are even needed yet.e

But, to extend your example, if we found a new animal in the wild then the people who support the ETH would say "Well, we found it in siberia so it must have somehow created a raft that floated it there from madagascar, then developed a set of technologies to fight off the diseases it had no resistance to, then created a way to live in siberia... Don't tell me that it just developed in siberia!"

[Sky Scanner]

Wookietim, on 07 February 2012 - 05:26 PM, said:

Actually, we have evidence of the concept of other universes right now (There is roughly a nine billion light year rip in our universe that physicists say can only be explained by a collision with another universe. I tried following the logic and my eyes crossed so I am just taking their words for it). So we have some evidence that other universes not only exist but that they can physically interact with our own.

There is evidence (On the quantum level) that we can send sub-atomic particles between them. So we have evidence that travel between them might be possible.

And we have math that tells us that there are all kinds of this stuff going on in nature. I have to admit - I can't follow the math personally, but the math comes from people who know what they are talking about so I will just hit the "I believe" button that the math is right.

So, actually, there is no reason to discount that idea out of hand in favor of another theory that requires things we have no actual evidence for and require new technology and laws of physics to be created just to buttress...

But that's no different then saying we have a huge universe, with so many billions of galaxies, each containing so many billions of stars, each of which has an unknown number of planets orbiting it. With all 3 examples you still need advanced technology to make a leap with association to ufo sightings.

I think the first thing everyone should do, which you have (inadvertently) highlighted with your posts is we need to forget about opinions on origin from believers and sceptics alike. We don't know if any visiting ET has travelled 4 light years, 400,000 light years or popped over from one of the moons in our own solar system.

Making assumptions before we get started is what pigeon holes this subject into fringe elements.

[Wookietim]

The Sky Scanner, on 07 February 2012 - 05:42 PM, said:

But that's no different then saying we have a huge universe, with so many billions of galaxies, each containing so many billions of stars, each of which has an unknown number of planets orbiting it. With all 3 examples you still need advanced technology to make a leap with association to ufo sightings.

I think the first thing everyone should do, which you have (inadvertently) highlighted with your posts is we need to forget about opinions on origin from believers and sceptics alike. We don't know if any visiting ET has travelled 4 light years, 400,000 light years or popped over from one of the moons in our own solar system.

Making assumptions before we get started is what pigeon holes this subject into fringe elements.

Actually, it's not the same.

If you could possibly move between universes, the theory would be that you would go from one to another, but stay in the same relative spot. That would mean that the problem of finding where to go in a universe of billion of galaxies and trillions of planets is solved.

Furthermore, many times we see reports of UFO's the seem to appear and vanish at will. The ETH says that this must be because of a technology that was developed that is completely unrelated to the travel between stars. Thinking in terms of traveling between dimensions would say that we see that because of the travel technology. ETH requires two separate pieces of tech, multi-dimensional theory (MDT) only requires one.

ETH has the nagging problem of visiting a new planet with it's diseases that one might not have resistance to. MDT sidesteps that by suggesting that each dimension is close enough that it doesn't require entirely new bits of medicine.

In other words, we have one theory (ETH) that requires all kinds of supporting pieces of tech to be assumed and posited that, while might be possible someday (I won't say they are impossible), aren't within any form of logical possibility right now... the MDT requires only one bit of tech that is very much possible in theory and has been shown to sometimes seemingly happen in nature (for sub-atomic particles at least)...

[scowl]

Other problems with the ETH is that we have UFO flaps. A small geographical area will have a ton of UFO reports that suddenly end. Why would ETs pick some town or county to terrorize and then split?

Also decades of UFO reports have little consistency. Apparently hundreds of models of UFOs have graced our skies over the decades. Rarely have any distinctive details about these supposed spacecraft been repeated especially recently.

In the 50's and 60's flying saucers were almost always two plates stuck together with a transparent cupola on top so you could the aliens turning knobs and levers on consoles with blinking lights. They always had tripod landing gear. If the aliens popped out in their shiny uniforms to take samples or spook witnesses, they always came out of a door on the bottom, never a hatch on the top.

This classic model flying saucer was so common that it became a standard prop in every UFO movie and television series ("The Invaders" copied it exactly). The classic is now very rare. You rarely hear of aliens walking out of flying saucers any more. At least three fourths of alien reports are bedroom visitations these days.

[Wookietim]

scowl, on 07 February 2012 - 06:54 PM, said:

Other problems with the ETH is that we have UFO flaps. A small geographical area will have a ton of UFO reports that suddenly end. Why would ETs pick some town or county to terrorize and then split?

Also decades of UFO reports have little consistency. Apparently hundreds of models of UFOs have graced our skies over the decades. Rarely have any distinctive details about these supposed spacecraft been repeated especially recently.

In the 50's and 60's flying saucers were almost always two plates stuck together with a transparent cupola on top so you could the aliens turning knobs and levers on consoles with blinking lights. They always had tripod landing gear. If the aliens popped out in their shiny uniforms to take samples or spook witnesses, they always came out of a door on the bottom, never a hatch on the top.

This classic model flying saucer was so common that it became a standard prop in every UFO movie and television series ("The Invaders" copied it exactly). The classic is now very rare. You rarely hear of aliens walking out of flying saucers any more. At least three fourths of alien reports are bedroom visitations these days.

Perhaps a theory could be tossed out there that is even more interesting than aliens from another planet or dimension (To ne at least)...

What if UFO's, Ctyptids, Ghosts, whatever, are all just a bit of nature that has no form until a certain person perceives them? I don't know how to express this so this will be a less than useful post, but stay with me.

An area has some sort of formless energy floating in it, looking for a spark. A set of people come upon it, setting it off as a manifestation of what they sort of want to see (It might be UFO's in the sky, or Mothman on the ground or dead relatives wandering about) which leads to more people seeing exactly that in that area since they are then primed to want to see it and manifest it.

That explains UFO flaps...

[Sky Scanner]

Wookietim, on 07 February 2012 - 06:20 PM, said:

Actually, it's not the same.

If you could possibly move between universes, the theory would be that you would go from one to another, but stay in the same relative spot. That would mean that the problem of finding where to go in a universe of billion of galaxies and trillions of planets is solved.

Furthermore, many times we see reports of UFO's the seem to appear and vanish at will. The ETH says that this must be because of a technology that was developed that is completely unrelated to the travel between stars. Thinking in terms of traveling between dimensions would say that we see that because of the travel technology. ETH requires two separate pieces of tech, multi-dimensional theory (MDT) only requires one.

ETH has the nagging problem of visiting a new planet with it's diseases that one might not have resistance to. MDT sidesteps that by suggesting that each dimension is close enough that it doesn't require entirely new bits of medicine.

In other words, we have one theory (ETH) that requires all kinds of supporting pieces of tech to be assumed and posited that, while might be possible someday (I won't say they are impossible), aren't within any form of logical possibility right now... the MDT requires only one bit of tech that is very much possible in theory and has been shown to sometimes seemingly happen in nature (for sub-atomic particles at least)...

I think it is the same, but that's neither here nor there really, since i'm not arguing in favour of a particular theory, i'm arguing in favour of all theories...as I said, I think there are as many different answers to the ufo phenomena as there are reports...not to mention the aspect of forming a sighting personal only to the person experiencing it....kind of like the way people report all sorts of phenomena when in close contact to an strong EMF, but with a twist ...anyway, I won't ramble on about that as it's not what the thread is about....

I agree with your question, I agree partly in most of your points, our opinions part if you were suggesting one theory over another!

[vitruvian12]

Wookietim, on 07 February 2012 - 07:10 PM, said:

Perhaps a theory could be tossed out there that is even more interesting than aliens from another planet or dimension (To ne at least)...

What if UFO's, Ctyptids, Ghosts, whatever, are all just a bit of nature that has no form until a certain person perceives them? I don't know how to express this so this will be a less than useful post, but stay with me.

An area has some sort of formless energy floating in it, looking for a spark. A set of people come upon it, setting it off as a manifestation of what they sort of want to see (It might be UFO's in the sky, or Mothman on the ground or dead relatives wandering about) which leads to more people seeing exactly that in that area since they are then primed to want to see it and manifest it.

That explains UFO flaps...

somewhat similar to 'the sphere'

[Sky Scanner]

Wookietim, on 07 February 2012 - 07:10 PM, said:

An area has some sort of formless energy floating in it, looking for a spark. A set of people come upon it, setting it off as a manifestation of what they sort of want to see (It might be UFO's in the sky, or Mothman on the ground or dead relatives wandering about) which leads to more people seeing exactly that in that area since they are then primed to want to see it and manifest it.

That explains UFO flaps...

Look up Persingers God Helmet experiment, look up the fluctuations of magnetic fields on the planet, trace the ufo hotspots and areas of high religious belief....you might find something



..that said, i'm not arguing against the ETH either

[Wookietim]

vitruvian12, on 07 February 2012 - 07:17 PM, said:

somewhat similar to 'the sphere'

Never heard of it... Actually I think I did - isn't that the movie with Jamie Lee Curtis that every critic warned people away from?