15 replies to this topic

[Persia]

Why have we never found evidence of extraterrestrial probes in our universe? A new study suggest that, from a mathematical point of view, we have not looked in enough places.

http://www.futurity....-in-vast-space/

[Anotheryahoo]

This is a false premise based on how primitive man gets to space. A interstellar traveling species is going to be way way more efficient 1st of all and not throwing away say 99% of the material to put that 1% into space like we do. A waste of time. Sort of like looking for radio signals when light speed or better is needed to travel the stars. If they want to find aliens they need to have OPEN investigations of the best ufo cases ever recorded, they wont or refuse to do that and there are plenty that point elsewhere..

Edited by Anotheryahoo, 10 November 2011 - 01:38 PM.

[booNyzarC]

Anotheryahoo, on 10 November 2011 - 01:38 PM, said:

This is a false premise based on how primitive man gets to space. A interstellar traveling species is going to be way way more efficient 1st of all and not throwing away say 99% of the material to put that 1% into space like we do. A waste of time. Sort of like looking for radio signals when light speed or better is needed to travel the stars. If they want to find aliens they need to have OPEN investigations of the best ufo cases ever recorded, they wont or refuse to do that and there are plenty that point elsewhere..

What, pray tell, are the best ufo cases ever recorded?  And why exactly do you associate UFO cases with ET?

[TheMcGuffin]

Anotheryahoo, on 10 November 2011 - 01:38 PM, said:

This is a false premise based on how primitive man gets to space. A interstellar traveling species is going to be way way more efficient 1st of all and not throwing away say 99% of the material to put that 1% into space like we do. A waste of time. Sort of like looking for radio signals when light speed or better is needed to travel the stars. If they want to find aliens they need to have OPEN investigations of the best ufo cases ever recorded, they wont or refuse to do that and there are plenty that point elsewhere..

That's already been done by the U.S. government--and others--in their own UFO investigations, going back to the 1940s.  That's why I don't really take 'skeptics' very seriously, because I know that has been done, even though the general public hasn't been given ALL this information--just some.

General James Doolittle, one of the smartest officers in the US military, was asked to look into this during World War II and concluding that the ET was already here and had been for a long time.  So did many other military officers like MacArthur and the head of the Air Force, Nathan Twining.  This is just a fact, and we have some of the evidence that led them to reach these conclusions long ago.  


As to why this subject was classified even more highly than the hydrogen bomb right from the start, I think I know why and have given some evidence to prove it--the possibility that some of the ETs were hostile.  They certainly spent a lot of time chasing and shooting at them in any case.

[None of the above]

LMAO!! Oh my aching sides, what a colossal waste of money this 'search' would be.

[BrandOfAmber]

Here we go again with booNyzarC pretending as if he/she has 'just stumbled across this whole, UFO thing...'

Ridiculous.  You know darn well of the Battle of LA, for example.  And if you don't by now it's clearly out of willful ignorance.  You've been directed to it repeatedly.

Why associate such cases with ET?  It's called Occam's razor, wherein the simplest solution is likely the correct one.  

I disagree with Anotheryahoo's statement here too, but seriously booNyzarC?  Do you take us all for idiots?

@Anotheryahoo - I respectfully disagree.  I'm unaware of any model of development for a sentient species that doesn't have that species originate 'On-World'.  This doesn't necessarily mean 'On-Earth' however intelligent species as we understand them develop on planetary environments.  

The article assumes that a species has visited Earth, and would then leave an un-manned probe to continue watching us.  That probe would transmit data to the visiting species.

This concept was first proposed (to my knowledge) as a Von Neumann probe.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-replicating_spacecraft

A probe like this would rest (in my opinion) however not in near earth orbit (where our 'junk' is) but in a stationary La Grange point, where it would not need to adjust its orbit, and would remain 'gravitationally locked' with the Earth-Moon system.

These are known points, and easily searchable.  

-Brand of Amber

[Vance665]

BrandOfAmber, on 10 November 2011 - 08:03 PM, said:

Why associate such cases with ET?  It's called Occam's razor, wherein the simplest solution is likely the correct one.  

So ETs traveling unknown light years across space just to do a few random flybys and not bother to make contact is simpler than a few people misidentifying what they saw? The only way this would make sense is if you embrace ET evidence that can't be proven. If you would only judge ETs based on the facts, the simplest solution is they are not here.

[Anotheryahoo]

brandofamber's point of the Lagrange point doesnt hold water, your thinking in Earthmans terms who needs to get to orbital velocity or sit in these points. A true space faring race wouldnt be bothered with orbit or this gravitational point because it would have developed a propulsion system that can go anywhere at will. They wouldnt need to orbit or sit a Lagrange point.
To deny every single well documented case that has multiple witness,radar observation and photographic evidence with police or military interaction is just denial.

[lost_shaman]

Anotheryahoo, on 10 November 2011 - 01:38 PM, said:

Sort of like looking for radio signals when light speed or better is needed to travel the stars.

Err... Because of Time Dilation you never need to exceed light speed to get anywhere in the Universe.

[zoser]

Persia, on 10 November 2011 - 11:31 AM, said:

Why have we never found evidence of extraterrestrial probes in our universe? A new study suggest that, from a mathematical point of view, we have not looked in enough places.

http://www.futurity....-in-vast-space/

What evidence is there that they are hiding?  The evidence is that they can come and go as they please in our air space; is it really far fetched that they are mingling with the population too?

[lost_shaman]

BrandOfAmber, on 10 November 2011 - 08:03 PM, said:

Here we go again with booNyzarC pretending as if he/she has 'just stumbled across this whole, UFO thing...'

Ridiculous.  You know darn well of the Battle of LA, for example.  And if you don't by now it's clearly out of willful ignorance.  You've been directed to it repeatedly.

And booN, myself and others discussed the case in-depth on the BE threads.

BrandOfAmber, on 10 November 2011 - 08:03 PM, said:

Why associate such cases with ET?  It's called Occam's razor, wherein the simplest solution is likely the correct one.  

That's not what Occam's razor says. It says when you have two hypotheses that equally explain an observation then the one with the least number of entities introduced is likely the correct hypothesis, but it's just a rule of thumb and isn't always correct.

[ohio state buckeyes]

Here a story from discovery.com http://news.discover...cts-111109.html

Its nice to see discovery treat the idea with some respect.

[Super_Sasquatch]

There's probably all kinds of things "hiding" in deep space that we can't see. Nothing would surprise me.

[psyche101]

BrandOfAmber, on 10 November 2011 - 08:03 PM, said:

Here we go again with booNyzarC pretending as if he/she has 'just stumbled across this whole, UFO thing...'

Ridiculous.  You know darn well of the Battle of LA, for example.  And if you don't by now it's clearly out of willful ignorance.  You've been directed to it repeatedly.

Are you saying booN has no right to express an opposing opinion in a discussion forum? Where do you get of? You are ignorant of the in depth evaluations of the BOLA case, that booN has already discussed extensively, and it is not a good case for ET at all.

BrandOfAmber, on 10 November 2011 - 08:03 PM, said:

Why associate such cases with ET?  It's called Occam's razor, wherein the simplest solution is likely the correct one.  

Yet it is rarely a solution at all, it is a guess. What case has been resolved by the notion of the ETH? And why do all cases require so much construction, yet still fail to identify definitive evidence?

BrandOfAmber, on 10 November 2011 - 08:03 PM, said:

I disagree with Anotheryahoo's statement here too, but seriously booNyzarC?  Do you take us all for idiots?

@Anotheryahoo - I respectfully disagree.  I'm unaware of any model of development for a sentient species that doesn't have that species originate 'On-World'.  This doesn't necessarily mean 'On-Earth' however intelligent species as we understand them develop on planetary environments.  

The article assumes that a species has visited Earth, and would then leave an un-manned probe to continue watching us.  That probe would transmit data to the visiting species.

This concept was first proposed (to my knowledge) as a Von Neumann probe.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-replicating_spacecraft

A probe like this would rest (in my opinion) however not in near earth orbit (where our 'junk' is) but in a stationary La Grange point, where it would not need to adjust its orbit, and would remain 'gravitationally locked' with the Earth-Moon system.

These are known points, and easily searchable.  

-Brand of Amber

And yet we have known about La Grange points since the late 1700's and they have been studied extensively. Nothing hiding there.

Home On Lagrange

[booNyzarC]

BrandOfAmber, on 10 November 2011 - 08:03 PM, said:

Here we go again with booNyzarC pretending as if he/she has 'just stumbled across this whole, UFO thing...'

Excuse me?  Where on earth did this come from?  Where exactly did I pretend anything at all?  Point out anywhere that I've done that either in this thread or elsewhere.

BrandOfAmber, on 10 November 2011 - 08:03 PM, said:

Ridiculous.  You know darn well of the Battle of LA, for example.  And if you don't by now it's clearly out of willful ignorance.  You've been directed to it repeatedly.

I know darn well about a lot of cases.  I asked Anotheryahoo which cases he or she thought were the best ufo cases ever recorded.  Do you have a problem with me asking other members to clarify what they mean when they make a statement?

By the way, the Battle of LA isn't all that impressive as far as evidence for ET is concerned in my opinion.  And yes, I've read your ATS thread.

BrandOfAmber, on 10 November 2011 - 08:03 PM, said:

Why associate such cases with ET?  It's called Occam's razor, wherein the simplest solution is likely the correct one.  

Since when has ET been the simplest solution to any problem?  Perhaps it is for the simple minded, but not for those who are grounded in reality.

Why isn't it the simplest solution you might ask?  Oh, I dunno... maybe because there isn't even the slightest shred of evidence that aliens exist let alone that they've paid us a visit.  Don't get me wrong, I am of the opinion that alien life exists somewhere out there, but there isn't anything concrete that we can point to and say "yep, that is proof positive for aliens."  If there is such proof, please do point it out.

BrandOfAmber, on 10 November 2011 - 08:03 PM, said:

I disagree with Anotheryahoo's statement here too, but seriously booNyzarC?  Do you take us all for idiots?

I don't take everyone for idiots, no.  In fact, I consider very few people to be idiots.

That being said, there are a handful of people who seemingly go out of their way to prove themselves as such.