Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
CT1993

Russan scientist crack crop circle code

125 posts in this topic

I may have missed something, but given we understand binary and so forth, there's nothing there to suggest it's "too advanced" for humans to have done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may have missed something, but given we understand binary and so forth, there's nothing there to suggest it's "too advanced" for humans to have done.

Humans can indeed make crop circles, and there is no denying this.

contact04_05.jpg

What humans currently can't demonstrate the ability to do are the following:


  • Modify the chemical/molecular structure of the crops like those consistent with what we'll call "authentic crop formation phenomena".



  • Leave no human evidence in the crop; IE: not breaking it and leaving footsteps, paths, etc.



  • Create massive and complex crop circles/formations in seconds or minutes as has been evidenced by eyewitness accounts and video recordings.


Edited by CT1993

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has there been evidence - no I'll qualify that, has there been impartial evidence - of that though?

I've heard of the microwave "planned cooking/wilting" in crop circles, but not "they've changed the molecular structure".

Oddly enough, there's scant evidence of that left by the human hoaxers either.

Those would be the "we drove past the field and then later that day we saw a crop circle" styled reports? That's dubious because when you look at something from one angle they look different from another angle. And video ... surely you have to admit, video evidence less reliable then "if the glove fits, you must acquit". And please, don't trot out the "but we've got video from before they had computers to manipulate the image" argument, because frankly they could manipulate Citizen Kane to show him kicking a kitten.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has there been evidence - no I'll qualify that, has there been impartial evidence - of that though?

I've heard of the microwave "planned cooking/wilting" in crop circles, but not "they've changed the molecular structure".

Oddly enough, there's scant evidence of that left by the human hoaxers either.

Those would be the "we drove past the field and then later that day we saw a crop circle" styled reports? That's dubious because when you look at something from one angle they look different from another angle. And video ... surely you have to admit, video evidence less reliable then "if the glove fits, you must acquit". And please, don't trot out the "but we've got video from before they had computers to manipulate the image" argument, because frankly they could manipulate Citizen Kane to show him kicking a kitten.

Dude do the research instead of saying "well this COULD happen" seriously look up on google earth those coordinates from the day before then the next day noone could do this in merly one night it sounds to me your pulling stuff out of your ****

here this guy has actually done research regarding this happening give it a read then get back at me

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/vida_alien/alien_contact04.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hello here is an explenation on how they work this code

By all means of respect, but do you just copy/paste from some fringe web site without really looking into what they actually say? The big font is quite the giveaway unless you have a purpose with it. I took the liberty of making it smaller and more readable.

Binary can represent many forms of data, CPU command codes, pixel color information, music data etc etc. All data goes through the CPU (and other logic circuits) as on and off switches, which we represent as 0s and 1s, because it’s simpler than writing off,on,off,off etc.

Binary is but one representation of data. It happened to be what we are using for computers. But that will probably change.

We sent them a message in binary, because it’s the simplest way to represent simple data in a radio transmission, and to be recognized as a uniform data stream (square wave of consistent frequency) so if they were to reply, would they not reply in binary also?

At the time, yes, it was the simplest. However, it should be noted that digital signals never are, they are all analog.

So therefore, they know we understand binary, and if they want to encode text in their designs, without actually writing the text,

That is quite an assumption. Chances are that if they are much more advanced than us, binary is a relic for them and they use something much more sophisticated. Or just something else.

ASCII is the simplest standard to use

For us, yes. ASCII was "invented" in the childhood of computers here on Earth. It's anybody's guess what ET would be using.

For those who wish to understand how 0s and 1s could possibly be stored as numbers, here’s how it works:

11111111 – 00000000 (255-0)

Each digit position corresponds to a power of 2. Binary is a base 2 number system. Two digits, 0 or 1.

From left to right, each position represents a single value:

7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 <– bit position (8 bits in 1 byte (position=exponent of base 2))

2^7,2^6,2^5,2^4,2^3,2^2,2^1,2^0 <– value it represents (if it is numercial data)

^ represents to the power of, or the exponent

these values then represent:

128,64,32,16,8,4,2,1

Using the above numbers, we can create any number between 0 and 255. Think, if 1, include the value represented by this bit position, or 0 don't include the number represented by this bit position, then add all the numbers that are included to get the decimal value. Seems complicated, but actually it shows a lot of data can be represented as 0s and 1s. CPUs only understand on or off switches, two states, base 2 is binary. All data has to be encoded as binary for the CPU to work with it. Hence the need for the conversion so that the data may be translated to something more meaningful.

11111111=255, because 128+64+32+16+8+4+2+1 = 255

Notice in the image I posted: http://www.ufo-blogg...inary-code.html

that all the bytes (groups of 8 bits) are separated by a space to distinguish each byte. And also, each byte of binary data always starts with a 0, so therefore, in the highest bit position, we don't include 128 in any, so all values are less than this. As they are on the ASCII table.

So here's each letter as decimal and binary:

01010000 = 80 = P

01000101 = 69 = E

01000001 = 65 = A

01000011 = 67 = C

01000101 = 69 = E

Yes, that is what we currently use. What if they use a code where a "bit" could have many states. Again, you are without critique projecting our representation of data onto ET.

Like most things mathematical, it probably seems complex the first time you learn it, but like anything it's easy when you KNOW how To learn = to know = to become easier

So for P, lets add up the numbers represented by the bit positions that are 1's to get the number 80, and then the letter P:

01010000, easy, just two numbers to add, 64 and 16 = 80. This could represent any data, or just be completely random. But if we decode each letter using the ASCII chart, and we get a word, or in the case of the alien face and disc, does that show randomness or structured information?

You are assuming that we can decode what ET would be sending us, if they ever do. How would you decipher Korean without a dictionary, and that would be a language originating from your own species?

In the case of the alien holding the disc, the alien face could be encoded to binary data also, but perhaps that picture is already there to show the data on the disc (because there's so much of it) isn't picture data.

Again, who knows what ET would make out of the data.

The more we try to decode with ASCII, the more we see this is what is intended as it is anything but random. That we could make all these words by coincidence is not highly improbable, but practically impossible.

What? This is pure nonsense. If you cannot remove yourself from what we use as data representation here on Earth and realize that ET would most assuredly use something differently, you will be fooling yourself.

Therefore we can be more sure it is actually text data the more we decode it, the more it becomes meaningful and demonstrates a structure.

No, you are simply fooling yourself.

For a beginner, this may seem very complicated process, but really it's not, especially when you use windows calculator to convert binary to decimal values which represent real letters of our alphabet via the ASCII table.

The conversion to decimal is only necessary to make it easier to see which letter is represented by the binary data, we could include the binary data next to each character on the ASCII table, but it's much easier for us to know we have the right character if we convert to decimal first.

Just to compare, our base 10 number system has powers of 10 as 'digit' positions:

1*10^2,2*10^1,5*10^0 = 125 decimal (dec=10,bi=2)

remember very early math lessons, hundreds, tens, units just to show how any number in our base 10 number system can be similarly represented by it's base, position and in this case the multiplier of that position, which we represent with digits 0-9 in each position.

Notice we call it a digit position, and not a bit position. Bit actually stands for Binary digIT. That being 0 or 1.

Anyway, hope it helps those of you who do wish to understand the simplicity of this encoding, and why they use the ASCII standard. It is a simple process understood by many, and hopefully in a while, once you grasp the concept, by even a few more

No, it is very simple. The difficult part, apparently, is the realization that what representation we use is most assuredly vastly different from what ET would using.

So, by all means of respect, but you are that naive?

Cheers,

Badeskov

Edited for clarification.

Edited by badeskov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Badeskov, your up. :D

:P

You could have done this one.... :P

*passes the beer to Hazzard*

Hey! What about me?!?!

Cheers,

Badeskov

Edited by badeskov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Humans can indeed make crop circles, and there is no denying this.

contact04_05.jpg

Yes, they can. Very sophisticated ones at that. You have no idea how much effort crop circle makers actually put into this, do you?

What humans currently can't demonstrate the ability to do are the following:


  • Modify the chemical/molecular structure of the crops like those consistent with what we'll call "authentic crop formation phenomena".

No evidence of this, if otherwise please reference.


  • Leave no human evidence in the crop; IE: not breaking it and leaving footsteps, paths, etc.

Oh, but they can if you are careful. I am guessing that you have never been at a farm before. I didn't grow up on a farm, but my family was one of farmers and I spent many a summer vacation on farms.


  • Create massive and complex crop circles/formations in seconds or minutes as has been evidenced by eyewitness accounts and video recordings.

Please do reference. This I think is either completely made up on your behalf or uncritically copy/pasted from your favourite fringe web site.

Cheers,

Badeskov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What Badeskov`s trying to say Is WHere`s The Beef !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By all means of respect, but do you just copy/paste from some fringe web site without really looking into what they actually say? The big font is quite the giveaway unless you have a purpose with it. I took the liberty of making it smaller and more readable.

And yes i did copy and post this information because someones asked me too and since i do not know much about how binary works and seen someone else explaining it in detail i copy/pasted it. I also made the font bigger to make it easier to read

Binary is but one representation of data. It happened to be what we are using for computers. But that will probably change.

And this relates to the information how?

At the time, yes, it was the simplest. However, it should be noted that digital signals never are, they are all analog.

Again how is this even relavent?

That is quite an assumption. Chances are that if they are much more advanced than us, binary is a relic for them and they use something much more sophisticated. Or just something else.

Yes it is obviously a "relic" to how advanced they are but do you think they are going to code a message in there Advanced ways of coding to try and tell us something? no they would not because they want us to be able to decode it therefor using the most basic system possible or the exact same one we used to send the message.

For us, yes. ASCII was "invented" in the childhood of computers here on Earth. It's anybody's guess what ET would be using.

yes they would be using highly mathmaticle ways of computing, but AGAIN they would use the easiest one for us to understand. i don't see how i even have to explain this.

Yes, that is what we currently use. What if they use a code where a "bit" could have many states. Again, you are without critique projecting our representation of data onto ET.

well maybe they could have a code where a "bit" could have many states but as you should know information is universal so what we know as a code would be there same anywhere in the universe no matter how basic. so it's not like they wouldn't have any idea of what our bits mean. you gotta give them the benifit of the doubt i mean they are highly advanced so much so that they probobly already have protocols in place for this type of thing because they probobly did this type of thing many times over.

You are assuming that we can decode what ET would be sending us, if they ever do. How would you decipher Korean without a dictionary, and that would be a language originating from your own species?

well i don't think an ET would send us a code in there own laguage i mean what would be the point, and since we sent the code in english they would reply in english so we could decode it

Again, who knows what ET would make out of the data.

well we know that ET's know our form of data because they developed it most likely many centurys ago. so that all we need to know anyways.

What? This is pure nonsense. If you cannot remove yourself from what we use as data representation here on Earth and realize that ET would most assuredly use something differently, you will be fooling yourself.

This is rediculous how can you call this pure nonesence, its anything BUT pure nonsense it Pure Fact

No, you are simply fooling yourself.

Again Pure fact and i don't think you have anyway of proving it otherwise so you say im fooling myself.... weak very weak badeskov

No, it is very simple. The difficult part, apparently, is the realization that what representation we use is most assuredly vastly different from what ET would using.

So, by all means of respect, but you are that naive?

Cheers,

Badeskov

Edited for clarification.

Are you serious with this reply misqouting and all i had respect for you as a skeptic but now i have little to none this is QUALITY information being stated here

Also sorry for reply in this way i do not know how to properly work this replying to mini qoutes thing so i made your text underlined and my reply's with bigger font

Edited by CT1993

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote

The more we try to decode with ASCII, the more we see this is what is intended as it is anything but random. That we could make all these words by coincidence is not highly improbable, but practically impossible.

What? This is pure nonsense. If you cannot remove yourself from what we use as data representation here on Earth and realize that ET would most assuredly use something differently, you will be fooling yourself.

This is what got me as arrogent. Do you even understand what is being said here they are saying once they realized that using ASCII the structure is anythign BUT Random. And that making words form with this decoding proccess without them doing it on purpose is not only improbobly BUT NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE

Quote

Therefore we can be more sure it is actually text data the more we decode it, the more it becomes meaningful and demonstrates a structure.

No, you are simply fooling yourself.

AGAIN as they figured out that words are being formed and not only words sentances are being formed that make sence, it demonstrated they are on the right path. and there was a structural process involved ment for US to decode.

im sorry but by saying "you are simply fooling yourself" Will NOT hold up against this, this was done with computers by professionals and it wasn't done right away people had to figure out it was binary then use ASCII to see what happens once they seen words form then sentaces they finally decoded a message and it was almost luck that they figured it out but it happend and theres no denying that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:P

You could have done this one.... :P

Hey! What about me?!?!

Cheers,

Badeskov

Not while your typing.. :D

drink and typing is bad for your posts :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not while your typing.. :D

drink and typing is bad for your posts :P

Mate, a drink enhances my ability to artisticly vocalize my opinion....:-P

Cheers,

Badeskov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think i rest my case seeing as how badeskov isn't not responding

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think i rest my case seeing as how badeskov isn't not responding

Your case is self defeating, but I will still take the time to address your argument nonetheless. But since I am on business travels, I will wait till I am on my laptop - don't have the patience for long posts on my phone.

Cheers,

Badeskov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no alien code.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you serious with this reply misqouting and all i had respect for you as a skeptic but now i have little to none this is QUALITY information being stated here

Also sorry for reply in this way i do not know how to properly work this replying to mini qoutes thing so i made your text underlined and my reply's with bigger font

Don't worry about misquoting; it's common skeptic's strategy here. Another favourite one is if they don't have any material or insight to challenge the issue directly they will do a character attack on the person that wrote the original hypothesis.

If that fails they attack you even to the point of using foul language. Anything goes really with them. That's why most people come and go after only a short while here.

Any way to help you.

When you press 'quote' to do a reply , insert the characters /quote (but use square brackets) after the first sentence that you wish to respond to.

Then look at the very top line of the other persons post. It looks like some long code in square brackets. Copy that and paste it after your first response at the beginning of the next sentence you wish to respond to. Finish your next sentence with another /quote (in square brackets). Then carry on like that. Easy. Just occasionally though it does not work with me. Sometimes it does sometimes not.

Keep up the good work btw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is further explination

Working from the middle, there are 5 groups of 8 circles which represent bit positions of 0s and 1s.

The circles without the line through the centre are 0s and think of the ones with the lines through them as digits of 1s. If this is binary, it’s the most logical way to represent it here. Nothing in the centre vs a line which looks like a 1 in the centre. Ignore the very centre circle, think of it as representing the origin, that is, where the message begins. It may have another meaning, who knows icon_smile.gif

So the first binary sequence is 01010000 = 80 decimal = ASCII character “P”

You can do this conversion easily with windows calculator set to binary mode:

For the latest version of windows calculator, set it to programmer mode. For earlier versions, set it to scientific (no programmer mode option available). Click the radio button (the dot) next to bin (binary). Once in binary mode type in the 0s and 1s then click the radio button on dec (decimal) to convert to decimal, then find the ASCII code chart to see which letter corresponds to the equivalent decimal number.

Here’s a quick ASCII chart I googled: http://www.asciitable.com/

Very very simple crop circle, 5 bytes (8 bits/byte), 5 letters that spell “PEACE”. Now you can verify this circle yourself icon_smile.gif

Very simple, very easy to see, hard to see it any other way really icon_smile.gif Unlike more complex circles and the varied ways to interpret them.

How and why the creators of the crop circle use ASCII? 8 bits per byte, 1s and 0s, which directly translate to alphanumeric characters used in English? Easily represented by circles which seems to be the easiest geometric shape for them to create? Or because it’s the only modern method understood by many to convert binary to text?

I’m sure the aliens could carve out the word PEACE in the ground if they can draw scan-line alien faces icon_smile.gif So why encode it? Perhaps to say there is more to these things than just art??? Would the word peace on the field look too much like a human created it?

I like this crop circle because it’s so simple, even as a lesson for those who don’t understand how simple this conversion is to try out the conversion process themselves so they can verify the circle does certainly contain the ASCII character codes for “PEACE” if it is in fact representing binary. Which it most certainly is is by the definition of any binary system.

One other thing, as a computer programmer I can see the ‘beads’ on a string. In computer programming a string is an alphanumeric collection, usually used for words but can also contain numbers that can’t be used in maths until the string is converted to an data type the deals with numbers as numbers. Just thought that might be a clue in the crop circle to say this clearly 8-bit binary isn’t numbers, but a string. For anyone who may have done BASIC programming at some point here’s a refresher:

10 A$=”PEACE”

20 PRINT A$

These letters are stored in memory as ASCII values, because in computers, data can only be stored in memory as 0s or 1s.

Hope this helps clear up how ASCII is used to communicate in these circles at times, who knows perhaps someone here can be the first to decode the next binary formation, or teach others how to verify it icon_smile.gif

You use ASCII Strings to get different things to talk to each other. You do not use it to create a graphical representation, you just send a graphical representation, in digital it is as easy as pie:

01010011 01100101 01100101 00101100 00100000 01001001 00100000 01100100 01101001 01100100 00100000 01110100 01101000 01101001 01110011 00100000 01101101 01100101 01110011 01110011 01100001 01100111 01100101 00100000 01101001 01101110 00100000 01100010 01101001 01101110 01100001 01110010 01111001 00101100 00100000 01101111 01101110 00100000 01100001 00100000 01110011 01101001 01101101 01110000 01101100 01100101 00100000 01100011 01101111 01101110 01110110 01100101 01110010 01110100 01100101 01110010 00101100 00100000 01101110 01101111 01110111 00100000 01001001 00100000 01100011 01101111 01110101 01101100 01100100 00100000 01101000 01100001 01110110 01100101 00100000 01110100 01100001 01101011 01100101 01101110 00100000 01110100 01101000 01100101 00100000 01110100 01101001 01101101 01100101 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01100110 01101100 01100101 01110011 01101000 00100000 01110100 01101000 01101001 01110011 00100000 01101111 01110101 01110100 00101100 00100000 01100010 01110101 01110100 00100000 01110111 01101000 01111001 00101110 00100000 01010011 01100001 01101101 01100101 00100000 01110001 01110101 01100101 01110011 01110100 01101001 01101111 01101110 00100000 01110111 01101001 01110100 01101000 00100000 01100011 01110010 01101111 01110000 00100000 01100011 01101001 01110010 01100011 01101100 01100101 01110011 00101100 00100000 01110111 01101000 01111001 00100000 01100111 01101111 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01100111 01110010 01100101 01100001 01110100 00100000 01101100 01100101 01101110 01100111 01110100 01101000 01110011 00101100 00100000 01110111 01101000 01100101 01101110 00100000 01100001 00100000 01110011 01101001 01101101 01110000 01101100 01100101 00100000 01101101 01100101 01110011 01110011 01100001 01100111 01100101 00100000 01100010 01100001 01100011 01101011 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01000001 01110010 01100101 01100011 01101001 01100010 01101111 00100000 01110111 01101111 01110101 01101100 01100100 00100000 01101000 01100001 01110110 01100101 00100000 01100010 01100101 01100101 01101110 00100000 01100110 01100001 01110011 01110100 01100101 01110010 00101100 00100000 01100101 01100001 01110011 01101001 01100101 01110010 00101100 00100000 01100001 01101110 01100100 00100000 01100011 01101111 01110101 01101100 01100100 00100000 01100001 01100011 01110100 01110101 01100001 01101100 01101100 01111001 00100000 01100010 01100101 00100000 01110101 01101110 01100100 01100101 01110010 01110011 01110100 01101111 01101111 01100100 00101110 00100000 01000001 01110011 00100000 01110011 01110101 01100011 01101000 00101100 00100000 01100011 01110010 01101111 01110000 00100000 01100011 01101001 01110010 01100011 01101100 01100101 01110011 00100000 01110011 01100101 01100101 01101101 00100000 01100001 00100000 01110110 01100101 01110010 01111001 00100000 01110011 01110100 01110101 01110000 01101001 01100100 00100000 01110100 01101000 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01100110 01101111 01110010 00100000 01100001 01101110 00100000 01101001 01101110 01110100 01100101 01101100 01101100 01101001 01100111 01100101 01101110 01110100 00100000 01110011 01110000 01100101 01100011 01101001 01100101 01110011 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01100100 01101111 00101110 00100000 01001000 01100101 01100011 01101011 00101100 00100000 01001001 00100000 01110011 01100101 01101110 01110100 00100000 01110100 01101000 01101001 01110011 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01111001 01101111 01110101 00100000 01101001 01101110 00100000 01100010 01101001 01101110 01100001 01110010 01111001 00101100 00100000 01100001 01101110 01100100 00100000 01101110 01101111 01110111 00100000 01111001 01101111 01110101 00100000 01100001 01110010 01100101 00100000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 01101001 01101110 01100111 00100000 01101001 01110100 00101100 00100000 01001000 01101111 01110111 00100000 01101000 01100001 01110010 01100100 00100000 01100011 01100001 01101110 00100000 01101001 01110100 00100000 01100010 01100101 00100000 01100110 01101111 01110010 00100000 01110011 01101111 01101101 01100101 01101111 01101110 01100101 00100000 01110111 01101000 01101111 00100000 01100011 01100001 01101110 00100000 01100011 01110010 01101111 01110011 01110011 00100000 01110011 01110000 01100001 01100011 01100101 00100000 01110100 01101111 00100000 01110110 01101001 01110011 01101001 01110100 00100000 01110101 01110011 00101110

See.

PS

83 97 109 101 32 114 101 112 101 97 116 101 100 32 105 110 32 65 83 67 73 73 13 10 83 101 101 44 32 73 32 100 105 100 32 116 104 105 115 32 109 101 115 115 97 103 101 32 105 110 32 98 105 110 97 114 121 44 32 111 110 32 97 32 115 105 109 112 108 101 32 99 111 110 118 101 114 116 101 114 44 32 110 111 119 32 73 32 99 111 117 108 100 32 104 97 118 101 32 116 97 107 101 110 32 116 104 101 32 116 105 109 101 32 116 111 32 102 108 101 115 104 32 116 104 105 115 32 111 117 116 44 32 98 117 116 32 119 104 121 46 32 83 97 109 101 32 113 117 101 115 116 105 111 110 32 119 105 116 104 32 99 114 111 112 32 99 105 114 99 108 101 115 44 32 119 104 121 32 103 111 32 116 111 32 103 114 101 97 116 32 108 101 110 103 116 104 115 44 32 119 104 101 110 32 97 32 115 105 109 112 108 101 32 109 101 115 115 97 103 101 32 98 97 99 107 32 116 111 32 65 114 101 99 105 98 111 32 119 111 117 108 100 32 104 97 118 101 32 98 101 101 110 32 102 97 115 116 101 114 44 32 101 97 115 105 101 114 44 32 97 110 100 32 99 111 117 108 100 32 97 99 116 117 97 108 108 121 32 98 101 32 117 110 100 101 114 115 116 111 111 100 46 32 65 115 32 115 117 99 104 44 32 99 114 111 112 32 99 105 114 99 108 101 115 32 115 101 101 109 32 97 32 118 101 114 121 32 115 116 117 112 105 100 32 116 104 105 110 103 32 102 111 114 32 97 110 32 105 110 116 101 108 108 105 103 101 110 116 32 115 112 101 99 105 101 115 32 116 111 32 100 111 46 32 72 101 99 107 44 32 73 32 115 101 110 116 32 116 104 105 115 32 116 111 32 121 111 117 32 105 110 32 98 105 110 97 114 121 44 32 97 110 100 32 110 111 119 32 121 111 117 32 97 114 101 32 114 101 97 100 105 110 103 32 105 116 44 32 72 111 119 32 104 97 114 100 32 99 97 110 32 105 116 32 98 101 32 102 111 114 32 115 111 109 101 111 110 101 32 119 104 111 32 99 97 110 32 99 114 111 115 115 32 115 112 97 99 101 32 116 111 32 118 105 115 105 116 32 117 115 46

Enjoy.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you serious with this reply misqouting and all i had respect for you as a skeptic but now i have little to none this is QUALITY information being stated here

Also sorry for reply in this way i do not know how to properly work this replying to mini qoutes thing so i made your text underlined and my reply's with bigger font

All you did was say Maybe ET uses something else.

So what?

Not going to get much simpler than 1's and 0's, is it? It seems a bit ridiculous to suggest that a species would enter a digital era and not know such a basic language. Why would they not find simpler old codes even easier to decode than we do? We are talking an advanced species are we not? It's a bit like saying when they add 1 + 1 they do not get 2. I am afraid that indeed, they do. No matter what planet "they" might come from.

Do you honestly, for one second, really believe that this is how another species would communicate? A Crop Circle??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not while your typing.. :D

drink and typing is bad for your posts :P

HOLD ME BEER AND WATCH THIS :D

Ohh crap

funny_geek_sayings_iphone_4_case-p176842580087583038en7pa_216.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All you did was say Maybe ET uses something else.

So what?

Not going to get much simpler than 1's and 0's, is it? It seems a bit ridiculous to suggest that a species would enter a digital era and not know such a basic language. Why would they not find simpler old codes even easier to decode than we do? We are talking an advanced species are we not? It's a bit like saying when they add 1 + 1 they do not get 2. I am afraid that indeed, they do. No matter what planet "they" might come from.

Do you honestly, for one second, really believe that this is how another species would communicate? A Crop Circle??

As stated before yes they would KNOW of such codes BUT to reply in the most simplistic way is to reply with the exact same code we sent the message with so we could read it brainiac

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As stated before yes they would KNOW of such codes BUT to reply in the most simplistic way is to reply with the exact same code we sent the message with so we could read it brainiac

Via transmission back to Arecibo, no, they did not, they allegedly created some artwork in a field, and made some mistakes to boot.

How is not the most simplistic way the form in which it arrived? We could not only read it, we would know it came from an Alien civilisation instead of this cryptic crop rubbish.

Edited by psyche101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

surely beings able to encode their message into a language that can be understood by man could simply write in English perhaps?

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

surely beings able to encode their message into a language that can be understood by man could simply write in English perhaps?

What I figure is the aliens doing this are geeks. Using English would be too simple.
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I figure is the aliens doing this are geeks. Using English would be too simple.

L33t spk thn.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.