Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Hazzard

What happens if a signal is found?

321 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

stereologist
Just now, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

Stop trying to cause trouble. If you  have a link POST IT and...

I posted multiple links showing where NEAs are located. You don't have to lie about me posting links. You need to take the time to fix your mistake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps
Just now, stereologist said:

What is so hard for you to read a simple piece of text and understand the location of NEAs?

You have moved the goal posts to start an argument. that's all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps
1 minute ago, stereologist said:

I posted multiple links showing where NEAs are located. You don't have to lie about me posting links. You need to take the time to fix your mistake.

If there is a mistake it is in the link, not anything I am worried about because my thrust is 100% correct and you need to admit your mistaken belief of otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps

I have made the claim in here and in other threads.... Asteroids have a high gold content in them and asteroids are quite numerous in our solar system.  I am meeting resistance from three posters - none of whom should be so foolish as to try to argue that out because it is simply correct.

So it goes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Coil
17 minutes ago, Hazzard said:

What Im asking is, how do you evaluate these stories credibility? They cant all be true, can they? How do you separate the lies, hoaxes and bullcrap from the real deal?

 
It's hard to say, I think few people would like to come up with this to be under suspicion. In addition, a lie can be checked on a lie detector and everything will open quickly. Those who flew or saw a UFO have a confident look and are not confused in describing events, and deceivers knowing that they can lie to think on the go to make their story look more convincing. In addition, if there are many eyewitnesses one event then collective fraud will not work.
 
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hazzard
1 hour ago, Coil said:
 
It's hard to say, I think few people would like to come up with this to be under suspicion. In addition, a lie can be checked on a lie detector and everything will open quickly. Those who flew or saw a UFO have a confident look and are not confused in describing events, and deceivers knowing that they can lie to think on the go to make their story look more convincing. In addition, if there are many eyewitnesses one event then collective fraud will not work.

Ok lets forget about fraud and hoaxes, but how about illogical reasoning, self-deception, misreading, inadvertently fudged data, and willful misunderstanding, or just plain old ignorance, innocent mistakes, misinterpretations, equipment errors, out-of-date references, overlooked results or causes, etc.

You do understand that all these must be examined first when investigating any pseudoscientific topic before one begins looking for presumed new or unusual natural phenomena!!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hazzard
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Coil said:

Another UFO story. Whatever sparked that one, whatever they saw, if anything at all, ET should be at the bottom of a very long list when trying to explain a UFO sighting. We dont know all there is to know about our world, far from it. Some unknown atmospheric phenomena like in Hessdalen could very well be the answer.  Some of these plasmas sure move and look like what people reported as "metallic looking craft/high speed/sharp turns".

What Im saying is, before we can claim that a UFOs is out of this world, we have to be 100% sure that its not from Earth.

 

http://www.hessdalen.org/index_e.shtml

Edited by Hazzard
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dejarma
1 hour ago, Hazzard said:

Some of these plasmas sure move and look like what people reported as "metallic looking craft/high speed/sharp turns".

all the tech we have at our finger tips in this day & age; yet no one has managed to capture these high speed/sharp turns on film

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
7 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

You have moved the goal posts to start an argument. that's all

No, I simply pointed out that the NEAs are not as close to Earth as you stated.

I had no idea you did not understand the meaning of moving the goal posts. Once again trying to help  you out.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_the_goalposts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
7 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

If there is a mistake it is in the link, not anything I am worried about because my thrust is 100% correct and you need to admit your mistaken belief of otherwise.

The link you used did NOT state that NEAs are as close you stated. So please correct this mistake of yours and move on

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
7 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

I have made the claim in here and in other threads.... Asteroids have a high gold content in them and asteroids are quite numerous in our solar system.  I am meeting resistance from three posters - none of whom should be so foolish as to try to argue that out because it is simply correct.

So it goes.

No one has stated anything about gold content other than you. In fact this post is a lie since I agreed with the gold content. The gold we find on Earth is due to asteroid bombardment after the crust solidified since the gold from Earth's formation was as I pointed out alloyed with the iron and at the Earth's core.

What I have been unable to assist you with is the understanding that the NEAs are not as close to Earth as you stated.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hazzard
13 hours ago, Dejarma said:

all the tech we have at our finger tips in this day & age; yet no one has managed to capture these high speed/sharp turns on film

It's a familiar and intriguing story: A strange craft appears in the sky, performs seemingly otherworldly aerobatics, baffles onlookers, and then is gone as quickly as it appeared, leaving us to question our eyesight and sanity.

But the reality is....

https://www.businessinsider.com/ufo-sightings-mistakes-real-objects-2018-11?r=US&IR=T#project-mogul-the-roswell-incident-might-be-the-most-famous-instance-of-a-ufo-sighting-10 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hazzard
On 8/23/2019 at 8:05 PM, Coil said:
 
It's hard to say, I think few people would like to come up with this to be under suspicion. In addition, a lie can be checked on a lie detector and everything will open quickly. Those who flew or saw a UFO have a confident look and are not confused in describing events, and deceivers knowing that they can lie to think on the go to make their story look more convincing. In addition, if there are many eyewitnesses one event then collective fraud will not work.
 

But you know that people can, and do, lie for different reasons? Some are even exposed as hoaxers and liars when it comes to claims of alien abduction and seeing alien visitors. Im sure that you are also aware that some people have a mental illness that causes them to have illusions and other problems with their perception of reality. And then there are those who are willfully ignorant. They are fantasy prone and find everyday life so boring so they make even the smallest thing into a major paranormal event.

I can understand all that, why live a boring world filled work, heartbreak, bad news and taxes when it can be filled with paranormal wonders like alien visitation, demons and people with superpowers.

!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saru

Thread cleaned

@stereologist and @Earl.Of.Trumps - enough already, please place each other on ignore.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GLCsector3295
On 8/9/2019 at 8:23 AM, Hazzard said:

Arecibo records strange signals from the region of Ross 128.  The SETI Institute's Allen Telescope Array joins the effort to uncover the source.

https://www.seti.org/signals-nearby-star-system

Despite what you might expect (especially if you are into Conspiracy theories) this protocol is not a classified government document stashed in a safe. Theres no sealed envelope to be ripped open. The text can be found on many websites and is straightforward and unsurprising. It states that scientists making the discovery should first do all they can to prove that the signal is truly extraterrestrial, then alert other astronomers (who would turn their telescopes to the new find), inform the government and tell the public. 

The biggest discovery of all time would result in big headlines in the morning newspapers, followed by a blistering stream of radio and TV reports? Seti practitioners and astronomers have no policy of secrecy, there are many in other countries than the US you know, and consequently any intriguing signals they find are quickly noted by the media. Then the "fun" would begin! 

Holy ****, I cannot imagine releasing that information and having hordes of crazys going nuts, religious zealots claiming the end of the world, press vans everywhere covering the nutty reactions, "THE END IS NOW",  aluminum foil sales tripling in a matter of days of the revelation, etc., etc... With that in mind, if I was on the team that actually received intelligent signals that could only be from extraterrestrial life, even I might be inclined to keep it an absolute secret?!

To detect a signal from another planet be wondrous. It would show that the appearance of life that can comprehend their own existence is not some improbable miracle, but a frequent occurrence? 

In the 17th century, when early telescopes were revealing great clouds of stars, French mathematician and philosopher Blaise Pascal wrote that the enormity of space terrified him. "Space is enormous. To learn that others are out there would be a comfort". 

 

While I would appreciate a signal to be found, I just do not believe SETI or NASA  are really serious about finding intelligent life out there. Everything SETI and NASA does, seems to just point at finding planets, and then theorizing what kind of atmosphere it has and if it might have water.  An then when something strange pops up like a FRB , it is just so quickly put into the natural causes category . Yet this is what I find odd. Aliens / UFOS visiting Earth.  Abductions , and UFOS, secret meetings between governments an aliens, what ever ya want to come up with based here on Earth. Yet humanity points everything it has out towards space and other stars and bupkiss. BUT Humanity did manage to get waterbears on the moon, supposedly those lil b*****s will live for a really long time even on the moon ... so perhaps humanity needs to stop looking for other life, learn how to turn people into water bears. 

 

k F THE WORLD

 

im going to bed.

 

peace out

 

 

 

:geek:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat

Excuse any ignorance on my part about the science of spectroscopy, but why isn't astronomy looking concertedly for the signatures of chemicals that are not "natural", far off in space, as a hint that they were made by beasties ? As for example the innumerable man-made organics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Free99

The universe is so vast I don't believe we are the only thing that grew out of Panspermia. The right conditions for this to happen on a planet however might be as vast as the universe if that makes any sense. I believe life is out there and one day it will be found. Rather it's development is below ours or way more advanced than ours would be like us driving past a cave man in a Lamborghini doing 225 mph. Would we see them or would they see us? We may even be centuries away from the technology needed to intercept a message. They could be so advanced they might have sent many messages and we just don't have the technology to intercept it. We may be just be banging two rocks together compared to their technology. Or they may be just climbing out of the mud about to stand up and take their first steps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
On 8/16/2019 at 11:09 AM, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

No way for me to answer that. I think about repeating an experiment with all the same factors (building blocks of life) in place and I assume we get similar results. not proven but, unless someone proposes - even a theory, that earth is somehow special and escaped pitfalls that are expected to be the norm on other earth twins then I think my theory has legs. One has to show me why an earth twin that has been around for sufficient time, cannot have life on it before I entertain the idea.

I do not dispute that, from what we do know life is highly likely to occur elsewhere. But the key here is 'similar'. As you say, life would more than likely exist under the same conditions, so why not the same time frame? It might simply take this long to get this far. We just don't know. We are lucky to be here, life on earth has suffered several mass extinction events. And we have a Jupiter to guard the system from many dangerous objects. Then there's the facts that most earth like planets are much larger than ours, which comes with more challenges regarding evolution and gravity. We have a reasonable idea of the local neighbourhood, there's no good reason to think life is within a reasonable distance with regards to travel. 

Quote

undisputed? I believe my link from UniverseToday disputes it heavily. So do other sources. The disk of this galaxy was formed 12-13 billion years ago.

This (below) is what we were discussing? I don't know how the galaxy got involved here? 

Quote

It is complex but scientists still are not sure as to why life was not created earlier than what evidence shows that it was.

The earth is 4.5 billion years old and the earliest life forms are dated to at least 3.5 billion years old. 

I'm not sure what you are referring to. On a cosmic time scale, that strikes me as fast? 

Quote

That was sort my point, specific environment, not just saying "this planet"

That reduces the number of times intelligent life would thrive though. 

Quote

Of course they are significant. So are the numbers of planets that are earth twins. you set up earth to be some incredible, once-in-a-universe item. I doubt that

No I'm not at all saying we are some sort of one of. I'm saying that all these factors hinder the chances of life and we didn't have to face any of them. Just a giant rock which worked to our advantage. That thins life out. It doesn't by any means deny it, but as you also pointed out, there are a lot of 'earth like' planets out there. I don't see the logic in bypassing them to come here. 

Quote

Agreed, we don't know. All we can do is spin the numbers and take educated guesses. My intuition tells me earth is not the one in a trillion, and even if it was there are two trillion galaxies to dwell on, too. We're not alone, that I am certain  of.

Again, I don't dispute that. But other galaxies? They are so far away they might as well be empty to us. We can't know. Just to get to the Andromeda galaxy even takes light 253 million years. 

Quote

It's not a cop out. the vast majority of planets with intelligent life on them have far more advanced or evolved civilizations simply by the bell curve numbers. We're the true embryo of this galaxy.

What bell curve numbers? There are some older planets sure, but that doesn't mean anything. There's no way to measure our technological advancement because there's nothing to compare it to. 

Why wouldn't there be intermediate intelligent species? Why only advanced and primitive? Why don't we see 'not so advanced' spaceships trundling into the solar system that can't be hidden from everyone? 

Quote

Of course, I have no answer for that. There are so MANY planets for ets to choose from. just because they don't come near us is no indication as to their existence.

Again with the no ET's existing. I'm honestly not sure where you're getting this from. 

That's never been my argument. The argument is that there's no reasonable proof that we have been visited by another alien species.

Quote

I have a theory about DNA. I think that when DNA is first created on the very first entity on any planet, it's the same. Then it quickly mutates to suit the current environment. Just a theory. 

Yes, that's pretty much how it works. That's evolution. 

How Genetically Related Are We to Bananas?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
10 hours ago, Habitat said:

Excuse any ignorance on my part about the science of spectroscopy, but why isn't astronomy looking concertedly for the signatures of chemicals that are not "natural", far off in space, as a hint that they were made by beasties ? As for example the innumerable man-made organics.

Because we detect exopleants by wobble and light dips in their stars. Smart people are working on that right now. The James Webb is hoped to assist in this as I understand. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
8 hours ago, Free99 said:

The universe is so vast I don't believe we are the only thing that grew out of Panspermia. The right conditions for this to happen on a planet however might be as vast as the universe if that makes any sense. I believe life is out there and one day it will be found. Rather it's development is below ours or way more advanced than ours would be like us driving past a cave man in a Lamborghini doing 225 mph. Would we see them or would they see us? We may even be centuries away from the technology needed to intercept a message. They could be so advanced they might have sent many messages and we just don't have the technology to intercept it. We may be just be banging two rocks together compared to their technology. Or they may be just climbing out of the mud about to stand up and take their first steps.

1 - There's no proof that life here was kicked off by panspermia. 

2 - If someone aas sending out a signal, wouldn't they make it as basic and easy to detect as possible to increase the chances of reward for their efforts? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hazzard
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, Free99 said:

 They could be so advanced they might have sent many messages and we just don't have the technology to intercept it. We may be just be banging two rocks together compared to their technology. Or they may be just climbing out of the mud about to stand up and take their first steps.

 

Edited by Hazzard
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Earl.Of.Trumps
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, psyche101 said:

I do not dispute that,

What? :w00t:   lol. you're slipping. 

Quote

from what we do know life is highly likely to occur elsewhere. But the key here is 'similar'. As you say, life would more than likely exist under the same conditions, so why not the same time frame?

ET life in the same timeframe is fine. So is any time frame. Earth is some 4.5 billion years old? that means that solar systems existed in this galaxy for billions of years before our sun was spawned. The word 'similar' is vague, yes. who knows what other life forms are like? some scientists think that other life forms may be silicon  based. But like all living things, they will strive to survive and replicate. As to how  intelligent...? no idea how to speculate on that only that if it happened here on our  planet it can surely happen on any one of the two billion+ earth twins in our galaxy

Quote

It might simply take this long to get this far. We just don't know. We are lucky to be here, life on earth has suffered several mass extinction events. And we have a Jupiter to guard the system from many dangerous objects. Then there's the facts that most earth like planets are much larger than ours, which comes with more challenges regarding evolution and gravity. We have a reasonable idea of the local neighbourhood, there's no good reason to think life is within a reasonable distance with regards to travel. 

Yes, there is no such thing for us as "reasonable distance" and won't be for some time. If we were foolish enough  to send a manned probe to our nearest star, they likely would neve return alive. A sever scientific breakthrough has to be made for us to seriously consider inter stellar travel.

Quote

This (below) is what we were discussing? I don't know how the galaxy got involved here? 

Well there ya go! Old posts. I can't recall now but it had to do with how old the galaxy was *formed* - in its final shape, I suppose. this is now a moot point. 

Quote

The earth is 4.5 billion years old and the earliest life forms are dated to at least 3.5 billion years old. 

I'm not sure what you are referring to. On a cosmic time scale, that strikes me as fast? 

Wow! 3.5 billion? I tried finding a link to that theory that the French scientists had concerning that one last key ingredient that made life possible but I could not find one. They listed that complex molecule, too. I'll have to book up on earth's earliest life forms and when they occurred.

Quote

That reduces the number of times intelligent life would thrive though. 

No I'm not at all saying we are some sort of one of. I'm saying that all these factors hinder the chances of life and we didn't have to face any of them. Just a giant rock which worked to our advantage. That thins life out. It doesn't by any means deny it, but as you also pointed out, there are a lot of 'earth like' planets out there. I don't see the logic in bypassing them to come here.

Who said they did? I theorize that that entire galaxy has been mapped out by ancient aliens the way our ancient mariners mapped out our planet. The aliens surely would have had time to meet and to share "maps". They all may know about us, possibly, and avoid interfering with our natural evolvement as meeting us and "leading" us in any way may prove disasterous to us societally. They may have a history of such bad results and just do the right thing by us by avoiding contact. I even think they may have a "United Planets" like we have United Nations. Very speculative, to be sure. But it is plausible due to their own evolution as intelligent beings. It is a subject for a debate itself.

 

Again, I don't dispute that. But other galaxies? They are so far away they might as well be empty to us. We can't know. Just to get to the Andromeda galaxy even takes light 253 million years. 

Agreed. Totally inaccessible right now and for foreseeable future. 

Quote

What bell curve numbers? There are some older planets sure, but that doesn't mean anything. There's no way to measure our technological advancement because there's nothing to compare it to. 

Again, it is speculative. Of course we cannot compare. We can look at models based on bell curve but that is not really proof. You know that there are a lot of religionists that really think this is the one and only planet so wasn't proven to them. (proof meaning "universal understanding")

Quote

Why wouldn't there be intermediate intelligent species? Why only advanced and primitive? Why don't we see 'not so advanced' spaceships trundling into the solar system that can't be hidden from everyone? 

Good point and I agree. But recall, that to  us humans, anything that can get to our planet is lumped into o ne big category - "intelligent". But I am sure that to those beings, they distinguish between themselves a whole pecking order that simply cannot be detected by us. As far us "clunky" not so advanced spaceships, I recall one case - Cash-Landrum, where the malfunctioning diamond-shaped UFO hovered and occasionally shot out flames (retro rocket??) from either side to keep it balanced. It was also spewing radioactivity that got the three witnesses deathly ill. Maybe that is one such case, although it can be argued that that was a US built test craft of some kind, as US army helicopters were chasing or accompanying it. 

Also, these ET's could share technology the way people in various countries on earth do , too. Meaning, the least evolved of the visitors could be operating on tech that they themselves did not develop and it is as superior as the more advanced spaceships. No real way to know.

Quote

Again with the no ET's existing. I'm honestly not sure where you're getting this from. 

That's never been my argument. The argument is that there's no reasonable proof that we have been visited by another alien species.

Only because you don't see "reasonable" as I do :) The US alone has 4,000 sightings a year just to MUFON so that does not include sightings that go unreported. has to be *something* to it. Too many vivid descriptions to call it all "mistaken identity"

Quote

Yes, that's pretty much how it works. That's evolution. 

How Genetically Related Are We to Bananas?

Amazing stuff. but what it means is, DNA is universal. Where did it come from? Scientists want to know about our existence, that may be the biggest question at the moment, where did DNA fly in from? what creates it? Is it star remnants? what is it? Is it itself a "creation" that is on going? If so, then who creates it?

The mysteries of life are mind boggling.

Edited by Earl.Of.Trumps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toast
6 minutes ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

Only because you don't see "reasonable" as I do :) The US alone has 4,000 sightings a year just to MUFON so that does not include sightings that go unreported.

Ok, then tell me how much people of the US total population are idiots and/or uneducated and/or request their 15 minutes of fame. Less than 4k? Unlikely.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist

Earl.Of.Trumps wrote

Quote

Only because you don't see "reasonable" as I do  The US alone has 4,000 sightings a year just to MUFON so that does not include sightings that go unreported. has to be *something* to it. Too many vivid descriptions to call it all "mistaken identity"

The logical fallacy of appeal to numbers has no bearing on whether or not sightings are anything of interest. The problem with this is that there is an underlying thought that not all of these reports can be wrong. Well they can all be wrong. The basic idea is that there must be some residue of good reports. Imagining this is easy. The real issue is to pull out that residue of good reports. The residue is what is left when the bad reports are removed. Where are these good reports?

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.