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 -

SETI Institute chief offers his views on UFOs and alien visitors


Recommended Posts

On 4/24/2024 at 1:05 PM, Essan said:

No. 

We keep our new technology secret, even when we test it openly, by making the gullible US public think they are seeing alien invaders from a another world. Daft though may seem to anyone with a brain half the size of a whelk.  And they fall for it every single time.... 

.. 

It's so easy because people really do want to believe it. Also in mermaids and sea monsters and I dunno...Cthulhu. 

Reality is just not entertaining enough, sometimes.

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well this thread will soon be cleansed if not locked and history of users course of conduct will be wiped.

It rewards flamebaiting to hide when you stick your foot in your mouth.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GlitterRose said:

It's so easy because people really do want to believe it. Also in mermaids and sea monsters and I dunno...Cthulhu. 

Reality is just not entertaining enough, sometimes.

Idk but I think many of us even a cynical skeptic like myself still like to imagine in some unrealistic credious way that there are still things out there that we don't know don't understand,
Years back I recall that TV show presented as a docudrama that mermaids , water apes were real, they used CGI but it was presented as realty a lot of people believed it.
My step daughter she isn't really into this stuff and assumed Bigfoot was real and proven she didn't think deeply about it.
as I get older I can understand fear being a motivation for blind beliefs too, it's not really a pleasant thought to think when I shuffle off this mortal coil that's it shows over, but I wouldn't be very interested in some afterlife that I'm reduced to low end mischief on the living either.
No, I dont blindly believe but I do keep an open mind, all I ask is show me proof I'm tired of hearing stories.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, the13bats said:

Idk but I think many of us even a cynical skeptic like myself still like to imagine in some unrealistic credious way that there are still things out there that we don't know don't understand,
Years back I recall that TV show presented as a docudrama that mermaids , water apes were real, they used CGI but it was presented as realty a lot of people believed it.
My step daughter she isn't really into this stuff and assumed Bigfoot was real and proven she didn't think deeply about it.
as I get older I can understand fear being a motivation for blind beliefs too, it's not really a pleasant thought to think when I shuffle off this mortal coil that's it shows over, but I wouldn't be very interested in some afterlife that I'm reduced to low end mischief on the living either.
No, I dont blindly believe but I do keep an open mind, all I ask is show me proof I'm tired of hearing stories.

 

 

I dunno...I'd take low end mischief on the living. Lol. 

I would secretly love for there to be a Nessie. It would just be so much fun. 

Megalodons in the Mariana Trench, ftw. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, GlitterRose said:

I dunno...I'd take low end mischief on the living. Lol. 

I would secretly love for there to be a Nessie. It would just be so much fun. 

Megalodons in the Mariana Trench, ftw. 

All the unproven stuff would be fun and exciting,

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, the13bats said:

All the unproven stuff would be fun and exciting,

 

I would take extraterrestrial visitation over all of them.

...except for maybe wearwolves.

Those are awesome. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

13b is a liar. he has the name for good.

I'll be back later with quotes and cites, and we'll see who was in error...

 

 

   😎

Edited by ChrLzs
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Hazzard said:

I would take extraterrestrial visitation over all of them.

...except for maybe wearwolves.

Those are awesome. 

Well hum, while I don't think due to the vastness of space ET visitation is likely at least in the next few dozen years,
I do find it the most likely thing to be proven in the paranormal supernatural areas.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, the13bats said:

Well hum, while I don't think due to the vastness of space ET visitation is likely at least in the next few dozen years,
I do find it the most likely thing to be proven in the paranormal supernatural areas.

 

You hated my wearwolves, didnt you? 😄

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Hazzard said:

You hated my wearwolves, didnt you? 😄

Not at all, I like all those beasties

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/10/2024 at 6:14 PM, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

you maroon, 

the thread was not about Cat Cove, that's why I ignored it. It has nothing to do with the objects in the sky.

Yes it was. I asked you about Winter Island several times because the location looked incorrect and you claimed to know everything about it. Your only response was that you need to make a right turn to get on it. You didn't even bother to use Google Maps to pretend to know anything about it.

  • Thanks 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
On 4/25/2024 at 11:09 PM, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

Diamond might be waiting but I and many others are not. ET's have been here, and still are here.

My conclusion: ET found the short cut. (worm hole, interdimensional travel, and perhaps something unfamiliar to us)

Interstellar travel has been postulated as being impossible by many and posters here at UM.

From a recent conversation and to remind the posters that human flying with flying machines was thought to be impossible back at the end of the 19th century and beginning of the 20th century. Scientists, engineers, and popular opinions, thought it won't happen (not everyone though).

The idea of a shortcut through space time is not that far-fetched. I like you mentioned it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, MrAnderson said:

Interstellar travel has been postulated as being impossible by many and posters here at UM.

This is a misrepresentation.  Voyager 1 & 2 are proof that interstellar travel is possible.  What is problematic is performing interstellar travel in timeframes that do not exceed many times the human lifespan.

 

10 minutes ago, MrAnderson said:

From a recent conversation and to remind the posters that human flying with flying machines was thought to be impossible back at the end of the 19th century and beginning of the 20th century.

Again this is a common misrepresentation.  Kites have been flying for thousands of years, balloons and dirigibles predate the 19th century.  Birds had obviously been observed to fly.  So while flight was difficult, it was clear that being able to fly did not violate any physical laws.  Those who stated flight was impossible were not a consensus voice and did not speak from a position of education.  This analogy used as an excuse to validate interstellar travel is largely irrelevant as FTL travel Does violate physical laws, or have absurd energy requirements.

22 minutes ago, MrAnderson said:

The idea of a shortcut through space time is not that far-fetched. I like you mentioned it.

What is your proposed shortcut?

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Grey Area said:

This is a misrepresentation.  Voyager 1 & 2 are proof that interstellar travel is possible.  What is problematic is performing interstellar travel in timeframes that do not exceed many times the human lifespan.

 

Again this is a common misrepresentation.  Kites have been flying for thousands of years, balloons and dirigibles predate the 19th century.  Birds had obviously been observed to fly.  So while flight was difficult, it was clear that being able to fly did not violate any physical laws.  Those who stated flight was impossible were not a consensus voice and did not speak from a position of education.  This analogy used as an excuse to validate interstellar travel is largely irrelevant as FTL travel Does violate physical laws, or have absurd energy requirements.

What is your proposed shortcut?

Interstellar travel by humans (to clarify). So not a misrepresentation. I am sure interstellar travel will only has a point if we are able to travel to other solar systems. Otherwise you don't expect our probes to reach a star system that is 100 light years away or even closer.

Maybe you want to look at the history again and see what popular opinion and some scientists and engineers had to say about humans being able to fly with flying machines.

This could help

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

"By the beginning of the twentieth century, popular opinion regarded air travel as impossible.[2][3] Contemporary engineers and scientists were also pessimistic about flight. Notable critics included Simon Newcomb, Lord Kelvin, and the chief engineer of the US Navy, George W. Melville, the latter of whom described flying machines as "wholly unwarranted, if not absurd".[4] After five years of preparations, aviation pioneer Samuel Langley was ready to test out his Aerodrome on October 7, 1903. Piloted by Charles Manly, the aircraft failed to fly and dropped into the Potomac River immediately after launch.[4]"

 

Notably the President of the British Royal Society Lord Kelvin was saying it's impossible (he wasn't the only one though)

Edited by MrAnderson
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MrAnderson said:

Interstellar travel by humans (to clarify). So not a misrepresentation. I am sure interstellar travel will only has a point if we are able to travel to other solar systems. Otherwise you don't expect our probes to reach a star system that is 100 light years away or even closer.

Maybe you want to look at the history again and see what popular opinion and some scientists and engineers had to say about humans being able to fly with flying machines.

This could help

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

"By the beginning of the twentieth century, popular opinion regarded air travel as impossible.[2][3] Contemporary engineers and scientists were also pessimistic about flight. Notable critics included Simon Newcomb, Lord Kelvin, and the chief engineer of the US Navy, George W. Melville, the latter of whom described flying machines as "wholly unwarranted, if not absurd".[4] After five years of preparations, aviation pioneer Samuel Langley was ready to test out his Aerodrome on October 7, 1903. Piloted by Charles Manly, the aircraft failed to fly and dropped into the Potomac River immediately after launch.[4]"

 

Notably the President of the British Royal Society Lord Kelvin was saying it's impossible (he wasn't the only one though)

Yes of course there were detractors, but you are totally missing the point.  The issue with early flight was due to issues around horsepower and such, the mechanics of fixed wing flight were known, observable in nature.

The article you linked gives a timescale on developing flight, regardless of how long, there were no physics defying technologies involved.

FTL travel is a totally different story.  I am not saying there’s no chance of discovering some yet unknown physics, but it’s pretty well understood that the speed of light is the universal speed limit.

I do, sincerely hope you are right.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/21/2024 at 1:02 PM, Grey Area said:

Yes of course there were detractors, but you are totally missing the point.  The issue with early flight was due to issues around horsepower and such, the mechanics of fixed wing flight were known, observable in nature.

The article you linked gives a timescale on developing flight, regardless of how long, there were no physics defying technologies involved.

Mr. Anderson believes that the entire world was "conditioned" (no details given how) into believing that heavier than flight was impossible and after it was accomplished everyone was so confused by it that it was considered a form of magic.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/21/2024 at 8:02 PM, Grey Area said:

Yes of course there were detractors, but you are totally missing the point.  The issue with early flight was due to issues around horsepower and such, the mechanics of fixed wing flight were known, observable in nature.

The article you linked gives a timescale on developing flight, regardless of how long, there were no physics defying technologies involved.

FTL travel is a totally different story.  I am not saying there’s no chance of discovering some yet unknown physics, but it’s pretty well understood that the speed of light is the universal speed limit.

I do, sincerely hope you are right.

I didn't say what the issues were at that time I just said that humans flying ehtj flying machines was thought to be impossible by a large number people including scientists, engineers and the public.

I was making an analogy which is relevant here. The idea that most of physics has begun discovered may not be true at all. We have discovered a lot no doubt but nobody can predict the future and the way technology will evolve.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, astrobeing said:

Mr. Anderson believes that the entire world was "conditioned" (no details given how) into believing that heavier than flight was impossible and after it was accomplished everyone was so confused by it that it was considered a form of magic.

I don't believe it. It was true that people were conditioned to think humans flying with flying machines was impossible

See first three sentences

"'By the beginning of the twentieth century, popular opinion regarded air travel as impossible.[2][3] Contemporary engineers and scientists were also pessimistic about flight. Notable critics included Simon Newcomb, Lord Kelvin, and the chief engineer of the US Navy, George W. Melville, the latter of whom described flying machines as "wholly unwarranted, if not absurd".[4] After five years of preparations, aviation pioneer Samuel Langley was ready to test out his Aerodrome on October 7, 1903. Piloted by Charles Manly, the aircraft failed to fly and dropped into the Potomac River immediately after launch.[4]"

 

Scientists and engineers too despite your claim that it was only Lord Kelvin who believed it was impossible.

Edited by MrAnderson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The theories for heavier-than-air flight were in development hundreds of years before the Wright Brothers.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

The theories for heavier-than-air flight were in development hundreds of years before the Wright Brothers.

See posts above.

The conversation was what was believed by a number of scientists and engineers back at the end of the 19th century and beginning of the 20th as well as the public opinion on the subject.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, astrobeing said:

Mr. Anderson believes that the entire world was "conditioned" (no details given how) into believing that heavier than flight was impossible and after it was accomplished everyone was so confused by it that it was considered a form of magic.

I never said the entire world. You asked me in another thread to tell you one person who didn't think air flight was possible. I pointed out to Kelvin. Then you wrongly said it was only one person. That's false. It was more than one as you can see from the links and posts. Let's not either what the original conversation was. Even to suggest that it was just Kelvin is a really bizarre argument (you don't have to know the history)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MrAnderson said:

See posts above.

The conversation was what was believed by a number of scientists and engineers back at the end of the 19th century and beginning of the 20th as well as the public opinion on the subject.

You cannot quantify you claims on public opinion.

Kelvin stated he didn't have faith in aerial navigation other than ballooning.  By the time he declined to join the aeronautical society theories of heavier than air flight had already been develop and proven.

Kites had been around for thousands of years.

The cohort you are claiming are likely the minority.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/25/2024 at 12:17 AM, Unusual Tournament said:

Me too. Imagine now being Bill Diamond and you clearly state that ‘we are not the only life in the universe’ but then go off on a tangent and state “but interstellar space travel is impossible” because the government wouldn’t lie on UAP’s” even though the military has filmed these objects 

So effectively, according to Billy there is life on other planets just that there is no possibility they can travel through space and time because we haven’t figured a way to do it and because our government wouldn’t “lie”

Hilarious right?

Explanation is hilarious!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

You cannot quantify you claims on public opinion.

Kelvin stated he didn't have faith in aerial navigation other than ballooning.  By the time he declined to join the aeronautical society theories of heavier than air flight had already been develop and proven.

Kites had been around for thousands of years.

The cohort you are claiming are likely the minority.

Why not? Because it doesn't suit your argument? To remind you the poster I was having the conversation had strong doubts if there was anyone out there who thought humans couldn't fly with flying machines.

I replied it was Lord Kelvin and he replied back he was the only one. We know this isn't true

"'By the beginning of the twentieth century, popular opinion regarded air travel as impossible.[2][3] Contemporary engineers and scientists were also pessimistic about flight. Notable critics included Simon Newcomb, Lord Kelvin, and the chief engineer of the US Navy, George W. Melville, the latter of whom described flying machines as "wholly unwarranted, if not absurd".[4] After five years of preparations, aviation pioneer Samuel Langley was ready to test out his Aerodrome on October 7, 1903. Piloted by Charles Manly, the aircraft failed to fly and dropped into the Potomac River immediately after launch.[4]"

Link to comment
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   1 member

    • Grey Area