# Can't take off my tin foil hat....



## TMA17 (Mar 9, 2018)

I'm a science, fact driven, open-minded person.  I'm fairly moderate on most things.  Show me the facts and I'll agree with you. I'm not ideologically driven.  With this topic, I sort of violate those qualities.  My personal belief is he is telling the truth. Millions of people on this planet already believe in far more outrageous things. I just don't think it's that out of the question....


----------



## Buka (Mar 10, 2018)

But, but...but...you don't think the Powers that be would hide something from us! Say it ain't so!


----------



## Martial D (Mar 10, 2018)

TMA17 said:


> I'm a science, fact driven, open-minded person.  I'm fairly moderate on most things.  Show me the facts and I'll agree with you. I'm not ideologically driven.  With this topic, I sort of violate those qualities.  My personal belief is he is telling the truth. Millions of people on this planet already believe in far more outrageous things. I just don't think it's that out of the question....


It's the very tendency for people to believe outrageous things, most of them mutually exclusive to each other (lookin at you religion), that makes a skeptical mind add a little extra salt to claims like these. What we do know for certain : people are prone to make BS claims, and others are prone to believe them without any actual evidence. This much can't really be cogently argued against.

So with that said, this particular claim is, as many many others, bereft of any evidence in support of that can be examined. Into the tire fire with it until some is produced as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 10, 2018)

My view on things like this is twofold. 

First, I simply don't believe our government (nor any other) is competent to keep evidence of a major secret (in this case, it would also be one that is well known) from seeing the light of day for a  quarter of a decade. Too many people think it's true, and there would be so much publicity if real evidence got out. By now someone would have wanted that attention.

Second, there are so many explanations that are more plausible for all the bits and pieces involved. These explanations aren't great, but reality is rarely clean and tidy. But it's an extraordinary claim, and I'd need some extraordinary evidence to give it much credence.


----------



## pdg (Mar 10, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> for a quarter of a decade.



2 1/2 years?

I think most administrations could manage it


----------



## Martial D (Mar 10, 2018)

pdg said:


> 2 1/2 years?
> 
> I think most administrations could manage it


Do you? Nowadays with cameras everywhere including in almost everyones pocket?

We are talking about thousands and thousands of people keeping silent for a period of time closer to 100 years than 50 (granted, recording devices weren't prevalent for this entire period of time, but cameras sure were).

In my experience if more than 5 people know something, the world knows. 2.5 years might as well be a million.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 10, 2018)

pdg said:


> 2 1/2 years?
> 
> I think most administrations could manage it


LOL - yep, they might, at that. Let's try "quarter of a century".


----------



## pdg (Mar 10, 2018)

Ok then, here we go 

To start off with, if it's not a secret it doesn't need keeping really - all it needs is enough of an aura of disbelief that it gets generally ignored.

So, the people who actually work on things like that are pretty well kept (let's say).

A few here and there think they can make their fame, so take pictures or similar.

Someone else who's still loyal takes a few pictures and does a little tweaking, enough so that the internet says "that's photoshopped, I can tell by the pixels" (in the old days, the press says "that's been doctored, look at the shadows").

Enough deliberate fakes swamp any genuine ones to the point of being ignored.

Same with stories - one person saying "I played chess with an alien" is just a random mental, right?

Boom, it's a conspiracy theory. Aliens, Titanic, faked moon landings, dolphins have underwater labs experimenting on paper, flat earth...

Everybody is so wrapped up in how much charge is left on their phone or that there's not enough foam on their coffee it just gets lost in the noise.

Until or unless something explodes, nobody really cares enough - and there's so many conspiracies (all part of the plan) and everyone is so easily distracted by shiny.


Success - everyone knows the secret, just pretend it's still a secret and nobody will believe it anyway.


----------



## Martial D (Mar 10, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> LOL - yep, they might, at that. Let's try "quarter of a century".


 
1993?


----------



## Anarax (Mar 10, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> My view on things like this is twofold.
> 
> First, I simply don't believe our government (nor any other) is competent to keep evidence of a major secret (in this case, it would also be one that is well known) from seeing the light of day for a  quarter of a decade. Too many people think it's true, and there would be so much publicity if real evidence got out. By now someone would have wanted that attention.
> 
> Second, there are so many explanations that are more plausible for all the bits and pieces involved. These explanations aren't great, but reality is rarely clean and tidy. But it's an extraordinary claim, and I'd need some extraordinary evidence to give it much credence.



Dr. Tyson essentially says the same thing in this video


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 10, 2018)

pdg said:


> Ok then, here we go
> 
> To start off with, if it's not a secret it doesn't need keeping really - all it needs is enough of an aura of disbelief that it gets generally ignored.
> 
> ...


That’s the kind of stuff I was talking about. There are more plausible explanations for photos that look Photoshopped.


----------



## Martial D (Mar 10, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> That’s the kind of stuff I was talking about. There are more plausible explanations for photos that look Photoshopped.


Exactly. We have a metric sh#t-ton of evidence of people making things up for attention and wealth. Human history is rife with it.

The explanation for photos that look photoshopped is usually that..they have been photoshopped.

To say that the world is just glazed over and ignores the evidence is to not understand how both science and journalism work in practice.

The former means not just photos, but reverse engineered alien tech would also eventually leak..and it hasn't seemed to. The latter means if it existed, we would see a lot more convincing evidence than we have.


----------



## pdg (Mar 11, 2018)

Martial D said:


> but reverse engineered alien tech would also eventually leak..and it hasn't seemed to.



How do you know?

Define alien tech?

I'm typing this very sentence on a handheld communicator...

There are star trek doors in supermarkets.

Just because the boffins haven't figured out the warp drives and tachyon amplifiers yet (and they're too big to sneak out).

Historical technological advancement was pretty stable for centuries, until about halfway through last century when it started to really take off.

One explanation is obviously that tech led to tech, the other explanation:


----------



## TMA17 (Mar 11, 2018)

Aerospace CEO Bigelow

 This is from Bigelow who is the CEO of a leading Aerospace Engineering company.

Lara Logan: Do you believe in aliens?

Robert Bigelow: I'm absolutely convinced. That's all there is to it.

Lara Logan: Do you also believe that UFOs have come to Earth?

Robert Bigelow: There has been and is an existing presence, an ET presence. And I spent millions and millions and millions -- I probably spent more as an individual than anybody else in the United States has ever spent on this subject.  

Lara Logan: Is it risky for you to say in public that you believe in UFOs and aliens?

Robert Bigelow: I don't give a damn. I don't care.

Lara Logan: You don't worry that some people will say, "Did you hear that guy, he sounds like he's crazy"?

Robert Bigelow: I don't care.


Lara Logan: Why not?

Robert Bigelow: It's not gonna make a difference. It's not gonna change reality of what I know.

Lara Logan: Do you imagine that in our space travels we will encounter other forms of intelligent life?

Robert Bigelow: You don't have to go anywhere.

Lara Logan: You can find it here? Where exactly? 

Robert Bigelow: It's just like right under people's noses. Oh my gosh. Wow.

The FAA confirmed to us that for years, it referred reports of UFOs and other unexplained phenomena to a company Bigelow owns. He told us he's had his own close encounters, but declined to go into detail


----------



## TMA17 (Mar 11, 2018)

Pentagon Program has no idea what these things are.


----------



## TMA17 (Mar 11, 2018)

Glowing Auras and ‘Black Money’: The Pentagon’s Mysterious U.F.O. Program

I’ve heard all the arguments against it all before and I used to share those.  Now I’m not quite so sure.  Most people don't bother to go far enough in researching this issue.

Yes it is true that 98% of UFO's are weather related, hoaxes, space debris among other things, however, the 2-5% of unexplained cases are quite remarkable.

I like Neil D. Tyson.  I also believe extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.  If I was a scientist in a professional sense and worked in a University etc. I too would be careful NOT to touch this subject as it will ruin  your career.  Primarily in the U.S.  Not as much in other countries.

I'd also say that any advance intelligence,say even a thousand years ahead of us, could have figured out how to travel the vast distances.  And they could be so advanced we wouldn't even know they are here.  Like showing an Iphone to someone in the year 1200 would seem like magic, that is how their technology would look to us.


----------



## TMA17 (Mar 11, 2018)

Duplicate post.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 11, 2018)

pdg said:


> How do you know?
> 
> Define alien tech?
> 
> ...


Actually, the pace of acceleration is a pretty smooth curve.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 11, 2018)

TMA17 said:


> Glowing Auras and ‘Black Money’: The Pentagon’s Mysterious U.F.O. Program
> 
> I’ve heard all the arguments against it all before and I used to share those.  Now I’m not quite so sure.  Most people don't bother to go far enough in researching this issue.
> 
> ...


That's a very different argument than Area 51. I consider it quite reasonable (and unsupportable, so not worth arguing either way) that a very advanced civilization may exist and may have technology allowing them to observe us without our being aware. I'm simply not willing to ascribe unexplained things to said civilization simply because there are other possibilities equally beyond our current ken.


----------



## pdg (Mar 11, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Actually, the pace of acceleration is a pretty smooth curve.



Shush...

Computers were reverse engineered from a crash landed transformer, everyone knows that.


----------



## Buka (Mar 11, 2018)

Alien technology obviously gave us the Thermos. Put hot soup in it, it stays hot. Put cold beer in it, it says cold.

I mean, how do it know?


----------



## pdg (Mar 11, 2018)

Buka said:


> Alien technology obviously gave us the Thermos. Put hot soup in it, it stays hot. Put cold beer in it, it says cold.
> 
> I mean, how do it know?



I need to read the instructions for mine again I think, or I broke it.

It said hot things stay hot and cold things stay cold - so I took some nice chicken and bacon soup and an ice-cream for after...


----------



## AngryHobbit (Mar 11, 2018)

I like the way Carl Sagan put it. "If it's just us - it's an awful waste of space". 

Meanwhile, in Russia - the better approach is to acknowledge something exists and then tell everyone not to worry about it. 
Russian Gov't Says Not to Worry About These 54 Severed Human Hands Found in Siberia


----------



## jobo (Mar 11, 2018)

pdg said:


> How do you know?
> 
> Define alien tech?
> 
> ...


it REALLY started to take off with the wright brothers, 

it gained a good deal of impetus, from about 1800, which more or less  matches them stopping burning witches and the fall of the church power to stop science. They started the century with water wheels and ended it with the internal combustion engine, that was some going, considering they had to sort steam out in-between.

the internal combustion engine was what the wright brothers were sat in their bicycle shop waiting for, it then took another 50 years and two world wars to develop flight to space.

compared with that lot, not that much  has happened since. .


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 11, 2018)

jobo said:


> it REALLY started to take off with the wright brothers,
> 
> it gained a good deal of impetus, from about 1800, which more or less  matches them stopping burning witches and the fall of the church power to stop science. They started the century with water wheels and ended it with the internal combustion engine, that was some going, considering they had to sort steam out in-between.
> 
> ...


Much of which also rests upon the shoulders of the invention of the printing press, which made sharing information much easier and made more information durable. Analogous to the impact of the Internet (and later the Web) on information sharing today.


----------



## jobo (Mar 11, 2018)

gpseymour said:


> Much of which also rests upon the shoulders of the invention of the printing press, which made sharing information much easier and made more information durable. Analogous to the impact of the Internet (and later the Web) on information sharing today.


and,,, like the internet, the rapid rise of the printing press was driven by a mass market for pornography and political unrest.


----------



## TMA17 (Mar 11, 2018)




----------



## JR 137 (Mar 11, 2018)

Buka said:


> Alien technology obviously gave us the Thermos. Put hot soup in it, it stays hot. Put cold beer in it, it says cold.
> 
> I mean, how do it know?


And you don’t even have to plug it in.  It’s mind boggling.


----------



## JR 137 (Mar 11, 2018)

jobo said:


> and,,, like the internet, the rapid rise of the printing press was driven by a mass market for pornography and political unrest.



Allegedly, DVD was saved from losing the format war with VHS because of porno.  I read somewhere that DVD was almost scrapped due to its very slow initial sales.  Once the porn industry switched to DVD, DVD became an overnight success.


----------



## Anarax (Mar 11, 2018)

UFO(Unidentified Flying Object) doesn't automatically mean aliens. It's simply a flying object that hasn't be identified. For the sake of argument let's say that they're experimental military craft. If so, not every member of the military would be privy to such information. We already possess amazing aircraft technology, F-22s, Stealth Bombers, DEWs, etc. Is what the Navy Pilot described really that far from our technological capability?


----------



## JR 137 (Mar 11, 2018)

So we ring some aliens, reverse engineer their technology, and all we get are iPhones, Bluetooth, and Thermos?  Ok, other than Thermos, that’s the best we could come up with?  How about something that actually makes a big difference in my life, like teleportation?  Or airplanes that race against flashlights?  Call me crazy, but finding aliens should easily end my Griswold family road trip vacations.  Why can’t I get to Wally World in seconds rather than days?

Those aliens are pretty dumb.  What did they do, take a Zeppelin here from across the galaxy?


----------



## TMA17 (Mar 11, 2018)

Anarax said:


> UFO(Unidentified Flying Object) doesn't automatically mean aliens. It's simply a flying object that hasn't be identified. For the sake of argument let's say that they're experimental military craft. If so, not every member of the military would be privy to such information. We already possess amazing aircraft technology, F-22s, Stealth Bombers, DEWs, etc. Is what the Navy Pilot described really that far from our technological capability?



Very good question.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 12, 2018)

Anarax said:


> UFO(Unidentified Flying Object) doesn't automatically mean aliens. It's simply a flying object that hasn't be identified. For the sake of argument let's say that they're experimental military craft. If so, not every member of the military would be privy to such information. We already possess amazing aircraft technology, F-22s, Stealth Bombers, DEWs, etc. Is what the Navy Pilot described really that far from our technological capability?


Imagine a drone. Light weight allows for quick direction change, fast acceleration. Now take that experimental, and it’s a plausible explanation.


----------



## pdg (Mar 12, 2018)

JR 137 said:


> So we ring some aliens, reverse engineer their technology, and all we get are iPhones, Bluetooth, and Thermos?  Ok, other than Thermos, that’s the best we could come up with?  How about something that actually makes a big difference in my life, like teleportation?  Or airplanes that race against flashlights?  Call me crazy, but finding aliens should easily end my Griswold family road trip vacations.  Why can’t I get to Wally World in seconds rather than days?
> 
> Those aliens are pretty dumb.  What did they do, take a Zeppelin here from across the galaxy?



They knew there was a chance they wouldn't make it back, so it's silly to send a flagship exploration vehicle packed with all the latest tech.

Send a trabant.


----------



## Martial D (Mar 12, 2018)

Anarax said:


> UFO(Unidentified Flying Object) doesn't automatically mean aliens. It's simply a flying object that hasn't be identified. For the sake of argument let's say that they're experimental military craft. If so, not every member of the military would be privy to such information. We already possess amazing aircraft technology, F-22s, Stealth Bombers, DEWs, etc. Is what the Navy Pilot described really that far from our technological capability?



Yes. Yes it is. No lift source, no propulsion source,, physics defying maneuverability and an acceleration rate that would turn pilots into pattee are a few things that are certainly well beyond what we can do now.


----------



## TMA17 (Mar 12, 2018)

It’s common sense to assume a large majority of UFO’s are top secret military technology.  However some of what has been observed by our own military has defied our understanding of physics.  Things that are far more advanced than what Elon Musk and Bigelow are working on and far more advanced than any foreign military has within their arsenal.

I find the extreme skeptics almost as ridiculous as the militant believers.

I had a guy once deny up and down these possibilities, along with climate change and other things....he then goes to church and believes Noah somehow put a cheetah and every species within the animal kingdom on his Ark.  Unreal LMAO

People are going to believe what they want to believe.


----------



## TMA17 (Mar 12, 2018)

....at the end of the day though a UFO is simply an unidentified flying object.


----------



## AngryHobbit (Mar 12, 2018)

JR 137 said:


> So we ring some aliens, reverse engineer their technology, and all we get are iPhones, Bluetooth, and Thermos?  Ok, other than Thermos, that’s the best we could come up with?  How about something that actually makes a big difference in my life, like teleportation?  Or airplanes that race against flashlights?  Call me crazy, but finding aliens should easily end my Griswold family road trip vacations.  Why can’t I get to Wally World in seconds rather than days?
> 
> Those aliens are pretty dumb.  What did they do, take a Zeppelin here from across the galaxy?


As an alien, I resent this remark! Of course... I'm an alien from the Soviet Union - not from another galaxy but that's beside the point...

That aside, I'd like to point out _Blade Runner_ takes place in 2019. WHERE are my flying cars?! WHERE are the replicants?!


----------



## pdg (Mar 12, 2018)

AngryHobbit said:


> That aside, I'd like to point out _Blade Runner_ takes place in 2019. WHERE are my flying cars?! WHERE are the replicants?!



Still got a year to sort those out.

I've been waiting almost 3 years for my back to the future hoverboard and self drying clothes...


----------



## JR 137 (Mar 12, 2018)

AngryHobbit said:


> As an alien, I resent this remark! Of course... I'm an alien from the Soviet Union - not from another galaxy but that's beside the point...
> 
> That aside, I'd like to point out _Blade Runner_ takes place in 2019. WHERE are my flying cars?! WHERE are the replicants?!


Back to the Future 2 took place in 2015.  No flying cars yet.  No hover boards either.  At least Blade Runner still has a year.


----------



## Anarax (Mar 12, 2018)

Martial D said:


> No lift source, no propulsion source


The concept of "new" technology is what people have a hard time with. Not gradual refinements over many years, but an original idea engineered and applied. There can't be "no propulsion source", there's simply not a source we are familiar with. A group of college students were able to create a non-explosive torpedo that used Earth's natural magnetic field to propel itself. Though it traveled slowly, imagine what the military could do with it after they allocated billions of dollars into such technology?   



Martial D said:


> physics defying maneuverability


Physics is a very important field of science, but even physics has and is open to refinement. Look at the history of Physics. Quantum Mechanics, Heisenberg's uncertainty principle and Quantum entanglement are all examples of new theories that were rejected and/or scrutinized. However; they were proven to be correct later on, meaning our understanding of science is always expanding.



Martial D said:


> acceleration rate that would turn pilots into pattee


As mentioned by GP, an unmanned(drone) craft is an easy solution to this obstacle.


----------



## Anarax (Mar 12, 2018)

TMA17 said:


> some of what has been observed by our own military has defied our understanding of physics


Our understanding of physics isn't static though. It has and is being challenged by new ideas and we refine what we know and understand. We must be open to the fact that our understanding isn't the end all and be all of science, nor should we think every breakthrough would be common knowledge.


----------



## jobo (Mar 12, 2018)

AngryHobbit said:


> ?! WHERE are the replicants?!


on here by the sound of it


----------



## jobo (Mar 12, 2018)

TMA17 said:


> It’s common sense to assume a large majority of UFO’s are top secret military technology.  However some of what has been observed by our own military has defied our understanding of physics.  Things that are far more advanced than what Elon Musk and Bigelow are working on and far more advanced than any foreign military has within their arsenal.
> 
> I find the extreme skeptics almost as ridiculous as the militant believers.
> 
> ...


at the moment they are spending billions of $trying to find any sign of "aliens" , why would they bother if they just needed to look out of the window.

trying to lump people who don't think we are being over run with aliens in with those who arnt excepting of  climate change , is a bit much


----------



## AngryHobbit (Mar 12, 2018)

pdg said:


> Still got a year to sort those out.
> 
> I've been waiting almost 3 years for my back to the future hoverboard and self drying clothes...


Yeah, there is that... In one of my sci fi stories, I actually one-upped the self-drying clothes. I had a piece of furniture in a little boy's room, into which his mom could just drop whatever clothes he had left scattered around the room (she still had to do that.) The piece of furniture then sorted them, washed them, dried them, and neatly folded them into their appropriate compartments. A typical fantasy of someone who spent her early life doing laundry by hand - sometimes without hot water.


----------



## AngryHobbit (Mar 12, 2018)

Anarax said:


> Our understanding of physics isn't static though. It has and is being challenged by new ideas and we refine what we know and understand. We must be open to the fact that our understanding isn't the end all and be all of science, nor should we think every breakthrough would be common knowledge.


Another thing we need to remember (and it's been pointed out by many leading scientists) - it is very possible we are approaching a point, where our ability to generate or observe new phenomena in various branches of science surpasses our ability to comprehend and interpret them. Our brain is starting to lag behind our technology.


----------



## Martial D (Mar 12, 2018)

Anarax said:


> The concept of "new" technology is what people have a hard time with. Not gradual refinements over many years, but an original idea engineered and applied. There can't be "no propulsion source", there's simply not a source we are familiar with. A group of college students were able to create a non-explosive torpedo that used Earth's natural magnetic field to propel itself. Though it traveled slowly, imagine what the military could do with it after they allocated billions of dollars into such technology?
> 
> 
> Physics is a very important field of science, but even physics has and is open to refinement. Look at the history of Physics. Quantum Mechanics, Heisenberg's uncertainty principle and Quantum entanglement are all examples of new theories that were rejected and/or scrutinized. However; they were proven to be correct later on, meaning our understanding of science is always expanding.
> ...


As I said initially, I'll wait for evidence to present itself. For now all you are doing is basically writing science fiction.


----------



## Anarax (Mar 12, 2018)

AngryHobbit said:


> Another thing we need to remember (and it's been pointed out by many leading scientists) - it is very possible we are approaching a point, where our ability to generate or observe new phenomena in various branches of science surpasses our ability to comprehend and interpret them. Our brain is starting to lag behind our technology.


So we're slowing becoming like the people in Idiocracy? Tell me something I don't know


----------



## Anarax (Mar 12, 2018)

Martial D said:


> As I said initially, I'll wait for evidence to present itself. For now all you are doing is basically writing science fiction.


What exactly did I write that's "science fiction"?


----------



## Martial D (Mar 12, 2018)

Anarax said:


> What exactly did I write that's "science fiction"?


The whole theorycrafting bit about how the theoretical ufo could perform as it was claimed to.


----------



## AngryHobbit (Mar 12, 2018)

Anarax said:


> So we're slowing becoming like the people in Idiocracy? Tell me something I don't know


Oh, no, nothing like that - although some of that IS happening. But no... this is an issue even for very smart people, apparently, including the scientists themselves. They theorize there is a certain natural progression to our ability to comprehend things.

 At this point, we have technology that allows us to see various macroscopic and microscopic events. But, even the very smart people who designed the technology to make the observation possible and set up experiments (in some cases) to initiate such events, have reached a point where they have trouble interpreting what they are seeing. Something is happening, the equipment is recording... something. They just don't know what it is. Neil deGrasse Tyson talked about this as did Stephen Hawking. 

Not being a theoretical physicist or mathematician, it's not always easy for me to follow them, but it's very humbling to see such great minds to finally get to something they don't understand. And admit as much.


----------



## Anarax (Mar 12, 2018)

AngryHobbit said:


> Oh, no, nothing like that - although some of that IS happening. But no... this is an issue even for very smart people, apparently, including the scientists themselves. They theorize there is a certain natural progression to our ability to comprehend things.
> 
> At this point, we have technology that allows us to see various macroscopic and microscopic events. But, even the very smart people who designed the technology to make the observation possible and set up experiments (in some cases) to initiate such events, have reached a point where they have trouble interpreting what they are seeing. Something is happening, the equipment is recording... something. They just don't know what it is. Neil deGrasse Tyson talked about this as did Stephen Hawking.
> 
> Not being a theoretical physicist or mathematician, it's not always easy for me to follow them, but it's very humbling to see such great minds to finally get to something they don't understand. And admit as much.



I was just joking. I think I understand what you mean. Our advance tools and instruments allow us to witness things we wouldn't even know they happened. Thus when they witness such phenomena, they must then theorize as explanation to what they witnessed.


----------



## Anarax (Mar 12, 2018)

Martial D said:


> The whole theorycrafting bit about how the theoretical ufo could perform as it was claimed to.



No, it was explaining how our understanding and technological capability is ever-changing. That we can't simply say "we can't do that thus it must be aliens" was my point. The magnetic torpedo was an example of a drive mechanism that could be mistaken for "no propulsion". 

I've never been called a scifi writer while trying to disprove alien involvement before


----------



## TMA17 (Mar 12, 2018)

I would have to see it for myself to "truly" believe it's ET, or have more confirmation (evidence) of some sort.  The UFO phenomena is real, but it doesn't necessarily mean it's alien.  That should be obvious.  Jacques Vallee  has a lot of good material on this subject.  We could be ants along side a highway and have not a clue what is moving by us.  Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

We lack a smoking gun as Machio Kaku says...











Based on what I have read over the last several years on this topic, including alien abductions, I do "believe" there is something to it that does not involve human technology.


----------



## AngryHobbit (Mar 12, 2018)

Anarax said:


> I was just joking. I think I understand what you mean. Our advance tools and instruments allow us to witness things we wouldn't even know they happened. Thus when they witness such phenomena, they must then theorize as explanation to what they witnessed.


Exactly. Or they might just say, "What the...? Well, I've got nothing, folks! I have no idea what the heck I'm looking at here!"


----------



## Martial D (Mar 12, 2018)

Anarax said:


> No, it was explaining how our understanding and technological capability is ever-changing. That we can't simply say "we can't do that thus it must be aliens" was my point. The magnetic torpedo was an example of a drive mechanism that could be mistaken for "no propulsion".
> 
> I've never been called a scifi writer while trying to disprove alien involvement before


Without the data/facts/evidence it's all sci-fi dude, it doesn't really matter if it's aliens or government cover-ups.

We might as well be discussing the engineering designs of pokeballs.


----------



## TMA17 (Mar 12, 2018)

Anarax said:


> Our understanding of physics isn't static though. It has and is being challenged by new ideas and we refine what we know and understand. We must be open to the fact that our understanding isn't the end all and be all of science, nor should we think every breakthrough would be common knowledge.



Absolutely agree.  Science is process.  Theories are always being challenged and refined.  We could be barely out of the woods on a cosmological timescale....and we may not even be able to perceive or understand would could theoretically be interacting with us.  Through science though, we can continue to learn more and progress....or regress.


----------



## AngryHobbit (Mar 12, 2018)

Martial D said:


> Without the data/facts/evidence it's all sci-fi dude, it doesn't really matter if it's aliens or government cover-ups.
> 
> We might as well be discussing the engineering designs of pokeballs.


Now wait a minute! Pokeballs are real!


----------



## pdg (Mar 12, 2018)

Martial D said:


> Without the data/facts/evidence it's all sci-fi dude, it doesn't really matter if it's aliens or government cover-ups.
> 
> We might as well be discussing the engineering designs of pokeballs.



Where is the crossover point 'twixt fiction and speculation?


----------



## Anarax (Mar 12, 2018)

Martial D said:


> it doesn't really matter if it's aliens or government cover-ups.


It does, considering that's what the thread and topical discussion is about


Martial D said:


> We might as well be discussing the engineering designs of pokeballs.


It's not the same at all. The pokeball is fictional, while the craft itself is real, and the magnetic drive is real. That doesn't mean the magnetic drive is the actual propulsion of the craft. The magnetic drive was an example to clear up a scientific misunderstanding


----------



## jobo (Mar 12, 2018)

Anarax said:


> It does, considering that's what the thread and topical discussion is about
> 
> It's not the same at all. The pokeball is fictional, while the craft itself is real, and the magnetic drive is real. That doesn't mean the magnetic drive is the actual propulsion of the craft. The magnetic drive was an example to clear up a scientific misunderstanding


are you taking about extracting power from the earths magnetic field? That would produce a 3 billionth of a volt per metre of collector, that apart from the fact it more or less disappears  at the equator,


----------



## Martial D (Mar 12, 2018)

pdg said:


> Where is the crossover point 'twixt fiction and speculation?


Evidence.


----------



## Martial D (Mar 12, 2018)

Anarax said:


> It does, considering that's what the thread and topical discussion is about



Not so much. The problem is that the subject of discussion can't/hasn't shown itself to even exist.  This would be identical to speculating on the biological origins of Bigfoot without evidence of Bigfoot.


> It's not the same at all. The pokeball is fictional, while the craft itself is real, and the magnetic drive is real. That doesn't mean the magnetic drive is the actual propulsion of the craft. The magnetic drive was an example to clear up a scientific misunderstanding


First, the premise that "the craft is real" hasn't been shown to be true.

Second, the technology to slowly move something via the earth's magnetic field is nothing like a spaceship that can zip around in any direction. You are making a huge stretch in support of something that is already a huge stretch. Mr fantastic would be impressed.


----------



## Anarax (Mar 12, 2018)

Martial D said:


> First, the premise that "the craft is real" hasn't been shown to be true.


I don't understand. What did you base your statement below off of then?


Martial D said:


> No lift source, no propulsion source,, physics defying maneuverability and an acceleration rate that would turn pilots into pattee






Martial D said:


> Second, the technology to slowly move something via the earth's magnetic field is nothing like a spaceship that can zip around in any direction. You are making a huge stretch in support of something that is already a huge stretch. Mr fantastic would be impressed.


You're misunderstanding the point. The magnetic drive was an example of how a craft with "no propulsion", or more specifically, a craft with no observable external propulsion could move. I used the example to prove a concept, not to state the actual propulsion of the craft.  


Martial D said:


> The problem is that the subject of discussion can't/hasn't shown itself to even exist.


So by that logic no one on the forum should talk about it? It's safe to say not every single video of a UFO is fake, thus the subject/topic exists. 


Martial D said:


> This would be identical to speculating on the biological origins of Bigfoot without evidence of Bigfoot.


No it wouldn't. The existence of UFOs isn't questionable, what they are is. Unless you're saying every single eyewitness account is a lie and every video is photoshopped?


Martial D said:


> First, the premise that "the craft is real" hasn't been shown to be true.


Again I ask what you based your statement below off of?


Martial D said:


> No lift source, no propulsion source,, physics defying maneuverability and an acceleration rate that would turn pilots into pattee


----------



## Martial D (Mar 13, 2018)

My statement vis a vis lift source etc was in reference to the claims made in a video posted here. I didn't state I agreed with the veracity of the stated claims.

Secondly, the evidence in support of UFOs(the videos/pictures available) are very much in doubt. People have been faking things like this at least as long as history has been recorded, and so far on this front nothing has really stood out as convincing to those that do not already believe.

As I've stated here twice before, I'll withhold judgement until real evidence hits the floor, but you'll have to excuse me if I don't turn blue holding my breath.


----------



## pdg (Mar 13, 2018)

Martial D said:


> Evidence.



We have evidence...

Someone sees a UFO, you can speculate about what it might be. Their story is evidence.

Now, if they made it up, their story is fiction - but saying whether they made it up or not is purely speculation...

So, again, we have evidence - discussing the validity or source of said evidence isn't fiction, it's speculation.


----------



## pdg (Mar 13, 2018)

Further...

The other night, I saw a light in the sky that tracked from horizon to horizon.

That's evidence, I saw it.

I can speculate as to what it was. It could be aliens. It could be a satellite. It could be the ISS.

Without _further_ information it remains speculation. It's not fictitious.

As it happens, I know it was ISS. Because I looked it up prior to the event and awaited it's arrival.

Had I taken that knowledge and disregarded it in favour of saying "aliens!", that's fiction.


So, stating that something _could_ be 'experimental military equipment' is speculation. Saying it _must_ be is fiction.


----------



## pdg (Mar 13, 2018)

Martial D said:


> the evidence in support of UFOs(the videos/pictures available) are very much in doubt. People have been faking things like this at least as long as history has been recorded, and so far on this front nothing has really stood out as convincing to those that do not already believe.



And that supports my earlier post.

You've seen so much fake stuff (some of which is quite convincing until very closely scrutinised) that you're desensitised to it.

The burden of proof is so much higher than if it was the first time you'd seen it.

So, one person provides one real image, unfortunately there has been some processing/degredation.

Agency X releases 5,000 images with a bewildering array of fakery and manipulation.

The real image is taken to be altered due to degredation artifacts or similar.

Objective achieved...


----------



## jobo (Mar 13, 2018)

pdg said:


> Further...
> 
> The other night, I saw a light in the sky that tracked from horizon to horizon.
> 
> ...


there's a difference between speculation, ie it could be several things, all of which are rational conclusion for the available evidence, AND wild speculation, , ie irrational conclusions based on little or no evidence, you have no evidence that its experimental military equipment, so that would be WILD


----------



## pdg (Mar 13, 2018)

jobo said:


> there's a difference between speculation, ie it could be several things, all of which are rational conclusion for the available evidence, AND wild speculation, , ie irrational conclusions based on little or no evidence, you have no evidence that its experimental military equipment, so that would be WILD



Pretty much, yes.

Suggesting it could be military as an option is normal speculation.

Even if you go wild and say it can only be military (based on the available evidence of someone saw something), it's still not fiction though...


----------



## Martial D (Mar 13, 2018)

Wild claims != "Evidence", else we have evidence of every off the wall claim ever made about anything.

As per your conspiracy theories, I'll just leave you right to them, as I return this subject to the heap of other non verifiable claims with the resurrection of so and so and faked moon missions and the like.


----------



## jobo (Mar 13, 2018)

pdg said:


> Pretty much, yes.
> 
> Suggesting it could be military as an option is normal speculation.
> 
> Even if you go wild and say it can only be military (based on the available evidence of someone saw something), it's still not fiction though...


no, something is either fact or its fiction, there isn't a halfway house, if you saw a flying thing, , that's a fact, your conclusion that it may be advanced technology being tried out by the military is fiction, unless you have some evidence that that is so.  Evidence that it is one thing, can not reasonably be gained from the fact you have no other explanation for what you saw


----------



## pdg (Mar 13, 2018)

Martial D said:


> I return this subject to the heap of other non verifiable claims with the resurrection of so and so and faked moon missions and the like



Moon missions then...

You believe they happened?

Held a moon rock in your hand have you?

If so, how do you know it's genuine? Did you go and collect it yourself?

There's not a telescope in existence that can resolve the lander or the flag, so you can't look at them yourself.

All we have for evidence is photos, personal accounts and records - all of which could be faked...

All of the evidence is what various government agencies have chosen to release 


Oh, much like whether there's an alien craft in storage...

(Personally, I use a balance of probability - the moon missions probably happened so I choose to accept they did. There's probably not an alien craft in storage.)


----------



## pdg (Mar 13, 2018)

jobo said:


> no, something is either fact or its fiction, there isn't a halfway house, if you saw a flying thing, , that's a fact, your conclusion that it may be advanced technology being tried out by the military is fiction, unless you have some evidence that that is so.  Evidence that it is one thing, can not reasonably be gained from the fact you have no other explanation for what you saw



But I could fabricate a fictional account of seeing something.

Anything based on that evidence (even though it's false/fictional) is speculation.


----------



## Martial D (Mar 13, 2018)

pdg said:


> Moon missions then...
> 
> You believe they happened?
> 
> ...



Yes yes very creative. Show me something to discuss.


----------



## jobo (Mar 13, 2018)

pdg said:


> But I could fabricate a fictional account of seeing something.
> 
> Anything based on that evidence (even though it's false/fictional) is speculation.


no again, unless you have evidence to speculate with and a logical method to analysis that evidence then your conclusions are guessing.

any thing that runs along the line of,,,, i can't explain that,, therefore it must be,secret advanced technology incorporating anti gravity and a magnetic hyper drive, is GUESSING and fiction.

the only logical conclusion to i can't explain that,,,, is its something you don't understand, and that's it, to most people things they don't understand includes very nearly all established physics,


----------



## pdg (Mar 13, 2018)

Martial D said:


> Yes yes very creative. Show me something to discuss.



Well, I have.

If you choose not to see it, that's up to you.



jobo said:


> any thing that runs along the line of,,,, i can't explain that,, therefore it must be,secret advanced technology incorporating anti gravity and a magnetic hyper drive, is GUESSING and fiction.



Guessing and fiction are two separate things.

Guessing is a mild form of using available evidence to speculate on possibilities.

Fiction is making something up entirely.

Go back to an earlier post where I outlined the difference between "must" and "could".


----------



## jobo (Mar 13, 2018)

pdg said:


> Well, I have.
> 
> If you choose not to see it, that's up to you.
> 
> ...


well no AGAIN, fiction is just that which can't be demonstrated to be a fact.  Guessing is reaching a conclusion with out the required evidence to prove that conclusion true.
saying it may or could be something is still a conclusion, a conclusion you have reached by guessing and us therefore fiction


----------



## TMA17 (Mar 13, 2018)

Third-party evidence for Apollo Moon landings - Wikipedia


How Our Maxwell GPUs Debunked the Apollo 11 Conspiracy Theory [Updated with Video] | The Official NVIDIA Blog


----------



## pdg (Mar 13, 2018)

jobo said:


> well no AGAIN, fiction is just that which can't be demonstrated to be a fact.  Guessing is reaching a conclusion with out the required evidence to prove that conclusion true.
> saying it may or could be something is still a conclusion, a conclusion you have reached by guessing and us therefore fiction



Back to pigeon chess again I see...

Saying something must be something based on scant evidence is an incomplete conclusion.

Saying something may/could be something based on scant evidence is speculation (or guessing if you will).

Just because something isn't proved beyond reasonable doubt doesn't make it fiction. It makes it a degree of speculation.

Just like Michael Jackson, it's not black or white.


----------



## pdg (Mar 13, 2018)

TMA17 said:


> Third-party evidence for Apollo Moon landings - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> How Our Maxwell GPUs Debunked the Apollo 11 Conspiracy Theory [Updated with Video] | The Official NVIDIA Blog



None of which is any more conclusive than NASA saying "look what we done did".

(Just for clarity, I don't think the moon landings were faked. I'm just saying that it would have been possible to do so.)


----------



## TMA17 (Mar 13, 2018)

I had a friend that thought the moon landing was fake.  I did for a short while until I looked into it further.  I now believe we did land on the moon as 3rd party evidence suggests.  The van allen belt was figured out among other obstacles that were brought up.


----------



## pdg (Mar 13, 2018)

TMA17 said:


> I had a friend that thought the moon landing was fake.  I did for a short while until I looked into it further.  I now believe we did land on the moon as 3rd party evidence suggests.  The van allen belt was figured out among other obstacles that were brought up.



If you actually want to believe the moon landings were faked, all the third party evidence can easily be put down to conspiracy.

Tracking can be spoofed, comms can be spoofed.

Everyone in the control room could be fooled - there would essentially only need be a handful of people who really know that everything was fake.

And if any of those tried to speak out, there's two foolproof solutions: 

Weight of conflicting evidence, and

Well, accidents happen...


----------



## TMA17 (Mar 13, 2018)

Right I mean you an question almost anything to the point where nothing is real...like this conversation and our understanding of reality is just an abstract part of the matrix.


----------



## TMA17 (Mar 13, 2018)

I’ve always found synchronities interesting.


----------



## pdg (Mar 13, 2018)

TMA17 said:


> Right I mean you an question almost anything to the point where nothing is real...like this conversation and our understanding of reality is just an abstract part of the matrix.



Exactly.

I can't prove beyond a shadow of doubt that I'm real...

On the flip side, you can choose not to question it at all and just believe what you want.

Flat earth might be pushing it a bit though.


----------



## Martial D (Mar 13, 2018)

pdg said:


> Well, I have.
> 
> If you choose not to see it, that's up to you.
> .


You've offered a what if piggybacking on another what if. We call that stoner talk where I'm from .


----------



## pdg (Mar 13, 2018)

Martial D said:


> You've offered a what if piggybacking on another what if. We call that stoner talk where I'm from .



I'll take that - at least it means I'm still alive 




Edit: The point is it's the same situation but reversed.

The majority of evidence you are prepared to accept falls firmly in favour of the moon landings being genuine so your conclusion is that it happened.

The majority of evidence you are prepared to accept falls contrary to the US government having alien artifacts in secret storage so your conclusion is that it's (very probably) false.

For both things, there is evidence of sorts that go against your conclusions. For whatever reason (conditioning, how you view the reliability of the sources) you choose to disregard that evidence as fictional.


----------



## jobo (Mar 14, 2018)

pdg said:


> Back to pigeon chess again I see...
> 
> Saying something must be something based on scant evidence is an incomplete conclusion.
> 
> ...


ok .
the star trek warp drive is fiction, though its theoretically possible, in that there is nothing in Einstein's equations that make a near light speed warp drive impossible, but it was fiction, it is fiction and it will remain fiction until someone builds one and proves it true. The writers speculated it will be invented, based on said equations, but the result of that speculation is FICTION


----------



## jobo (Mar 14, 2018)

pdg said:


> I'll take that - at least it means I'm still alive
> 
> 
> 
> ...


but there is tons of evidence that the moon landings took place and non at all that they didn't, if by evidence you mean scientific data accepted by peer review as being accurate.

and there is no evidence at all of alien spaceships, ( same defintion of evidence)


----------



## pdg (Mar 14, 2018)

jobo said:


> ok .
> the star trek warp drive is fiction, though its theoretically possible, in that there is nothing in Einstein's equations that make a near light speed warp drive impossible, but it was fiction, it is fiction and it will remain fiction until someone builds one and proves it true. The writers speculated it will be invented, based on said equations, but the result of that speculation is FICTION



Well, actually you're wrong...

Star Trek warp speed is very much faster than light.

If it were "near light speed" and hence theoretically possible to achieve while complying with Einstein's (incomplete) theories, then the original 5 year mission would have just allowed them to reach Proxima Centauri, which is our next closest star and hugely unlikely to support intelligent life.

Seeing as warp speed is measured in light years per hour, it cannot in any way exist with our current understanding of physics.

That's fiction, not speculation.

Because it can't be supported at all.


----------



## jobo (Mar 14, 2018)

pdg said:


> Well, actually you're wrong...
> 
> Star Trek warp speed is very much faster than light.
> 
> ...


but a drive that warps space in order to propel  you accross the  universe IS possible, at what speed? They will need to sort out quantum entanglement and worm holes through alternative dimentions, to decieded if faster than light is possible, its not looking good so far, but you never know.
Science FICTION has a habit of becoming science FACT or at least a watered down version of it, i read the other day that they are close to " inventing" the tricorder

Nb if faster that light Isn't possible then the,chances of their being alien craft at area 51 is reduced even more


----------



## Buka (Mar 14, 2018)

I sure wish the earth was flat. Think about a flat earth and one of those red sunsets...




 
We might look like a pizza from outer space. I betcha the aliens would come then. I betcha.

That's probably why they built Area 51 in the first place. It's going to be a drive through.


----------



## Buka (Mar 14, 2018)

Kind of cool, for anybody interested. My name be going!

Public Invited to Come Aboard NASA’s First Mission to Touch the Sun


----------

