Yes, I grew up with the skyline flare videos and am ultimately unimpressed by them as well.
Last edited:
At 15, I didn't even know what LSD was yet, however I never used the stuff.
That orb a hundred feet away from my window was not some trip I was on.
Maybe us, the people who've seen stuff were "chosen".
Chosen to be laughed at and ridiculed for our sightings, who knows, who cares.
At any rate, it doesn't bother me or influence my life.
Sounds about right to my mind. It seems nature looks to fill every available niche. Some close and the species occupying that niche die off and others open up and get filled. I read a short while ago that over 3.8 billion yrs, the Earth had hosted 10.7 billion species. It really took off the last 65 million yrs as we became a ‘garden planet’ ie nice and comfortable for life.
No.
So you don’t seem to have an opinion either way, but you have decided that scientists talking about the probability (difficult concept for some) of advanced civilizations elsewhere being very low are not in a position to make that call because we don’t have a ‘complete theory of gravity’.
Last edited:
An incomplete theory is incomplete, and doesn’t have all the answers. Would you agree with this statement?
There seems to be some sort of impasse here. Saying that given a current state of knowledge and evidence provided one considers something to have a low probability is not "making a call" on the existence or non existence of anything.
“Probability”, considering the current state of the art, is relatively meaningless. We don’t even know what it is that we don’t know.
Yes it does. The outlier is believability. What do you make of eyewitnesses that are trained observers, with sterling reputations, that claim to have seen things that can’t be explained?
You mean it wasn't as good just prior to that 65 million years?
BTW, when that asteroid hit 65 m.y. ago, it made this planet a very hostile place for biological lifeforms for a while. Before that impact, this planet was flourishing with complex lifeforms. IOW, it was already nice and comfortable for life.
There’s alternative hypotheses that are nonetheless improbable that are not predicated on an extraterrestrial origin
re: "nice and comfortable for life"
It was the UAP report about bubbling sea that led me to things like hydrothermic bacteria and other nearby creatures. That motivated me to Gould, who seems to hold bacteria as the most adaptive life form. And from chapter 1 of FH, fishes as the supreme vertebrate.
But I don't want to get too off-topic. I'd say that probability suggests the first extraterrestrial life humans encounter will be a bacterium. I hear NASA is going to search Venus.
It was the UAP report about bubbling sea that led me to things like hydrothermic bacteria and other nearby creatures. That motivated me to Gould, who seems to hold bacteria as the most adaptive life form. And from chapter 1 of FH, fishes as the supreme vertebrate.
But I don't want to get too off-topic. I'd say that probability suggests the first extraterrestrial life humans encounter will be a bacterium. I hear NASA is going to search Venus.
Nothing more. You can’t say what they are or what they aren’t. However, discrediting the observations of others based on our current limited understanding of physics makes no sense. This includes the probability conversations. Probability implies an understanding of the variables and their likelihood. Conjecture based upon a limited theory is not enough to establish meaningful probability.
You mean it wasn't as good just prior to that 65 million years?
Not as comfortable as the last 30- 40 million yrs. Ice ages came, and as James Lovelock says, ‘a cold earth is a productive Earth’. Cool oceans mean high oxygen levels and life thrives (think about krill etc that support the largest mammals ie whales). Even the tropical oceans cooled. If the ocean temperature is above 22 or 23, it’s effectively an oceanic desert compared to the northern latitudes.
Simply that they made an observation that cannot be explained, not anything else.
Secondly, the probability that it’s an advanced alien civilization visitation is extremely low, though not impossible.
That should lead one to look for a rational explanation. All sorts of alien craft completely disobeying fundamental physics is not a rational explanation, for example an object accelerating from lower near zero speed and traveling 50 miles in 43 seconds in a dense atmosphere
Last edited:
What source are you basing this on? I posted a link to a paper by an Astro-biologist that referenced numerous other papers by academics on the subject, and I posted a link to a TED talk by Prof Mark Defant.
You raise ‘incomplete or limited physics’ and then claim that disqualifies scientific opinion on probability as ‘conjecture’.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.