aliens?

[ibC]

What the average person like myself finds when studying the UFO phenomenon is a lot of rumors, a lot of speculation, and even more garbage. Nevertheless, one thing is for sure, something IS going on. Possibilities are endless, and many are likely, but it's a strong fact that there is an unidentified intelligent presence in our skies and in our space. The massive amount of witness testimony alone should be enough to no longer ignore this issue. Irrational skeptical arguments can no longer be tolerated, for people are generally not stupid, and I am not stupid, we are seeing these things... they are real.

 

The question is no longer 'Are they here?', but is 'Why are they here? 'Where are they from?' And 'What can their existence teach us about our own?' Some have argued that these crafts are all advanced military technology, and this is a possibility, but in no way can that account for the entire phenomena. UFO's have been documented in various ways since long before the Ford model T was even in production, so it's pretty clear human origin for this presence falls short of a complete explanation.

 

When are we going to start acting like adults and discuss this openly and intelligently?

[Royston]

When are we going to start acting like adults and discuss this openly and intelligently?

 

When there's proof.

[DV8 2XL]

Damn. Ever since I was a kid I've wanted to be abducted by space fairing aliens, but has it happened - no. Instead they go after neurotics that don't want to be. It's a cruel and unfair universe, I tell you.

[Phi for All]

When are we going to start acting like adults and discuss this openly and intelligently?

To me, this sounds more like, "When are you just going to admit that they're real so you can join the bandwagon and I can stop spending so much time convincing you?" I remain skeptical but hopeful that we are not alone in this galaxy.

 

Open and intelligent adult discussion has been going on for quite some time. Much of that discussion has even applied the scientific method to the study, but that's where it all breaks down. When something defies direct observation and repeatable experimentation, it tends to fall into non-quantifiable categories like religion and fairy tales. Especially when alternative, more likely explanations are readily available.

[DV8 2XL]

Nevertheless some good science has been done; the Drake equation , for example and SETI (despite the null result so far). Within the confines of legitimate science we seem to be doing all we can with the tools available.

[Phi for All]

Nevertheless some good science has been done; the Drake equation , for example and SETI (despite the null result so far). Within the confines of legitimate science we seem to be doing all we can with the tools available.

It is gratifying that even when we are chasing aliens we are solving other mysteries as well. Science is full of discoveries like that. Ether was used to give women a buzz at Victorian parties (where it was unseemly for them to be seen drinking) until a doctor realized it's anaesthetic properties.

 

If we end up colonizing space before resource depletion forces us to, all because we were curious about possible neighbors, I say let's chase us some aliens.

[Edtharan]

Irrational skeptical arguments can no longer be tolerated, for people are generally not stupid, and I am not stupid, we are seeing these things... they are real.

Yes they can be that stupid. There is a phonomena that is called religion. Each religion (ther may be a few exception I don't know about) professes to be the One True Religion. If this is the case then only 1 group can be right and all the others are wrong. This leaves the majority of people on the planet believing in, and devoting their entire life to a dumb idea (and if no religion is right...).

 

So from this I can say that there can be a lot of people that do believe in dumb ideas and let those ideas influence how they act and so just because a lot of people say they saw something and believe it was aliens is no garuntee that it was aliens.

 

Damn. Ever since I was a kid I've wanted to be abducted by space fairing aliens, but has it happened - no. Instead they go after neurotics that don't want to be. It's a cruel and unfair universe, I tell you.

Me too.

Actually if aliens are visiting us then they would be able to hack into the internet and perform searches for stuff like this, so they are likely to see these posts and maybe the weill respond to our requests

[Franklin]

Are these hoaxes?

http://paranormal.about.com/library/weekly/aa011402a.htm

 

Not a bad UFO here!

http://www.lookatentertainment.com/v/v-1783.htm

[ecoli]

Are these hoaxes?

http://paranormal.about.com/library/weekly/aa011402a.htm

 

if they're using a paranormal explaination, then most probably.

[padren]

One consession I have to make is, that if you do see what appears to be a literal UFO, chances are you'll never be able to communicate in words effectively enough to convince others that what you saw was not in fact venus or swamp gas or some other factor.

 

And if you did convince someone you are not mistaken, delusion or dishonesty are still more probable explanations than actually seeing an alien from another world.

 

I do think its worth questioning what the burden of proof would be to prove such events were transpiring. Its entirely reasonable to decide that the requirements are both "too high" (ie, if such events did take place, are they likely to be thought not to be due to the burden of evidence needed?) and "too low" (too much BS is likely to be taken as fact) at the same time, they are not mutually exclusive.

These are independant scales, that are both dependant on what you are investigating.

 

Take trying to prove "god" for instance, by definition a God could reasonable ensure no evidence is ever discovered of him, and at the same time any amount of proof could be some super dude that happened not to have created the universe and is just messing with our heads, because once you entertain the possibility of one super being, logically you should entertain the possibility of somewhat lesser super beings.

 

Hence, I'd give the "god question" a para-rating of 10/10 as the ultimate non-provable case, and things like UFOs are high but lesser on the scale.

 

Basically, if you've seen a UFO, I'd say all the power to you in trying to figure it out, but its not a phenomenon that (if valid) lends itself easily to empirical evidence and the scientific method.

[sunspot]

UFO's and aliens are examples of modern mythology. The ancient Greeks were convinced of Zeus and the rest of their gods in much the same way. In both cases, these were projections from within, stemming from what the psychologist Carl Jung called the collective unconscious. A projection is sort of an unconscious movie projecting through the eyes overlaying reality. In modern lingo, the collective unconsious is similar to personality software that underlies the human personality and is common to all humans. Its collective nature is why mythology can become a collective projection or many can see a very similar movie.

[bascule]

Are these hoaxes?

http://paranormal.about.com/library/weekly/aa011402a.htm

 

The first one is. I'm not going to bother with the rest.

 

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/mom/spheres.html

 

Over the past several decades' date=' South African miners have found hundreds of metallic spheres, at least one of which has three parallel grooves running around its equator. The spheres are of two types--"one of solid bluish metal with white flecks, and another which is a hollow ball filled with a white spongy center" (Jimison 1982).

 

It is important to note at this time, that (Jimison 1982) is:

 

Jimison, S. (1982) Scientists baffled by space spheres. Weekly World News, July 27.[/quote']

 

Ed: Okay, changed my mind, I'll do the second one too:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dropa

 

The Dropa (also known as Dropas, Drok-pa or Dzopa) are, according to certain controversial writers, a race of dwarf-like extraterrestrials who landed near the Chinese-Tibetan border some twelve thousand years ago.

 

Skeptics note, however, a number of problems with the case (and a lack of corroborative evidence), which offers significant doubt as to the reality of the more sensationalistic Dropa claims. Mainstream critics argue that the entire affair is a hoax.

 

No traceable, credible evidence for this theory exists, or can be proven to have existed in the past. Proponents of the Dropa-stones story claim that this is the result of social disruption caused by the Chinese Cultural Revolution and of a conspiratorial coverup by Chinese authorities. However this story goes well beyond China. Its opponents claim it is long proven to be a forgery by Erich von Däniken.

 

Richie notes that the Dropa tales intrigued Gordon Chreighton, a Fellow of the Royal Anthropological Society and Royal Geographical Society. Upon investigation, Chreighton judged the sensationalistic Dropa-Extraterrestrial allegations tales to be "groundless," and detailed his findings in an article for Flying Saucer Review.

 

The word "Dropa", according to Chrieghton, describes the pastoral residents of Tibetan highlands, and can be roughly translated as "solitude" or "isolated". Furthermore, Chreighton described the Dropa as not resembling "troglodytes", or as stunted; on the contrary, they tend to be rather large and sturdy, befitting their occupation as herders. (Richie, 95-96)

 

Below is a detailed rebuttal of most sensationalistic Extraterrestrial/Dropa claims

 

1. The discovery. There are no mentions of 'Tsum Um Nui' anywhere; as he is supposed to have fled China and died in Japan in the 60s this cannot be negated by cultural revolution - communist coverup theory. Also, there is no mention of the 1938 archaeological expedition to the Bayan Kara Ula range. The "Peking Academy of Pre-History" that was the supposed originator never existed.

 

2. Early Sources. The first reliable mention of the story is in Erich von Däniken's infamous 1968 book, Chariots of the Gods. Vast majority of names and sources appearing there cannot be corroborated, and no existence of the following Soviet or Chinese scholars can be found anywhere outside this story: Chu Pu Tei, Tsum Um Nui, Ernst Wegener, Vyatcheslav Saitzev, Sergei Lolladoff. Most tellingly, Däniken gives his main source for the story as a Soviet sci-fi writer Alexander Kazantsev; however Kazantsev himself disagrees with Däniken's account and says that it was Däniken who told him the story, not the other way around.

 

3. Later Sources. The 1978 book Sungods in Exile "edited" by David Agamon, appeared to lend support to the story of the Dropa, but Agamon admitted in the magazine Fortean Times in 1988 that the book was fiction and that its alleged author, a British researcher named Dr. Karyl Robin-Evans, was imaginary. Some websites claim to show a photo of Dr Robin-Evans with the Dalai Lama. A frail, old man assisted by the current Dalai Lama, the photograph is quite recent and can not be Dr Robin-Evans -- he died in 1978, according to Hartwig Hausdorf.

 

4. Translation. There is absolutely no precedent for an unknown language being successfully deciphered. All lost Ancient languages have been rediscovered only because they survived in forms familiar to scientists. Even in such cases, deciphering and understanding these older language forms and their scripts has usually taken decades for multiple teams of highly competent linguists, and their findings are constantly being debated and updated. Many ancient scripts (notably Linear A from the island of Crete and Rongorongo from Easter Island), have defied deciphering precisely because they cannot be linked to any known language. Given these facts, there would be even greater difficulties in translating a truly extraterrestrial language. It is therefore highly unlikely that a single Chinese scholar with no reported background in linguistics could single-handedly decypher an alien script or language in his spare time.

 

5. The Disks. All that exists of the supposed alien disks are several wide-angle photographs. The disks photographed, firstly, do not match the described "12-inch disks"; the disks photographed are very large. Secondly, the photos show none of the supposed deep grooves. Finally, absolutely no photos, descriptions, analyses or any other evidence of the actual 'alien script' appear anywhere at all.

 

6. The Evidence. The disks were supposed to be stored in several museums in China. None of these museums have any traces of these disks, nor can any be found of the ones supposedly sent to USSR for analysis.

 

7. The Dropa Tribe. While reported to be a tribe of feeble dwarfs, in actuality the Dropas are nomadic herders who inhabit most of the northern Tibetan Plateau. The Ham are also inhabitants of Tibet, and traditionally have supplied Tibet's warriors: many of the 13th Dalai Lama's bodyguards during his escape from the Chinese invasion were Ham Tibetans.

[JohnB]

Without worrying about the existence of aliens or otherwise.

 

Sunspot, a very nice explanation. Of course if you can't actually prove the existence of a collective unconscious, then it's absolutely meaningless. Can you objectively prove it's existence?

 

Padren, you have touched on an area I find interesting in these debates. The veracity of witnesses. (Or their treatment)

 

Imagine you are on a jury. Constable Smith gives you a concise report of how he observed the defendant committing the crime. Crime, actions, places, times. My, but he is an impressive witness. Logical, observant and precise. You are impressed and find the defendant guilty. In short you believe his report.

 

How is it that this same man becomes viewed as some sort of liar, or at least delusional if he gave a similarly concise report of a UFO? His treatment says far more about the belief patterns of the listeners than it does about the veracity of his testimony.

 

A possible explanation?

 

For some 2,000 years our civilisation has been reared on the idea that it is tops. The Greco-Romans that base our history were the most powerful civs of their times. Then Christianity told us that we (The Christian West) were favoured by God. For all this time it's been; We are the best. We know more. We can do things that others can't. Our science is superior.

 

The simple idea of an alien craft challenges these long held beliefs. Because it would show that not only were there others who could do things we cannot, but they can do things that we believe impossible. In an instant, we would go from the top of creation to a very poor second best. In one day, the US Military goes from being the mightiest army in history to a bunch of people whose weaponry is so hopelessly outclassed that they may as well be Hoplites manning Triremes.

 

All religions would hate the idea because to them it would show that God liked someone else more than he liked us. What our physicists would say about FTL travel is anyones guess.

 

Hence it is not the idea of aliens that is unpalatable, but what they would represent. Our fall from the pinnacle of creation to some backwater hicks with quaint ideas inhabiting a small planet around an adverage star.

 

In short. For many it is easier to believe that Constable Smith is a deluded madman than it is to believe that our superiority is the delusion.

 

As a final point to ponder. Not a single example of a Pharonic Nemes headdress has ever been found. We know them only from statues and tomb paintings. (Granted the Sphinx is one hell of a statue. ) So considering that the only evidence for their existence is pictures, does anyone actually doubt that the Pharaohs wore them?

When something defies direct observation and repeatable experimentation, it tends to fall into non-quantifiable categories like religion and fairy tales.

 

Please note, I'm not arguing for the existence of aliens or the non-existence of the Nemes headdress. I'm looking at the beliefs and thought processes involved in debating various topics.

[bascule]

Of course if you can't actually prove the existence of a collective unconscious, then it's absolutely meaningless. Can you objectively prove it's existence?

 

Yes, you find the genes which are responsible and demonstrate how they manifest their effects.

[JohnB]

And this has been identified and it's effects shown?

 

If so, then he has a possible explanation. If not, then the explanation is nothing more than theology.

[sunspot]

Jung did a good job showing how similar mythology appears in cultures where it can be shown that there was not direct transmission of info between the cultures. One may argue that aliens, Atlantis, etc. spread the seed of mythology eons ago, but this is hard to prove. The collective unconscious is different in that it is something that is self observeable.

 

The archetypes of the collective unconscious are assumed empty at birth and are memory organization software based on collective human experience. In this respect, they become programmed by our exposure to culture making them generic human with a cultural flavor. With respect to mythology, all that was needed to happen was one person having a profound set of dreams, for example. If this stemmed from the collective unconscious, since the rest of the members of the culture have similar programming of the archetypes, the dream can strike a resonance since they express something that is slightly below consciousness. This would spread the collective expression to others because it seems right for some reason.

 

As culture advances, so does the collective programming. Eventually, the old myths no longer strike a resonance, since the arcehtype expression have evolved along with culture. This sometimes requires replacing the old gods with the new. For example, in ancient Greece the first organzied myths or archetypes were the Titans. These became replaced by Zeus and others to reflect the advancement in collective cultural sophification.

[JohnB]

Where is your proof that there is a collective unconscious? What gene causes it? Where in the brain can it be found? How does it get programmed?

 

Your explanation requires that someone believe without proof that the collective unconscious exists, hence my Theology comment.

 

What you have is three paragraphs of very impressive psychobabble. Where is your proof?

Jung did a good job showing how similar mythology appears in cultures where it can be shown that there was not direct transmission of info between the cultures.

There has been quite a bit of work done in the field of Archaeology since Jung. How do you show there is no direct transmission between cultures? If you go far enough back, all cultures must have a common root as they all came from the original group of H. Sapiens. Or did the collective unconscious start earlier than that?

 

As to contact since then, the Isolationist/ Diffusionist arguments have yet to be settled by modern Archaeologists, so I strongly doubt that Jung could have settled the conflict a hundred years ago.

 

I think I see where you're going with the rest of the idea, but again. Where is your objective proof?

 

From where I sit, your whole proof rests on the assumption that there has never been contact in any way with an alien race. How do you prove this assumption?

 

All cultures on Earth have some sort of "Flood" myth. How do you decide whether this myth is a result of the collective unconscious or a distortion of real events in the distant past?

 

Without any form of objective proof, I'm required to agree with your theory simply because I believe it to be so. That's theology.

[Helix]

I believe in life elsewhere to the extent that somewhere billions of lightyears away, there are few bacteria. No aliens, no E.T. Just the ET version of E.Coli.

 

There was one story I heard, though, that is fairly compelling. Many people were gathered one night, I think to view a comet (so they weren't paranormal hunters) when there was this bright red light of some sort and/or some odd aircraft. No one could explain it. Personally, I think it was probably a prototype jet. But still...

[bascule]

And this has been identified and it's effects shown?

 

I'm not sure how much work has actually been done as far as finding what genes are responsible for what personality types, but modern psychology has been shifted almost completely away from Freud's pseudoscientific insistence upon nurture over nature and accepted that our personalities come primarily from genetics and not upbringing.

[JohnB]

So it would appear that modern psychology has moved from believing an unproven and possibly unprovable theory to believing an unproven but possibly provable theory. I suppose that's progress of a sort.

 

Bascule, I'm not trying to be difficult, but I do hold science to the same levels of proof as science holds pseudoscience. If someone comes here and makes a definitive (possibly silly) statement the first question asked is "What is your proof?".

 

While I was a lurker here I was greatly impressed with this attitude, that's one of the reasons I became a member. There was no bar to anyone putting up any silly idea provided they were willing to at least try to back it up with proof. Of course they were shot down in flames very quickly.

 

In this case the tables are turned slightly. Definitive orthodox statements were made and I asked for proof. So far neither you nor Sunspot have produced anything that even remotely resembles that.

 

Sunspot, you may be right in what you say, I'm willing to listen. Convince me.

I believe in life elsewhere to the extent that somewhere billions of lightyears away, there are few bacteria. No aliens, no E.T. Just the ET version of E.Coli.

Helix, why then do you think Earth is special?

 

In everything I've ever read, take the primordial goop add sunlight etc, you get Amino acids. (IIRC they have been found in meteorites as well.) Continue to bake the Amino acids add a generous supply of lightning and they will combine. Given enough time it is almost a foregone conclusion that life will occur. Given life, evolution should almost certainly occur. Why do you think it continued here but don't think it continued elsewhere? Why should Earth be special?

 

If Earth is not special in some way then the same processes that occurred here must have occurred virtually everywhere else that conditions were even remotely similar. In our case, they led to an intelligent lifeform. Of course in other cases it may result in an evolutionary dead end and the ecology of the planet stabilizes somewhere.

 

It would not surprise me if we eventually find many worlds where higher lifeforms evolved but intelligence did not. Like Earth would be if the line of H. Sapiens had not appeared. There would still be lions and tigers, fish and birds, spiders and snakes, just no intelligent lifeforms.

[bascule]

Bascule, I'm not trying to be difficult, but I do hold science to the same levels of proof as science holds pseudoscience. If someone comes here and makes a definitive (possibly silly) statement the first question asked is "What is your proof?".

 

It's okay, I'm a skeptic too. This page is a little more substantiated:

 

http://www.braintypes.com/16_types.htm

[JohnB]

Thanks mate. I try (sometimes without success) to be skeptical wherever possible, so I tend to question the Orthodox as well as the Unorthodox. Questioning the Othodox view is not welcome in some areas. (Especially when the orthodox view comes up short in the proof department. )

 

I can't get the link to work. No probs, I'll do a bit of searching on "braintypes" and see what I come up with.

[Mace Sin]

There are hundreds, thousands, millions, billions, trillions of planets, I believe I heard, that exists in our Universe. What are the chances that there is no life on any of those other planets? Slim, but I also think that many of these alien conspiracies are nonsense.

 

Here's the reason many UFO sightings occur:

 

 

 

Lenticular clouds. They look like UFO's if you're actually telling yourself you're witnessing an alien encounter, doesn't it? Nope, they're nothing but water vapor in the air.

[starbug1]

Lenticular clouds. They look like UFO's if you're actually telling yourself you're witnessing an alien encounter' date=' doesn't it? Nope, they're nothing but water vapor in the air.[/quote']

 

 

Imagine if you were on LSD. Those clouds would look ready to abduct you.

[JohnB]

Slim, but I also think that many of these alien conspiracies are nonsense.

Many yes, most possibly (probably), all no.

 

If all were false, then Air Traffic Control Radar would really be able to track Venus and I don't think that's possible, do you?

 

A point that hasn't been brought up. While science deals in reproducable results, if there are alien craft, then how do you get them to co-operate?

 

On that sort of basis, you can't prove I exist. There are posts by JohnB, but that's really only anecdotal evidence. Can anyone predict when my next post (appearance) will be?

 

Again, I'm not arguing for the existence of alien craft in our atmosphere, just pointing out the problems with the preferred way of looking at the problem. I side with Phi, if it gets us into space more, let's go chase some aliens.