UFO smoking gun?

[Ten oz]

12 hours ago, Moontanman said:

I am flat out asserting the investigation is inadequate, assumptions have nothing to do with it.. 

Investigating the possibility of aliens or alien civilizations is not something that a shift in focus is necessary for. We only look for them far away, I am suggesting we look for them close at hand. We are quite capable of doing this, we simply do not because the idea of UFOs and close by aliens is not taken seriously... 

Unfortunately I don't agree with this. I do not believe DOD, FAA, NASA, NOAA, and etc do not take the issue serious. Unidentified fly objects in U.S. air space, or any industrialized nations airspace, are investigated to the fullest degree possible. An unidentified flying object could potentially be new technology from an adversary or contain technology which one day make be developed by an adversary. Every federal agency involved in avionics and aviation have legit reasons to take unidentified flying objects seriously. I do not believe groups of Generals are sitting around the pentagon rolling their eyes if and or when Commanders out in the field route up reports outline anomalous interaction via radar, thermal imagine, eyewitness sightings, or etc. Not because I have unwavering trust in bureaucracy but because there are simply for more reasons to investigate than not. I think that the reality is that the official reports on the Phoenix lights, Battle Los Angeles, and etc are mostly accurate minus any classified information (protecting military secrets). They weren't merely "not taken seriously". 

[Moontanman]

51 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

Unfortunately I don't agree with this. I do not believe DOD, FAA, NASA, NOAA, and etc do not take the issue serious. Unidentified fly objects in U.S. air space, or any industrialized nations airspace, are investigated to the fullest degree possible. An unidentified flying object could potentially be new technology from an adversary or contain technology which one day make be developed by an adversary. Every federal agency involved in avionics and aviation have legit reasons to take unidentified flying objects seriously. I do not believe groups of Generals are sitting around the pentagon rolling their eyes if and or when Commanders out in the field route up reports outline anomalous interaction via radar, thermal imagine, eyewitness sightings, or etc. Not because I have unwavering trust in bureaucracy but because there are simply for more reasons to investigate than not. I think that the reality is that the official reports on the Phoenix lights, Battle Los Angeles, and etc are mostly accurate minus any classified information (protecting military secrets). They weren't merely "not taken seriously". 

 

As far as I know the only attempt at a scientific study of UAP was the Condon report which, by their own admission, started out with the conclusion and looked to for ways to support that conclusion. 

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

Quote

Principal critics[edit]

Astronomer J. Allen Hynek wrote that "The Condon Report settled nothing."[4] He called Condon's introduction "singularly slanted" and wrote that it "avoided mentioning that there was embedded within the bowels of the report a remaining mystery; that the committee had been unable to furnish adequate explanations for more than a quarter of the cases examined."[4] Hynek contended that "Condon did not understand the nature and scope of the problem" he was studying[4] and objected to the idea that only extraterrestrial life could explain UFO activity. By focusing on this hypothesis, he wrote, the Report "did not try to establish whether UFOs really constituted a problem for the scientist, whether physical or social."[4]

Astrophysicist Peter A. Sturrock wrote that "critical reviews...came from scientists who had actually carried out research in the UFO area, while the laudatory reviews came from scientists who had not carried out such research."[49] As an example, Sturrock noted a case in which an allegedly supersonic UFO did not produce a sonic boom. He notes that "we should not assume that a more advanced civilization could not find some way at traveling with supersonic speeds without producing a sonic boom."[50]

 

[dimreepr]

32 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

As far as I know the only attempt at a scientific study of UAP

Indeed, no reason to think you have access to government secrets; every capable country has every reason to keep a forensic eye on their airspace, and absolutely no reasons not to and cosmologically science has investigated in every possible way.  

[Ten oz]

@Moontanman, do you feel the Moon is a good place to look for evidence of extraterrestrial visitation? If extraterrestrials existed and had intelligence which functioned akin to our the Moon would be a fairly obvious place to observe earth from. Along the lines of your view that enough isn't being done to investigate the possibility of extraterrestrials do you think more ET related investigation of the Moon is in order? 

Serious question. Not trolling you. In considering your position I thought about what made sense in my opinion. I think it makes sense that any intelligence visiting Earth would leave things behind to continue monitoring. The Moon seems like as good a place as any to use as an outpost. 

[Moontanman]

On 5/12/2018 at 8:13 AM, dimreepr said:

Indeed, no reason to think you have access to government secrets; every capable country has every reason to keep a forensic eye on their airspace, and absolutely no reasons not to and cosmologically science has investigated in every possible way.  

Of course I do not, neither do you and some countries do give credence to the extraterrestrial hypothesis, no, the light of scientific inquiry has not been shown publicly on the phenomena and the Air Force has used ridicule to discourage any real scientific investigation. 

1 hour ago, Ten oz said:

@Moontanman, do you feel the Moon is a good place to look for evidence of extraterrestrial visitation? If extraterrestrials existed and had intelligence which functioned akin to our the Moon would be a fairly obvious place to observe earth from. Along the lines of your view that enough isn't being done to investigate the possibility of extraterrestrials do you think more ET related investigation of the Moon is in order?

Luna is already the subject of so much silly pareidolia BS study of it's surface is almost as full of hoaxes, scams, and misrepresentations of the available data it's almost as bad as UFO sightings. The moon is a huge place, any evidence would have to be in plain sight and be big enough to draw our attention...   

 

1 hour ago, Ten oz said:

Serious question. Not trolling you. In considering your position I thought about what made sense in my opinion. I think it makes sense that any intelligence visiting Earth would leave things behind to continue monitoring. The Moon seems like as good a place as any to use as an outpost. 

The Moon would be a good place to base any surveillance of the Earth but I have my doubts that aliens would need a base nearby to do this with.  

[Ten oz]

56 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

Luna is already the subject of so much silly pareidolia BS study of it's surface is almost as full of hoaxes, scams, and misrepresentations of the available data it's almost as bad as UFO sightings. The moon is a huge place, any evidence would have to be in plain sight and be big enough to draw our attention...   

Why does it matter if idiots have already made conspiracy theories about the Moon. Isn't that sort of you point about UFO's, that they aren't taken seriously enough in part because of some many hoaxes and the scientific community pretentiously being afraid of looking silly?

57 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

The Moon would be a good place to base any surveillance of the Earth but I have my doubts that aliens would need a base nearby to do this with.

What are your doubts based on?

[Moontanman]

26 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

Why does it matter if idiots have already made conspiracy theories about the Moon. Isn't that sort of you point about UFO's, that they aren't taken seriously enough in part because of some many hoaxes and the scientific community pretentiously being afraid of looking silly?

To be honest the moon is not that easy to really look at, we don't have enough resolution to see anything but brobdingnagian constructs. On the other hand there are a handful of really odd things on the moon we can see but not with enough resolution to really be sure of anything but the fact they are odd.  

26 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

What are your doubts based on?

I doubt the entire concept of aliens traveling interstellar distances specifically to see us. Much of my doubts center around aliens wanting anything to do with planets to begin with and parking an artificial colony world on the moon is problematic at best and putting it in orbit would make it stand out like a sore thumb. While an artificial world could be hidden in places like the asteroid belt or the lagrange points of Jupiter it's more likely a small if not tiny machine could observe us with no risk to their own life and property.  I have a difficult time justifying the idea of live aliens ever coming into contact with the Earth's biosphere or them risking their lives for data that we would be capable of sending something like a drone or rover in our stead to collect.   

[Ten oz]

1 hour ago, Moontanman said:

I doubt the entire concept of aliens traveling interstellar distances specifically to see us. Much of my doubts center around aliens wanting anything to do with planets to begin with and parking an artificial colony world on the moon is problematic at best and putting it in orbit would make it stand out like a sore thumb. While an artificial world could be hidden in places like the asteroid belt or the lagrange points of Jupiter it's more likely a small if not tiny machine could observe us with no risk to their own life and property.  I have a difficult time justifying the idea of live aliens ever coming into contact with the Earth's biosphere or them risking their lives for data that we would be capable of sending something like a drone or rover in our stead to collect.   

Putting tools on or around planets for the sake of observering them is literally what we (humans) do. So there is at least our example to show such does occur. If alien intelligence was anything like ours it reason they might do similar things. 

[Moontanman]

40 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

Putting tools on or around planets for the sake of observering them is literally what we (humans) do. So there is at least our example to show such does occur. If alien intelligence was anything like ours it reason they might do similar things. 

 

The idea of them being hidden is a bit difficult to explain, we certainly would not be likely to hide or want to. 

My dog and pony show is basically that civilizations form a galactic presence much like an ecosystem on the earth with the niches filled with civilizations instead of various animal populations. 

Interstellar space is a lot less empty than was originally thought. There is more than enough material in the form of gas, dust, and small bodies like asteroids, both frozen and rocky with various degrees of both to support quadrillions of habitats.

The materials would be both removed and added to space by various natural processes like nova or star formation. 

If controlled fusion is possible there is no real barrier to artificial habitats moving slowly around the galaxy finding a small object and mining it for carbon and ice, fuel and construction materials, freely available.

Habitats could simply travel around in space stopping every few centuries to top up volatiles and trace elements, fusion fuel, and build other habitats. In this way they would be comparable to living organisms that gather resources, metabolise, and reproduce. 

[Ten oz]

10 hours ago, Moontanman said:

The idea of them being hidden is a bit difficult to explain, we certainly would not be likely to hide or want to. 

If we (humans) fail to identify the technology it would hidden from us without there needing to be any purposeful effect. More over this thread is about your opinion that more serious efforts should be committed to investigating UFOs which themselves can be described as avoiding detection. So if you understand if UFOs on earth are avoiding detection why wouldn't that apply to UFOs elsewhere? 

10 hours ago, Moontanman said:

Interstellar space is a lot less empty than was originally thought. There is more than enough material in the form of gas, dust, and small bodies like asteroids, both frozen and rocky with various degrees of both to support quadrillions of habitats.

There is also enough material that Earth could have already been obliterated several times over by giant asteroids, swallowed into a black hole, or etc. Just because something can happen or likely will happen doesn't automatically mean it is happening at this moment. 

10 hours ago, Moontanman said:

Habitats could simply travel around in space stopping every few centuries to top up volatiles and trace elements, fusion fuel, and build other habitats. In this way they would be comparable to living organisms that gather resources, metabolise, and reproduce. 

Some speculate tardigrades exist similar to this. 

[Scott of the Antares]

On 09/05/2018 at 6:05 PM, Ten oz said:

Our (human) spacecraft leave behind boosters, exhaust, scorched launch pads, and etc. Loads of trash from our spacecraft are orbiting earth at this moment.  On the moon our astronauts have left behind a flag, trash, and various pieces of equipment used to take measurements. It is impossible for me to know what form physical evidence from aliens would take but I can't think of any known flying objects which leave behind nothing. Birds leave poop & feathers. Meteorites crash and can be studied. 

Just because you/we can’t think of an example of a flying craft that doesn’t leave physical evidence doesn’t mean they don’t/can’t exist. If they have visited us, I doubt they used internal combustion engines! 

2 hours ago, Ten oz said:

Some speculate tardigrades exist similar to this. 

Like the new Star Trek on Netflix?!

[dimreepr]

57 minutes ago, Scott of the Antares said:

Just because you/we can’t think of an example of a flying craft that doesn’t leave physical evidence doesn’t mean they don’t/can’t exist. If they have visited us, I doubt they used internal combustion engines! 

 

At what point are we going to acknowledge that this thread may as well/should be in religion, rather than speculation?

[Moontanman]

3 hours ago, Ten oz said:

If we (humans) fail to identify the technology it would hidden from us without there needing to be any purposeful effect.

I am assuming that any alien technology would have to follow the laws of physics as we know them. Waste heat would be a dead give away even at distances comparable to the oort cloud or Kuiper belt. 

3 hours ago, Ten oz said:

 

More over this thread is about your opinion that more serious efforts should be committed to investigating UFOs which themselves can be described as avoiding detection. So if you understand if UFOs on earth are avoiding detection why wouldn't that apply to UFOs elsewhere? 

No, in fact I am not talking about UFOs in this context. I am talking about artificial habitats large enough to contain entire societies for very long periods of time.  

3 hours ago, Ten oz said:

There is also enough material that Earth could have already been obliterated several times over by giant asteroids, swallowed into a black hole, or etc. Just because something can happen or likely will happen doesn't automatically mean it is happening at this moment. 

Some speculate tardigrades exist similar to this. 

I'm not sure what you mean by this. Can you elaborate? 

1 hour ago, Scott of the Antares said:

Just because you/we can’t think of an example of a flying craft that doesn’t leave physical evidence doesn’t mean they don’t/can’t exist. If they have visited us, I doubt they used internal combustion engines! 

I think we would have to assume any alien technology has to follow the rules of physics as we know them. 

1 hour ago, Scott of the Antares said:

Like the new Star Trek on Netflix?!

I hope that is not what is being suggested. 

17 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

At what point are we going to acknowledge that this thread may as well/should be in religion, rather than speculation?

As soon as we start talking about supernatural mumbo jumbo... 

[dimreepr]

7 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

As soon as we start talking about supernatural mumbo jumbo... 

What's the difference? Since you have no evidence...

[Ten oz]

2 hours ago, Scott of the Antares said:

Just because you/we can’t think of an example of a flying craft that doesn’t leave physical evidence doesn’t mean they don’t/can’t exist. If they have visited us, I doubt they used internal combustion engines! 

Until proof of visitation exists why take anything off the table? I agree that if aliens exist they probably aren't using aircraft build by Boeing. That said combustion exists throughout the universe; the Sun for example. 

 

33 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

What's the difference? Since you have no evidence...

Yep, there is evidence to support anything solidly. 

Edited May 31, 2018 by Ten oz
Sun is an example of Fusion. Combustion comment is not literal.

[dimreepr]

9 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

Yep, there is evidence to support anything solidly. 

I'm just going to assume you meant to include the word 'no'.

[Moontanman]

25 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

What's the difference? Since you have no evidence...

 I am suggesting that we do have evidence and there are ways to gather even more poignant evidence, do you really dismiss all UFO reports as nonsense? They may not be alien spacecraft  but it is clear that UAP is and has been detected. 

[dimreepr]

8 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

 I am suggesting that we do have evidence and there are ways to gather even more poignant evidence, do you really dismiss all UFO reports as nonsense? They may not be alien spacecraft  but it is clear that UAP is and has been detected. 

This article has much more evidence:

http://www.iflscience.com/space/physicist-has-a-new-solution-for-the-fermi-paradox-and-its-pretty-worrying/

And it's barely a hypothesis.

[Moontanman]

3 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

This article has much more evidence:

http://www.iflscience.com/space/physicist-has-a-new-solution-for-the-fermi-paradox-and-its-pretty-worrying/

And it's barely a hypothesis.

 My idea about the galaxy being colonised by artificial habitat aliens who avoid planets has just as much traction as his idea.  

[dimreepr]

2 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

 My idea about the galaxy being colonised by artificial habitat aliens who avoid planets has just as much traction as his idea.  

Indeed and that's my point.

But we do build on ant hills.

[Moontanman]

1 minute ago, dimreepr said:

Indeed and that's my point.

Except my idea is potentially falsifiable, his is not.. 

[dimreepr]

2 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

Except my idea is potentially falsifiable, his is not.. 

Now you're starting to lose my (well earned) respect.

[Moontanman]

Just now, dimreepr said:

Now you're starting to lose my (well earned) respect.

Please elaborate on that, how is his idea falsifiable? Unless they come here we have no way of knowing if his idea is anything but baseless assertions. My idea can be falsified with out the aliens cooperation or seeing them attack us. 

[Scott of the Antares]

Whilst we are talking UFOs, what did you folks make of the STS-48 footage?

[Moontanman]

11 minutes ago, Scott of the Antares said:

Whilst we are talking UFOs, what did you folks make of the STS-48 footage?

 Do you have a link? I never heard of it...