Is it possible we are being "OBSERVED " by a higher life form ?

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Well Mike, ............you .....

I need to say , that you have put a slant on this subject that is not necessary . Many people genuinely think about this subject " are we alone " even SETI is set up to this end .

 

Years ago I thought about the difficulties of an advanced race communicating with us . I think personally , I would prefer the version as illustrated by the film ". Close encounters Of the third kind " ? However , I thought, as this has not occurred . This is about 20-30 years ago . I reasoned on long bus journeys . :- ...

 

If such another space civilisation wanted to make contact , they ' might ' choose this idea of ' ambiguity' . Why , because it is such a gentle way of communicating . Individuals could gently have conclusions that could just as easily have originated in there own brain, come from something a colleague just happened to voice , or if you had access to monkeys typing on typewriters for a long time , in which case the idea could have come from random operations . So how do you tell which of those three or four methods gave the right answer. Surely the idea that was right. That's almost nature, or science discovery for that matter.

 

So there is NO HOCUS POCUS there . How does any person question ideas they have . Try it out . Test the idea on colleagues , Think again.

 

Now there are many people who can recount , episodes of Serendipity, coincidences of a fortunate kind .

 

Over the years , I have taken note of these events , which can stimulate me personally to feel , is there some communication possible with the universe , as if it were some hyper, linked up , reactive , organised , system , that was beyond anything we can imagine. So rather than trying to get my head around that ! Why not just try it out ?

 

So basically I did what I have described , assumed the universe was , what I said in the previous paragraph. Assumed any serendipity , must be viewed as possible ambiguity. And accept it as pure coincidence . But if there were any merit in the particular thought, try it out , test it , investigate it , discuss it with a colleague .

 

I have read a lot of science , over the years, listened to many lectures , taken note of wise men , and avoided tripe. Maybe my head is full of different ideas. Maybe I am happy in my pursuit of truth ,discovery , and happiness.

 

I am certain most people would agree ,we are no where near a complete understanding of everything. I appreciate I particularly love the fringe edges of science , not ignoring the solid content that makes up a backbone of understanding . However I feel there is much , much , much more out there to discover, so I like to have a peep! ( in my particular style ) . I am not at odds with much of science , I just can not, and never have been able to resist , " , what's way over the horizon , and beyond "

 

Maybe my very occasional ( not every day , 25 in my entire life ) trying to select between ( right ,wrong , or in between ) seemed totally harmless . ( almost like " eeny , meeny, minee,,mo ) , I am sure many a management meeting has broken up with three equally plausible ideas, and the Managing Director has gone away and thought , ' it's an equal toss up between those three ideas"

 

All I have done is ' dare I say it ' gone about things is a sort of scientific way , although clearly I have needed to bring in both philosophical and far reaching ideas.

 

Why not think the unthinkable , think the impossible , think the far futuristic , think there really is a universe out there that wants to communicate with you , but you may have to , take , it will be ambiguous ( for all sorts of reasons ) why not ' nothing ventured nothing gained '

 

Mike

Edited April 13, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Strange]

If such another space civilisation wanted to make contact , they ' might ' choose this idea of ' ambiguity' . Why , because it is such a gentle way of communicating .

 

In other words, it is undetectable as communication.

 

When I first pointed out that you need to define objective criteria to discriminate these "ambiguous" communications from random chance, you agreed that was a very important thing to do. But now you have reverted to the same subjective waffle.

 

 

So there is no hocus pocus there . How does any person question ideas they have . Try it out . T

 

But trying it out is meaningless if all you are going to do is look at some arbitrary random event and label it "communication".

 

"Oh look, a bird flew past; that must mean something"

"Oh look, a bird didn't fly past; that must mean something."

"Oh look, it started raining; that must mean something"

"Oh look, it didn't start raining; that must mean something"

 

I agree with Spyman, you are deluding yourself based on wishful thinking. Any "communication" that you discern is just selection bias and confirmation bias. As it is, this is probably just harmless fun that keeps you amused.

 

But it is a small step from there to delusional behavior.

 

The only way to avoid that is to apply critical thinking and objective criteria. Sadly, that will make these "communications" disappear which is, I assume, why you don't want to employ those tools.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

In other words, it is undetectable as communication...............

 

 

The only way to avoid that is to apply critical thinking and objective criteria. Sadly, that will make these "communications" disappear which is, I assume, why you don't want to employ those tools.

I must say that since being a child , I have come across birds that seemed to have some form of accident , or setback .

 

They all died, I never saved one . They seem so sensitive to disturbance. Since having acted with communications , in the good old days with " tuning in " things were so sensitive ! You soon lost communications if you tweeted or tuned in a rough handed manner .

 

So I am saying here , maybe the universe is trying to communicate gently , maybe we will miss something if we are expecting too strong a signal . When a gentle signal is there all the time .

 

Mike

 

( I am offering this in the 'Lounge '. Where one can meet friends , have a drink , and fireside conversation ! )

 

You could always take me outside and give me a good talking to, and tell me I have had too much to drink !

Edited April 13, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Spyman]

( I am offering this in the 'Lounge '. Where one can meet friends , have a drink , and fireside conversation ! )

But if you want a good scientific discussion you still have to reach some level of rigor and demand.

 

You could always take me outside and give me a good talking to, and tell me I have had too much to drink !

Ok, I tried that and this is what I got for it:

 

I need to say , that you have put a slant on this subject that is not necessary . Many people genuinely think about this subject " are we alone " even SETI is set up to this end .

 

Years ago I thought about... /Snip/

And as expected you didn't take my challenge and instead argue something I never have opposed, as if you don't want to find out the truth and deliberately avoid to engage in the discussion, floating away with random thoughts and wishful thinking.

 

There is a very large gap between thinking about other life forms elsewhere in the Universe and claiming that communication exists.

 

So there is NO HOCUS POCUS there . How does any person question ideas they have . Try it out . Test the idea on colleagues , Think again.

No Mike, you are basically arguing hocus pocus and subjective opinion, your claim lacks critical thinking and scientific procedures.

 

But if there were any merit in the particular thought, try it out , test it , investigate it , discuss it with a colleague .

Then WHY don't you do that? Why don't you do scientific tests or listen to the answers you have gotten here in this thread?

 

I am not at odds with much of science , I just can not, and never have been able to resist , " , what's way over the horizon , and beyond "

Well, I have important news for you, you are certainly att odds with science and "way over the horizon" in this matter.

 

So I am saying here , maybe the universe is trying to communicate gently , maybe we will miss something if we are expecting too strong a signal . When a gentle signal is there all the time .

The truth is that there is NO ONE communicating with you, this "gentle signal" exists only through your imagination.

(And you better snap out of it and sober up, before you get delusional.)

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

.

 

And as expected you didn't take my challenge and instead argue something I never have opposed, as if you don't want to find out the truth and deliberately avoid to engage in the discussion, ....)

Sorry , what bit , have I not taken up your challenge.

 

I am more than happy to discuss such an important subject , (provided it is not just pouring scorn on the ideas ! For the sake of it . )

 

Mike

Edited April 14, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Spyman]

Sorry , what bit , have I not taken up your challenge.

No, the challenge is to scientifically test if your observations is random events or messages from a higher life form.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

No, the challenge is to scientifically test if your observations is random events or messages from a higher life form.

Wow ! I am not sure I can handle being on the end of that one !

 

I was quite happy with my ' Ambiguity ' approach .

I could just say to myself ' happy coincidence '. Serendipity !

 

If I have to consider there might be someone on the other end ?

 

Eek ! That might freak me out ! Zap ! Oops too much signal! Man! You just 'Burned me to a frazzle ' !

 

However it is a question? And it deserves an answer .

 

If you don't hear from me again . You know I will have been scorched !

 

Help.

 

Mike

Edited April 15, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Spyman]

Wow ! I am not sure I can handle being on the end of that one !

 

I was quite happy with my ' Ambiguity ' approach .

I could just say to myself ' happy coincidence '. Serendipity !

 

If I have to consider there might be someone on the other end ?

 

Eek ! That might freak me out ! Zap ! Oops too much signal! Man! You just 'Burned me to a frazzle ' !

 

However it is a question? And it deserves an answer .

 

If you don't hear from me again . You know I will have been scorched !

 

Help.

 

Mike

Seriously? You don't seem to think your own claim is important nor really interested in trying to find the truth.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Seriously? You don't seem to think your own claim is important nor really interested in trying to find the truth.

.

.Yes I like the idea of truth . However what if my idea about ' ambiguity ' , is a truth . In other words , for all sorts of reasons of , damage limitation to culture , a higher ,intelligent , life form , MAY , consider it an essential , to keep its existence and contact , at arms length , namely screened behind ' ambiguity ' . So that it is always possible to dismiss it.

 

I will try and think of a way that it could be still possible to make a scientific test . To your satisfaction .

 

Other than you trying it out for yourself , that is !

 

Mike

 

Ps . My first question was :- Is there anybody there?

 

Good job I was in the middle of a moor , and nobody on earth was there to hear me .

I might have got locked up ? Or as Strange keeps reminding me , about men in white coats !

 

Another proviso ,I worked out was :- It was going to be essential, that there was no reason why you should not have the answer . In other words it was not going to hurt anyone , having the answer . So I made my self think of a question which had no reason, why I should not know the answer . " Is there anybody there ? " seemed harmless enough .

Edited April 15, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Strange]

Wow ! I am not sure I can handle being on the end of that one !

 

I was quite happy with my ' Ambiguity ' approach .

I could just say to myself ' happy coincidence '. Serendipity !

 

If I have to consider there might be someone on the other end ?

 

Eek ! That might freak me out ! Zap ! Oops too much signal! Man! You just 'Burned me to a frazzle ' !

 

However it is a question? And it deserves an answer .

 

If you don't hear from me again . You know I will have been scorched !

 

Help.

 

Mike

 

So you are saying that you don't want to apply a scientific approach and critical thinking because it might prove you are right, and that would be scary?

 

I assumed you didn't want to do it because it would prove that you were wrong.

 

Ho hum.

[Spyman]

.Yes I like the idea of truth . However what if my idea about ' ambiguity ' , is a truth . In other words , for all sorts of reasons of , damage limitation to culture , a higher ,intelligent , life form , MAY , consider it an essential , to keep its existence and contact , at arms length , namely screened behind ' ambiguity ' . So that it is always possible to dismiss it.

Mike, I think it is crucial that you understand that if the communication is screened behind ambiguity to such extent that it can't be measured with a scientific test, then from a scientific standpoint that is evidence for absence of communication.

 

It's good that you like the idea of truth, so can you now please stop beating around the bush and confirm that you understand by clarifying whether you have a scientific measurable communication or unreliable, unrepeatable and subjective signs.

 

I will try and think of a way that it could be still possible to make a scientific test . To your satisfaction .

Oh, don't bother for my satisfaction, I am already convinced that you are wrong, it would be for your own good.

 

Other than you trying it out for yourself , that is !

Yes, I did, there was no answer whatsoever, not even a wrong one.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Yes, I did, there was no answer whatsoever, not even a wrong one.

.

.

Well I don't know what to make of that !

 

Perhaps this supports my idea that there is possibly , just possibly , an additional, more ' esoteric '. nature about the cosmos , yet to understand . In other words, if you are looking for too ridged , cause and effect , mathematical , rigour in everything . Then you will not see the esoteric bit . It is there but you can not see it , because you are looking for rigour, cause and effect , maths , rigid absolute science as we know it. That is not meant in a disrespectful way . There are mixed up images around on paper that have a dinosaur hidden in a jumble of mixed lines , you have to de- focus to see them . Sometimes it seems impossible , then suddenly the dinosaur stands out as clear as day .

 

Maybe , or it's all a load of bunk! Then , However , then I am left with a set of interesting answers , that came from somewhere. Maybe memories that have been churning around inside my brain for years . Maybe they came out of an ' insight' , out of my own mind , out of an oblique observation of nature , out of a memory , out of the nature of the cosmos itself in its totality , whatever that is or ..?

 

I must say . I do quite like the idea , that , in the right frame of mind, you can just ask out loud , simply , in a quiet place , with an open mind . As long as you define it , quite markedly what you want and , what alternatives you expect !

 

Mike

 

Esoteric . English Oxford dictionary link :- http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/esoteric

 

And synonyms :-

SYNONYMS of esoteric :-

abstruse, obscure, arcane, recherché, rarefied, recondite, abstract, difficult, hard, puzzling, perplexing, enigmatic, inscrutable, cryptic, Delphic;

complex, complicated, involved, over/above one's head, incomprehensible, opaque, unfathomable, impenetrable, mysterious, occult, little known, hidden, secret, private, mystic, magical, cabbalistic

rare involuted

Edited April 16, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[tar]

Mike,

 

I am breaking my rule by responding to a thread I have not read, so I apologize for any break in continuity.

 

I wanted to add that esoteric, in my book, is basically what the uninitiated think about the stuff the initiated talk about.

 

When you think of the vocabulary of doctors, for instance, the greek and latin names for simple, understandable stuff, makes for the possibility that a laymen would consider the doctorspeak, esoteric.

 

In reference to this thread topic, nobody here is uninitiated when it comes to communication with the universe. We all have seen the thing in operation for our entire lives. You and I Mike, have been around the place for 60 and 70 years, respectively. You and I both ran the experiment the same day, at the same time and we both got answers.

 

I do not think that it makes any sense that a more advanced lifeform is watching and listening and answering when we ask.

 

My take is more along the lines of what you were saying about memories, and deep seated realizations that are part of us, just from having seen the thing in operation for 60 or 70 years. It might turn out that we ourselves are the advanced lifeform that is observing the place.

 

Regards, TAR

[Spyman]

Perhaps this supports my idea that there is possibly , just possibly , an additional, more ' esoteric '. nature about the cosmos...

No, it really don't, NO communication do not support more 'esoteric' anything, it falsifies communication.

(Doing hocus pocus and dressing it up with fine words doesn't make it science.)

 

Did you not understand what I said or do you refuse to listen? I asked for a crucial confirmation and you failed to deliver:

Mike, I think it is crucial that you understand that if the communication is screened behind ambiguity to such extent that it can't be measured with a scientific test, then from a scientific standpoint that is evidence for absence of communication.

 

It's good that you like the idea of truth, so can you now please stop beating around the bush and confirm that you understand by clarifying whether you have a scientific measurable communication or unreliable, unrepeatable and subjective signs.

Why did you ignore my request and continue to obfuscate such a simple question?

 

I ask again: Do you claim to have a scientific measurable communication or not?

 

Maybe , or it's all a load of bunk! Then , However , then I am left with a set of interesting answers , that came from somewhere. Maybe memories that have been churning around inside my brain for years . Maybe they came out of an ' insight' , out of my own mind , out of an oblique observation of nature , out of a memory , out of the nature of the cosmos itself in its totality , whatever that is or ..?

If your messages are indistinguishable from random events and have three possible answers, then they will be wrong twice as often as they are correct. Thus such collection of answers are totally unreliable and essentially worthless. But if the communication is false and your answers instead came from your subconscious then they can have some worth and meaning.

 

I must say . I do quite like the idea...

Fondness for an idea does not make it true, but it can make you more likely to be fooled by it.

[sunshaker]

Mike smith cosmos,

Do not let any boby turn you from your belief,

I have also struggled with this "communication" for many years, It started coming on strong about 12years ago, it was so powerful I did not know what it was, nothing seemed to make sense with the known laws of physics, I even filled my ears with wax, tried to keep my eyes closed for long periods of time.

Nothing no longer seemed random, Nothing seemed set in stone, so much I was blind to, so much that had always been there trying to make contact,

I rarely speak about this now, I have found a balance I can live with, it is like a new sense which I would now never change.

 

Those that can see let them see.

 

You ,(well I ) have never been able to explain this "new sense", so I keep it to myself, but to lose it would be worse than losing a limp or one of my other senses.

 

It is to immense to be defined within any box.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

........ I asked a simple question?[/b]I ask again: Do you claim to have a scientific measurable communication or not?....it.

Here is a scientific test . Both Tar and I ( mike) , carefully experimented with this idea, either side of the Atlantic Ocean , at the same time about a year ago . If you care to read these few quoted posts 85# onward

 

Link :- http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/82736-is-it-possible-we-are-being-observed-by-a-higher-life-form/?p=808404

 

It's basically , earlier in this thread.

 

I am trying to track down Tars , experience ,in this experiment , the other side of the Atlantic Ocean .

 

The results are quite interesting , independent, different questions , makes interesting reading . ,

 

Mike

Edited April 17, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Acme]

... In other words, if you are looking for too ridged , cause and effect , mathematical , rigour in everything .

In other words, if one is looking to use science.

 

Maybe , or it's all a load of bunk!

So it is. Other terms that come to mind: guff, hogwash, rot, hokum, meaninglessness, nonsense, nonsensicality, drivel, and garbage to name just a few.

 

I must say . I do quite like the idea , that , in the right frame of mind, you can just ask out loud , simply , in a quiet place , with an open mind . As long as you define it , quite markedly what you want and , what alternatives you expect !

Mike

I must say I do quite dislike the idea of writing voluminously and yet saying nothing of import. I define it as ghyliphymentotpentweutlle.

 

PS I'm an old man myself and if I hear that condition used one more time as an excuse and/or reason to carry on with such amphigory posing as sensibility that we see here, I think I shall blow chunks.

Edited April 17, 2015 by Acme

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

In other words, if one is looking to use science. So it is. Other terms that come to mind: guff, hogwash, rot, hokum, meaninglessness, nonsense, nonsensicality, drivel, and garbage to name just a few. I must say I do quite dislike the idea of writing voluminously and yet saying nothing of import. I define it as ghyliphymentotpentweutlle.PS I'm an old man myself and if I hear that condition used one more time as an excuse and/or reason to carry on with such amphigory posing as sensibility that we see here, I think I shall blow chunks.

Sometimes it's beneficial and good " to loosen up a little ". I am not the first ' man of science ' to dabble in a certain extreme , fringe , ideas , hoping to discover something new. I am not trying to link myself to such august personages, merely their practice to " think the unthinkable "

 

Sometimes I get the feeling , that you are not too impressed with my line of reasoning ,here ! In my looking for more obtuse, fringe , type research , into the very perilous waters of the Magellan straits ?

 

Link :- http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strait_of_Magellan

 

Mike

Edited April 17, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Acme]

Sometimes it's beneficial and good " to loosen up a little ". I am not the first ' man of science ' to dabble in a certain extreme , fringe , ideas , hoping to discover something new. I am not trying to link myself to such august personages, merely their practice to " think the unthinkable "

 

Mike

Man of science? By saying you're not trying to link yourself you are in effect linking yourself. Yet another example of the obtuseness that you let pass for critical thinking. (Or at least that's the communication that I just channeled from Kryon.)

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Man of science? By saying you're not trying to link yourself you are in effect linking yourself. Yet another example of the obtuseness that you let pass for critical thinking. (Or at least that's the communication that I just channeled from Kryon.)

Well Carols' Kryon. Is even more way out , than my modest listening in . They are supposed to be tampering with our magnetic core of the earth.

 

 

Mike

[Acme]

Well Carols' Kryon. Is even more way out , than my modest listening in . They are supposed to be tampering with our magnetic core of the earth.

 

Mike

No; it's not really any further out than what you propose here. Having read the first 5 or 6 of his/their books to humor a friend, I'm up on what 'they' are purported to be doing. Yet another grand load of douchebaggery for the gullible and addled mind.

[hypervalent_iodine]

!

Moderator Note

Since this has gone well away from a genuine, tangible question to the plain ridiculous, I am closing this thread (pending review).

Edit: it stays locked.