PeteSilas said:

morningsong said:

I believe people have seen UFOs but one has to consider that UFO doesn't spell space alien. Any organization from anywhere could be working on any number of projects, many fail and are never seen again, others receive grants and get all spiffy and polished up and don't look so "unusual" after it's rolled out for the public eye.

i think it was buzz aldrn who claimed to see a ufo but he added the definition as a caveat, he saw an unidentified flying object, not a ship, not an alien, something he couldn't identify. one of the other astronauts is a lot more sure of alien existence, he grew up in roswell and was there when the whole thing went down, great interviews on youtube. I had a close friend who swore she saw an alien in a grocery store, she just thought this one guy looked really waxy and inhuman, like an alien in disguise, I knew another guy who claimed to see a ufo in arizona, a seeming hotspot for them. Who knows what they might be, they might be creatures advanced far ahead of us, maybe time or dimension travellers. I don't think that we can explain away everything by everyone. Neil Tyson dismisses them all by saying eyewitness testimony is the most unreliable, but if you want to, you can rationalize any kind of belief, including the belief scientists put in their field. It's not all that different.

Can't tell people they didn't see what they think they saw. But at the same time it doesn't mean others HAVE to buy into what they say they saw. I've expressed why I'm not buying, for more reasons than what I've ever heard NdGT or any other astrophysicist/astronomer/astrobiologist has had to say about it, and until there's a reasonable explanation to my own doubts than I'll just listen until I get bored.

i hear you, until i see things with my own eyes, i'll doubt.

morningsong said:

PeteSilas said:

i think it was buzz aldrn who claimed to see a ufo but he added the definition as a caveat, he saw an unidentified flying object, not a ship, not an alien, something he couldn't identify. one of the other astronauts is a lot more sure of alien existence, he grew up in roswell and was there when the whole thing went down, great interviews on youtube. I had a close friend who swore she saw an alien in a grocery store, she just thought this one guy looked really waxy and inhuman, like an alien in disguise, I knew another guy who claimed to see a ufo in arizona, a seeming hotspot for them. Who knows what they might be, they might be creatures advanced far ahead of us, maybe time or dimension travellers. I don't think that we can explain away everything by everyone. Neil Tyson dismisses them all by saying eyewitness testimony is the most unreliable, but if you want to, you can rationalize any kind of belief, including the belief scientists put in their field. It's not all that different.

Can't tell people they didn't see what they think they saw. But at the same time it doesn't mean others HAVE to buy into what they say they saw. I've expressed why I'm not buying, for more reasons than what I've ever heard NdGT or any other astrophysicist/astronomer/astrobiologist has had to say about it, and until there's a reasonable explanation to my own doubts than I'll just listen until I get bored.

PeteSilas said:

i hear you, until i see things with my own eyes, i'll doubt.

morningsong said:

Can't tell people they didn't see what they think they saw. But at the same time it doesn't mean others HAVE to buy into what they say they saw. I've expressed why I'm not buying, for more reasons than what I've ever heard NdGT or any other astrophysicist/astronomer/astrobiologist has had to say about it, and until there's a reasonable explanation to my own doubts than I'll just listen until I get bored.

I've accepted many-a-thing that I've never witnessed with my own eyes, so I'm not saying that. I think I've expressed exactly what I meant, so I won't delve any further.

morningsong said:

PeteSilas said:

i hear you, until i see things with my own eyes, i'll doubt.

I've accepted many-a-thing that I've never witnessed with my own eyes, so I'm not saying that. I think I've expressed exactly what I meant, so I won't delve any further.

the friends and family i've had who've seen ghosts, well, i don't see why they'd lie. i know there is a motive to lie for some people, but there is none of that with my friends, they aren't going to the news trying to get attention, they aren't trying to tell everyone they meet, they are just recounting something to me. I haven't seen any ghosts though and i've been in places where you'd think they'd make themselves known, i like being alone, i like being up late at night, never seen anything.

PeteSilas said:

morningsong said:

I've accepted many-a-thing that I've never witnessed with my own eyes, so I'm not saying that. I think I've expressed exactly what I meant, so I won't delve any further.

the friends and family i've had who've seen ghosts, well, i don't see why they'd lie. i know there is a motive to lie for some people, but there is none of that with my friends, they aren't going to the news trying to get attention, they aren't trying to tell everyone they meet, they are just recounting something to me. I haven't seen any ghosts though and i've been in places where you'd think they'd make themselves known, i like being alone, i like being up late at night, never seen anything.

I kind of take Anne Rice's view on ghost to heart. They don't have any effect in what's really going on in the world so they're best ignored. Personally, I find the whole concept of ghosts highly depressing. True or not I would prefer to remain ignorant of them. So far none have bothered me and I'm quite happy with that.

morningsong said:

PeteSilas said:

i think it was buzz aldrn who claimed to see a ufo but he added the definition as a caveat, he saw an unidentified flying object, not a ship, not an alien, something he couldn't identify. one of the other astronauts is a lot more sure of alien existence, he grew up in roswell and was there when the whole thing went down, great interviews on youtube. I had a close friend who swore she saw an alien in a grocery store, she just thought this one guy looked really waxy and inhuman, like an alien in disguise, I knew another guy who claimed to see a ufo in arizona, a seeming hotspot for them. Who knows what they might be, they might be creatures advanced far ahead of us, maybe time or dimension travellers. I don't think that we can explain away everything by everyone. Neil Tyson dismisses them all by saying eyewitness testimony is the most unreliable, but if you want to, you can rationalize any kind of belief, including the belief scientists put in their field. It's not all that different.

Can't tell people they didn't see what they think they saw. But at the same time it doesn't mean others HAVE to buy into what they say they saw. I've expressed why I'm not buying, for more reasons than what I've ever heard NdGT or any other astrophysicist/astronomer/astrobiologist has had to say about it, and until there's a reasonable explanation to my own doubts than I'll just listen until I get bored.

At this point, I simply don't about peoples opinions and what they "think" they saw.

I want some concrete proof. Nothing else will do, that is why I keep track of the disclosure project.

I'd be cool with whatever SETi puts it's final stamp on.

PeteSilas said:

Neil Tyson dismisses them all by saying eyewitness testimony is the most unreliable, but if you want to, you can rationalize any kind of belief, including the belief scientists put in their field. It's not all that different.

Actually, it's entirely different. Science works in a completely different way.

Lianachan said:

PeteSilas said:

Neil Tyson dismisses them all by saying eyewitness testimony is the most unreliable, but if you want to, you can rationalize any kind of belief, including the belief scientists put in their field. It's not all that different.

Actually, it's entirely different. Science works in a completely different way.

not really, not when evidence contrary to their theories gets squashed under threat of having careers ruined, it's really no different. Lot's of faith is required to believe theory, which is the same thing which people use for religion, faith. Scientists desire to usurp religion and god because they want it's position, you don't see them trying to overthrow art or architecture because there isn't a lot of overlap, their nemesis is religion, they wouldn't attack those things if they weren't a threat. I like listening to Tyson and i also like listening to alot of other things, we ain't even close to having shit figured out.

PeteSilas said:

Lianachan said:

Actually, it's entirely different. Science works in a completely different way.

not really, not when evidence contrary to their theories gets squashed under threat of having careers ruined, it's really no different. Lot's of faith is required to believe theory, which is the same thing which people use for religion, faith. Scientists desire to usurp religion and god because they want it's position, you don't see them trying to overthrow art or architecture because there isn't a lot of overlap, their nemesis is religion, they wouldn't attack those things if they weren't a threat. I like listening to Tyson and i also like listening to alot of other things, we ain't even close to having shit figured out.

Utter crap I'm afraid. There are such things as religious scientists, you know. That scientists are out to usurp religion is a ludicrous suggestion.

Lianachan said:

PeteSilas said:

not really, not when evidence contrary to their theories gets squashed under threat of having careers ruined, it's really no different. Lot's of faith is required to believe theory, which is the same thing which people use for religion, faith. Scientists desire to usurp religion and god because they want it's position, you don't see them trying to overthrow art or architecture because there isn't a lot of overlap, their nemesis is religion, they wouldn't attack those things if they weren't a threat. I like listening to Tyson and i also like listening to alot of other things, we ain't even close to having shit figured out.

Utter crap I'm afraid. There are such things as religious scientists, you know. That scientists are out to usurp religion is a ludicrous suggestion.

utter crap yourself, go watch some tyson and see how long it takes him to talk shit about religion, or take for example steve nye, the science guy who told parents to stop teaching their kids religious doctrine, which although i'd agree in general, i think it's arrogant as fuck to tell people how to raise their kids.

PeteSilas said:

Lianachan said:

Utter crap I'm afraid. There are such things as religious scientists, you know. That scientists are out to usurp religion is a ludicrous suggestion.

utter crap yourself, go watch some tyson and see how long it takes him to talk shit about religion, or take for example steve nye, the science guy who told parents to stop teaching their kids religious doctrine, which although i'd agree in general, i think it's arrogant as fuck to tell people how to raise their kids.

Is that what you focus on? Maybe you should watch Tyson and Krauss get into it and you'll see the difference in schools of thought. And I watch Krauss too, I know where he stands as far as religion is concerned, and that's his opinion still has nothing to do with where I stand. None of that has anything to do with science in and of itself. It's sad that most people think that religion is the major focus, I am so happy I dug deeper and got away from that type of thinking.

PeteSilas said:

Lianachan said:

Utter crap I'm afraid. There are such things as religious scientists, you know. That scientists are out to usurp religion is a ludicrous suggestion.

utter crap yourself, go watch some tyson and see how long it takes him to talk shit about religion, or take for example steve nye, the science guy who told parents to stop teaching their kids religious doctrine, which although i'd agree in general, i think it's arrogant as fuck to tell people how to raise their kids.

both are theophobic bigots (and it is Bill Nye, not Steve)


EDIT: and I do not know or care what Tyson's creds are but we know Bill Nye is a child's television host. His degree is NOT in a hard science. (But like my coworker with a PhD in Art History....(that is a thing?) insists on being called Dr...)

[Edited 10/6/17 9:53am]

There are really more than 2 scientists regularly on social media and various networks and nobody has to agree or accept with every single word that comes out of anybody's mouth you know. That whole stepford behavior is really creepy to me.

Graycap23 said:

morningsong said:

Can't tell people they didn't see what they think they saw. But at the same time it doesn't mean others HAVE to buy into what they say they saw. I've expressed why I'm not buying, for more reasons than what I've ever heard NdGT or any other astrophysicist/astronomer/astrobiologist has had to say about it, and until there's a reasonable explanation to my own doubts than I'll just listen until I get bored.

At this point, I simply don't about peoples opinions and what they "think" they saw.

I want some concrete proof. Nothing else will do, that is why I keep track of the disclosure project.

What about guys who have actually lived in outer space (low Earth orbit, to be exact) for up to six months long? Or have gone to the Hubble telescope multiple times to fix it? And none of them have seen anything they couldn't explain.

To me, that's the most concrete proof of the non-existence of ETs and UFOs. These men and women are in a position far better than anyone else ever could be and if there was something out there, surely they would have seen it.

It's reading stuff like this that makes me scratch my head and have a lot of questions. Mainly why would we still be doing experiments like this. We started doing these type of experiments 70 years ago and yet we still know so little about how plants work in space. Heck ancient people figured out a lot about plants a long time ago but obviously the rules change in space.

Believe it or not, the first space travelers were seeds. In 1946, NASA launched a V-2 rocke...ying maize seeds to observe how they’d be affected by radiation. Since then, the scientific community has learned a great deal about the effects of the space environment on seed germination, metabolism, genetics, biochemistry and even seed production.


https://www.space.com/38205-seeds-in-space-for-growing-food.html

OnlyNDaUsa said:

PeteSilas said:

utter crap yourself, go watch some tyson and see how long it takes him to talk shit about religion, or take for example steve nye, the science guy who told parents to stop teaching their kids religious doctrine, which although i'd agree in general, i think it's arrogant as fuck to tell people how to raise their kids.

both are theophobic bigots (and it is Bill Nye, not Steve)


EDIT: and I do not know or care what Tyson's creds are but we know Bill Nye is a child's television host. His degree is NOT in a hard science. (But like my coworker with a PhD in Art History....(that is a thing?) insists on being called Dr...)

[Edited 10/6/17 9:53am]

ya, i believe i heard that about bill/steve, he actually lives here in seattle. I just think it's fucked telling people how to raise their kids but that's the arrogance we see. there is one scientist who points out the rationale for believing there is no bod and he's right, without a god, you can do whatever you want without repurcussions, which is actually what alot of people like to believe. ONe of my fave books is by native author vine deloria called red earth white lies, he points out just how much cockeyed logic science uses and points out how scientists get treated if they find evidence that points in any other direction than the one that the field wants. One was a human skeleton found somewhere in central america about 200,000 years old, the scientist had his career destroyed, that's science for you, just as human as religion, politics or anything else humans can get their hands on and fuck up.

this morning i watched a lot of vids with interviews of edgar mitchell and something cooper, astronauts and they had a lot of interesting stuff to say. Mitchell particularly is a highly intelligent dude and i couldn't really follow him all that much, i'm no scientist. one thing i notice about any smart man is that they always have holes in their logic, Mitchell mentioned Uri Geller as a psychic he'd observed, seemingly not realizing how much of a fraud the dude is. It goes to show that even smart people have gaps in their thinking.

RodeoSchro said:

Graycap23 said:

At this point, I simply don't about peoples opinions and what they "think" they saw.

I want some concrete proof. Nothing else will do, that is why I keep track of the disclosure project.

What about guys who have actually lived in outer space (low Earth orbit, to be exact) for up to six months long? Or have gone to the Hubble telescope multiple times to fix it? And none of them have seen anything they couldn't explain.

To me, that's the most concrete proof of the non-existence of ETs and UFOs. These men and women are in a position far better than anyone else ever could be and if there was something out there, surely they would have seen it.

RodeoSchro said:

Graycap23 said:

At this point, I simply don't about peoples opinions and what they "think" they saw.

I want some concrete proof. Nothing else will do, that is why I keep track of the disclosure project.

What about guys who have actually lived in outer space (low Earth orbit, to be exact) for up to six months long? Or have gone to the Hubble telescope multiple times to fix it? And none of them have seen anything they couldn't explain.

To me, that's the most concrete proof of the non-existence of ETs and UFOs. These men and women are in a position far better than anyone else ever could be and if there was something out there, surely they would have seen it.

Do u believe humans have been to the moon?

If so, when has the colonizer ever gone somewhere.......and never returned to take it over?

Why didn't they return to the Moon?

[Edited 10/6/17 16:11pm]

Seriously? Nobody pays these guys any attention.

[Edited 10/6/17 16:35pm]

Jill Tarter Never Found Aliens—But Her Successors Might

IN DECEMBER 2016, three generations of women astronomers joined me for a phone call. Debra Fischer, Natalie Batalha, and Margaret Turnbull have dedicated their careers to comprehending planets beyond the solar system, the signs of microbial life that might be on those planets, or both of those out-there topics. We talked some about their astronomy, but we mostly talk about another astronomer: Jill Tarter—the long-time leader of the search for extraterrestrial intelligence and the inspiration for the movie and book Contact’s main character, Ellie Arroway.

Jill Tarter




When Turnbull first watched Contact, as an intern at Harvard University, she was ready to scoff. Contact follows Arroway as she searches for a radio signal from an intelligent extraterrestrial civilization, battling bureaucracy, politicians, economic woes, statistical unlikelihood, institutionalized sexism, and her own emotional demons. As a nonfictional woman scientist and a SETI scientist, Tarter faced the same challenges. But this is where the two women’s stories depart: Arroway finds a signal. E.T. calls. E.T. sends instructions for building a spaceship. Humanity builds the spaceship (not without trials), and (not without trials) Arroway becomes the sole passenger.

But they do understand and, in some ways, sympathize with the idea that what they do is mainstream, while what inspired them about Contact is fringe. “Within the scientific community, there is healthy skepticism,” says Fischer. “And the question is ‘How do you ever get to a meaningful null result?’” Meaning, “How long and how hard do SETI scientists have to look for extraterrestrial intelligence and find nothing before they say, ‘There is nothing. We are alone.’”

And there’s not a good answer, because the thing about the universe is there’s always more of it to search. There are always new ways that aliens might communicate. And you could try different combinations of places and ways of looking forever and never concede. The inability to get a null result makes a study, in the eyes of some and in some philosophies of science, unscientific. That’s part of why Tarter and other SETI colleagues have tried to set limits—like looking at a million stars within 1,000 light-years—from which they can draw incremental and statistical conclusions.

Graycap23 said:

Lianachan said:

Graycap23 said:

Do u believe humans have been to the moon?

If so, when has the colonizer ever gone somewhere.......and never returned to take it over?

Why didn't they return to the Moon?

[Edited 10/6/17 16:11pm]

The moon missions weren’t to colonise, they were part of the space race. That’s the problem with early space missions being a race - races are won, and then they stop. If anybody still believes the moon landings were faked, I have several bridges to sell them.

There is a reason that they never went back.

morningsong said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

I do not think they are. And your post here is part of why I am very skeptical of any ongoing contact.

I am not sure where you are on this issue: I am I think it very likely there is other life out there... that we are somewhere in the middle... but that they have not and will not make contact even if they do manage to discover us. I think the odds of any planet discovering advanced life on any other planet is very small and even then being able to make contact much less visits is also not likely.

Sure I believe there is enough room for there to be life elsewhere. Distance and time are a SOB and there are some serious challenges that require some serious advanced thought to overcome, we are nowhere near any of that. We can't even get a robot to Enceladus yet, let alone cross to another solar system. The reality and the imagination are not quite in sync yet.

Thank you. I don't think folks understand how vast space is. Traveling at light speed (186, 000 miles per second) it would still take four years to reach the closest star to Earth. As you said, they'd have to overcome serious challenges (distance & radiation) to reach our planet.

uPtoWnNY said:

morningsong said:

Sure I believe there is enough room for there to be life elsewhere. Distance and time are a SOB and there are some serious challenges that require some serious advanced thought to overcome, we are nowhere near any of that. We can't even get a robot to Enceladus yet, let alone cross to another solar system. The reality and the imagination are not quite in sync yet.

Thank you. I don't think folks understand how vast space is. Traveling at light speed (186, 000 miles per second) it would still take four years to reach the closest star to Earth. As you said, they'd have to overcome serious challenges (distance & radiation) to reach our planet.

if they had the tech to get this far, don't you think they'd know how to deal with those challegnes.

Graycap23 said:

Graycap23 said:

RodeoSchro said:

What about guys who have actually lived in outer space (low Earth orbit, to be exact) for up to six months long? Or have gone to the Hubble telescope multiple times to fix it? And none of them have seen anything they couldn't explain.

To me, that's the most concrete proof of the non-existence of ETs and UFOs. These men and women are in a position far better than anyone else ever could be and if there was something out there, surely they would have seen it.

Do u believe humans have been to the moon?

If so, when has the colonizer ever gone somewhere.......and never returned to take it over?

Why didn't they return to the Moon?

[Edited 10/6/17 16:11pm]

Of course, we went to the moon. And to answer your question, we returned there several times. We quit going when we ran out of money; shifted focus to Skylab and then to the ISS and the shuttle; and then had two shuttle disasters which pretty much doomed funding for the return to the moon we had planned.

My buddy that just got back from six months on the ISS was originally assigned to our lunar program. He was going to be one of the first Americans to return to the moon. But:

We screwed up our program because we didn't fund it consistently. Meanwhile, the Chinese passed us in the race to the moon, and there was no possible way to catch them. This all happened in the early-to-mid 2000's. You can look it up. It wasn't like we never planned to go back.

So, when President Obama took office, he wanted to re-invigorate our space program but trying to catch the Chinese in a moon race would have been a waste of time and money. So he focused our space program on going to Mars.

That's why we quit going to the moon - after actually having gone back there with astronauts five times after our original moon landing in 1969, and a few other times with unmanned vehicles.

To say "we never went back" is factually incorrect.

.

[Edited 10/8/17 12:06pm]

Even if we or anyone else can go anywhere we wanted, why would we be so presumptuous to believe we were that amazing a place to focus on. How many billions of stars are out there? There is a lot to see and a lot of places to go. Heck, even in my own state of California there are tons of "must-see" destinations I have yet to visit.


Are there UFO's? My guess is yeah. Have they visited us? Accidentally maybe. But I'm sure there are more interesting places to focus on. I'd never want to go to the moon or Mars myself. There is a lot of barren wasteland right here at home. Why take a stressful and expensive trip out there. I'll support talented scientific explorers to do it though, whether they be men or machines. I would much rather let the machines do it. We get far more bang for the buck. There are still gadgets sent in the 70's, 80's and 90's exploring the solar system for us. Way better and cheaper than had we send dudes or dudettes out there.

i never heard of china going to the moon.

RodeoSchro said:

Graycap23 said:

Do u believe humans have been to the moon?

If so, when has the colonizer ever gone somewhere.......and never returned to take it over?

Why didn't they return to the Moon?

[Edited 10/6/17 16:11pm]

Of course, we went to the moon. And to answer your question, we returned there several times. We quit going when we ran out of money; shifted focus to Skylab and then to the ISS and the shuttle; and then had two shuttle disasters which pretty much doomed funding for the return to the moon we had planned.

My buddy that just got back from six months on the ISS was originally assigned to our lunar program. He was going to be one of the first Americans to return to the moon. But:

We screwed up our program because we didn't fund it consistently. Meanwhile, the Chinese passed us in the race to the moon, and there was no possible way to catch them. This all happened in the early-to-mid 2000's. You can look it up. It wasn't like we never planned to go back.

So, when President Obama took office, he wanted to re-invigorate our space program but trying to catch the Chinese in a moon race would have been a waste of time and money. So he focused our space program on going to Mars.

That's why we quit going to the moon - after actually having gone back there with astronauts five times after our original moon landing in 1969, and a few other times with unmanned vehicles.

To say "we never went back" is factually incorrect.

.

[Edited 10/8/17 12:06pm]

PeteSilas said:

i never heard of china going to the moon.

Chinese Lunar missions.