11 ms·

To dismiss all evidence of UAP's out of hand as "illogical" is just as unscientific as to accept them as being proof of ET visitation. It may be that all these

To dismiss all evidence of UAP's out of hand as "illogical" is just as unscientific as to accept them as being proof of ET visitation. It may be that all these claimed observations are the product of some sort of collective psychosis, as this article appears to assume, but that's just one hypothesis among many others. Empirical questions require empirical investigation, not ignoring the question.

fogihujy 6y ago
It's pretty much the same as with other pop-sci stuff that is being shoveled down the throat of people who still watch regular TV; sensationalized bullshit in most cases. We know there's something out there; it's occasionally seen by people who report it, and who who often somehow fail to bring proper cameras with them. It could be aliens, foreign governments, or more mundane explanations like weather phenomena. We just don't know what it is yet.
HourglassFR 6y ago
> To dismiss all evidence of UAP's out of hand as "illogical" is just as unscientific as to accept them as being proof of ET visitation. I think it's pretty disingenuous to present those two takes as being equally bad. Yes we don't know everything and leaving room for extraordinary things to happen is healthy, but I have yet to see evidences that aliens have cause a UAP. On the other hand we have good empirical evidence that sighting of unusal phenomenas with perfectly mundane explanations can, and do, create testimonies of so called "alien visitations". We even have pretty good psycho-sociological explanations for why this happens. So without even looking at the specific details of a particular UAP sighting, coming at it from the angle of "people probably saw weird stuff and their brains filled the gap" is the right approach in my opinion. That doesn't mean we have to stop here of course, but it is a sensible default position.
- tgflynn 6y ago
  > I have yet to see evidences that aliens have cause a UAP Neither have I but the title of this article is "why look at flying saucers", not "why believe in ET visitation". > We even have pretty good psycho-sociological explanations for why this happens. What well accepted psychological explanation is there for 4 naval aviators reporting an encounter with an object that appeared to defy our knowledge of aerodynamics in clear weather and broad daylight in the exact location they were vectored to by an Aegis radar system ?
  - SiempreViernes 6y ago
    They got confused by a mundane object?
    - tgflynn 6y ago
      Four pilots in two different aircraft plus the radar operators all confused in the same way. What are the odds of that ?
      - eitland 6y ago
        > What are the odds of that ? Not good. My best alternative explanations is: top secret research project going out of their way to fool everyone, possibly with the help of a few pilots and radar operators :-)
        prudhvis 6y ago
        Sure. Let's assume that there are top secret research programs. What this tells us is that the research had yeilded such results as * Super High Density energy storage mechanism, that when being used actually cools down instead of heating up * An energy source that isn't based around burning fossil fuels for propulsion, that is highly efficient. * A device that could atleast in theory be using some kind of an inertial cancellation mechanism. Any of this could be a solution to climate change. Why would our own governments lie and put the future of this planet in jeapordy?. Just so they can win the next war but lose a Future?. The idea that this is some kind of a secret research project doesn't add up.
        eitland 6y ago
        > What this tells us is that the research had yeilded such results as Personally, if I was tasked with making sure everyone respected the American Army I'd make sure to hire a magician and keep that hire very very secret. I'm not saying there aren't any serious technical breakthroughs. But I'd still hire the best reliable magician I could get. After all, any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic and my bet is that it goes the other way too. (Some replace "magic" with "rigged demo" and that too is true - and possibly relevant.) Also, I think it is Penn or Teller who says something along the lines of: there's one thing people constantly underestimate when it comes to magic and that is how incredibly far magicians are willing to go to conceal their tricks.
ansible 6y ago
I did used to entertain the idea of aliens visiting this solar system. And then I better understood the stupendous energy requirements for a two-way trip to even the very closest neighboring solar system. And it is just not practical, even for a civilization at the end of the technology development tree. We might see one-way probes, but they are as likely to be a part of hegemonizing swarm, looking to convert all usable matter in the solar system into computronium. Certainly they're not going to just faff around, kidnap a few people and then leave quietly. When aliens visit, everyone will know. Luckily, we haven't seen any evidence of Kardashev type-2 civilizations nearby, so we may be good for a while. Though that's also sort of depressing, as it is weak evidence that life is not too common across the galaxy.
- jordwest 6y ago
  > even for a civilization at the end of the technology development tree. How do we know what the end of the technology development tree looks like? There are just so many mysteries that remain within our current understanding of science, we can’t say for sure that it’s not easy (for example) to bend space time or some other possibility that makes faster than light travel possible. Quantum entanglement, for example, breaks many of our assumptions about the impossibility of FTL travel. > When aliens visit, everyone will know. Maybe, but perhaps a civilisation that has survived the great filter would look differently at civilisations they stumble upon. Maybe, like we do when searching for microbes on Mars, they would try not to disturb the life they discover. This is all just speculation of course, but I think when looking at this topic it’s all too easy to apply a human centric view on what’s possible and what’s not, and the truth is we just know so very little. Or, we know a lot, but there are so many more mysteries than solved problems.
  - dplavery92 6y ago
    While I would also not presume to know how different our understanding of the universe may look in hundreds (or thousands!) of years, I do draw some exception to the following comment: >Quantum entanglement, for example, breaks many of our assumptions about the impossibility of FTL travel. Quantum entanglement can produce correlated measurements between systems, even when the entangled systems are separated by large distances. In a sense, this can be used to measure the state of an entangled system at great displacement "faster" than it would take light to travel from that distant system to the observer. However, the state of the entangled systems is prepared before the systems are separated from one another (at much less than the speed of light.) Any attempt to change the state of one of the entangled systems (at a distance) breaks the entanglement. Entanglement cannot be used to communicate information from one point to another faster than the speed of light. It certainly doesn't allow FTL transfer of matter/energy.

fogihujy 6y ago

It's pretty much the same as with other pop-sci stuff that is being shoveled down the throat of people who still watch regular TV; sensationalized bullshit in most cases. We know there's something out there; it's occasionally seen by people who report it, and who who often somehow fail to bring proper cameras with them. It could be aliens, foreign governments, or more mundane explanations like weather phenomena. We just don't know what it is yet.

HourglassFR 6y ago

> To dismiss all evidence of UAP's out of hand as "illogical" is just as unscientific as to accept them as being proof of ET visitation. I think it's pretty disingenuous to present those two takes as being equally bad. Yes we don't know everything and leaving room for extraordinary things to happen is healthy, but I have yet to see evidences that aliens have cause a UAP. On the other hand we have good empirical evidence that sighting of unusal phenomenas with perfectly mundane explanations can, and do, create testimonies of so called "alien visitations". We even have pretty good psycho-sociological explanations for why this happens. So without even looking at the specific details of a particular UAP sighting, coming at it from the angle of "people probably saw weird stuff and their brains filled the gap" is the right approach in my opinion. That doesn't mean we have to stop here of course, but it is a sensible default position.

tgflynn 6y ago
> I have yet to see evidences that aliens have cause a UAP Neither have I but the title of this article is "why look at flying saucers", not "why believe in ET visitation". > We even have pretty good psycho-sociological explanations for why this happens. What well accepted psychological explanation is there for 4 naval aviators reporting an encounter with an object that appeared to defy our knowledge of aerodynamics in clear weather and broad daylight in the exact location they were vectored to by an Aegis radar system ?
- SiempreViernes 6y ago
  They got confused by a mundane object?
  - tgflynn 6y ago
    Four pilots in two different aircraft plus the radar operators all confused in the same way. What are the odds of that ?
    - eitland 6y ago
      > What are the odds of that ? Not good. My best alternative explanations is: top secret research project going out of their way to fool everyone, possibly with the help of a few pilots and radar operators :-)
      - prudhvis 6y ago
        Sure. Let's assume that there are top secret research programs. What this tells us is that the research had yeilded such results as * Super High Density energy storage mechanism, that when being used actually cools down instead of heating up * An energy source that isn't based around burning fossil fuels for propulsion, that is highly efficient. * A device that could atleast in theory be using some kind of an inertial cancellation mechanism. Any of this could be a solution to climate change. Why would our own governments lie and put the future of this planet in jeapordy?. Just so they can win the next war but lose a Future?. The idea that this is some kind of a secret research project doesn't add up.
        eitland 6y ago
        > What this tells us is that the research had yeilded such results as Personally, if I was tasked with making sure everyone respected the American Army I'd make sure to hire a magician and keep that hire very very secret. I'm not saying there aren't any serious technical breakthroughs. But I'd still hire the best reliable magician I could get. After all, any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic and my bet is that it goes the other way too. (Some replace "magic" with "rigged demo" and that too is true - and possibly relevant.) Also, I think it is Penn or Teller who says something along the lines of: there's one thing people constantly underestimate when it comes to magic and that is how incredibly far magicians are willing to go to conceal their tricks.

ansible 6y ago

I did used to entertain the idea of aliens visiting this solar system. And then I better understood the stupendous energy requirements for a two-way trip to even the very closest neighboring solar system. And it is just not practical, even for a civilization at the end of the technology development tree. We might see one-way probes, but they are as likely to be a part of hegemonizing swarm, looking to convert all usable matter in the solar system into computronium. Certainly they're not going to just faff around, kidnap a few people and then leave quietly. When aliens visit, everyone will know. Luckily, we haven't seen any evidence of Kardashev type-2 civilizations nearby, so we may be good for a while. Though that's also sort of depressing, as it is weak evidence that life is not too common across the galaxy.

jordwest 6y ago
> even for a civilization at the end of the technology development tree. How do we know what the end of the technology development tree looks like? There are just so many mysteries that remain within our current understanding of science, we can’t say for sure that it’s not easy (for example) to bend space time or some other possibility that makes faster than light travel possible. Quantum entanglement, for example, breaks many of our assumptions about the impossibility of FTL travel. > When aliens visit, everyone will know. Maybe, but perhaps a civilisation that has survived the great filter would look differently at civilisations they stumble upon. Maybe, like we do when searching for microbes on Mars, they would try not to disturb the life they discover. This is all just speculation of course, but I think when looking at this topic it’s all too easy to apply a human centric view on what’s possible and what’s not, and the truth is we just know so very little. Or, we know a lot, but there are so many more mysteries than solved problems.
- dplavery92 6y ago
  While I would also not presume to know how different our understanding of the universe may look in hundreds (or thousands!) of years, I do draw some exception to the following comment: >Quantum entanglement, for example, breaks many of our assumptions about the impossibility of FTL travel. Quantum entanglement can produce correlated measurements between systems, even when the entangled systems are separated by large distances. In a sense, this can be used to measure the state of an entangled system at great displacement "faster" than it would take light to travel from that distant system to the observer. However, the state of the entangled systems is prepared before the systems are separated from one another (at much less than the speed of light.) Any attempt to change the state of one of the entangled systems (at a distance) breaks the entanglement. Entanglement cannot be used to communicate information from one point to another faster than the speed of light. It certainly doesn't allow FTL transfer of matter/energy.