5 ms·
> My 2c is extra-terrestrial civ is less likely than co-terrestrial civ (subterrainean/ocean) - but lets stop talking about this like they are hallucinations or
by md_ 5y ago
> My 2c is extra-terrestrial civ is less likely than co-terrestrial civ (subterrainean/ocean) - but lets stop talking about this like they are hallucinations or possible atmospheric phenomenon.
Why?
This whole thing reminds me a bit of the "Havana Syndrome", in that:
- It's an extraordinary claim, presented with limited evidence.
- It defies obvious logical explanation (i.e., a motive).
- The phenomenon lacks a clear definition, leaving the door open for multiple disparate phenomena with different causes to be lumped together.
I believe the third aspect is really underemphasized as a causal factor in "hard to explain" phenomena: because this may in fact be multiple different phenomena, with different causes, it's likely that any single mundane explanation does not explain all observations, and thus appears to be a weaker explanation than it is.
This is sort of a "defender's dilemma" of strange phenomena: if you can't explain all of them, you appear to be unable to explain them. But because of the aforementioned definitional problem, that's not necessarily a surprising or meaningful thing.
To your specific point: the idea of a co-terrestrial civilization is extraordinary. I struggle to imagine the only evidence would be a few spurious radar signatures and odd videos.
- gfodor 5y agoI agree with the concerns, however as someone who has been kept up a bit with the phenomenon, the main body of stuff to look at are the set of reports which involve: - Multiple expert witnesses, usually pilots or radar operators, getting visual and sensor confirmation from multiple vantage points - Air and ground tracking - High cohesion and consistency (in terms of object size, cardinality, dynamics, and timing) between the witness reports Taken together, these reports form a closure over the set of plausible explanations that should approximately explain all or none of them. My 2c is that any plausible explanations are by and large "big" and non-trivial ones like shared delusions.
- md_ 5y agoDon't get me wrong: I am baffled by some of the reports (especially, as you note, those that have multiple witnesses or multiple independent pieces of evidence). But of course alien civilizations—or (non-human?) co-terrestrial civilizations—are such an extraordinary hypothesis that I do not see why they should be treated as more plausible than (as you note) something like shared delusions. Let me expand upon that a bit. My (tongue in cheek) explanation is this: Humans have an undiscovered facility for shared perceptual delusions and (seemingly deliberate) confabulation. That is to say, individuals with shared cultural contexts may respond to the same environmental triggers (weird reflections, social stressors, I don't know!) by hallucinating the same things. Moreover, upon experiencing such a hallucination, some subjects will confabulate corroboratory evidence, perhaps even (unconsciously) going so far as to tamper with radar recordings or (unconsciously) colluding with other "witnesses"—and individuals who engage in this confabulation have no memory or recollection of it later. This is a totally wild explanation, and I don't actually believe it. But is it as plausible as alien civilizations? I sorta think so!
- quacked 5y agoI wouldn't even go that far. We have to remember where this information is coming from. This is the U.S. Military. We don't have "pilot confirmation", we have files, transcripts, and audio that are allegedly pilot confirmation. Given the amount of evidence released so far, which seems more likely? - Alien civilization - Some other form of hyper-advanced technology - The U.S. Military and/or various U.S. intelligence agencies are perpetrating a hoax in order to further some kind of strategic goal I know which one I'm picking, barring much more widely acknowledged and damning evidence.
- gfodor 5y agoWell, you've gotta dig but these reports now by the US military are highly similar to other reports that have leaked out over the decades from on-the-record military officers from the US and other states. The reason this is a noteworthy topic now all of a sudden is precisely because the US military is making these claims - the material claims are not new but have been brushed off for the usual reasons.
- quacked 5y agoI definitely can't claim to know anything, but I would have a very hard time believing that other claims that are similar to these aren't part of a wider agenda. To be clear, I'm fairly conspiracy-friendly. I am just very skeptical of this new tech angle. More reports from states that have obviously opposed the US would definitely make me think more about the veracity of the leaked "evidence".
- mladen5 5y agoMost of conspiracy theories narrative was being controlled by Russia in recent years and now USA wants some of that. Probably with nothing to gain but conspiracy theories is all i hear from boomers these days.
- gfodor 5y agoI love the way you are thinking about this, and you're a really solid skeptic! I hope we get more people questioning this the way you have, instead of saying it's clouds :)