4 ms·

Because the UFO angle brings free publicity. Everything I’ve read of his about this sort of thing is always couched in language that makes it clear he’s not con

Because the UFO angle brings free publicity. Everything I’ve read of his about this sort of thing is always couched in language that makes it clear he’s not convinced it’s definitely aliens, he just wants to push a boundary and found a useful untapped stream of free PR and the funding that can bring so he writes regularly plausible science up, but plays up the Alien angle to get crowd attention… in part because he got fed up with even the suggestion that something being aliens was ridiculous when a large percentage of scientists consider the chances were completely alone in the universe to be quite low.

nullifidian 4y ago
Just like how almost all planetary science projects are presented to the public as efforts to find life. This is just "manufacturing consent" messaging to ensure continued funding and public interest.
Simon_O_Rourke 4y ago
I get that, but it really irks my inner academic when he shifts gears this way. "Maybe it's a meteorite, maybe it's an alien though... Or maybe it's Elvis flying on the Loch Ness monster." The old quip that it's a small step from the sublime to the ridiculous applies here I think.
- colordrops 4y ago
  Have you listened to any of his other talks? Do you understand his reasoning as to why he mentions aliens? He addresses stereotypical attitudes identical to yours.
  - Simon_O_Rourke 4y ago
    Yes I have and no he doesn't.
    - colordrops 4y ago
      Yes he does, pretty directly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbJpP_6pOww https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbJpP_6pOww
- fsloth 4y ago
  Hypothesizing about a billion year old alien remnant is not Loch Ness monster, it’s just discussing statistics about a phenomena we have no good statistics for - except we know it’s plausible since we already know interstellar space is already populated by two probes launched by a civilization of sentient creatures. I’d say its a topic solidly in the domain of scientific inquiry, but it’s not well defined yet since people trying to discuss it are labeled loonies (reminds me of atom theory and plate tectonics- two phenomena which were prominently ridiculed as well). Of course, ”alien studies” is a domain that is quite hard at the moment-and may always remain so. And sure, there is lots of crazy talk around the topic. But the fact we have people trying to invent perpetual motion machines does not make every thermodynamicist and machine engineer looney.
  - Simon_O_Rourke 4y ago
    > populated by two probes launched by a civilization of sentient creatures. I've been to parts of New Jersey, and proving it's civilization, let alone sentience or any form of self-awareness may be eagerly disputable.
- adastra22 4y ago
  This funding is from people interested in the ET angle. Aliens is how you get the money.
  - cronix 4y ago
    Right, "a search for new life" will always trump "a search for new mineral" in the eyes of the public and likely most of the scientific community.

nullifidian 4y ago

Just like how almost all planetary science projects are presented to the public as efforts to find life. This is just "manufacturing consent" messaging to ensure continued funding and public interest.

Simon_O_Rourke 4y ago

I get that, but it really irks my inner academic when he shifts gears this way. "Maybe it's a meteorite, maybe it's an alien though... Or maybe it's Elvis flying on the Loch Ness monster." The old quip that it's a small step from the sublime to the ridiculous applies here I think.

colordrops 4y ago
Have you listened to any of his other talks? Do you understand his reasoning as to why he mentions aliens? He addresses stereotypical attitudes identical to yours.
- Simon_O_Rourke 4y ago
  Yes I have and no he doesn't.
  - colordrops 4y ago
    Yes he does, pretty directly: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbJpP_6pOww https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HbJpP_6pOww
fsloth 4y ago
Hypothesizing about a billion year old alien remnant is not Loch Ness monster, it’s just discussing statistics about a phenomena we have no good statistics for - except we know it’s plausible since we already know interstellar space is already populated by two probes launched by a civilization of sentient creatures. I’d say its a topic solidly in the domain of scientific inquiry, but it’s not well defined yet since people trying to discuss it are labeled loonies (reminds me of atom theory and plate tectonics- two phenomena which were prominently ridiculed as well). Of course, ”alien studies” is a domain that is quite hard at the moment-and may always remain so. And sure, there is lots of crazy talk around the topic. But the fact we have people trying to invent perpetual motion machines does not make every thermodynamicist and machine engineer looney.
- Simon_O_Rourke 4y ago
  > populated by two probes launched by a civilization of sentient creatures. I've been to parts of New Jersey, and proving it's civilization, let alone sentience or any form of self-awareness may be eagerly disputable.
adastra22 4y ago
This funding is from people interested in the ET angle. Aliens is how you get the money.
- cronix 4y ago
  Right, "a search for new life" will always trump "a search for new mineral" in the eyes of the public and likely most of the scientific community.