35 ms·

> How many scientists can you name that are looking for signs of technologically advanced non-human craft in our atmosphere? The US government and, indeed, alm

> How many scientists can you name that are looking for signs of technologically advanced non-human craft in our atmosphere? The US government and, indeed, almost every government on earth, scans our atmosphere constantly for alien craft both from earth and using satellites (which is to say, they're looking for missiles and bombers) because it's sort of a core function of national security to control your own airspace. I'm not sure you need anything extra to find "non-human" spacecraft.

david-gpu 3y ago
> The US government and, indeed, almost every government on earth, scans our atmosphere constantly for alien craft both from earth and using satellites (which is to say, they're looking for missiles and bombers) because it's sort of a core function of national security to control your own airspace. I'm not sure you need anything extra to find "non-human" spacecraft. And do they systematically release that data for academic researchers to analyze? Or is it automatically classified? If it is classified (hint:it is) then how do we know what they have found? If you were part of the military brass and your mission was thus the defense of your nation, what would you do if you received radar reports of objects behaving unlike anything else that your known technology could do? And if upon further research your experts determined beyond reasonable doubt that these anomalies are real craft, what would you do? Remember that your mission is to provide every possible military advantage to your country and to prevent other countries from gaining an advantage agsinst you. Me? I would try to shoot them down to study them and keep the lid on the whole thing to prevent our adversaries from leapfrogging our current technology.
- empyrrhicist 3y ago
  Please look up the "argument from ignorance", because that's what you're doing.
  - david-gpu 3y ago
    I'm not saying "we don't know have X data, so Y must be true/false, I am saying there is a perfectly plausible explanation for why if data from military sources did exist then it wouldn't automatically be known to the public. Because that is the argument that was being made by the comment I was replying to. If you have a more detailed criticism I would be happy to address it.
    - empyrrhicist 3y ago
      Replace "true/false" with "probably/reasonable to consider" and you're doing exactly that. You're using uncertainty to elevate an implausible hypothesis for consideration.
      - david-gpu 3y ago
        The comment I replied to was stating that if alien vehicles visited Earth then the military would be aware of it, with the implicit assumption that if the military was aware of UAPs then the it would inform the public. My counterargument is that if the military detected UAPs then they would have both a strong incentive not to inform the public and the means to keep it secret. Thus the (public) absence of (military) evidence is not evidence of absence. Happy to address any other misunderstandings.

david-gpu 3y ago

> The US government and, indeed, almost every government on earth, scans our atmosphere constantly for alien craft both from earth and using satellites (which is to say, they're looking for missiles and bombers) because it's sort of a core function of national security to control your own airspace. I'm not sure you need anything extra to find "non-human" spacecraft. And do they systematically release that data for academic researchers to analyze? Or is it automatically classified? If it is classified (hint:it is) then how do we know what they have found? If you were part of the military brass and your mission was thus the defense of your nation, what would you do if you received radar reports of objects behaving unlike anything else that your known technology could do? And if upon further research your experts determined beyond reasonable doubt that these anomalies are real craft, what would you do? Remember that your mission is to provide every possible military advantage to your country and to prevent other countries from gaining an advantage agsinst you. Me? I would try to shoot them down to study them and keep the lid on the whole thing to prevent our adversaries from leapfrogging our current technology.

empyrrhicist 3y ago
Please look up the "argument from ignorance", because that's what you're doing.
- david-gpu 3y ago
  I'm not saying "we don't know have X data, so Y must be true/false, I am saying there is a perfectly plausible explanation for why if data from military sources did exist then it wouldn't automatically be known to the public. Because that is the argument that was being made by the comment I was replying to. If you have a more detailed criticism I would be happy to address it.
  - empyrrhicist 3y ago
    Replace "true/false" with "probably/reasonable to consider" and you're doing exactly that. You're using uncertainty to elevate an implausible hypothesis for consideration.
    - david-gpu 3y ago
      The comment I replied to was stating that if alien vehicles visited Earth then the military would be aware of it, with the implicit assumption that if the military was aware of UAPs then the it would inform the public. My counterargument is that if the military detected UAPs then they would have both a strong incentive not to inform the public and the means to keep it secret. Thus the (public) absence of (military) evidence is not evidence of absence. Happy to address any other misunderstandings.