4 ms·
I'm surprised to hear someone of his intellectual caliber resort to ridicule when someone brings up UFOs. UFOs "appearing" to "cranks and weirdos" doesn't reall
by mbenjaminsmith 14y ago
I'm surprised to hear someone of his intellectual caliber resort to ridicule when someone brings up UFOs. UFOs "appearing" to "cranks and weirdos" doesn't really describe the phenomena, as anyone who spent more than 30 minutes on the subject would know.
I'd would have loved to have heard him debate the late John Mack (Harvard Medical School, won a Pulitzer) on the subject. It's incredibly arrogant for him to think that he can ignore the research of other academics (or remain in ignorance of it) and still speak authoritatively on the subject.
I don't expect him to champion the field but since he's asked so frequently about extraterrestrial life and/or UFOs it would be nice if his canned response was a bit more intelligent.
It's incredible to dismiss so much theoretical/speculative physics in the interview and at the same time say that maybe M-Theory will tie up the loose ends in the Standard Model, but then again, maybe it won't and we'll be back to the drawing board. Even though we admittedly don't understand the universe with any degrees of completeness, obviously these popular ideas are false based on our understanding of the universe?
- rimantas 14y ago> doesn't really describe the phenomena, as anyone who > spent more than 30 minutes on the subject would know. It actually does.
- philhippus 14y agoThere are plenty of credible witnesses to UFO sightings. The problem is people getting their knickers in a twist over the acronym 'UFO' - a product of societal conditioning.