Stanton Friedman's thoughts on interstellar travel

originally posted by: parad0x122
a reply to: EnPassant

I'm sorry, but I feel like I'm just spinning around in circles. None of what you said to support your side of the argument is based on fact. Actually it's the opposite. There are plenty of indirect evidence of the existence of wormholes, off the top of my head the "Cold Spot" comes to mind. You said it yourself, even the idea of the astral plane's existence is only supported by paranormal studies. Not science. Not physics.

I don't like mixing spirituality with logical thought processes. Too much wiggle room.

I don't accept that science is the only way to knowledge.

a reply to: Sharted

I think the ufos are not using any kind of fusion power or reactor. They are coming and going out of this physical plane which means they don´t belong in this physical plane(atleast not anymore). So technically they are from a different reality altogether.

originally posted by: EnPassant


I don't accept that science is the only way to knowledge.

This is essentially the same as saying:

"I don't believe that a method of reaching truths, facts and educated guesses through the use of technology, math, observation, exhaustive testing - a method and system that welcomes challenges, more information and further testing by other intelligent, qualified and dedicated truth seekers - is the way to knowledge. I'd rather listen to a dude that says he's cool and loves everyone....because you know, he meditates, so there's that."

Science is not a religion or ideology, despite what new-age loons like to believe. Science seeks truth, knowledge and understanding of the universe around us.

There is indirect evidence to support wormholes. The physics and the math support it & their existance would not violate known physics.

How does the existence of astral plane violates ´known´ physics?

There is absolutely no evidence of an "astral plane". A term that was coined to describe something that happened only in the imagination of people. There is no scientific basis behind it....at all. There's a difference between "theory" and scientific theory.

There is no evidence of astral plane because science deals only with matter. To them, anything beyond the grasp of ´known´ science is a fantasy.

originally posted by: radkrish

There is no evidence of astral plane because science deals only with matter. To them, anything beyond the grasp of ´known´ science is a fantasy.

That's simply false. Science is not only the study of matter (Did you mean, mass?). In astrophysics for example, there's research dedicated to understanding negative energy and anti-matter. Science is simply a blanket term for a method to seek understanding of the inner workings of anything. This is why there are different fields of science. Hell, light has no mass. We have come to understand photons and waves quite extensively.

If there were any evidence of an astral plane or telepathy, many scientists would be quite fascinated and interested. Unfortunately, there's zero proof of either.

originally posted by: EnPassant
I don't accept that science is the only way to knowledge.

That's fine and dandy, you have your right to your opinion. But I'd hazard to say that it might be a good idea to state your ideas as just that, ideas, rather than making them sound as if they are proven facts. (Read: Science)

a reply to: LogicalRazor

Again, I agree 100%.

originally posted by: LogicalRazor

originally posted by: EnPassant


I don't accept that science is the only way to knowledge.

This is essentially the same as saying:

"I don't believe that a method of reaching truths, facts and educated guesses through the use of technology, math, observation, exhaustive testing - a method and system that welcomes challenges, more information and further testing by other intelligent, qualified and dedicated truth seekers - is the way to knowledge. I'd rather listen to a dude that says he's cool and loves everyone....because you know, he meditates, so there's that."

Science is not a religion or ideology, despite what new-age loons like to believe. Science seeks truth, knowledge and understanding of the universe around us.

Most of our understanding of the world is not 'scientific' in the normal sense of the word. We understand the world through EXPERIENCE. For example, practicing piano. We learn such skills through experience. This kind of learning is also knowledge.

We also know the world through experience via the senses. If we eat an orange we KNOW what an orange tastes like. Science cannot tell us such things. We can only know through experience. Science cannot tell us how a joke is funny, but that does not stop us from experiencing the humor in it.

If I go out on Friday night I don't bring a book on Boolean logic to guide me in enjoying my time out. I KNOW how to enjoy myself.

Some people have seen ufos. They KNOW.

originally posted by: parad0x122

originally posted by: EnPassant
I don't accept that science is the only way to knowledge.

That's fine and dandy, you have your right to your opinion. But I'd hazard to say that it might be a good idea to state your ideas as just that, ideas, rather than making them sound as if they are proven facts. (Read: Science)

There are many things that are in evidence but are outside the scope of science. There is the testimony of many people and there are ways of approaching this testimony and analyzing it that create a compelling case for the phenomena in question. Link

a reply to: EnPassant

Please tell me you didn't just site Uri Geller, a known hoaxer,illusionist, and magician, as a source for backing up your story.

He openly admitted in 2007 that he in fact, did not, have psychic powers. But then he flip-flopped his answer again in 2008. If you ask me, that's no where near a credible source.

originally posted by: LogicalRazor

Hell, light has no mass. We have come to understand photons and waves quite extensively.

Slightly off topic but I've always wondered. Since light has no mass why can't it escape from black holes, since gravity shouldn't affect it? Always wondered this, but I suppose we don't really know a thing about black holes.

originally posted by: parad0x122

He openly admitted in 2007 that he in fact, did not, have psychic powers. But then he flip-flopped his answer again in 2008. If you ask me, that's no where near a credible source.

Can you refer me to a link to this admission?

originally posted by: EnPassant

There are many things that are in evidence but are outside the scope of science. There is the testimony of many people and there are ways of approaching this testimony and analyzing it that create a compelling case for the phenomena in question. Link

Yes there are many things outside the scope of science, but experience is a completely different thing. We certainly aren't going to reach other stars via experience are we? Science is the only feasible way of doing this. I admit there are MANY things we have yet to discover, but science has proven to be the best way to discover new things. Sure, people can discover music and just about any other genre through experience, they can even become experts in the field, but they won't master interstellar travel anytime soon.

a reply to: EnPassant

Just to site one: Uri Gellers Confession and Human Fallibility

It's listed all over the place online, you can find it just by Googling his name..


Oh, and a personal testimony by someone who attended MIT and tested his "magical" spoons.

About 25 years ago, just after I had graduated from MIT, I was living with some MIT grad students, and one of them was in the Materials Science department at MIT. One of his buddies in his lab had been to a show by Uri Geller where he bent a spoon. The guy asked for the spoon to take as a souvenir and though Geller didnt want to give it up, due to the pressure from the crowd he had to. He took it back to the lab to analyze and it was obvious it had been doctored. The spoon had marks on it where it had been clamped in a standard fatigue machine. Most materials (including the metals that spoons are made of) exhibit what is called fatigue, if you subject the material to a cyclic stress of a certain magnitude, it has a certain lifetime, after a number of cycles it will fail and fail quite reproducibly. The fatigue lifetime is characteristic of the material and how it has been loaded. An object that has been fatigued to near its fatigue limit looks perfectly ok, but is actually on the verge of failure. A piece of metal at its fatigue limit can be made to fail with a very small force, much below the failure load for an intact object. It is easy to tell fatigue failure because the cracks have progressed in a characteristic way. They are called beach marks because they are reminiscent of how a beach appears in a topographical map with a number of parallel striations.

That quote is also on the link above.

originally posted by: parad0x122
a reply to: Erno86

Okay...so you're essentially admitting that your initial statement is speculative, even if based off of 3rd party testimony combined with one personal sighting. This I can understand. I still don't agree with the idea of thinking that every alien that may have visited us used the same technology even, but that's a different discussion all together. Thanks for clearing it up! Did you happen to get any pictures of your sighting in the 70's?

Sorry...no pics from my 76 sighting; though I should have been ready for a pic after I saw the approx. 15,000 mph bluish-white light coming from the direction of Washington D.C. --- one minute later --- looked to be a straight perpendicular descent to earth [approx. 30 mph from about 1 mile away] of an approx. 800' foot diameter ball of reddish-orange fusion plasma with no fiery tail. I did not perform a landing zone search in that incident --- Though I did investigate the 1977, Fawn Grove, Pennsylvania UFO burnt out landing site, with three tripod marks; including pics of the landing zone --- minus the foofighter.

originally posted by: Sharted

originally posted by: LogicalRazor

Hell, light has no mass. We have come to understand photons and waves quite extensively.

Slightly off topic but I've always wondered. Since light has no mass why can't it escape from black holes, since gravity shouldn't affect it? Always wondered this, but I suppose we don't really know a thing about black holes.

Well, first....gravity and magnetic fields will bend space-time. If we take into account the Higgs Field and assume Einstein's belief that space-time is a "thing" that can be twisted, bent and shaped....then what may be happening is the area where the photons are traveling through is sucked into the wormhole, trapping the light traveling in it. Then there's another....According to Einstein, inertial mass grows exponentially...and if you smash two photons together, you possibly end up with an electron and a positron...with mass. Quite coincidentally, we've made some advances in the last few months....

phys.org...

originally posted by: Sharted

originally posted by: LogicalRazor

Hell, light has no mass. We have come to understand photons and waves quite extensively.

Slightly off topic but I've always wondered. Since light has no mass why can't it escape from black holes, since gravity shouldn't affect it? Always wondered this, but I suppose we don't really know a thing about black holes.

Photons can escape from the magnetic poles of some spinning black holes, at near the speed of light.

Google: Black hole jets

a reply to: LogicalRazor

Interesting read, even if I only understand some of it. I saw a YouTube video where a woman was slowing photons down, below, could this be used to collide photons and create the electrons and positrons?

matter creation via collision of photons has already happened. just reported in the last month as a matter of fact.

originally posted by: Sharted
a reply to: LogicalRazor

Interesting read, even if I only understand some of it. I saw a YouTube video where a woman was slowing photons down, below, could this be used to collide photons and create the electrons and positrons?

I have no Idea what "UFO"s may be powered by. But I would think using "fusion" power would be a method to create the direct energy needed to power the Electo Magnetic engines.

We all know that "Nuclear" power stations are very crude technology....all they do is use a nuclear reaction to heat water ,to make steam,to drive turbines......very inefficient system. Direct drive gas turbine (jets) engines are much more efficient.

Electro magnetism seems to be the most logical system, and has been hinted at from various things like, the Movie Earth vs Flying Saucers in the 50s, to Edwin White's Contact with Planet Koldas in the 60s. etc etc.

We know Nasa recently claimed that there are "Magnetic Highways" between Stars, planets, Galaxys etc....a claim made by Edwins Whites Contacts, back in the 1960s.

We know the "UFOs" have an affinity with H2O......which is easy to obtain your nuclear fuel = Hydrogen and a breathable gas = Oxygen.

Perhaps if you travel in these "Magnetic Highways" all matter travels in the same direction??
Considering these highways might only be 1/2 a mile wide, in space full of trillions of miles of....Space.....it may not be much effort to avoid other stuff.

I dont think any of the Apollo missions were destroyed by space debris, and they were travelling at 20,000 mph or so.

But who knows.......Are they off World Aliens, or life on (under) Earth and seas, living with us right now?.

We still have much to learn.