It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Aliens or ex-inhabitants..

page: 3
14
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 2 2015 @ 11:24 PM
link   
Back on topic:

It is far more probable that any visitors would be ExtraTerrestrial as opposed to Time Travelers. The physical requirements for space travel are all known, and for the most part solved with current Terrestrial technologys. The requirements for time travel are barely more than hypothesis at present.

The technology for inter stellar travel to at least near by stars is known, and can be built with off the shelf technology. This technology would be adequate for travel to stars within say 10 - 15 ly. And while trips of this nature would be lengthy, these near stars can be practically reached without the use of FTL. The only real requirement is that the traveler can live long enough to complete the trip. At 75% of the speed of light travel time is twice for the stationary observer as for the moving one.




posted on Feb, 2 2015 @ 11:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tangerine
I'm glad you've concluded that you're done but disappointed that you were unable to cite any testable evidence proving the existence of extraterrestrials visiting earth and abducting people. Bummer.


And I presume that you are aware that most evidence on such things is primarily subjective. As an experiencer I have found that most will accept the experience at the subjective level and then fool themselves into thinking that it is objective. I personally went through an extended period where I (now) don't think I could effectively tell the difference. It has been through the diligent application of more proper scientific procedure/protocol that has allow me to become something that maybe, has a few "flashes" of true objectivity.

These issues that I have somewhat overcome are shared by the rest of the sentient creatures in the Universe...no One / no thing escapes.

Anyway, I have my "tested" experiences, however, the dataset is not, nor do I believe it can be made, acceptable to you. What has happened to me an many others is something that must be experienced first hand, otherwise it is meaningless.

edit on 2-2-2015 by tanka418 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 04:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: Tangerine
I'm glad you've concluded that you're done but disappointed that you were unable to cite any testable evidence proving the existence of extraterrestrials visiting earth and abducting people. Bummer.


And I presume that you are aware that most evidence on such things is primarily subjective. As an experiencer I have found that most will accept the experience at the subjective level and then fool themselves into thinking that it is objective. I personally went through an extended period where I (now) don't think I could effectively tell the difference. It has been through the diligent application of more proper scientific procedure/protocol that has allow me to become something that maybe, has a few "flashes" of true objectivity.

These issues that I have somewhat overcome are shared by the rest of the sentient creatures in the Universe...no One / no thing escapes.

Anyway, I have my "tested" experiences, however, the dataset is not, nor do I believe it can be made, acceptable to you. What has happened to me an many others is something that must be experienced first hand, otherwise it is meaningless.


I would never dispute that the experiences are meaningful. My quarrel is with those who have reached a firm conclusion about the nature of the experiences (that they call fact) absent any testable evidence. Even experienced first hand, however convincing they might be of one's hypothesis, they're not testable evidence and, hence, not fact.



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 07:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tangerine
I would never dispute that the experiences are meaningful. My quarrel is with those who have reached a firm conclusion about the nature of the experiences (that they call fact) absent any testable evidence. Even experienced first hand, however convincing they might be of one's hypothesis, they're not testable evidence and, hence, not fact.


But these experiences can be testable. If One pays attention in successive events a wealth of data can be extracted, experiencers usually don't have just one event. Many features can be isolated, attributes cataloged and measured. Logical, rational conclusion based on empirical data collected first-hand. The only issue with the scientific method is that each event is absolutely unique and can not be repeated, and thus not verified. But, that does leave the clever experiencer with a base of knowledge.



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 08:19 PM
link   
a reply to: nosmokinggun

I would say that yes, your theory is probable and can be true regardless of whether or not your math is correct.

I'd made my own theories of mysterious alien life and one of them was that long ago a civilization out of our own bloodlines had advanced so greatly that they broke off of the evolutionary tree here on the land and re-established themselves as a separate new race either on the moon or deep in the ocean. This theory would work well with your own theory and other theory's I'd heard of.



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 08:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: Tangerine
I would never dispute that the experiences are meaningful. My quarrel is with those who have reached a firm conclusion about the nature of the experiences (that they call fact) absent any testable evidence. Even experienced first hand, however convincing they might be of one's hypothesis, they're not testable evidence and, hence, not fact.


But these experiences can be testable. If One pays attention in successive events a wealth of data can be extracted, experiencers usually don't have just one event. Many features can be isolated, attributes cataloged and measured. Logical, rational conclusion based on empirical data collected first-hand. The only issue with the scientific method is that each event is absolutely unique and can not be repeated, and thus not verified. But, that does leave the clever experiencer with a base of knowledge.



You can log all sorts of accounts but you can't test the veracity of those accounts. "Attributes" have been isolated and cataloged. All they prove is that a certain percentage of accounts mention those attributes. We have absolutely no testable evidence proving that extraterrestrials exist, visit earth and abduct people.



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 10:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: Tangerine
I would never dispute that the experiences are meaningful. My quarrel is with those who have reached a firm conclusion about the nature of the experiences (that they call fact) absent any testable evidence. Even experienced first hand, however convincing they might be of one's hypothesis, they're not testable evidence and, hence, not fact.


But these experiences can be testable. If One pays attention in successive events a wealth of data can be extracted, experiencers usually don't have just one event. Many features can be isolated, attributes cataloged and measured. Logical, rational conclusion based on empirical data collected first-hand. The only issue with the scientific method is that each event is absolutely unique and can not be repeated, and thus not verified. But, that does leave the clever experiencer with a base of knowledge.



You can log all sorts of accounts but you can't test the veracity of those accounts. "Attributes" have been isolated and cataloged. All they prove is that a certain percentage of accounts mention those attributes. We have absolutely no testable evidence proving that extraterrestrials exist, visit earth and abduct people.


You misunderstand...in simple terms; YOU have no testable evidence, I have an abundance.

Although, while were at it...you say that the cataloging, measuring of attribute only proves (demonstrates) percentages. You should take notice of the nature of those attributes, their stats (percentages)...could be important data hiding in what you think is useless.



posted on Feb, 3 2015 @ 11:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: Tangerine
I would never dispute that the experiences are meaningful. My quarrel is with those who have reached a firm conclusion about the nature of the experiences (that they call fact) absent any testable evidence. Even experienced first hand, however convincing they might be of one's hypothesis, they're not testable evidence and, hence, not fact.


But these experiences can be testable. If One pays attention in successive events a wealth of data can be extracted, experiencers usually don't have just one event. Many features can be isolated, attributes cataloged and measured. Logical, rational conclusion based on empirical data collected first-hand. The only issue with the scientific method is that each event is absolutely unique and can not be repeated, and thus not verified. But, that does leave the clever experiencer with a base of knowledge.



You can log all sorts of accounts but you can't test the veracity of those accounts. "Attributes" have been isolated and cataloged. All they prove is that a certain percentage of accounts mention those attributes. We have absolutely no testable evidence proving that extraterrestrials exist, visit earth and abduct people.


You misunderstand...in simple terms; YOU have no testable evidence, I have an abundance.

Although, while were at it...you say that the cataloging, measuring of attribute only proves (demonstrates) percentages. You should take notice of the nature of those attributes, their stats (percentages)...could be important data hiding in what you think is useless.



You have testable evidence proving that extraterrestrials exist, visit earth and abduct people? No you don't. You don't have an iota of testable evidence. So-called evidence that is not available to be tested and can not be tested is, defacto, not testable evidence.



posted on Feb, 4 2015 @ 12:09 AM
link   
Good thread OP star and flag. . . .

They have been here forever, and are always here in the ever present most likely due to time travel capabilities, I would guess they are hanging out in various safe times and other dimentions just out of our view. Meaning they could be right in front of you and you would never see them would probably walk right through them like a ghost.






posted on Feb, 4 2015 @ 08:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Tangerine

"
Although, while were at it...you say that the cataloging, measuring of attribute only proves (demonstrates) percentages. You should take notice of the nature of those attributes, their stats (percentages)...could be important data hiding in what you think is useless.
"


You have testable evidence proving that extraterrestrials exist, visit earth and abduct people? No you don't. You don't have an iota of testable evidence. So-called evidence that is not available to be tested and can not be tested is, defacto, not testable evidence.


You haven't understood a single thing I've said!!!

Go back and re-read the paragraph above, it says much!

Also, you need to stop trying to expand the scope here. You want a specific kind of "proof", we're talking a wee bit more generic.

I'm not sure WHY you refuse to look at available data with clear eyes and can only presume that the whole affair, this business of Extraterrestrials, is so frightening that you will not accept any data, regardless of how it is collected.

You speak of "testing" volatile and intermittent data sources, you complain about how difficult it is to collect reliable data; yet I don't think you have ever had to deal with an intermittent system and the frustrations presented by their very nature.

Again, you should actually LOOK at the evidence, and the events. Because as volatile and intermittent as they are; they contain a wealth of data waiting to be properly addressed. IF you would drop your "poor me" attitude (about data) and actually try to understand, you might find things somewhat different.

You should also understand that "proof" is not available to any but a mathematician. Prof in all areas of science are generally NOT available. You should also understand that in the world of probability (this is where you will find the "proof" you want), probabilities of either 0 (zero) r 1 (ne) NEVER happen...these are ideal state and can not exist. So this prof you seek is only a probability, thus...all One needs do is demonstrate a very high probability (or very low).

Anyway, it would appear that your expectations of data, evidence are unreasonable, unattainable and useful only to server as insulation between you and reality.



posted on Feb, 4 2015 @ 09:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord
Good thread OP star and flag. . . .

They have been here forever, and are always here in the ever present most likely due to time travel capabilities, I would guess they are hanging out in various safe times and other dimentions just out of our view. Meaning they could be right in front of you and you would never see them would probably walk right through them like a ghost.



Again, I must speak against the notion of "time travel"; there is no data, I'm aware of, that suggests such a thing.

These ideas that ET are super advanced, have some technology that allows for FTL are all rather unfounded. The reality is that ET doesn't need any of that...time travel, FTL, super advanced technology to visit. There is a wealth of stars and planets all within traveling distance from Earth; within say 90ly (180 Terrestrial years).

It seems that so many get all "hung up" of the whole "alien" notion, as if it were something real. The reality is that ET, IF he is capable of visiting, is probably so much like Terrestrials that y'all couldn't find the differences without help. Course then you would refuse that help.



posted on Feb, 4 2015 @ 09:26 AM
link   
a reply to: tanka418

You speak of "testing" volatile and intermittent data sources, you complain about how difficult it is to collect reliable data; yet I don't think you have ever had to deal with an intermittent system and the frustrations presented by their very nature.


Hey tanka, How's your New Year so far?

I think I know what you are dealing with. Would you liken this to trying to troubleshoot a software issue where the user is complaining of some vague bug but you are unable to reproduce the error and have no error message to work with and yet you are expected to fix it? Maybe you waffle back and forth between thinking the user just might be nuts and there is really something really wrong with this software but either way you have to resolve the issue. The one advantage in this situation is that we are able to look over the users shoulder and usually they are just typing in he wrong field or they haven't rebooted in months or the network cable is bad...



posted on Feb, 4 2015 @ 09:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: tanka418
The reality is that ET, IF he is capable of visiting, is probably so much like Terrestrials that y'all couldn't find the differences without help.



Even with help... from a DNA lab.



posted on Feb, 4 2015 @ 09:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord
Good thread OP star and flag. . . .

They have been here forever, and are always here in the ever present most likely due to time travel capabilities, I would guess they are hanging out in various safe times and other dimentions just out of our view. Meaning they could be right in front of you and you would never see them would probably walk right through them like a ghost.



Again, I must speak against the notion of "time travel"; there is no data, I'm aware of, that suggests such a thing.

These ideas that ET are super advanced, have some technology that allows for FTL are all rather unfounded. The reality is that ET doesn't need any of that...time travel, FTL, super advanced technology to visit. There is a wealth of stars and planets all within traveling distance from Earth; within say 90ly (180 Terrestrial years).

It seems that so many get all "hung up" of the whole "alien" notion, as if it were something real. The reality is that ET, IF he is capable of visiting, is probably so much like Terrestrials that y'all couldn't find the differences without help. Course then you would refuse that help.



If for a moment we assume some flying saucer type UFOs are ET craft they appear to have anti-gravity technology which is far more advanced than us. If they can do that they might also have faster than light travel ability. Without this it would only be possible to travel the smallest distances to the nearest stars, and the probability they have intelligent life is low compared to the rest of the universe.



posted on Feb, 4 2015 @ 10:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: Tangerine
I would never dispute that the experiences are meaningful. My quarrel is with those who have reached a firm conclusion about the nature of the experiences (that they call fact) absent any testable evidence. Even experienced first hand, however convincing they might be of one's hypothesis, they're not testable evidence and, hence, not fact.


But these experiences can be testable. If One pays attention in successive events a wealth of data can be extracted, experiencers usually don't have just one event. Many features can be isolated, attributes cataloged and measured. Logical, rational conclusion based on empirical data collected first-hand. The only issue with the scientific method is that each event is absolutely unique and can not be repeated, and thus not verified. But, that does leave the clever experiencer with a base of knowledge.




And what has all this data collected told us that is testable?

Has it told us where the "aliens" come from?

Has it told us the nearest habitable planet?

Has it told us -anything- new about our universe that science could test?



posted on Feb, 4 2015 @ 03:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: JimTSpock
If for a moment we assume some flying saucer type UFOs are ET craft they appear to have anti-gravity technology which is far more advanced than us. If they can do that they might also have faster than light travel ability. Without this it would only be possible to travel the smallest distances to the nearest stars, and the probability they have intelligent life is low compared to the rest of the universe.


Advanced anti-gravity technology...www.hpcc-space.de...

Et may not be as advanced you believe. And, he doesn't need FTL. With a technology like the above example, travel time to the nearest is slightly more than 4 ship years or probably around 10 Earth years.

The knowledge gained from just one such mission would have a profound impact on future mission and craft. And all of that just from the development phase.

Stars within range could be as far away as 10 ly or so, or one way missions as far out as 30 or 40...and all without FTL.



posted on Feb, 4 2015 @ 03:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: tanka418

You speak of "testing" volatile and intermittent data sources, you complain about how difficult it is to collect reliable data; yet I don't think you have ever had to deal with an intermittent system and the frustrations presented by their very nature.


Hey tanka, How's your New Year so far?

I think I know what you are dealing with. Would you liken this to trying to troubleshoot a software issue where the user is complaining of some vague bug but you are unable to reproduce the error and have no error message to work with and yet you are expected to fix it?


Yep, that pretty much describes it...wish I'd said that...but, ya know...it all still in the data...just have to look deep enough.



posted on Feb, 4 2015 @ 03:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: FormOfTheLord
Good thread OP star and flag. . . .

They have been here forever, and are always here in the ever present most likely due to time travel capabilities, I would guess they are hanging out in various safe times and other dimentions just out of our view. Meaning they could be right in front of you and you would never see them would probably walk right through them like a ghost.



Again, I must speak against the notion of "time travel"; there is no data, I'm aware of, that suggests such a thing.

These ideas that ET are super advanced, have some technology that allows for FTL are all rather unfounded. The reality is that ET doesn't need any of that...time travel, FTL, super advanced technology to visit. There is a wealth of stars and planets all within traveling distance from Earth; within say 90ly (180 Terrestrial years).

It seems that so many get all "hung up" of the whole "alien" notion, as if it were something real. The reality is that ET, IF he is capable of visiting, is probably so much like Terrestrials that y'all couldn't find the differences without help. Course then you would refuse that help.



The reality is that there's no evidence proving that extraterrestrials exist and visit earth. None whatsoever. This massive data bank of sightings of unidentified flying objects and a lesser collection of reports of abductions has resulted in exactly no evidence. Perhaps it's time to consider other possibilities as the cause(s).



posted on Feb, 4 2015 @ 03:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: JadeStar
And what has all this data collected told us that is testable?



Wouldn't know. I've never heard of anyone actually collecting that data in one place and applying an appropriate schema to it.



Has it told us where the "aliens" come from?



Well, if we widen our scope of data and evidence...perhaps. I know you are aware of what current myth, even ancient myth says about where ET is from...are you aware there may be some reality to it? For instance, if we look at Sirius most just see a bright star. A star that you and I know doesn't support the right kind of life, if at all. But, beyond that is a wee G class star called Nu 2.



Has it told us the nearest habitable planet?



Yes, there is extant data that will tell us the currently know "closest" habitable planet...well a good guess anyway.



posted on Feb, 4 2015 @ 03:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: JimTSpock
If for a moment we assume some flying saucer type UFOs are ET craft they appear to have anti-gravity technology which is far more advanced than us. If they can do that they might also have faster than light travel ability. Without this it would only be possible to travel the smallest distances to the nearest stars, and the probability they have intelligent life is low compared to the rest of the universe.


Advanced anti-gravity technology...www.hpcc-space.de...





Not.

Heim achieved some media renown in the 1950s and 1960s, but his ideas have never been well-accepted in the physics community. A significant portion of Heim's work has not been published in rigorously peer reviewed journals. Heim's theory also predicts the existence of two hypothetical neutrinos, which have been shown not to exist by experiments at the Large Electron–Positron Collider

No tech. Just questionable ideas.
edit on 4-2-2015 by draknoir2 because: (no reason given)







 
14
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join