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.

 

Neil DeGrasse Tyson: ET and DNA

page: 10
39
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 22 2015 @ 04:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Scdfa

originally posted by: JadeStar
Scdfa - How familiar are you with Peter A Sturrock?

I don't think you realize we're are investigating two different things which have a whole set of different questions and area which are applicable to it.

Me - Astrobiology....



You - UFOs


As you can see, there's not much overlap so please keep that in mind.


I am quite familiar with some of the UFOs that are actually alien craft, inside and outside. I'm here to raise awareness of the reality of alien contact.



You know I'm definitely on your side when it comes to this subject.
Not trying to pressure you or anything but would you feel comfortable discussing this on ATS? Perhaps you could start a thread.




posted on Mar, 22 2015 @ 05:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Scdfa
I'm not investigating UFOs.
Maybe you should be investigating. I used to think there might be something to the Travis Walton abduction story until I started investigating it. You can actually learn things by investigating, and when enough things like this stack up, it's hard to keep believing the story.

Skeptical Information on the Travis Walton "UFO Abduction" Story


He was falling apart and so was his story...

"Ground Saucer Watch," a pro-UFO organization, was the very first UFO organization on the scene of the Walton "abduction". In cooperation with Dr. J. Allen Hynek of CUFOS, Dr. Lester Stewart of GSW began to interview the Walton family while Travis was still "missing." They immediately smelled a hoax. These are their conclusions...

1. Walton never boarded the UFO. This fact is supported by the six witnesses and the polygraph test results. [3]
...
6. The media and GSW was fair to the witnesses. However, when the story started to 'fall apart' the Waltons would only talk to people who did not doubt the abduction story.
...
8. The Waltons 'sold' their story to the National Enquirer and the story was completely twisted from the truth.



posted on Mar, 22 2015 @ 08:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: Scdfa
I'm not investigating UFOs.
Maybe you should be investigating. I used to think there might be something to the Travis Walton abduction story until I started investigating it. You can actually learn things by investigating, and when enough things like this stack up, it's hard to keep believing the story.

Skeptical Information on the Travis Walton "UFO Abduction" Story


This picture says it all. "look! we are a bunch of dishonest dirty hippies that just got away with something!"



posted on Mar, 22 2015 @ 09:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Scdfa Let's hear HIM discuss the Travis Walton case in the same detailed way YOU just did. He won't, because the Travis Walton case is a serious event, and Tyson is intentionally avoiding any serious discussion regarding alien abductions.

Next time he's asked, he'll say ashtray again. And it will get a laugh from the audience, again. That's how disinformation works.


The reason it gets a laugh is despite years of abduction reports no one has ever taken anything off of one of these "ships" which could be analysed and studied by science.

Nor has there been much in the way of information from the alleged abductors to the abductees about things which are unknown but which could be confirmed or refuted by science.

There so far is nothing coming from the abduction phenomena which would point to an extraterrestrial origin for it.

In most of these stories do not sound like the interactions of a interstellar species but rather a bad hollywood sci-fantasy movie lacking any sort of hard science, so that is why he says ashtray.

Without physical evidence or information which is currently unknown to science but which could be confirmed by it the whole abduction thing seems to have an origin a lot closer to Earth, the from lightyears away, perhaps within the brain of the abductee.
edit on 22-3-2015 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2015 @ 09:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Scdfa

Science has failed you. Epic fail, one might say.

Some people put their faith in science as if it were their religion. Well, when it comes to this subject, that faith is unfounded.


Then you misunderstand what science actually is. Science does not require faith. It requires repeatable data, observation and measurement. Such repeatable data, observations and measurements make up scientific evidence.

What science has over faith is that it does not require belief, it only requires data. It doesn't require someone to suspend disbelief and check their brain at the door, anyone can examine the data, question it, refute and falsify it with better data etc.


Science will never find evidence if it refuses to look for evidence.


If you think that science refuses to look for evidence then you are grossly uninformed.

It's funny considering right now there are whole burgeoning fields of science looking for just such evidence that we are not alone and the evidence they are seeking is better than old stories from UFO lore which contain nothing which can be repeatably tested.

Here is a paper which uses sound scientific practices to predict that just about every star has on average two Earth sized planets in its "goldilocks zone".

Here is an article detailing how we might detect life on other planets around other stars.

Here is a site at Cornell University which contains detailed spectra (colors) of different forms of life so that we may possibly detect it on another world circling a nearby star with future space telescopes: Surface biosignatures of exo-Earths

Infact there is a whole new institute for the study of other planets like Earth and the life which may exist on them: Institute for Pale Blue Dots

(continued....)



posted on Mar, 22 2015 @ 09:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Scdfa
Science will never find evidence if it refuses to look for evidence.


And here is the agenda of a SETI science meeting which was recently held in the UK:


This meeting will be held at Birkbeck College in London on September 11 and 12th 2014.

It is intended as a workshop where academics can talk together and further the aim of promoting SETI work in UK academia.

It is thus open to all UK-based academics and members of learned societies active in SETI research, and to those who have published SETI paprs in academic journals. Persons who wish to attend should contact the UKSRN Co-ordinator, Alan Penny, who will ascertain the eligibility of each applicant. People attending are invited to present papers.

There is a Facebook page 'UKSRN2014' and a Twitter hashtag -- 'uksrn2014'.

Talks
Ansbro New instrumentation to detect ET presence in the Solar System
Armstrong It's 'easy' to colonise the universe. What are the implications?
Baxter Who owns the Monolith? The development of policies concerning the detection of artefacts of extraterrestrial intelligence in the Solar System
Capova Interstellar communication in sociocultural perspective in context with interspecies interactions
Crawford Resolving the Fermi Paradox: zoo hypothesis or nothing?
Dartnell How to rebuild a civilisation and the implications for L
Edmondson SETI: Detection and messaging - one without the other?
Forgan Can Collimated Extraterrestrial Signals be Intercepted?
Jack Hickish Collaborative, Open-Source SETI with CASPER: The Collaboration for Astronomy Signal Processing and Electronics Research
Neal Preparing for Extraterrestrial Contact: A risk management perspective
Penny Optical SETI at St Andrews - a concept
Pinault SETI by Other Means: Seeking Clues from Interstellar Dust and the Lunar Paleoregolith
Sandberg That is not dead which can eternal lie: what are the physical constraints for the aestivation hypothesis?
Andrew Siemion Facility Radio SETI Observations
Webb Setizen Science: new directions for SETI?
Panel Future Prospects for the UKSRN and for SETI in the UK
General Discussion


(continued...)



posted on Mar, 22 2015 @ 09:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Scdfa
Science will never find evidence if it refuses to look for evidence.



Abstracts



Is the Solar System visited by exogenous intelligences from other planets or dimensions? If this were the case, observable signatures might be in the form of emissions, reflections, unusual thermal properties and unconventional spectra due to their surface properties.

Present telescopes with spectrographs are inadequate for a scanning survey to attempt to detect any such signatures due to their small field of view, spatial resolution, spectral resolution and the challenges of tracking an unknown trajectory following detection.

Instrumentation is proposed consisting of a survey telescope that can photometrically and spectroscopically image large areas of the sky, simultaneously distinguish potential artificial spectral signatures from natural background objects, and track any movement.

A spectrograph using a novel design approach is proposed that addresses the constraints of limited field of view and the ability to record simultaneously both visual and spectral images of one or more objects. A proof-of-concept instrument has been built which successfully demonstrates the capability of this design in recording simultaneous visual and spectral images of multiple known objects.


Stuart Armstrong It's "easy" to colonise the universe. What are the implications?


Our earthly intuitions and metaphors are a poor guide for the rules of the universe. Just as it took very careful analysis to figure out the laws of physics, we need to be precise and specific when we project forward humanity’s potential future in the stars. And when we do that, we find that colonisation of the universe is – in cosmic terms – both easy and rapid. Moreover there are strong reasons, both internal and external, for a civilization to want to expand soon after that becomes possible. So star-spanning civilizations are likely to quickly become thousand-galaxy spanning ones.

This talk will aim to demonstrate that fact, and then to examine some of its implications, both in terms of the likelihood of alien existence, the future fate of humanity, and of the universe itself. The cosmos would likely end up getting partitioned by expanding species, giving non-trivial anthropic constraints for our observations. Indeed, most of the universe would be inhabited by species that started expanding early on – and yet the Earth is a late-comer as planets go.


Stephen Baxter Who owns the Monolith? The development of policies concerning the detection of artefacts of extraterrestrial intelligence in the Solar System

Through the SETI endeavour we have now been searching for electromagnetic signals from alien civilisations for over fifty years, without success. But what if we found, not a signal, but an artefact of extraterrestrial intelligence, somewhere on Earth or in the solar system? We ourselves have deposited relics of space probes and human activity on the Moon, Mars and elsewhere, and we have sent messages to the stars in the form of artefacts: the plaques and records on the Pioneer and Voyager spacecraft. The probability of our detecting such an artefact is thus non-zero. And yet to the authors’ knowledge no publicly agreed policy concerning the discovery of such objects exists; at time of writing the only widely accepted policy is the document known as the ‘First SETI Protocol’ of 1989 which essentially guides action in the immediate aftermath of a signal detection event. The purposes of this paper are:
1) to review the literature concerning the discovery of an artefact of ETI within the solar system.
2) to highlight issues, suggest precedents and propose draft policy ideas which will amount to an extension of the First SETI Protocol to cover the circumstance.

The hope is that this paper will contribute to the ongoing discussion of how the human race might prepare itself for the momentous event of detection of ETI.


Klara Anna Capova Interstellar communication in sociocultural perspective in context with interspecies communication


TBD


Ian Crawford Resolving the Fermi Paradox: zoo hypothesis or nothing?


Many solutions to the Fermi Paradox have been proposed over the years, but I suggest that the only two which seem really persuasive are (1) that space-faring extraterrestrial civilisations have somehow managed to quarantine the Earth against interference for most of its history (the 'Zoo Hypothesis') or (2) that space-faring extraterrestrial civilisations do not exist, or have at least been very rare throughout the history of the Galaxy. I will conclude that the latter interpretation is the most plausible.


Lewis Dartnell How to rebuild a civilisation and the implications for L


This talk will discuss a few biological considerations for SETI, including the origin of life, extremophiles, and astrophysical threats to a planetary biosphere. The consequences of a collapse of civilisation will also be mentioned.


William Edmondson SETI: Detection and messaging - one without the other?


Sending an image is decodable and recoverable, but trying to send a 'message' is pointless. Semiotics, linguistics and anthropology show that any sort of conversation with ET is not possible. Anthropology requires co-presence; it can't be done over the phone; a conversation with a shared language will not be possible until after we've reached ETI or they have reached us.


Duncan Forgan Can Collimated Extraterrestrial Signals Be Intercepted?

The Optical Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (OSETI) attempts to detect collimated, narrowband pulses of electromagnetic radiation. These pulses may either consist of signals intentionally directed at the Earth, or signals between two star systems with a vector that unintentionally intersects the Solar System, allowing Earth to intercept the communication. But should we expect to be able to intercept these unintentional signals? And what constraints can we place upon the frequency of intelligent civilisations if we do?

I will present results from Monte Carlo Realisation simulations of interstellar communications between civilisations in the Galactic Habitable Zone using collimated beams. We measure the frequency with which beams between two stars are intercepted by a third. The interception rate increases linearly with the fraction of communicating civilisations, and as the cube of the beam opening angle. I will comment on the implications for OSETI searches being able to detect transmissions not intended for humanity.


(continued...)
edit on 22-3-2015 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2015 @ 09:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Scdfa
Science will never find evidence if it refuses to look for evidence.




Jack Hickish Collaborative, Open-Source SETI with CASPER: The Collaboration for Astronomy Signal Processing and Electronics Research

Over the last ten years, the Collaboration for Astronomy Signal Processing and Electronics Research (CASPER) has been working to reduce the cost and complexity of radio astronomy instrumentation. The result has been the creation of a suite of open-source hardware platforms and software tools which have been used in radio-astronomy observatories all over the world to power a variety of scientific instruments. In particular, CASPER has enabled a variety of successful SETI experiments.

To date, no CASPER-based SETI instruments have been deployed in the UK. However, several UK universities are CASPER collaboration members and over recent years have made significant investments in both hardware and design expertise. In this presentation I will give a brief overview of the CASPER collaboration's work and their various SETI projects around the globe. I will talk about the ways in which I hope the knowledge of the CASPER community can be leveraged to encourage and enable SETI research in the UK and discuss my personal SETI aspirations, which I hope can be fulfilled with the support of other UKSRN members.


Mark Neal Preparing for extraterrestrial contact: A risk management perspective


This paper explores the risks for humanity posed by extraterrestrial life forms. Using a risk management perspective, the article examines questions of how we can evaluate extraterrestrial risks, and how – and whether - we should prepare for each risk eventuality. In order to clarify thinking about such matters, different risk scenarios are developed and examined; and the various threats analysed. Examining these scenarios, it is recognised that although such risks are small in terms of probabilities, they could result in massive social, political or existential impacts. Such scenarios, it is argued, should thus be analysed, criticised and refined; and steps taken to determine the most likely or disruptive of the risk scenarios, so that preparations may be made for such eventualities.


Alan Penny An optical search in the UK - the concept


A design study is presented for a low-cost optical SETI search in the UK. The main difficulty in undertaking a SETI search in the UK is the lack of funding and the lack of people. A design is put forward that could implement a piggy-back optical nanosecond flash search using the 1-metre telescope at St Andrews. This would undertake long (hours) observations of a mixture ofG and K stars looking for these indicators of an artificial origin. It will be much less powerful than the existing Berkeley survey and the Harvard all-sky surveys, but the long dwell times would open up a new phase space.

The design is driven by the need for ultra-low cost, both in equipment and in the call on observers.


Lewis Pinault SETI by Other Means: Seeking Clues from Interstellar Dust and the Lunar Paleoregolith

Technological civilisations achieving Earth's present level of spacefaring capabilities may have left detectable micron-sized traces of asteroid mining and other activities dispersed through the galaxy. Recognising the cheap and wide-reaching transport possibilities, more advanced civilisations may have designed and dispersed similarly sized particles encompassing exploratory-probe growing capabilities. This talk addresses the assumptions and preliminary approaches to detecting both incidental detritus and possible probe fragments on the Moon and elsewhere in the solar system, including geological sampling challenges and citizen-science and automated search algorithms for high-resolution artefact detection.


Anders Sandberg That is not dead which can eternal lie: what are the physical constrainrs on the aestivation hypothesis?


The thermodynamics of computation make the cost of a certain amount of (irreversible) computation proportional to the temperature. As the universe cools down, one Joule of energy is worth proportionally more. Hence a civilization desiring to maximize the total amount of computation would want to use its energy endowment as late as possible: using it now means far less computation can be done. Hence an early such civilization, after expanding to gain access to enough raw materials, would settle down and wait (“aestivate”) until it becomes rational to use the resources. The aestivation hypothesis states that we are not observing any aliens since the initial expansion phase is brief and intermittent and the aestivating civilization and its infrastructure is also largely passive and compact.

The aestivation hypothesis hinges on a number of assumptions I will examine in this paper. The main goal is to find what physical and value constraints make it rational to aestivate, and see if these can be met. If they cannot, then the aestivation hypothesis is not a likely answer for the Fermi question. Conversely, assuming the truth of the hypothesis puts nontrivial constraints on what values alien civilizations would hold. The plausibility in particular hinges on how stable control a civilization can maintain over its domain over long eras, and that it is rational to not transform the domain in any radical (observable) way. The continued activity of stars and mass-loss from galaxies due to galactic winds put a strong constraint on compatible alien utility functions: the lost mass-energy must be worth less than the effort to retain them.


Andrew Siemion Facility Radio SETI Observations

I will discuss how to propose for and conduct SETI observations at national and international radio astronomy observatories, including open source software for data reduction and analysis.


Stephen Webb Setizen Science: new directions for SETI?

Although observational SETI science is in its sixth decade, the approaches used to date represent (perhaps inevitably) technically and historically biased viewpoints. The traditional radio, and more recently optical, searches for signals have been determined in large part by our civilisation's current scientific and technological capabilities and our cultural attitudes. A less biased approach might be to adopt what Steven J. Dick calls a "Stapledonian mindset": we could ask how the activities of extraterrestrial civilisation might manifest themselves and, in turn, how we might observe those activities. In coming years a host of new instruments, operating at a variety of wavelengths, will deluge us with data. In this talk I enquire whether we might expand SETI activities by mining this data, and in particular whether examining this data might provide a role for "setizen scientists".



And that was just one conference...

So the next time you or anyone like you says "Science refuses to look for evidence of ET" you or they are either uninformed, misinformed or lying.

Sorry for the long excerpts, I'm just denying ignorance...
edit on 22-3-2015 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-3-2015 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 22 2015 @ 09:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Scdfa
Science will never find evidence if it refuses to look for evidence.


The first irrefutable proof of life beyond Earth is far more likely to come from the work of scientists on projects like those I mentioned above than from a reported alien abduction in a tabloid or a youtube video misidentifying lights in the sky as an "alien spacecraft".
edit on 22-3-2015 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 12:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Arbitrageur

originally posted by: Scdfa
I'm not investigating UFOs.
Maybe you should be investigating. I used to think there might be something to the Travis Walton abduction story until I started investigating it. You can actually learn things by investigating, and when enough things like this stack up, it's hard to keep believing the story.

Skeptical Information on the Travis Walton "UFO Abduction" Story


He was falling apart and so was his story...

"Ground Saucer Watch," a pro-UFO organization, was the very first UFO organization on the scene of the Walton "abduction". In cooperation with Dr. J. Allen Hynek of CUFOS, Dr. Lester Stewart of GSW began to interview the Walton family while Travis was still "missing." They immediately smelled a hoax. These are their conclusions...

1. Walton never boarded the UFO. This fact is supported by the six witnesses and the polygraph test results. [3]
...
6. The media and GSW was fair to the witnesses. However, when the story started to 'fall apart' the Waltons would only talk to people who did not doubt the abduction story.
...
8. The Waltons 'sold' their story to the National Enquirer and the story was completely twisted from the truth.


And maybe you should be investigating, instead of putting up shoddy propaganda, Arbitrageur. You can actually learn things by investigating, and when enough things like this stack up, you might be able to see them for what they are.

Sorry to practically quote you, but I found your post to me to be very rude and condescending, and your tone of assumed superiority has yet to be established in any way.

Now, folks, if you've read my posts recently, you've heard me wonder why those who try so hard to deny alien contact so often resort to twisting the facts to weaken the case for alien contact. In this thread alone I've pointed out several examples of just that. If their case is so strong and there is no alien contact, they should establish that with an honest look at the facts, they shouldn't have to resort to trickery and distortion to make their case.

Well, folks, here's another prime example of just that. And here's how simple it is to refute the slanted half-truth that Arbitrageur found so compelling. Let's just take a look at number one of what Arbitrageur has posted .





1. Walton never boarded the UFO. This fact is supported by the six witnesses and the polygraph test results.


Wow, sounds pretty damning, eh? Except it is pretty much false, on several points:

First, they call it a fact that Walton never boarded the UFO, but they offer no evidence that supports their opinion. So how can they call that a fact?

Two, they claim that "fact" is supported by the six witnesses and the polygraph test results. This is also untrue, and here is why. The six witnesses that saw Travis Walton being struck by an energy beam from a disc shaped UFO never at any point claimed they saw Travis being taken aboard the ship. They saw Travis thrown through the air by the energy beam and saw him strike the ground where he lay lifelessly. Now, upon seeing this, they fled for their lives , driving down the mountain at reckless speed, trying to avoid the same fate as Travis.The last they saw, Travis was unconscious on the ground.

These six witnesses testified again and again in police reports, affidavits, and eventually a polygraph examination that they did not know what happened to Travis Walton after they drove away.

And folks, THAT IS ALL Arbitrageur's number one claim is based on:

because the six witnesses never claimed to see Travis board the UFO, they claim that "SUPPORTS" the position that Travis never boarded the UFO.

Pretty deceptive, wouldn't you say? These six witnesses had no knowledge either way regarding Travis Walton being aboard the UFO, and they testified to that. But because their testimony doesn't positively support Walton's abduction, these people would have you believe that supports the position he was NOT aboard the UFO!

That untruth is par for the course with those who deny alien contact. I urge you not to fall for it. Once again, if the denier's position is so strong, why do they make untrue statements such a big part of their argument?

The facts of the Travis Walton case are a matter of public record. The results of the polygraph examinations determined that the witnesses were telling the truth when they said that Travis Walton was struck by an energy beam from a disc-shaped UFO.

Don't take my word for it. Investigate, as Arbitrageur says. But do a better job.

Thank you, and good night.




edit on 23-3-2015 by Scdfa because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-3-2015 by Scdfa because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-3-2015 by Scdfa because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-3-2015 by Scdfa because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 01:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Scdfa

Now you're moving the goalposts. Your claim was that there was no evidence. So I established that testimony is indeed evidence.

You can have any opinion you like on how reliable that evidence is, I have no issue with your opinion.

The admissibility of polygraphs in court has no bearing on the matter, either. But just so you know, polygraphs are still admissible in New Mexico.

Good job on deflecting and completely skipping over the fact that your quoted definition of evidence was mostly in legal terms. You can't compare eyewitness testimony of a crime and give it the same weight as eyewitness testimony of alien abductions when there has been zero foundation set for the existence of ET. You would have to take it for granted that:
- ET exists.
- ET has the capability to travel our galaxy or the universe.
- ET visits Earth.
Then skip directly to giving serious consideration to abductions. That's because in lieu of physical evidence, abductions in themselves are not evidence enough of ET. Also, as I pointed out earlier, just because you personally experience something doesn't automatically make Travis Walton's, or any abduction story, true. You still should be questioning the validity of all sides of the story told and not just buy into the story you've been sold.

You have not shown that eyewitness testimony is evidence when the subject your speaking about (ET on Earth) has not been definitively shown and is still based in fantasy and not reality.



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 01:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Scdfa
You say you're not investigating UFOs and get a reply suggesting you investigate them and call that condescending?

It's a valid suggestion.

You left out this part:
Travis Walton Abduction

After completing the exam, McCarthy determined that Walton was lying. Clark quotes from McCarthy's official report: "Based on his reaction on all charts, it is the opinion of this examiner that Walton, in concert with others, is attempting to perpetrate a UFO hoax, and that he has not been on any spacecraft".[3]:640 Later, McCarthy would assert that "sometimes Travis would hold his breath, in an effort to 'beat the machine'.
So if none of the witnesses saw him board the UFO, and the only person left who claimed he boarded the UFO is lying, then he didn't board the UFO, or at least that was the basis for the GSW conclusions which by the way include 8 other damning points that you didn't address either. It's a preponderance of lots of evidence against it being genuine, not one single thing like the failed lie detector test, though that didn't help.

Apparently GSW already suspected a hoax even before the lie detector test because of the odd reactions and attitudes of the family about the disappearance of Travis, and remember, GSW isn't some skeptical organization, it was a pro-UFO organization. By this time Hynek was also a UFO believer and he also thought Walton was hoaxing.

edit on 23-3-2015 by Arbitrageur because: clarification



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 01:24 AM
link   
a reply to: JadeStar

Two quotes from Jade: First this one, on why alien abductees don't just steal ashtrays from the aliens.


The reason it gets a laugh is despite years of abduction reports no one has ever taken anything off of one of these "ships" which could be analysed and studied by science.


Then this rather pompous jem:




Sorry for the long excerpts, I'm just denying ignorance...


Sorry Jade, but your first quote completely negates the second.

For such brilliant people as yourself and Neil Degrasse Tyson to have such a poor understanding of alien abductions, and a complete and utter disregard for the life and safety of an abductee, that allows you to suggest they should attempt to steal anything from these advanced and powerful beings is not denying ignorance at all, but rather, embracing it.






edit on 23-3-2015 by Scdfa because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 01:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
a reply to: Scdfa
You say you're not investigating UFOs and get a reply suggesting you investigate them and call that condescending?

It's a valid suggestion.

You left out this part:
Travis Walton Abduction

After completing the exam, McCarthy determined that Walton was lying. Clark quotes from McCarthy's official report: "Based on his reaction on all charts, it is the opinion of this examiner that Walton, in concert with others, is attempting to perpetrate a UFO hoax, and that he has not been on any spacecraft".[3]:640 Later, McCarthy would assert that "sometimes Travis would hold his breath, in an effort to 'beat the machine'.
So if none of the witnesses saw him board the UFO, and the only person left who claimed he boarded the UFO is lying, then he didn't board the UFO, or at least that was the basis for the GSW conclusions which by the way include 8 other damning points that you didn't address either. It's a preponderance of lots of evidence against it being genuine, not one single thing like the failed lie detector test, though that didn't help.

Apparently GSW already suspected a hoax even before the lie detector test because of the odd reactions and attitudes of the family about the disappearance of Travis, and remember, GSW isn't some skeptical organization, it was a pro-UFO organization. By this time Hynek was also a UFO believer and he also thought Walton was hoaxing.


And you left out this part: Travis Walton passed five polygraph examinations.

The following report on the final polygraph examination of Travis Walton was actually sponsored by a skeptic, Jerry Black. The test was performed with the latest state of the art equipment, by Cy Gilson, the most highly respected polygraph expert.

On February 4, 1993, a polygraph examination was administered to Mr. Travis Walton. The purpose of this examination was to determine whether or not Mr. Walton was being truthful in his statement about seeing a UFO and being abducted by the UFO plus other facts surrounding the abduction. Two series of questions were asked to cover all the areas we believe were important.

The relevant questions asked and the answers given are as follows:

Series #1:

Question #R1:

On November 5, 1975, in the forest area called Turkey Springs, did you see a large glowing object hovering in the air?

Answer: YES

Question #R2:

While you were standing near that UFO­like object, did you believe you were struck by an energy source emitted from that large object?

Answer: YES

Question #R3:

After regaining consciousness in a small, humid room, did you see nonhuman creatures with large dark eyes?

Answer: YES

Question #R4:

Did you conspire with your brother Duane or anyone else or act alone to stage a hoax about your UFO abduction?

Answer: NO



Series #2:

Question #R1:

Between November 1 and 11, 1975, did you use any drugs, either legal or illegal?

Answer: NO

Question #R2:

Between November 5 and 10, 1975, were you hiding anywhere on the Gibson ranch?

Answer: NO

Question #R3:

Was the urine sample given to Dr. Kandell on November 11, 1975, your first voided specimen following your UFO experience?

Answer: YES

Question #R4:

Was this UFO incident a conspiracy to help Mike Rogers get out of his Turkey Springs contract?

Answer: NO

"Mr. Walton's physiological responses were monitored during the presentation of these questions by means of a Scientific Assessment Technology's Computer, Model CAPS 700. The following responses were recorded on this instrument's strip chart: relative blood pressure; skin conductance; thoracic and abdominal respiration. Data from three presentations of these questions were respiration. Data obtained for each series, and were subject to numerical scoring and computer­based analysis.

The numerical score of Series #1 was +34. The numerical score of Series #2 was +26. In the system of numerical scoring developed and validated at the University of Utah, total numerical scoring of +6 or more is considered indications of truthfulness.

The computer ­based analysis returned a posterior probability of truthfulness of .964 in the first series, and a .961 in the second series. These indicating that charts like these produced in each series, by Mr. Walton, are produced by truthful examinees 96% of the time.

Based on the numerical score of the polygraph charts and the computer based analysis, it is the opinion of this examiner that Mr. Walton was being truthful when he answered these relevant questions.

Sincerely,

Cy Gilson "



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 02:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Ectoplasm8





Good job on deflecting and completely skipping over the fact that your quoted definition of evidence was mostly in legal terms.


I quoted the Merriam-Webster dictionary definition of the word "evidence".

Is it your contention that police reports and witness testimony do not fall within those definitions of evidence?



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 02:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: Scdfa

Science has failed you. Epic fail, one might say.

Some people put their faith in science as if it were their religion. Well, when it comes to this subject, that faith is unfounded.




originally posted by: Scdfa

Science has failed you. Epic fail, one might say.

Some people put their faith in science as if it were their religion. Well, when it comes to this subject, that faith is unfounded.


Then you misunderstand what science actually is. Science does not require faith.


Jade, it is quite clear that that was my point exactly.
edit on 23-3-2015 by Scdfa because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 02:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: JadeStar

originally posted by: Scdfa
Science will never find evidence if it refuses to look for evidence.



Abstracts



Is the Solar System visited by exogenous intelligences from other planets or dimensions? If this were the case, observable signatures might be in the form of emissions, reflections, unusual thermal properties and unconventional spectra due to their surface properties.

Present telescopes with spectrographs are inadequate for a scanning survey to attempt to detect any such signatures due to their small field of view, spatial resolution, spectral resolution and the challenges of tracking an unknown trajectory following detection.

Instrumentation is proposed consisting of a survey telescope that can photometrically and spectroscopically image large areas of the sky, simultaneously distinguish potential artificial spectral signatures from natural background objects, and track any movement.

A spectrograph using a novel design approach is proposed that addresses the constraints of limited field of view and the ability to record simultaneously both visual and spectral images of one or more objects. A proof-of-concept instrument has been built which successfully demonstrates the capability of this design in recording simultaneous visual and spectral images of multiple known objects.


Stuart Armstrong It's "easy" to colonise the universe. What are the implications?


Our earthly intuitions and metaphors are a poor guide for the rules of the universe. Just as it took very careful analysis to figure out the laws of physics, we need to be precise and specific when we project forward humanity’s potential future in the stars. And when we do that, we find that colonisation of the universe is – in cosmic terms – both easy and rapid. Moreover there are strong reasons, both internal and external, for a civilization to want to expand soon after that becomes possible. So star-spanning civilizations are likely to quickly become thousand-galaxy spanning ones.

This talk will aim to demonstrate that fact, and then to examine some of its implications, both in terms of the likelihood of alien existence, the future fate of humanity, and of the universe itself. The cosmos would likely end up getting partitioned by expanding species, giving non-trivial anthropic constraints for our observations. Indeed, most of the universe would be inhabited by species that started expanding early on – and yet the Earth is a late-comer as planets go.


Stephen Baxter Who owns the Monolith? The development of policies concerning the detection of artefacts of extraterrestrial intelligence in the Solar System

Through the SETI endeavour we have now been searching for electromagnetic signals from alien civilisations for over fifty years, without success. But what if we found, not a signal, but an artefact of extraterrestrial intelligence, somewhere on Earth or in the solar system? We ourselves have deposited relics of space probes and human activity on the Moon, Mars and elsewhere, and we have sent messages to the stars in the form of artefacts: the plaques and records on the Pioneer and Voyager spacecraft. The probability of our detecting such an artefact is thus non-zero. And yet to the authors’ knowledge no publicly agreed policy concerning the discovery of such objects exists; at time of writing the only widely accepted policy is the document known as the ‘First SETI Protocol’ of 1989 which essentially guides action in the immediate aftermath of a signal detection event. The purposes of this paper are:
1) to review the literature concerning the discovery of an artefact of ETI within the solar system.
2) to highlight issues, suggest precedents and propose draft policy ideas which will amount to an extension of the First SETI Protocol to cover the circumstance.

The hope is that this paper will contribute to the ongoing discussion of how the human race might prepare itself for the momentous event of detection of ETI.


Klara Anna Capova Interstellar communication in sociocultural perspective in context with interspecies communication


TBD


Ian Crawford Resolving the Fermi Paradox: zoo hypothesis or nothing?


Many solutions to the Fermi Paradox have been proposed over the years, but I suggest that the only two which seem really persuasive are (1) that space-faring extraterrestrial civilisations have somehow managed to quarantine the Earth against interference for most of its history (the 'Zoo Hypothesis') or (2) that space-faring extraterrestrial civilisations do not exist, or have at least been very rare throughout the history of the Galaxy. I will conclude that the latter interpretation is the most plausible.


Lewis Dartnell How to rebuild a civilisation and the implications for L


This talk will discuss a few biological considerations for SETI, including the origin of life, extremophiles, and astrophysical threats to a planetary biosphere. The consequences of a collapse of civilisation will also be mentioned.


William Edmondson SETI: Detection and messaging - one without the other?


Sending an image is decodable and recoverable, but trying to send a 'message' is pointless. Semiotics, linguistics and anthropology show that any sort of conversation with ET is not possible. Anthropology requires co-presence; it can't be done over the phone; a conversation with a shared language will not be possible until after we've reached ETI or they have reached us.


Duncan Forgan Can Collimated Extraterrestrial Signals Be Intercepted?

The Optical Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (OSETI) attempts to detect collimated, narrowband pulses of electromagnetic radiation. These pulses may either consist of signals intentionally directed at the Earth, or signals between two star systems with a vector that unintentionally intersects the Solar System, allowing Earth to intercept the communication. But should we expect to be able to intercept these unintentional signals? And what constraints can we place upon the frequency of intelligent civilisations if we do?

I will present results from Monte Carlo Realisation simulations of interstellar communications between civilisations in the Galactic Habitable Zone using collimated beams. We measure the frequency with which beams between two stars are intercepted by a third. The interception rate increases linearly with the fraction of communicating civilisations, and as the cube of the beam opening angle. I will comment on the implications for OSETI searches being able to detect transmissions not intended for humanity.


(continued...)


There is nothing inherently wrong in any of these projects you tout, and I agree with many of them.

Where the tragedy lies is in the fact that all of you choose to pretend that alien contact is not already taking place, and has been for the better part of a century now.

You seem to take a great deal of pride in having a curious scientific mind, but never once have you asked me for details of the alien beings I have encountered, or even information I could provide on their vehicles. You could then weigh for yourself the worth of what I have to say.

But you simply do not want that information. You prefer to spend enormous amounts of time writing posts that justify ignoring people like me.



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 06:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: Scdfa
a reply to: Ectoplasm8





Good job on deflecting and completely skipping over the fact that your quoted definition of evidence was mostly in legal terms.


I quoted the Merriam-Webster dictionary definition of the word "evidence".

Is it your contention that police reports and witness testimony do not fall within those definitions of evidence?


Yes, its evidence of hallucinations. You have yet to answer how abduction experiences differ from hallucinations. Surely you know what a hallucination is. Don't avoid the question with pathetic insults this time.
Thank you very much my deadhead brother



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 07:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Scdfa

Oh yes, please tell us more about ET. We haven't got enough ET stories yet.



posted on Mar, 23 2015 @ 08:11 AM
link   
I don't really buy the idea that aliens far more intelligent than us would look at us like bugs that need to be stepped on,we are the dominant species on planet Earth ,we are the masters of the planet just like the aliens would be to their planet so I think they would respect that.

If we theoretically discovered a planet inhabited by primitive humans I think some kind of agreement would be made not to disturb or contact them in any way until they are ready,that could be the case with us,if we go back say 200 years do you think we were ready for alien contact? If not what makes you think we are ready now?



new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join