First contact: The man who'll welcome aliens, page 1

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 6 times

Topic started on 8-3-2010 @ 04:58 PM by woodwardjnr

This was an interesting article by Jon Ronson about Paul Davies, the scientist with the responsibility of making official contact, if there was communication via SETI. an interesting read and raises interesting questions on what information we would want to share directly.

www.guardian.co.uk...

reply posted on 8-3-2010 @ 05:16 PM by Signals

Good article...seems like boring work though.

SETI can't be telling us everything.

reply posted on 8-3-2010 @ 06:02 PM by MisterMan

That sounds like a pretty nice job.

reply posted on 8-3-2010 @ 06:23 PM by DoomsdayRex

Originally posted by Signals
SETI can't be telling us everything.

What is SETI supposedly hiding and what evidence do you have for this claim?

reply posted on 8-3-2010 @ 06:25 PM by ladyinwaiting

You know, I actually feel sorry for this guy. Sorta all dressed up with nowhere to go. "The eerie silence" which might last 500 years.

What a frustrating job.

reply posted on 8-3-2010 @ 06:31 PM by DoomsdayRex

Originally posted by ladyinwaiting
You know, I actually feel sorry for this guy. Sorta all dressed up with nowhere to go. "The eerie silence" which might last 500 years.

What a frustrating job.

We can hope that Shostak's estimates of contact within the next 15 years is accurate.

We can hope.

reply posted on 8-3-2010 @ 06:35 PM by Smell The Roses

Intersting though, as long as this job has been around that an article such as this is being written now.

Kind of makes me lean even more towards the "we are being prepared" feeling...

reply posted on 8-3-2010 @ 06:37 PM by Signals

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex

Originally posted by Signals
SETI can't be telling us everything.

What is SETI supposedly hiding and what evidence do you have for this claim?

What other ways are they attempting to receive a signal that we haven't even thought of or been told about?

Who's to say SETI isn't just a front to keep us asleep and still hoping someday we'll make contact....all the while secret projects have already established it?

Nothing in 50 years? Come on....

reply posted on 8-3-2010 @ 06:39 PM by Archirvion

reply to post by DoomsdayRex

when u say contac..you mean a meeting right? cause contact was with modern humans back in the 40\50s

reply posted on 8-3-2010 @ 06:41 PM by Smell The Roses

Originally posted by Archirvion
reply to post by DoomsdayRex

when u say contac..you mean a meeting right? cause contact was with modern humans back in the 40\50s

Pretty sure they mean "publicized" meeting/contact. As in we would all know about it once it happens...

The real first contact to all the non believers so to speak...

reply posted on 8-3-2010 @ 06:57 PM by DoomsdayRex

Originally posted by Signals
What other ways are they attempting to receive a signal that we haven't even thought of or been told about?

You tell us. And provide evidence.

Originally posted by Signals
Who's to say SETI isn't just a front to keep us asleep and still hoping someday we'll make contact....all the while secret projects have already established it?

Do you have any evidence of what whatsoever?

Originally posted by Signals
Nothing in 50 years? Come on....

And?

reply posted on 8-3-2010 @ 07:33 PM by draknoir2

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex

Originally posted by ladyinwaiting
You know, I actually feel sorry for this guy. Sorta all dressed up with nowhere to go. "The eerie silence" which might last 500 years.

What a frustrating job.

We can hope that Shostak's estimates of contact within the next 15 years is accurate.

We can hope.

It's possible that first contact has already been made.

One word: WOW!

[edit on 8-3-2010 by draknoir2]

reply posted on 8-3-2010 @ 07:45 PM by hungrydirt

reply to post by DoomsdayRex

Pretty venomous post for seemingly no reason. If you actually read the guys post, he says "Who's to say", which obviously shows that he is positing a "what if" scenario. Someone needs to relax.

reply posted on 8-3-2010 @ 07:48 PM by RyannVonDoom

Originally posted by hungrydirt
reply to post by DoomsdayRex

Pretty venomous post for seemingly no reason. If you actually read the guys post, he says "Who's to say", which obviously shows that he is positing a "what if" scenario. Someone needs to relax.

All his posts I've noticed seem to be like this.

reply posted on 8-3-2010 @ 07:55 PM by Signals

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex

You tell us. And provide evidence.

Do you have any evidence of what whatsoever?

And?

DR I have none...

only offering common sense

reply posted on 8-3-2010 @ 08:01 PM by Ventessa

And what do the E.T.'s have to say about this guy being the #1 guy to talk to? I'm pretty sure they've already chosen to speak face to face with other people. He might be the first one to do it in front of camera though.

reply posted on 8-3-2010 @ 08:24 PM by DoomsdayRex

Originally posted by hungrydirt
Pretty venomous post for seemingly no reason. If you actually read the guys post, he says "Who's to say", which obviously shows that he is positing a "what if" scenario. Someone needs to relax.

And someone needs to realize that criticism of an idea or asking for evidence is not the same as "venom". Far too often in this field "who's to say" is substituted for evidence, while "what if" is confused with reality.

reply posted on 8-3-2010 @ 08:46 PM by hungrydirt

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex
And someone needs to realize that criticism of an idea or asking for evidence is not the same as "venom". Far too often in this field "who's to say" is substituted for evidence, while "what if" is confused with reality.

The only person who seems to be confusing anything is you. The guy is making an opinion based statement, and you are brashly calling for "evidence". Criticizing a blatant stream-of-consciousness statement for not containing evidence is the sort of stuff which paralyzes these types of discussions on this website.

Who's to say a UFO didn't crash in Roswell in the 40's? Oh wait, let me substantiate my open-ended statement before a random forum troll jumps down my throat about it; but, wait, I have to substantiate my personal opinions? Deny ninkampoopery!

reply posted on 8-3-2010 @ 08:46 PM by EsSeeEye

Originally posted by Signals
DR I have none...

only offering common sense

What ifs and fictitious theories aren't common sense. They're shotgunning the problem with random hopes and dreams and creating a smoke barrier rather than finding out what's really going on by using actual logic.

Making up stories in the attempt to sensationalize things, like "What's SETI hiding?" does nothing but deflect from the topic.

As for SETI, I used to have a lot of hope, but the more I've learned about their methods, the less excited I am about them actually receiving anything. That said, I don't see many others out there doing much (unless you count all the folks channeling) , so I still support SETI's efforts, at least.

reply to post by hungrydirt

So, we shouldn't expect evidence to back up any claim made off-the-cuff by any random member? What should we do with random, unsubstantiated claims, then? Ignore them? Wouldn't that be just as bad as asking for evidence?

[edit on 3/8/2010 by EsSeeEye]

reply posted on 8-3-2010 @ 08:49 PM by DoomsdayRex