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.
Originally posted by OldDragger
Two very very different questions, that UFO fans don't seem to get!
Question one, are there other intelligent beings? Probably.
Totally seperate question 2: Are they visiting us? Probably not.
The laws of pysics ans the tremendous distances of space would seem to pretty much rule it out.
Any WHY assume so much? Because you were raised on science fiction, keyword FICTION.
Why assume "we are a young species"? Whats your evidence/
Why assume anybody else would invent, or even WANT TO invent space travel? Because of science fiction.
things like 'warp drive' don't exist, they are plot devices for science fiction space opera stories. we are no closer to zipping anywhere in space very quickly than we were a million years ago!!!
Originally posted by Norio Hayakawa
Vallee and Keel basically came with a conclusion that this whole phenomenon goes beyond the physical and that it may be impossible to study it through the so-called "scientific" or "empirical" method.
But why should the eyes of another get labeled as unreliable just because you didn't see it and the witness forgot to bring his forensic evidence gear.
Claiming the the experience is a lie, for whatever reason...
If I told you I just ate a pancake
Carl Sagan mentioned the connection between UFO beliefs and religious beliefs back in 1966, starting a little after 3 minutes in this video:
Originally posted by Norio Hayakawa
Beliefs in "UFOs" as physical extraterrestrial spacecraft are no different from "religious beliefs".
We live in very unsettled times. It used to be possible to believe in a personal, benevolent, powerful, all-knowing God, who cared about individuals, who you could pray to, but now there's very few people who really believe that, I think.
Science, for good or for ill, has destroyed a lot of the traditional theologies, and yet people have the same need to believe that they always did...perhaps more so because of the times we live in.
The flying saucer myths are a really clever compromise. It's a way of having beings that come from the sky that are worried about us, that are powerful, that are going to step in and prevent us from destroying ourselves (which we very well might) and yet have the cloak of science....so no one can say "nonsense, that doesn't match science", it's all very pseudoscientific.
I would think that for at least the contact myths, and probably for a lot of the events of people that just see things they don't understand flying overhead, what's involved is psychology and theology, and not so much the physical sciences.
I'm glad you corrected yourself to admit that it's our understanding that will change, and not physics.
Originally posted by predator0187
Physics is in it's infancy and will more than likely change many, many times.
Technology will advance and so will our scientific understanding,
What matters is that an objective account could be 100 % real and you dismiss it because there is no evidence it happened. Why ?
I am not sure about the 10% but that could be right. For sure there is much we don't understand.
Originally posted by predator0187
Physics will always be physics but maybe we only have a grasp on 10% of its entirety.
I think we are on the same page.
i hope you understand what I am trying to say, because I am confusing myself a little.
I have had discussions with you about physics in the past, and would not mind having another one...
. It's a pretty creative way to go faster than light without going faster than light locally. It would be interesting if we can ever show it's more than just theoretical, but it would take enormous amounts of power, probably a matter-anti-matter reaction just like Star Trek suggested.
a speculative mathematical model