1966 Interview with Carl Sagan

Just come across this video of Carl Sagan being interviewed by Walter Cronkite in 1966.

It's funny, a lot of what he said 45 years ago, rings true even today.

I also think he also sums up my feelings on UFOlogy as well, for those keeping score at home.

WOW! he could have given this interview today on the news and it would still seem up to date.

would have thought this would get more attention, I keep coming back to it to see what people are saying...

reply to post by roughycannon


Wrong time of the day I would say.

Thanks for replying!

Well its 8:21 AM here in good auld scotland what time is it down there?

reply to post by roughycannon


Nearly 4:30pm here.

And middle of the night in the good ol USA...

Back on topic and in reply to your first post, I agree, things like exo-planets were still mostly fringe theories back then.

The Americans are sleeping... lets talk about them.

Its crazy to think what we know now compared to them back in 1966, infact the average joe probably knows more about the universe than Sagan back then I dont mean the mathematics but just general stuff, and even without this knowledge Sagan was able to have an opinion that has stood the test of time...

Amazing to think that in 45 years we have had a wealth of luxuries like mobile phone technology, the internet, malaria free mosquitoes, the fall the Berlin wall and the end of the iron curtain, a man on the moon and microwave ovens and yet people still act like children regarding the concept of extra terrestrial life and pretend to know things which clearly are falsehoods.

I think that in another 45 years there will be more of the same too. This saddens me as there really is no need for this type of petulant behaviour.

Of course I could be wrong and perhaps intelligent life from the stars really does traverse massive distances just to anal probe Billy Bob and Mary Sue and leave no physical evidence - I must remain sceptical.

Carl Sagan really was a voice of reason and an inspiration for the majesty that is creation.

Thanks for posting Chad!

-m0r

reply to post by m0r1arty

Carl Sagan really was a voice of reason and an inspiration for the majesty that is creation.

I'll drink to that!

reply to post by Chadwickus


yep he sums it up well. unfortunately posting this on the ats aliens forum is a bit like posting darwins theory of evolution on a creationist forum. Its not going to go down well.

personally im disapointed with the lack of rebuttals from the believers.

reply to post by yeti101


Ahh what can ya do?

Maybe it's just very hard to argue what he had to say?

Always great to hear some words from the late Dr. Sagan

I do respect Carl Sagan's opinion of course. However, referring to a quote of Sagan that Turiddu has in his signature, I would say that we know so little that we can't really say that we have the means or the ability of even remotely "grasping the Universe as it really is". So this interview does a good job of voicing the opinion of these people, however how wrong or right they were or how wrong or right we are it is too early to say in my opinion.

reply to post by Chadwickus


Thanks for the vid chad

I am work right now, so I gotta wait to watch the vid, but if it's coming from the mouth of Sagan, I'm sure it's good.

Originally posted by m0r1arty
Of course I could be wrong and perhaps intelligent life from the stars really does traverse massive distances just to anal probe Billy Bob and Mary Sue and leave no physical evidence - I must remain sceptical.

Reductio ad absurdum.

I did not watch the Sagan video due to lack of time, but I doubt Sagan uses the same fallacious logic.

I find it interesting that this interview shows that even in 1966 the scientific community was of the belief that many stars had planets, and that it was possible -- and perhaps even probable -- that at least some of those planets had intelligent life.

It seems as if these days, every time an exoplanet (such as Gliese 581c) is found, there are people here on ATS who try to argue that science is short-sighted, or even useless, because (as they argue) "just a few years ago scientists didn't think there were too many other planets, or that life is too complex to have begun elsewhere".

This interview shows that even 45 years ago (and most likely even before that) mainstream science believed that many other planetary systems exist, and that intelligent ET life probably also exists. It shows that mainstream science has believed for decades that life is may be ubiquitous in the universe, that intelligent ET's probably exist, AND that all these recent discoveries about exoplanets is NOT part of some conspiracy that is bringing us "the beginnings of disclosure", but rather is simply giving us new evidence regarding these long-held beliefs.

It seems as if many of the ideas of ET life and exoplanets mainstream science discusses today that some people claim are all about "OMG! The Beginning of Disclosure!" have been openly discussed by mainstream science for 45 years -- or even longer.

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People


You make some very good points, Soylent.

Many here seem to think NASA is some evil, faceless entity but the reality is they are made up of people like you and me, people who just love space and astronomy (I just don't have the degree).

Originally posted by jclmavg
Reductio ad absurdum.

Sure thing. It's obvious that they are Plebeian battle cruisers here to liaise with our governments regarding the threat of inter-dimensional war with the Greys,and to bring peace, and have been at this for millennia.

Pretty sure mine was less absurd.

You chose which side of the fence you stand on. Don't blame folk for pointing and laughing.

-m0r

I love those epic one-eyed-pipe-smoking-in-the-studio-silent-sidekick-pirate type of astronomers.

The Robertson Panel was a committee commissioned by the Central Intelligence Agency in 1952 in response to widespread reports of unidentified flying objects, especially in the Washington, D.C. area. The panel was briefed on U.S. military activities and intelligence; hence the report was originally classified Secret.

Apart from Robertson, the panel included: ·
Luis Alvarez,[3], physicist, radar expert (and later, a Nobel Prize recipient); ·
Frederick C. Durant, missile expert; ·
Samuel Abraham Goudsmit, Brookhaven National Laboratories nuclear physicist ·
Thornton Page, astrophysicist, radar expert, deputy director of Johns Hopkins Operations Research Office; ·
Lloyd Berkner, physicist, and J. Allen Hynek, astronomer, were associate panel members.

Taken from wikipedia

Found a thread on this panel HERE

Though I am not on the alien/ufo bandwagon, I am not on the other wagon either. I do however smell a fish in this vid that needs some more sniffing.

Arrrrrr

reply to post by Chadwickus


I figured somebody would have said something by now, but oh well.

"There is not a single verified or checked out report which is at all connectible with the possibility of extraterrestrial life."

I would have to say this is false. There are, and were at the time Sagan made this statement, many "checked out" reports that defied conventional explanation. The pattern of details in many of these reports - which seem to indicate artificial objects under intelligent control, or at least some kind of natural phenomenon that does a good impression of artificial objects under intelligent control - can lead, and indeed has led sane, intelligent, educated, reasonable people to conclude that the extraterrestrial hypothesis is not an unreasonable "possible" explanation. At the very least the ETH cannot be ruled out, which is what Dr. Sagan seems to be trying to do with his phrase "at all connectible with the possibility". Perhaps he meant something such as, "There is no proof that UFOs are of extraterrestrial origin", which would have been both more accurate and less wordy.

With all due respect to Sagan - and certainly a lot of respect is due - this is not the only quote of his I've encountered that seems to indicate that he may not have been as familiar with the relevant literature as he thought he was. Being a world-famous astronomer is no small feat, to be sure, but it does not qualify a person to make faux-authoritative pronouncements on topics that lie outside one's area of expertise - and apparently in this case, outside one's scope of general study. Stephen Hawking might also think about reserving judgment regarding this subject until such time as he has taken even a passing glance at it.


On a side note, an interesting tidbit to note about Sagan's monocular sidekick can be digested here