It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


UFO sightings warn of alien invasion, states Stephen Hawking who fears SETI’s search

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on May, 29 2011 @ 11:26 PM
From what Ive seen on my journey across the Internet, it is plausible that we have already been raided and blasted back to the stone age thousands of years ago..

posted on May, 30 2011 @ 12:08 AM
Too late they are already here, and have been since the dawn of time. Of course the Government & top figures like Stephen Hawking are going to lie, and mislead the public. They know the truth, but will they ever tell us? Hell no! So what makes you think we are the only Humanoids in the vast Universe? How would you be able to distinguish us from them or them from us. Maybe they have a different physical appearance but still have some Humanoid DNA. Maybe they have abilities or technology to change physical appearance in order to blend in with Humans on Earth. You cant listen to anything these people say. Nothing they have told us is the truth, absolutely nothing. If they had, maybe we all wouldn't be so damn confused as to who we really are and how we got here.

After all Stephen Hawking is the same quack who told us this- "I regard the brain as a computer which will stop working when its components fail. There is no heaven or afterlife for broken down computers; that is a fairy story for people afraid of the dark," he added.

This guy is full of $*** and spins the story any way the Elite sees fit. He's a bought & paid for Puppet.

posted on May, 30 2011 @ 12:23 AM
I don't know whether to debate the theory or the theorist. This is pretty old news, but I don't think I really gave it much thought when it was 'big' news back at the start of the year, or was it last year when he first made these statements?

I agree he has a great mind, but he's purely guessing with this sort of stuff. I wouldn't doubt his ability to tame physics, quantum mechanics and of course "Hawking Radiation", but aliens - is that really his line of work? I think this is just, if anything (and not fear mongering) it's just his own thoughts, without any real evidence or scientific backing. He probably got drunk one night and had this idea about aliens and wrote it down, and someone thought - oh my god, Hawking hasn't been in the news since he went in a zero gravity plane four or five years ago, let's put his new drunken statements out there!

As far as I'm aware, there is no evidence he's ever had a UFO or alien encounter. And personally, I tend not to listen to people who make statements but have had no experience of an encounter themselves.

And if UFOs signal an alien invasion, considering we possibly have evidence that dates back to the dawn of man that sphere's and things have been seen in the sky - God knows what kind of timeline Hawking is talking about when he states that. We clearly haven't been invaded by aliens in the past 3000 years, so how can UFO sightings be any kind of legitimate signal of an invasion? If I stand over an ant hill I find in a random field and observe, I'm not invading.

So for the theory: Poppycock. We all know if aliens wanted the earth, for its resources, they would've taken them a long time ago, when we humans hadn't plundered them all.

And as for the theorist: He's becoming a washed up, boring old scientist in my eyes grasping for attention. He should stick to what he knows best. Sure, these comments about aliens and heaven raise some fun debates. But soon he'll need to wear a clown suit and a big red nose for me to take much notice. If you're reading prof Hawking, stop talking about subjects you don't have a clue about! Don't demean the thousands of people who have had legitimate experiences, none of which signaled an invasion, as many of these people will automatically interpret what you're saying as BS.

Hawking is not a credible figure to take advice about aliens from. Your next door neighbor who had a close encounter of the third kind is a far better figure to listen to.

If anyone finds any tales of Hawking meeting aliens or seeing UFOs, I'd be interested to know.
edit on 30-5-2011 by markymint because: Spelling

edit on 30-5-2011 by markymint because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 30 2011 @ 12:44 AM
If space aliens wanted to take over the earth, they could have done so a long time ago. And for space aliens to reach earth, they would expend an enormous amount of energy. Unless they found out a way to break the law of physics. That is physics as we understand it. Maybe they had discovered a worm hole. And perhaps can even manipulate it. Maybe they are a long lived species, or mate on board their ships to produce offspring who will reach the earth.

And why earth? Though they may even visit other civilizations.

I do believe there are other civilizations out there. Just by chance alone. But how many are advanced to the point of interstellar space travel? How many are as advanced as us? And how many are in the stage of development where they only recently discovered fire? I'm just saying this because most people automatically assume that if there are other civilizations, they must be more advanced than us. I don't believe that.

posted on May, 30 2011 @ 02:35 AM
Those abundant resources would also be available on other planets also. But there are 2 resources that are very difficult to replensih. Water, and a proper functioning sun. It would be interesting to see how they would handle problems with these. Water can be recycled. But the planet would be devoid of plant life out in the open. A sun once it starts growing large enough can crimp their style also.

So my question is, how many planets are out in the universe that can support life? Since this could determine whether earth is fodder for some soon to be homeless aliens.

I have an interesting twist here... How do we know that we and other life forms were not planted here to save a dying population? Not only could we all be ET's, but so can many other life forms on earth. The number of species on earth are just too diverse. With new ones being "found" on a regular basis. Think about the garden of eden (first humans on earth). There could be some truth to this. You know how stories get changed over time. Perhaps the garden of eden was actually the original compound of alien survivors? And punishment to those that broke the laws was banishment. Now likely there would be an explorer group that would establish the human colony. Later would come, perhaps Noah's Ark with the animals? Since saving human life would be the first priority, animals second.

Now if a large number of people were suddenly uprooted and thrown on a planet, they would basically be starting over. High tech items would be functionless once their energy source would run out. Communication amongst each other would be lost. And their technological know-how would be useless with nothing but raw materials available. Perhaps raw materials they are not accustomed to handling. Their primary concern would be food and shelter from the elements. And I think over time, much technology would be lost. For example, place a large group of people on a deserted island and see what happens.

This could easily explain the Antikythera Mechanism, ancient batteries etc... So there are 3 ways of looking at found ancient technology. The aliens left it, but hide from us for some mysterious reason (just like invisible God), human technology advanced then regressed, or it was retained technology by alien surviivors. If you think about it, there was no major catastrophe on earth during that time frame. So, there is no reason for our technology to have regressed. But if technology was carried to earth, it could be lost over time. Using Occam's razor , which scenario seems most likely? Not saying this is so, but earth could have already been utilized for its resources.
edit on 30-5-2011 by elouina because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 30 2011 @ 09:01 AM

Originally posted by superwurzel666
Personally I'd have thought that any species capable of inter-stellar travel would have long ago had to overcome the desire for exploitation and primitive conquest in order to create a stable and unified enough society for them to commit enough resources, education and development to make such an endeavour realistic in the first place. Peoples who invade and kill other peoples for their resources are probably not peoples evolved enough to overcome the huge obstacles of manned inter-stellar travel. Probably why WE can't do it.

I don't know about that. I mean, Earth's history seems to indicate the opposite is true. Heavily armed, militarily advanced societies with little regard for the sovereignty of other people, tend to do relatively well.

See: Genghis Kahn, Europe, Roman Empire, etc. etc. etc.

posted on Jun, 4 2011 @ 09:37 AM
reply to post by vexati0n

As far as I know, Europe, Rome and the Mongols have not undergone manned interstellar space travel, so my point still holds.

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in