posted on Mar, 30 2012 @ 05:08 PM
reply to post by Aliensun
You asked me to 'build a wormhole' and called my theory 'magical'. Your general attitude was 'my theory is proved right, your theory is just
silly'. That's kinda douchey if you ask me. My reaction of 'name calling' was a reaction to your tone and perceived attitude.
Three things you might find interesting:
1. You can't say 'this discussion is over' and then keep discussing. Either you're storming off in a huff, your you're not - you can't have your
cake and eat it too
2. "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" So anything we haven't discovered the science behind is currently
considered magic. Therefore your 'zero-mass ships' are just as magical as my wormholes.
3. I think you're a bit confused about what the word 'proof' means. There may be some
evidence that UFOs if they exist
mass. But that's far from proof. Proof is evidence that is undeniable. The manipulation of gravity is just as valid an explanation for the way those
craft operate as mass nullification is, therefore I can deny your interpretation of the evidence, therefore that evidence is not proof.
Both are just theories, both are unproven.
Providing us with a craft that has zero mass is just one part of the interstellar travel equation. Even if a craft does not have inertia, which I
suspect you're suggesting with zero mass, it requires some sort of momentum to move. So are you going to tell use what method of propulsion is used
by these zero mass craft that have, according to you, been proven to exist
I have to address that too. I believe that UFOs exist, but that's just a belief. I don't believe they have been proven to exist. And I think the
vast majority of people, even the vast majority of UFO believers, would agree with that. So how can you use an unproven phenomena to prove a theory