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.

 

Neil Degrasse Tyson takes on every major conspiracy theory including aliens and visitation...

page: 3
6
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 23 2012 @ 11:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Pauligirl
 


From your own source.


Because of a wobble in the Earth’s orbit, the positions of the constellations slowly shift from year to year. The most perfect galactic alignment between the Earth, Sun and the center of the Milky Way happened back in 1998, but now we’re slowly shifting away from that alignment. In the coming decades, the perfect alignment will shift to another day.


This is what I said.

your other links only refer to only the Earth or only the Sun. Not the Earth, Sun and galactic centre.
The above states exactly what I said. Read it a little more carefully. According to our high preist of scientism it happens every year ON THE DAY.

Case closed, Tyson was wrong.

edit on 23-6-2012 by squiz because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by cripmeister
Even if [scientists] are mostly ignorant of the litterature they're aware of the lack of good data to study.


How would they be aware of UFO data or any lack thereof if not familiar with the science done long ago? Your statement doesn't make sense.



Originally posted by cripmeister
If there was any [UFO data] it would have made it into the scientific journals wouldn't you say?


Sure it would've... if you want to ignore the taboo and sociological and interpersonal aspects of the UFO topic, how those have affected the science purporting to study it, and so on. But only a fool would ignore such factors, and I don't, so I'd definitely NOT agree that if there were any good data it'd be found in the scientific journals.

For more on this, read:
1) "Politicking and Paradigm Shifting: James E. McDonald and the UFO Case Study", Dr. Paul McCarthy's Ph.D. thesis.
2) "Sovereignty and the UFO", by Dr.'s Wendt and Duvall.

Do you believe the Condon Report represents balanced and objective science, cripmeister?

(The same question I asked Jim Oberg three weeks ago, right here, and which he has not answered....)



Originally posted by cripmeister
Even with corroborating radar data all one can say is 'there was *something* there'. Unless there was a technical malfunction or human error in evaluating the radar returns of course. This is usually where investigations end.


That there was "something" there (as you admit) is rather significant, and shouldn't be glossed over. Especially when that something is detected on multiple radars, shows up exactly where multiple witnesses (ground and/or air) say they saw a 'UFO', and when every conventional explanation for the 'UFO' has been reasonably ruled out by qualified experts, right? (Do you know how many cases of this sort sit unexplained?) Most people I know would call that evidence of something worthy of further study (even if not "proof" of anything extraterrestrial), and they would also denounce the ridicule of those who were unfortunate enough to have seen it ...

To me, Tyson is way out of line in offering opinions on the UFO topic, and my suspicion is he's not even read the Condon Report or any of the other relevant science. (Why won't someone simply ask him is he has?!?) I like the guy and appreciate the eloquence found in some of his explanations of astronomical concepts, but he is clearly ignorant regarding the science that's been done regarding UFOs. Well, either that, or he's not ignorant of past UFO science... in which case we have to ask: why is he implicitly encouraging ridicule of the topic, and UFO witnesses? That's highly improper and probably scientifically unethical, because there is no scientific conclusion anywhere, not even in the Condon Report, which would justify that ridicule.



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 04:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Frith
 


He never made the argument that the government can't lie to its people.

There is a difference between saying a government is capable of lying, and claiming that they are lying specifically about alien visitation and UFOs. It is likely that some UFOs are classified experimental aircraft and would you REALLY fault the government for lying about something like that? The government does a lot of stupid things, but keeping aircraft a secret until they're ready to inform the world seems pretty smart.

As for the OP I like Tyson but I really wish he and others of my fellow skeptics would differentiate between UFOs that are UFOs and UFOs as in alien spacecraft because it really is a massive distinction. Michael Shermer has made similar mistakes I think in ridiculing the UFO phenomenon without separating the kooks who believe they've had an alien-reptilian baby, the folks who leap to the alien conclusion at every light they see in the sky, and those who seriously look into UFOs in an attempt to find the real explanation even if its a completely mundane one.

I myself have seen a UFO, and that's just it, I wouldn't pretend to know what the hell I saw, it was unidentified and that's the point of calling it a UFO. I have insufficient data to call it anything else but unidentified. Jumping to the alien conclusion, no matter what I claimed to have seen, is premature.
edit on 24-6-2012 by Titen-Sxull because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-6-2012 by Titen-Sxull because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 06:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Titen-Sxull
reply to post by Frith
 


He never made the argument that the government can't lie to its people.

There is a difference between saying a government is capable of lying, and claiming that they are lying specifically about alien visitation and UFOs. It is likely that some UFOs are classified experimental aircraft and would you REALLY fault the government for lying about something like that? The government does a lot of stupid things, but keeping aircraft a secret until they're ready to inform the world


This is not just 'likely' but certain. I heard it personally from a government employee in the intelligence community that some old (e.g. 1950's-1960's) era UFO sightings were in fact their projects but this was never revealed to the public until many years later when they were officially declassified. It was not clear whether they were revealed to investigative Air Force committees, but I could easily imagine them not being discussed either. There is always compartementalization, they would have to get permission and background checks. Why bother when it's easier to shut up and get on with their regular job? Why make more work?



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 07:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by TeaAndStrumpets

How would they be aware of UFO data or any lack thereof if not familiar with the science done long ago? Your statement doesn't make sense.


I already explained it. Good, meaning useful in a scientific sense, data makes it into scientific journals and litterature. The article Investigation & analysis of transient luminous phenomena in the low atmosphere of Hessdalen valley, Norway made it into the scientific journal Acta Astronautica in 2010 Source. The age old argument about taboo is not valid in my opinion.


Originally posted by TeaAndStrumpets

Do you believe the Condon Report represents balanced and objective science, cripmeister?


No I don't. I am pretty sure Oberg doesn't either, even if he hasn't yet honored you with a reply



Originally posted by TeaAndStrumpets

That there was "something" there (as you admit) is rather significant, and shouldn't be glossed over. Especially when that something is detected on multiple radars, shows up exactly where multiple witnesses (ground and/or air) say they saw a 'UFO', and when every conventional explanation for the 'UFO' has been reasonably ruled out by qualified experts, right? (Do you know how many cases of this sort sit unexplained?) Most people I know would call that evidence of something worthy of further study (even if not "proof" of anything extraterrestrial), and they would also denounce the ridicule of those who were unfortunate enough to have seen it ...


But where do you go from there?



posted on Jul, 12 2012 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheStev

Originally posted by mbkennel

Originally posted by TheStev
. If aliens are here we don't know what they want and why they're here. These facts alter any assumption about potential behaviour of alleged races. Say what you will about the UFO phenomena - you cannot even speak to the question of alien visitation until you allow that the question of motive throws a monkeywrench into scientific consideration.
edit on 23-6-2012 by TheStev because: Readability


If aliens are here, WHY don't we know what they want and why they're here?



If that is true, and I'm not claiming it is, it would clearly be because they want to remain hidden. If they want to remain hidden, surely they would want their motives to remain hidden too.

If we visited another planet - do you think we would broadcast our intentions? If we planned to colonise a planet and there was already a race there, do you think we would land and say 'Hey guys, we're Earthlings and we want to take over your planet, okay?'

It doesn't matter what the motive is, that's an even bigger speculation that the idea that they're visiting. What matters is that people remember there is a motive to be considered.

How far would police-work go if cops ignored the fact that their suspects are intelligent and have motives of their own? Why should scientific investigation ignore motive when it exists with any intelligent being?


Tyson actually said something himself about this in another thread that I really thought was great.

www.wimp.com...

Consider this: the smartest ape on the planet, Coco, can communicate with us using limited sign language. We share 99% of the same genes as apes. Now imagine there's another race of lifeforms out there who are genetically just 1% different from us in the same way.


-CM
edit on 12-7-2012 by CajunMetal because: Redundancy...oof!




top topics
 
6
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join