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.

 

Who says you can't get here from there?

page: 3
5
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 12:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by GiodanoBruno

You and I will never know if we are the pinnacle of the universe. Never.. So why think about it. Get it?



No, I don't quite get it. You see no point in contemplating any notion that you don't think you'll ever get a definite answer to? You're not into philosophy then?

If we do try to think about our likely place in the Universe compared to that of other intelligent civilizations, there are only a few options regarding our relative technological abilities. Maybe we are at the forefront of advancement, and 98 percent of the other civilizations are young and primitive by comparison. On the other hand, we might be "newborns" so to speak, one of the least sophisticated civilizations in existence. There's also the possibility that we occupy some little spot on the vast spectrum between these two extremes.

If we are approximately in the middle, then it seems not-too-far-out to suppose that there are civilizations out there far in advance of us. The Universe is a very old thing. How far ahead could they potentially be without things getting "ridiculous" for you? Hundreds of years? Thousands? Is one million years really that much of a stretch? Especially if we are not only in the middle, but in the low end of the middle - or in the low end of the whole spectrum.

This kind of speculation may get us to a solid conclusion, but it can allow us to clarify the possibilities and their potential implications.




posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 01:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Orkojoker
 


The problem is there is no empirical evidence that suggests life forms ahead of or behind us. So musings are fine, but dont state it as a probable fact.



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 09:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
reply to post by Orkojoker
 


The problem is there is no empirical evidence that suggests life forms ahead of or behind us. So musings are fine, but dont state it as a probable fact.


Actually there is empirical evidence that suggests life forms ahead of us.


The word empirical denotes information acquired by means of observation or experimentation


Wikipedia

I think we can safely categorize both the UFO stimuli as observed by witnesses and the UFO reports as probed by investigators as "information acquired by means of observation". If you want to say this data is not readily replicable, then you're right. But unfortunately that's the nature of the phenomena in question. Occurrences are unpredictable, localized and generally of short duration. But it is incorrect to say it is not empirical data. All of our experience is empirical.

The empirical data related to a particular subset of UFO reports suggests that apparently intelligently-controlled manufactured objects are being seen that display characteristics not replicable by human technology.

I would never claim the ETH is a fact - or even a "probable fact", whatever that might be. It's a rational hypothesis.
edit on 24-6-2012 by Orkojoker because: (no reason given)

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



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 10:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Orkojoker
 


The UFO phenomena is not empirical evidence of alien life. It is not empirical evidence of anything at this moment. Show me something that is proven to be a UFO piloted by aircraft. Before you go off spouting big boy words you should learn how to use them.



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 11:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
reply to post by Orkojoker
 


The UFO phenomena is not empirical evidence of alien life. It is not empirical evidence of anything at this moment. Show me something that is proven to be a UFO piloted by aircraft. Before you go off spouting big boy words you should learn how to use them.


It is empirical data inasmuch as it is based on observation. What's your definition of empirical? And I believe the word we were using was "suggests". The data represented in a subset of the "unknown" reports suggests intelligently controlled objects or phenomena. If we aren't the intelligence controlling these things, then that would suggest they are controlled by an intelligence that is not us. This is not proven, of course, but it is suggested, based on the analysis of empirical (observational) data.

I'm not sure what you mean by "Show me something that is proven to be a UFO piloted by aircraft", so I can't really respond to that. But let's not conflate the terms "evidence" and "proof" as though they were the same thing. There is plenty of evidence to consider in this subject, and while it proves nothing it is very suggestive.
edit on 24-6-2012 by Orkojoker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 11:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Orkojoker

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
reply to post by Orkojoker
 


The UFO phenomena is not empirical evidence of alien life. It is not empirical evidence of anything at this moment. Show me something that is proven to be a UFO piloted by aircraft. Before you go off spouting big boy words you should learn how to use them.


It is empirical data inasmuch as it is based on observation. What's your definition of empirical? And I believe the word we were using was "suggests". The data represented in a subset of the "unknown" reports suggests intelligently controlled objects or phenomena. If we aren't the intelligence controlling these things, then that would suggest they are controlled by an intelligence that is not us. This is not proven, of course, but it is suggested, based on the analysis of empirical (observational) data.

I'm not sure what you mean by "Show me something that is proven to be a UFO piloted by aircraft", so I can't really respond to that. But let's not conflate the terms "evidence" and "proof" as though they were the same thing. There is plenty of evidence to consider in this subject, and while it proves nothing it is very suggestive.
edit on 24-6-2012 by Orkojoker because: (no reason given)


A UFO observation is empirical data that there is something unknown to the general public flying. It is not empirical data for Alien beings. I am sorry you can not understand the difference. Aliens is speculation on actual data, there is no data for Alien beings. So let's reword my last statement, show me something that is proven to be real (not a hoax) and the evidence suggests it is Alien in nature. There is nothing. There is no empirical evidence for alien beings. Something unknown is not evidence for aliens.



posted on Jun, 25 2012 @ 12:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
reply to post by Orkojoker
 


Because logically it can not be both. It has to be one, you do not have to know their mind and choose the "right" one, but logic dictates it must be one or the other. Your refusal to choose one for a thought experiment is due to the fact that you understand the moment you choose one logic will refute that possibility. Then if you choose the other logic will refute that possibility. If both are illogical, and logic dictates one must be true, then logically the only conclusion is that no alien species are visiting Earth.
So lets say you are from the planet Vulcan. We humans do not comprehend your alien thinking. Your thought experiment has a very narrow set of parameters while there could be infinite number of reasons for a visitation. You also make assumptions about their technology and then base all your logic on those assumptions.



posted on Jun, 25 2012 @ 12:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Orkojoker

Originally posted by GiodanoBruno

You and I will never know if we are the pinnacle of the universe. Never.. So why think about it. Get it?



No, I don't quite get it. You see no point in contemplating any notion that you don't think you'll ever get a definite answer to? You're not into philosophy then?

If we do try to think about our likely place in the Universe compared to that of other intelligent civilizations, there are only a few options regarding our relative technological abilities. Maybe we are at the forefront of advancement, and 98 percent of the other civilizations are young and primitive by comparison. On the other hand, we might be "newborns" so to speak, one of the least sophisticated civilizations in existence. There's also the possibility that we occupy some little spot on the vast spectrum between these two extremes.

If we are approximately in the middle, then it seems not-too-far-out to suppose that there are civilizations out there far in advance of us. The Universe is a very old thing. How far ahead could they potentially be without things getting "ridiculous" for you? Hundreds of years? Thousands? Is one million years really that much of a stretch? Especially if we are not only in the middle, but in the low end of the middle - or in the low end of the whole spectrum.

This kind of speculation may get us to a solid conclusion, but it can allow us to clarify the possibilities and their potential implications.



There is nothing to contemplate(philosophy) about aliens or us mastering space travel. Talking about some advance alien civilization is based on "imagination" and us passing our moon is delusional blind "hope".

Imagination and hope should never be aloud to run rampant with one's intellect. Get it?

You see how you use the words "maybe or approximately" ,, always in future tense(advanced tense)


False hope buddy,,false hope



posted on Jun, 25 2012 @ 12:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by ZetaRediculian

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
reply to post by Orkojoker
 


Because logically it can not be both. It has to be one, you do not have to know their mind and choose the "right" one, but logic dictates it must be one or the other. Your refusal to choose one for a thought experiment is due to the fact that you understand the moment you choose one logic will refute that possibility. Then if you choose the other logic will refute that possibility. If both are illogical, and logic dictates one must be true, then logically the only conclusion is that no alien species are visiting Earth.
So lets say you are from the planet Vulcan. We humans do not comprehend your alien thinking. Your thought experiment has a very narrow set of parameters while there could be infinite number of reasons for a visitation. You also make assumptions about their technology and then base all your logic on those assumptions.


Wrong, you are simply parroting the common "we dont think like aliens" line. I have carefully avoided this. It must be one or the other, they either wish to remain hidden, or they do not care if they remain hidden. This has nothing to do with me trying to figure out their motives or assigning human motives to them. If you do not understand how only one of those can be true you need to do some reflecting.

The only assumption I make is that they posess superior technology, do you think we posess the technology to travel to other solar systems or galaxies? If not then you agree with me. If you do, I can't help you.



posted on Jun, 25 2012 @ 12:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
I did not say they must be always seen or always hidden. I said they must wish to remain hidden, or not care if they are seen. It can not be both, it must be one or the other. So pick one, or tell me how they can logically want to be hidden while not caring if they are seen.


well sometimes one occupant wishes to remain hidden and another does not. Occasionally a disagreement will ensue and there is a fight over the controls. one pushes the "hide" button and then the other pushes the "unhide" button. if it gets physical, other buttons may be pushed accidentally. I know, I know...why would they come all this way just to have a silly argument?



posted on Jun, 25 2012 @ 01:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
The only assumption I make is that they posess superior technology, do you think we posess the technology to travel to other solar systems or galaxies? If not then you agree with me. If you do, I can't help you.


That asumption is what you base everything on.

do I think we can make it to other galaxies? Not right now.

I dont agree with you.

I am certainly not interested in your help for anything since my logic is far superior.



posted on Jun, 25 2012 @ 01:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by ZetaRediculian

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
The only assumption I make is that they posess superior technology, do you think we posess the technology to travel to other solar systems or galaxies? If not then you agree with me. If you do, I can't help you.


That asumption is what you base everything on.

do I think we can make it to other galaxies? Not right now.

I dont agree with you.

I am certainly not interested in your help for anything since my logic is far superior.

How is your logic superior. They can get here with their technology. We can not get there with ours.
Your logic says we have superior technology. Where is there any logic?

Tell me the logic of how they can do what we can't and yet you believe our technological abilities surpass their own. I can't wait to hear this.



posted on Jun, 25 2012 @ 01:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by ZetaRediculian

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
I did not say they must be always seen or always hidden. I said they must wish to remain hidden, or not care if they are seen. It can not be both, it must be one or the other. So pick one, or tell me how they can logically want to be hidden while not caring if they are seen.


well sometimes one occupant wishes to remain hidden and another does not. Occasionally a disagreement will ensue and there is a fight over the controls. one pushes the "hide" button and then the other pushes the "unhide" button. if it gets physical, other buttons may be pushed accidentally. I know, I know...why would they come all this way just to have a silly argument?



Thank you for bringing comedy into this and displaying how rediculous it is to postulate anything other than what I say. I'm glad we are in agreement.



posted on Jun, 25 2012 @ 01:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
Wrong, you are simply parroting the common "we dont think like aliens" line. I have carefully avoided this. It must be one or the other, they either wish to remain hidden, or they do not care if they remain hidden. This has nothing to do with me trying to figure out their motives or assigning human motives to them. If you do not understand how only one of those can be true you need to do some reflecting.


So I reflected and I think you are silly. Now I am parroting the "you are an idiot" line. Lets say sighting 'A' was an alien craft of unknown origin. Where did it come from? How did it ge here? Nobody knows. if they are ET, can they get here from there? if they have superior tech I guess they could since it is beyond our current understanding.

stating they "wish to remain hidden" is ABSOLUTELY assinging human motivation to something that is completely unknown and is ABSOLUTELY 100% ridiculous.



posted on Jun, 25 2012 @ 01:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by ZetaRediculian

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
Wrong, you are simply parroting the common "we dont think like aliens" line. I have carefully avoided this. It must be one or the other, they either wish to remain hidden, or they do not care if they remain hidden. This has nothing to do with me trying to figure out their motives or assigning human motives to them. If you do not understand how only one of those can be true you need to do some reflecting.


So I reflected and I think you are silly. Now I am parroting the "you are an idiot" line. Lets say sighting 'A' was an alien craft of unknown origin. Where did it come from? How did it ge here? Nobody knows. if they are ET, can they get here from there? if they have superior tech I guess they could since it is beyond our current understanding.

stating they "wish to remain hidden" is ABSOLUTELY assinging human motivation to something that is completely unknown and is ABSOLUTELY 100% ridiculous.


Ok now you show you have zero capabilities for a logical discussion, superior logic indeed.

You assigned sighting A to be an alien craft. Why does a UFO have to be an alien craft? It doesn't. It could be a top secret military craft. It could be a persons mind playing tricks. You show your bias by forcing sighting A to be an alien craft.

Also I am surprised your superior logic did not understand I never stated they wish to remain hidden. I stated only one can be true, either they wish to remain hidden, or they do not care if they remain hidden. Or do you think they wish to remain hidden all the while not caring? This is not assigning them any property or evaluating motives, it is simple logic. Two opposite things can not both be true. I can not desire to live only in America while desiring to live anywhere except America. That is simple logic and has nothing to do with my motives.

Now how about we go to my question which you completely ignored. You stated Aliens can get here, we can not travel the distances they can, yet you said they do not have superior technology. So please explain to me with your superior logic how they can achieve with lesser technologies things we can not dream of achieving today.



posted on Jun, 25 2012 @ 01:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by ZetaRediculian

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
The only assumption I make is that they posess superior technology, do you think we posess the technology to travel to other solar systems or galaxies? If not then you agree with me. If you do, I can't help you.


That asumption is what you base everything on.

do I think we can make it to other galaxies? Not right now.

I dont agree with you.

I am certainly not interested in your help for anything since my logic is far superior.

How is your logic superior. They can get here with their technology. We can not get there with ours.
Your logic says we have superior technology. Where is there any logic?

Tell me the logic of how they can do what we can't and yet you believe our technological abilities surpass their own. I can't wait to hear this.


WHAT? Why don't you draw your logic tree out and post it here?
A: there is a sighting
B: Hypothesis 1: They are Aliens from another galaxy
C: Can they get here from there?
D: If they are from another galaxy and they got here, yes.
E: what kind of tech do they have? Unknown.
F: Why would they allow themselves to be seen? Unknown.
G: Does some dude from the internet have it all figured out? not even a little bit.



posted on Jun, 25 2012 @ 01:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by ZetaRediculian

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by ZetaRediculian

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
The only assumption I make is that they posess superior technology, do you think we posess the technology to travel to other solar systems or galaxies? If not then you agree with me. If you do, I can't help you.


That asumption is what you base everything on.

do I think we can make it to other galaxies? Not right now.

I dont agree with you.

I am certainly not interested in your help for anything since my logic is far superior.

How is your logic superior. They can get here with their technology. We can not get there with ours.
Your logic says we have superior technology. Where is there any logic?

Tell me the logic of how they can do what we can't and yet you believe our technological abilities surpass their own. I can't wait to hear this.


WHAT? Why don't you draw your logic tree out and post it here?
A: there is a sighting
B: Hypothesis 1: They are Aliens from another galaxy
C: Can they get here from there?
D: If they are from another galaxy and they got here, yes.
E: what kind of tech do they have? Unknown.
F: Why would they allow themselves to be seen? Unknown.
G: Does some dude from the internet have it all figured out? not even a little bit.


Why is hypothesis 1 Aliens? Let's run with it though, maybe you will actually answer my question this time, doubt it though.
1. Do they possess technology that allows them to get here? Yes.
2. Do we possess technology that would allow us to get there? No.
3. Who possesses the superior technology? You answer this one. Tick Tock, Tick Tock.



posted on Jun, 25 2012 @ 02:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by ZetaRediculian

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
Wrong, you are simply parroting the common "we dont think like aliens" line. I have carefully avoided this. It must be one or the other, they either wish to remain hidden, or they do not care if they remain hidden. This has nothing to do with me trying to figure out their motives or assigning human motives to them. If you do not understand how only one of those can be true you need to do some reflecting.


So I reflected and I think you are silly. Now I am parroting the "you are an idiot" line. Lets say sighting 'A' was an alien craft of unknown origin. Where did it come from? How did it ge here? Nobody knows. if they are ET, can they get here from there? if they have superior tech I guess they could since it is beyond our current understanding.

stating they "wish to remain hidden" is ABSOLUTELY assinging human motivation to something that is completely unknown and is ABSOLUTELY 100% ridiculous.


Ok now you show you have zero capabilities for a logical discussion, superior logic indeed.

You assigned sighting A to be an alien craft. Why does a UFO have to be an alien craft? It doesn't. It could be a top secret military craft. It could be a persons mind playing tricks. You show your bias by forcing sighting A to be an alien craft.

Also I am surprised your superior logic did not understand I never stated they wish to remain hidden. I stated only one can be true, either they wish to remain hidden, or they do not care if they remain hidden. Or do you think they wish to remain hidden all the while not caring? This is not assigning them any property or evaluating motives, it is simple logic. Two opposite things can not both be true. I can not desire to live only in America while desiring to live anywhere except America. That is simple logic and has nothing to do with my motives.

Now how about we go to my question which you completely ignored. You stated Aliens can get here, we can not travel the distances they can, yet you said they do not have superior technology. So please explain to me with your superior logic how they can achieve with lesser technologies things we can not dream of achieving today.
A UFO that has no explaination could be an alien craft from another galaxy piloted by aliens with superior technology who wish to remain hidden and who wish to be seen at the same time for reasons unknown to us. to try to logically deduce that it could not possibly be aliens by assigning human motivation is silly.

"I can not desire to live only in America while desiring to live anywhere except America. That is simple logic and has nothing to do with my motives."

This makes no sense and has nothing to do with logic.

first "desiring" IS a motive:


mo·tive /ˈmoʊtɪv/ [moh-tiv] noun, adjective, verb, -tived, -tiv·ing.
–noun 1. something that causes a person to act in a certain way, do a certain thing, etc.; incentive.


second. desires change and is not an absolute. I can desire 2 women. I can desire to live in an America only but at the same time I also desire to live in France and where a scarf....I can't decide so I shall split my time and in the fair months I will go to Paris and during the off season I will live in America.



edit on 25-6-2012 by ZetaRediculian because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2012 @ 02:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by ZetaRediculian
I can desire to live in an America only but at the same time I also desire to live in France and where a scarf

edit on 25-6-2012 by ZetaRediculian because: (no reason given)


You continue to display zero logic. If you do not see why you can not simultaneously desire to live ONLY in America while also desiring to live in France you can not be helped. Two opposite things can not both be true. When you understand this let me know and we can continue this debate with actual logic.



posted on Jun, 25 2012 @ 02:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by ZetaRediculian

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04

Originally posted by ZetaRediculian

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
The only assumption I make is that they posess superior technology, do you think we posess the technology to travel to other solar systems or galaxies? If not then you agree with me. If you do, I can't help you.


That asumption is what you base everything on.

do I think we can make it to other galaxies? Not right now.

I dont agree with you.

I am certainly not interested in your help for anything since my logic is far superior.

How is your logic superior. They can get here with their technology. We can not get there with ours.
Your logic says we have superior technology. Where is there any logic?

Tell me the logic of how they can do what we can't and yet you believe our technological abilities surpass their own. I can't wait to hear this.


WHAT? Why don't you draw your logic tree out and post it here?
A: there is a sighting
B: Hypothesis 1: They are Aliens from another galaxy
C: Can they get here from there?
D: If they are from another galaxy and they got here, yes.
E: what kind of tech do they have? Unknown.
F: Why would they allow themselves to be seen? Unknown.
G: Does some dude from the internet have it all figured out? not even a little bit.


Why is hypothesis 1 Aliens? Let's run with it though, maybe you will actually answer my question this time, doubt it though.
1. Do they possess technology that allows them to get here? Yes.
2. Do we possess technology that would allow us to get there? No.
3. Who possesses the superior technology? You answer this one. Tick Tock, Tick Tock.


why is hypothesis 1 aliens? because it is hypothesis 1? Is there a reason it cant be?

who posses superior technology? it depends on what your assumptions are. define "superior" please. since you don't understand what "motive" means it is logical to assume that you dont know this either.

The question can not be answered since I have know idea how they got here. maybe it was an accident? It is really a bunch of unknowns so trying to apply logic like you are doing is futile and ....silly



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join