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.


Report: Invisible alien probes “could already be” in our solar system

page: 2
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 12:22 PM
Alien Probe?

by Patrick Huyghe

In late 1991, astronomers may have detected an extraterrestrial space probe in near Earth space. Who makes such a startling statement? Some wild-eyed UFO believer? A renegade scientist? A tabloid psychic? No, not at all. His name is Duncan Steel.

Who is Steel, you wonder? I'll quote from the jacket of his new book, Rogue Asteroids and Doomsday Comets (Wiley, 1995): "Duncan Steel, Ph.D. is a research astronomer at the Anglo-Australian Observatory and a research fellow at the University of Ad elaide, Australia. A world renowned authority on the comet, hazard, he has served on both the Detection Committee and the Intercept Committee created by NASA to assess the threat of comet and asteroid collisions and investigate technologies to avert such impacts." Not only that, but Steel is thought of as a "longtime skeptic" and "as someone who almost invariably has his facts right," according a reviewer in an Australian magazine (Colin Keay in The Skeptic, Vol 15, No.3, 1995).

So how did Steel come to his startling conclusion? Here's the scoop. On Nov. 6, 1991 Jim Scotti using the Spacewatch telescope at Kitt Peak in Arizona discovered a body which he initially described as a "fast moving asteroidal object," a month befo re its closest approach to the Earth. Later, the object's heliocentric orbital elements suggested instead that "the object might be a returning spacecraft." As the approximately 30-foot object, now labeled 1991 VG, neared the Earth, astronomers at the Eur opean Southern Observatory tracked it and found strong, rapid brightness variations suggestive of reflections from a rotating spacecraft.

His curiosity piqued, Steel decided to investigate the different probabilities for the nature of this object, according to his account "SETA and 1991 VG," published in The Observatory (Vol. 115, pp. 78-83, 1995). "SETA," by the way, stands for "Search for Extra-Terrestrial Artifacts" within our Solar System. Steel first wondered whether the object could be a returning spacecraft, given those brightness variations and its very Earth-like orbit. But he found that none of the handful of man-ma de rocket bodies left in heliocentric orbits during the space age have purely gravitational orbits returning to the Earth at that time. Besides, if 1991 VG was a man-made rocket body, then its return to our vicinity and its accidental detection by Spacew atch was, Steel calculated, a very unlikely event, on the order of one in 100,000 per year.

So could it be a natural body, Steel then asked himself? One factor that strongly argued against this interpretation was the light variation the object exhibited, which resembled those of rotating artificial satellite trails seen in wide field astronomic al photographs. The second factor is that the object's pre-encounter orbit of 1991 would have made it unstable in close approaches to the Earth on a time scale measured in millennia. This means, that if it is an asteroid, it would have recently arrived in that orbit, which is, Steel states, very unlikely.

Therefore, concludes Steel, we have to seriously consider the possibility that this object has "an alien genesis." Given our meager surveillance of near-Earth objects, there is little chance that objects of this kind would have been spotted in the past. There is nothing here, in other words, that would contradict the alien probe hypothesis, says Steel.

Steel's probability analysis does not end here. He goes on to tackle an issue that not doubt made his colleagues pale. Was 1991 VG under control or making a random passage by the Earth, he asks? Since only "about one in 50 objects passing randomly within 0.022 AU have perigee heights as low as 0.0031 AU," Steel thinks there is a "possibility that it was a singular alien space probe on a controlled reconnaissance mission."

Steel ends his surprising analysis on a cautious note, however. His personal bias, he states, is that 1991 VG is really a man-made artificial object. But if it was, he concludes, then it's observation was really an incredible fluke. So much so, in fact, that scientists, he says, should "consider the possibility of some other origin for it."

All in all, it's quite an amazing piece of work. But I can't help but wonder if he's being serious. After all, it does appears in an April issue. Nobody likes to be a fool.

On the other hand, Steel is not the kind of scientist who pulls his punches. In his new book about the threat that asteroids and comets pose to life on Earth, he speculates that Stonehenge was originally erected during a period of intense celestial bombar dment--some perhaps of Tunguska-like force--about 5,000 years ago. Stonehenge's purpose, he ventures, was "to monitor meteor rates in order to predict when storms were due." Steel doesn't expect this hypothesis to be warmly welcomed by anthropologists and antiquarians. Nor will SETI astronomers take kindly to the notion that an alien probe may have performed a reconnaissance mission of Earth in 1991. Of course, human-built space probes have done just that in our solar system for the past quarter century. Why couldn't someone out there be taking a peek at us?

Pretty cool. I think there may be probes from some place out there, billions of years is a long time.

edit on 17-7-2013 by RUFFREADY because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 12:22 PM
reply to post by shaneslaughta

Your opinion is of course valid.

Here's the thing. Some things aren't possible according to the tried and tested laws of physics. But, here's the best part about science, that can and will be updated when we discover something new. But until we can test it, we have to go with what we have.

In 1800, the atom was the smallest unit of matter, that's it, nothing smaller, just the atom. Then, scientists who had no reason to doubt the science, going about the scientific method, cracked it open and discovered, wait, no, the atom is made of neutrons and protons inside, with electrons equal to the number of protons, circling the nucleus of neutrons and protons.

So then we're left with electons and protons being the smallest unit of matter, they make up atoms. Then, of course, we started smashing them together, and what do we find? antiparticles, gluons, bosons, and whole zoo of new particles.

posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 12:25 PM
reply to post by ImpactoR

Also I am not saying we need to turn unproven theories into facts, I find this whole argue meaningless. I am clearly talking about more-open mind by the main stream science, that's it!

what mainstream science is close minded? That's my point, that's what you said, and it's untrue, we wouldn't have most of the discoveries of the last century if mainstream science wasn't objective and open minded. In fact, you simply can't perform ANY science without being objective.

Now if you want to talk about peoples misconceptions about science, your argument might make sense, but if you are talking about actual trained scientists performing experiments (which you clearly were) you are wrong.

And honestly, if I was getting paid to do this, I wouldn't be living pay cheque to pay cheque. so that's the thing? I don't agree with you, so obviously I'm paid to have that opinion?

wow, talk about objective.

posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 12:28 PM
There "could be" something to this story. This "could be" based on theory. I "could be" a genius, but I'm not.

My point is that it's a good read and fun to think about but it contains a lot of guess work and very few solid facts. Thanks, they "could be" right.

posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 12:35 PM
We figured out RADAR evading stealth technology... I am just spit-balling here, but wouldn't an advanced alien race be able to figure out how to evade our detection?

The Asgard figured it out on SG-1, after all

posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 12:47 PM

Originally posted by JimOberg

I can think of no 'a priori' reasons why this might not already be true, but the debate hereabouts is, do the things people report have anything to do with this hypothesis? Worth debating, for sure!

Jim were you visiting a bar in happy hour when you typed this?

If these probes are can these probes be the things that people report.......because that means they must have "detected" them in the first place........which of course they wouldn't be able to, as they are invisible and undetectable.

edit on 17-7-2013 by Logical one because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 12:54 PM

Originally posted by ImpactoR

...I am criticizing that part that cannot accept something may exist if they do not have it in plain sight, even when there are clues suggesting that possibility. I am not even talking about the 'invisible alien probe' because there is no clue about such things, though they may exist - even though one has the right to doubt when nothing suggests they do.

Also I am not saying we need to turn unproven theories into facts, I find this whole argue meaningless. I am clearly talking about more-open mind by the main stream science, that's it!

The purpose of science in not to blindly make up "what if" scenarios without any attempt to test those "what if" scenarios.

Science may create a "what if" scenario (a hypothesis) about a fact of nature that is not previously supported by the current scientific understanding of the time -- but then science TESTS that hypothesis. That's what science is, and that's what the scientific process is.

There are people in mainstream science who are theoretical thinkers -- the people who come up with these previously unsupported hypotheses to begin with (these "what if" scenarios). THOSE people are certainly open-minded, and they are in the mainstream of science. However, the scientific process then must be used in an attempt to test those hypotheses before they could be considered scientific theories.

Take Stephen Hawking for example. The understanding science had of a black hole is that nothing could ever escape it. However, Hawking said "wait a second -- "what if" our current understanding of black holes is wrong, and quantum physics tells us it is possible for a black hole to radiate mass and energy very slowly". He then found ways to mathematically test his hypothesis, and thus the theoretically tested existence of "Hawking Radiation" was born, which postulates that a black hole will eventually evaporate into nothing (albeit in trillions of years).

There are forward-thinking "outside the box" type people in mainstream science, always questioning the current understanding of science. That's what scientists do everyday -- they question what science is already telling them, and try refine what science knows.

As Carl Sagan says in his essay "The Dragon in My Garage" (which I linked in a previous post) about the scientific process:

...So you don’t outright reject the notion that there’s a fire-breathing dragon in my garage. You merely put it on hold. Present evidence is strongly against it, but if a new body of data emerge you’re prepared to examine it and see if it convinces you.

the only sensible approach is tentatively to reject the dragon hypothesis, to be open to future physical data...
(color emphasis mine)

Science has never claimed to know everything. I mean, the WHOLE POINT of science is to question things. That's what science does, and that's why the scientific process exists -- to question what we think we know about things.

As Comedian (and intelligent man) Dara Ó Briain has said:

"Science knows it doesn't know everything, or else it would stop.

edit on 7/17/2013 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 01:07 PM
If this alien probe was not meant to be found, we probably won't detect it. Kind of like a spy probe. Why should we be able to?? What law of physics says we must discover it?

I don't know of a science law that says we must be able to detect all alien probes. Perhaps there's a law that says we COULD, but it might require we have the power of a star. After all, humans "could" have detected extrasolar planets 500 years ago, IF they had the technology and hardware.

For all we know, this thing communicates not via radio, but via particles? Or maybe it communicates via a frequency we're not searching? Maybe it uses laser communication?

I would think this thing could just observe earth from out past Jupiter somehow. It would just watch what we "emit" and wouldn't need to bounce any signal off of us. Would it be undetectable?

Also.. maybe these "spy probes" are extremely small.

Science can do an incredible amount of "trickery". I wouldn't be surprised if it was undetectable, at least given our current level of technology and detection schemes.
edit on 17-7-2013 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 01:16 PM
What nonsense. And scientists are being paid for this rubbish ? There 'COULD' be flying pigs out there. There 'COULD' be strawberry flavored jelly monsters out there. Everything and anything is 'possible'.
These 'scientists' are just stupid and should learn to stop this runny poo from dribbly out of their mouths !

posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 01:18 PM
I would like to congratulate Jim Oberg for such an open minded thread (specially from a "nuts and bolts" person!).

Of course such an idea is possible and feasible.
We all know that top-level armies are developing/testing/using(?) light-bending equipment (sort of Harry Potter´s invisibility cloak) and crossing technologies.

If we can achieve that, just imagine what a centuries/millennia more advanced civilization can do.

If such a idea becames validated by TPTB/scientist that means disclosure is iminent and ETH is a strong possibility.

We are a blink of an eye from being fully aware

posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 01:41 PM
reply to post by sayzaar

There 'COULD' be strawberry flavored jelly monsters out there.

Now I'm hungry.

runny poo from dribbly out

Now I'm not so hungry.

posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 01:59 PM
reply to post by JimOberg

and? it is not and will never be your solar system. Same for the earth you think you own it? From what your race did you shouldnt even deserve to own anything. Any species from out there has the right (as from free will) to come and invade or cohabit here. You have no word to tell no right to even oppose. And if you do it will always be a selfish humancrapthing with as its best interested a pathetic and illusory comfort. Never will any of your reasons be "right - truer - objective - deserved".

Since it is probable that aliens came on earth it would be understandable that they would want to observe it from afar if they cant or dont want to come again. Whatever their goals, at their current level of technology it wouldnt be a hard task at all. For example there is a high presumption that the structure at Tunguska is really alien made and used to protect the earth from asteroid/space related ELEs. If they can achieve such a feat then surely stealth satelites are child's play. Of course nothing wil ever be sure until you witness it with your own senses. But this should be easy if you meet certain requirements.

posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 02:02 PM
Sometimes there's valid argument where absence of evidence is evidence for absence.

If for instance, I give you a drinking glass and tell you it's full of your favorite beverage, but to all appearances, and to every TESTABLE extent, the drinking glass appears to be empty, and remains empty regardless the testing parameters, the evidence, or lack there of, would then indicate the glass is indeed empty.

We could of course play these silly little probability games. It's a drinking glass, made specifically for the purpose of containing drinking beverages, so, there's a very high probability that it could be containing a drinking beverage even though it appears empty.

There's probability. There's possibility. Then, there's what is actually there according all testable parameters.

The glass is empty ... continue to test and speculate if you want.

I'm going to go make some coffee, and actually fill my glass with something more than possibility, probability or speculation.

edit on 17-7-2013 by Druscilla because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 03:55 PM
reply to post by Druscilla

Well, these sort of speculations do bring out good ideas for books and movies at least

This just out in paper back by David Brin

Gerald Livingston is an orbital garbage collector. For a hundred years, people have been abandoning things in space, and someone has to clean it up. But there’s something spinning a little bit higher than he expects, something that isn’t on the decades’ old orbital maps. An hour after he grabs it and brings it in, rumors fill Earth’s infomesh about an “alien artifact.”

Good to read while I drink my coffee

posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 04:37 PM
"Science has explained nothing; the more we know the more fantastic the world becomes and the profounder the surrounding darkness."
- Aldous Huxley -

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
- Arthur C. Clarke -

"The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination."
- Albert Einstein -

posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 05:04 PM

Originally posted by ImpactoR
That's what differs proper science from your so called 'scientists' that are nothing but people with some diplom and zero objectivity.

They're not all arrogant insecure retards with a piece of paper.

posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 05:08 PM
"Dr. Anders Sandberg, of the Future of Humanity Institute at Oxford University, suggests a more depressing answer to the question of why we have never seen evidence of extraterrestrial life, “Beyond a certain technological level, civilizations can spread not just across their own galaxy but across enormous intergalactic distances. There are millions or billions of galaxies from which a civilization could have reached us, if it were established early,” Sandberg says."

"The answer to why no one has contacted us yet may be simple - intelligent civilisations tend to wipe themselves out. "

2nd Paragraph above, is not exactly an unexpected outcome if there is a need to understand why we have never seen any evidence, yet the 2nd paragraph is something of a presumption based on Earth's historical record. You just know after reading the 1st paragraph, what the 2nd will say. We are still here despite everything, although at something of a crossroads with the technology to be able to annihilate everything.

Then there is the idea of the probes using camouflage, and having a 'threshold' before allowing any revealing of existence, all well and good, but that needs to be of a philosophy in a different dimension than ours, since we have sent stuff out willy nilly with no such sophistication, unless of course these alien civilisations did the same thing in their 'early days' . So one thing at least I do agree with, is that all explorations to other planets in our local should be looking for ancient artifacts akin to a Voyager or other lost in space vehicles.

posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 05:11 PM

Originally posted by azureskys

"Science has explained nothing; the more we know the more fantastic the world becomes and the profounder the surrounding darkness."
- Aldous Huxley -

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
- Arthur C. Clarke -

"The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination."
- Albert Einstein -

Yes, I like that Einstein quote. It makes everyone as free as a bird.
edit on 17-7-2013 by smurfy because: Te xt.

posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 05:11 PM
I've been saying it for years but the idea that they are "invisible" really kills the idea's legitimacy to a passerby.

Camouflage makes sense in a way but overall it wouldn't be a major concern unless they knew we had life here from their planet-based observations which is another part of the equation.

They would most likely only send out their probes after observing like we did to know just what they're looking for.

Also, they could have a Fleet of autonomous ships that send probes out searching for certain things rather then all encompassing probes.

posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 05:13 PM

Originally posted by phishyblankwaters
reply to post by ImpactoR

If something cannot be tested it doesn't exist? Lots of things one may not even imagine can exist and they may exist - if science doesn't accept this (correction: main stream science) - then this is pseudoscience! Or better change its approach.

Clearly you have reading comprehension issues. Science has gone about proving things that, when theorized, couldn't be proven.

I think you have completely missed ImpactoR's point. Go away and think about it for a while.

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3  4 >>

log in