the forgotten smoking guns

a reply to: AlFeynman

ETH: extraterrestrial hypothesys, the most common and seriously overated theory to explain UFO sightings
IDH: interdimensional hypothesys, see the work of jacques vallee and john keel

a reply to: BeefNoMeat

very true, there is no proof that UFOs use gravitational engines

a reply to: humanoidlord

There's a strong chance that LIGO would detect if there was a 'warp ship' anywhere near the Earth.. and it hasn't. (and no, being able to 'cloak' the fabric of space time not to emit gravitational waves from your craft is not the answer). This is all just another form of modern mythology.

originally posted by: humanoidlord
a reply to: james1947

my theories are based in the ages old works keel and vallee

Neither of those august gentlemen are "ages old"...in fact they are barely older than I am...

originally posted by: BeefNoMeat
a reply to: james1947

ROFLMAO!!!!

Are they really? Chopped liver or not, he better have the lab time and/or IR&D funds to show something for those theories, no? MIT should ring him up. MIT Lightcraft - Silent, Model Plane

This is actually funny because I was playing (seriously "playing") around with idea and devices like that some 60+ years ago.

Or maybe he should ring up CERN??

Billions of dollars spent attempting to get two lousy protons to annihilate each at speeds approaching the speed of light; the world’s foremost engineering university can’t even envision technology beyond drones, but there are ‘theories’ and ‘working on nano scales’ of technology that usurps all that with a little warp drive? Ok, if you say so, but everyone else says no.

So...who's this "everyone else"? Perhaps you should do some reading and at least begin to catch up.

try starting here:
www.space.com...
www.askamathematician.com... an-light/

www.youtube.com...

These links talk about the Alcubierre Drive, this theory has been developed to the point that nano scale warp bubbles can be created, and, best of all, the energy requirements have been reduced from "the observable Universe" to the size of a Viking probe, and that work was done by NASA.

There is even a gentleman in Nebraska that is developing a "Warp Drive" using exotic materials (specially designed "circuit boards") who claims to get a (very) small amount of "movement"...his stuff need a lot of work...

So, there probably isn't many "informed" Physicists that will make the claim that "warp drive" isn't possible. And, many will also tell you it isn't practical...yet.

The star map, I can’t speak to how well vetted it is, but you’re absolutely correct in your assertion about the maths and probablities...problem is, how does one make such a giant leap of faith using the same fundamental maths (simple, irrevocable probability distribution functions) regarding ‘warp drives’/superluminal/FTL/_insert favorite parlance_?

What "giant leap of faith?" I done the work to prove that visitors from some 40 light years distant have been here, and abducted Humans. Using simple logic we can determine that FTL, and hence "warp drive" was used.

The actual star in question is probably a bit younger than Earth (it is (Zeta Reticuli 2) supposed to be on the order of 3 billion years or so), and since it would take something like 700,000 years to travel that distance in anything Earth has, we are free to conclude that the Zeta Reticulans have a faster method of travel. Given the distances, etc. we can also conclude that any practical travel method must be FTL, other wise the "visitors" could never return home. AND, if they launched a sub-light mission to the "map" they produced, it would have been caught up with and replaced with a faster ship (one using FTL).

Maybe CERN is a big cover to destroy the earth and MIT is filled with a bunch of teachers and no doers, but it really doesn’t fit too well with the second law of thermodynamics or the ‘path of least resistance’ or the law of conservation and many other tenets of science that would be the case. 100% that isn’t the case — because of science.

Just where in the name of ATS did you ever get the mistaken notions that any of that would be violated?

There are NO violations of ANY "tenet" of science!

originally posted by: humanoidlord
a reply to: AlFeynman

ETH: extraterrestrial hypothesys, the most common and seriously overated theory to explain UFO sightings

ETT: Something new...An upgrade to ETH. We now have the Extraterrestrial Theory. The hypothesis has been given more evidence and gained a modicum of proof.

When we don't confuse the paranormal, with the "advanced normal", we find that ETH (or ETT) explains everything quite nicely.

IDH: interdimensional hypothesys, see the work of jacques vallee and john keel

I will leave this to you for now...Although, you might want to actually render your own interpretation of IDH so that we all know where you are coming from in that regard.

Personally, it seen that both are confusing paranormal with normal. They seem to want to put ET in the same "box" with Casper (the friendly Ghost), and other inhabitants of the Hendecad. They also seem to tend to ignore that Human perception of events and objects change with time, so much so that old tales of "little people", Elves, fairies, even Angles are probably just different ways Humans have mistaken Extraterrestrials.

Anyway, I am truly curious about this IDH, but, retired or no (somehow, even in retirement; I have several projects to juggle), I don't seem to have the time to properly read several books to gain an understanding. SO...IF you could direct me to an overview, a white paper, or something online that I can knock out in about 30 mins I be appreciative.

originally posted by: humanoidlord
a reply to: james1947


"Do you not see a rather serious problem with this instance? Just how-in-the-hell did those ET's build anything? How do they manipulate tools?"

amazing! you somehow missed the entire point of my thread, despite litterally shoving it in your face:
ETH DOESN'T EXPLAINS ALL CASES! (and thanks to the similarity between all them, IDH also applies to the ETH sounding ones too)

Back to the topic at hand.

And, speaking of "hand": It doesn't matter whether we like ETH, or IDH all technological beings have to have a method of manipulating their environment. Humanoids use their Hand, that creature had a "cone" at the end of its arm, would seem kind of useless. And, thus not something that would evolve and remain. Just sayin'.

On the ETH/IDH debate: I think that ETH explains every instance of Extraterrestrials, even when they seem "spooky" and more ID in nature. It should be remembered that IF there is such a thing as alternate "realities"/"dimensions" then they too MUST have a functional "dimensional matrix" such as the 11 dimension matrix we enjoy. In other words; they are as solid an physical as we are, and can only visit by virtue of their technology.

By the way: the use of "dimension" in this context is probably linguistically incorrect, and the use of "reality" should be preferred. Again...just sayin'.

a reply to: james1947

While I agree with you that the ETH does explain many or most of the associated phenomena events, the thing that always trips me up is when other so-called paranormal events precede, coincide, or happen in the aftermath of sighting a UFO or the classic abduction experience.

In many instances you'll have bigfoot sighting in and around areas of UFO activity. Now when the interested parties, let's say BFRO and MUFON get a call, I'm willing to bet that most times they don't ask about anything other than the area they are studying. That, I think, is part of the problem. The UFO researcher doesn't car that the witness saw bigfoot that same night, and the bigfoot researcher doesn't want to hear about lights in the sky.

It's part of the obfuscation of this topic. Everyone is very quick to dismiss this or that aspect. Part of what draws me towards the IDH is two-fold. One: the more nuts & bolts descriptions of 'zooming off in a flash' could fit with moving to a different 'dimension', rather than breaking our known laws of physics; ie: speed of light (I'm sure you've heard the flatlander viewing a three dimensional object analogy, where said object suddenly appears, grows larger then shrinks and seemingly disappears into nothing) and Two: the other associated phenomena; as I mention, cryptid sightings, poltergeist activity. I can't tell you what might happen when a craft from another 'dimension' travels here; there may very well be some sort of bleed-over effect that catches things from -other- 'dimensions' and that is what we are also seeing.

Fascinating discussion!

Do you not see a rather serious problem with this instance? Just how-in-the-hell did those ET's build anything? How do they manipulate tools?

They are not human so we do not know of what they can do. The human thought process and knowledge may be too limited.

a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

exactly! i have told thomas that before and he just said that "the fields are too local to detect", wich is BS
rural america where LIGO is located is full of UFO activity, eventually they would detect something

a reply to: james1947

in ufology terms they are ages old, apparently mostly ufologists forget the research that was done before the 1980's!

a reply to: james1947

This is actually funny because I was playing (seriously "playing") around with idea and devices like that some 60+ years ago.

nice tottally real story dude!

So...who's this "everyone else"? Perhaps you should do some reading and at least begin to catch up. try starting here: www.space.com... www.askamathematician.com... an-light/ www.youtube.com... These links talk about the Alcubierre Drive, this theory has been developed to the point that nano scale warp bubbles can be created, and, best of all, the energy requirements have been reduced from "the observable Universe" to the size of a Viking probe, and that work was done by NASA. There is even a gentleman in Nebraska that is developing a "Warp Drive" using exotic materials (specially designed "circuit boards") who claims to get a (very) small amount of "movement"...his stuff need a lot of work... So, there probably isn't many "informed" Physicists that will make the claim that "warp drive" isn't possible. And, many will also tell you it isn't practical...yet.

the same scientists that tought that N-rays and poliwater were a real thing?
hmmmm.....

The actual star in question is probably a bit younger than Earth

wait a minute... did you just debunk yourself? how can a civilization have technology better than us, when they are "new arrivals"?

a reply to: james1947

ETT: Something new...An upgrade to ETH. We now have the Extraterrestrial Theory. The hypothesis has been given more evidence and gained a modicum of proof. When we don't confuse the paranormal, with the "advanced normal", we find that ETH (or ETT) explains everything quite nicely.

sure it is kiddo

I will leave this to you for now...Although, you might want to actually render your own interpretation of IDH so that we all know where you are coming from in that regard. Personally, it seen that both are confusing paranormal with normal. They seem to want to put ET in the same "box" with Casper (the friendly Ghost), and other inhabitants of the Hendecad. They also seem to tend to ignore that Human perception of events and objects change with time, so much so that old tales of "little people", Elves, fairies, even Angles are probably just different ways Humans have mistaken Extraterrestrials. Anyway, I am truly curious about this IDH, but, retired or no (somehow, even in retirement; I have several projects to juggle), I don't seem to have the time to properly read several books to gain an understanding. SO...IF you could direct me to an overview, a white paper, or something online that I can knock out in about 30 mins I be appreciative.

its a very complex theory that can't just be explained in "one paper", you need to research

a reply to: james1947

have you ever researched john keel and vallee? to them it isn't as simple as "people arriving here from others dimensions" but illusions created by some powerfull enity from another reality!

a reply to: roadgravel

agreed, the ufo phenomena is very complex

originally posted by: humanoidlord
a reply to: james1947

the same scientists that tought that N-rays and poliwater were a real thing?
hmmmm.....

"hmmmm" indeed, you appear to be more than a bit confused. N-rays were a "thing" an gone before the time of any of the scientists mentioned, and, "poliwater" is a brand of high density polyethylene pipe. So...you were saying?

wait a minute... did you just debunk yourself? how can a civilization have technology better than us, when they are "new arrivals"?

No, I didn't "debunk" myself...it is perfectly reasonable for a 3 billion year old planet to have evolved as far, or even a bit farther than Earth. If you check out Earth's history, and all the near extinction level events that have occurred (and the frequency) you can begin to understand that Earth may be a bit retarded.

Ya know, it might help if you studied the ETH a bit more closely. You know, learn about planetary evolution, stellar class, and other related stuff.

originally posted by: humanoidlord
a reply to: james1947



"ETT: Something new...An upgrade to ETH. We now have the Extraterrestrial Theory. The hypothesis has been given more evidence and gained a modicum of proof. When we don't confuse the paranormal, with the "advanced normal", we find that ETH (or ETT) explains everything quite nicely."

sure it is kiddo

Well unless you have data/evidence to the contrary...I guess it remains a "proven" hypothesis.

its a very complex theory that can't just be explained in "one paper", you need to research

Yes, I'm sure it is a complex subject, but, I've seen a short paragraph that is a rather simplistic overview, I'm sure some could do better in several pages (less than 10).

Okay, firstly; it is not a theory, it is a hypothesis.
Second; I've seen subjects far more complex than what the overview I saw alludes to dealt with adequately in a "white paper".

And, I made the suggestion that you write a paper defining your interpretation of IDH, not for my benefit, but, rather yours. I find it quite helpful to actually write (articulate) my ideas, that way I can refine and understand them better myself. Just a suggestion...

Yes, I've researched both Keel and Vallee.
That "powerful entity" isn't from another reality, its from this one! There is a long standing tradition of studying this "powerful entity" that exists in every single society that has ever existed on Earth, much of that tradition still exists today in various schools of thought. None of them teach "alternate realities/dimensions", but, that may just be a matter of perception. Although, much of those ancient traditions can be seen in today's science...like the methodology (which your system seems to lack).

a reply to: james1947

"hmmmm" indeed, you appear to be more than a bit confused. N-rays were a "thing" an gone before the time of any of the scientists mentioned, and, "poliwater" is a brand of high density polyethylene pipe. So...you were saying?

poliwater was an alleged form of water that behaved like a polymer that was found in the 60's, it caused a social panic, because some people thought it would turn all water in the world into polywater, just because that happened in a sci-fi novel apparently.
it was later found to be, just like the N-rays a error caused by impurities in the water and nobody ever talked about it again

No, I didn't "debunk" myself...it is perfectly reasonable for a 3 billion year old planet to have evolved as far, or even a bit farther than Earth. If you check out Earth's history, and all the near extinction level events that have occurred (and the frequency) you can begin to understand that Earth may be a bit retarded. Ya know, it might help if you studied the ETH a bit more closely. You know, learn about planetary evolution, stellar class, and other related stuff.

i already did, in fact until some times ago, i thought it was the correct explanation but then i saw all the stuff that din't fit and it fell in shambles

a reply to: james1947

Well unless you have data/evidence to the contrary...I guess it remains a "proven" hypothesis.

i tryed to discuss with you the "proof" that you gave but you can't see the obvious, so i stopped

Yes, I'm sure it is a complex subject, but, I've seen a short paragraph that is a rather simplistic overview, I'm sure some could do better in several pages (less than 10). Okay, firstly; it is not a theory, it is a hypothesis. Second; I've seen subjects far more complex than what the overview I saw alludes to dealt with adequately in a "white paper". And, I made the suggestion that you write a paper defining your interpretation of IDH, not for my benefit, but, rather yours. I find it quite helpful to actually write (articulate) my ideas, that way I can refine and understand them better myself. Just a suggestion... Yes, I've researched both Keel and Vallee. That "powerful entity" isn't from another reality, its from this one! There is a long standing tradition of studying this "powerful entity" that exists in every single society that has ever existed on Earth, much of that tradition still exists today in various schools of thought. None of them teach "alternate realities/dimensions", but, that may just be a matter of perception. Although, much of those ancient traditions can be seen in today's science...like the methodology (which your system seems to lack).

some day, maybe i will write a book but for now i am still in deep research mode, i ain't a seer so my theories are still developing

originally posted by: humanoidlord
a reply to: james1947

i already did, in fact until some times ago, i thought it was the correct explanation but then i saw all the stuff that din't fit and it fell in shambles

What didn't fit?