Ancient Aliens Debunked Documentary

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Harte
Sorry, the reality was Mount Everest was the tallest mountain. It took mans perception to catch up to the truth.

No the real answer is some other mountain that doesn't exist anymore, according to your logic.

After all, you can't prove it didn't exist.
Harte

Lots have changed over millions of years. Sad you don’t realize “truth” is always in flux and limited by our prospective of short lives. .

There's a difference between "evidence" and "truth."
The above continued attempt at another straw man argument shows that you are either unwilling or unable to understand that point.

originally posted by: neutronflux
I guess by using your logic Pangaea never existed.

Two straw men in the same post.
Not a record, but not a good sign.
BTW, are you under the impression that there is NO evidence for Pangea?

Harte

a reply to: Harte

Ok. Then what is this conclusive test being conducted that shows there is no life on planets outside our solar system? A test that reruns positively no life on planets outside our solar?

Again. You are projecting test results on tests that we don’t have the means to administer. Is that false.

a reply to: Harte

Smart aliens might live within 33,000 light-years of Earth. A new study explains why we haven't found them yet.

www.businessinsider.com...

According to the paper, all searches for extraterrestrial intelligence, or SETI, have examined barely a swimming pool's worth of water from a figurative ocean of signal space.

"We haven't really looked much," Shubham Kanodia, a graduate student in astronomy who cowrote the study, said during a NASA "technosignatures" workshop in Houston on September 26.

Because the only thing we have done is “listen” for 60 years and have not found extraterrestrial intelligence conforming to our preconceived notions, you thank we have an ample size to make an educated guess?

a reply to: turbonium1

How is this any different that any form of religion? There is no shred of proof for any religion, however there are more people that believe in something than are agnostic. Talk about the ultimate fake news!

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Harte

Smart aliens might live within 33,000 light-years of Earth. A new study explains why we haven't found them yet.

www.businessinsider.com...

According to the paper, all searches for extraterrestrial intelligence, or SETI, have examined barely a swimming pool's worth of water from a figurative ocean of signal space.

"We haven't really looked much," Shubham Kanodia, a graduate student in astronomy who cowrote the study, said during a NASA "technosignatures" workshop in Houston on September 26.

Because the only thing we have done is “listen” for 60 years and have not found extraterrestrial intelligence conforming to our preconceived notions, you thank we have an ample size to make an educated guess?

No. It's the default position, logically.

Harte

originally posted by: Harte

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Harte

Smart aliens might live within 33,000 light-years of Earth. A new study explains why we haven't found them yet.

www.businessinsider.com...

According to the paper, all searches for extraterrestrial intelligence, or SETI, have examined barely a swimming pool's worth of water from a figurative ocean of signal space.

"We haven't really looked much," Shubham Kanodia, a graduate student in astronomy who cowrote the study, said during a NASA "technosignatures" workshop in Houston on September 26.

Because the only thing we have done is “listen” for 60 years and have not found extraterrestrial intelligence conforming to our preconceived notions, you thank we have an ample size to make an educated guess?

No. It's the default position, logically.

Harte

No. Not if you don’t have a adequate sample size. And if you don’t have a proper sample size, you don’t have the information to make conclusive results.

Which is why it's the default position.

Harte

originally posted by: Harte
Which is why it's the default position.

Harte

That’s not how it works. There is no “default” position if you flat out don’t know. There is just the unknown and possibilities.

And you seem disturbed by the unknown, and are blind to the possibilities.

a reply to: neutronflux

I just need to point out after watching this back and forth, that you and Harte aren’t having the same conversation. You’re Speaking to the statistical probability of life existing in other planets. Harte is explaining that it’s fine to think that but there is, as yet, zero evidence to support it. Science doesn’t deal in negatives, you can only demonstrate evidence for something existing. You don’t show evidence it doesn’t exist. So from your initial claims, the onus is on you to support your own position with evidence demonstrating the existence of life elsewhere in the galaxy or visible universe.

a reply to: peter vlar

You

Harte is explaining that it’s fine to think that but there is, as yet, zero evidence to support it. Science doesn’t deal in negatives, you can only demonstrate evidence for something existing.

Now then, you name a test that we as humans have conducted on planets thousands of light years away that have given conclusive results there is no life.

Again, there is no “default” setting. If you don’t know, you cannot say if there is or isn’t life. The only thing we have done is listen for 60 years. How is that even a representative sample size.

Again.

Smart aliens might live within 33,000 light-years of Earth. A new study explains why we haven't found them yet.

www.businessinsider.com...

According to the paper, all searches for extraterrestrial intelligence, or SETI, have examined barely a swimming pool's worth of water from a figurative ocean of signal space.

"We haven't really looked much," Shubham Kanodia, a graduate student in astronomy who cowrote the study, said during a NASA "technosignatures" workshop in Houston on September 26.

Back to the planet example.

I still stand by my example:
In the past, we had a pretty good idea other stars had planets. In fact, it be right out stupid to assume our sun was the only star with planets. We didn’t have proof of other planets around distance stars until the right technological was developed. However, there was always other planets orbiting distance stars. The proof was always there, our perception had to grow to find the truth.

a reply to: peter vlar

www.businessinsider.com...

The group agrees with the well-known SETI astronomer Jill Tarter, who said in 2010 that it was silly to conclude intelligent aliens do not exist nearby just because we haven't yet found their beacons.

originally posted by: peter vlar
a reply to: neutronflux

I just need to point out after watching this back and forth, that you and Harte aren’t having the same conversation. You’re Speaking to the statistical probability of life existing in other planets. Harte is explaining that it’s fine to think that but there is, as yet, zero evidence to support it. Science doesn’t deal in negatives, you can only demonstrate evidence for something existing. You don’t show evidence it doesn’t exist. So from your initial claims, the onus is on you to support your own position with evidence demonstrating the existence of life elsewhere in the galaxy or visible universe.

Ultimately it comes down to what each individual considers to be "evidence". For those of us who have actually seen UFO, including some US Navy pilots and NASA in space, the evidence is there.

That some in denial cannot grasp that speaks only to their state of denial.

originally posted by: Salander

originally posted by: peter vlar
a reply to: neutronflux

I just need to point out after watching this back and forth, that you and Harte aren’t having the same conversation. You’re Speaking to the statistical probability of life existing in other planets. Harte is explaining that it’s fine to think that but there is, as yet, zero evidence to support it. Science doesn’t deal in negatives, you can only demonstrate evidence for something existing. You don’t show evidence it doesn’t exist. So from your initial claims, the onus is on you to support your own position with evidence demonstrating the existence of life elsewhere in the galaxy or visible universe.

Ultimately it comes down to what each individual considers to be "evidence". For those of us who have actually seen UFO, including some US Navy pilots and NASA in space, the evidence is there.

That some in denial cannot grasp that speaks only to their state of denial.

Would you care to explain how unexplained phenomena in the sky on Earth is "evidence" for the existence of other intelligent life light years from Earth?

Harte

a reply to: Harte

What I have seen with my own eyes but once, and what the Navy aircraft recorded, were not within the technology humans have. The flying objects the Navy recorded were not limited to the same aerodynamic laws we are, and there was no heat signature, suggesting their propulsion systems are far more advanced than ours.

Now it is possible that what I and the Navy saw were machines out of Area 51, the products of our black projects, but those are inspired by reverse-engineered craft post-crash here.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: Harte

What I have seen with my own eyes but once, and what the Navy aircraft recorded, were not within the technology humans have. The flying objects the Navy recorded were not limited to the same aerodynamic laws we are, and there was no heat signature, suggesting their propulsion systems are far more advanced than ours.

Now it is possible that what I and the Navy saw were machines out of Area 51, the products of our black projects, but those are inspired by reverse-engineered craft post-crash here.

Or, they could be supernatural phenomena, natural phenomena, hallucinations, mistaken observation, from our future... etc.
Any evidence for those?

Harte

a reply to: Harte

Or they could be craft controlled by aliens, travelling between perhaps dimensions or vast expanses of space.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: Harte

Or they could be craft controlled by aliens, travelling between perhaps dimensions or vast expanses of space.

There's a vast gulf of difference between "could" and "are."

Harte

a reply to: Harte

2 out of the last 3 posts, yours and mine, have begun with "Or". Thank you.