What are the Scientific Criteria for an Extra-terrestrial object or sample?

Using Neil DeGrasse Tyson's logic as a model, it's not unreasonable to think that if you were to allow him to analyze an authentic E.T. craft (or a piece of it) he would likely conclude:

'Boy that's interesting, but it's highly likely this is just a top-secret, highly advanced terrestrial craft made by our Govt."

It's also not unreasonable to think that if you were to allow Neil DeGrasse Tyson to analyze an E.T. entity (or a piece of it) he would likely conclude:

'Boy that's interesting, but it's highly likely this is just an undiscovered species we haven't found yet."

Under this kind of Scientific guideline, nothing can really be proven to be extra-terrestrial. Meteors fall from space all the time, yet they contain many elements found here. Does that mean something E.T. can't contain elements found here?

What are the Scientific Criteria for an Extra-terrestrial object or sample?

a reply to: NightVision

Something that has off-world elements?

originally posted by: NightVision
Using Neil DeGrasse Tyson's logic as a model, it's not unreasonable to think that if you were to allow him to analyze an authentic E.T. craft (or a piece of it) he would likely conclude:

'Boy that's interesting, but it's highly likely this is just a top-secret, highly advanced terrestrial craft made by our Govt."

It's also not unreasonable to think that if you were to allow Neil DeGrasse Tyson to analyze an E.T. entity (or a piece of it) he would likely conclude:

'Boy that's interesting, but it's highly likely this is just an undiscovered species we haven't found yet."

Under this kind of Scientific guideline, nothing can really be proven to be extra-terrestrial. Meteors fall from space all the time, yet they contain many elements found here. Does that mean something E.T. can't contain elements found here?

What are the Scientific Criteria for an Extra-terrestrial object or sample?

Folks like to talk about "isotope ratios." Elements that are shown to have isotopic characteristics not commonly used in manufacturing on Earth. But it still doesn't eliminate the possibility of an object being handmade in small numbers with very unusual alloys and isotopes.

Additionally, if we're talking about interdimensional or time-shifted objects or creatures, their planet of origin would be Earth. This Earth, just not this time or reality. It would be reasonable to assume that aluminum from Earth-X is going to have the same old isotope ratios we have here on good ol' Earth-Prime.

originally posted by: SecretKnowledge
a reply to: NightVision

Something that has off-world elements?

We're assuming that the elements we've discovered are common throughout the universe - iron, hydrogen, calcium, bismuth, lead, etc. The trick would be to find something different about them that make it impossible for them to have originated on Earth.

originally posted by: SecretKnowledge
a reply to: NightVision

Something that has off-world elements?

What would be an example of that? How would we analyze something like that if our equipment doesn't know what to look for?

originally posted by: NightVision
Using Neil DeGrasse Tyson's logic as a model, it's not unreasonable to think that if you were to allow him to analyze an authentic E.T. craft (or a piece of it) he would likely conclude:

'Boy that's interesting, but it's highly likely this is just a top-secret, highly advanced terrestrial craft made by our Govt."

It's also not unreasonable to think that if you were to allow Neil DeGrasse Tyson to analyze an E.T. entity (or a piece of it) he would likely conclude:

'Boy that's interesting, but it's highly likely this is just an undiscovered species we haven't found yet."

Under this kind of Scientific guideline, nothing can really be proven to be extra-terrestrial. Meteors fall from space all the time, yet they contain many elements found here. Does that mean something E.T. can't contain elements found here?

What are the Scientific Criteria for an Extra-terrestrial object or sample?

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR CREATING THIS THREAD!

This is sorely needed.

What type of evidence is acceptable enough for critics?

Likely these objects we are encountering (the specific ones on video) seem to be surveillance probes/drones. If you were to see an up close picture of them, you would think nothing of them. You would most likely see a ball, or a tictac, or another distinguishable shape. Nothing extraordinary. If you arent elaborating at all.. based on looks, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference at all between alien tech and our tech.

So im not sure why people are so focused on detail of camera footage.

The thing that distinguishes the objects is their performance and mode of propulsion.

And theres no way to prove that without capturing one.

Which good luck, it evades our EW capabilities and can run circles around missiles.

So at what point will skeptics be okay with making a deduction?

originally posted by: NightVision

originally posted by: SecretKnowledge
a reply to: NightVision

Something that has off-world elements?

What would be an example of that? How would we analyze something like that if our equipment doesn't know what to look for?

I'm of the opinion that the elements we've discovered so far have hidden properties that we don't have a good way of measuring yet. For instance, I suspect that every element has its own multi-dimensional properties. A gravity dimension for example that "pulls" an atom into itself. I also think our Periodic Table of Elements is missing big sections where there are elements that have less physicality and exist more in non-physical reality that we are unable to detect. If we could somehow measure those qualities, perhaps we'd find some "new" elements. Don't know. That's a pretty tall conjecture pile.

originally posted by: NightVisionWhat are the Scientific Criteria for an Extra-terrestrial object or sample?

Perhaps the latest thread starting with “Transcript & Commentary.......” may or may not answer your question....

Some of the transcript as follows.....RD is Richard Dolan LE is Lou Eli

“ RD: I want to ask you, because you just opened up a really interesting door. I’ve got a bunch of questions here I want to get to but you mentioned isotopic ratios. So are you suggesting, are you implying or are you stating, are you aware of artifacts that may be in the possession of military and government, private corporations, that are of isotopic ratios that are manufactured, but that are not from here?

LE: I am aware of exotic material that, so far, cannot be explained as being from here. Ultimately, I have to be very careful, I will not say emphatically that it’s not or that it is, because we need more analysis. And this is why initially, we entered into an agreement with a government element involving a CRADA agreement because there was enough there where it wasn’t just us, but there were other people that were pretty convinced that this material demands further research. And this research isn’t cheap, it’s expensive. You’re paying for a lot of man hours and a lot of equipment and expertise to look at something and you don’t conduct that type of analysis on tinfoil. That’s just not the way we do business.

And to get to that point, when you’re looking at something, let’s take this pen, for example. I know I use pen’s a lot in my analogies but they tend to be kind of convenient, I guess. So let’s take this pen, for example. Before you were to ever spend the kind of money going into any type of atomic analysis and research onto this pen, there are some things that you’re going to do. You’re first going to study – which is much less expensive – its physical properties and characteristics. You might look at its tensile strength, you might look at its physical properties, electrical conductivity, etc, right? Its melting points and whatnot. If you find enough uniqueness there, you might spend the extra money to begin to look at its chemical or molecular signatures, looking at the way it’s structured from a crystalline perspective and the way the molecules are organized and the way the chemical compounds relate to one another. And you can do further testing to determine whether or not this is something that we’re used to seeing.

If you find enough uniqueness there, then you go into the really expensive part of analysis, which is the atomic or nano-level analysis, where now you’re looking at the relationships of the atoms themselves. And looking at the electron valences to determine the isotopic structure and relationship. Now, why is that so important? Because in order for us now, even with today’s modern-day technology, what we called nano-engineering isn’t easy, it’s very, very expensive and there’s always some degree of imprecision. So, if you want to have an isotopic ratio of let’s say, 33%, 33%, 33%, you have to be very precise, on how you manufacture that and that level of precision costs a tremendous amount of money and resources and know how to do. And still yet, there are variances within that atomic structure. To get it perfect is, I’m not gonna say it’s impossible, but it’s almost impossible. And certainly, when you look at the temporal aspect of this, and when some of this material was collected, it becomes even more improbable that this material was naturally occurring on here. We know it was manipulated. The question is, how was it manipulated…

RD: I want you to clarify it and then I want to ask you something different, which is, I think, very important. I have a bunch of things I wanna ask. But it sounds like you are stating that you are aware of studies that at least currently, seem to indicate that there are technologically sophisticated materials with isotopic ratios that we don’t know how to explain. Is that is that fair?

LE: It is fair and furthermore, I’ll tell you that I personally briefed senior elements within the DoD construct on that material so it’s not just what I believe. That was actually briefed.

RD: Now, these materials, are these large, are these small, are we talking about part of a craft or we talking about something different that’s not recognizable? Or is it recognizable?

LE: Umm, well..great question, Richard. Let me take a pass on that one, only because I, I…”

originally posted by: Blue Shift
We're assuming that the elements we've discovered are common throughout the universe - iron, hydrogen, calcium, bismuth, lead, etc. The trick would be to find something different about them that make it impossible for them to have originated on Earth.

If hydrogen, helium and lithium weren't as common throughout the universe as they are locally there'd be no observable universe.

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

You see the problem with that, and im not saying you would do this... is that people will automatically take that and say..

"Just because we didnt make it, and we have never seen that on earth before, doesnt mean its extraterrestrial. There's new species of animals discovered every day. It could very well be something we just havent discovered here yet"

I guarantee there will be people that say that ^

That is what is SO frustrating. At what point does it become undeniable?

Then again.. theres people who still think the earth is flat. So I guess there is no answer to that,

originally posted by: Lucidparadox
a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Just because we didnt make it, and we have never seen that on earth before, doesnt mean its extraterrestrial. There's new species of animals discovered every day. It could very well be something we just havent discovered here yet"

Your point is valid in that new creatures are being discovered all the time. As far as elements go.....no one from my readings have challenged perhaps that these exotic elements could come from within and under the crust of our own planet. For instance, on the surface crust of our planet there are “Rare Earth” elements found only in certain locations of the planet. We use these elements for all sorts of electronics etc....Elements for flying craft can just as well come from “Inner Rare Earth” elements mining. Perhaps there is a secret and newer Periodic Table with many other elements only known to a select group of people for national security purposes of course.

Speculation on my part of course

originally posted by: Lucidparadox
a reply to: Ophiuchus1

That is what is SO frustrating. At what point does it become undeniable?

That's exactly what I'm trying to root out. I don't know that there's any true way to verify anything as being extra-terrestrial at this point in time with our technology.

Could this be a factor in the U.S. Govt's decision to move so slowly on the public relations end of the UFO topic?

originally posted by: NightVision
That's exactly what I'm trying to root out. I don't know that there's any true way to verify anything as being extra-terrestrial at this point in time with our technology.

If there are super heavy elements in a significant sample quantity with highly stable isotopes that we cannot create on earth at this time due to technological restraints that would be a very good indicator.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: NightVision
That's exactly what I'm trying to root out. I don't know that there's any true way to verify anything as being extra-terrestrial at this point in time with our technology.

If there are super heavy elements in a significant sample quantity with highly stable isotopes that we cannot create on earth at this time due to technological restraints that would be a very good indicator.

Let me ask you this: Do think it's possible that the U.S. Govt has created something 'like' this somewhere within the compartmentalized/classified confines of the Military Industrial Technical Complex?

Elemental composition, radiation readings, propulsion engineering, biological residue, data interfacing, etc.

Of course, saying "this obviously didn't come from Earth" isn't much to work with because it narrows down the list to the other 99.9999% of the universe that we have never been to. It doesn't help us strategize our approach to classifying or reproducing such technology for our own purposes. Still a complete mystery and possibly a lethal one.

originally posted by: NightVision
Let me ask you this: Do think it's possible that the U.S. Govt has created something 'like' this somewhere within the compartmentalized/classified confines of the Military Industrial Technical Complex?

A highly stable super heavy element? No. You need an operating fusion reactor, we don't have one.

originally posted by: Blue Shift

originally posted by: SecretKnowledge
a reply to: NightVision

Something that has off-world elements?

We're assuming that the elements we've discovered are common throughout the universe - iron, hydrogen, calcium, bismuth, lead, etc. The trick would be to find something different about them that make it impossible for them to have originated on Earth.

What makes you think we have not only found every single possible natural element in existence but that we also found them all on one little mote of dust in this vast universe.

originally posted by: Lucidparadox
That is what is SO frustrating.

Do you know what is more frustrating? The fact that they would be right.


That's why I never use absolutes, I think in terms of percentage, so if some very unusual object or creature with unique characteristics, not shared with any know object or creature from Earth, would appear, I would consider it, for example, 80% likely to be from outside our planet.

And I think it's the best way to look at it.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: NightVision
Let me ask you this: Do think it's possible that the U.S. Govt has created something 'like' this somewhere within the compartmentalized/classified confines of the Military Industrial Technical Complex?

A highly stable super heavy element? No. You need an operating fusion reactor, we don't have one.

Highly speculative, but John Lear said that according to what Lazar told him, Element 115 was the 'fuel source' for the alleged craft he worked on. The 115 would be placed into a chamber, then bombarded w photons, which would decay the 115 into 116 and throw off anti-matter. This anti-matter would then supply the energy for the gravity generators. I know zero about physics/elements, but I've always wondered if that makes any sense to someone who does.

originally posted by: NightVision

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: NightVision
Let me ask you this: Do think it's possible that the U.S. Govt has created something 'like' this somewhere within the compartmentalized/classified confines of the Military Industrial Technical Complex?

A highly stable super heavy element? No. You need an operating fusion reactor, we don't have one.

Highly speculative, but John Lear said that according to what Lazar told him, Element 115 was the 'fuel source' for the alleged craft he worked on. The 115 would be placed into a chamber, then bombarded w photons, which would decay the 115 into 116 and throw off anti-matter. This anti-matter would then supply the energy for the gravity generators. I know zero about physics/elements, but I've always wondered if that makes any sense to someone who does.

If you really want to know, real phsycists like Stanton Friedman, Dr. David L. Morgan, and Tom Mahood know for sure that Lazar is not a real physicist because what you just wrote there and lots of other Lazar claims are complete nonsense from a physicist's perspective. Physicist Dr. David L. Morgan wrote a detailed review of Lazar's claims:

Lazar Critique by Dr. David L. Morgan

After reading an account by Bob Lazar of the “physics” of his Area 51 UFO propulsion system, my conclusion is this: Mr. Lazar presents a scenario which, if it is correct, violates a whole handful of currently accepted physical theories. That in and of itself does not necessarily mean that his scenario is impossible. But the presentation of the scenario by Lazar is troubling from a scientific standpoint. Mr. Lazar on many occasions demonstrates an obvious lack of understanding of current physical theories. On no occasion does he acknowledge that his scenario violates physical laws as we understand them, and on no occasion does he offer up any hints of new theories which would make his mechanism possible. Mr. Lazar has a propensity for re-defining scientific terms, and using scientific language in a confusing and careless way. For these reasons, I don’t feel that Lazar’s pseudo-scientific ramblings are really worthy of any kind of serious consideration.

In regard to your OP questions, we would use the scientific method. In science, it's not possible to prove anything to 100% certainty. Science always allows the introduction of new evidence which could falsify currently accepted scientific theories. So let's say an abductee follows Tyson's advice to steal the ashtray from the flying saucer, and he gives it to Tyson for analysis. Let's say Tyson finds the isotope ratios don't occur naturally on Earth. That doesn't prove it's extraterrestrial, but it might warrant further investigation to see if one can find processes that have produced such an isotope ratio. Then there's the barrier that you can only search known sources, which means classified military applications are still unknown.

For a creature claimed to be ET, that might give a more definitive answer if we could take a DNA sample and analyze that. It may be possible to show with a high probability whether the DNA is related to life on Earth or not. It would take a nearly impossible freakish coincidence for the aliens to have DNA resembling ours.

Personally I think something like this would be fairly convincing but I'd expect them to eventually communicate if they got this far: