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.

 

OK, so UFO's are REAL..now what?

page: 6
32
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 30 2008 @ 12:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Alter-Ego
 


Aliens from other planets, multi-dimentional beings, angels & demons... they're all the same in my opinion. Just different interpretations of different species. We all exist in the multiverse, but humans are only able to experience 3 dimentions.

That's my piece!



posted on Nov, 30 2008 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Heike
 


Nice post.

Let's look at one real and one fictional representation of an advanced sentient group visiting another planet.

We visited Mars. How did we do it?

1. We used the smallest possible probes which would be able to contain all the instruments needed to do surveying and sampling;
2. We did not use a stealthy system;
3. We did not visit in person.

The Starship Enterprise visited other planets and except for nearly crashing out of orbit NEVER had craft flying around in the atmosphere.

Any visiting alien species would:
1. Use the smallest, most economically feasible craft necessary to visit other star systems. Let me ask you, why are ALL fantasy depictions of aliens completely devoid of economic considerations? Because ANY large-scale visitations in giant ships, would break the budget of any Class II civilization.

2. Use Non-stealth probes. Why use stealth? It's not necessary, it's not testable, it's not viable. So all this talk of SECRECY is only out there because the ALIEN phenomenon seems stealthy, hiding behind atmospheric phenomenon, lights in the sky and mistaken identifications.

3. Any alien civilizations which might want to visit other planets would FIRST have to assure they would not be destroyed by planetary collisions, or gamma-ray bursts. This means they MUST have a complete duplication of their main planetary capabilities. Otherwise any group going out to explore might find their planet has had an extinction event when they return.

4. Cross-contamination by micro-organisms is a REAL, valid and compelling consideration. H.G. Wells was right.

These are only the top four requirements for a carbon-based, sentient, technology-based civilization who might attempt space-faring.

To summarize:
1. No large visits, economics;
2. No stealth;
3. Long dwell time before space-exploration can commence;
4. No visits in person by biological-entities due to contamination risk.

A couple minor concerns.

1. Just as on Earth, the concept of 'PRIME REAL ESTATE' exists. If Mars is not a thriving alien colony, then they are NOT here in our Solar System.
2. Robust Quarantine - The Galaxy is a vast expanse of mostly empty space. High radiation, Hard vacuum. Vast distances. Intense cold. Micrometeorite risks.
3. The Fermi paradox. It only would take a million years to colonize an expanse the size of our Galaxy. They're not on every planet yet, and Billions of years have passed.
4. Time Synchronicity.

The last one, Time Sync is one of the biggest barriers to any theory of Alien Visitation. Our technological civilization has existed for only a few thousand years. To sync up a visit with our technological phase, taking into account travel time to even the closest systems, would be nearly impossible.

For all practical purposes, these above factors make the possibility of visits to Earth NOW, by non-human, non-terrestrial entities an extremely small possibility. So small that any list of explanations would have it so far down at the bottom of choices so as to be negligible.

So, any discussion of Aliens being -here- in person, would have to solve and explain all these exceptional circumstances to be a viable, top-of-the-list explanation for any observations of what we call the ET-hypothesis.

en.wikipedia.org...

This does not mean that advanced sentient carbon-based live does not exist in the Galaxy or in the Universe.

It simply limits the chances they're coming here. (or even getting off their own planet)

Just some thoughts.

[edit on 11/30/2008 by Badge01]



posted on Nov, 30 2008 @ 01:21 PM
link   
reply to post by oinkment
 


In all fairness to history, descriptions of unknown things flying through the air always used the closes approximation in terms that the observer knew. I doubt that ancient man would look at something unknown that flies, and say "That looks like an airplane!" So, it was characterized as beasts (before wheeled transport), chariots/buggies (after wheeled transport), airships/zepplins (before airplanes, after balloons),and aircraft/spacecraft in the modern era.

It's not so much that the form has changed, the describing vocabulary has changed.



posted on Nov, 30 2008 @ 01:40 PM
link   
*SNIP*

I noticed you mentioned Star Trek, I'm a huge fan of Star Trek: TNG. In TNG it is known that Starfleet spies on planets to determine whether or not to make official contact with them. They even send some of our people disguised as aliens to live among the aliens in secrecy for years in an effort to determine if they are worthy of contact.

I want to comment on your other skeptic points but don't have the time now, will do later.

Mod-Note: Large quote removed. Please review this link:
Excessive Quoting vs. How to Quote



[edit on 30-11-2008 by Skyfloating]



posted on Nov, 30 2008 @ 02:00 PM
link   

I noticed you mentioned Star Trek, I'm a huge fan of Star Trek: TNG. In TNG it is known that Starfleet spies on planets to determine whether or not to make official contact with them. They even send some of our people disguised as aliens to live among the aliens in secrecy for years in an effort to determine if they are worthy of contact.


The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

Like many posters and Members of ATS I was once a fairly strong believer in the possibility of alien visitation. It was my interest which lead me to dissect the phenomenon. So it is inaccurate to call my post 'skeptic'(al).

I do not completely discount that non-terrestrials have visited Earth at some time. I just look at all the observable phenomenon that may lead one to speculate that 'aliens did it', or 'aliens are here' and the result of my dissection from the point of view of a fan of the ET hypothesis, is that I'm forced to conclude that this kind of explanation is VERY, VERY, VERY far down at the bottom of a list of MANY possible explanations, both prosaic and fantastical.

Why some people put Aliens at the TOP of a list of possibilities makes little sense.

Just for fun, here's some arbitrary numbers, just speculation.

1. Chance that a high strangeness sighting is due to terrestrial craft, terrestrial phenomenon, or even a Multi-billion dollar military based hoax to misguide our enemies is about 1 in 10.

2. Chance that this same sighting is a real-live non-terrestrial alien, by comparison is about 1 in 10e10, or ten decimal points less probable. (due to some of the points I mention above).

How do I come to that? If you use a conservative estimate of the Drake Equation and a strong feeling that evolution does not select for intelligence (over claws and teeth, say), there's only 1 chance in 10 of any COMMUNICATION-enabled sentients inhabiting any Galaxy and a much smaller chance that any of them could achieve the capacity to explore space outside their Low Orbit or their own Solar System.

Remember, too, the Drake Equation doe not predict Alien visitation, only the chance of COMMUNICATION over vast distances.

I personally, think that there are probably Millions of Sentient Creatures in our Galaxy. Just that virtually NONE of them can leave their planet at a time-frame parallel to our current technological phase.


As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.


[edit on 11/30/2008 by Badge01]



posted on Nov, 30 2008 @ 02:43 PM
link   
Why I believe in objects commonly called "UFO's"..???: Personal observation of them, twice. The interest started of course at a young age, hearing a story from my father, a former US Navy pilot. He encountered his on a flight near San Diego in the 50's. Bizarre story that cemented his belief in them. He never had reservations telling his story, which is cool.

What are they? I don't know. I don't have enough information to definitively answer that question.

"I don't know".....is a valid answer. (It's the CORRECT answer to your question, by the way) What I "think" they could be is irrelevant. It muddies the water, thinking globally. Until we have verification what they are...I'll just wait. But, something tells me I'll never find out, and I'm ok with that. I'll get by just fine.

It sure is fun pondering the possibilities though.



posted on Nov, 30 2008 @ 02:52 PM
link   
Lets also keep in mind there is no reason for ET to have human shapes, limbs etc. I find kind of silly to hear/see (fake?) fotos of ETs with "small" mouths. Why are mouths needed? Why not a body that resembles a blob which is a protective and natural shape for high pressure environments.

And like our clams and oysters why can't ET have evolved advanced abilities to exude exo-dura (shells) capable of resisting space vacuum, with embodied "circuitry" and even controlled quantum bio-processes enabling them to "bio-synthesize" superconductive organs as part of their natural evolution to E/M space drives? Just some thoughts.

[edit on 30-11-2008 by havanaja]

[edit on 30-11-2008 by havanaja]



posted on Nov, 30 2008 @ 03:20 PM
link   
I think UFOs are a combination of different things, between anomalies, military craft, independent or third-party craft (private businesses etc.) and ET/Beings are probably all happening.

I think the sheer size of our universe and the nature we've observed is proof enough that life exists outside our little rock, and I find it incredibly self-centered to believe that we are the only planet in the universe, or the first planet in the universe to contain life, especially considering that there are galaxies so old that we are recieving light that is *ahem* 250 million years old. And humans have been on Earth for... let's be very generous... 1 million years? Space is so massive it's impossible for numbers to do it justice, it is just out of our capability to understand just how massive and old it really is. Ok, so there's my rant for why ET must exist, and why (if the technology is possible) they most likely already have light-speed technology.

As for government/independently owned spacecraft, all the pieces exist, all the necessary technology for us to achieve incredible speeds (perhaps not light-speed) without harm to the pilot exists in public records, it's just been scattered to the point where only a few actually have put it together. It's there though, do your research and you'll find that it is actually more unlikely that no one has put together this type of technology. Oh, and Britain's 4 year plan to release all of their UFO files ends "at the end of 2012." That's no coincidence, and you're a fool if you believe it.

Beings from another dimension... it's a possibility, but I don't take it seriously, quantum physics is just getting started and what exactly a dimension is has yet to be solidly defined under scientific theory.

Anomalies/swamp gas/Chinese lanterns... it's kind of a toss up. Sometimes it really is just something stupid that you see. Ball lightning really does occur and swamp gas really does light up, go figure right? However, when it's doing circles around a jet, I think these explanations should probably be tossed out the door almost immediately.

K, I'm done ranting, hope everyone had a good Thanksgiving here in the US
, enjoy your Sunday!



posted on Nov, 30 2008 @ 03:27 PM
link   
Very Nice Post Badge01! - That must be why your a Moderator!

I learnt a lot on that one and I am also a subscriber to the Fermi Paradox as a explanation for lack of alien contact. Your right the odd's are too against than for alien visitation. I particulary liked your Time Sync bit that made a lot of sense.

To go back to the original post - UFO's are real but they are Unidentified Flying Objects - which means anything from your list rather than the Alien reason - hope that clarifies things for the OP.



posted on Nov, 30 2008 @ 03:35 PM
link   
reply to post by havanaja
 


Good point on the 'human shape' idea.

-Most- scientists and futurists will say that it makes sense to have a majority of sense organs in one area, thus a 'head'. Most say it makes sense for creatures who are designed to travel in space (with attendant hazards/requirements) to be:
1. Relatively small (under 5'8-ish)
2. Have arms or tentacles
3. Lack lower body specialization (no need to perambulate)
4. Have durable skin and uncomplex organ-systems (less to go wrong)
5. Self-healing capabilities

I might add other advantages would be:
1. Radiation resistant;
2. Slow metabolism but quick computational skills (or use of bio-mechanical augmentation;
3. Be entirely non-biological (i.e. android). (bio-systems seem to do best at self-healing, though, so maybe part bio-part android/mechanical).

On the idea of the poster above about 'vastness of the Universe', remember, with 10e21 stars in the Universe, you could have 1 sentient civilization for every 100 Galaxies, leaving 10e19 civilizations, BUT they would be SO SPARSE (large distance between them) that, like SPACE, the Universe would be deemed mostly EMPTY of life.

See the paradox? As you approach fantastically large numers, arguments based on 'numbers' and 'prevalence' rapidly become meaningless.

If there were only 1 sentient space faring civilization per million Galaxies, that would still mean there were 10e15 civilizations, but we'd never bump into them traveling everywhere we could for Billions of years.



posted on Nov, 30 2008 @ 03:52 PM
link   
Aliens and or advanced Beings.

I have looked at alot of info about this subject. And I think most UFOs are alien of origin or an advanced being native to this planet. Its obvious some UFOs are experimental military airspace tech, but there's no way they are all of those millions of sightings.

Anyone play Chrono Trigger for SNES? That games pretty much solidified my decision on whether reptites are real or not and if they are native to this planet.



posted on Nov, 30 2008 @ 04:15 PM
link   
most people believe in Alien life but they don't believe they are visiting us



[edit on 30-11-2008 by easynow]



posted on Nov, 30 2008 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by oinkment
 


Heh, thanks, but Mods are chosen based on some mysterious list of requirements and making good theories is probably not on that list.

I'm the first to admit that my theories are, in part, EXTREMELY anthropomorphic, i.e. based on what we know about sentient beings.

BUT, most of the 'beings' people report are also 'Humanoid' looking. IOW, no one that I'm aware has ever reported being abducted or contacted by an extremely -different- creature (like a Giant living spaceship like Maya on Farscape, or a race of beetles or bees).

Virtually -all- reported contactees describe 'human-like' creatures, or creatures based on Earth organisms.

Our Sci-Fi is pretty 'out there' but I don't know of any sci-fi creature that isn't based, in some part, on a earth creature, from a giant amoeba to a hive, to a Maya, to race of tree-creatures, or rock-creatures.

I'd expect, as Arthur C. Clarke and others have suggested, that true 'aliens' would be "stranger than we can imagine". Thus, almost all reports of 'aliens' have that 'tell' of being based on an Earth creature, be it Reptile, Insectoid, Mammalian, Birdlike or Amphibian.

I think one BIG error we make is in postulating that there are ANY pressures, evolutionary or otherwise, that select for Intelligence.

MOST pressures are towards bigger teeth, bigger claws, bigger size and more aggression. The only creatures that evolve intelligence are those WITHOUT such robust characteristics - it's their 'defense' toward the common evolutionary trend and thus, I think, would be rare and easily killed off.

Remember, the Dinosaurs dominated for Millions and Millions of years and the result was mostly bigger dinosaurs. Majungatholus dominated Madagascar uncontested for 50-60 million years and never got 'smarter'.

So if 'intelligence' is an accident and a defense mechanism, I think it's entirely possible that there are only a few sentients anywhere.

Where am I leading with this train of thought?

Though many people somewhat mindlessly parrot the adage about it being 'ARROGANT' to think we're alone, I actually think it's preferable to believe we are COMPLETELY ALONE in the whole Universe.

Why? Well, maybe if we took this idea to heart we'd get some small realization of how special and rare and wonderful we are, and how important it is we don't kill ourselves off.

We may be the Universe's one, best chance, and it has nothing to do with arrogance. In fact, it engenders a deep sense of Humility.


$.02



posted on Nov, 30 2008 @ 04:22 PM
link   
If you examine the Caduceus, it is a double-helix symbolizing DNA as well as health-care in general. It dates back millenia...how did they know DNA was a double-helix? The reptilian aliens, the same who imparted the knowledge of good and evil to Adam and Eve in Genesis are responsible for the imparting of all knowledge of civilization. The feathered serpent in Mayan cosmology, Culculcan is another feathered reptile god. Chinese verenate the dragon, another winged serpent. My belief is that the UFO's belong to these aliens who seeded this planet with Homo Sapien and have been silently standing vigil over civilization since its inception. We are the aliens and they are us.

Another reference to these all knowing aliens is what many consider a name for the first monotheistic belief system...Israel...osirIS, RA, ELohim.
Israel is just another name for the Pantheon of progenitor species that genetically engineered humankind out of their DNA and that of Homo Erectus centuries before the Bible was recorded and the Jewish people had developed an alphabet.



posted on Nov, 30 2008 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by checkitb4uwreckit

Originally posted by shauny
I lean more towards Time Travel, than i do creatures from another world.


but do you doubt that creatures can exist on another world?


Since we exist, we know it's possible for it to happen. But we have no idea how probable it is. It might be so improbable and such a lucky fluke that we might be the only time it ever happened. There's no way to know for sure, since we have no idea how life comes to be in the first place. How does a batch of chemicals turn into a living thing? Don't know.

The time travel notion has several things going for it.

1. We don't have to hypothesize about some unknown aliens out there. We know we exist. No need to try to explain the phenomenon with another unknown.

2. We know we're clever. We've figured out how to fly, how to travel in space, how to split an atom. If anybody can figure out a way to beat that speed of light limit, we can.

3. UFOs are the right size. Human sized. Not 1,000 miles across.

4. The most commonly reported "alien" is not shaped like a beetle or blob of good, or a clump of crystals. They look a lot like people.

5. The continued lack of good, definitive evidence in spite of many good sightings can be seen as a clue in itself. That clue is how can they be so efficient as to not make a tell-tale mistake? Possible answer: A time traveler can always go back and correct that mistake before it's made.

6. We have a very limited understanding of time, but current theories suggest that it's really more of an illusion, a convenience of perception, than a hard physical reality. Feynman equations don't even include time as a variable.

Of course, if you want to have your cake and eat it, too, I suppose one could consider human time travelers as "aliens," since they are not really of this earth (and perhaps evolved beyond us ordinary humans), or aliens as time travelers, since in order to bridge the incredible distances between planets, some kind of unusual trans-temporal travel would be necessary. Likewise, they all can be considered to be from another "dimension," since a different time is a different dimension.

At the moment, though, all of these things are only conjectural. It may be one of these things, or several, or something completely different we don't understand and may never understand. We don't know nearly enough about UFOs, time, space, or consciousness to make a determination.



posted on Nov, 30 2008 @ 05:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by skeptic_al
Did I miss something or what?
Every UFO info posted on this forum for as long as can remember is
Fake, Intentionally Deceptive, or has a earthy explanation.


Over the last 60 years there have literally be tens of thousands of sightings by people who are not liars, crazy, or prone to misinterpreting what they see. There has also been decent photographic evidence gathered of things flying around that are probably not secret government aircraft.

There is also a large core of mostly ignored anecdotal evidence by stable, honest people that includes testimony about extremely odd, weird and spooky stuff happening -- psychic events, time slips (including missing time), distortions in perception, etc. -- that are at the very fringes of what we can even understand.

Somebody mentioned Occam's Razor earlier in the topic. In this case, what is more likely -- that every single individual account, photograph, video, ground trace, radar track, etc., is mistaken, a hallucination, or a hoax? Or that one out of a thousand or so (maybe more, maybe less) happened exactly as the witness described it, thereby nullifying the possibility of the more mundane explanation?

Yes, people can be mistaken. But they can also accurately describe what they saw.
Yes, they could be black project craft. But what people have (assumedly accurately) described make that impossible for some sightings.
Yes, people can lie. But for the most part, people with nothing to gain and much more to lose tend to want to be truthful and helpful.

So that leaves us with a very, very small number of real UFO cases that are completely unexplainable and baffling. Encountering a real UFO is extremely rare, but after all this time, after looking at all the available evidence, we can say with about 99.99 percent assurance that they do exist. That's how far we've come in the last 60 years or so. I know it doesn't seem like very far, but there's no big hurry here to figure these things out. We have all the time in the world.

So, they're real. As for what they are, though... ???
???



posted on Nov, 30 2008 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Alter-Ego
 


I reckon there ancient ships if you look back India had a civilization ,that supposedly had ships that fit the descriptions of these UFO's and what nuclear weapons looked like as well so yep that my through check em out there call Valhalla's or something very similar



posted on Nov, 30 2008 @ 06:31 PM
link   
State what you think they are:

Several different entity types imho. From possible high atmosphere creatures to angelic like beings, passing through aliens. And we have their negation, which is man made falsifications to confuse the issue for the ordo ab chaos agenda crowd as well as possible black ops tech.

Give a brief explanation why:

There are more things in heaven and earth that dreamt of by your philosophy... Also, my own personal experiences in this area of UFO's have been plural and somewhat varied, making me think I saw more than one encounter type with more than one type of entity or technology. Meditation has lifted the veil slightly at a much more complex reality than I previously was awake to. Added to the NWO conspiracy which I think can be accepted as a given we have fertile ground for a complex phenomenology.



posted on Nov, 30 2008 @ 06:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Alter-Ego
 


I believe that ufo's exist. And I believe in extra terrestrials. I asked my dad one day if he believed in flying saucers and life on other planets. My dad was a very down to earth man. He told me that he just didn't see how we could be all there was in this huge universe. When I asked him what he thought that they looked like, he told me that he was sure that part of them had large heads with large almond shaped eyes because there were so many sightings that described them like that. I agree with Dad, I just don't see how we can be the only living beings in a universe as big as ours.



posted on Nov, 30 2008 @ 06:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Badge01

I think one BIG error we make is in postulating that there are ANY pressures, evolutionary or otherwise, that select for Intelligence.

MOST pressures are towards bigger teeth, bigger claws, bigger size and more aggression. The only creatures that evolve intelligence are those WITHOUT such robust characteristics - it's their 'defense' toward the common evolutionary trend and thus, I think, would be rare and easily killed off.

Remember, the Dinosaurs dominated for Millions and Millions of years and the result was mostly bigger dinosaurs. Majungatholus dominated Madagascar uncontested for 50-60 million years and never got 'smarter'.

So if 'intelligence' is an accident and a defense mechanism, I think it's entirely possible that there are only a few sentients anywhere.

Where am I leading with this train of thought?

Though many people somewhat mindlessly parrot the adage about it being 'ARROGANT' to think we're alone, I actually think it's preferable to believe we are COMPLETELY ALONE in the whole Universe.

Why? Well, maybe if we took this idea to heart we'd get some small realization of how special and rare and wonderful we are, and how important it is we don't kill ourselves off.

We may be the Universe's one, best chance, and it has nothing to do with arrogance. In fact, it engenders a deep sense of Humility.


$.02


You are correct that intelligence is merely a defense mechanism, that's why it takes a long time for sentience to form. The universe is billions of years old, that's a lot of time. It's probable that there are alien races out there that have been around for over a billion years. I do not see why you would think that sentience would be rare.

I however do not believe intelliegence is an accident, to me it's clearly a defense mechanism. I believe that given enough time, any planet with life would eventually form sentient beings.

I do not see how the belief that your race is the only one in the world would make your survival any more important in your mind than for someone who like me believes the universe is filled with sentient life.

If anything I would think those who think like me would make the wiser choises for survival, such as colonizing other planets, building space stations, building starships for defense, etc. People with your mindset on the other hand would more likely remain on Earth with their heads stuck in sand, believing there's nothing out there, believing you're so special that you must have been created by a god and will be taken care of by that god.



new topics

top topics



 
32
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join