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.
Originally posted by yeti101
reply to post by Orkojoker
what if i told you i saw the loch ness monster as other people have claimed. Then suppose we actually caught a huge dinosaur like creature in loch ness. In the above situation would you be any more likely to consider my loch ness monster sighting as genuine?
why or why not?
What if i told you i saw a unicorn with wings gallop down my street. Then suppose we actaully found a herd of flying unicorns in the amazon jungle. In the above situation would you be anymore likely to consider my flying unicorn sighting as genuine? why or why not?
see what i did there? i've not changed my individual evidence it still remains bad. But we changed reality to make it more believable.
What you demonsrated is the cosmic leaps of imagination you have to make in order for the ETH to become plausible
Let's suppose that somehow we here on Earth knew for a fact that there were several thousand intelligent species in our galaxy, and that 90 percent of them were at least 100,000 years ahead of us technologically. How we discovered this is not important. The scientific community considers it as well established as anything in human knowledge. We also know that each of these civilizations is capable of travelling from any point in the galaxy to any other point in the galaxy in no more than three days.
Originally posted by yeti101
reply to post by Orkojoker
what evidence is there that any ufo sighting is connectable with ET spaceships?
and in my scenario i just added how we know these things are real. You can substitute "finding a dinosaur like creature" to " we know they still exist on earth - it doesnt matter how we know"edit on 11-3-2011 by yeti101 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by Orkojoker
Let's suppose that somehow we here on Earth knew for a fact that there were several thousand intelligent species in our galaxy, and that 90 percent of them were at least 100,000 years ahead of us technologically. How we discovered this is not important. The scientific community considers it as well established as anything in human knowledge. We also know that each of these civilizations is capable of travelling from any point in the galaxy to any other point in the galaxy in no more than three days.
How we "know" this is crucial. We "knew" there was no water on the Moon for years, but now we know otherwise. Scientists already accept the possibility that the universe is filled with life, some of it perhaps more "advanced" than we are... but we don't know that with any certainty. If we "knew" all the things you posit in your hypothetical because we had actually made contact with the extra-terrestrials, then we would know for a fact whether we were seeing spacecraft in our skies because they would have identified themselves. Even so, people would continue to see things in the skies they could not identify. Here is the question for you: if in your hypothetical situation, the aliens agreed that they would always flash red green and blue navigation lights when operating near Earth, what would you make of floating orange orbs? Would they be UFOs? Would you need to find some other explanation, since you would now know for a fact that they are not extra-terrestrial craft?
Originally posted by TinkererJim
reply to post by Orkojoker
Why would we still debate on UFOs once we establish the existence of intelligent beings outside of Earth. Interesting to contemplate on the world after confirmation. I see the world will still be split into 2 camps. One that prefers to live in status quo and be sealed from external influences, and another that will be totally focused on technology and exploration.
I completely agree that method by which we "know" any fact is of the utmost importance in determining whether or not we really "know" it.
However, for the purposes of this exercise the method by which we have gained this hypothetical knowledge is irrelevant.
In our scenario, we know it to be a fact, and you personally accept the knowledge as totally valid.
Originally posted by Orkojoker
Just a quick hypothetical situation to consider:
Let's suppose that somehow we here on Earth knew for a fact that there were several thousand intelligent species in our galaxy, and that 90 percent of them were at least 100,000 years ahead of us technologically. How we discovered this is not important. The scientific community considers it as well established as anything in human knowledge. We also know that each of these civilizations is capable of travelling from any point in the galaxy to any other point in the galaxy in no more than three days.
In the above situation, would you be any more likely to consider some UFOs to potentially represent visits by some of these beings?
Why, or why not?
Discuss.
Originally posted by majestictwo
Originally posted by Orkojoker
Just a quick hypothetical situation to consider:
Let's suppose that somehow we here on Earth knew for a fact that there were several thousand intelligent species in our galaxy, and that 90 percent of them were at least 100,000 years ahead of us technologically. How we discovered this is not important. The scientific community considers it as well established as anything in human knowledge. We also know that each of these civilizations is capable of travelling from any point in the galaxy to any other point in the galaxy in no more than three days.
In the above situation, would you be any more likely to consider some UFOs to potentially represent visits by some of these beings?
Why, or why not?
Discuss.
It appears to me you just want and answer of YES from people in an attempt to convince others its possible to have aliens here. Its not that simple, in a hundred thousand years it might be possible for us to be those aliens and visit others but I'm afraid we would need to survive that long as a species. There is a long list of things that point to NO.
I guess what I'm saying is its unlikely rather than a yes
Whatever it was that convinced them, it has been written about extensively in the peer reviewed journals and has been agreed upon to a great degree: We have this knowledge, science now tells us.
Originally posted by DJW001
reply to post by Orkojoker
Whatever it was that convinced them, it has been written about extensively in the peer reviewed journals and has been agreed upon to a great degree: We have this knowledge, science now tells us.
And I read those peer reviewed journals: what do they say?
I would say that we have evidence of things flying around that seem to be under intelligent control but which do not seem to be within the scope of human technology
Originally posted by yeti101
reply to post by Orkojoker
I would say that we have evidence of things flying around that seem to be under intelligent control but which do not seem to be within the scope of human technology
I havnt seen any good evidence for that. 1 video of a craft of unknown origin doing incredible manouvers would be good. As the decades have past it gets worse for the eth we have an order of magnitude greater covergae of our skys from the ground and from space. Still nothing.
Originally posted by Orkojoker
In the above situation, would you be any more likely to consider some UFOs to potentially represent visits by some of these beings?
Originally posted by ShadeWolf
reply to post by Orkojoker
Well, scientifically speaking, we do basically know that there are roughly 10,000 intelligent species we could theoretically detect in the Milky Way, thanks to the Drake Equation.