UFO Evidence Forums : General Discussion
Return to the General Discussion Homepage
User not logged in - Login or Register

subject: Let us get together


  Replies 11 - 20 (out of 20 total)

MOO MOO
6/30/2004 3:56:28 PM

You seem to miss my point.

I'm not trying to deny the existence of life beyond our planet. I'm merely stating that (and this IS a fact, for anyone who remotely trusts mainstream science). That we do not have proof of extraterrestrial life. Be it intellegent or not.

And until we do, we can't rightly predict how many planets -- if any, have life. Life may very well be unique to earth. There also may be galaxies swarming with life. We simply can't theorize where and how life is formed, until we get a second example.

Remember, I'm not trying to disprove the existence of life on other planets. Personally, I'm hoping that Mars yields some fossil evidence. If it IS there, we WILL find it. And if it is found, and proven not to come from Earth, we could very well speculate that there very well could be life elsewhere in our galaxy... indeed, it would be almost certain. It would still be up in the air if we are the first 'intellegent' life, but it would definitely tip the scale in favor of extraterrestrial intellegence.

The meteor from Mars does not yield conclusive proof of Martian life. When first it was studied, many people felt that it proved life outside of earth. As more time went by, and more studies undertaken, the majority of scientists moved away from that conclusion. There is still a good number of researchers who believe it is fossilized Martian life, but most do not.

LJ
7/7/2004 5:41:56 PM

Moo Moo: I can appreciate a skeptical perspective, but when it hits at the very essence of common sense reasoning, I have to stick my two cents in here, hopefully in a constructive vein. Regardless though, I still fully support skeptics having full opportunity to contribute their viewpoints.

Its fairly safe to state that mankind cannot truly comprehend the vastness and complexities of the universe. I conceed that the various publicized formulas out there may not be the best of 'yardsticks'. At the moment, it's what we have.

But simple logic and mathematical probabilities dictate that life elsewhere is quite probable, if not almost guaranteed, at sorts of evolutionary stages.

This is almost nondebatable and one shouldn't require physical proof set upon the kitchen table to accept its plausibility. That's taking skepticsm too far (IMO).

And, unless your privvy to the most closely guarded internal secrets of major governments, you cannot entirely dismiss the possibility, no matter how remote, that proof does exist behind those closed doors. As I mentioned in a previous post, it's my view that the Air Force and Nasa have (as examples), over the years, collected irrefutable radar and imaging data (minimally), that won't be publicized on the evening news.

So while I can appreciate your position, I think it is much too inflexible.

WOO WOO
7/7/2004 7:34:13 PM

It is not at all inflexible... When microbes are found, I will not be proven "wrong", I will just have more information, and more examples to make further hypothesis on. Theories on the probabilty, or inprobabilty of life is based on speculation, and will continue to be that until we get enough data to make a more conclusive theory.

I don't deny life could exist elsewhere. Infact, it is quite probable. Unfortunetly, we simply CAN'T KNOW how many worlds have life, or use any mathematical equations to dictate the number of civilizations. The Drake equation requires an assumption. Until that assumption is replaced with a sample, we have nothing to base probabilty on. Indeed, it is POSSIBLE that life as we know it, is unique to earth.

Sure, it is possible for Nasa to be hiding this kind of data... but seemingly unlikely.

It would be foolish for Nasa to hind that kind of information. If they found complex life forms on Europa... indeed, if they found fossilized microbes on Mars, it would boost funding to incredible highs, and be a shot in the arm for new inventions. I find it incredibly unlikely that Nasa's purpose is to be a diversion from extraterrestrial existence... that would be taking conspiracies too far, and would be an extremely costly smokescreen. It also wouldn't last long... The US government has a hard enough time keeping less interesting papers classified.

Ice Phoenix
7/8/2004 2:08:00 AM

"i think you're a lunatic. how about we all gather around the fire and sing kumbaya and hold hands and sway back and forth. now doesn't that just sound fantastic." - Ricky

LOL!!!

"It would be foolish for Nasa to hind that kind of information. If they found complex life forms on Europa... indeed, if they found fossilized microbes on Mars, it would boost funding to incredible highs, and be a shot in the arm for new inventions. I find it incredibly unlikely that Nasa's purpose is to be a diversion from extraterrestrial existence... that would be taking conspiracies too far, and would be an extremely costly smokescreen. It also wouldn't last long... The US government has a hard enough time keeping less interesting papers classified."

The "costly smokescreen" of NASA is funded by the taxpayer, so no problem there, & any funding boosts from discovery of life would go to a minority of NASA's people (biologists), while displacing most (geologists, chemists, astro-physicists, etc.) so no problem there with a cover-up either.

Also, the US Government can keep anything of national security relevance secret for as long as it wants. This has been proved time & time again, from the nuclear bomb to the first intelligence satellite. If something gets out, they discredit it. Simple really.


7/8/2004 2:28:53 AM

Viral,
Take a look at this site: (might suit your needs better)

http://www.ufo-forums.com

Cestode Raffity
7/8/2004 5:07:20 AM

It surprises me that a renegade alien hasn't blown the lid off the whole thing by going public. Clearly whatever goverment structure the aliens have is in cahoots with our governments, but a rogue alien could open up the whole issue.

Maybe there simply aren't any renegades? And all aliens sing from the same hymn-sheet?

Ice Phoenix
7/8/2004 6:03:51 AM

Well the majority of visiting species seem to be highly telepathic, & possibly of a "hive mind". An example of a hive mind is an ant or bee colony. They all operate as one, which is why they're referred to as super-organisms, although they use chemical rather than telepathic signals.

This could be one reason for no "renegade aliens". If they don't think like individuals, or at least not to the extent humans do, there'd be much less, if any rebellious thinking, let alone actions.

I would agree some alien species are likely in cahoots with these covert programs. The greys are believed to be such a species.

Cestode Raffity
7/8/2004 8:58:23 AM

I struggle with that hypothesis. I mean, if their brains are big enough for free thought, how do thery maintain the hive mind thing?

Bees and ants have that setup sure, but they are lower organisms. Surely aliens could decide to act differently if they wanted?

Ice Phoenix
7/8/2004 10:03:38 AM

If they wanted to yes, but who knows what they want. Anyway, it's only an idea. They may maintain individuality despite all of the thought-sharing.

DiamondStar
7/8/2004 10:54:56 AM

i will admit to having both hive and individual thougts.
frustrating as it is, i cannot 'undo' this ability.
more admissions from others who understand
this are needed. blah


  Replies 11 - 20 (out of 20 total)



Return to General Discussion Homepage

 

 

Ads help to support this site: