• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Aliens and UFOs

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
4,086
4,980
460
I think the most intriguing thing about those examples is that the shape's of UFO's remain consistent throughout time.

Yeah, and not only the craft but the quintessential alien head: oval shaped, big eyes, small nose and mouth shows up dozens of times on cave drawings throughout the last 20,000 years, many are strikingly similar on different continents, along with the craft depictions.

I think the government and media did a great job of making it all to be sort of a mockery. A joke. Makes people feel more comfortable that they're the superior beings, center of the universe etc
 
Last edited:

desertdroog

Gold Member
Aug 12, 2008
6,070
11,965
1,400
Well, I guess you've never heard the mess this shit is causing. That would make your ears bleed for sure.


I have heard of the current events and even with the information provided, no verifiable proof has been offered to show me that the phenomena reported on proves the existence Extra Terrestrial Beings, much less that they are visiting Earth.

I remain a skeptic until the proof is undeniable.
 

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
4,086
4,980
460
I have heard of the current events and even with the information provided, no verifiable proof has been offered to show me that the phenomena reported on proves the existence Extra Terrestrial Beings, much less that they are visiting Earth.

I remain a skeptic until the proof is undeniable.

No one is saying theres undeniable proof though. But then again, what is undeniable? Even if tons more info came out there are a large % of people that would call everything fake just to coupe with it.
 
Last edited:

desertdroog

Gold Member
Aug 12, 2008
6,070
11,965
1,400
No one is saying theres undeniable proof though. But then again, what is undeniable? Even if tons more info came out there are a large % of people that would call everything fake just to coupe with it.
I am responding to someone atting me after months of my non-interaction in this thread.

So in response to you:

O.K.
 
  • Love
Reactions: Romulus

johntown

Member
Dec 27, 2010
3,082
1,705
845
East Coast
While I think it is very possible that they could be out there on some other planet, I have high doubts that they are flying around in space.

If you believe in evolution and math then statistically for all the conditions to be right for life on a planet are next to impossible. If the impossible happened once here for all the conditions to happen again is mathematically impossible.

If you believe we are created by God then you could believe that either we are alone and everything was created just to show the awesome power of God. Or you could believe that everything was created for a purpose and there could be things out there that we are not meant to know about yet.
 

V4skunk

Member
Nov 20, 2018
2,986
3,406
465
While I think it is very possible that they could be out there on some other planet, I have high doubts that they are flying around in space.

If you believe in evolution and math then statistically for all the conditions to be right for life on a planet are next to impossible. If the impossible happened once here for all the conditions to happen again is mathematically impossible.

If you believe we are created by God then you could believe that either we are alone and everything was created just to show the awesome power of God. Or you could believe that everything was created for a purpose and there could be things out there that we are not meant to know about yet.
Dude the US Navy and Pentagon says the ufo phenomenon is real.
 
Feb 7, 2012
1,019
764
810

If you wanna see lots of pictures of fuzzy stars, or dots that dont seem to move that you can barely see, Mufon is a great resource. My favorite are the totally real ufo videos which always seem to just be a slice of things, you never see the videos running to the end...you never see the "ufos" fly off, the videos always just cut.

If i looked up and saw something so bizarre and had a camera with video capabilities...im going to record it until i see them disperse.
Rule of thumb: if it doesnt move or the video doesnt run until objects cannot be seen any longer, the person taking the video doesnt believe its anything either.
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: nikolino840

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
4,086
4,980
460
While I think it is very possible that they could be out there on some other planet, I have high doubts that they are flying around in space.

If you believe in evolution and math then statistically for all the conditions to be right for life on a planet are next to impossible. If the impossible happened once here for all the conditions to happen again is mathematically impossible.

If you believe we are created by God then you could believe that either we are alone and everything was created just to show the awesome power of God. Or you could believe that everything was created for a purpose and there could be things out there that we are not meant to know about yet.
You're literally standing on an example of a life producing planet. Our ability to see other systems is detail is the problem imo, they're too far away. And scientists agree that mars had oceans and rivers, as well as some of Saturns and Jupiters moons. So, over the course of billions of years, who knows what has transpired just in our solar system.

Then there are billions of stars in our galaxy alone, and billions of galaxies. Seems almost arrogant to assume it's not likely considering the scale of the universe. It's like a blind man living in a cave his whole life talking about theres nothing else outside because he can't see it.

We're literally cosmically blind, no two ways about it. We can't even see a hundredth of a percentage of what's out there.
 
Last edited:

johntown

Member
Dec 27, 2010
3,082
1,705
845
East Coast
You're literally standing on an example of a life producing planet. Our ability to see other systems is detail is the problem imo, they're too far away. And scientists agree that mars had oceans and rivers, as well as some of Saturns and Jupiters moons. So, over the course of billions of years, who knows what has transpired just in our solar system.

Then there are billions of stars in our galaxy alone, and billions of galaxies. Seems almost arrogant to assume it's not likely considering the scale of the universe. It's like a blind man living in a cave his whole life talking about theres nothing else outside because he can't see it.

We're literally cosmically blind, no two ways about it. We can't even see a hundredth of a percentage of what's out there.
I see you don’t keep up to date on science because very recently they found out that there actually were not rivers and oceans on Mars and what they thought was caused by something else.

Anyway I don’t think you really understand just how unique the Earth is and everything that is required for life to even have a slight chance to evolve.

Some of the calculations for things to happen are higher than the billions.

I’m not saying for sure yes there is nothing. My argument is statistically and if you are arguing against that then you really don’t understand science.
 

V4skunk

Member
Nov 20, 2018
2,986
3,406
465
Not really debating that there are plenty of "unidentified flying objects". That is just obvious. My comment is more about aliens.
But the US Navy are detecting ufo on radar accelerating from almost sea level to over 60,000 feet in a second. Defying gravity!
The g force involved in this kind of acceleration is crazy. A modern fighter pilot blacks out at 14g or something and not much more than that can tear a plane to pieces...
My point is! Is that there is technology out there that is beyond our dreams.
I believe most ufo sightings are black project experimental anti gravity craft.
 

Tevious

Member
Aug 30, 2011
2,494
175
745
Damn these embedded reddit videos are super annoying how they just auto-play. I'm like 4~5 post up when they start and I'm wondering where the fuck that audio is coming from. Please use links and don't embed them here. That shit should be banned.

Idk, maybe. I just don't see drones during the day with tails. The movement, especially the way it takes off reminds me more of this case.

This video was actually stunt planes practicing for a fireworks show. You can see another video of it here:


And one of the planes crashes near the end.

johntown said:
I see you don’t keep up to date on science because very recently they found out that there actually were not rivers and oceans on Mars and what they thought was caused by something else.
Adding to this. Apparently, it was an ice ball planet at one point, rather than being warm with oceans and rivers.


Although, there is still some evidence for some liquid water on the surface, even today.
 
Last edited:

V4skunk

Member
Nov 20, 2018
2,986
3,406
465
Damn these embedded reddit videos are super annoying how they just auto-play. I'm like 4~5 post up when they start and I'm wondering where the fuck that audio is coming from. Please use links and don't embed them here. That shit should be banned.



This video was actually stunt planes practicing for a fireworks show. You can see another video of it here:


And one of the planes crashes near the end.


Adding to this. Apparently, it was an ice ball planet at one point, rather than being warm with oceans and rivers.


Although, there is still some evidence for some liquid water on the surface, even today.
Evidence for water?
NASA have flat out confirmed there is running water on Mars.
 
  • LOL
Reactions: Insane Metal

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
4,086
4,980
460
I see you don’t keep up to date on science because very recently they found out that there actually were not rivers and oceans on Mars and what they thought was caused by something else.

Anyway I don’t think you really understand just how unique the Earth is and everything that is required for life to even have a slight chance to evolve.

Some of the calculations for things to happen are higher than the billions.

I’m not saying for sure yes there is nothing. My argument is statistically and if you are arguing against that then you really don’t understand science.
Lol, I dont think you understand the scale of the universe. Billions of planets times billions of galaxies. And what is the actual metric for discovering life then? Earth is unique, sure, but how unique actually? There are some that argue its not as unique as we originally thought

As for your oceans and rivers on mars, I have no idea what you're talking about, this article is new just a few months old.


Whether liquid water still exists there today is an open question, but we know that the planet was once covered with oceans, lakes and rivers.

Actually, the evidence keeps piling up about rivers. Not sure what science youre keeping up with.

 

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
4,086
4,980
460
Adding to this. Apparently, it was an ice ball planet at one point, rather than being warm with oceans and rivers.


Although, there is still some evidence for some liquid water on the surface, even today.

In the first minute of the video, the guy says it's just a theory. A very early theory too.
 

RoadHazard

Member
Dec 9, 2008
18,986
1,329
1,125
Gothenburg, Sweden
Intelligence does not equal kindness. How many billions of animals have humanity murdered for our own benefit (be it for using the land for our own needs or something else)?

I think there's a pretty high chance that any alien species intelligent and advanced enough to travel across the cosmos would not give a crap about us.
 

justAjohn

Member
Apr 27, 2020
66
53
160
Intelligence does not equal kindness. How many billions of animals have humanity murdered for our own benefit (be it for using the land for our own needs or something else)?

I think there's a pretty high chance that any alien species intelligent and advanced enough to travel across the cosmos would not give a crap about us.
But they would give a crap about our resources, or even us as a resource. I mean humans probably contain some rare elements too, there are so many of us. They might even harness energies beyond our ken, like harnessing emotions (fear comes to mind).I think the state of it is observing the development of some hairless monkeys enforced by the neutral guys and occasional harvest by the opportunistic bad guys.

Hollow Earth though. Does anybody know if the formation of planets can be modelled and show that planets cannot be hollow? Otherwise UFO could easily be unindetified sinking objects and "aliens" just inner earth occupants.
 

RoadHazard

Member
Dec 9, 2008
18,986
1,329
1,125
Gothenburg, Sweden
But they would give a crap about our resources, or even us as a resource. I mean humans probably contain some rare elements too, there are so many of us. They might even harness energies beyond our ken, like harnessing emotions (fear comes to mind).I think the state of it is observing the development of some hairless monkeys enforced by the neutral guys and occasional harvest by the opportunistic bad guys.

Hollow Earth though. Does anybody know if the formation of planets can be modelled and show that planets cannot be hollow? Otherwise UFO could easily be unindetified sinking objects and "aliens" just inner earth occupants.
I'm pretty sure that gravity makes hollow planets impossible.
 

Boswollocks

Member
Apr 19, 2019
8,030
12,913
780
Mars
But the US Navy are detecting ufo on radar accelerating from almost sea level to over 60,000 feet in a second. Defying gravity!
The g force involved in this kind of acceleration is crazy. A modern fighter pilot blacks out at 14g or something and not much more than that can tear a plane to pieces...
My point is! Is that there is technology out there that is beyond our dreams.
I believe most ufo sightings are black project experimental anti gravity craft.
9G is when a male pilot blacks out, -2G for a red out

10.5 G the average female pilot blacks out, -3G for red out.

The materials of fighter jets made in the 80's could withstand 20G (in reality they can't because of the systems on board designed to keep the pilot alive would break/explode by design at that G).

Modern day drones however can withstand 35G with high end parts. Maybe more could be possible if designed specifically for it.

FWIW i saw top secret tech at a top secret base (i shouldn't have seen it), at a location i won't disclose (It was in America). It was the fastest fucking thing i have ever witnessed. this was 10 years ago. If i had have seen that aircraft while walking in the park, i would have swore it was a UFO
 
Last edited:

Leyasu

Banned
Apr 25, 2014
4,933
1,146
615
They don’t need our resources. There is plenty everywhere in the galaxy.

They are probably just keeping an eye on us
 

V4skunk

Member
Nov 20, 2018
2,986
3,406
465
9G is when a male pilot blacks out, -2G for a red out

10.5 G the average female pilot blacks out, -3G for red out.

The materials of fighter jets made in the 80's could withstand 20G (in reality they can't because of the systems on board designed to keep the pilot alive would break/explode by design at that G).

Modern day drones however can withstand 35G with high end parts. Maybe more could be possible if designed specifically for it.

FWIW i saw top secret tech at a top secret base (i shouldn't have seen it), at a location i won't disclose (It was in America). It was the fastest fucking thing i have ever witnessed. this was 10 years ago. If i had have seen that aircraft while walking in the park, i would have swore it was a UFO
Yes but imagine accelerating from zero and one second later being 11 miles/60k feet away. The g force is orders of magnitude higher than even 35g.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Boswollocks

Boswollocks

Member
Apr 19, 2019
8,030
12,913
780
Mars
Yes but imagine accelerating from zero and one second later being 11 miles/60k feet away. The g force is orders of magnitude higher than even 35g.
Yeah the acceleration is nuts, though i would have to see the footage to make sure that was correct. I wonder what force is required and heat shielding needed to blast through relatively high-pressure air (almost zero ft above sea level). Not to mention how the sound barrier would work at such high speed, as the laws of pressure are inverse above the speed of sound.
 

nush

Gold Member
Oct 16, 2017
7,517
17,996
770
A long haul flight from wherever you are.
FWIW i saw top secret tech at a top secret base (i shouldn't have seen it), at a location i won't disclose (It was in America). It was the fastest fucking thing i have ever witnessed. this was 10 years ago. If i had have seen that aircraft while walking in the park, i would have swore it was a UFO
Chinny Recon.
 

V4skunk

Member
Nov 20, 2018
2,986
3,406
465
Yeah the acceleration is nuts, though i would have to see the footage to make sure that was correct. I wonder what force is required and heat shielding needed to blast through relatively high-pressure air (almost zero ft above sea level). Not to mention how the sound barrier would work at such high speed, as the laws of pressure are inverse above the speed of sound.
What do you mean you need to see the footage?
I'm talking about radar data that no one cares about.
Also this is how it is possible.
And Nikola Tesla has the same patent for his flying machine.
 

Darkmakaimura

Gold Member
Dec 12, 2008
14,579
5,188
1,470
I had a weird thought but I don't want to delve into it at 12:30 am much.

This applies to UFOs in some cases and maybe even ghosts.

But what if they function or this reality or super-reality functions something like Mario Kart Home Circuit.

You know how you create this track on your living room floor and then you race with virtual Goombas and whatnot.

The enemy cars are on the Switch screen but they're not actually there on your living room floor. Like you're racing ghosts that are not there on your mom's floor!

But they are there on the game and Switch screen and they can (maybe) cause your car to react and they know your car is there and they're racing you for score.

Koopa is in his car on the screen racing you on your floor BUT HE'S NOT THERE!!!! But he sort of is.

What if there's aspects of reality that work this way. Maybe this could explain why there's been UFO sightings where half a crowd of individuals see a UFO but the half doesn't?

Is Mario Kart an insight into Plato's Cave? Could UFOs and ghosts be similar to Koopa in your living room?
 

FemdomFilmFan

Banned
Sep 13, 2020
250
296
245
39
Dublin, Ireland
I was just thinking what it would be like if such a thing ever happened but I would be terrified if I actually saw a UFO alien spacecraft. People like to say aliens wouldn't harm us because they were able to achieve interstellar travel but how do we know they wouldn't manipulate a relatively less intelligent race such as ourselves? I'm not saying it wouldn't be fascinating to see an alien or their spacecraft up close but I think it's only natural we would be cautious as well. However, the topic of extraterrestrial life has always interested me so feel free to share your thoughts in this thread.
...

...

Nope; I'll be damned if I can find any logic in that idea.
 

Darkmakaimura

Gold Member
Dec 12, 2008
14,579
5,188
1,470
George Knapp hosting Coast to Coast AM live tonight. Four hours of UFO talk.


Edit: first half sounds like new age bullshit, which is disappointing considering Knapp usually deals with the more serious aspects.


 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: zombrex

King of Foxes

Member
Jan 9, 2018
2,769
5,908
680
Latvia
So Trumps speech to the UN, the part about weapons we have never had or could ever dream about was the tic tac right?

I hope so

 

InverseAgonist

Formerly 'TheInverseAgonist'
Sep 8, 2020
25
64
265
You're literally standing on an example of a life producing planet. Our ability to see other systems is detail is the problem imo, they're too far away. And scientists agree that mars had oceans and rivers, as well as some of Saturns and Jupiters moons. So, over the course of billions of years, who knows what has transpired just in our solar system.

Then there are billions of stars in our galaxy alone, and billions of galaxies. Seems almost arrogant to assume it's not likely considering the scale of the universe. It's like a blind man living in a cave his whole life talking about theres nothing else outside because he can't see it.

We're literally cosmically blind, no two ways about it. We can't even see a hundredth of a percentage of what's out there.
This isn't quite true. We know life has formed on our planet, but even on our planet which has all the ingredients for advanced life, at a fundamental level what emerged out of the primordial ooze has it's roots in one event. There isn't evidence that life forming is common even here. For instance, there are several different conformational shaped DNA's phosphate backbone can exist in (alpha, beta, z-DNA, etc); yet all life utilizes just one. The key metabolic pathways are all conserved and reused and built on as things advanced. The same kinases and enzymes exist. Neurons got faster by first doing the obvious biophysical scaling of getting fatter and then myelin appeared and became ubiquitous in higher organisms. Even human brains are modular and demonstrate the existence the prior spinal chord and limbic system being built upon by the neocortex. And during development it's common to learn that development recapitulates evolution of the nervous system. Everything can be traces back to that one event. Even here the probabilities aren't looking good.

And we know there is no intelligent life in the solar system. This is clear from the energy spectra and EM radiation we've measured. We really aren't "cosmically blind" -- we can see all the way back to the beginning of the universe and deep into the distance at a time that early star formation was already underway and should have produced life. We're actually cosmic latecomers, according to the Drake equation, there should be a Gaussian distribution of civilizations at different points of advancement, with many, many of them in the middle spewing out EM radiation that we should have picked up. All we have is one bizarre "Wow!" signal in 1977 and the newly discovered FRB phenomena which most astrophysicists believe to be natural in origin.

Looking out, we can be reasonably sure based on the priors we have from earth that it's a low probability that life has evolved within our light-cone, which is the only observable universe that we can ever see. I posted two excellent papers on this topic here.

Sucks, but it's very unlikely that intelligent life exists out there. Life, sure, maybe even some really neat shit has evolved. But for the little guys in Area 51, it's not looking good.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Boswollocks

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
4,086
4,980
460
This isn't quite true. We know life has formed on our planet, but even on our planet which has all the ingredients for advanced life, at a fundamental level what emerged out of the primordial ooze has it's roots in one event. There isn't evidence that life forming is common even here. For instance, there are several different conformational shaped DNA's phosphate backbone can exist in (alpha, beta, z-DNA, etc); yet all life utilizes just one. The key metabolic pathways are all conserved and reused and built on as things advanced. The same kinases and enzymes exist. Neurons got faster by first doing the obvious biophysical scaling of getting fatter and then myelin appeared and became ubiquitous in higher organisms. Even human brains are modular and demonstrate the existence the prior spinal chord and limbic system being built upon by the neocortex. And during development it's common to learn that development recapitulates evolution of the nervous system. Everything can be traces back to that one event. Even here the probabilities aren't looking good.

And we know there is no intelligent life in the solar system. This is clear from the energy spectra and EM radiation we've measured. We really aren't "cosmically blind" -- we can see all the way back to the beginning of the universe and deep into the distance at a time that early star formation was already underway and should have produced life. We're actually cosmic latecomers, according to the Drake equation, there should be a Gaussian distribution of civilizations at different points of advancement, with many, many of them in the middle spewing out EM radiation that we should have picked up. All we have is one bizarre "Wow!" signal in 1977 and the newly discovered FRB phenomena which most astrophysicists believe to be natural in origin.

Looking out, we can be reasonably sure based on the priors we have from earth that it's a low probability that life has evolved within our light-cone, which is the only observable universe that we can ever see. I posted two excellent papers on this topic here.

Sucks, but it's very unlikely that intelligent life exists out there. Life, sure, maybe even some really neat shit has evolved. But for the little guys in Area 51, it's not looking good.
To assume a theorized life producing single event can rarely happen on another planet is a bit narrow-minded in my view, considering the immense scale of the universe. You're literally forecasting the events untold numbers of planets over billions of years while assuming the cocktails of chemicals are similar to our own, ignoring the wild variations in even our own tiny solar system. The combinations alone are mind boggling, to the point that a life producing event could not be required on billions of planets. And yes, you are cosmically blind in terms of the detection methods of life. We use extremely primitive methods to detect life and will for another hundred years or more. To have a rough understanding of size does equate to anything, even in our own tiny galaxy.

Even phosphorus detection in Venus was just recently discovered lol and that's literally next door cosmically. Every few years we discover things that are basic, even gravity waves lmao. We're deaf, blind, and dumb and struggle to travel to our own moon. We have just enough knowledge to be arrogant, that's it.

Every few decades going back to the 1600s, the "great minds" of science have radical restructuring of the way they think they think things worked through discovery, and all the while confident, even cocky within their respected era. Then they end up completely wrong, even our recent scientists still do this with basic understandings of the galaxy.
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Boswollocks

Boswollocks

Member
Apr 19, 2019
8,030
12,913
780
Mars
What do you mean you need to see the footage?
I'm talking about radar data that no one cares about.
Also this is how it is possible.
And Nikola Tesla has the same patent for his flying machine.
Sorry buddy, i've only just seen this.

If it's purely Radar signals you're seeing, then i have some really bad news for you; RADAR is easy as fuck to fool. That's why ECM and ECCM exist, and the reason the f117 stealth and B2 stealth have that wierd pattern on them.
 

InverseAgonist

Formerly 'TheInverseAgonist'
Sep 8, 2020
25
64
265
To assume a theorized life producing single event can rarely happen on another planet is a bit narrow-minded in my view, considering the immense scale of the universe. You're literally forecasting the events untold numbers of planets over billions of years while assuming the cocktails of chemicals are similar to our own, ignoring the wild variations in even our own tiny solar system. The combinations alone are mind blogging, to the point that a life producing event could not be required on billions of planets. And yes, you are cosmically blind in terms of the detection methods of life. We use extremely primitive methods to detect life and will for another hundred years or more. To have a rough understanding of size does equate to anything, even in our own tiny galaxy.
I would recommend reading the linked papers, especially the one entitled "Dissolving the Fermi Paradox" if you want a probabilistic view on this events.

That said, we make certain assumptions such as that the laws of physics remain constant across the universe. This is widely held. Some question it, but it's a fringe view. Given the same physics, you get the same chemistry. The periodic table is constant and we know how it works really well. If you move away from carbon, you're stuck with silicon. Which has it's own known downfalls.

Now the chemical space defining carbon chemistry is truly immense, even bigger than you're imagining. But there are constraints on the system. Life needs information to be preserved and encoded, Schrödinger noted this in 1944 when he predicted an asymmetric crystal. We know it as DNA. Ultimately you're going to need a linear encoding scheme to evolve entropically favorably that can be duplicated and error-corrected. You're constrained to something like DNA/RNA. And then you have this long "Turing tape" like entity which must be physically compacted -- again there are constraints on this. Stuart Kauffmann posited that life could have started first in self-organizing autocatalytic sets of proteins, but the idea is so-so and it wouldn't work for intelligent life. In fairness, he would disagree with me.

Again, we're not "cosmically blind" -- we've been searching out to 10^16 meters and found nothing in the electromagnetic spectrum to show life, from simple signals or background EM leakage to spectrally encoded patterns of emissions on earth-like planets that would signify life's existence. Again, the Drake equation predicts a Gaussian distribution of many, many lifes, many of which would be at the stage of transitions and advance through EM usage even if we're going to presume there some yet discovered more advanced means to power and communicate (don't bet on it). Yet, we see nothing. Actually, that's not true -- SETI routinely picks up our own signals that are bouncing around. So, uhm, no.

Romulus said:
Every few years we discover things that are basic, even gravity waves lmao. We're deaf, blind, and dumb and struggle to travel to our own moon. We have just enough knowledge to be arrogant, that's it.
Gravity waves were postulated over 100 years ago as solutions to Einstein's work on GR.

I know you won't read the math heavy papers I linked to, but perhaps you'll watch this video by a physicist I've met named Max Tegmark:

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: iconmaster

V4skunk

Member
Nov 20, 2018
2,986
3,406
465
Sorry buddy, i've only just seen this.

If it's purely Radar signals you're seeing, then i have some really bad news for you; RADAR is easy as fuck to fool. That's why ECM and ECCM exist, and the reason the f117 stealth and B2 stealth have that wierd pattern on them.
I'm talking about the phased array radar data the US Navy released to the public along with the tictac footage.....
You are pretty much talking shit here and have done zero research, shit the Navy pilot was on Joe Rogan with US Navy permission and the Pentagon has even admitted UFO/UAP phenomena is real...
 

Romulus

Member
Mar 21, 2019
4,086
4,980
460
I would recommend reading the linked papers, especially the one entitled "Dissolving the Fermi Paradox" if you want a probabilistic view on this events.

That said, we make certain assumptions such as that the laws of physics remain constant across the universe. This is widely held. Some question it, but it's a fringe view. Given the same physics, you get the same chemistry. The periodic table is constant and we know how it works really well. If you move away from carbon, you're stuck with silicon. Which has it's own known downfalls.

Now the chemical space defining carbon chemistry is truly immense, even bigger than you're imagining. But there are constraints on the system. Life needs information to be preserved and encoded, Schrödinger noted this in 1944 when he predicted an asymmetric crystal. We know it as DNA. Ultimately you're going to need a linear encoding scheme to evolve entropically favorably that can be duplicated and error-corrected. You're constrained to something like DNA/RNA. And then you have this long "Turing tape" like entity which must be physically compacted -- again there are constraints on this. Stuart Kauffmann posited that life could have started first in self-organizing autocatalytic sets of proteins, but the idea is so-so and it wouldn't work for intelligent life. In fairness, he would disagree with me.

Again, we're not "cosmically blind" -- we've been searching out to 10^16 meters and found nothing in the electromagnetic spectrum to show life, from simple signals or background EM leakage to spectrally encoded patterns of emissions on earth-like planets that would signify life's existence. Again, the Drake equation predicts a Gaussian distribution of many, many lifes, many of which would be at the stage of transitions and advance through EM usage even if we're going to presume there some yet discovered more advanced means to power and communicate (don't bet on it). Yet, we see nothing. Actually, that's not true -- SETI routinely picks up our own signals that are bouncing around. So, uhm, no.



Gravity waves were postulated over 100 years ago as solutions to Einstein's work on GR.

I know you won't read the math heavy papers I linked to, but perhaps you'll watch this video by a physicist I've met named Max Tegmark:

I watched the vid. He's using math to calculate the possibility of intelligent life that would have evolved similarly to us and are currently in a state that we can detect. There are counter-arguments from scientists that claim we could have advanced lifeforms in our own galaxy.

This isn't just one scientist either


I still maintain we're cosmically blind because we're using methods we think we would work. 200 years ago, scientist would have used telescopes. "Well, can't see anything." 150 years later, radar detection. "Well, can't see anything." Again, we just recently discovered gravity waves, a pillar of the universe. I understand it was proposed, but even up until recently it was disputed. We weren't even in agreement to how gravity worked until recently lol

And why would aliens be so easily detectable? Every single paper I've seen comes with the asterisk of "if they're developing technologies similar to our own." That's a massive assumption and we're we forced to use. And who's to say they don't have a better understanding of the galaxy than we do, and like our military technology, is based around concealment and stealth.

A new study suggests this may be because we've searched just 0.00000000000000058% of a "cosmic haystack" in our hunt for an alien "needle."
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Praise the Sun
Reactions: Ma-Yuan and V4skunk

InverseAgonist

Formerly 'TheInverseAgonist'
Sep 8, 2020
25
64
265
I watched the vid. He's using math to calculate the possibility of intelligent life that would have evolved similarly to us and are currently in a state that we can detect. There are counter-arguments from scientists that claim we could have advanced lifeforms in our own galaxy.
Thanks for watching! And thanks for providing a video -- it was interesting stuff.

romulus said:
I still maintain we're cosmically blind because we're using methods we think we would work. 200 years ago, scientist would have used telescopes. "Well, can't see anything." 150 years later, radar detection. "Well, can't see anything." Again, we just recently discovered gravity waves, a pillar of the universe. I understand it was proposed, but even up until recently it was disputed. We weren't even in agreement to how gravity worked until recently lol
Right. My argument -- which I don't want to keep repeating -- is that given the huge numbers of intelligent life coming out of the Drake equation, we should be seeing a distribution of life at all different stages of development. Even if we assume your right and that there is more advanced technology for communication and energy production that we invariably switch over too, there should be even more civilizations behind it according to the distribution that are still progressing forward and using our "primitive" EM radiation stuff. We should be detecting these. We should be detecting the more advanced civilizations that are now advanced of us, but went through the EM phase but were the right distance that we're seeing their past. We see none of this. It just strains my imagination.

Romulus said:
And why would aliens be so easily detectable? Every single paper I've seen comes with the asterisk of "if they're developing technologies similar to our own."
It's hard to be invisible unless you're actively trying to be. With numbers as large as those contemplated, it's improbable that all would be but us. We've basically announced ourselves to the universe (IMHO, like fools) thanks to high-powered military RADAR and the active SETI programs.

PS. Thanks for the great chat! We disagree, but I respect your argument. I need to take off for a bit so sorry if I can't respond.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Romulus