Are aliens out there? Heavens, I hope so!

[#juan]

Programs like SETI SETI@home are searching radio waves for some sign of life but there might be a more advanced technology that isn't limited by the speed of light. and not detectable by our current science. Alien radio waves that started their journey five hundred light years away are hardly going to contain breaking news from the senders who might be extinct by the time we pick up the signal.

 

[Spade]

YouTube - Japan Airlines UFO Sighting

 

[AnnaG]

Intelligence is a relative thing, isn't it.We considered the aboriginal people ignorant savages at one time but science is only beginning to catch up to their knowledge of how life on Earth works and the intricate balancing act that is the web of life. There are ancient structures that we can only guess at how they were built because we think we are the most advanced civilization to date but if we would get off our high horse for a moment,we might discover that we were not the first or the brightest candle to burn on this planet.

There may have been civilizations that were far more technologically advanced than ours. Their technology may have been quite different and we are just not advanced enough to figure it out. They may have left and are now coming back to check out how the remnants are making out. Perhaps they are the same as us physically, and are sharing their technology with us now. If they look like us,how would we know they are not from here? Just because we don't know, doesn't mean it is not possible.

Good post, Cliffy.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

Let's not be too credulous about that video, Spade. A little research into that JAL UFO report would have shown you that two other aircraft were vectored into the vicinity of that flight, UA flight 69 and a C-130 military plane, they all saw each other but only the JAL crew saw anything else. When the JAL pilot reported the UFO was directly in front of UA 69, pilots on the latter flight saw nothing there. Human perceptions of unrecognized objects are notoriously unreliable. If you don't know what something is and there's nothing familiar around it, as would be the case with an object in the sky, you can make no reliable estimate of its size, distance, or movements. Odds are the JAL pilot was misperceiving Jupiter and Mars, which at the time would have been low on the horizon, very bright, and in the direction he reported seeing the UFOs.

 

[AnnaG]

Let's not be too credulous about that video, Spade. A little research into that JAL UFO report would have shown you that two other aircraft were vectored into the vicinity of that flight, UA flight 69 and a C-130 military plane, they all saw each other but only the JAL crew saw anything else. When the JAL pilot reported the UFO was directly in front of UA 69, pilots on the latter flight saw nothing there. Human perceptions of unrecognized objects are notoriously unreliable. If you don't know what something is and there's nothing familiar around it, as would be the case with an object in the sky, you can make no reliable estimate of its size, distance, or movements. Odds are the JAL pilot was misperceiving Jupiter and Mars, which at the time would have been low on the horizon, very bright, and in the direction he reported seeing the UFOs.

You think they saw flying gods?
Dexter, I am shocked at you.

 

[darkbeaver]

I suggest you check out this site CB, before you go too far down that road: Bad Archaeology: leave your common sense behind!

In particular, you can't believe anything Erich von Daniken, Graham Hancock, or Immanuel Velikovsky say, they have no idea what they're talking about. Neither does Darkbeaver.

The No-Belief Belief System
Jan 29, 2010
I believe in not believing. I try not to believe anything, which is not the same as believing nothing. Even though nothing is not something, believing in nothing is still believing, and I try not to do that.

 

[AnnaG]

The No-Belief Belief System
Jan 29, 2010
I believe in not believing. I try not to believe anything, which is not the same as believing nothing. Even though nothing is not something, believing in nothing is still believing, and I try not to do that.

Aaaaahhh. Finally; progress. WTG, Beav!

 

[darkbeaver]

There is no bad archeology only bad very bad archeologists. A vote for bad archeology is a vote for bad science. Dexter is trying to trick you with the fallacy of dogma. I would give you that in latin except that I no few of us still speak it.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

There may have been civilizations that were far more technologically advanced than ours. ... Just because we don't know, doesn't mean it is not possible.

Doesn't mean it's likely either. There's no good evidence of civilizations here more technologically advanced than ours, so there's no reason to think there have been.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

You think they saw flying gods?

That's as good an explanation as alien visitors. :smile:

 

[darkbeaver]

Doesn't mean it's likely either. There's no good evidence of civilizations here more technologically advanced than ours, so there's no reason to think there have been.

An idea shared by the church of Rome for the same reason. It is not logical to assume that we are in a state of continual progress along a straight line to heaven.
Every other chart on the planet shows a wave form. Dexter supports the simple notion that time on task equals a positive outcome, it don't. Waves,up and downs, trees do it birds do it and the bees do it but humans can't possibly do it because science won't support it.

 

[countryboy]

The No-Belief Belief System
Jan 29, 2010
I believe in not believing. I try not to believe anything, which is not the same as believing nothing. Even though nothing is not something, believing in nothing is still believing, and I try not to do that.

I believe you're right. At least, based on what I think I believe, if I'm believing correctly. I believe in something that is worth believing in, as long as it's not nothing. It it turns out be to be nothing, then I believe I won't believe in it anymore. But, if it turns out to be something other than nothing, I believe I would believe in it. But then again, I could believe in nothing because it is still believing (not in something, of course) but then I believe I could end up being confused. I believe I'll quit while I'm ahead. Or behind. I guess that depends on what I believe in. Or not. Maybe. :-(

 

[countryboy]

Let's not be too credulous about that video, Spade. A little research into that JAL UFO report would have shown you that two other aircraft were vectored into the vicinity of that flight, UA flight 69 and a C-130 military plane, they all saw each other but only the JAL crew saw anything else. When the JAL pilot reported the UFO was directly in front of UA 69, pilots on the latter flight saw nothing there. Human perceptions of unrecognized objects are notoriously unreliable. If you don't know what something is and there's nothing familiar around it, as would be the case with an object in the sky, you can make no reliable estimate of its size, distance, or movements. Odds are the JAL pilot was misperceiving Jupiter and Mars, which at the time would have been low on the horizon, very bright, and in the direction he reported seeing the UFOs.

I know quite a few experienced airline people who usually know what they're looking at, even at night.

 

[karrie]

I know quite a few experienced airline people who usually know what they're looking at, even at night.

:lol:

 

[darkbeaver]

Doesn't mean it's likely either. There's no good evidence of civilizations here more technologically advanced than ours, so there's no reason to think there have been.

My argument is that we are here at all because of very good technology. Let's reproduce Cheops. The planet is littered with evidence of old technology.

 

[darkbeaver]

I believe you're right. At least, based on what I think I believe, if I'm believing correctly. I believe in something that is worth believing in, as long as it's not nothing. It it turns out be to be nothing, then I believe I won't believe in it anymore. But, if it turns out to be something other than nothing, I believe I would believe in it. But then again, I could believe in nothing because it is still believing (not in something, of course) but then I believe I could end up being confused. I believe I'll quit while I'm ahead. Or behind. I guess that depends on what I believe in. Or not. Maybe. :-(

Good article for the head what.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

The planet is littered with evidence of old technology.

I've never suggested otherwise, and that's not the point anyway. The point is that there's no evidence of any civilization that knew more than, or even close to as much as, we do about physics, chemistry, biology, mathematics, engineering, and the technologies we can produce with them.

 

[AnnaG]

I've never suggested otherwise, and that's not the point anyway. The point is that there's no evidence of any civilization that knew more than, or even close to as much as, we do about physics, chemistry, biology, mathematics, engineering, and the technologies we can produce with them.

So being advanced hinges upon the amount of technology?
I think it's all relative myself. The Chinese were more advanced than say, the Brits were even at a later date in a few things. As in the use of gunpowder and tea for instance. The Japanese were making some quite exquisite steel while a lot of others only had crude iron. We are stuck with a 12 month calendar when a 13 month one would make more sense.

 

[petros]

So then, thousands of ancient texts say the gods came down from the heavens and we pass it off as myth and impossible?

If it happened today and everybody around the world wrote about it at the same time saying "the gods come from space (the heavens)" would people six thousand years from now believe that the gods did come down from the heavens?

 

[AnnaG]

So then, thousands of ancient texts say the gods came down from the heavens and we pass it off as myth and impossible?

Lack of evidence is lack of evidence. If there was evidence for creation and no evidence for evolution, then we'd be thinking the other way around.

If it happened today and everybody around the world wrote about it at the same time saying "the gods come from space (the heavens)" would people six thousand years from now believe that the gods did come down from the heavens?

Who knows what future people might think?