Arguments Against ETH

[humanoidlord]

Uhm, this is totally off-topic too. And this is a huge subject, black holes. We should start a new thread if you want to talk about all this stuff.

i agree, this has 0% to do with alternative explanations for UFOs

 

[humanoidlord]

Interesting but I can't help but think of the arguments the cargo cults might have had sitting around the campfire at night. As for ET, we all have an unavoidable anthropomorphic bent to our perceptions, experiences, theories mo matter how detailed or well reasoned. Don't see how we could fail to.

This is a bit silly, but I remember a newspaper article about an octopus that let itself out of an aquarium at a zoo by doing a series of things the keepers never even thought of. Apparently they are quite intelligent and have some notable problem solving capacity. It had it's own ideas, agenda and capabilities that we never even suspected because we just couldn't fathom (in advance) what they might be. I wonder what it might have said if we could have tracked it down and talked to it. My anthropomorphism tells me it might've said "you buncha a******s"

I can't say what the source of this phenomenon is with any certainty, nor can anyone else. I can filter out the obvious fakery and most of the all too common lunacy - which is a lot of ufology in general really, but I really don't even know how to pick a starting point for any of this.

agree we need to stop thinking in human terms when dealing with UFOs and start thinking in terms of a incomprehensible phenomena

 

[Thomas R. Morrison]

to continue the discussion

Okay, but Jesus dude – eight messages back-to-back? I think you’re proselytizing more than discussing.

i am talking about alternative realities, not dimensions in the mathematical sense

So you mean like Oz and Middle Earth, then. Alternative realities are great science fiction, but terrible science.

some outlier cases like the jean hingley CE3 and the bebedouro abduction says otherwise

Y’know, every time somebody has cited specific (unproven) cases to support their “high strangeness” argument, it turns out to be cases involving people meeting aliens and going on board their spaceships. Which is hilarious, because those kinds of stories are 100% ETH, if they actually happened. I suppose I’ll have to get around to looking at the cases you mentioned, to see if the trend continues. But I reckon the odds are high that they’ll just be making my case for me.

what about paranormal hotspots and people that have experienced all those stuff during their lives? we have a few in this very forum if you wanna ask, in fact nivek is one,
there is a point that it stops being a coincidence and starts being a true enigma

Yeah, I’ve heard Dr. Barry Taff’s interviews, and there’s definitely paranormal stuff that goes on in the world. But why anyone would think that hauntings and demonic possessions or whatever, have anything to do with UFOs, is beyond me.

People who think that a single explanation for all things paranormal, is better than many explanations for various types of phenomena, are exhibiting a logical fallacy known as the conjunction fallacy. People made the same mistake in Medieval Europe centuries ago, when they tried to explain everything from meteors to eclipses to supernovas, using a single intellectually bankrupt explanation: divine provenance aka supernatural beings. That's what you're doing right now.

but how do UFOs radiate heat or make artificial gravity?

Technologically, obviously.

suffice to say that is never gonna happen, remenber when the MJ12 papers surfaced and everyone thought we had found the explanation?

The MJ-12 documents were some kind of PsyOp. They came from an anonymous source, and contained significant disinformation.

On the other hand it seems that the AATIP analyzed an exotic metamaterial with Dr. Puthoff and Dr. Davis, and not only found the material to be atomically aligned and manufactured with nonterrestrial isotopic ratios, but apparently the damn thing lost some of its rest mass under activation with THz radiation.

So, it already happened, and now we just have to wait for that research to be declassified, or for similar results to be conducted in the public sector, which is exactly what the ADAM Project is working on right now.

UFOs have been here since we were monkeys and somehow we have done NO progress on finding anything about them, no, comparisions to hypothetical gravity drive vehicles don't count as proof
isn't that a bit suspicious?

We’ve only had modern science for about 300 years, and there’s never been a legitimate scientific investigation of the UFO phenomenon in the public sector.

So no, our lack of progress isn’t the slightest bit surprising, because answers don’t just fall out of trees, they have to be found through proper methodology and suitable investigative technology, which really only the military has – stuff like national radar data and high-speed jet interceptors etc.

Also, you’re mischaracterizing the status of gravitational field propulsion – it’s a valid theoretical concept expressed in the well-established formalism of general relativity. So that means that our best physics predicts this kind of propulsion capability.

“Hypothetical” means something entirely different. Alternative realities, for example, are merely hypothetical, rather than theoretical.

Respected journals publish theoretical physics articles, for instance. Whereas hypothetical ideas are relegated to Ancient Aliens and the National Inquirer.

there have been several public attempts at finding what UFOs are since at least the 50's, including studies of window areas like point pleasant and the hudson valley, all reached a similar conclusion: there is more to the phenomena than we think

A guy with a notebook and a fifth of whiskey does not qualify as a legitimate scientific investigation. And there’s ample evidence that the sightings in the Hudson Valley have been conventional aircraft.

exactly, ufos change according to your progress, these days its almost impossible to find anything related to saucers, now take a look what happens when you type black triangle in the MUFON database

No, you’re wrong. The radar operator in the USS Nimitz CSG who saw the gun camera video described the craft as a domed disc with a flat bottom. Flying disc-shaped craft are still quite common. The military now has black triangular craft so that probably explains the bump in those types of reports. But some few of them probably involve alien black triangular craft as well, and those reports have been around for decades.

Also it’s far more likely, as we discussed earlier in this thread, that people in the past used terms like “fiery shield in the sky” rather than “disc-shaped UFO” because the terminology of any given era is going to be limited to that culture’s experience. It’s goofy to try and say that reports of “chariots in the sky that shined like the god Helios,” were actually describing a chariot with wheels and horses in the sky. People of ancient times only had the words they were familiar with to describe what they saw.

wait until you read that book i told you about, he makes a good case that the airships weren't what they looked like

I’ve read a number of those accounts and they sounded like airships with rudders. Stuff we had the capability to make at the time. Unlike AAVs, which are well beyond modern technological capabilities, and always have been.

science fiction, don't underestimate the genius of some of these writers, most of what we see today in ufology has appared in fiction at least once

as time went on UFOnauts became more boring and boring , and they stopped using realistic astronaut outfits and started wearing spandex suits just like in science fiction, go figure

OK, so first try counting all movies that feature a cosmic trickster type being, and after that count all movies that feature aliens, i will wait....

Okay so you believe every crazy story about aliens in spacesuits, and then try to formulate an argument from their changing fashions. Haha.

Even the term “cosmic trickster” sounds absurd. No wonder nobody’s making movies about it. It’s a dumb idea.

agree we need to stop thinking in human terms when dealing with UFOs and start thinking in terms of a incomprehensible phenomena

Great idea: let’s stop thinking rationally and think irrationally instead. Because that’s what “incomprehensible thinking” is – it’s nonsensical irrational thinking, like fairies and angels and devils.

No thanks. Some of us are glad that the Dark Ages are behind us, and we don’t want to go backwards.

 

[pigfarmer]

Except that we’ve made some significant progress in science

Indeed. Somewhat related, I heard an interview with 'Charles Ostman Historian of the Future' . Never heard of him before but he was suggesting that we are on the brink of being able to radically alter the nature of our existence; advances in computing and genetic technologies reaching the point where we can engineer ourselves as we see fit. Can't comment on the validity of anything he's saying - just something interesting to listen to while endlessly driving. Epileptics stay the hell away from his website - he needs a web designer from the future too.

Stanton Friedman suggests that the development of nuclear weapons is what brought us to the attention of ET. Okaaaaay. What Ostman was talking about sounds like just as much of an existential threat - but you can't see it from orbit I suppose. Hell, while we're just speculating maybe we have to grow up a bit before we can even have a conversation. Joe Haldeman's Forever War has an interesting take on our own development, ability to communicate etc. that wouldn't be out of place with these topics.

Also, I find your commentary on propulsion systems, etc to be fascinating and you relate them clearly. Out of my league but I try to keep up. In trying to relate some of this to a friend I suggested that the Wright Flyer and the latest F35 are essentially the same thing from a certain point of view. If I could suddenly see all the secrets the government(s) have under development it would be disappointing to find that they weren't researching radically new forms of propulsion/flight. Not that you are saying this specifically, but I'm not sure we're giving ourselves enough credit to suggest that we would need to recover 'exotic foreign technology' to achieve it. Maybe not the best analogy but it only took a relatively few years from theoretical physics to Hiroshima when the need and resources for development were applied.

 

[nivek]

I think you’re proselytizing more than discussing.

That's exactly what I see too...

...

 

[nivek]

Stanton Friedman suggests that the development of nuclear weapons is what brought us to the attention of ET.

This I agree with to a point, I think the locals have been visiting us for generations, at least those who are advanced enough to travel here, but I think nuclear detonations did attract certain other types of aliens, or more pointedly, certain types of technology detected our nuclear activities and it was enough of a 'blimp on the screen' so to speak to warrant investigation to our humble but warring planet...I suspect in some cases after they returned to whence they came they shared their information with the rest of their species and any allies or neighbors at some point, to which these others also became curious and decided to pop in on earth for a visit themselves, to see our activities firsthand...Its also a possibility in some cases after visiting our planet they thought us too bizarre or remote to even understand us or thought us too primitive to harness such raw destructive power...I do think in some cases our nuclear detonations did attract others to our planet through the use of some advanced and very sensitive technology...

...

 

[nivek]

agree we need to stop thinking in human terms when dealing with UFOs and start thinking in terms of a incomprehensible phenomena

When you say 'human terms' you are really using those two words to say 'intelligently', at least from my viewpoint, but then I have to ask, why would any rational person want to stop thinking intelligently and in its stead start thinking incomprehensibly?...Where is the logic and reasoning, what would justify such a regression to the stone age in terms of thinking?...

...

 

[Thomas R. Morrison]

Indeed. Somewhat related, I heard an interview with 'Charles Ostman Historian of the Future' . Never heard of him before but he was suggesting that we are on the brink of being able to radically alter the nature of our existence; advances in computing and genetic technologies reaching the point where we can engineer ourselves as we see fit. Can't comment on the validity of anything he's saying - just something interesting to listen to while endlessly driving. Epileptics stay the hell away from his website - he needs a web designer from the future too.

Charles Ostman is a brilliant guy who seems to be closely plugged in with the research efforts of DARPA and the DoD. I think that for him, advancements 50-100 years away seem like they're right on our doorstep. So I tend to listen closely to what he has to say, and presume that he's correct, but that his predictions are a few decades further away because our ideas of "immanent" are slightly different.

Stanton Friedman suggests that the development of nuclear weapons is what brought us to the attention of ET. Okaaaaay. What Ostman was talking about sounds like just as much of an existential threat - but you can't see it from orbit I suppose. Hell, while we're just speculating maybe we have to grow up a bit before we can even have a conversation. Joe Haldeman's Forever War has an interesting take on our own development, ability to communicate etc. that wouldn't be out of place with these topics.

I'll have to see what Haldeman has to say, thanks for the tip.

Nivek is probably right - our interstellar neighbors have probably dropped by to have a look around for many millennia, but they probably intensified their interest as we detonated over 2000 nukes, as Friedman suggests. Just as we'd take note and investigate if we heard gunshots next door.

Also, I find your commentary on propulsion systems, etc to be fascinating and you relate them clearly. Out of my league but I try to keep up. In trying to relate some of this to a friend I suggested that the Wright Flyer and the latest F35 are essentially the same thing from a certain point of view. If I could suddenly see all the secrets the government(s) have under development it would be disappointing to find that they weren't researching radically new forms of propulsion/flight. Not that you are saying this specifically, but I'm not sure we're giving ourselves enough credit to suggest that we would need to recover 'exotic foreign technology' to achieve it. Maybe not the best analogy but it only took a relatively few years from theoretical physics to Hiroshima when the need and resources for development were applied.

I'm glad you find the subject of field propulsion to be interesting. I've been chasing that rabbit since I was a child, and it's been encouraging to see it go from "a laughable impossibility" as I was growing up to "a theoretically viable proposal" as an adult. I'd really like to see it make the next major step to "a successful proof-of-principle experiment in the lab" before I die. Because I think that human civilization will have a fighting chance, once that happens, so I could die in peace if we get that far with it.

It is an inevitability if human civilization continues to progress technologically; but I think that a back-engineering effort could contract the time frame considerably. The difference between the development of the nuclear warhead, and gravitational field propulsion, is that we arrived at a viable theoretical approach by way of the chain reaction, pretty quickly - and once we had that, the first successful experiments were only a few years away. We're missing that linchpin between theory and production, with the concept of gravitational field propulsion. We know that the metric will work, but we don't know how to produce it. Achieving it with the energy densities available to us now probably pivots on a theory of quantum gravity, which we don't have yet. A recovered sample could help us bridge that crucial gap in our understanding, sooner than we'd make that leap on our own.

I've been sniffing around the edges of secret military research programs for decades, and I'm convinced that they're researching extremely advanced concepts. There's evidence that they've experimented with terrestrial field propulsion concepts which react with the Earth's electromagnetic properties, for example. And Stanton Friedman has mentioned the extensive work they've done on magnetoaerodynamic propulsion - they almost certainly have functioning craft built on that principle right now. And it's conceivable that they've made some progress in the direction of gravitational field propulsion at this point, but I'm doubtful about it. And the Pentagon seemed to reach the same conclusion - we can't build craft like the Tic-Tac AAV that Cmdr. Fravor encountered

But I'm confident that someday, one way or another, we will. If we don't succumb to our own stupidity, or some major natural disaster, first.

 

[humanoidlord]

So you mean like Oz and Middle Earth, then. Alternative realities are great science fiction, but terrible science.

the ones that exist, not the fictional ones

Y’know, every time somebody has cited specific (unproven) cases to support their “high strangeness” argument, it turns out to be cases involving people meeting aliens and going on board their spaceships. Which is hilarious, because those kinds of stories are 100% ETH, if they actually happened. I suppose I’ll have to get around to looking at the cases you mentioned, to see if the trend continues. But I reckon the odds are high that they’ll just be making my case for me.

to keep a very long story short, the first one involves a woman getting paid a visit by some bizzare fairie/grey like things that came out from a very unusual UFO
the second one involves a brazilian farmer getting abducted by some diver suit wearing guys and getting taken to a cave by a cilindrical UFO, where he meets dwarves and jesus christ (yes really!)
both are completely contrary to what we know as ETH
i suggest you track down the original flying saucer review articles for both

Yeah, I’ve heard Dr. Barry Taff’s interviews, and there’s definitely paranormal stuff that goes on in the world. But why anyone would think that hauntings and demonic possessions or whatever, have anything to do with UFOs, is beyond me.

because they are awfully similar

People who think that a single explanation for all things paranormal, is better than many explanations for various types of phenomena, are exhibiting a logical fallacy known as the conjunction fallacy. People made the same mistake in Medieval Europe centuries ago, when they tried to explain everything from meteors to eclipses to supernovas, using a single intellectually bankrupt explanation: divine provenance aka supernatural beings. That's what you're doing right now.

you still have not explained hotspots, question evading much?

Technologically, obviously.

thats know as a handwave, just because we could develop something in the future doesn't means we will

anonymous source

its almost 99% sure that it was richard doty, in fact he leaked almost identical documents called the aquarius papers to gullible ufologists in the middle 2000's

On the other hand it seems that the AATIP analyzed an exotic metamaterial with Dr. Puthoff and Dr. Davis, and not only found the material to be atomically aligned and manufactured with nonterrestrial isotopic ratios, but apparently the damn thing lost some of its rest mass under activation with THz radiation.

So, it already happened, and now we just have to wait for that research to be declassified, or for similar results to be conducted in the public sector, which is exactly what the ADAM Project is working on right now.

delongues recently released "trailer" (?) video of the ADAM project looks like some shitty history channel documentary

Also, you’re mischaracterizing the status of gravitational field propulsion – it’s a valid theoretical concept expressed in the well-established formalism of general relativity. So that means that our best physics predicts this kind of propulsion capability.

while it is plausible, the way to do it is 100% hypothetical

And there’s ample evidence that the sightings in the Hudson Valley have been conventional aircraft.

mile wide aircraft with visible piping and appearence quite similar to the 1800's airships, sure they were

No, you’re wrong. The radar operator in the USS Nimitz CSG who saw the gun camera video described the craft as a domed disc with a flat bottom. Flying disc-shaped craft are still quite common. The military now has black triangular craft so that probably explains the bump in those types of reports. But some few of them probably involve alien black triangular craft as well, and those reports have been around for decades.

while disc UFOs are still reported sometimes, black triangles completely stole the spotlight, also i find it unlikely that the military has advanced antigravitational tech

Also it’s far more likely, as we discussed earlier in this thread, that people in the past used terms like “fiery shield in the sky” rather than “disc-shaped UFO” because the terminology of any given era is going to be limited to that culture’s experience. It’s goofy to try and say that reports of “chariots in the sky that shined like the god Helios,” were actually describing a chariot with wheels and horses in the sky. People of ancient times only had the words they were familiar with to describe what they saw.

i know that i have already said this, but yeah you should read that book i mentioned, there is a very interesting chapter there about the airships

I’ve read a number of those accounts and they sounded like airships with rudders. Stuff we had the capability to make at the time. Unlike AAVs, which are well beyond modern technological capabilities, and always have been.

not all of them, in one of them the witness actually talks with the airship crew and the operator says that they use a no gravity substance that coats the airship....

Okay so you believe every crazy story about aliens in spacesuits, and then try to formulate an argument from their changing fashions. Haha.

yeah and?

Even the term “cosmic trickster” sounds absurd. No wonder nobody’s making movies about it. It’s a dumb idea.

well maybe my terminology is bad, but is the idea of a being that can do almost anything and has been spying on humanity since it's start really that bad?

Great idea: let’s stop thinking rationally and think irrationally instead. Because that’s what “incomprehensible thinking” is – it’s nonsensical irrational thinking, like fairies and angels and devils.

i am saying that we are too young as a civilization to comprehend what the UFO phenomena really is

 

[humanoidlord]

When you say 'human terms' you are really using those two words to say 'intelligently', at least from my viewpoint, but then I have to ask, why would any rational person want to stop thinking intelligently and in its stead start thinking incomprehensibly?...Where is the logic and reasoning, what would justify such a regression to the stone age in terms of thinking?...

we can't comprehend UFOs yet, we barely landed in the moon and we are already thinking about something that transcends reality as we know it?

 

[pigfarmer]

I'm glad you find the subject of field propulsion to be interesting. I've been chasing that rabbit since I was a child, and it's been encouraging to see it go from "a laughable impossibility" as I was growing up to "a theoretically viable proposal" as an adult. I'd really like to see it make the next major step to "a successful proof-of-principle experiment in the lab" before I die. Because I think that human civilization will have a fighting chance, once that happens, so I could die in peace if we get that far with it.

Coincidentally I've been reading Rocket Men by Robert Kurson and here are a couple of interesting things I just saw:
.....a report written by Goddard and published in 1919, A Method of Reaching Extreme Altitudes ridiculed by the New York Times for suggesting that a rocket could operate in the vacuum of space or carry payloads to the Moon. “He only seems to lack the knowledge ladled out in high schools.” Goddard responded by saying “Every vision is a joke until the first man accomplishes it; once realized, it becomes commonplace.”

In a conversation with Charles Lindbergh Goddard once said that it was possible to design a rocket powerful enough to reach the Moon, but the money required to build it – as much as a million dollars. Apparently this gave Lucky Lindy a good chuckle. I mentioned earlier that the development of theoretical concepts is driven by need and application of resources. Can't help but think of walking into the Air & Space Museum and seeing the Spirit of St.Louis hanging there and then looking not far away to see a lunar lander.

Without getting too far off topic one further point. As for Robert Kurson, I'm reading Rocket Men as a follow on to Shadow Divers and I would rate them both as excellent page turners and informative but they focus more on the personalities involved. Good vacation books - not that I'd know what a vacation is. History is perishable and becomes two dimensional very quickly; we tend to focus on specific facts and forget that real live smelly perfectly fallible human beings are involved. In Shadow Divers the official record was flat wrong and wasn't changed easily. I read a lot of military history and for a better understanding of whatever event I try to look into the personalities involved. I can't help but think that many researchers fail to take this into account when digging through old case files and reports. Time passes and technology changes but human foibles .... not so much.

 

[pigfarmer]

i am saying that we are too young as a civilization to comprehend what the UFO phenomena really is

For no reason I can actually support (because we have nothing to compare ourselves to just yet) my guts agree with that but it doesn't mean we shouldn't make the attempt as best we can

 

[nivek]

we can't comprehend UFOs yet, we barely landed in the moon and we are already thinking about something that transcends reality as we know it?

There is where you hit upon the fine line but you didn't see it...We can understand and gain knowledge of things before our ability to develop it technologically and build it physically...We understood how to get to the moon way before we were actually able to get there physically, and using that same token, we have the ability to understand how very advanced technology can function long before we will be able to replicate it and build it ourselves...So with this I strongly disagree with you, we have the intellectual ability to understand UFOs, we have the ability to understand how they travel through space even if we cannot build one ourselves yet...Knowledge and understand always comes before physical application of that understanding...

...

 

[nivek]

i am saying that we are too young as a civilization to comprehend what the UFO phenomena really is

I think we are on the precipice of great knowledge and understanding of this 'UFO phenomena', we are definitely at a point in our understanding of the universe and ourselves to be able to understand the technology behind these UFOs...

...

 

[humanoidlord]

There is where you hit upon the fine line but you didn't see it...We can understand and gain knowledge of things before our ability to develop it technologically and build it physically...We understood how to get to the moon way before we were actually able to get there physically, and using that same token, we have the ability to understand how very advanced technology can function long before we will be able to replicate it and build it ourselves...So with this I strongly disagree with you, we have the intellectual ability to understand UFOs, we have the ability to understand how they travel through space even if we cannot build one ourselves yet...Knowledge and understand always comes before physical application of that understanding...

...

if we can, then why haven't we done it yet?

 

[humanoidlord]

I think we are on the precipice of great knowledge and understanding of this 'UFO phenomena', we are definitely at a point in our understanding of the universe and ourselves to be able to understand the technology behind these UFOs...

...

and what if its not ET we are dealing with?

 

[nivek]

if we can, then why haven't we done it yet?

That's like asking why we haven't harnessed nuclear fusion affordably yet...

...

 

[nivek]

and what if its not ET we are dealing with?

It's not one blanket covers all...Some will probably be this and some will be that, and there will be some of them, and a few of those, of course there will be those other ones, and so forth...

...

 

[humanoidlord]

That's like asking why we haven't harnessed nuclear fusion affordably yet...

...

if its gravitational manipulation like thomas say, then it isn't that hard, they must be using some exotic material

 

[humanoidlord]

It's not one blanket covers all...Some will probably be this and some will be that, and there will be some of them, and a few of those, of course there will be those other ones, and so forth...

...

i have seen this explanation brought to me many times, and i still think there is a problem: UFOs are too similar