Bob wrote:While I really don't want to prolong this voyage to the stars
Why not? That's what this thread is all about.
With regard to time travel, if you watch the series, "The Universe" astrophysicists, including Stephen Hawking, are speculating about the possibilities of actual time travel. It's been well known for many years that in accordance with Einsteins theories, if speeds can be achieved close to the speed of light, time will dramatically slow down for anyone on board the vehicle while time on earth would not be affected. That isn't theory. That is real. You could be only days or even only hours older, but dozens, perhaps hundreds of years would have passed on earth. So, if the technology ever gets that far, zipping one's way to the distant future is already known to be possible.
As far as time travel in reverse, now they are saying that too is theoretically possible, even within the guidelines of Einsteins theories of space and time being a very different thing than we have been taught all our lives to believe. I can't remember the source, but I remember reading an article once in which Einstein himself was trying to explain relativity in layman's terms. Of course, I can't remember word-for-word what he said, but the gist of it was something like this: "Everyone has experienced a terrible minute seeming far longer than a minute. Everyone has experienced a wonderful minute seeming nearly instant. That happens because those lengths of time are not imagined. They are real and actual. If you can grasp that, now you understand relativity."
Let me deal with Bob's skepticism first. The most famous artifact comes, of course, from the famous Roswell crash. Before the military (who initially claimed the object was a "flying saucer" and later claimed it was a weather balloon) intervened a farmer failed to return a large piece of foil which had memory - a material for which we had no such technology in 1947. It was photographed by the newspaper and seen by several before the military finally confiscated it. One can only speculate why the military would want something from a weather balloon. Additionally, and I know you will not view this as a credible source, the series on the History Channel called UFO Hunters has included several segments in which objects containing materials we don't yet know how to combine were found at various crash sites. Two of these fragments are emitting electromagnetic pulses which short circuit electronic instruments - and doing so without any apparent power source. Other bits and pieces have also been found at various crash sights.
Bob goes further in poo pooing my presentation of alternative, albeit unlikely, explanations besides alien visitors. Given that Bob accepts the existence of such phenomena and seemingly has rejected my conjectural explanations, I would be interested to know his hypotheses. Certainly he is not disagreeing with Project Blue Book or the recently declassified British UFO studies that a significant number of such sightings defy conventional explanation. I attempted to present three alternatives, rejected by Bob, so I am waiting to hear some additional ones.
Gaybutton wrote:
It's been well known for many years that in accordance with Einsteins theories, if speeds can be achieved close to the speed of light, time will dramatically slow down for anyone on board the vehicle while time on earth would not be affected.
Moving towards the speed of light is just one of the ways in which time can be warped. The other, in accordance with Einstein's theory is that gravity effects the space-time continuum. Since everything has gravity that means for a person standing by the pyramids, for example, time moves more slowly than for those standing some distance away. Admittedly, by only a couple nanoseconds, but still different. It is hypothesized that if one could travel to a place, like a black hole, with gigantic gravity, time could almost be brought to a stop in relation to more distant locations.
As yet, we humans do not know how to manipulate gravity - nor do we really understand it. But, if gravity ever can be controlled, and it is likely that some day it will be possible, time can also be controlled. And that brings us back to the possibility that UFOs may very well be some future version of humans moving through the space time continuum.
That's something else that bothers me. It's always crash sites. I'm sorry, but I don't buy the idea that intelligent beings on another world managed to build spacecraft technologically advanced enough to come here, and when they get here, they crash. And supposedly there have been several crash sites.
Crash sites. Bizarre lights in the sky. Strange objects. Aliens coming here for sinister reasons or reasons beyond our understanding. Can't one of these just land intact somewhere and and make themselves known already?
I always enjoy the ideas that aliens visited thousands of years ago and taught ancient civilizations how to build the pyramids and whatnot. Of course not one word about alien beings in any of the surviving ancient scrolls, hieroglyphics, or anything else. Just like the Bible. Thousands of years ago people communicating directly with God. God making a personal appearance to Moses. Well, that was the last we've heard from God in awhile. What's He been doing all this time? I suppose there are still people who have better communication with God than most of us, but first they have to wear robes and funny hats. God only grants authority to those in uniform.
Meanwhile, also for thousands of years nobody has heard from the alien pyramid builders. I would have thought they would at least come back once in awhile for maintenance. Why don't they come back and teach us how to build a few things?
If we ever do get to meet aliens or establish communication with intelligent life on other worlds, you know what would be one of the first questions I would ask? Do the residents of their worlds ever look up into the night sky and see strange lights and UFO's of their own?
RichLB wrote:Let me deal with Bob's skepticism first. The most famous artifact comes, of course, from the famous Roswell crash.
What artifact? It doesn't exist. I went to Wright Patterson AFB in Dayton and asked to see it and was told I was crazy.
Believing in Roswell is like believing in the Tooth Fairy but as another poster stated, once someone has an idea or belief in their head then nothing is going to change it. But it is fun discussing it.
That's something else that bothers me. It's always crash sites. I'm sorry, but I don't buy the idea that intelligent beings on another world managed to build spacecraft technologically advanced enough to come here, and when they get here, they crash. And supposedly there have been several crash sites.
I disagree. I don't think that crashes are that unbelievable. How many spacecraft have we sent to the Moon and to Venus and Mars that have crashed? Plenty! The planets in our own solar neighborhood are practically junkyards.
When you consider the enormous distances these craft would have to travel, then radiation, bombardment from meteors, gamma rays, and then entering our own atmosphere, it wouldn't surprise me at all to find them arriving here in pieces.
thaiworthy wrote:How many spacecraft have we sent to the Moon and to Venus and Mars that have crashed? Plenty!
I don't know. How many? "Plenty" doesn't tell me anything. I don't know of any we've sent to those planets that weren't crashed intentionally.
thaiworthy wrote:it wouldn't surprise me at all to find them arriving here in pieces.
It would surprise me. They would be that far technologically advanced, but can't build a spacecraft capable of arriving here undamaged? Don't you think aliens capable of traveling here or sending probes here would also be capable of building spacecraft that can withstand the journey? Besides, maybe Earth is only one stop among many for them.
As noted earlier, we all believe what we want to believe and thousands of years of human history certainly supports the notion that humans have the capability to believe the dumbest damn things, officially and unofficially.
Rich, you ask me to come up with alternate explanations. Sorry, I'm not conjuring up anything. As far as I'm concerned, the various sightings of whatever come down to a few categories: (1) Those reported by credible and incredible sources which have been shown to be natural phenomena (and, for seriously considered sightings, most of them have ultimately fallen into this category); (2) those reported by nut cases (anal probes anyone?); and (3) those reported by apparently credible sources which have defied any explanation so far. As to that last category, I suspect that some of those reports were simple perception errors and the rest are likely natural phenomena which looked like something else. But I see no rational basis to suggest the third category includes the tooth fairy, aliens, or exotic dancers from Timbuktu.
As to Rich's suggestion about the most famous "artifacts" (rhe so-called Roswell alien spacecraft), all I can say is "baloney." Doesn't exist and, although I've read many articles about the previously "secret" airforce base known as Area 51 - and I've also viewed several television programs about it over the years, I still have seen zero credible evidence of anything "alien" or "spooky." Anybody can believe what they want to believe (that's pretty obvious given some of the comments in this thread alone) but, like religion, the Holy Ghost (or even Thai ghosts), alien anal probes, etc., those that believe in such things do so as a matter of faith (i.e., they believe something because they believe it and not because it is supported by any scientific study or where any demonstration of its reality can be given). In short, presuming I can't see, touch, or smell it, I believe in what's demonstrable and what the general scientific community tells us does exist. I can't "see" gravity but I understand it when one can repeatedly demonstrate its effects. I've never seen a "black hole" but I'm satisfied they exist as the scientific community can demonstrate it via mathematics and physics. And so on.
Rich has slowly shifted the language here from alternative rational theories to "possible theories" and now to "alternative, albeit unlikely, explanations." Regardless of what you want to call them, when you start with no credible or demonstrable facts in the first place, such alternative explanations rate about the same level as witchcraft in attempting to devine a true answer.
Bob, let me try to understand your position. Fundamentally you don't believe real UFOs exist. Is that correct? You base that belief on the fact that the vast majority of reported sightings come from nuts, publicity seekers, or explainable atmospheric phenomena. You go on to justify your non-belief by attempting to lump UFOs with other highly speculative belief systems such as witchcraft, ghosts, fairies, etc. Have I got that right?
We've already gone over the supportive data dis-confirming your denials. I'm not quite sure how you explain (other than to humorously chide) what many find to be corroborative data. This includes; photographs and films, eye witness reports from pilots, military officers, police, engineers, Jimmy Carter, the ex governor of Arizona, etc., radar confirmation, radiation burns from witnesses in whole towns, the massive mobilization of military at reported crash sights, objects of unexplained origin found at these crash sights, environmental evidence (radiation readings, indentations, etc.), and so on. While claiming to be an advocate of the scientific method, you simultaneously dismiss data which belies your (faith based?) pre-assumption.
I add that your recounting of Area 51 is silly. Firstly, is is still a secret military base with workers either resident or flown in on a government airline (Janet) from Vegas. Given it's secret nature, is it surprising you have not seen any information on what is going on there? Your ignorance about area 51's goings on hardly proves your point.
And finally, please be fair. With my "possible theories", "alternative... theories" and "rational theories" I was clearly referring to what UFOs might be, not to whether or not they exist. You may, of course, cling to whatever narrow view of the world you like, but don't distort and misrepresent my position. That is neither fair nor productive.
