UFO's and Aliens. Do they exist? Do you think there's even a chance that there is other intelligent life in our galaxy or universe or do you think we Humans are the only intelligent life in all of creation? These are questions that we as a species, man-kind, have asked since as far as our recorded history goes back. Even Ancient man, with no knowledge of modern science or modern understanding of what "Space" was, would look to the night sky at the twinkling stars and wonder...."Are we truly alone?".
Honestly, I've always thought aliens existed. Whether or not they've actually visited this planet at any point in it's history I don't know and I don't think anyone can truly say one way or the other and have definitive proof. Of course there is probably just as much "proof" that aliens don't exist as there is that they do, but, at least we are now discovering for a Fact that there is or was "some form" of life in the universe outside of the planet Earth. We know from microscopic fossils in martian rocks that at one point millions of years ago there was at the very least Single Celled life on Mars. We found this out back in the late 90's. Didn't hear about it? That's not surprising since I only found out about it because of a 10 second mention on ABC's "World News Tonight" back in 96-97. Today how-ever you can research this for your-self as many papers and articles have been published on the subject. A quick Google Search will lead you to many results such as these:
Meteorite Yields Evidence of Primitive Life on Early Mars Source: www.solarviews.com Article from 1997
Fossil Life in Martian Rock Found in Antarctica ? Source: http://spider.seds.org/spider/Mars/Marsrock/marsrocks.html Article from 1996
Proof of Life in Three Martian Rocks May Come This Year Source: www.popsci.com Article from 2010
This is enough in my eyes to call it "Definitive Proof", they're just waiting on the specific results so they can say it's a fact without a shadow of a doubt, and I respect them for waiting and taking it slow and doing the science the right way. A claim such as this can't be rushed no matter how apparent the results of any "proof" might be.
While I do believe in intelligent life outside of this planet, I'm still a skeptic. I mostly believe in what I can see with my own eyes. What I can feel with my own two hands. I think it's important for anyone doing any Serious research into the matter to be a skeptic and to try to dis-prove or debunk as many fakes as possible. With our advances in computers and video editing and special effects it's easier than ever for the nut-jobs and conspiracy wackos out there to make convincing "proof" on their own and it's people like those that bring a bad ilk to any Serious research into the matter. Sadly there are a lot of fakers and crazy people out there working in both directions of the debate. There are people who make fake videos of UFO's and try to pass them off as real and there are various groups and religious zealots who try to prove that Everything is fake and say that None Of It is real and anyone who believes there is intelligent non-human life in the universe is a moron or a liar.
Worse yet there are many people out there who are terrified of the idea that aliens may exist. Some people are so closed minded that no matter what scientific advances we may make or what we may learn about the universe and life its-self, they will Never believe that alien life exists even if aliens were to land on the White-House lawn and announce to the world that they are real and that they are here. Even if that did happen (which of course it hasn't) there would be a certain percentage of the world's population that would say it was faked, even if the proof was pointing a particle cannon at their head.
I'm about to tell a story I've never told publicly before. I've never told it honestly because I'm a little afraid of what it may make people think in regards to my sanity. If you choose to believe it, that's great. If you choose not to believe it, that's great too. One thing I do know for sure, I know what I saw...
Note: Before I get into the story, keep in mind that I was a kid. I was 13 or 14 years old. I had never done any drugs, didn't smoke cigs, didn't drink, and I wasn't a wild kid with a crazy imagination. I never had an "imaginary friend" at any point and even when I did grow up and start "partying" I've never had a hallucination nor have I ever saw something that I wasn't completely sure was right in front of me (magic tricks aside).
It was the summer of the year that my family moved from Deland in Volusia County out to Lake Mack in Lake County, Florida. I had to go to summer school that year to make up a failing English grade in 7th grade English (long story but basically I got screwed out of the grade I should have received). Because there weren't that many kids in my area going to summer school that year all of us in the neighborhood had to meet down at the corner store which was the only bus-stop for summer school that year. School started at 7 A.M. and was all the way in Leesburg (almost an hour from my house). We kids had to be at the bus-stop at 5:30 A.M. because it was a very long ride all the way to Leesburg from where we were in Lake Mack and there were other students to stop and pick up along the way. I was walking to the bus-stop down a long winding road. It was a normal paved road and there were houses and trailers all over the place. Even though the road was deserted because it was so early in the morning it was still a populated and crowded neighborhood. As I was rounding the bends I noticed all the tall pine trees were swaying back and forth pretty hard like there was about to be a storm, but oddly enough I couldn't feel any wind. I'm not going to say there wasn't any wind, there very well could have been and the currents were too high off the ground for me to feel the wind, but, I didn't actually feel any wind.
I was looking up at the tops of the pine trees when a very Large Triangle came out over the trees. At first I thought it was a helicopter and maybe I was seeing the lights on the ends of the rotors but then two things hit me. First, I couldn't hear Any noise. None what-so-ever. Second, if the lights I saw were on the ends of the rotors they would have been spinning very fast and not been stationary. They were also way too far apart to be rotor blades. The object was at least 3 times as high up as the trees, maybe 4 times as high, and it...was....Massive. I'm talking like the size of a Boeing 747, Massive. I quickly realized there was no way in hell that it was a helicopter. There were no flashing lights on it. They were on steadily. There were four lights in total. One larger light in the center and three more slightly smaller lights, one at each tip of the Triangle. I had seen plenty of helicopters up close, even military ones as I've lived close to Deland Airport for most of my time in Deland and seen plenty of air shows and air planes and helicopters first hand. I've seen both the Apache and the smaller Cobra Attack Chopper that it shares it's design with. It's also of note that out in Lake Mack in Lake County we were technically on the out-skirts of the Ocala National Forrest. The army had a bombing range on the far edge of the forrest and at least 3 or 4 times a year you could hear the bombs being dropped and all you had to do was go outside when the planes or helicopters were flying over-head to see what vehicles were doing the bombing. Lake Mack was right underneath their flight path for a long time even though the bombing range its-self was a good 60 or 70 miles away.
Anyway, when I realized just what it was I was looking at....well, I'm not ashamed to admit I got scared and started running for the bus-stop. I didn't look back and I didn't slow down. When I finally got to the point where I could see the store and see the other kids through the darkness standing under the street light at the store I stopped running. I didn't want the other kids thinking I was too scared to walk to the bus-stop in the dark, which I wasn't. I've never been afraid of the dark, not even as a small child. At that point when I stopped running I took the time to look behind me. Not surprisingly I didn't see anything. Nothing. No ship, no Triangle, no wind, and the trees were as still as could be since there was no wind.
I'm not gonna say I know for sure that it was aliens. I don't and to surmise that with no further evidence would be kinda stupid in my eyes. What I do know is that I have no idea what it was and it WASN'T a conventional aircraft. I honestly don't know what It was, but I do know I have Never seen Anything like It nor have I since. That one experience has led me to believe in intelligent life outside of this planet. I can't say it Was aliens. I can say I Think it was, because I have no other explanation for it.
So.....what do YOU believe? Do YOU think we're alone in the universe? Or do YOU think there is far more out there then we could ever dream is possible?
Wow, have none of you read Descartes? It was more of joke than serious, oh well.
As was my reply, tho i concentrated more on Rousseau, as he is a family member
Even if causality did exist, it does not imply a "mover" or "Prime mover. Occam's razor?
{in bold type} is, therefor, all fictional literature and art out the window? Ideas as well? Many hypotheses have no "real" translations. Mathematics, in fact: It would exist and have great meaning without anyone to propose it. In fact, the part of Mathematics which relates to "reality" as you know it is basically arithmetic.... i.e. 'counting' things.
Even if causality exists, one does not need a 'prime mover' to explain it. The endless-beginningless oscillations of time/space/matter do not require "S-meone's" finger to push them along. They do that all by themselves. It is an innate property.
Your own 'alpha - alpha prime' linearity does not mean that it is the only logic system, and even in it, circles (a type of line) exist. A circle has no beginning nor end, yet exists and is valid.
Very adventurous of Shaunna.
And now for something completely normal.
Hello Jafo. I see that you haven't read a thread prior to #471. In answer to your question, please look here.
Only possible explanation? That's a very absolute statement. What evidence or qualification do you draw on to reach this conclusion?
Of course we exist and must have come into existence. Recognising we are not intelligent enough to have an answer is not a cop out. The cop out is dismissing that in favour of a single bold statement which cannot be proved.
[quote who="DrJBHL" reply="503" id="2869210"]Regarding observation, we cannot know all causes and their effects simply by being present in the place where they are occuring. That is why some things tend to appear random, as that occurs when you don't know all of the underlying causes. Unless you mean to say that some events are random events because you cannot know all of the causes and their effects, and therefore they do not exist. Though that actually would be solipsism.Even if causality did exist, it does not imply a "mover" or "Prime mover. Occam's razor?But anything hypothesised has little meaning if you cannot translate it to reality. There is no record of an event that was not caused, there is no example or evidence of one, and there is not even a conceptual idea of any hypothetical system where it might be possible that some events occur without being caused. That is saying something.{in bold type} is, therefor, all fictional literature and art out the window? Ideas as well? Many hypotheses have no "real" translations. Mathematics, in fact: It would exist and have great meaning without anyone to propose it. In fact, the part of Mathematics which relates to "reality" as you know it is basically arithmetic.... i.e. 'counting' things.Even if causality exists, one does not need a 'prime mover' to explain it. The endless-beginningless oscillations of time/space/matter do not require "S-meone's" finger to push them along. They do that all by themselves. It is an innate property.Your own 'alpha - alpha prime' linearity does not mean that it is the only logic system, and even in it, circles (a type of line) exist. A circle has no beginning nor end, yet exists and is valid.[/quote]
Causality: Every cause has an effect, and every effect is itself the cause of another effect. Each event in a chain is at some point begun. If any event in a chain is not begun, then it is not an effect, and does not become a cause, and there is nothing after it, as it does not exist. As such, causality necessitates that there must have been a Prime mover, because if the first event is not begun, then there is no chain of events, and there is no causality.
Causality is philosophised about, but is not inherently a philosophy. It is an explanation of how the fabric of the universe moves and interacts. If you want to logically disagree with it, then you need to disprove it first. It would also help if you could otherwise explain how our universe does function on a fundamental level.
Circles exist as an idea. You cannot show me a circle. You can only show me something that resembles the idea of a circle. In other words, it cannot be physically instantiated, and we are discussing physical reality.
The innate properties of existence were given to them by their necessary creator, and set into motion.
To re-state somewhat of my original post.
The fundamental particles of which matter is composed, are always in motion. This motion must have begun at some point. If it did not begin, then it does not exist. This is why matter cannot always have existed, as the very nature of it necessitates that it must have a beginning. Matter cannot create itself, as what is not, cannot. If we leave it at that, existence is disproved, and this observably is not so. So, there must have been an entity that is not of matter, and that created matter and set it in motion, giving it the innate properties that it now has. This entity cannot be of matter, as in that case the creator would also had to have had a beginning, and then you'd run into the unresolved spiral of who created the creator of the creator, and so on.
To sum it up in short, there is nothing that is, that was not begun.
Now, there has been something irking me about this whole conversation, and slowly creeping to the fore of my mind. Those who have claimed not to believe in causality, or do not believe that it is necessary, have spouted some vague ideas or concepts which, while interesting, do not give a substitute or counter theory to the established one (causality). Not one person has given any indication of how anything can actually/physically/realistically/provably/observably occur without being caused. But they argue so vehemently that it does not apply, or is just rubbish. So, you are basically all saying, "I cannot disprove causality, and I don't have a better explanation, but it is not true because of these half explanations and hints at some mysterious and possibly non-existent alternative thoughts."
Give me a substitute system for causality that fits into our reality, and explain how, or disprove causality. Otherwise, just say that you don't want to believe in it, and that's fine by me.
Actually, it is a single bold statement that cannot be disproved. You are not the first to disagree with it, and you are also not the first to completely omit a single other possibility. It is becoming a trend in this thread that people strongly disagree without being able to point out where the error is, or provide a better explanation.
Matter is. How can something be? It is either eternal, self-instantiated, or created. Knock out two, you're left with one. There is no other possibilty. Not because I say so, or because someone else might have said so, but because it is an inescapable truth. You are welcome to demonstrate how to escape it, and then it will not be an inescapable truth.
If you come to a conclusion, and cannot disprove it, do you drop it for fear of seeming arrogant? Or do you stick with it until such a time as some new information is available, and you can then say different?
I'm getting the feeling that many people simply don't want this to be true. It has become the status quo that people who believe in God are ignorant, and athiests/agnostics are the intellectuals. This view has spread in part because most people who believe in God, do so because the Torah/Bible/Qur'an say so, and not because the existence of the creator is actually an irrefutable fact. Also, believing in God often means that you have to adjust your values/principles/morals and lifestyle to something prescribed rather than something you fashion yourself. So, it is far easier to dismiss God, as it seems to leave one with more freedom.
I often come across these strong yet empty reactions to this particular issue. It has become somewhat of a social experiment for me, and the results are quite consistent. Mainly, "this is YOUR belief not MINE", or "this is wrong but I can't say why".
Not so. It exists because of the conversion of mass to energy and vice versa. They are equivalent by Einstein's equation.
It is the innate property of the negative curvature of space-time that the universe expands to a point and simultaneously it is contracting and when that reaches a certain point of density of plasma (which was once matter) it 'Big Bang"'s and expans/contracts again. Energy and matter are not independent (as is time).
Not so by the prior reasoning.
No, I do not. There is neither beginning nor end, rather a continuum. Similarly mass and energy.
In fact, if you read what I have written above, then you will see that in fact, it can. You are taking a slit second of infinity and reasoning from it.
The fallacy in that is that time is not infinitely divisable into snap shots (the fallacy of the hare and tortoise race).
To conclude, there is neither beginning nor end. The phenomenon is a perpetual motion machine: expansion/contraction simultaneously and matter/energy conversion and vice versa, simultaneously. Since matter and energy cannot be created 'magically' there are laws governing their interchangeability. These are also with neither beginning nor end.
Oh, for crying out loud.
Istari...you did NOT answer the question, instead you posted a link.
It is clear you are intentionally a troll.
I take it, therefore that you CANNOT answer as you do NOT know, so I shan't labor the point further.
"Matter is. How can something be? It is either eternal, self-instantiated, or created. Knock out two, you're left with one. There is no other possibilty. Not because I say so, or because someone else might have said so, but because it is an inescapable truth."
Again, what is inescapable? The apparent naivete of presuming there are ONLY three 'options'...and childhood maths tells you 3-2=1?
Congrats....again the basis is bullshit because there is an ASSUMPTION [by whomever] that there are only three options.
Even WITH acceptance of the assumption there are only three...what idiot knocked out the first two and thus concluded there is a God who dun it?
Convenience of creationists everywhere.
Why cannot matter/energy have always existed? Why do humans INSIST on instilling everything including inanimate objects with their own mortality?
Just because you see time passing....until you shuffle off this mortal coil in 3 score and 10 man determines 'all things must pass'.
Frog-shit.
Scientists are 'curious' creatures wanting to find LOGIC out of chaos so are hell-bent at adapting perception of reality to suit currently agreed 'models' of reality.
Then there's a bunch who get shit-scared when things don't add up right and blame a deity...or say "Eureka...I just proved God exists".
What they meant is...."we have an unknown variable that is screwing with our results......let's name it."
Someone like L. Ron Hubbard might think that way....maybe....if he ever demonstrated ownership of a brain.....
...that functions.....
L. Ron Hubbard
{just say no}
L. Ron Hubbard has been mentioned, so does that mean to were to the point of mentioning Hitler?
Nope!
Oh, wait a minute...... you did.
However, there are two distinct and fundamental differences between Ron L. Hubbard and that other bloke (you know, the one we weren't going to mention). Ron L. Hubbard set up a bogus church to rip people off and amass great personal wealth.... the other bloke had henchmen storm in and just take it. Therefore, I propose the twain shall never meet because they are like chalk and cheese (in comparison) and should not appear in the same discussion/debate.
In fact, Ron L. Hubbard should not be mentioned in a discussion regarding UFOs and/or aliens. Reason? Hubbard wrote science fiction - and rather poor science fiction at that - and aliens are NOT science fiction, as was proven by Speilberg's movie, ET. Anyone who saw that movie and photos of the Roswell Greys would know he was/is the genuine article.
If I'm not mistaken Crono908, negative connotation was the context emphasis.
Except for the "newscaster" He's funny. And nice colors.
I want to comment but ....... as soon as L. Ron Hubbard was mentioned none of this made any sense. We live in a causal universe. Cause and effect. One does not exist without the other. To attribute our existence to a higher power always begs the question, What higher power? Some give this higher power a name and some don't. It doesn't matter. What is is. We are not here by design as some would have you believe. In a universe some 14 billion years old and no one alive was there at the time so therefore no one can say with any certainty one way or the other. Everything is conjecture, speculation at best with no real concrete proof. Words in a book are only words, hearsay. If you were not there at the time how do you know? Theories are called theories for a reason. They exist to be proven or disproved depending on available evidence, available being the operative word. Matter has always existed before the Big Bang and will still exist after this universe goes cold. Don't forget. Energy is matter and vice versa. The two are interchangable. Don't think so? Boil water and watch the steam rise. Steam is a gas or water vapor. Cool it and you have water, a liquid. Freeze it and you have ice, a solid. Three forms of matter. Infinite diversity in infinite combinations over the course of billions of years is bound to develop into something resembling life. Evolution and survival of the fittest took it from there. What worked was kept. What didn't work was tossed away. Evolution is just a fancy word for growth. Adaptation to an existing environment. As the environment changed so did the life forms change in order to survive. You learn and grow as you learn. Simple.
The Universe is actually an EWOM release dated 13 billion years ago. The dev team is on patch 1.11x10 to the tenth power. People are complaining about a confusing UI and lots of unused space on the map. The mod community has little support. Debates on whether seasons should last millions or billions of years. Mechanics need an overhaul and the Universe dev team is deciding whether to release a stand-alone version. The good news: that version of Elemental has teleport higher in the tech tree. The bad news: you can't find any civilizations without teleport.
If you say so.
At last.....someone with the answers....
Though I thought the answer was "42".
"Don't Panic"
Okay.
Now that'd be a good idea, if it's portable and can be carried around on a thumb drive.
The human race is a beta that's been released too early?
That would explain all the bugs and crashes... not to mention the stupid AI...
Truer words have never been spoken ........ until now.
Mama?
Papa... why is me here, how did I get here?
Is me a miracle of God or was I dropped off by aliens on them way to Mars?
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
