UFO Conjectures

Tuesday, December 25, 2007

UFOs: The Cosmology Flaw


Earth is too insignificant to attract alien beings in flying saucers.

The UFO phenomenon can’t be explained by interplanetary alien visitations; the universe, even the Milky Way, is filled with too many planets that are more prone to invite visitors than Earth would.

The Earth is infinitesimally small in the cosmological context, and without vibrant attractive features. Even the water element is trivial by observational standards.

Unless UFO inhabitants have technologies that enable “them” to ferret out minerals or liquids that they need or find interesting -- and no UFO has exhibited such advanced technology – the Earth would remain invisible to them.

Alien explorers scouring the Universe or just our galaxy alone would miss the Earth by virtue of Earth’s inconsequentiality.

Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune or one of their moons would create more excitement than Earth would.

But Earth-centric ufologists still think that this planet is a beacon of some kind that has attracted interplanetary visitors since time immemorial.

Sure, the UFO phenomenon exists, but would better be explained by time travel (from the past or future) or even a parallel universe or existence.

(The Mac Tonnies idea of a concurrent, unknown or hidden Earthian civilization accounting for UFOs is without any evidence, circumstantial or otherwise.)

Those who have astronomical acumen understand just insignificant the Earth is, in the great cosmological scheme of things.

As a beacon for flying saucers, Earth falls short by a long way.

And the vast number of UFO sightings and varying craft configurations (if real) indicate a sizable presence that means some alien culture has an inordinate interest and exploratory fleet available to waste time in Earth’s skies, or a slew of alien cultures have stumbled upon Earth and have been intrigued enough, to the detriment of all other planets in the galaxy or Universe, to remain on scene for millennia, and to what purpose?

A technologically advanced species wouldn’t find Earth’s radio or television broadcasts of such vital interest that the species would expend vast resources and time to seek the source out. It’s senseless on the face of it.

An argument can be made that UFOnauts are loopy and we human beings can’t fathom their thought processes or modus operandi.

That’s a possibility we admit, but hoping for a relief from Earth’s woes by such obtuse creatures makes little sense also.

And if flying saucers were or are an invading vanguard, the procrastination bespeaks something not sinister but inept.

No, cosmology doesn’t allow for alien or interplanetary UFOs, so the mystery has to be explained in some other way....or dismissed out of hand as worthy of further attention, which we’ve been advocating for some time now.


  • What proof are you presenting here other than "because I say so"?

    Unless UFO inhabitants have technologies that enable “them” to ferret out minerals or liquids that they need or find interesting -- and no UFO has exhibited such advanced technology – the Earth would remain invisible to them.

    By Blogger i-smarter-than-u, at Wednesday, December 26, 2007  

  • UFOs have not shown an advanced technology; that is, what has been observed is little more than a technology a few years in advance of our own....if UFOs are, indeed, from an alien/intergalactic civilization.

    Moreover, the elements found on Earth, aside from water, are abundant elsewhere in the Milky Way and Universe beyond.

    What would be the attraction for an alien civilization -- it's certainly not the intelligence of the beings here, as that is desperately lacking.

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, December 26, 2007  

  • Instant acceleration to massive hypersonic speeds without a sonic boom, Instant disintegration, Physical morphing of its shape into other shapes, morphing into balls of light, splitting into multiple pieces...

    Do you really consider the above examples of ufo capabilites to represent technology that is only a few years in advance of our own?

    By Blogger Brandon, at Wednesday, December 26, 2007  

  • Brandon...

    The characteristics you list are akin to a phenomenon that isn't nuts and bolts configured.

    The UFOs that exhibit the properties you cite are not what we consider alien craft (flying saucers).

    That's the problem with the UFO phenomenon -- it has to be categorized so that material physical attributes are not confused with non-material attributes.

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, December 26, 2007  

  • This is the little game your site plays. Firstly, it is irrelevant whether or not the technology is advanced in comparison to ours, but it is--simply by the fact that UFOs are hypothesized to be alien craft. You're trying to have it every which way, and you can't.

    Every person who's done their share of debate, even in high school, knows how it works.
    You have to agree on some basic facts. People have reported all SORTS of apparently controlled craft in our atmosphere, some exhibiting behavior above and beyond what is of know capability to humans accomplish in flight.

    This argument is erroneous. I also can argue that Earth is a rarity, by our own top scientists’ assessment, and that life may be abundant, but not common in our Universe. The point being you still said "UNLESS" aliens have this technology, well I proved (through articles I cited) that we have the technology (to detect elements on other planets). So even given that aliens are not more advanced than humans (which they would have to be at least a little to travel the planets) this still gives them the ability to detect elements of life. Your argument that water is found elsewhere is specious, as water is found with a host of other life enabling characteristics on Earth, and we are unique in our immediate surroundings. You ALSO admit:
    "aside from water". Well water is a big deal. Sorry. Your arguments fall flat, and that is being generous.

    By Blogger whateverbuddy, at Wednesday, December 26, 2007  

  • Whateverbuddy...

    While an alien technology might be able to find our atmosphere and other Earth elements, as we ourselves are able to do during searches for planets in the galaxy, as you note, this means that there are other worlds with atmospheres (perhaps water too) which shows that Earth is not unique, and as we contend, not outstanding significantly.

    That is, alien cultures, if they exist, can find a plethora of planets more attractive than Earth, or equally attractive if you will.

    And considering that plethora, why would an alien culture expend as much travel and time here when there are so many other worlds to explore?

    You could say that the alien culture or cultures that are visiting (and have been visiting Earth over the years) is so fraught with people and craft that visiting Earth is no problem.

    But cosmologically that seems remote, in many ways.

    So we think looking at the arcane possibilities -- time travel or interdimensional travel might prove more productive.

    We know it's comforting to think that Earth is someplace special, but it isn't.

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, December 26, 2007  

  • Here is the good part. If you accept the fact that earth-like planets are most likely abundant, if not common, throughout the Universe, then it makes the ET
    hypothesis MORE likely, not less. I agree there may be some inter-dimensional/time aspects to some UFO sightings or reports, but (assuming that a small % of reports represent actual visitations) this does NOT rule out that the craft came from other physical planets or worlds. HOW they got here is of course open for debate. Life, and advanced life, (not taking into account guidance from a creator God), is probably the exception, not the rule in the Universe. Using ourselves as an example, I would suspect other intelligent creatures would seek out--well--like creatures. So we do not have to be "special" or "unique" as long as we fill a need for said alien species-we fill in gaps in their knowledge of what makes up their "world". Look it may be cliché, but this example works: most humans don't consider ants all that "important" either, BUT we still study them. WHY? Sometimes just to study them. The same could be said for any "alien" (read: extra-solar system explorers.

    By Blogger What_about_it, at Wednesday, December 26, 2007  

  • What_about_it:

    Your points are well taken.

    Let us note that ants are studied by a very few, with little expense or use of resources.

    The curiosity of UFO aliens seems ongoing and rather inconclusive on "their" part.

    Let's assume there are other life-forms in the galaxy (and the Universe itself).

    The extent of UFO intrusions to study our life-form(s) -- us and other creatures on the Earth -- seems a bit much.

    To travel here via worm holes would be daunting, and travel inter-stellarly moreso, as you know.

    To do so, at the rate that ufology posits for UFO visitations, bespeaks an obsession that is irrational on any terms.

    Did extraterrestrials stumble upon Earth by mistake and can't keep from returning?

    Are we -- is this civilization -- so much more fascinating than the myriad other worlds (and possible creatures) elsewhere in the Milky Way (or the whole Universe)?

    It doesn't compute....for us anyway.

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, December 26, 2007  

  • If we could look at our perspective for a second, some thoughts on what we might do if we could, and perhaps we can in the future. To keep "life" and our genes alive we might spread them to numerous places in order to keep our "species" suriving. I use species loosely because with some simple tinkering we can sort of Lego our DNA into whatever form we might find acceptable.

    DNA seems to be the building blocks of our biology and an earnest seeding of the galaxy and beyond would seem natural if we view it in the context of survival. We would partner the technological know how with biological need to do so.

    I guess it seems rather presumptuous to guess at why some entity might visit our planet or why they wouldn't. Our reasoning may not apply, and even if it does we may not be looking at the right things.

    I don't know that these aliens, if they even exist, would come to a planet for elementary resources. That is, abiotic ones. I mean we can't even account for most of the matter in the universe!! Maybe they can. It seems more plausible to me that there would be biotic reasons behind visitation and not a lack of water or other resources.

    Then again it could be those compelling Dancing with the Stars episodes. If thats not entertaining to aliens then they have absolutely no sense of humor and have no permission for even being on my planet.

    By Blogger TC, at Tuesday, January 01, 2008  

  • Earth has been around for billions of years. It's only a very small fraction of those billions of years in which humans have been around. And a far smaller fraction of time in which humans were able to jettison themselves or their probes off the planet.

    So while there may be many other planets in the relative vicinity which have life, there may be something special about Earth's progress. Sure, the UFOs could visit other planets. But what might they find? It is certainly reasonable to believe that they might find dinosaurs, or even planets with only plant or microbial life. And as interesting as those might be, they may not be nearly as interesting to these visitors as we humans are today.

    Indeed, by studying us, the aliens could possibly gain better insights as to their own evolution.

    By Blogger Epinoia, at Monday, January 07, 2008  

  • Persons who think that the Earth is a "tourist" spot for alien visitaitons have got to step back and view this planet in the context of the galaxy and the Universe as a whole.

    Only then will the idea of Earth as a beacon for extraterrestrials be put in perspective, and seen to be idiotic at the outset.

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, January 08, 2008  

  • Only then will the idea of Earth as a beacon for extraterrestrials be put in perspective, and seen to be idiotic at the outset.

    So let me get this straight, RRRGroup -- those who believe the Earth is worth visiting are idiots? Your attitudes stink and I find this comment insulting to be honest. Not only are you boorish and arrogant, but your argument is spurious and is nothing more than assumptions based on assumptions based on assumptions. Which is hypocritical, because you are constantly attacking UFO researchers for making assumptions based on little evidence. Practice what you preach, Iconoclasts. This is the last time I'll be visiting this site because it's very obvious you spend most mornings admiring your omniscience in the mirror.

    By Blogger Rick, at Sunday, January 13, 2008  

  • Rick...who isn't going to visit here to read this:

    The idea that Earth -- a backwater in the galaxy and Universe -- is a beacon for extraterrestrial visits is idiotic, not the beings who supposedly come here.

    You have got to read more carefully, as should all UFO hobbyists.

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, January 13, 2008  

  • No, you have got to read more carefully. I'm talking about people on Earth who think our planet is worth visiting by ET.

    If you can't think of any reason why ET wouldn't want to come here, then you have a very small, sad imagination and appreciation of life. I hope it's comfortable in your dreary, concrete box of cynicism.

    But on the other side of the coin, your attitude is a good reason for ET to stay away...

    By Blogger Rick, at Sunday, January 13, 2008  

  • You observed:

    "The Mac Tonnies idea of a concurrent, unknown or hidden Earthian civilization accounting for UFOs is without any evidence, circumstantial or otherwise."

    This is demonstrably incorrect. It is disingenuous at best, and even blatantly dishonest and intentionally misleading in more accurate review. It is an example of "ignore, downplay, or ridicule and the evidence will go away." But it won't.

    The circumstantial evidence for an earthly non-human presence and intelligence is in fact overwhelmingly present. Men have been sent to the gas chamber on far less evidence. The research of Ivan T. Sanderson ("Invisible Residents"), John Keel (in particular "Disneyland of the Gods") and the myriad cogent observations of Jacques Vallee more than bear this out.

    Archeologically anomalous objects and artifacts which by all understanding predate humanity also bear out this very uncomfortable but self-evident fact.

    As I point out in my own work (Caverns, Cauldrons, and Concealed Creatures, 1st Edition Jan. 2000, 2nd Edition Jan. 2007, URL below), and in much greater detail, the evidence is overwhelming in terms of sheer volume and, when applying Occam's Razor, no other truly logical conclusion can be reached. From Shag Harbour to various folklore (yet based in fact, as in the case of homo floresiensis)accounts, "other" intelligent hominids or humanoids, and other types of technically-advanced beings, have always been with us on this planet.

    The extraterrestrial hypothesis is a smoke-screen, a diversion intended to keep us looking upward, rather than all around, behind, and beneath us here on our teeming ball of very fertile dirt. The very fact that most "alien" forms conform (as I've pointed out in both editions of my book as well as magazine articles)to an "earthly vertebrate template", i.e., two arms, two legs, central trunk, two (binocular) eyes, one mouth, generally reptilian/amphibian or simian characteristics, etc. etc, would indicate that whatever we're dealing with springs from the same pool of genetic diversity that gave us lizards, human beings, blue whales, and hermit crabs.

    Today's "alien abductions" and "hybridization" tales bear a startling similarity to folktales and first-person, non-folklore accounts from throughout history--except that such activity was then blamed on fairies, elves, demons, succubi or incubi, djinn, and various other subterranean- or sub-oceanic-based non-human "humanoids". In order for such genetic activity to ever bear fruit, even rarely, then a genetic similarity would have to exist which utterly disqualifies beings from other star-systems and planets, where genetic make-up would in all likelihood be incompatible with ours (and by "ours" I mean "earthly", as all creatures on Earth, no matter how seemingly-bizarre or different in appearance, share a huge amount of the same genetic information/structure). Again, this is circumstantial (very good circumstantial) evidence for a non-human presence here on our own world, rather than one which originates somewhere else.

    -W.M. Mott

    By Blogger wmmott, at Wednesday, January 23, 2008  

  • W. M. Mott,

    We accept the thesis that there are and have been anomalous presences during humankind's reign of the Earth, but our statement was that there is no proof of a "civilization."

    That is, there is no extant evidence of a parallel civilization with all the attributes that a full-blown civilization has.

    The incidents of strange beings and artifacts appearing within the construct of our civilization are many, but that doesn't a civilization make.

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Wednesday, January 23, 2008  

  • "That is, there is no extant evidence of a parallel civilization with all the attributes that a full-blown civilization has."

    But this is merely semantics.

    UFOs themselves are apparently (or are designed to give the appearance of) artificial, "constructed" and "engineered" objects. Hence they are "evidence" of a parallel (regardless of location or origin) "civilization", albeit a civilization which is highly secretive and deceptive in its dealings with others (us).

    Since most, nearly all, UFO sightings and encounters take place in the vicinity of the Earth's surface (this includes our skies), this is evidence of a phenomenon which is largely (but perhaps not totally) localized to the Earth. Therefore, it is evidence of, most likely, an "earthly" civilization. Occam's Razor applies.

    If there is a hominid species that, for whatever reason, requires an influx of human/homo sapiens genetic material on a regular basis in order to survive (in other words, a close relative in terms of species, perhaps even a form of man), yet one which prefers to remain hidden for the most part while they/it "reap" whatever they wish from the ecosystem we share with them (and here is the reason for their "sudden concern" about our impact on the environment), then this explains many "mysteries" indeed.

    If one were to put all the UFOs near bodies of water with all those USOs which have been seen in the world's bodies of water, it would probably outweigh those seen away from water. At the same time, UFO appearances have, on numerous occasions, accompanied volcanic eruptions, and UFOs have been videotaped coming and going from active volcanoes. So what conclusion should we reach here? This is simply not an extraterrestrial phenomenon and never has been.

    We have no way of knowing how many civilizations may have preceded us on this planet, only to be "pushed to the brink" of mutual assured destruction as outlined in the Bhagavad-Gita, the Mahabarata, the Genesis account of Sodom and Gommorah, or even more "historically recent" accounts such as those recorded by Alexander the Great, in which "flying shields" destroyed city walls in Asia Minor, and were seen by him to, at another location in India, come and go repeatedly from a deep river. The heat-fused city of Mohenjo-Daro is still radioactive--and there is no explanation for this in terms of "modern science". Obviously, if nuclear war occurred in the distant past, the safest place for humanoid beings to take refuge would be under the seas and beneath the ground. Such an event would also explain much about their wariness and secretiveness in general, and as you know, UFOs seem to have an unhealthy fascination with our military prowess and bases, while at the same time exhibiting an arrogant, "superior" disregard for human safety (whether by alleged contact involving trauma and pain, or exposure to dangerous forms of deadly radiation for unfortunate witnesses).

    The existence of inexplicable relics of an advanced type could very likely be evidence of the "UFO civilization", before it destroyed itself in a spasm of rage. Radiation and isolation of genetic groups could explain much in terms of "their" alleged interest in human fertility and procreation, and I'm also talking about this strange trait among anomalous humanoids in general, as outlined in my last post.

    By Blogger wmmott, at Wednesday, January 23, 2008  

  • Mr. Mott,

    All that you post is interesting, and "true."

    But there is no inter-active or prominent evidence that a working civilization is operating within the confines of the Earth's environment, beneath the seas or above terra firma.

    With all the sophisticated technology extant, one would think that humans would have uncovered a "civilzation" that is present, or the remnants of a prior civilization that virtually exterminated itself.

    Your hypothesis, along with that of Mac Tonnies, is intriguing, but like the UFO phenomenon, is without proof, or even concrete circumstantial evidence -- else we'd all be the trail of these sub rosa peoples rather than inferring they exist.

    Ockham's Razor doesn't apply: your thesis is too complex to utilize the maxim that Ockham proffered.

    Adrian (for the RRRGroup)

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, January 24, 2008  

  • "Ockham's Razor doesn't apply: your thesis is too complex to utilize the maxim that Ockham proffered."


    Not at all. Just the opposite is the case.

    Occam's Razor states that the simplest answer among a myriad of theories or postulates, no matter how unlikely or strange it might seem at first, is most often the correct answer, or the most accurate.

    Given the theories of the extraterrestrial hypothesis, the time travel hypothesis (too fraught with potential paradoxes to even be considered), the multi-dimensional hypothesis (alone or by itself), and the "hidden civilization of earthly origin" hypothesis, the latter is the simplest and the most logical. Given the circumstantial evidence I've cited, it is also the theory most closely supported by facts.

    Thanks for the very rational discussion, btw. In an area of study with so much fierce squabbling and territoriality, it's always nice to find a logical, open-minded party with whom to discuss such matters!

    By Blogger wmmott, at Thursday, January 24, 2008  

  • Mr. Mott,

    Thank you.

    Your erudite comments are a pleasure to read also.

    We have access to Rich Reynolds' extensive library of books and material about possible prior civilizations on Earth.

    (He's a believer in the idea that some previous civilizations existed here, and went under for various reasons. As to how technological those civilizations might have been, that's another matter for him.)

    The rest of us just don't see anything that proves a working civilization is intact and operating right under our noses, as it were.

    The UFO phenomenon is also one that hasn't provided anything worthwhile for the public at large; maybe the military but not us plain folks who have to earn a living just to survive.

    But discussions about such things help move the days along.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, January 24, 2008  

Post a Comment

<< Home