UFO Conjecture(s)

Saturday, June 11, 2016

Trillions of alien civilizations?

But we have yet to come into contact with any....
Click here Alien Life

You know my view: the vast number of UFO reports, over the years and ongoing (somewhat), rule out extraterrestrial visitations.

The conglomeration of supposed alien visitations via flying saucers or UFOs (or in any other way) rules out, sensibly, the idea of ETs scouring our galaxy or the Universe itself and determining the Earth is the place to be.

The article, linked above, gets at the heart of the issue. If there are trillions of alien civilizations extant, why would our planet be singled out for special attention?

Yes, I know many of you think Earth and its inhabitants are a special, intelligent species, but that view is steeped in the religious patina of Hebrew and other ancient myths (which I'll be dealing with here upcoming).

This planet is so inconsequential in the cosmos that for other advanced alien civilizations to find us is, itself, incongruous.

But then to keep coming back, as UFO reportage tells us is happening, is ludicrous on the face of it.

(Yes, there may be or has been an intelligent probe on occasion by AI machines probing the cosmos for life, animate or intelligent machine-only, like itself, but even then the idea that such AI entities are coming here in droves bespeaks a jump from logic to bizarre faith and intellectual madness.)



  • To play Devil's Advocate for a moment, what if what we view as a lot of visits or even a constant presence really isn't that special? What if we are the interstellar equivalent of Antarctica (with humans in the role of penguins, I guess), and aliens from a vast civilization come here in what to them are very, very small numbers, far from the center of things, to conduct research that very few of their fellow aliens really know or care about?

    If we posit that there is a good likelihood of an advanced civilization out there, I think that makes as much sense, or more, as your notion that there could be no reason for them to come here because we humans are meaningless to them. Indeed, it takes into account our unimportance, but still leaves room for a presence, which to us might then be conflated, through myth and legend, into something much bigger and more important than it really is to them.

    By Blogger Paul Kimball, at Sunday, June 12, 2016  

  • My argument Paul is that there would be so many "Antartica's" out there -- since there are trillions of civilizations -- that to provide an ongoing raft of explorations, via UFOs, to check out this forlorn planet, makes little or no sense; after all, these are supposed to be advanced civilizations coming here.

    To further your analogy, one would have to posit that the explorers have a mind-set similar to that of the Victorians who sent out expeditions to Africa, South America, and eventually the North and South Poles.

    That doesn't sound so advanced to me.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, June 12, 2016  

  • People are people, Rich (or aliens are aliens). Times may change, but basic impulses do not. We are who we are.

    And if there is an advanced civilization out there, it's population could well number in the tens or hundreds of billions, or even trillions. I have no problem imagining that a few anthropologists, or historians, would find their way here to study either our planet, which contains an amazingly diverse ecosystem (that perhaps they no longer have), or even our civilization, in the same way that some people are still interested in our own ancient history.

    We may not be the most important thing in the galaxy, but you're too quick to completely dismiss the prospect that this planet and its denizens could be of interest to someone out there, even if they might be viewed as cranks or oddballs by their fellow aliens.


    By Blogger Paul Kimball, at Sunday, June 12, 2016  

  • Oh, I agree, Paul, that the diversity and happenings here, on Earth, might be of interest to an alien civilization.

    But not to the point where dozens, hundreds, thousands of UFOs, carrying interested aliens here, show up; maybe a few or even a hundred but not the amount that UFO lore indicates.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, June 12, 2016  

  • Yes, I agree, and would say that the vast majority of reports can be explained, but that still leaves those that are not, and all I'm saying is that given the likely proliferation of life throughout the cosmos, it's possible some of it may have ventured here from time to time (or even on a permanent basis as a sort of research outpost). but in your original post, you dismiss even this possibility when you wrote, "You know my view: the vast number of UFO reports, over the years and ongoing (somewhat), rule out extraterrestrial visitations."

    Good to see you have changed (or perhaps "clarified" would be a better word) your view. :-)

    By Blogger Paul Kimball, at Sunday, June 12, 2016  

  • Well, Paul, I have adopted, rather recently, the view that von Neumann-like probes might account for some UFO sightings.

    Machine Intelligence (AI] roaming the cosmos makes sense to me but, again, not in an amount that would explain the many UFO sightings registered over the years.

    There seems to be another or other explanation for witnessed UFO sightings, aside from the usual -- misperception of mundane atmospheric phenomena, hoaxes, madness, secret military devices, et cetera.

    MI or machine visitations, for me, are not "extraterrestrial visitations" which imply human-like or humanoid beings; i,e,, ETs.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, June 12, 2016  

  • I don't know anyone worth talking to who thinks "extraterrestrial" must imply visitations by humanoid-type creatures. Anything not from this planet would be extraterrestrial by it's very nature. A machine intelligence would certainly qualify. Heck, so would a non-sentient probe. Our plucky little Mars rover is an extraterrestrial visitor (if you happen to be a Martian).

    You're the one always encouraging people to rise above the muck of over-simplification, amigo - don't get caught in it yourself!


    By Blogger Paul Kimball, at Sunday, June 12, 2016  

  • Having said all that as a Devil's Advocate, I don't see any evidence that convinces me extraterrestrials of any kind - humanoids, probes, AI - have visited us any time recently (by which I mean in recorded human history). I wouldn't rule it out, but I would put it way down the list of likely explanations.

    By Blogger Paul Kimball, at Sunday, June 12, 2016  

  • Considering the mental abilities of UFO buffs, one has to be careful not to be nuanced.

    But, for me, extraterrestrial visitations reeks of ETs, in the Spielbergian sense: a humanoid creature,

    A von Neumann-like probe or intelligent machine probe doesn't qualify as extraterrestrial (with the implication I note above) for me.

    But you make a point Paul.

    I just think that you forget how common folk interpret the word extraterrestrial. They see the word defining all the creatures from fiction and movies, not something like the Mars rover.

    I'm read by a more erudite crowd, who know the difference and my nuanced postings.

    If I were writing for the Facebook crowd or general public, the great unwashed, I might be more careful with my terminology, but I refuse to cast pearls before swine, so I'll stick with my distinction(s).


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, June 12, 2016  

  • I'm read by a more erudite crowd, who know the difference and my nuanced postings.

    I've read some of the commentary here over the years, and I'm not so sure of that. ;-)

    By Blogger Paul Kimball, at Sunday, June 12, 2016  

  • Hahahaha...

    You may be right.

    I like to give some of them the benefit of the doubt.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, June 12, 2016  

  • Paul,

    It is difficult to understant how there can be progress with the great unwashed (or the MSM) when someone so obviously intelligent as yourself can state, baldly, that you don't see "any evidence" that there have been extraterristrial visists of "any" kind, including probes, etc. This would imply that all of the radar cases, all of the EM cases, all of the eyewitness cases by pilots and police, over the last 60 years, somehow have a conventional explanation. Goodness. Even the highest levels of the military, in 1947(!), did not believe that. Even they knew then that the reported phenomena was real and that it exhibited intelligence under control and could be evasive when confronted; hence the secrecy and discrediting of witnesses. That "intelligent evasiveness" for objects that can be tracked on radar at speeds (back then)that were impossible for us or the Russians is "evidence" of something extra-ordinary. Even a cursory reading of the literature since then confirms these notions in spades (again, unless, everyone is lying or seeing Venus). I just don't get the "I don't see any evidence" pronouncement...I just don't.

    By Blogger Dominick, at Sunday, June 12, 2016  

  • Dominick:

    There ought to have some hard evidence of ET visits by now. There just aint any.

    If you think that we don't need hard evidence (i.e. wreckage, machinery or alien bodies) then the whole argument becomes pointless. The scientific fraternity will NEVER accept the kind of evidence you list as proving ETs have visited our planet. It may SUGGEST this but nothing further. And ET proponents always say is "it is hushed up by the military", etc. A standard 'cop out' for the lack of real evidence.

    Hence even if there really have been ET visits, we shall never be able to establish this until and unless hard evidence is obtained. And preferably soon after it happens too. ET visits way back in history are equally useless as the evidence will have disappeared by now. (Ancient astronauts promoters notwithstanding).

    Think how long it was before meteorites were finally accepted by science. Only when actual hard evidence, in the form of meteoritic fragments, were obtained for study.

    By Blogger cda, at Sunday, June 12, 2016  

  • There is no evidence that convinces me beyond a reasonable doubt, which is the standard that needs to be applied for such an extraordinary claim, thay intelligent life has visited Earth. There isn't even enough evidence - real, solid, physical evidence, not stories told by alleged witnesses - that convinces me on the balance of probabilities that extraterrestrials have visited. I don't rule it out, but anyone who thinks there is enough evidence to make those kinds of conclusion is doing so based on faith, not reason.


    By Blogger Paul Kimball, at Sunday, June 12, 2016  

  • Paul is saying -- and I presume to speak for him here -- that there is no evidence for intelligent extraterrestrial life visiting the Earth.

    And I agree with him/

    Even though I see intelligent behavior in UFO movement, One can't say that the intelligence comes form ETs or beings from afar.

    The phenomenon shows, it seems to me, and Dominick, intelligent behavior but does that mean the intelligent behavior is coming from alien beings?

    There is no evidence and, again, I see little chance of ETs visiting Earth is the vast amounts portrayed by UFO lore.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, June 12, 2016  

  • Yes, quite right. I think there is a fair bit of mostly anecdotal evidence, stretching far beyond the boundaries of the so-called UFO phenomenon, that indicates the real possibility of interactions with some form of higher or advanced intelligence / consciousness, but there is nothing that can prove it as a fact, and certainly nothing that proves it is extraterrestrial if it does exit.

    By Blogger Paul Kimball, at Sunday, June 12, 2016  

  • All of you assert that we require hard evidence to provide proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Fine, I agree. And we can all agree that that sort of proof does not exist. But scientists are often forced to make reasonable conjectures about the facts of reality without so-called hard evidence. (Einstein, in one of the more famous cases, did just this). Paul said that there was not "any" evidence that might lead to a ETH conclusion and I strongly disagreed with that. IF SOME UFOs show up on radar as solid objects and SOME display intelligencee (curiosity, evasive action), even as scientists we can make a reasonable conjecture about the reality of the phenomena. My reasonable conjecture is that some of these are ET probes on some undetermined exploration. If you have some alternative hypothesis to explain the evidence accompaning the phenomena (and please don't say that there is not "any" evidence), present it for consideration. Believe me, I would love to consider some reasonable alternative!

    By Blogger Dominick, at Sunday, June 12, 2016  

  • Dominick:

    UFOs could be anything -- an unusual, unknown phenomenon, or something from our future (or past), something from an existent unfound civilization on Earth (the Mac Tonnies conjecture), something from another dimension or alternate universe, or some kind of intrinsic human madmess.

    But the ET proposition is possible but seemingly unlikely,as I see it (as you know). The droves of UFO reports, if true, bespeak an insane exploration of this lonely planet in the outback of the cosmos.

    And your ETs are supposed to be intelligent or advanced.

    The extraterrestrial scenario is a matter of faith not logic or reason (or science).

    That's all.

    I'd like to help you out here, but the ET thing is too exotic, considering that ETs would be smart enough (if advanced) to be more judicious than what the UFO lore indicates.

    Your view allows for crazy, unreasonable UFOs, a possibility, but a remote possibility.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, June 12, 2016  

  • But, Rich, you did not deal with the evidence! Noise is evidence; radar images are evidence; E/M effects are evidence; weight and mass are evidence (cases involving alleged landings, marks in the ground, etc.); intellegent motion is evidence. I could go on but, I hope, you get the point. So, you see, UFOs could not be "anything". That's an irrational conclusion given the evidence. Something from the future or the past? Unless you can make a rational argument for time travel, that's also an irrational conclusion. Something from another dimension or alternate universe? Science fiction with no solid basis in either theory or fact. Actually, if you think about it (and I have) the ET hypothesis is the least weird theory that could explain the evidence that we see right before our face. There are objections--and you have raised them and, of course, I understand them--but that takes nothing away from the fact that the ET hypothesis is the least irrational theory out there concerning some UFOs. Is that proof? Of course not but it is reasonable conjecture, given the evidence. Ghosts, time travel from the future(?) and some still unknown natural phenomenon are emphatically NOT. I'm done.

    By Blogger Dominick, at Sunday, June 12, 2016  

  • Dominick:

    I luv ya, but you're off on your own sci-fi kick.

    Earth is so remote, so inconsequential, and so nutty (the diversity and the history) that only an alien culture enamored of freaks would expend so much energy and time to visit in the cascading amount that UFO provides.

    You are positing a "religious view" -- that is, you believe that something from afar is coming here and has come here for eons, to observe and maybe even interfere.....like God's angels in the Hebrew Bible or OT/NT.

    There is, of course, seeming calculated intelligence in the few UFO reports one might see as authentic, bu that, in no way, indicates an extraterrestrial presence. Yes, it's a possibility, but only one of many (which I have listed).

    If you can step outside your view of Earth as central and important to the cosmos, trying to see the insignificance of this planet (in the graphics I keep foisting upon readers here), you'd readily realize that countless trips by ETs from there to here is ridiculous on the face of it.

    There has to be countless civilizations, as the article I used for this posting says, which are much more remarkable and attractive to an advanced alien species.

    ETs coming here rather than visiting more advanced civilizations in the vast Universe, or even in other dimensions or universes would indicate an irrational, even insane, species, one hardly advanced at all.

    It's like Earthlings going to Kentucky rather than visiting the Louvre in Paris.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Sunday, June 12, 2016  

  • Aliens in 1950s looking sci fi rocket ships that crash with seeming regularity traveling across the vastness of interstellar space are reasonable conjecture, but time travel, which is just as theoretically possible, is not? Neither one is particularly likely, but each equally plausible as fringe ideas... unless you're a zealot.

    By Blogger Paul Kimball, at Monday, June 13, 2016  

  • At this point, in view of his assertion that there are so many radar cases, ground trace cases, high speed and manoeuver cases etc., Dominick should be asked to list his best ten, or even five, such UFO cases. Should these turn out to have reasonable alternative explanations (not necessarily 100% proven explanations) he will be in serious trouble. He cannot then be allowed to list another five, because the first five were already, by definition, his considered best. Remember that lots of old, seemingly good unexplained, cases that Keyhoe et al thought so marvellous, have fallen by the wayside.

    So go on Dominick, list your 'top five' if you dare and see what people have to say. It may well be that all five have bitten the dust long ago in other people's eyes.

    Tread carefully, it is dangerous ground!

    By Blogger cda, at Monday, June 13, 2016  

  • Coming late into this conversation but have read the post and comments carefully.

    I have come to believe that, like you asked RR, we must think outside the box and openly recognize that something is happening -the real traces, not the lights in the sky or such that may be dismissed, that are being confronted by a technology or physics (more likely) beyond our awareness.

    What makes most sense to me would be a dimensional perception issue. I'm thinking that our UAPs could be temporary distortions that allows us gimps of what is or might be ongoing at some level.

    It also occurs that it's just possible that we could be just being outsmarted, looking for crashes or physical evidence that would mean nothing for those above what our senses detect - a cargo cult like issue.

    Traditional flying saucers, airships, and the like could also be deceptions, if we are talking of physics understood by our betters as I'm still thinking that linear travel is unlikely or impossible.

    Bottom line, thinking outside the box, the dimensional issue makes the most sense to me. It doesn't mean the ETH but it could but perhaps combined in the other aspects.


    By Blogger Bryan Daum, at Monday, June 13, 2016  

  • An inter-dimensional presence would be interesting, Bryan, hosted by beings from those dimensions or dimension that have a sense of humor or a maliciousness bordering on madness.

    Slipping in and out of dimension seems less troublesome than a trek across the cosmos.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, June 13, 2016  

  • I would think, optimistically perhaps, it would be more likely one of exploration,curiosity and interest as we might do. All that is needed is a form of access beyond our perspective.


    By Blogger Bryan Daum, at Monday, June 13, 2016  

  • Two things I keep accenting: curiosity would be better served in other Universe venues I imagine and the raft of visitors, indicated by UFO ET believers, is a bit much, to assuage curiosity or even scientific investigation.

    Earth seems unique to us but there has to be more interesting planets in the vast cosmos, which explorers (AI and others) would want to seek out, not squandering its resources, time, and efforts on this backwater oasis in the numbers represented by UFO sightings.

    But a travel by our future ancestors, backward to now, to see how they came about makes a kind of sense to me.

    Or a slippage form one dimension or multiverse to this one seems reasonable, to some extent.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Monday, June 13, 2016  

  • Paul wrote:

    "There isn't even enough evidence - real, solid, physical evidence, not stories told by alleged witnesses - that convinces me on the balance of probabilities that extraterrestrials have visited."

    I've made this case before however ET proponents still claim landing marks, radiation, burned soil, radar images, etc. are "evidence" supporting their claim that UFOs are flown by alien pilots.

    Unfortunately while this may be "evidence" it isn't substantial enough to conclude UFOs are alien space craft.

    I'm of the opinion that the < 10% of truly inexplainable sightings have more to do with a phenomenon that is indigenous and local rather than interstellar.

    By Blogger Brian Bell, at Thursday, June 16, 2016  

  • The purpose of our own curiosity in this issues is to attempt to understand a phenomenon, that's a given, but it goes back to the question of just what is the phenomenon. To project indigenous and local is still a projection, albeit a conservative one.


    By Blogger Bryan Daum, at Thursday, June 16, 2016  

Post a Comment

<< Home