Guest guest Posted January 4, 2004 Report Share Posted January 4, 2004 Thanks for clarifying your remark, though you go further to apparently condescend to me as some scientifically naive and uneducated twit who claimed more than I in fact did. We necessarily disagree on evidence. I've never " seen " mesons or bubble chamber trails, but I accept their photos in say a Sci Am article as reasonable " evidence " . There is a huge wealth of credible research by credible scholars, interviews, unhoaxed film, and more. Anyone with serious interest I refer to things like Timothy Good's Above Top Secret just for a start. Governmental entities with only indirect interest like the CIA deny conducting any investigation into matters they research specifically with multimillion dollar budgets specifically for it. I argue your reasoning is circular, that there is no credible evidence because anything claiming ET visitation is real you ipso facto define as inherently non-credible. At least give the point consideration. You suggest my sighting was maybe drone craft or my mind. Surely you don't think I never asked myself these questions? Drone craft do not glow bright red nor illuminate clouds as they pass into them or execute instantaneous changes of direction. My imagination? Sure, just like I could be imagining the computer in front of me, which I submit I am not. I tried to come up with alternative explanations after I observed them, and failed. Let me suggest for your consideration these warn't no stinkin' weather balloons or planet Venus either, and that you might care to start allowing for if nothing else the very possibility these babies are definitely for real. I all but stated outright for you that the connection between extraordinary performance craft and ET life was indirect; but it's a far shorter hop once you accept the first; (a) because they're so far beyond conventional physical technology (laws of momentum, etc.), and (b) because of the, I argue, abundant corroborative evidence consistent with them. I don't challenge you to believe it on my say-so alone; but kindly in future cease to claim I did when I did not. Internal terrestrial diversity is a reference to within species; the account represented the ET's in question as saying that off-world civilizations are generally far more homogenized. Your claim I claimed they're magic is false; I asserted little more than advanced use of science. Believe me, I can make all the arguments against ET contact probably better than you. The sun, 6.0x10^5 miles across, if reduced to BB size, would be about 58 miles from Proxima Centauri; relativistic limitations, etc. You may wish to consider in the hypothetical, if nowhere else, that a civilization in existence for, e.g., 600 million years, may be capable of bypassing those restrictions with continuum alteration and better harnessing of the fundamental forces. You take this further off-topic than I intended, and we don't need to prolong it. My key point was ultimately the moral logic of an advanced civilization evolving into vegetarianism; on this, perhaps, we may agree. , The Stewarts <stews9@c...> wrote: > > On Sunday, January 4, 2004, at 11:21 AM, > wrote: > > > Message: 10 > > Sun, 04 Jan 2004 04:16:57 -0000 > > " radcsusa " <peakqstr@n...> > > Re: Same with Minerals For That Matter / ET life > > > > Not sure i understand your ET comment; you seem to dismiss the idea of > > ET life > > Not at all, I'd say life, even intelligent life, off Earth is inevitable. > I am saying there is zero evidence of it ever having visited here. > > > and tie it to the idea of difference in medical exams. > > Did that simply to underscore how we'd be able to tell at once if > something that didn't evolve in Earth's biosphere showed up. > > > So a > > slightly off-topic comment if I may. > > > > Having observed UFO's > > Ah, you switch topics. Which is okay as long as you realize you've just > done so. Many equate UFO with Space Alien and that is simply wrong. > There need be no connection whatsoever with an apparent light or machine > seen in the sky which we can't account for, and Space Aliens. > > By the way, I've seen many UFOs myself, have experienced missing time and > even location shift, etc. > > > years ago beyond the shadow of doubt, in > > manuevers vastly beyond the most advanced terrestrial craft, > > You are presuming here that what you saw was A) actually there and, B) a > craft. Could also have been in your mind, or a model, or projection, or > unoccupied drone, etc. > > > I have > > rather less doubt than you extraterrestrials are real. > > Bingo. You are saying UFO = ET and I demur. This is neither logic nor > observation, but projection of unwarranted conclusions. We simply lack > the evidence to make this huge leap. > > > Interestingly, > > one piece of lit on the subject I've read since claimed one of the > > most interesting things to them about us is our exceptional degree of > > internal diversity. > > I don't even know what that means. Internal diversity? You mean cockpit > design? What? > > > > One of the many things that fascinated me from that particular > > narrative, by the way, was the account that the ET's in question are > > vegetarian, > > Again, a ludicrous leap. How can anyone possibly assert specifics about > beings we have no evidence for whatsoever? > > > AND extremely skilled at food synthesis, basically capable > > of duplicating anything we have from their own basic plant matter. > > What you're asserting here is the same as saying, " They're magic! " > > > > Not that we human beings are terribly rational > > Keep saying this over and over and you'll see how very right you are. > > > and would necessarily > > handle it well, but crossing my own fingers for open contact sooner > > rather than later anyway :-D > > *sigh* > > Best of luck. > > > > > > > > , The Stewarts <stews9@c...> > > wrote: > >> To an extraterrestrial life form, all Earth life would look more > > similar > >> than different. > >> > >> That's another reason why we know there hasn't been an ET here yet > > -- the > >> basics would be so utterly different as to be glaringly obvious to the > >> briefest of medical exams. > >> > >> > >> On Saturday, January 3, 2004, at 11:28 AM, > > (AT) (DOT) > >> com wrote: > >> > >>> One theory is that humans evolved the way they did because our pre- > >>> hominid ancestors left the rainforest and entered woodlands. So if > >>> wild pigs evolved in an environment similar to a woodland then > >>> anythings possible. But does it really matter? Even as distantly > >>> related as a fish or reptile is to me, I would still consider it akin > >>> to cannibalism to eat one. > >> " Innumerable suns exist; innumerable earths revolve about these > > suns in a > >> manner similar to the way the seven planets revolve around our sun. > > Living > >> being inhabit these worlds. " > >> --Giordano Bruno, Dominican monk burned at the stake in Rome in 1600 > > for > >> insisting on a heliocentric cosmology. > > > > > > > > 'I didn't mean to kill nobody. I just meant to shoot the sonofabitch in > the head and two times in the chest. Him dying was between him and the > Lord.' > --R. I. Burnside, Mississippi bluesman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.