Extra terrestrial life beyond our blue planet

  • Thread starter Newton08
  • Start date
  • #1
11
0
Everone is curious if there is any extra terrestrial life beyond our blue planet.

do aliens really exist?

Some organizations claim that they've got the strong evidences about existence of alien or the landing of alienship on earth, is it true?

any comments'd be appreciated.

cheers,
ryan.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Answers and Replies

  • #2
russ_watters
Mentor
20,125
6,644


The evidence, as of now, does not meet scientific standards for reliability.
 
  • #3
26
0


There will exist extra terrestial life because we cant be alone in such vast a universe but the probability of us ever having an interaction with such life is neglibly negligible
 
  • #4
russ_watters
Mentor
20,125
6,644


Such absolutes like "can't" don't apply to a problem where there is no direct evidence to support any conclusion.
 
  • #5
madmike159
Gold Member
369
0


Some one (sorry can't remember who it was) when asked if he thought life existed in other parts of the universe replied "I hope so, otherwise it’s a big waste of space".
I doubt aliens have landed here. Even if they had FTL travel the effort for them to get here wouldn't be worth it if all they did was fly around or make crop circles.
 
  • #6
46
1


If there were aliens(much intelligent species) travelling our planet in UFO's , why they land only in developed countries like USA,russia Germany etc,why not in very poor countries I guess its the false propaganda made by government of rich country publicizing that they have well understand space and have a lot of progress in that.
i believe that there may be living organism in other planet ,but we cannot be sure if they are under/above intelligent than us.
 
  • #7
198
0


Because I assume the aliens want to interact with intelligent humans. Aka developed countries :D
 
  • #8
46
1


Because I assume the aliens want to interact with intelligent humans. Aka developed countries :D
Our supposed aliens are to be millionth times intelligent than intelligent humans,why would they visit the species having intelligency,1millionth of the themselves
 
  • #9
russ_watters
Mentor
20,125
6,644


Some one (sorry can't remember who it was) when asked if he thought life existed in other parts of the universe replied "I hope so, otherwise it’s a big waste of space".
That would be Matthew McConaughey's character in Contact....great movie.
 
  • #10
madmike159
Gold Member
369
0


That would be Matthew McConaughey's character in Contact....great movie.
Yea thats the one. Best line "Thats hydrogen times pi".
I think for alien's to get here they would need a higher level intelligence than us.
 
  • #11
Borek
Mentor
28,600
3,078


I think for alien's to get here they would need a higher level intelligence than us.
Sounds like contradiction to me - if they have a higher level of inteligence than we do, they won't get here.
 
  • #12
11
0


If there were aliens(much intelligent species) travelling our planet in UFO's , why they land only in developed countries like USA,russia Germany etc,why not in very poor countries
Yeah, the most UFO encounters are recorded in US, that doesn't necessarily mean most US Americans have video camera. I think US government is working on secret super technology aircrafts but I don't agree that they are working with aliens. yeah, I also can't understand why UFO's are only encountered mostly in developed countires. Some even claim that they've been kidnapped by aliens, lol. If I're kidnapped I'd take control of their alienship with my evil mind, lol.
 
  • #13
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,260
301


If there were aliens(much intelligent species) travelling our planet in UFO's , why they land only in developed countries like USA,russia Germany etc,why not in very poor countries I guess its the false propaganda made by government of rich country publicizing that they have well understand space and have a lot of progress in that.
i believe that there may be living organism in other planet ,but we cannot be sure if they are under/above intelligent than us.
Your premise is false. Without addressing the claim of ET directly, UFO reports are not limited to industrialized countries. In fact, in Peru, the idea of visiting ETs is almost taken for granted; esp with the older people.
 
  • #14
46
1


Your premise is false. Without addressing the claim of ET directly, UFO reports are not limited to industrialized countries. In fact, in Peru, the idea of visiting ETs is almost taken for granted; esp with the older people.
well it was up to my knowlege.:redface:
 
  • #15


If there were aliens(much intelligent species) travelling our planet in UFO's , why they land only in developed countries like USA,russia Germany etc,why not in very poor countries I guess its the false propaganda made by government of rich country publicizing that they have well understand space and have a lot of progress in that.
i believe that there may be living organism in other planet ,but we cannot be sure if they are under/above intelligent than us.
This is where you are dead wrong, there have been reports in countries all over the world even in third world countries.

Here is a good video by astrophysicist Dr. Michio Kaku.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #16
98
0


I wonder why I always hear about things like aliens, ghosts or UFOs, and yet I haven't seen any of them in my whole years of living on earth. My guess is that I will never see these exotic things, and this is too bad! :frown:. Perhaps there is only one wicked alien that is wandering the earth trying to mock us, the lucky son of a b...:mad:
 
Last edited:
  • #17
19
0


They exist. I don't know why they are here. I don't know where/when they are from. I can't explain how they might travel across - what we perceive as - vast space IF they come from other star-systems.

I do know I have seen two moving in tandem one evening - DEFINIETLY NOT a plane or anything else that flies around this earth that anyone has ever knowingly invented. No sound and super-fast.

I had a very close relative who was sworn to secrecy - working for the Canadian Federal Government. Years ago, he told me that he was involved with a few interesting projects with the military after WWII. He was commissioned to investigate UFO sightings. He said that he couldn't give me any information because of his secrecy oath but he did say: "I started the program a skeptic; when I finished I knew for sure that we are not alone in the universe." From someone as honest and true as this man - I HAVE to believe it.
 
  • #18
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,260
301


I do know I have seen two moving in tandem one evening - DEFINIETLY NOT a plane or anything else that flies around this earth that anyone has ever knowingly invented. No sound and super-fast.
What exactly did you see?
 
  • #19
19
0


What exactly did you see?
When it happened, I reported it to Peter Davenport of NUFORC:

Click http://www.nuforc.org/webreports/043/S43202.html" [Broken] for my report.

The whole list of sitings from my province at NUFORC is found http://www.nuforc.org/webreports/ndxlON.html" [Broken].

If you go to the Ontario sitings link within NUFORC - via link directly above - you will notice my report dated: 3/27/05 20:40 Brampton (Canada) directly above it - later on in the evening - another report was apparently logged: 3/27/05 22:15 Brampton (Canada)

Davenport runs a pretty tight ship and is well respected. There is a lot of great reading and reports within the site from all over North America.

http://www.nuforc.org/" [Broken]

The data base for North America - although titled "National" - is found http://www.nuforc.org/webreports.html" [Broken].
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #20
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,260
301


When it happened, I reported it to Peter Davenport of NUFORC:

Click http://www.nuforc.org/webreports/043/S43202.html" [Broken] for my report.
Thanks. If you haven't done so already, be sure to take a look at the UFO Napster at the top of the S&D page. Note that the NSA [National Security Agency] just reorganized their site again, so while the reports cited are still available, not all NSA links are working.

Why do you think that you saw alien spacecrafts, and not some unrecognized natural phenomenon, or an unfamiliar technology?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #21
CEL
656
0


It is very hard to evaluate speed with only angular measurement. A near slow moving object has the same angular displacement than a fast moving and distant object in the same time.
So, unless you had a reference (the objects flying behind objects at a known distance), you could not know if they were at very high speeds.
 
  • #22
19
0


It is very hard to evaluate speed with only angular measurement. A near slow moving object has the same angular displacement than a fast moving and distant object in the same time.
So, unless you had a reference (the objects flying behind objects at a known distance), you could not know if they were at very high speeds.
In this case there were many relativistic references for me to be certain that these two objects were moving at a very high rate of speed - and acceleration - compared to any other flying object I have ever seen.

Your argument is really only valid for an observer in an unknown environment. If you were to live near an airport that clearly had a zone where planes were either taking-off or landing or circling. And high above there are planes passing overhead regularly. You would be quite familiar with the rate at which a plane moves across or through your field of view while landing, taking-off, circling and flying very high overhead. This was my situation.

Again, your suggestion can be valid at times when an object is moving directly towards or away from the observer. It is very difficult to guage the velocity or acceleration if you only see a light source of unknown size and it is moving right towards or directly away from you. This was not my case.

An example would be standing on a very flat piece of land - say like the Bonneville salt flats - and a vehicle is approaching from a few miles away. It would be impossible to visually estimate the velocity of the vehicle if it were coming directly at you or moving directly away from you. If it were a small dot on the horizon and it became so close that you could read the model name on the hood within 5 seconds, you would be absolutely correct in "assuming" that it was moving very quickly. In fact I would argue that you would be absolutely correct if you stated with certainty that the vehicle was moving very very quickly.
 
  • #23
CEL
656
0


In this case there were many relativistic references for me to be certain that these two objects were moving at a very high rate of speed - and acceleration - compared to any other flying object I have ever seen.

Your argument is really only valid for an observer in an unknown environment. If you were to live near an airport that clearly had a zone where planes were either taking-off or landing or circling. And high above there are planes passing overhead regularly. You would be quite familiar with the rate at which a plane moves across or through your field of view while landing, taking-off, circling and flying very high overhead. This was my situation.

Again, your suggestion can be valid at times when an object is moving directly towards or away from the observer. It is very difficult to guage the velocity or acceleration if you only see a light source of unknown size and it is moving right towards or directly away from you. This was not my case.

An example would be standing on a very flat piece of land - say like the Bonneville salt flats - and a vehicle is approaching from a few miles away. It would be impossible to visually estimate the velocity of the vehicle if it were coming directly at you or moving directly away from you. If it were a small dot on the horizon and it became so close that you could read the model name on the hood within 5 seconds, you would be absolutely correct in "assuming" that it was moving very quickly. In fact I would argue that you would be absolutely correct if you stated with certainty that the vehicle was moving very very quickly.
Even if you know your surroundings, you can not estimate the distance of an object against the sky, specially at night. In automatic control theory such a situation is called unobservable.
A practical example is the Moon. When it is near the horizon it appears much larger then when it is overhead. In both cases the Moon covers exactly yhe same angle, but unconciously we think that it is farther away at the horizon, so the same angle represents a larger object.
 
  • #24
19
0


Even if you know your surroundings, you can not estimate the distance of an object against the sky, specially at night. In automatic control theory such a situation is called unobservable.
A practical example is the Moon. When it is near the horizon it appears much larger then when it is overhead. In both cases the Moon covers exactly yhe same angle, but unconciously we think that it is farther away at the horizon, so the same angle represents a larger object.
Are you sure you know what you are talking about? The Moon illusion is apparently still a conundrum. Not to mention that I read that a much greater percentage of people unconsciously perceive the moon on the horizon as a "closer" object, not an object that is farther away.

The moon enigma aside, the situation was not one that required my knowledge of the distance of the objects. In ANY case the objects would have been moving very quickly. If they had been directly overhead - which they were at first - and 100 feet above the ground, they would have been moving very very quickly. If they were directly overhead and 4 miles up, they would have been moving at multiple-mach speeds relative to any and all airplanes I have seen moving at any height.

Let's use your moon example. IF one evening you saw the moon on the horizon "rising" at what you perceive as its nominal rate and suddenly - within 4 seconds it was nearly overhead, would you be thinking that you were experiencing an illusion or an unmeasurable sight or would you be confident that the moon actually moved that quickly? Clearly other physical situations would make this very very unlikely, but what you have visually witnessed clearly was not normal relative to the rate at which the moon pretty well always moves. You don't need to know whether the moon is bigger or smaller on the horizon or whether it is an illusion. You don't need to know whether the moon is 1000 miles closer or 40,000 miles closer, you only need to know that the speed it just exhibited was way faster than it has ever been before.
 
  • #25
Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
7,260
301


gtatix, you still haven't explained why you think it was an alien spacecraft.
 

Related Threads on Extra terrestrial life beyond our blue planet

  • Last Post
Replies
3
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
826
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
29
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Last Post
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
79
Views
4K
Replies
32
Views
6K
Replies
11
Views
2K
Top