It didn't miss the key point, because that was my key point. Read it again. As mankind learns and knows more, his "reality" will change accordingly. He's not anywhere near knowing all the reality of the Universe at this point in his evolution of knowledge is also my point.
Stanford Professor warns massive UFO disclosure is around the corner.
- Thread starter buster
- Start date
- Status
People like Chuck Yeager said yes, because a lot of engineering research and testing was involved before he ever actually did it. Research and testing takes a lot of risk out of things like described above.
I dont watch Ancient Aliens.
IF we choose not to believe pilots and sailors who have plenty to risk by coming forward then we eliminate most credible witnesses.
Curious ...what are sensors designed for detecting UAP? Pretty sure no such thing exists but who knows.
Read every word and quoted several lines from it already. It never mentioned " aliens" only cases of " other".
The DNI reversing themselves is pretty substantial.
This line right here is quite a departure from previous stance - " UAP clearly pose a safety of flight issue and may pose a challenge to U.S. national security."
Maybe you can join Nasas new endeavor to search? I heard they have a whole 100K put aside for it.
I have zero doubt you haven't seen anything unexplainable, most haven't.
When credible people do see something that is further correlated by sensor data it matters.
Lifetime pilots, naval aviators, businesspeople like John Lear, are all otherwise very credible witnesses.
A majority of these things are likely mistakes, but like the report say a very small % seem to be something else.
Bitog majority doesn't recognize any witness as credible in this matter regardless of background.
I disagree. I think our current understanding explains most of our reality very well. With the exception of a grand unifying theory, the arrow of time, dark energy/matter, and a handful of other issues the standard model explains most of how our observable and testable universe works. Some people believe in the idea that the more we know the more questions we have and it is the opposite. With the exception of the previously mentioned topics, we are already at the point where most "new physics" involve "special situations" that are rare in nature. The "ordinary natural world" is VERY well understood. Experimentalists will continue to verify the standard model and while new discoveries are sure to be made it is the most successful scientific theory ever...by far...because it explains just about everything that is testable very very well.
As for Chuck, he chose to get into a vehicle where the physics were fully understood - the only questionable part was the engineering.
Last edited:
Just because man undersrands most things on Earth and our relatively small solar system doesn't mean he automatically understands everything in the Universe. "Most of our reality" isn't really that extensive with respect to the whole Universe, or even our own Galaxy. As time goes on, more knowlege unfolds, and it always will because it's not anywhere near all-knowing.
Engineering is verified by many different levels of testing, and a lot of engineering knowlege has been learned throughout history from both success and failures during testing. Yes, better have some engineers, testers and builders that know what they are doing before the ultimate final test is conducted.
Last edited:
The standard model doesn't just explain our little corner of the universe - it explains just about everything we see for billions of light years in every direction. Cosmology is a huge part of basic science and part of its goal is to look at physical processes across the entire universe and experimentally/observationally the physics here is the same as physics 13 billion light years away and into the past.
The question of alien life is a fascinating one. On one hand, the scale of the universe does make it seem improbable that alien life can't exist somewhere. Looking at Earth though, life beyond microscopic germs has only existed somewhere around 500 million years out of an approximate 5 billion year existence for Earth. For 90% of Earths life, there was no visible life to be seen. We could be looking at a variety of planets unaware that life will be emerging there in the next few million years or so.
The other counter I have to intelligent alien life is that intelligent life is extremely rare. Over the history of the Earth, there have been literally hundreds of billions, if not trillions of different species to exist. Yet only one advanced civilization has ever risen. While we as humans understand we're the smartest, I don't think we as a species collectively understand just how incredible and unique the advancements we've made are.
The other counter I have to intelligent alien life is that intelligent life is extremely rare. Over the history of the Earth, there have been literally hundreds of billions, if not trillions of different species to exist. Yet only one advanced civilization has ever risen. While we as humans understand we're the smartest, I don't think we as a species collectively understand just how incredible and unique the advancements we've made are.
Science is man's endless search for truth in nature.
Have we come a long way since, "earth, wind and fire"? Yes.
Have we barely scratched the surface? Yes.
When I started in semiconductors, 65nm technology node was the densest chip geometry. No one dared to consider nodes of even 10 years ago, much less today's geomerties.
The only chip companies left standing are those who bet the company on "impossible" materials and processes.
Have we come a long way since, "earth, wind and fire"? Yes.
Have we barely scratched the surface? Yes.
When I started in semiconductors, 65nm technology node was the densest chip geometry. No one dared to consider nodes of even 10 years ago, much less today's geomerties.
The only chip companies left standing are those who bet the company on "impossible" materials and processes.
All this alien and UFO talk, if anything proves that people have an inherit need to believe in something higher than themselves. I don’t want to go into R territory, but in the end that’s what it comes down to. People just don’t realize it.
Science-fiction is being discussed as if it were science. Warp drives, infinite universes, faster than light travel, etc. all seem very feasible, one just has to believe, or better yet, imagine.
Science-fiction is being discussed as if it were science. Warp drives, infinite universes, faster than light travel, etc. all seem very feasible, one just has to believe, or better yet, imagine.
That is totally different. Bill gates also said we would not need more than few MB of memory and look where we are at now.
Improving on existing technology is not the same as imagining some alien tech and saying that our science just hasn’t caught up with it yet.
That's not what it is at all, these are former CIA and highly trained military people now coming out and saying we have no idea what these are, but they are operating in a way that defies physics as we understand it.
Have you even done any reading or research into it? Or are you just going by what you already know and assume?
I am not sure anyone has claimed alien tech; I didn't. I am saying science has come a long way but has only scratched the surface.
Your Gates example proves my point. What our best believe (and understand) at any one time may change, or even be wrong.
You’re conflating advancement in science with advancement in technology (semiconductor size).
They’re very different things.
Respectfully disagree. Technology is applied science.
Exactly. It’s science applied to a problem.
It is not science per se.
Getting better at manufacturing isn’t changing the nature of understanding the universe.
It’s overcoming technical challenges, which may, or may not, reveal fundamental properties or phenomena.
From a technology POV this may be true but from a science perspective, and I don't accept "you don't know what you don't know here", what observable phenomena are happening that aren't already explained by the current version of the standard model? There are some gaps in what happens when macroscale things become quantum things as far as gravity and using two sets of laws, dark matter/energy but we're pretty sure it's just some neutral uncharged matter that very weakly interacts with our charged particle universe, maybe some discussion about whether or not quarks are in fact fundamental particles (to be honest I lost track of where this currently sits), and then a bunch of stuff like M-theory/string theory/many worlds which is fun to think about but going nowhere in the past +50 years and they are probably impossible to ever test satisfactorily anyway.
Other than those the universe for as far as we can see in all directions seems to fit our current theory very very very well. It would be truly strange if there was a huge area of physics that we understand nothing about and that later explains our universe better than our current model.
Yes I have and people repeating these things or these supposed eye witness testimonies all have to believe. It all revolves around believing.
For all we know, these former CIA and military people just want their 5 minutes of fame and some quick buck. Flaunting credentials doesn’t prove anything, in fact makes me question their motives even more.
I have to disagree again. There is no tech without science.
Without today's technologies how could we model the universe, develop the Hubbel and Webb space telescopes?
Build reusable rockets and land them on an incredibly exact spot back on earth?
Heck, technology just gave us a picture of a black hole.
- Status