From: Aaron LeClair <force.nul> Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 15:02:11 -0500 Fwd Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2004 15:21:38 -0500 Subject: Re: Are We Alone? - LeClair >From: Frank Warren <frank-warren.nul> >To: UFO UpDates - Toronto <ufoupdates.nul> >Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 07:21:14 -0800 >Subject: Are We Alone? >Source: Iowa City Press Citizen >http://www.press-citizen.com/news/032404seti.htm >March 24, 2004 >Are we alone? >Speaker tells of technology hunt for extraterrestrials >By Kristen Schorsch >Iowa City Press-Citizen >Spaceships shaped like Frisbee discs. Skinny beings with large >heads, long fingers and oval-shaped eyes. >Nope. Not for Kevin Hansen. <snip> It's weird that a lot of these SETI astronomers say there is not one shred of scientific evidence to support ufos, alien abduction etc., therefore they search for signals. It's inconsistent. They don't apply the same mode of thinking to their trade. I find it sad that there is more evidence to support alien visitation than there is for dark-matter, seti signals, cosmic strings, and awhile back, black-holes and extra- solor planets. No one to this day has seen a black-hole or these new planets we are finding, not to mention has a piece of one. They don't get ridiculed though. I know, I know, that is because of the nature of the beast. Yet, let's consider the nature of the beast in regards to the ETH. A tech. advance species could be as hard to detect as a black- hole. They could outsmart us, out stealth us, out run us. Take away our cameras, malfunction them etc. Yet some of these "scientist" demand proof before investigating. A little backwards I think. Like their black holes, ufologist have evidence and data that indicate the eth. They deduce an explaination through process of elimination. For some reason, many a scientist, don't apply this method when it comes to ufos etc. I recall Sagan saying, *I'm aware of how much I want et visitation to be true, therefore I increase my skepticism*. Why not increase objectivity? He made himself biased. I recall Hynek once said "Scientist don't always act scientifically" Sad, but seemingly true. I agree with somthing I read in A Gary Zukav book. It implied that a lot of people who are called scientist, are more accurately technicians. I think these seti scientist, fit that mold. That isn't to say one can't be both. For the record, I'm glad we are listening for signals. I won't attack their field of inquiry like they do ufology. To do so, would only hamper their progress, like they do ours. I am a critic of their thinking however. They demand proof before investigating, then ridicule those who have what they consider none. Not realizing one of the best way to prove somthing, is to take seriously, not ridicule, and do objective investigations. Seti scientist (as well as other scientist) comment about how the eth can't be so, even though many haven't even done research or investigation into the ufo related subjects. It's arrogant. They assume they would know how an *advance* society would do inter-stellar, travel. Since they can't figure it out, no one has. Makes as much sense for someone to tell a baseball player he can't hit home runs, because they can't explain the physics of hitting a homerun. Add to that asking someone who isn't a physicist, or a sports fan. We need the scientific community to not ridicule this subject. How do they like it when someone ridicules theirs? It hurts the availability of data and evidence. People are less likely to come forward because of the riducule factor. Part of the reason they don't have the proof they want, is their own making. They make it harder to get the proof they want others to seek, then ridicule, for not having it.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp