Relax, it'll be 1,500 years before aliens contact us

June 17, 2016 by Blaine Friedlander
This is the "South Pillar" region of the star-forming region called the Carina Nebula. Like cracking open a watermelon and finding its seeds, the infrared telescope "busted open" this murky cloud to reveal star embryos tucked inside finger-like pillars of thick dust. Credit: NASA

If you're expecting to hear from aliens from across the universe, it could be a while.

Deconstructing the Fermi and pairing it with the mediocrity principle into a fresh equation, Cornell astronomers say extraterrestrials likely won't phone home – or Earth – for 1,500 years.

"We haven't heard from yet, as space is a big place – but that doesn't mean no one is out there," said Cornell student Evan Solomonides '19, who will present "A Probabilistic Analysis of the Fermi Paradox" at the American Astronomical Society's meeting June 16 in San Diego. Yervant Terzian, Cornell's Tisch Distinguished University Professor of Astronomy, is the co-author on the unpublished paper upon which this presentation is based.

"It's possible to hear any time at all, but it becomes likely we will have heard around 1,500 years from now," said Solomonides. "Until then, it is possible that we appear to be alone – even if we are not. But if we stop listening or looking, we may miss the signals. So we should keep looking."

The Fermi paradox says billions of Earthlike planets exist in our galaxy, yet no aliens have contacted or visited us. Thus the paradox: the cosmos teems with possibility. The mediocrity principle – originated by 16th-century mathematician Copernicus – says Earth's physical attributes are not unique, as natural processes are likely common throughout the cosmos, and therefore aliens won't discover us for a while.

Hunting for extraterrestrials means sending out signals like television broadcasts, for example. As Earth's electronic ambassador, TV and radio signals are sent into space as a byproduct of broadcasting. These signals have been traveling from Earth for 80 years at the speed of light. For aliens receiving these transmissions, they would likely be indecipherable, said Solomonides, as the extraterrestrials would need to decode light waves into sounds, then parse 3,000 human languages to grasp the message.

Nonetheless, Earth's broadcast signals have reached every star within about 80 light years from the sun – about 8,531 stars and 3,555 Earthlike planets, as our Milky Way galaxy alone contains 200 billion stars.

"Even our mundane, typical spiral galaxy – not exceptionally large compared to other galaxies – is vast beyond imagination," said Solomonides. "Those numbers are what make the Fermi Paradox so counterintuitive. We have reached so many stars and planets, surely we should have reached somebody by now, and in turn been reached … this demonstrates why we appear to be alone."

Combining the equations for the Fermi paradox and the mediocrity principle, the authors suggests Earth might hear from an alien civilization when approximately half of the Milky Way Galaxy has been signaled in about 1,500 years. "This is not to say that we must be reached by then or else we are, in fact, alone. We simply claim that it is somewhat unlikely that we will not hear anything before that time," Solomonides said.

For Solomonides, this research was inspired by an assignment in the astronomy course, The Search for Life in the Universe, taught by Terzian. As an aficionado of the late Cornell astronomy professor Carl Sagan, who contemplated this very problem, Solomonides explained in a Sagan-esque way:

"We are on the third planet around a tediously boring star surrounded by other completely normal stars about two-thirds of the way along one of several arms of a remarkably average . The mediocrity principle is the idea that because we are not in any special location in the universe, we should not be anything special in the universe."

Explore further: Are there antimatter galaxies?

Related Stories

Are there antimatter galaxies?

June 10, 2016

One of the biggest mysteries in astronomy is the question, where did all the antimatter go? Shortly after the Big Bang, there were almost equal amounts of matter and antimatter. I say almost, because there was a tiny bit ...

Do we live in a special part of the universe?

April 4, 2016

We've already talked about how you're living at the center of the universe. Now, I'm not going to say that the whole universe revolves around you… but we both know it does. So does this mean that there's something special ...

Are aliens watching old TV shows?

January 20, 2015

You've probably heard the trope about how aliens have been watching old episodes of "I Love Lucy" and might think these are our "historical documents". How far have our signals reached?

Laser cloaking device could help us hide from aliens

March 31, 2016

Two astronomers at Columbia University in New York suggest humanity could use lasers to conceal the Earth from searches by advanced extraterrestrial civilisations. Professor David Kipping and graduate student Alex Teachey ...

Enrico Fermi and extraterrestrial intelligence

April 8, 2015

It's become a kind of legend, like Newton and the apple or George Washington and the cherry tree. One day in 1950, the great physicist Enrico Fermi sat down to lunch with colleagues at the Fuller Lodge at Los Alamos National ...

Recommended for you

Scientists uncover origins of the Sun's swirling spicules

June 22, 2017

At any given moment, as many as 10 million wild jets of solar material burst from the sun's surface. They erupt as fast as 60 miles per second, and can reach lengths of 6,000 miles before collapsing. These are spicules, and ...

139 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Osiris1
1.3 / 5 (14) Jun 17, 2016
Or it ....could.....be as soon as toNIGHT...
antialias_physorg
4.8 / 5 (18) Jun 17, 2016
Earth's broadcast signals have reached every star within about 80 light years from the sun – about 8,531 stars and 3,555 Earthlike planets

Even for the closest solar systems (4ly away) our signals are so weak that not even theoretically optimal amplifiers would pick them up.

The Fermi paradox says billions of Earthlike planets exist in our galaxy, yet no aliens have contacted or visited us.

I can't really get behind such a probabilistic view. If there are aliens out there able to make contact then they have
- intelligence
- the abiility to communicate with other species of their own (or greater) capabilities

This says to me that it is well possible that those species will have dealt with one another and may even have a common approach (e.g. "leave stuff alone until it gets off its rock by itself"). The do not act independently of one another. In such a scenario the density of aliens out there doesn't matter because it all hinges on one decision.
tungsten
5 / 5 (24) Jun 17, 2016
Human signals reach the half of the galaxy in 1500 years?

That's a very strange claim: the galaxy is 100,000 ly across and we are 30,000 ly from the centre, so it takes more like 15000 yrs.

BTW the signal back would take just as much time
Mark Thomas
4.6 / 5 (18) Jun 17, 2016
Tungsten, I wondered if they missed a decimal place too, but even 15,000 years would not be enough to reach half the galaxy.
StudentofSpiritualTeaching
1.8 / 5 (22) Jun 17, 2016
This whole sending of signals and listening for a bleep is beyond silly. The same is true for the probability calculation. This all assumes that in the vast universe, with billions of planets that had been, are and will be able to produce life forms such as ours, no intelligent species had developed millions or at least ten thousands of years earlier than ours. On millions of planets the intelligent/human inhabitants are right now that advanced that they already travel beyond the speed of light, with a large share of them already managing travels to the past and future. We have certainly been and are visited by them, and for the time being secretly studied like super primitive relatives to let evolve first before making actual contact.
philstacy9
1.5 / 5 (22) Jun 17, 2016
The most obvious reason for not hearing from aliens is they are already here building a wall to keep humans from migrating into the universe with their baggage of toxic progressive and Islamic ideologies. Aliens do not want humans preventing global warming on alien worlds. Aliens want to be free to draw pictures of Mohammad without getting their heads cut off by peaceful Muslims. Aliens do not want to be called racist and lectured that black lives matter. Humans are not invited to alien parties because they are not cool. An Islamic EMP attack could be the alien wall.
leo_foss_7
2.2 / 5 (9) Jun 17, 2016
Any nearby intelligence would already know that the Earth was harbouring life, and developing technolgically. They would have known that the earth was a prime candidate for life from its light spectrum, and probes would likely be sent to determine how far developed we were.
The idea that an extraterrestrial intelligence wouldn't know we are here until we started sending out radio waves is ludicrous.
Da Schneib
4.7 / 5 (15) Jun 17, 2016
I will point out that 1500 years ago we wouldn't discover radio for 1420 years.

Meanwhile I agree someone dropped a zero, and worse. More like the order of magnitude of 10s of k years than 1500. And someone also dropped a 2 or a 3, because the diameter of 100 kly implies an area of 31.4 gly². To get 16 gly² (that is, half the galaxy) would require 71 kly coverage. So the actual time required is, obviously, 71,000 years, not 1500.

Simple math rule: half the area of a circle is within 72% of the diameter. Implicit in the value of pi.

5s for @tungsten and @Mark.
Da Schneib
4.5 / 5 (15) Jun 17, 2016
Even for the closest solar systems (4ly away) our signals are so weak that not even theoretically optimal amplifiers would pick them up.
And you may even be optimistic!

This says to me that it is well possible that those species will have dealt with one another and may even have a common approach (e.g. "leave stuff alone until it gets off its rock by itself"). The do not act independently of one another. In such a scenario the density of aliens out there doesn't matter because it all hinges on one decision.
I think that's optimistic. I don't expect more than a few civilizations in our galaxy, and I wouldn't be surprised if we were the only one. It's yet to be determined if we are robust enough to be starfaring.
Da Schneib
4.7 / 5 (13) Jun 17, 2016
Any nearby intelligence
Define "nearby."
Telekinetic
1.9 / 5 (18) Jun 17, 2016
I believe in science and what I witness with my own eyes. I've had the great privilege to witness an alien craft hovering above my house located in a heavily wooded, remote area. While I was observing the silent, silver colored cylinder- wingless and unmarked, the occupants of the craft were observing me. The only way anyone will believe that aliens exist is to have a first-hand encounter themselves, otherwise it will be considered to be hearsay.
Mordechai Mineakoitzen
1.5 / 5 (16) Jun 18, 2016
Fact is, aliens may have tried to contact us, and we couldn't, or failed to, recognize their methods. After all, we're very biased towards methods we would personally use. I recall reading one reported contact from an alien something, and it said that since we did not answer their "call", so to speak, they presumed we weren't intelligent, and thus would not try again. Fair enough, though it indicates they have their own confirmation bias going on, if true.

The Fermi Paradox is based on a logical flaw, however. It presumes to say that we have not been contacted based on some undefined parameters or some blatant approach. Perhaps we have been though, on that personal note which "Telekinetic" notes above. Such is contact. However the Fermi Paradox would not consider it to be that.
Mordechai Mineakoitzen
1.4 / 5 (18) Jun 18, 2016
Speaking to contact, "believe it or not" style…

One time, after reading a book on contacting aliens telepathically, I went about my way trying it, and something very real and definite replied within my mind, in a rather forceful manner, asking, "Why do you contact us?", and I realized that my contact approach hadn't even included a "Hello", or a greeting, so was kind of like a guest barging into dinner or something, mentally. In my rush to simply see if such could be done, I'd forgotten basic manners.

They've ignored me since. ;)
Otto_Szucks
1.3 / 5 (15) Jun 18, 2016
I believe in science and what I witness with my own eyes. I've had the great privilege to witness an alien craft hovering above my house located in a heavily wooded, remote area. While I was observing the silent, silver colored cylinder- wingless and unmarked, the occupants of the craft were observing me. The only way anyone will believe that aliens exist is to have a first-hand encounter themselves, otherwise it will be considered to be hearsay.
- Telekinetic
For the vast majority of humans, first contact with E.T. is the furthest thing on their minds or what is considered to be important. Anything out of the ordinary that would cause a disturbance in their lives would be very unwelcome, even if fascinating. But for those of us, such as you and I who have witnessed E.T. spacecraft close enough to recognize it as from another world, has it made our lives better or easier other than KNOWING that E.T.s have been coming to visit for longer than we can even imagine?
Otto_Szucks
1.5 / 5 (16) Jun 18, 2016
(cont'd)
My sightings on two separate occasions as a young man hiking in the mountains with friends were some of the most incredibly awesome events in my life; the second sighting having reaffirmed the first one, although my friends and I also knew that to the human outsiders, our experiences would be mostly a blend of "bread and circus" and "finger-pointing" if any one of us elaborated on what we had seen together. As we became older and understood what humans are really like, we all felt that talking about it extensively to the media and other strangers would open us to ridicule, as had happened to so many who revealed their own experience with E.T.
So, we all determined that it would be best to stay up on the subject and find out what others have said and done, but not to open ourselves to scrutiny, particularly by government agencies.
There is no way that governments are unaware of the E.T. presence on and above Earth, even though they disavow any knowledge.
Jayded
5 / 5 (11) Jun 18, 2016
Even if they picked up our signal their reply would not be present for roughly 150 000 years. The probability of of surviving as a species for the next 150k years is extremely slim so yeah, we probably will never know of advanced life forms. Naturally as we are governed by chaos math as opposed to its linear cousin, there is a chance that we may develop a new form of transmission that somehow speeds up our signal (greater than light speed) or perhaps some form of wormhole device etc but at present outside of maybe finding primal RNA on some other planet I think our chances are slim to none.
Christian Haerle
5 / 5 (11) Jun 18, 2016
Like some of the others who have commented here, I don't understand how the authors calculate that our broadcast signals of radio and television would have reached half of our Milky Way galaxy in 1500 years.

But my bigger disagreement with the article is the assumption of the authors that signals from hypotheticals aliens will be the result of us "hearing back" from them, that we won't receive any signal from them until our signals have been received. It seems to me far more likely that we would simply notice their routine broadcast signals first, before any sort of "response", for the simple reason that less time is required. If a hypothetical alien race is on a planet 1000 light years away, we should be able to detect any of their television and radio broadcasts if they were made 1000 years ago or more. Whereas if one assumes that they have to hear us first, and will then make a broadcast to us, we won't know about them until, at the earliest, 2000 years after our TV/radio.
ChiefFartingDog
Jun 18, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
ChiefFartingDog
Jun 18, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
BiteMe
Jun 18, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Captain Stumpy
4 / 5 (16) Jun 18, 2016
The only way anyone will believe that aliens exist is to have a first-hand encounter themselves, otherwise it will be considered to be hearsay
@Telekinatic
actually it will always be considered hearsay unless you can provide empirical evidence. see at least the first 4 minutes:
https://youtu.be/m5WK_7GQ9GQ

I think CFD has it spot on except it's a kind of census. "Just how many total nutjobs are we relying on to make our quota of hits on a given story?"
you might have something there:
it does appear to feed the system where the number of replies on a given thread show "popularity" allowing PO to advocate for greater financial compensation from adverts displayed on their site

TheGhostofOtto1923
1.7 / 5 (17) Jun 18, 2016
Human-level intelligence is a blip on the cosmic scale. It signifies an almost instantaneous transition from the biological to the machine.

Once biologicals become smart enough to build machines, they quickly design machines that are better than they are at everything. Because thinking biologicals are smart enough to imagine how much better things would be done if machines designed for the purpose, were doing them.

There are many other ways to say this.

They build machines to replace them while at the same time replacing parts of their own bodies with machine components to work better and prolong their lives. And there is nothing within our own bodies which cannot be replaced with better and more efficient widgets.

And after 1000 gens (or much fewer) of all this replacing, the biological is gone.

And lets face it - post-bio machines have absolutely nothing to say to biologicals except perhaps 'get out of the way'.

And they probably wouldnt say it would they?
cont>
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (16) Jun 18, 2016
But really - what would machines need where we are that they couldnt find at umpteem million other places within the galaxy? Do we occupy such a unique and valuable strategic location that machines would need to expend such great time and energy in order to reach?

And why would a machine intelligence want to proliferate anyway? More consumption would only mean a quicker eventual demise.

They may want to order things within a reasonable-sized sphere around them, to protect themselves (itself) from calamity, and this unnatural orderly state might be something we could detect.

But conversation? What would be the point?
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.8 / 5 (16) Jun 18, 2016
I've heard that in my practice VERBATIM a thousand times from schizophrenics
Hey - youre that black psychiatrist pussytard always used to pretend she was not. Racistblackdude as I recall?

Oh and we've got 3-4 noobs quoting thusly
Mark Thomas 5 /5 (5) Jun 17, 2016... Telekinetic 3 /5 (6) 14 hours ago
-etc. Nobody quotes like that.

I hate it when imbeciles try to be clever.
This fucker needs to be isolated, broken and driven from the land
I wonder if this isnt pussytard playing with herself again.

Wouldnt be the first time.
Otto_Szucks
1.3 / 5 (14) Jun 18, 2016
Hey, for those that think it's innocent fun debating OS, take a look of the character of the individual that your are encouraging.

This fucker needs to be isolated, broken and driven from the land. Bottom of the comments. http://phys.org/n...pse.html
- Cheap Farting Dog

And that, of course, is your ONLY contribution to a SCIENCE THREAD regarding aliens from another world or even another galaxy, right? Does it scare you?
Again, you and yours have scant knowledge of the topic of this article, but your wish is to remove anyone and everyone who DO have that knowledge.
My wife and I have been to Australia on vacations, but we have never come across such as you and your need to behave as a troglodyte. Is it a congenital disease? Careful that you don't turn out to be another Theghostofotto. That will doom you for certain since GhostofOtto'sAss never talks science topics unless it's about "fish being a metaphor for womanly smells".
Bookbinder
4.5 / 5 (8) Jun 18, 2016
I doubt it. In 50 years we will be using some device based on paired electrons and will have forgotten all about radio waves, just like all the other civilizations in out galaxy. No one is listening to Lucy.
Telekinetic
1.8 / 5 (16) Jun 18, 2016
The only way anyone will believe that aliens exist is to have a first-hand encounter themselves, otherwise it will be considered to be hearsay
@Telekinatic
actually it will always be considered hearsay unless you can provide empirical evidence.


The "empirical evidence" which you demand is by definition evidence based on "observation" and the use of one's senses. You're an illiterate nincompoop bandying about terms whose meaning you haven't a clue. Nonetheless, I asked these alien visitors to schedule a return visit to participate in lab experiments.
And to BiteMe, we're all so very impressed that you have a "practice" prescribing anti- "whatever" pharmaceuticals to your patients whether they need them or not. I see by diagnosing me by one paragraph I've written makes you very good at what you do. I pity the people whose mental health is in your hands because of your snide, cavalier attitude toward their illness. You're a human garbage can.
Otto_Szucks
1.2 / 5 (15) Jun 18, 2016
@Telekinetic
Nothing you, nor I, nor anyone else who have had the pleasure of knowing and seeing Extraterrestrial spacecraft at a close enough range to recognize them as being not of this Earth - will ever convince these mud suckers of PO wrt the genuineness of our experiences. I believe that these "people" come into such threads as this, only for the purpose of boosting their own ego and make a big pretense that their lack of a similar experience makes them somehow superior to those who have had that great event in life.
Perhaps the mud suckers such as the ones in this thread would never be allowed to see what you and I and so many others have seen because they were found to be unacceptable by E.T. for whatever reason, such as having a shitty attitude to begin with. I am certain that E.T.s are able to identify "madness and mayhem makers" who would be more likely to use E.T.s for target practice than be polite, welcoming, and accepting of their presence.
Captain Stumpy
4.3 / 5 (17) Jun 18, 2016
You're an illiterate nincompoop bandying about terms whose meaning you haven't a clue
@telephonetic
so... i guess you didn't actually watch that vid link?

is the scientific community also full of illiterate nincompoop[s] bandying about terms whose meaning [they] haven't a clue?

or did you just not comprehend the video, Dr. Tyson or what was said? or what i said, for that matter?

Hmm... lets take a look:
https://en.wikipe...evidence

Nope
So... i guess it's just you who are "an illiterate nincompoop bandying about terms whose meaning you haven't a clue"

thanks for being clear and stating your level of comprehension so that we can ignore your trolling stupidity and abject failure to comprehend basic science

tell you what, though: when they return for your lab experiments, ask them to show you why eyewitness testimony is the worst kind of evidence you can have in science

... then ask them where your brain is and if you can have it back
Otto_Szucks
1.5 / 5 (16) Jun 19, 2016
The only way anyone will believe that aliens exist is to have a first-hand encounter themselves, otherwise it will be considered to be hearsay
@Telekinatic
actually it will always be considered hearsay unless you can provide empirical evidence.


The "empirical evidence" which you demand is by definition evidence based on "observation" and the use of one's senses. You're an illiterate nincompoop bandying about(..)
- Telekinetic

EXPERIENCE is the BEST teacher, as well as the BEST Empirical Evidence that one could ever acquire. Those who never acquired that same type of experience are most often "green" with envy. They find it necessary to DEMAND that which they themselves are unable to have - i.e. EXPERIENCE. Then they cry and scold and throw a tantrum and INSIST that you MUST give them evidence, or they won't believe you.
So who gives a fck if CapnFrumpy believes or not. Frumpy is totally irrelevant & has a lot of nerve demanding anything.
Captain Stumpy
4.2 / 5 (19) Jun 19, 2016
more about "eyewitness testimony" and it's reliability
https://youtu.be/...6EF60BB0

https://youtu.be/...6EF60BB0

if that's too hard for you to understand, you are gonna hate the references at the end
here are some more:
http://psycnet.ap...22/1/50/

http://www.annual...1.145028

http://psycnet.ap...62/1/90/

the human mind is susceptible to delusion and hallucination

repeating the delusion helps you reinforce the belief to yourself... it doesn't actually prove anything to anyone

does that make it real?
no
does it make it experience?
no

this is the problem with anecdote and eyewitness testimony without evidence that can be validated by secondary sources

if it can't be replicated or validated, it's BS

dismissal of a baseless claim is not prejudice or wrong, it is required by the scientific method
see links above/last post
Otto_Szucks
1.3 / 5 (15) Jun 19, 2016
the human mind is susceptible to delusion and hallucination


In which case insanity is common to all minds; no exceptions

repeating the delusion helps you reinforce the belief to yourself... it doesn't actually prove anything to anyone


And who are these "anyone" who are demanding such proofs?

does that make it real?


Yes. As far as reality is real.

does it make it experience?


Absolutely. Experience is everything to any individual.

this is the problem with anecdote and eyewitness testimony without evidence that can be validated by secondary sources


And who are YOU to make such demands of evidence from anyone else's experience?

if it can't be replicated or validated, it's BS


That's only YOUR opinion. Many things can't be replicated OR validated...such as Black Holes and Dark Matter. They must be BS.
Otto_Szucks
1.3 / 5 (16) Jun 19, 2016
dismissal of a baseless claim is not prejudice or wrong, it is required by the scientific method


A claim is not baseless unless the evidence indicates it as such once the COMPLETE evidence is presented. Until then, YOU are only ASSuming that it is baseless, according to your level of Confirmation Bias and your religious zeal wrt your demands for substantiation of evidence. There are some who will provide you with incomplete evidence, knowing full well that YOU will dismiss it as baseless. YOU are well known for your harassment of these individuals even though YOU are grossly unqualified to make such demands for evidence of claims.

The scientific method applies to ALL theories, including the Electric Universe theory. The evidence FOR Electric Universe theory will be presented through the proper channels at the proper time when every piece of evidence is collated into an orderly fashion and the evidence for EU is complete and insurmountable.
Telekinetic
1.5 / 5 (15) Jun 19, 2016
Captain Stumped-

I suppose my wife hallucinated the same thing as I did. The craft hung overhead long enough to get binoculars from inside the house and study its shape with them.
You will never have an experience like this, Cap'n Stumpy, playing video games in your mom's basement.
You need to get outside once in a while.
Da Schneib
4.5 / 5 (17) Jun 19, 2016
In which case insanity is common to all minds; no exceptions
Actually this is incorrect. It's possible to account for this particular type of "insanity." The method is called "The Scientific Method."

You appear to be unfamiliar with it, in addition to your innumeracy. Noted that you are descending to philosophy of the solipsistic, rhetorical, navel-gazing variety because you have trouble thinking about any other sort.
BiteMe
Jun 19, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
KaFaraqGatri
Jun 19, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
john berry_hobbes
3.4 / 5 (20) Jun 19, 2016
Otto_Szucks 1 /5 (5) 11 hours ago
@Telekinetic
Nothing you, nor I, nor anyone else who have had the pleasure of knowing and seeing Extraterrestrial spacecraft at a close enough range to recognize them as being not of this Earth - will ever convince these mud suckers of PO wrt the genuineness of our experiences. I believe that these "people" come into such threads as this, only for the purpose of boosting their own ego and make a big pretense that their lack of a similar experience makes them somehow superior to those who have had that great event in life.
Perhaps the mud suckers...


Use your real name, anonymous coward, and we'll see who's sucking mud. You are a nasty piece of filth.
Telekinetic
1.8 / 5 (16) Jun 19, 2016
@BiteMe

Your definition of schizophrenia and peer-reinforced delusion would make all of those who believe in Jesus and other deities eligible for your regimen of pharmaceuticals and yet most of them haven't even witnessed seeing Jesus in the sky. So in a way, my belief in what I actually saw is more valid than the beliefs of nearly the entire population of the world.
And as an aside, you may think you're helping people but you're not. That's your delusion. Time to take your own medicine.
Otto_Szucks
1.3 / 5 (14) Jun 19, 2016
In which case insanity is common to all minds; no exceptions
Actually this is incorrect. It's possible to account for this particular type of "insanity." The method is called "The Scientific Method."

You appear to be unfamiliar with it, in addition to your innumeracy. Noted that you are descending to philosophy of the solipsistic, rhetorical, navel-gazing variety because you have trouble thinking about...
- da schlub

You conveniently left out this general statement made by CapnShrimpy, namely:

"the human mind is susceptible to delusion and hallucination"

to which I replied that: "In which case insanity is common to all minds; no exceptions"

You may need to take up your argument with CapnFrumpy, who made a general statement wrt THE HUMAN MIND, a blanket statement that involves ALL human minds, no exceptions.
You may backpedal in behalf of Frumpy, but her statement remains.
Innumeracy is only YOUR opinion, in tandem with YOUR Confirmation Bias
Da Schneib
4.5 / 5 (15) Jun 19, 2016
YOUR Confirmation Bias
Confirmation bias has nothing to do with it.

In fact, your use of this in a logically fallacious manner confirms your own confirmation bias; you ignore consensus reality by claiming that consensus reality is confirmation bias. This is, as @BiteMe says, true confirmation bias: rejecting consensus reality by claiming it's somehow not real. It's also proof of schizoid ideation, again as @BiteMe claims. Thanks for demonstrating this so succinctly.
TheGhostofOtto1923
1.9 / 5 (18) Jun 19, 2016
Nothing you, nor I, nor anyone else who have had the pleasure of knowing and seeing Extraterrestrial spacecraft at a close enough range to recognize them as being not of this Earth
-Because they were looking out the cockpit at you? This CEotTK of yours didn't happen to happen at Montgomery Regional did it?
My wife and I
-One of those same-sex marriages? Good on you pussytard.
In which case insanity is common to all minds; no exceptions
Ah but it's a little more common to your mind than most I'll wager.
Otto_Szucks
1.3 / 5 (14) Jun 19, 2016
In which case insanity is common to all minds; no exceptions
Actually this is incorrect. It's possible to account for this particular type of "insanity." The method is called "The Scientific Method."

You appear to be unfamiliar with it, in addition to your innumeracy. Noted that you are descending to philosophy of the solipsistic, rhetorical, navel-gazing variety because you have trouble thinking about any other sort.
- da schlub

Note also that Philosophy, in and of itself, was, and is, a PRECONDITION for ALL science, as well as religion. EVERY word spoken/written, every thought that formulates into a theory, hypothesis, assumption, etc. STEMS FROM PHILOSOPHY. Your very thoughts ARE the epitome of Philosophy, whether correct or not. I have explained this to Noumenon and I now explain it to you.

The "Scientific Method" which you and others adhere to, is flawed. You rely on flawed mathematical formulas that are inherently rigid, uncompromising and inviolate
Otto_Szucks
1.5 / 5 (15) Jun 19, 2016
@BiteMe

Your definition of schizophrenia and peer-reinforced delusion would make all of those who believe in Jesus and other deities eligible for your regimen of pharmaceuticals and yet most of them haven't even witnessed seeing Jesus in the sky. So in a way, my belief in what I actually saw is more valid than the beliefs of nearly the entire population of the world.
And as an aside, you may think you're helping people but you're not. That's your delusion. Time to take your own medicine.
- Telekinetic

Aren't you aware that, perhaps 95% of psychiatrists, psychologists, etc. go into the field because they themselves are predisposed to mental health issues, and are in the field so that they may avail themselves of mental health info to find out their own mental problems, and cure themselves of it? Big pharma is their mainstay where they prescribe those poisons to their patients, for the purpose of alleviating their own guilt and fears. Mother Teresa syndrome
Da Schneib
4.4 / 5 (14) Jun 19, 2016
I suggest before you start on philosophy you review the Sokal Affair, @Otto_Socks. Looks to me like Philosophy_Sucks. Just sayin'.
Otto_Szucks
1.3 / 5 (14) Jun 19, 2016
I suggest before you start on philosophy you review the Sokal Affair, @Otto_Socks. Looks to me like Philosophy_Sucks. Just sayin'.
- da schlub

Your Sokal Affair is meaningless. Your attempt at "humor" descends into stupidity.
Philosopny is the result of the mechanics of the Mind, and from that comes ideas, theories, etc. All of your opinions are simple philosophical notions, while your clinging to the doctrines of Scientific Method has become your religion.
Da Schneib
4.3 / 5 (17) Jun 19, 2016
Your Sokal Affair is meaningless.
On the contrary, it shows that deconstructionism is meaningless.

I wasn't "attempt[ing] humor." I was demonstrating that modern "philosophy" isn't connected with reality.

The scientific method isn't connected with philosophy, and philosophy isn't connected with reality, and the Sokal Affair proves both those points categorically. That you cannot demonstrate otherwise is pretty good evidence supporting my view, and your unsuccessful attempt to disprove it that violates the precepts of the very philosophical principles you pretend to espouse is even better evidence.

The big difference between philosophy and science is experiment, and like most deniers you discount experiment because you are innumerate.
Otto_Szucks
1.3 / 5 (14) Jun 19, 2016
YOUR Confirmation Bias
Confirmation bias has nothing to do with it.

In fact, your use of this in a logically fallacious manner confirms your own confirmation bias; you ignore consensus reality by claiming that consensus reality is confirmation bias. This is, as @BiteMe says, true confirmation bias: rejecting consensus reality by claiming it's somehow not real. It's also proof of schizoid ideation, again as @BiteMe claims. Thanks for demonstrating this so succinctly.
- da schnoz

Perhaps you have forgotten that in several previous threads, I had revealed to one and all that I am on a "Learning Curve" wrt the Standard Model and Electric Universe Theory. Therefore, for you (or anyone) to say that I am holding a Confirmation Bias wrt either of these two THEORIES, is dumbass silly and is reflective of your need for validating your own biases by demeaning the opinions of others.

Are you certain that you're not Theghostofotto or a close relative of hers?
Da Schneib
4.3 / 5 (16) Jun 19, 2016
I had revealed to one and all that I am on a "Learning Curve" wrt the Standard Model and Electric Universe Theory. Therefore, for you (or anyone) to say that I am holding a Confirmation Bias wrt either of these two THEORIES
EU is not a theory, nor is it even a hypothesis. It is a disproven conjecture and your espousal of it proof of your lack of understanding of physics and experiment, and further your innumeracy and consequent "belief in" unphysical conjectures that are plausible in unphysical philosophy. That this philosophy is unphysical and that philosophers were incompetent to judge this was demonstrated by the Sokal paper.

In short, you are innumerate, mesmerized by navel-gazing solipsistic rhetorical philosophy, and incapable of understanding why you are wrong: an obvious Dunning-Kruger syndrome victim.
Otto_Szucks
1.3 / 5 (14) Jun 19, 2016
Your Sokal Affair is meaningless.
On the contrary, it shows that deconstructionism is meaningless.

I wasn't "attempt[ing] humor." I was demonstrating that modern "philosophy" isn't connected with reality.

The scientific method isn't connected with philosophy, and philosophy isn't connected with reality, and the Sokal Affair proves both those points categorically. That you cannot demonstrate otherwise is pretty good evidence supporting my view, and your unsuccessful attempt to disprove it that violates the precepts of the very philosophical principles you pretend to espouse is even better evidence.

The big difference between philosophy and science is experiment, and like most deniers you discount experiment because you are innumerate.
- da schmo

I wasn't attempting to "demonstrate" pro or con. Sokal isn't worth my time. Read my previous posts. I already had said that Philosophy is a PRECONDITION of the sciences, and with science comes experimentation. So?
Da Schneib
4.3 / 5 (16) Jun 19, 2016
Sokal isn't worth my time.
That you dismiss it without evidence is sufficient evidence of your incompetence.
Otto_Szucks
1.3 / 5 (14) Jun 19, 2016
I had revealed to one and all that I am on a "Learning Curve" wrt the Standard Model and Electric Universe Theory. Therefore, for you (or anyone) to say that I am holding a Confirmation Bias wrt either of these two THEORIES
EU is not a theory, nor is it even a hypothesis. It is a disproven conjecture and blahhh

In short, you are innumerate, mesmerized by navel-gazing solipsistic rhetorical philosophy, and incapable of understanding why you are wrong: an obvious Dunning-Kruger syndrome victim.

- da schmoo

Trotting out D-K simply is stating that you are feeling some self-defeat, which required you to reflect your feelings back onto your adversary. Not very well thought out, but that's YOU.
As to EU, it is very much a Theory. One that is perhaps unorthodox, but it still holds many possibilities that your rigid mindset will never accept, even when it's proven to be correct. As stated, I am contemplating BOTH theories, not my navel. Both are plausible...and fun.
Whydening Gyre
4.8 / 5 (16) Jun 19, 2016
All this philo- talk...
Where's Noumenal when you need him?
Science is not the result of Philosophy, OS.
It's the other way around..
Da Schneib
4.3 / 5 (16) Jun 19, 2016
As to EU, it is very much a Theory.
I assert with as much evidence as you have provided that it is not, and with more:

It makes no unique predictions substantiated by observation.

We done here?
Otto_Szucks
1.3 / 5 (14) Jun 19, 2016
Sokal isn't worth my time.
That you dismiss it without evidence is sufficient evidence of your incompetence.
- da schnooko

That again, is YOUR opinion, which is indicative of your philosophical mien. Your sardonic approach to my fairness wrt both SM and EU as I prefer to await further results, is quite childish.
Do you cry much and slam your fist on your table at home? Such childish nonsense is unhealthy, you know.
Telekinetic
1.6 / 5 (14) Jun 19, 2016
To the skeptics of this forum:
Your inability to accept the "reality" of highly advanced civilizations in our MULTI-verse will also be your downfall in understanding the trove of new information coming from the field of Quantum Physics. A single particle that exists in two locations at once- impossible? Entangled particles that behave identically at great distances from one another- also impossible? An infinite amount of outcomes from a seemingly single event- see David Deutsch.
Your adamant protests against the idea of extraterrestrials being here now doesn't speak to your sanity but rather to your feeling threatened. Historically, that's how science has been hindered.

Da Schneib
4.3 / 5 (16) Jun 19, 2016
That again, is YOUR opinion
Sure, and it's also the opinion of every competent physicist on the planet.

Of course, you dismiss that just like you dismiss the opinion of every competent geophysicist on the planet on AGW.

More fuel for my fire: deniers can't count.
Otto_Szucks
1.3 / 5 (14) Jun 19, 2016
All this philo- talk...
Where's Noumenal when you need him?
Science is not the result of Philosophy, OS.
It's the other way around..
- WhydG

It wasn't I who brought up the topic of Philosophy. Place your blame on the one who mentioned it first in the first place. Personally I LOVE Philosophy. I am using it right now as I type these words. And so did you.

Wherever DID you get your idea that science doesn't result from Philosophy, Why'd?
It certainly does. Each time you question anything, you are philosophizing, posing a question, forming an opinion, etc. You have to be getting your incorrect ideas on philosophy from Thegoatofotto. Do you also hate women and think that Fish is a metaphor for womanly smells, as Otto'sghost does?
Da Schneib
4.2 / 5 (15) Jun 19, 2016
It wasn't I who brought up the topic of Philosophy.
Sure it was; you brought up EU.

You're lying again, Otto's_Socks.
Otto_Szucks
1.3 / 5 (14) Jun 19, 2016
To the skeptics of this forum:
Your inability to accept the "reality" of highly advanced civilizations in our MULTI-verse will also be your downfall in understanding the trove of new information coming from the field of Quantum Physics. A single particle that exists in two locations at once- impossible? Entangled particles that behave identically at great distances from one another- also impossible? An infinite amount of outcomes from a seemingly single event- see David Deutsch.
Your adamant protests against the idea of extraterrestrials being here now doesn't speak to your sanity but rather to your feeling threatened. Historically, that's how science has been hindered.

- Telekinetic
OF COURSE these fools feel threatened. The presence of E.T. on and above Earth, with their abilities to roam the galaxy AT WILL thoroughly frightens these lunatic Anthropocentric humans. Even more so than the possibility of the End of the World (as we know it).
humy
5 / 5 (9) Jun 19, 2016
from this link:

"...Nonetheless, Earth's broadcast signals have reached every star within about 80 light years from the sun – about 8,531 stars and 3,555 Earthlike planets,
..."

This implies that out of the ~8,531 stars within 80 light years from the sun, ~3,555 of them have Earth-like planets. To arrive at that figure, if they assumed that there is is the vast majority of cases of only one Earth-like planet being around each star with an Earth-like planet, they would have to assume ~42% of all stars have Earth-like planets to get that ~3,555 figure. Is that ~42% backed up by the observations or statistical analysis?
Da Schneib
4.5 / 5 (15) Jun 19, 2016
OF COURSE these fools feel threatened.
Nope, actually we feel amused that anyone would think your puerile philosophical rhetorical navel-gazing solipsistic bullsxxt has any meaning beyond your psychotic views. Demonstrating their paucity of evidence is child's play, but still more advanced than your playgrounding.
Otto_Szucks
1.5 / 5 (15) Jun 19, 2016
It wasn't I who brought up the topic of Philosophy.
Sure it was; you brought up EU.

You're lying again, Otto's_Socks.
- da schnoop

Both Standard Model AND EU have derived from philosophical brainstorms. I brought up the topic of Extraterrestrials, as did Telekinetic. The topic of the article conforms with both our experiences, so we were not off-topic. Then schnoopo comes along to defend CapnStumpRump to get it on with me. I will comply if I see that its worth my time. And no, I don't need to lie. And as far as I can tell, Telekinetic has no need to lie also.

You people who don't like the idea of E.T.s ruining your Sundays, well, too bad. Put your blindfolds on and you won't see what's coming.
Da Schneib
4.4 / 5 (14) Jun 19, 2016
I brought up the topic of Extraterrestrials, as did Telekinetic. The topic of the article conforms with both our experiences,
I don't think anyone here accepts psychotic delusions as "experiences."

Consensus reality is formed from repeatable experiment, not from anecdote.

It doesn't surprise me that an AGW denier would try to misrepresent psychotic delusions as reality.
Whydening Gyre
4.8 / 5 (16) Jun 19, 2016
As to alien Contact?
Ever wonder why the Human Race is always at a point of High Drama?

Level 3 civilization's "virtual" reality.
Earth is Great America/Disneyland. (Or Sunday night TV)

Face it, kids - we're the entertainment...
Otto_Szucks
1.3 / 5 (14) Jun 19, 2016
That again, is YOUR opinion
Sure, and it's also the opinion of every competent physicist on the planet.

Of course, you dismiss that just like you dismiss the opinion of every competent geophysicist on the planet on AGW.

More fuel for my fire: deniers can't count.
- da schnoopypoopy

Where do you get the idea that I dismiss anything said and done by competent physicists? IF they are truly competent, they will continue to seek and find the TRUTH. I don't think that they give a flying fck about YOUR Confirmation Bias, although I'm sure they appreciate your anonymous support for their work. That also goes for EU physicists, and I respect THEIR work also.

As far as AGW goes, it's SUMMERTIME...and the living is easy. IF the glaciers are still melting in December. that is when i will become suspicious...although it could also mean that the Earth is entering a warming cycle all on her own. Can you adapt? I can.
Otto_Szucks
1.3 / 5 (14) Jun 19, 2016
Wherever DID you get your idea that science doesn't result from Philosophy, Why'd?

In my book, Philosophy is (or should be) a method of idealizing observed reality in a rational manner.
Do you also hate women...

Love them. So much that I wish I had my own vagina (I'd never have to leave home)
and think that Fish is a metaphor for womanly smells, as Otto'sghost does?

Fish was a grumpy old guy on "Barney Miller"
It's also a tasty source of protein (Tuna and Miracle whip - yum) and Omega3 fatty acids.
Womanly smells? Unless there's a yeast infection involved, not bad...:-)
(No Miracle whip necessary)
- Why'd

LOL You express your ideology very well.
Um...your OWN vadge? You sure about that?
Nah, not THAT Fish. GhostofOtto'sAss is the one who proclamed that fish is a metaphor for womanly smells...which led many of us to believe that Otto goes around sniffing women's crotches.
Oh shite, that is TOO FUNNY.
LMAO
Otto_Szucks
1.3 / 5 (14) Jun 19, 2016
I brought up the topic of Extraterrestrials, as did Telekinetic. The topic of the article conforms with both our experiences,
I don't think anyone here accepts psychotic delusions as "experiences."

Consensus reality is formed from repeatable experiment, not from anecdote.

It doesn't surprise me that an AGW denier would try to misrepresent psychotic delusions as reality.
- da schnoopopoopo

What is YOUR evidence wrt YOUR CLAIM of "psychotic delusions"? Just because you SAY SO? And who ARE you, anyway? You are ONLY a piece of flesh that will die someday and will probably NEVER SEE that which I, Telekinetic, and millions of humans have had the privilege to have seen and experienced...including scientists, airline pilots and military officers, among others.

Nobody is holding your lack of experiential evidence wrt E.T.s against you. But your insistence that anyone who DID have such an experience is deluded, just because YOU say so, is sheer stupidity.
Whydening Gyre
4.8 / 5 (16) Jun 19, 2016
Why'd
LOL You express your ideology very well.

Thank you.
Um...your OWN vadge? You sure about that?

Cept for the mense part, sure. Imagine having both... The most sought after lesbian on the planet...
GhostofOtto'sAss is the one who proclamed that fish is a metaphor for womanly smells...

It's one of many, I'm sure. That particular metaphor has been around LOOOooong before Ghost - or internet chat rooms....
My great grandfather even had a joke about it...
which led many of us to believe that Otto goes around sniffing women's crotches.

Something a great many of us (males) have done at one time or another, no doubt...
Don't you?
Whydening Gyre
4.7 / 5 (15) Jun 19, 2016
which led many of us to believe that Otto goes around sniffing women's crotches.

Something a great many of us (males) have done at one time or another, no doubt...
Don't you?

I mean, think about the dearth of information it provides to your Instinct/subconscious self...
Otto_Szucks
1.5 / 5 (16) Jun 19, 2016
Before I go I want to express my opinions on "Consensus". Consensus is most often statistical bullshit that is dropped on the heads of millions of uninformed or misinformed adults in the US and Europe who have no time or compulsion to check out the source of Consensus and whether or not it consists solely of TRUTH, and nothing but. Billions of humans are fooled into believing Consensus.
The IMAMs of the Muslim faith use Consensus to whip their believers into line. ISIS/ISIL uses Consensus to encourage their acolytes to behead the innocents in the Middle East, and Consensus will convince them to behead Europeans and Americans or die trying.

The general Consensus is that they will find 72 virgins as their reward for killing the "infidels".
That is what belief in Consensus does. So much for that.
Otto_Szucks
1.3 / 5 (14) Jun 19, 2016

which led many of us to believe that Otto goes around sniffing women's crotches.

Something a great many of us (males) have done at one time or another, no doubt...
Don't you?
- WhydG

Sniffing womens' crotches? Only if they've recently showered. I prefer my woman clean and sweet-smelling before I go ____ on her. Get my drift? Condoms are a nuisance, but necessary. I can only use king-sized...LOL
someone11235813
5 / 5 (12) Jun 19, 2016
ugh!, this is not even pseudo science.
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (14) Jun 19, 2016

Sniffing womens' crotches? Only if they've recently showered. I prefer my woman clean and sweet-smelling before I go ____ on her. Get my drift?

My original comment to you was removed. Maybe it was the reference to Miracle Whip... Thanks for immortalizing it by quoting ...
Condoms are a nuisance, but necessary. I can only use king-sized...LOL

Maybe your imagination needs a condom... THAT might be king-sized...
Da Schneib
4.7 / 5 (12) Jun 19, 2016
Condoms are a nuisance, but necessary. I can only use king-sized...LOL

Maybe your imagination needs a condom... THAT might be king-sized...
Patton is said to have waged psychological warfare against the Russians by distributing extra large condoms labeled "Medium" to them. I think Otto's_Socks fell for the ruse.
Otto_Szucks
1.3 / 5 (15) Jun 19, 2016

Sniffing womens' crotches? Only if they've recently showered. I prefer my woman clean and sweet-smelling before I go ____ on her. Get my drift?

My original comment to you was removed. Maybe it was the reference to Miracle Whip... Thanks for immortalizing it by quoting ...
Condoms are a nuisance, but necessary. I can only use king-sized...LOL

Maybe your imagination needs a condom... THAT might be king-sized...
- WhydG

Oh yeah...I see that your comment was removed. You mentioned tuna fish and Miracle Whip. Then you mentioned "unless there's a yeast infection involved". Hmmm someone must've read something into that.
Imagination? Not at all. I'm a big guy...6 feet 6 1/2 inches tall. Sorry to dash your hopes, Why'd.
Like I said - king sized. Being tall AND handsome does have its advantages that most other men don't have.
Da Schneib
4.3 / 5 (12) Jun 19, 2016
Being tall AND handsome does have its advantages that most other men don't have.
You mean other than naming yourself after the repository most men use when they...

Well, never mind.
Whydening Gyre
4.7 / 5 (15) Jun 20, 2016
Imagination? Not at all. I'm a big guy...6 feet 6 1/2 inches tall. Sorry to dash your hopes, Why'd.
Like I said - king sized. Being tall AND handsome does have its advantages that most other men don't have.

And yet you appear Dwarfed by your own ego...
Hmmm. A legend in his own mind...
Otto_Szucks
1.3 / 5 (15) Jun 20, 2016
Imagination? Not at all. I'm a big guy...6 feet 6 1/2 inches tall. Sorry to dash your hopes, Why'd.
Like I said - king sized. Being tall AND handsome does have its advantages that most other men don't have.

And yet you appear Dwarfed by your own ego...
Hmmm. A legend in his own mind...
- Why'd

LOL no need to put yourself down just because I would tower over you. Perhaps you and da schrub are short fellers, you may have a Napoleon complex, as most shorties do. But do try to make the most of it. And try to avoid going up to the tallest guy you can find and kick him in the shins (or balls). Make sure you play nice.

:)
Osiris1
1.3 / 5 (16) Jun 20, 2016
If there are folks out there, they are God's people as well. They may well have a custom to let us alone until we:
--- Pose a threat to the common order
----Disrupt a member's concession or mining operation...like maybe on Ceres
----Start exploring to the extent that their germs, parasites, pagan religions, undigestible nor assimilatable invasive populations of sentients or vermin contaminate the claimed bodies of member cultures or violate treaty assigned volumes of space, etc.
At that point or before if cultures show the will to do the above, we will be contacted in no uncertain terms, probably at a governmental level, with instructions to those governments to retain the secrecy of the contacts until told otherwise.

Kinda like the situation we have now! For the last hundred years or more.
antialias_physorg
4.5 / 5 (16) Jun 20, 2016
f there are folks out there, they are God's people as well.

Which of the several thousand gods did you have in mind?
(And if they are really so moronically stupid as to believe in a god then they surely have their own and not an immortal, omnipotent, omniscient, humane, universal, antropomorphic, English-speaking, Angolo-Saxon, pro-American god )

--- Pose a threat to the common order

In that case they'd just nuke us from orbit (it's the only way to be sure)
----Disrupt a member's concession or mining operation

Profit oriented aliens would also nuke us from orbit. But...really...mining concessions? You're out of your f*ing mind.
----Start exploring to the extent....

W.T.F???

Man...you are seriously too much into Hollywood style aliens.
CubicAdjunct747
1 / 5 (11) Jun 20, 2016
I dont think aliens are very common in the galaxy. Just like the idea of god, you really have to look at what aliens dont do to really tell the story. For one, they dont surf! WE have the best waves within many light years, and is a great resource for planet Earth. Even if aliens are huge, i bet some of our 50 footers can give them the kicks they seek. Any alien that doesnt surf is lame, unfun, and we should not invite them to our planet.
Whydening Gyre
4.6 / 5 (18) Jun 20, 2016
- Why'd

LOL no need to put yourself down just because I would tower over you. Perhaps you and da schrub are short fellers, you may have a Napoleon complex, as most shorties do. But do try to make the most of it. And try to avoid going up to the tallest guy you can find and kick him in the shins (or balls). Make sure you play nice.
:)

5'11". Not short, not tall.
Don't look now, but your narcissism is showing...
saintmess
5 / 5 (15) Jun 20, 2016
but ... but .. they contacted me in 1976 :)
BongThePuffin
Jun 20, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
BongThePuffin
Jun 20, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
BiteMe
Jun 20, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
AGreatWhopper
3.6 / 5 (17) Jun 20, 2016
Whydening Gyre5 /5 (8) 18 hours ago
which led many of us to believe that Otto goes around sniffing women's crotches.


He doesn't have NEARLY that much class. Bicycle seats are more his style. It's how he detects sociopaths.
AGreatWhopper
3.6 / 5 (20) Jun 20, 2016
ChiefFartingDog 3.7 /5 (15) Jun 18, 2016
Hey, for those that think it's innocent fun debating OS, take a look of the character of the individual that your are encouraging.

This fucker needs to be isolated, broken and driven from the land. Bottom of the comments.


Vermin control is definitely in order. I think character is important when it goes past a certain line, irrelevant before. Both Ottos show the depths of their scumbag character the way they have started using feminine gender as an insult. Their self loathing gets projected onto everything and everyone and they overcompensate with their overblown egos.
AGreatWhopper
3.7 / 5 (21) Jun 20, 2016
Da Schneib4.6 / 5 (9) 19 hours ago

I don't think anyone here accepts psychotic delusions as "experiences."

Consensus reality is formed from repeatable experiment, not from anecdote.

It doesn't surprise me that an AGW denier would try to misrepresent psychotic delusions as reality.


500 stars! They can spew all day long and it comes down to those simple points.
jim_xanara
3.5 / 5 (19) Jun 20, 2016
Otto's_socks whined:
will probably NEVER SEE that which I, Telekinetic, and millions of humans have had the privilege to have seen and experienced..


We know just how reliable the evidence of your senses is. All around you AGW marches on relentlessly and you can't see it. It's MUCH more obvious than that we are being visited by ET.

"Privileged". Yeah, I thought a lot of this was worthless blanks fantasizing how they lives are actually special. The fuzzy comparisons are laughable. Millions of people have seen something they can't identify- and that automatically makes them believers that ET is visiting the planet regularly. THAT, good people, in a nutshell, is the quality of the reasoning that passes for logic with the nutter fringe.
jim_xanara
3.5 / 5 (19) Jun 20, 2016
Otto_Szucks 1 /5 (8) Jun 19, 2016

A claim is not baseless unless the evidence indicates it as such once the COMPLETE evidence is presented


OK. You're a worthless piece of dog shite. Now, we will consider that to be correct until the COMPLETE evidence is presented when you have made your last post. The claim is not baseless. We'll do it your way.

Piece of shite.
Whydening Gyre
4.4 / 5 (14) Jun 20, 2016
Whydening Gyre5 /5 (8) 18 hours ago
which led many of us to believe that Otto goes around sniffing women's crotches.


He doesn't have NEARLY that much class. Bicycle seats are more his style. It's how he detects sociopaths.

Actually, that wasn't me. It was OS....
Telekinetic
1.6 / 5 (13) Jun 20, 2016
Otto_Szucks 1 /5 (8) Jun 19, 2016

A claim is not baseless unless the evidence indicates it as such once the COMPLETE evidence is presented


OK. You're a worthless piece of dog shite. Now, we will consider that to be correct until the COMPLETE evidence is presented when you have made your last post. The claim is not baseless. We'll do it your way.

Piece of shite.

Okay Jim,
Everyone knows that all Englishmen are cross-dressers, and love to be whipped with leather riding crops. That would describe you to a "T". Let's see you prove otherwise. Nancy boy.
Captain Stumpy
4.5 / 5 (16) Jun 21, 2016
my wife hallucinated
@telek
mass hysteria is more likely than alien visitation considering the lack of evidence

eyewitness testimony has no credibility if it can't be validated

see also: [psychology] agenticity, Informational Influence, Insufficient Justification, Confirmation Bias, Misinformation Effect, Compliance Techniques, projections, hallucinations, the need for closure (answers)
You will never ...
i've seen many UFO's
most were natural objects, some were USAF craft, some still undefined ... so you are wrong

you made a claim
there is no evidence that can be validated by secondary parties

this is, by definition, not evidence that can be accepted by the scientific method as it can't be proven

you didn't watch Dr. Tyson in the video, did you?
basement
Ohh, that will teach me to use logic and science on a science site!

maybe now you can tell Dr. Tyson that too?
bill Nye?
they say the same thing, moron!
LOL

huk'd on fonix didn't work fer yu
Captain Stumpy
4.5 / 5 (16) Jun 21, 2016
Your inability to accept the "reality" of highly advanced civilizations
teleschizophrenic
my flying spaghetti monster can kick your aliens *ss any day of the week!

at least i can prove my flying spaghetti monster with a can of hairspray, a 3" PVC pipe and some spaghetti & a match

you can't even validate a claim that you saw something
perhaps you should read this: https://en.wikipe...evidence

tell you what, feel free to put your money where your mouth is:
write it all up and submit it to a peer reviewed scientific journal... I will bet you $100 that they decline because there is no empirical verifiable evidence that can be validated

we can use a moderated site to hold the cash if you want

at least now we know what your mindset is we can just ignore you for the psychotic delusional idiot troll who can't tell science from fecal matter that you've proven yourself to be

& that is empirically proven above, in your own words
Whydening Gyre
4.7 / 5 (15) Jun 21, 2016
Telekinetic.
It might have helped your argument if your wife had grabbed a CAMERA instead of binoculars...
Dark_Solar
4.2 / 5 (15) Jun 21, 2016
This premise behind this article is shaky at best given that the evolutionary processes responsible for the development of high intellect can happen pretty much any time once requisite traits of tool use, communication and environmental manipulation are acquired. The universe and our galaxy are both immensely old and already we've found stable stars in the Milky Way that show signs of being almost as old as the universe. Find a water-bearing goldilocks planet in orbit around one of these stars and there's a high probability that not only is there life on it, but that this life has had literally billions of years to spawn an intelligent species. Consider that from what we can tell, life on Earth began slightly more than 4 billion years ago and that the Earth is estimated to be around 4.5 billion years old; that leaves an easy 8 billion year chunk of time for any number of species to have arisen, attained sentience, and spread into the universe.
Telekinetic
1.5 / 5 (15) Jun 21, 2016
Telekinetic.
It might have helped your argument if your wife had grabbed a CAMERA instead of binoculars...


In the heat of the moment, I was only interested in examining the craft to satisfy my own natural scientific curiosity and not to prove anything to a bunch of academically-challenged adolescents. I've posted about this incident before on this forum and was surprised and appalled that not one person asked about details, which, as an ardent fan of science, would be the first thing I would do. By questioning me with the intent to trip me up would also have been fine. It's disgusting that all of these ninnies squawking about scientific method don't have the brains to practice it.
antigoracle
1.5 / 5 (15) Jun 21, 2016
Think about it. This is exactly what the aliens would want you to do, so that you fall into their trap. /sarc
KaFaraqGatri
Jun 21, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
ChiefFartingDog
Jun 21, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Da Schneib
4.4 / 5 (13) Jun 21, 2016
at least i can prove my flying spaghetti monster with a can of hairspray, a 3" PVC pipe and some spaghetti & a match
You forgot the meatballs!!!
Whydening Gyre
4.7 / 5 (15) Jun 21, 2016
In the heat of the moment, I was only interested in examining the craft to satisfy my own natural scientific curiosity and not to prove anything to a bunch of academically-challenged adolescents.

It might have proved something to NON "academically challenged", as well...
I've posted about this incident before on this forum and was surprised and appalled that not one person asked about details, which, as an ardent fan of science, would be the first thing I would do. By questioning me with the intent to trip me up would also have been fine.
Alrighty. then. Let's start with;
1. Altitude?
2. Distance?
3. Shape?
4. Coloring?
5. Moving/hovering?
6. Windows?
7. What did binoculars aid you in seeing?
Answer those and I will then have further questions.
Oh... Scientific method also infers documentation. Lots and lot's of it....
Telekinetic
1.5 / 5 (15) Jun 21, 2016

Telekinetic Sep 02, 2011 Rank: 1.9 / 5 (9):
About 5 years ago, I witnessed a UFO of the silver cigar tube type at approximately 500 feet in the air. It was dusk but there was still plenty of light to see it clearly. It was making a slow trajectory above a very heavily wooded area and with binoculars, I could see that there were no wings, tail assembly, ailerons, markings, or sound. There was a narrow slit in the front that I assume was for visibility. Its movement was completely straight and was definitely not a gas filled blimp. This is absolutely not fiction, and I asked a flight instructor with 20 years as an Air Force mechanic if a craft can fly straight without wings of some kind to which he replied "No". I asked then how would he explain what I saw and he said that the area has had numerous UFO sightings. I think our universe is old enough and hospitable enough to have had many extraterrestrial civilizations for over millions of years.

Whydening Gyre
4.7 / 5 (14) Jun 21, 2016

... UFO of the silver cigar tube type at approximately 500 feet in the air. It was dusk but there was still plenty of light to see it clearly. It was making a slow trajectory above a very heavily wooded area and with binoculars, I could see that there were no wings, tail assembly, ailerons, markings, or sound. There was a narrow slit in the front that I assume was for visibility. Its movement was completely straight and was definitely not a gas filled blimp.

Approx. size?
Distance from you?
Why would you say not a blimp? Was it windy?
I know you will rail at this, but it's important info. Were there any alcoholic beverages ingested? Or prescription drugs? Cannabis? Even - cigarets...?
Telekinetic
1.6 / 5 (14) Jun 22, 2016
The overall length was about 35 ft. and approximately 8 ft in diameter with both ends rounded. Its distance from where I stood was 40 ft and about 500 ft. high. The flight instructor was my flight instructor at the time. I neither imbibed alcohol or ingested anything mind-altering- i was sober as a judge at the time.
Now, a good detective determining the veracity of a story doesn't need anymore details other than comparing the story told nearly 5 years ago to the story told recently.
And as an illustration of how idiotic my detractors are, they all voted unanimously in favor of Dark_Solar's
post where he states clearly and unequivocally that other intelligent civilizations likely exist, which is corroborative of my statements. You pathetic knuckleheads can't comprehend what's written in front of your slobbering faces!
BongThePuffin
Jun 22, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Telekinetic
1.6 / 5 (14) Jun 22, 2016
@ Mummy's Powder Puff:

If I had a supercollider in my kitchen, I could produce a Higgs Boson for you. But to see an actual craft from another part of our multiverse takes nothing but a pair of eyes and being in the right place at the right time. Me frustrated? No. Why would I need to convince a no-account wanker like yourself of anything?

antialias_physorg
4.4 / 5 (14) Jun 22, 2016
"Evidence" is a bit weird. Eyewitness testimony plays a part as evidence in a courtroom. In a scientific context it is the worst kind of evidence (read: it doesn't count as evidence at all)
Especially since there are a gazillion (scientifically replicable) ways you can get people to see weird stuff that isn't there. From Fata morganas to chemically or electrically (or even psychologically) induced hallucinations.

It boils down to: "nice for you that you think you saw something - but so what?"
Otto_Szucks
1.3 / 5 (11) Jun 22, 2016
I dont think aliens are very common in the galaxy. Just like the idea of god, you really have to look at what aliens dont do to really tell the story. For one, they dont surf! WE have the best waves within many light years, and is a great resource for planet Earth. Even if aliens are huge, i bet some of our 50 footers can give them the kicks they seek. Any alien that doesnt surf is lame, unfun, and we should not invite them to our planet.
- CubicAdjunct747

Are you really serious??
Otto_Szucks
1.4 / 5 (11) Jun 22, 2016
but ... but .. they contacted me in 1976 :)
- saintmess

WHO contacted you? The FBI? CIA? MI5? Are you a terrorist?
Whydening Gyre
4.7 / 5 (15) Jun 22, 2016
The overall length was about 35 ft. and approximately 8 ft in diameter with both ends rounded. Its distance from where I stood was 40 ft and about 500 ft. high. The flight instructor was my flight instructor at the time. I neither imbibed alcohol or ingested anything mind-altering- i was sober as a judge at the time.

Okay. What were weather conditions?
Now, a good detective determining the veracity of a story doesn't need anymore details other than comparing the story told nearly 5 years ago to the story told recently.

The illusion that our own memories are valid is an - illusion. A good detective is always in the falsification mode.
Your anger with others is a driver for lowered objectivity. Lose that first.
Otto_Szucks
1.4 / 5 (11) Jun 22, 2016
@Telekinetic
The overall length was about 35 ft. and approximately 8 ft in diameter with both ends rounded. Its distance from where I stood was 40 ft and about 500 ft. high. The flight instructor was my flight instructor at the time. I neither imbibed alcohol or ingested anything mind-altering- i was sober.
Now, a good detective determining the veracity of a story doesn't need anymore details other than comparing the story told nearly 5 years ago to the story told recently.
- Telekinetic

You have described a cylindrical-shaped ET spacecraft. The race of E.T.s use several models of spacecraft in the skies above us. Some are triangular or cylindrical, but most are disk-like, smooth and windowless. They emit a plasma-like aura that pulses, surrounding the spacecraft, which led us all to believe that the plasma is emitted by their propulsion system.
The E.T.s recharge their propulsion systems with antimatter generated in lightning storms and go invisible during that time
Otto_Szucks
1.6 / 5 (13) Jun 22, 2016
(cont'd)
@Telekinetic
And as an illustration of how idiotic my detractors are, they all voted unanimously in favor of Dark_Solar's post where he states clearly and unequivocally that other intelligent civilizations likely exist, which is corroborative of my statements. You pathetic knuckleheads can't comprehend what's written(..)
- Telekinetic

Yes, I noticed that also. The 5 trolls rated him all FIVES without comprehending the reality of what was posted. LMAO
Most humans don't, or rarely look up at the sky while walking, and even sitting, unless birdshit happens to land on their head. It's just not the human thing to do. to watch the skies. The action is all happening in front of, or around them. They are just so disinterested, judging by the comments I read in this thread, plus written and oral mindsets of those I have spoken to offline. That means that "the man in the street" or those in Physorg threads are uninterested in the interactions between man and ET.
Whydening Gyre
4.7 / 5 (15) Jun 22, 2016
The illusion that our own memories are valid is an - illusion.

Apologies, should have read "without error" instead of "valid".
Memory engrams are a relational process... not exact imprint.
Otto_Szucks
1.4 / 5 (11) Jun 22, 2016
(cont'd)
@Telekinetic
It is a normal practice for humans to declare ANY kind of personal experience that involves an extraterrestrial presence to be a mental disorder of some type; not merely due to their not having had the same kind of experience with the ET phenomena, but due mostly to the Fright Factor which is illustrative of the Fight or Flight syndrome which humans have built-in to their primitive psyche.
E.T.s are aware that the vast majority of humans are chickenshits who would prefer to believe that they reign supreme universally, but who concede socially that there IS a SLIGHT possibility that "they are not alone". But when ANYONE speaks out about having had interaction with ET, suddenly those whose bent it is, is to punish and impugn, will bravely take center stage so that one and all will take a stand along with them in trying to prevent further confessions of personal ET interaction. THAT us humanity at its psychopathic worst. Or MAYBE it is their best.
Telekinetic
1.5 / 5 (16) Jun 22, 2016
"Evidence" is a bit weird. Eyewitness testimony plays a part as evidence in a courtroom. In a scientific context it is the worst kind of evidence (read: it doesn't count as evidence at all)
Especially since there are a gazillion (scientifically replicable) ways you can get people to see weird stuff that isn't there. From Fata morganas to chemically or electrically (or even psychologically) induced hallucinations.

It boils down to: "nice for you that you think you saw something - but so what?"

And your contribution to this discussion, antialias, boils down to the drool of an imbecile.
antialias_physorg
4.3 / 5 (17) Jun 22, 2016
And your contribution to this discussion, antialias, boils down to the drool of an imbecile.

Very persuasive argument, that. Totally.

All I'm saying is that if one persone says "I totally saw something" then that doesn't mean diddly squat. There's plenty of people who said they saw god or Elvis or the Loch Ness monster. How, in a qualitative way, is your testimony different from theirs? Why is yours to be believed whereas theirs is not? They claim to "know what they saw" just like you - and they are as convinced ofthe veracity of their claims as you are.

Just going "But I am right because it's me - and they are wrong because they're not me" is not really a good argumentative basis.

TheGhostofOtto1923
1.7 / 5 (18) Jun 22, 2016
Evidence.
Oh yeah...I see that your comment was removed. You mentioned tuna fish and Miracle Whip. Then you mentioned "unless there's a yeast infection involved". Hmmm someone must've read something into that.
Imagination? Not at all. I'm a big guy...6 feet 6 1/2 inches tall. Sorry to dash your hopes, Why'd.
Like I said - king sized. Being tall AND handsome does have its advantages that most other men don't have
Here we have pretty conclusive evidence that pussytard is a woman. A pretty stupid, pretty fat, and pretty sick, woman.
Telekinetic
1.5 / 5 (17) Jun 22, 2016
And your contribution to this discussion, antialias, boils down to the drool of an imbecile.

Very persuasive argument, that. Totally.

All I'm saying is that if one persone says "I totally saw something" then that doesn't mean diddly squat. There's plenty of people who said they saw god or Elvis or the Loch Ness monster. How, in a qualitative way, is your testimony different from theirs? Why is yours to be believed whereas theirs is not? They claim to "know what they saw" just like you - and they are as convinced ofthe veracity of their claims as you are.


The difference here is that you and others dismiss out of hand what could be a fascinating event because 1., It never happened to you and 2., you are so convinced of your being right or so lazy that you don't bother to investigate the testimony of heads of state, military, astronauts, police and other normal, credible witnesses who recount similar events. It's antithetical to the spirit of discovery.
Otto_Szucks
1.3 / 5 (13) Jun 22, 2016
Whydening Gyre5 /5 (8) 18 hours ago
which led many of us to believe that Otto goes around sniffing women's crotches.


He doesn't have NEARLY that much class. Bicycle seats are more his style. It's how he detects sociopaths.

Actually, that wasn't me. It was OS....
- WhydG
But you were thinking it too. Admit it. You have been in PO threads long enough to see what TGofO has been doing for years. Telling lies constantly. And she has made sure that you have gotten all FIVES for your ratings. Did you win a prize yet? What is the name of your Coven, BTW?
Whydening Gyre
4.6 / 5 (18) Jun 22, 2016
The difference here is that you and others dismiss out of hand what could be a fascinating event because 1., It never happened to you

You/ We don't know that. It may have...
and 2., you are so convinced of your being right or so lazy that you don't bother to investigate the testimony of heads of state, military, astronauts, police and other normal, credible witnesses who recount similar events.

Or that, either.
It's antithetical to the spirit of discovery.

Also antithetical is the unwilling acceptance of a simpler answer.

If you are thru venting, I'd like to continue with investigating your claim.
If you wouldn't mind answering my last questions of you....
Otto_Szucks
1.3 / 5 (13) Jun 22, 2016
And your contribution to this discussion, antialias, boils down to the drool of an imbecile.

Very persuasive argument, that. Totally.

...says "I totally saw something" then that doesn't mean diddly squat. There's plenty of people who said they saw god or Elvis or the Loch Ness monster. How, in a qualitative way, is your testimony different from theirs? Why is yours to be believed whereas theirs is not? They claim to "know what they saw" just like you - and they are as convinced ofthe veracity of their claims as you are.

Just going "But I am right because it's me - and they are wrong because they're not me" is not really a good argumentative basis.

- aap
Matter of fact, aap...there is no real evidence that YOU exist. You have typed words into your box which may not have been typed by you at all, but either by another person pretending to be you - or even many persons taking turns at pretending to be you. Or you're a bot. Can you show evidence that you exist?
Whydening Gyre
4.8 / 5 (17) Jun 22, 2016
But you were thinking it too. Admit it.

GofO's proclivities are not my business or concern.
You have been in PO threads long enough to see what TGofO has been doing for years. Telling lies constantly.

Apparently, I don't see that. He does, however, seem to dislike self-aggrandizement by others.
And she has made sure that you have gotten all FIVES for your ratings. Did you win a prize yet?
GofO has prob'ly '1'ed me way more times than '5'ed. Mostly I think he doesn't grade me at all.
What is the name of your Coven, BTW?

Sorry, but you have to be less than 6 ft tall and only have medium sized endowment to find that out...
Otto_Szucks
1.3 / 5 (14) Jun 22, 2016
The difference here is that you and others dismiss out of hand what could be a fascinating event because 1., It never happened to you

You/ We don't know that. It may have...
and 2., you are so convinced of your being right or so lazy that you don't bother to investigate the testimony of heads of state, military, astronauts, police and other normal, credible witnesses who recount similar events.

Or that, either.
It's antithetical to the spirit of discovery.

Also antithetical is the unwilling acceptance of a simpler answer.

If you are thru venting, I'd like to continue with investigating your claim.
If you wouldn't mind answering my last questions of you....
- Why'd

And what kind of questions do you intend to ask? Are you going to phish for personal and business information as Ghostofotto/CapnStrumpet/OinkleIra have done to gkam and attempted with bschott?
Do you believe everything that Barak Obama and hillary clinton say?
Whydening Gyre
4.8 / 5 (18) Jun 22, 2016
- Why'd
And what kind of questions do you intend to ask?

The kind that aid in getting a clearer picture of what Telek saw.
Are you going to phish for personal and business information as Ghostofotto/CapnStrumpet/OinkleIra have done to gkam and attempted with bschott?

Not even interested.
Do you believe everything that Barak Obama and hillary clinton say?

Barak - 75-80%
Hillary - not sure.
The Donald - Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha!!!!!! A used car salesman who got lucky in Real Estate...
Otto_Szucks
1.3 / 5 (16) Jun 22, 2016
@WhydG
You intend to investigate into that which has been revealed already to the full, and yet, the only other information you could possibly get Telekinetic to expound upon is his personal information and where he works, address, etc.
IMO just as I had already revealed my own experience with ET spacecraft as a young man with my friends on a hiking trip, there would be nothing further to add, except for my personal and business info which are my own, which are not yours to know.
If Telekinetic wishes to reveal more info about his sighting and the conditions surrounding it, that is his call. But I caution you to avoid phishing for anything else that could prove to be actionable.
Otto_Szucks
1.3 / 5 (16) Jun 22, 2016

What is the name of your Coven, BTW?

Sorry, but you have to be less than 6 ft tall and only have medium sized endowment to find that out...
- WhydG

Looks like I don't qualify, being a very proud 6 feet 6 1/2 inches without shoes and, as I've bragged about already, very well endowed, thanks.
So, is that a European, American, or Asian Coven?
john berry_hobbes
3.7 / 5 (21) Jun 22, 2016
Yup. You can tell it every time. "Cocktail Weenie Peenie" syndrome.

I'm 6'5" and don't go around posting my personal details. That's called sanity. Go impress your sister, redneck.
Sheik_Yerbuti
Jun 22, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
Otto_Szucks
1.3 / 5 (13) Jun 22, 2016
Whydening Gyre 5 /5 (9) 22 hours ago

Approx. size?
Distance from you?
Why would you say not a blimp? Was it windy?


Deserves an honest answer. Think it goes pretty much like this:

Approx. size?
4".

Distance from you?
About 2', looking down.

Why would you say not a blimp?
It DEFINITELY could not be called a blimp.

Was it windy?
Yes! In fact a yellow stream was coming up from it and splattering me when I faced into it...oh. Never mind.
- shake your booty
Gosh you're stupid.
antigoracle
1.3 / 5 (13) Jun 22, 2016
I'm 6'5" and don't go around posting my personal details. That's called sanity...

Wow, 6'5", that should be a record for the biggest pile of doody. Now tell us AGreatWanker, posting using over a dozen sock puppets and talking to yourself, is that called sanity?
Whydening Gyre
4.7 / 5 (15) Jun 22, 2016
@WhydG
You intend to investigate into that which has been revealed already to the full,

Maybe the right question has yet to be asked.
and yet, the only other information you could possibly get Telekinetic to expound upon is his personal information and where he works, address, etc.

Irelevant data.
IMO just as I had already revealed my own experience with ET spacecraft as a young man with my friends on a hiking trip, there would be nothing further to add,

A limited opinion, then.
If Telekinetic wishes to reveal more info about his sighting and the conditions surrounding it, that is his call.

indeed it is. Maybe his sense of discovery wants to. Also, see top response in this comment..
But I caution you to avoid phishing for anything else that could prove to be actionable.

See 2nd response in this comment.
Whydening Gyre
4.7 / 5 (15) Jun 22, 2016
WhydG
Looks like I don't qualify, being a very proud 6 feet 6 1/2 inches without shoes and, as I've bragged about already, very well endowed, thanks.

Key word - bragged...
So, is that a European, American, or Asian Coven?

Human. You prob'ly don't qualify there, either...
Whydening Gyre
4.7 / 5 (15) Jun 23, 2016
Whydening Gyre 5 /5 (9) 22 hours ago

Approx. size?
Distance from you?
Why would you say not a blimp? Was it windy?


Deserves an honest answer. Think it goes pretty much like this:

Approx. size?
4".

Distance from you?
About 2', looking down.

Why would you say not a blimp?
It DEFINITELY could not be called a blimp.

Was it windy?
Yes! In fact a yellow stream was coming up from it and splattering me when I faced into it...oh. Never mind.

Sheik. You should lay off the beer before ya come on...:-) EVERYbody knows you don't pee into the wind....
antialias_physorg
4.7 / 5 (14) Jun 23, 2016
The difference here is that you and others dismiss out of hand what could be a fascinating event

No. I don't dismiss it out of hand. Just as I don't dismiss that someone saw Elvis. But until and unless they can demonstrate this in some way their testimony is utterly useless. It conveys no useful information.

It never happened to you

A lot of things never happened to me, so?

you are so convinced of your being right

No. I'm just telling you how science works. Eyewitness testimony is not a basis for science.
UNLESS you can use your experience to devise a test by which the testimony can be corroborated and/or repeated by an arbitrary/independent observer. Then you're golden.

you don't bother to investigate

And that's the problem: HOW do you investigate this stuff? If you have any idea then bring it forth. THAT's how science works.
Not: "I saw something - you figure how to check it out!"
Otto_Szucks
1.8 / 5 (10) Jun 25, 2016
you don't bother to investigate

And that's the problem: HOW do you investigate this stuff? If you have any idea then bring it forth. THAT's how science works.
Not: "I saw something - you figure how to check it out!"
- aap

The title of the article is: "Relax, it'll be 1,500 years before aliens contact us".
The text seems to be with regard to Extraterrestrials and First Contact within the next 1500 years. Since every person who is alive now will have been dead a long time after that many years, it may be possible that the author and researchers had decided to "play it safe" to give the article the possibility that First Contact with ET (aliens) cannot possibly happen sooner than that length of time. Since everyone living now and centuries to come, will not make it to see it happen, it makes the whole matter moot and has been decided already - decided that any interaction between man and ET is impossible. This is a universal mindset among many doubters
ElectricBoobVerses
Jun 26, 2016
This comment has been removed by a moderator.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.