|
|
| Author |
Message |
eldrich
|
|
UFOs
| 
Sep 6 21:06 UTC 1995 |
Here comes the Ufo item. Everyone knows about UFOs, Hollywood love 'em and now
all the big tv networks are doing little X-files spinoffs, but what is the t
truth about UFOs. Are they real? What do you think?
|
| 129 responses total. |
orinoco
|
|
response 1 of 129:
|
Sep 6 23:18 UTC 1995 |
I am sure that there are other life forms out there. I am equally sure that,
if we saw them, we wouldn't recognize them as life.
|
bubu
|
|
response 2 of 129:
|
Sep 13 21:39 UTC 1995 |
I really belive there is life out there somewhere...Wether they have visited
Earth or not..I'm not sure. Here is a news item i found in the paper
yesterday, from my hometown (Monroe, MI):
SOFIA, Bulgaria(AP)-
Talk about foreign aid!
Lured by three self-styled mediums, about 1,500 people gathered at an airfield
in northern Bulgaria on Monday, awaiting the arrival of eight space ships
piloted by extraterrestrials, police Maj. Stoyan Marinov said.
Among other things, state TV reported, the mediums promised that the aliens
would help this poor Balkan country pay its $12.9 billion foreign debt.
The crowd gathered in Shtraklevo, 200 miles northeast of the capital, Sofia,
after three local woman - Radka Trifonova, Zdravka Krumova and Ekaterina
Nikiforova - declared that space ships from distant galaxies would land at
11 a.m.
The mediums, wearing identical dresses they had sewn for the occasion, waited
along with the crowd.
Nothing came.
|
orinoco
|
|
response 3 of 129:
|
Sep 14 19:14 UTC 1995 |
<he he he>
|
eldrich
|
|
response 4 of 129:
|
Sep 14 20:08 UTC 1995 |
Welcome Bubu! They always give the articles to the stuff where nothing happens.
tippical!
|
bubu
|
|
response 5 of 129:
|
Sep 15 01:42 UTC 1995 |
thanks Bob, yeah and they always put them in the smallest papers...<heh>
|
kain
|
|
response 6 of 129:
|
Sep 23 01:18 UTC 1995 |
I believe in ufos and other life forms to think that we're the only inteligent
life is simply stupid. there must be cultures out there a thousand times more
advanced than ours.
|
buttrfly
|
|
response 7 of 129:
|
Sep 24 22:26 UTC 1995 |
good call.
|
orinoco
|
|
response 8 of 129:
|
Sep 25 22:55 UTC 1995 |
how do you measure "advanced"?
which is more advanced, a rock or the air?
|
eldrich
|
|
response 9 of 129:
|
Sep 28 19:46 UTC 1995 |
Well, there's lots of ways you could be advanced, technologicly, metaly, physic
ly and other ways that we can't begin to comprehend. I think that other must be
more attuned to nature than us. Maybe ufos aren't the big chunks of intricut
circitry that we invision them as, personaly I think they may very well be
intirely organic in nature. Why not an animal? Think about it.
|
orinoco
|
|
response 10 of 129:
|
Sep 28 19:53 UTC 1995 |
you're just begging the question bob...how would you determine whether one
civilization is more advanced than another?
|
hoagy
|
|
response 11 of 129:
|
Oct 10 07:53 UTC 1995 |
At least we should be able to agree on one thing :
If we believe that we're the most technologically advanced
civilization in the entire universe (and on and on and on....),
we're deluding ourselves.
If we believe we are the only civilization, we're egoists.
To challenge the notion that we're it, the only sentient life
forms in the universe, is the dagger of death. It offends someone's
sensibilities when you offer them a scenario they can't accept
as valid. It's like telling a christian "Hey, did you ever
wonder about all the other religions? Did you know that you're
pretty much wrong in your beliefs, and you don't have a soul?"
(This is just an example - no flames, please)
You will offend that christian. They will sputter and fume.
They will not be happy that you have presented something which
is nigh impossible ( to them )
|
orinoco
|
|
response 12 of 129:
|
Oct 10 21:03 UTC 1995 |
you'd be amazed how much we take for granted, though. It *is* incredibly
unlikely for even ONE sentient civilization to come into being. But,
given that it is possible for one, the lack of more would be even less likely
|
hoagy
|
|
response 13 of 129:
|
Oct 11 04:35 UTC 1995 |
Incredibly unlikely? How? According to what standards?
we've very little to go on, and if we use just us as the
example of what other life forms whould be like, and where, well, then
a whole new can of worms has opened!
|
eldrich
|
|
response 14 of 129:
|
Oct 12 20:12 UTC 1995 |
We're not advanced. It's just our inflated egos.
Anyway, occasionaly I watch the Star Trek shows and there are too things I find
horribly wrong with them. everyone speaks english (yes, I know they must have
translating do-dads on their ships but everone can't have one) and all the
alien are humaniod! Starwars did a half decent job with there guys but I find
these just discusting.
|
hoagy
|
|
response 15 of 129:
|
Oct 13 05:31 UTC 1995 |
We might not be 'advances', but two things come to mind :
(a) I don't see any other species walking around or swimming on earth which
is productive as defined by our standards. Civilized, perhaps.
(b) From 1800-1930, the total knowledge on earth doubled. From 1930 to 1970,
it doubled again. From 1970 to 1985, it doubled again. It's about
to double once more.
For some species which isn't 'advanced', we have a pretty good track
record of getting our brains working. Sure, we can toss around "We're
destroying the planet!" theories, but the simple fact is, we're the
most advanced species on the planet. Others in the universe either
more advanced than us or the same must exist.
|
scott
|
|
response 16 of 129:
|
Oct 14 13:12 UTC 1995 |
Sure, the chances are that other civilizations have to exist... nothing in
the rules say that more advanced civilizations have to exist at the same time
as ours.
|
eldrich
|
|
response 17 of 129:
|
Oct 16 15:39 UTC 1995 |
re #15:
What did I tell you! EGO!E-G-O! Why does everyone say we're the most advanced
species on the planet? I can't say who is the most advanced on the planet and
if I could I wouldn't because I really don't care) but I do know that we are
not it. <Eldrich wonders how advanced you have to be to word wrap> <Eldrich
gives up and eats a peach>
|
kain
|
|
response 18 of 129:
|
Oct 18 00:59 UTC 1995 |
but again the question comes up what doe sit mean to be advanced
we've got ourselves a little paradox!
|
orinoco
|
|
response 19 of 129:
|
Oct 18 19:46 UTC 1995 |
For the purposes of a discusion <disgush> about UFO's, let's consider "more
advanced *IN TERMS OF SPACE FLIGHT*. In other words, since we are concerned
only with the flying objects of an alien race, we should want to know
if they can reach our planet or not
|
kain
|
|
response 20 of 129:
|
Oct 22 02:35 UTC 1995 |
well if they actually have been sighted I would imagine if they can get here
across a few galaxies that they probably can
|
eldrich
|
|
response 21 of 129:
|
Oct 24 20:38 UTC 1995 |
re #19
Hmm, hadn't thought of that.
|
orinoco
|
|
response 22 of 129:
|
Oct 24 23:09 UTC 1995 |
The next question is, "how much more is there to spaceflight that we
haven't discovered". If there is a lot more that we have to learn, we can
expect most alien civilizations to be furhter ahead than us. On the other
hand, if rocket technology is as far as you can get in terms of
spaceflight, then most alien races will probably be less advanced, flight-wise
.
|
eldrich
|
|
response 23 of 129:
|
Oct 26 21:16 UTC 1995 |
Trust me, rockets aren't going to get us anywhere. What we need is anti-grav
tech.
|
orinoco
|
|
response 24 of 129:
|
Oct 27 20:04 UTC 1995 |
Impossible. Or at least highly improbable. You need something to push
*against* the force of gravity--you can't just have gravity stop working.
|