What are the Scientific Criteria for an Extra-terrestrial object or sample?

originally posted by: NightVision
Using Neil DeGrasse Tyson's logic as a model, it's not unreasonable to think that if you were to allow him to analyze an authentic E.T. craft (or a piece of it) he would likely conclude:

'Boy that's interesting, but it's highly likely this is just a top-secret, highly advanced terrestrial craft made by our Govt."

It's also not unreasonable to think that if you were to allow Neil DeGrasse Tyson to analyze an E.T. entity (or a piece of it) he would likely conclude:

'Boy that's interesting, but it's highly likely this is just an undiscovered species we haven't found yet."

More of the same and a misunderstanding of the level of evidence required to show ET on Earth. An uneducated lash-out assumption. It's taken to a ridiculous extreme to try and prove a point. It's only another version of:
If ET landed on your front lawn, you still wouldn't believe.

On the believer side, too many use the appeal to authority to help bolster their case for ET. They seem to think the more ammo you can gather the stronger the point and the more true it will be seen. Each case isn't taken individually but pointed to as a group. The mentality of - If all these people claim it, it has to be true - What makes it true is one tiny piece of actual evidence. One case could be pointed to and it would be the end of discussion. But that cannot be done.

Tyson is seen as a position of authority. But his opinion doesn't make the issue any less true. You know what does? The continued lack of real evidence. If he came foward and said yes ET is visiting Earth but no evidence was presented, I seriously doubt the diehard skeptic would all of a sudden believe ET is visiting Earth. But I can guarantee believers would latch onto that statement as another thing to toss in their bucket to show ET is here. An opinion is evidence to the believer, not to the diehard skeptic.

Tyson would likely require indepth, deep technical analysis by scientists educated and experienced in their field. He would want the evidence to be questioned, re-questioned, and studied by multiple sources. I think any nonbeliever would want the same. Nothing at all wrong with that level of analysis when we're talking about the immense discovery of another intelligent being coming to Earth.

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Agnostic has other use:

a person who is unwilling to commit to an opinion about something
political agnostics

Source

Hi all,
My take on the subject.
Physical object could be made of anything normal...Say, aluminum. It is an exotic form of beam that delivers a physical object to a spot from a distance. What do you think?

originally posted by: ArMaP
a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Agnostic has other use:

a person who is unwilling to commit to an opinion about something
political agnostics

Source

That’s funny.... I went to your source to get further defining for Political Agnostics and it could not pull up Political Agnostics. Anyway other online dictionary’s do have something for it.



So I don’t see where “a person who is unwilling to commit to an opinion about something” fits with what the author’s goals are ..... I would think after all the analysis is done you would want to commit to an opinion of the results found.

Thx anyway ArMap

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

I think what was meant was that they need people with no preconceived ideas about specific explanations to do the data collection, so they do not a tendency to favour some data over other.

originally posted by: ArMaP
a reply to: Ophiuchus1

I think what was meant was that they need people with no preconceived ideas about specific explanations to do the data collection, so they do not a tendency to favour some data over other.

Gotcha

Using “unbiased” might have worked nevertheless......

originally posted by: Encounter
Hi all,
My take on the subject.
Physical object could be made of anything normal...Say, aluminum. It is an exotic form of beam that delivers a physical object to a spot from a distance. What do you think?

idk, The "beam" is serving to dematerialize the vessel, control movenet, navigation. If matirialized vessel needs to take off the ground, it has to jump to an altitude from where the "beam" can pick it up and transport. Some exploit in hologram theory may be? I am not expert at all thought.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Blue Shift
We're assuming that the elements we've discovered are common throughout the universe - iron, hydrogen, calcium, bismuth, lead, etc. The trick would be to find something different about them that make it impossible for them to have originated on Earth.

If hydrogen, helium and lithium weren't as common throughout the universe as they are locally there'd be no observable universe.

Yeah. But I also understand that the observable universe is only a relatively small part of the entire universe, and just like you might walk into a room where by the simple laws of chance all the air is compressed into a tiny portion of one corner, I can imagine fairly large areas of the universe where there are none of the common elements around. There could even be areas that are little pockets where everything is built from antimatter. But it would probably have to be really, really far away, if the concept of "distance" even exists at that point. Negative mass? Negative distance? It's where the math falls apart.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: NightVision
That's exactly what I'm trying to root out. I don't know that there's any true way to verify anything as being extra-terrestrial at this point in time with our technology.

If there are super heavy elements in a significant sample quantity with highly stable isotopes that we cannot create on earth at this time due to technological restraints that would be a very good indicator.

The Astr0 story told of a 160,000 year-old artifact found in a diamond mine that supposedly could only be manufactured by using an atomic explosion. So far, we don't use atomic bombs for manufacturing anything, only "de-manufacturing." That would be a good candidate. If it wasn't fiction, of course.

originally posted by: Alien Abduct

originally posted by: Blue Shift

originally posted by: SecretKnowledge
a reply to: NightVision

Something that has off-world elements?

We're assuming that the elements we've discovered are common throughout the universe - iron, hydrogen, calcium, bismuth, lead, etc. The trick would be to find something different about them that make it impossible for them to have originated on Earth.

What makes you think we have not only found every single possible natural element in existence but that we also found them all on one little mote of dust in this vast universe.

I like the idea (unproven) that there are a host of elements we have not discovered because they exist in a kind of halfway region between physical and non-physical existence. Kind of like Star Trek's "Dilithium," where it is written to have a multi-dimensional component that allows space ships to create a warp bubble outside normal spacetime.

If you look at our Periodic Table of Elements, you can see where it (obviously, to me) looks out of balance so maybe 2-D is not the best way to represent what's really going on. Maybe the reality of it is that it's more like a Rubik's Cube.

But we are not very good at detecting and measuring non-physical matter.

originally posted by: Blue Shift
Yeah. But I also understand that the observable universe is only a relatively small part of the entire universe, and just like you might walk into a room where by the simple laws of chance all the air is compressed into a tiny portion of one corner, I can imagine fairly large areas of the universe where there are none of the common elements around. There could even be areas that are little pockets where everything is built from antimatter. But it would probably have to be really, really far away, if the concept of "distance" even exists at that point. Negative mass? Negative distance? It's where the math falls apart.

To me that is an all-too-convenient scenario with no observable proof.

originally posted by: Blue Shift
The Astr0 story told of a 160,000 year-old artifact found in a diamond mine that supposedly could only be manufactured by using an atomic explosion.

Supposedly? FFS.

Let me know when this gets peer reviewed by someone who isn't looking to prove space aliens.