NASA wants to control the conversation around the search for ET

a reply to: JimOberg

What do you consider to be reliable evidence for this?

The evidence would be the astronaut's narration of what he/she thinks he/she saw, which must be correlated with what sensors and detectors sense and detect. No such correlation has ever been proven. Therefore, what ever the astronaut says he/she saw must be discarded.

Only when is a correlation with detectors and sensors can the narration be taken seriously, and even then the instrumental readings do always have a prevalence, unless you can prove they are malfunctioning.

What I'm trying to say is that human eyes were not designed to operate under extreme, hostile, and totally non-terrestrial environments, hence using those eyes as reliable sensors is an imprudence. Astronaut X may think he saw artificial structures on the surface of planet Y, or even that an alien being approached to greet him, but if the sensors do not detect anything, the case should be dismissed.

My view is that any space operation carried out by humans is always carried out under high stress. Fatigue, acting in a strange and hostile environment, fear of dying, all of it distort the reasoning process of an astronaut. Only when there is a correlation between the sensing instruments, the physics of the experience, and logic, would the astronaut's narration be taken into account, and even then, just as mere data.

originally posted by: scrounger
a reply to: Ectoplasm8

the first problem with yours (and obergs) argument is your assuming that our definition of "life" is the only one that can exist.
hell on our own planet we are finding life (like at the bottom of the ocean by a vent) that "science experts" claim cannot exist.
we have viruses that exist, multiply and defy the "experts" criteria for life.
they are STILL DEBATING if its alive

now we expect that all life and especially advanced civilizations have to be made up of creatures like us , use oxygen, process food like we do (and even eat the same things), need water and a set climate range.

how arrogant....

i could point out that its mathematically IMPOSSIBLE with all the worlds just in our own galaxy that we are the most advance civilization and the only one at that.

I think i can sum up the absolute impossibility of your claim and those science "experts" make with one statement

your taking a teaspoon of the ocean and claim since there are no sharks in it that there are no sharks in the ocean.

scrounger

I never said life is boxed into only our idea of what life is, I'm not clear on where that came from. That would be a ridiculous assumption.

Earth being the perfect host for high intelligence has shown us it's extremely rare even in perfect conditions. Life has shown to only need a survival instinct and basic needs. This is not any "experts" opinion but one that's has been shown to us all when you look.

I also never said human levels of intelligence won't be out there. Just that I don't believe it will be common which has to be factored in.

originally posted by: scrounger

astronauts and cosmonauts are scientists, MILITARY , pilots and in essence HIGHLY TRAINED to observe, identify and/or describe what they saw. you dont get anymore "expert" than this.
as i stated before about "mental gymnastics" here we have an example.

So when astronauts say they have NOT seen evidence of ETI, and that the media stories are distorted or entirely fabricated, why don't you believe them?

a reply to: JimOberg

An open letter to James Oberg

Greetings Jimmy,

I know your the Grandest of Skeptics…..you’ve written much as in OMNI Magazine and others, etc…

I wonder if you could do us here, at one of your favorite and entertaining forums, a BIG Favor.

Now, you and I know, your getting up there into the Expiring ages. E.T. may be coming for you, perhaps in the near future.

Do you think, when your time is close to running out of old age, you could give us here at the forum….a Death Bed Confession? (Not to long in windage like some of your writings 😉)

Something short and bittersweet…… words to the effect ..”I Confess, that Aliens and UFO’s, do…and have always existed”…….”and that I played a major mouthpiece roll for NASA in coverups and disinformation to the primarily, civilian populations.”

Would that be so hard Jimmy?

You do know of course, there are no rewards in heaven for those who die with secrets.

Knowledge was meant to be shared.

Spiritually, you’ll want to exit, whenever God deems, with a clear conscience.

If I were you, I would…

Think of it as your life’s ending Epilogue.

Just sayin, Jimmy.

Can we get that type of commitment from you? The forum has been probably one of your sources of information for some of your inspirations and contributions to some of your writings perhaps?…….. It’s only fair…..

Sincerely,
Ophi

👽🛸🍷

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Wouldn't be advisable you give us first a definition of skeptic? Why not agnostic? Or maybe the entire issue is undecidable? Perhaps then we could understand a potential answer.

I, for one, do not believe you are a believer, yet you are clearly not an skeptic.

originally posted by: Direne
a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Wouldn't be advisable you give us first a definition of skeptic? Why not agnostic? Or maybe the entire issue is undecidable? Perhaps then we could understand a potential answer.

I, for one, do not believe you are a believer, yet you are clearly not an skeptic.

I know of J.O. Years ago from publications listed here…..

Source: en.m.wikipedia.org...

…..” Author and journalist

As a journalist, Oberg writes for several publications, mostly online; he was previously a space correspondent or commentator for UPI, ABC News and currently MSNBC, often in an on-air role. He is a Fellow of the skeptical organization CSICOP and a consultant to its magazine Skeptical Inquirer.

He has written more than a thousand magazine and newspaper articles, including such magazines as The Wall Street Journal, USA Today, Scientific American, OMNI, Popular Science, Popular Mechanics, New Scientist, IEEE Spectrum, Air Force Magazine, Star and Sky, etc.”…….

A Skeptic is the moniker I prefer to use, since it’s what I know of him from long ago.

The names Agnostic, Undecidable, we’re not in the lexicon of my vocabulary back when I was a youngin. I have always known him as a Skeptic and remain to do so.

As for attributing Skeptic to J.O.? I think the description of Skepticism fits him well enough…

Source: en.m.wikipedia.org...

….” Skepticism (American and Canadian English) or scepticism (British, Irish, Australian, and New Zealand English) is generally a questioning attitude or doubt towards one or more putative instances of knowledge which are asserted to be mere belief or dogma. Formally, skepticism is a topic of interest in philosophy, particularly epistemology. More informally, skepticism as an expression of questioning or doubt can be applied to any topic, such as politics, religion, or pseudoscience. It is often applied within restricted domains, such as morality (moral skepticism), theism (skepticism about the existence of God), or the supernatural.”…….

As for myself…..I like to remain Unbiased in that I can’t be a full believer or a full denier. I’m a fence sitter looking at both sides. An analogy….I’m neither a republican or democrat….I am a card carrying Independent looking at both sides of an issue, and going with the mental decision of my gut feeling. Sometimes being right, and sometimes being wrong.

Throughout my postings since 2010, I’ve expressed my opinions on UFOLOGY. If folks see me as Biased, then fine, I’m both a biased skeptic and biased believer. If that makes sense.

👽☕️🍩

originally posted by: Ophiuchus1
a reply to: JimOberg
....
Just sayin, Jimmy.
....

We're running out of time for you to identify and document a single factual or logical flaw in my reports. Sigh...

Here's my latest contribution:

Introduction – Witness Reactions to Fireball Swarms from Satellite Reentries.
jamesoberg.com...



What did I get wrong?

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

"a questioning attitude or doubt towards one or more putative instances of knowledge"

Sorry, that definition would work if, and only if, we assume aliens and the existence of aliens is an instance of knowledge.

Obviously, this is not the case. Therefore, one cannot even be skeptical about the existence of aliens. At most, one can only be agnostic. Getting the aliens into the equation of knowledge is not fair.

originally posted by: JimOberg

originally posted by: Ophiuchus1
a reply to: JimOberg
....
Just sayin, Jimmy.
....

We're running out of time for you to identify and document a single factual or logical flaw in my reports. Sigh...

Here's my latest contribution:

Introduction – Witness Reactions to Fireball Swarms from Satellite Reentries.
jamesoberg.com...

What did I get wrong?

I gather, that’s a No Go on the Death Bed Confession from you Jimmy 🙁



——————————————————————————————————————
Of course, I’m running out of time, perhaps it’s at the end of my time when certain truths are revealed. I have no fear of my time running out. Life’s a learning journey.

You’ve provided an argument about the “Fireballs” of the Hawaii incident, that lends to a plausible explanation, I can agree to.

You are a devil for details. Those that approach an observation usually observe as the big picture without delving into the depths of what the possible actual causes could be. Were I am a laymen of overall observations, your a dissector. Those who don’t dissect, are usually those who oppose and rebuke. I can be one of those. I can’t fault where I have not done due diligence myself. But I can antagonize for consensus in my favor, to win an argument. I’m almost always loosing arguments in UFOLOGY…..and that’s okay. I would like to think I can learn from those loosing arguments.

You stated ….“What did I get wrong?”….. Nothing, Jimmy.

I’m to naive in the subject matter of rocket science, to present a formidable argument. You could be BS’ing me about the aspects of the re-entry characteristics of rocket stages…..I wouldn’t know it from the Ark on Mt. Ararat….to be true or not. I’ll take your word on your analysis, given your reputation.

Hmmmm, so your not going to admit, and throw in the towel on the existence of Aliens and UFO’s, huh, that’s disappointing Jimmy.

👽😉🍺

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

As I've stated before, I can see NO persuasive argument that ETI cannot be operating as close to us as they choose, at the detectability level they choose. The possibility is important enough that it should always be on the going-in candidate explanation list for initially unexplainable perceptions. AND a few spaceflight sightings that have no known prosaic explanations, just possibly because documentation of human activities are incomplete.

originally posted by: PillarOfFire
a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Not A Space Agency can 'bleeeeeeeeeep itself. And every cent it stole from the American People.

For more info see...
fakingspace

Any particular reason your linking to a racist flat earth believing lunatic?

Taken from an interesting NASA Framework related article ……

…..“Instead of declassifying documents that reflect decades-old technologies used by witnesses with no scientific expertise, it would be far better to deploy state-of-the-art recording devices, such as wide-field cameras on telescopes or audio sensors, at the sites where the reports came from and search for unusual signals,” Avi Loeb, a Harvard physicist, told The Daily Beast.”…..

Source: So You Think You Found Aliens. Now What?

Really, I don’t know what to think these day’s, I just hope to see an Alien and craft on live worldwide tv, before I drop dead of hopeful old age natural causes.

👽🍺

a reply to: Ophiuchus1

Wide-field cameras on telescopes? An audio sensors? At the sites where the reports came from... Honestly, I can't understand what Mr. Loeb is proposing. The sites where UFOs are seen are over-deployed with cameras and audio recorders of all types. Those sites are big cities, air bases, malls, football stadiums. Lot of people with recording devices, everywhere, every time. And they've got nothing at all.

And what does Mr. Loeb mean with unusual signals? Extra-solar asteroids that he readily takes as alien spaceships?

I think Mr. Loeb is as frustrated as you are that despite all of the massive deployment of instruments, after all searches in all bands across the entire EM spectrum, each and every signal you've found is just explained as a natural phenomena, and when they are not, they happen to be a mundane microwave oven in the lab, or a transient Chinese satellite, or just a drone.

You won't find your aliens because you have designed them as per your image and liking. You expect them to be just as you are, having the passions you have, feeling the feelings you feel. This is called The Moses Syndrome: when you expect your God to be like you... to just meet a burning bush talking to you there where you didn't expect it at all. You don't see your aliens because you cannot accept the idea that they are radically different from you, so radically different, so xenobiologically alien that even if they are in front of you, you simply cannot see them.

An ant never notices a human, it never sees him. It simply cannot.

originally posted by: Direne
a reply to: Ophiuchus1

You won't find your aliens because you have designed them as per your image and liking. You expect them to be just as you are, having the passions you have, feeling the feelings you feel. This is called The Moses Syndrome: when you expect your God to be like you... to just meet a burning bush talking to you there where you didn't expect it at all. You don't see your aliens because you cannot accept the idea that they are radically different from you, so radically different, so xenobiologically alien that even if they are in front of you, you simply cannot see them.

An ant never notices a human, it never sees him. It simply cannot.

What would be your expectation of Intelligent life not born of the lifeforms and resources of planet earth?

I don’t know what that looks like. Intelligent life could be a thinking and talking ant from the planet Zanti ……



My hope is for lifeforms to be visible to the eye and communicative so that we earthlings at a minimum, by either their mental, or verbalized ways of communicating is, understandable to us. We, or I, can only wish for expectations of what extraterrestrial life would be like, bipedal, head, torso, arms, hands, legs, feet.

We as a species, have concocted just about every way possible, of what an extraterrestrial entity could be dreamt and depicted as …..for books, magazines, TV, motion pictures….etc…. We should not fear what any Extraterrestrial may appear as.

Yes, I have a image and a preference in mind.

What’s yours if any?

So Old school am I, that the proverbial landing on the white house lawn scenario would actually suffice to answer my curiosity of life elsewhere….



…..albeit it may never happen at that location, just as long as it does somewhere, and makes it to a live, as it happens, Breaking News report with cameras on the scene.

👽🛸🍷