Why don't aliens initiate contact?

While we might think we are mature adults, I suspect that any aliens out there will probably view us as children (little ones at that). There might be a few souls on this planet who might be at a point where they are willing to embrace difference, unselfishness, and not react to everything 'alien' with 'Kill it', or live life on the basis of 'me, me, me'... but I think that as a race we have a LONG way to go.

Do you give a 2 year old a car and attempt to teach it how to drive?... or give the same child a gun or knife, or a vial of acid, to see what he'll do with it?... even if the child reaches out his hand and wails 'gimme, gimme!'

You tend to your children as long as it takes... You teach them up to a point, but beyond that they must learn by themselves.

I think that this is where we are with regard to whatever alien presence might be out there and visiting us, and visiting us they are... of that I have very little doubt.

Why?... Why all the lights in the sky? The constant enigmatic sightings, always just that little bit too out of reach for us to see clearly, obtain evidence, have definite proof?

I suspect it's partly to increase the awareness of some (hell, it's got us discussing it, hasn't it?..lol), and partly to bypass the party line our 'superiors' keep spouting.... all without really giving much away, thus interfering in humanity deciding it's own road and fate.

Perhaps, if we're good little children we might be moved from the nursery to infant school sometime in the future... but looking at the mess this planet is in, I can't help but doubt it will be any time soon!

*sigh*

"we can assume that they didnt just HAPPEN upon the technology, it probably took a very long time to develop."
- Absolutely. The aliens by definition have lost all faith, fully immersed themselves in science and advancement and probably been able to turn themselves into a type-3 civilisation. See en.wikipedia.org... for more details.

They WILL know how to communicate with us if they developed along the same path. This is the only thing we can assume at the moment.

The last part of your reply was good, but the most likely way to explore the universe isn't to go yourself - its to send self-replicating probes out in all directions, which then do the same when they can replicate from raw material after reaching another planet... this is a very efficient way of exploring the universe.

If we design our probes anything like we design our current exploration devices, it will probably contain a hello message and some advanced communication technology to try to send/recieve messages and scan for life.

reply to post by sufusci


One should always follow the rules he imposes on others, it levels the playing field:
You said:
"Please stop talking about things that are pure conjecture. This includes john lear (all unsubstantiated) and others. There's no point talking about "beliefs" as all we can go on at the moment is what we know for CERTAIN. This would include:"
and then you summed with these "facts":

"1. Aliens have NOT made contact to the general populus."

Conjecture. Can you prove this statement? It appears to me that this is your opinion and not a fact. This appears to be a "belief".

"2. A lot of the "sightings" can be explained away (atmosphere affects, local craft, "lucid" dreaming etc)."

Yes. The Condon Committee report, despite what the stated summation delcared, actually "explained" 80% and left 20% unexplained. "A lot" is much different than "all". If you had only a 20% chance of being killed, would you jump off the bridge?

"3. Our current knowledge believes the speed of light is a maximum, putting restrictions on flight time and thus time to reach a population."

Wrong. There is a particle that exceeds "C". The speed of light was believed to be the unalterable "constant". That is, the speed of light was unalterable. However, scientists have succeeded in slowing the speed of light to a crawl.

And, when skeptics apply this theory to UFO's, it is only partly applied. Don't forget that the whole theory says "as an object approaches the speed of light it gains mass, time intervals slow down, and distance decreases". It does NOT state "nothing can exceed the speed of light".

If distance decreases with speed, the "standard" light year limit as applied to space travel is questionable. What a light year is is the distance light travels at 186,000 miles per second for one year without regard to the rest of the theory. A light year is used in astronomy as a convenience to measure great distances.

When applying this theory to a space craft making a journey to a star system 40 light years away, you must apply the entire theory to the calculation. At 99% "C" the time to reach the destination would be considerably less than 40 years. If ET has a lifespan of 200 years, then the round trip is feasible.

"4. We are currently scanning for any signals and have found nothing reputable thus far."

Reputable?

There was signal recently that appeared to meet all the criteria for SETI, however it was not of long enough duration to enable confirmation.

Also, why do we think an advanced alien race would use radio signals as their way to communicate? Obviously, light and quantum particles are possible communication media, and much more efficient, not to mention faster.

"5. We have travelled ourselves to other planets and have encountered nothing."

Perhaps. However, although man has made it to the moon, everything else has been accomplished using robotic devices. The limited capability of such devices would make encounters only a chance affair.

As to whether the ET hypothesis is correct, there are many other possible explanations such as inter-dimensional and time travel.

I think the evidence is hard to dismiss. Granted, most "sightings" have a mundane explanation. But, there are those instances where visual and radar have combined to present situations where the mundane appears not acceptable. Any attempt to explain these are conjecture, therefore, they remain unexplained.

We always want to apply human intelligence, lifespans, and capabilities to the ET problem. If they exist, they are most likely NOT human and their technology, purposes and thought processes are most likely NOT like ours.

I am convinced that something is going on, but trying to apply our limitations to them (aliens, or even humans from the future, or ??) is just not going to get us anywhere.

Hopup

Originally posted by Hopup Dave
"1. Aliens have NOT made contact to the general populus."

Conjecture. Can you prove this statement? It appears to me that this is your opinion and not a fact. This appears to be a "belief".

Please point to the contact that was visible, unambiguous to the general populus. E.g. at a live sporting event, something on television. Probably would include a face to face. I'd love to see this, obviously I missed it!

"2. A lot of the "sightings" can be explained away (atmosphere affects, local craft, "lucid" dreaming etc)."

Yes. The Condon Committee report, despite what the stated summation delcared, actually "explained" 80% and left 20% unexplained. "A lot" is much different than "all". If you had only a 20% chance of being killed, would you jump off the bridge?

This is different than 20% are of extraterrestrial origin. Your claim is wrong; 20% unexplained is not 20% ET. Using occams razor we can take the simplest answer, that these ones were simply unexplained, but more than likely NOT an ET.

"3. Our current knowledge believes the speed of light is a maximum, putting restrictions on flight time and thus time to reach a population."

Wrong. There is a particle that exceeds "C". The speed of light was believed to be the unalterable "constant". That is, the speed of light was unalterable. However, scientists have succeeded in slowing the speed of light to a crawl.

Please get back to me when your claim is supported by the majority of physicists.
See math.ucr.edu... for a rational discussion. It *MAY* be possible, but at the moment is still science FICTION. Lets discuss what we know to be true, rather than that that MAY be. Theres no point discussing your beliefs, as we may as well talk about gods, fairies and magic. Lets stick to what we know for a fact, at this stage. If and when we learn otherwise through science then reevaluate, like any logical being would.

"4. We are currently scanning for any signals and have found nothing reputable thus far."

Reputable?

There was signal recently that appeared to meet all the criteria for SETI, however it was not of long enough duration to enable confirmation.

Also, why do we think an advanced alien race would use radio signals as their way to communicate? Obviously, light and quantum particles are possible communication media, and much more efficient, not to mention faster.

Umm... so you agree with me? Nothing reputable? Verified? No there is not.

"5. We have travelled ourselves to other planets and have encountered nothing."

Perhaps.

No correct. Of course if you buy into the conspiracies I will never convince you, but there has never been life encountered on our travels thus far. If and when this evidence changes, lets reevaluate.

As to whether the ET hypothesis is correct, there are many other possible explanations such as inter-dimensional and time travel.

There is also the possibility of a pink tooth fairy or the easter bunny, but there is the no evidence for either of them. Its FICTION.

I think the evidence is hard to dismiss. Granted, most "sightings" have a mundane explanation. But, there are those instances where visual and radar have combined to present situations where the mundane appears not acceptable. Any attempt to explain these are conjecture, therefore, they remain unexplained.
/.... the rest

What evidence? There is a lot we don't understand about the earth. The simple mundane solution is often one those who use "magical thinking" want to discount. Why not err on the side of simplicity (i.e. unexplained local phenomona) than always going to the extraordinary (ET's, magic etc).

Its so much less likely.

The question I am asking is why they wouldn't contact if they were here.

reply to post by sufusci


Sorry, didn't see your reply till now, well, to answer your questions, if they are related to daemons/faries then the lore of both suggests that deals can be made to them and although they are crafty, they will try to honour them until those who are contracted slip up.

I think this is why they keep the agreement. Daemons and faries (the latter in particular) have a peculiar type of honour that would ultimately make them honour their agreements with us, and as I say, America started boring all these holes a long time ago, and givent that Shaver's Dero and the Indian mythos of coming from inside the 'mounds' sounds VERY fay, I think personally, it gives it a lot of credence (to me at least).

They were discovered again when we had technology, and we obviously have a lot more iron these days than we did then. I suspect the government make use of the occult and probably were advised that these beings might agree to a contract so that's why they generally seem to deal exclusively with the US government.

That's not to say, given the level of espionage that the other governments haven't found their own mounds (Glastonbry Tor and various UK mounds, not to mention France etc) and made deals with the faries that inhabit their own countries.

I think there is something about atomics they dislike or perhaps want to use in some way, because a LOT of reports suggest these 'aliens' are very interested in atomics and nuclear power. Whether this perhaps means they want to use it to their advantage, or are trying to stop us hurting them, I'm unsure, but its an odd occurance that most people who believe in the 'space' theory consider means they wouldn't let us use atomics, but I think they were already here when we deonated the first two, and thats why there is very minor activity in those areas (Japan seems to rarely report UFO activity) and why I think that most of the weird craft near Nevada are man-made, perhaps the plans or even the craft are from these 'faries' but they are being drive by men.

reply to post by Hopup Dave


i have to say, it appears to me that you,and othrs like you, like point out the bits of science we dont yet know or understand, and claim this MUST be ET.
you also like to assume that all alien life that is intelligent is SUPER INTELLIGENT, with their interdimensional travel, oh and time travel. there is nothing to support the reality of either, if anything, there are hypothetics. infact, to the best of my knowledge, the universe has 4 dimmensions, length, breadth, height, and time. it would be interesting to know just how we could travel between these? oh i know, by our current methods of limited travel.

and you ask why ET would use radio waves as a way to communicate? well if they have all this wonderful technology, at some point in their history i bet they didnt have it, it was developed through time, much like we are doing. is it not feasible to assume that at some point in their history they used EM waves? even if, now they have sometyhing better and stopped using EM tech, the signals they transmitted in their early days will still be propagating through space for others (like us) to pick up.

i'm of the opinion that ET is not much more, if at all, capable than us. they may be more advanced because they have either had more time to develop their technology than we have, or they dont have the obstacles to progress that we do like religion, greed and corruption.

i also believe that if they had found us, then they would make contact. imagine needing a new pair of shoes. you would get up, go into town or the city, look in the shoe shops, maybe trying some on. when you find the shop that sells the pair that you just MUST HAVE, you buy them and take them home. you dont look around see the ones you want in a window, think hmmm they're nice, turn round and go home.

if ET is travelling through space to space to other worlds, then we can assume they have asked the same question we have," are we alone?".
so they discover us and think,"well that answers that question", then go home and put their feet up?! na, dont think so.

Originally posted by ejsaunders
reply to post by sufusci

 

I think this is why they keep the agreement. Daemons and faries (the latter in particular) have a peculiar type of honour that would ultimately make them honour their agreements with us, and as I say, America started boring all these holes a long time ago, and givent that Shaver's Dero and the Indian mythos of coming from inside the 'mounds' sounds VERY fay, I think personally, it gives it a lot of credence (to me at least).

I don't give much credence to many of the mythos of old. From my research I have concluded that ancient "myths" or traditions usually served a functional purpose to their society: its very unlikely they are real.

Have you ever wondered why people CLOSE TO THE STONE AGE had all these amazing experiences while we don't? The ancient cultures weren't all that smart in general from what we can tell, and definitely didn't have a scientific process. Over the last 500 years science has gradually whittled down nearlly EVERY magical experience known to man, and explained it with elegant theory. Only the brain and some more obscure worldly events need to be explained... and "faith" has lost.

Myths are just that: something that has long lost its purpose.

reply to post by sufusci


Point 1: My point is this: You made statements that are just as much conjecture on your part as any believer makes: ie: How do you know, scientifically, that no group of humans has ever been contacted by aliens or other occupants of UFO's? You cannot know this for a fact, anymore than I can know for a fact that it has occurred.

Point 2: I did not claim 20% were ET. 20% is unexplained. Your statement seemed to indicate that because 80% were mundane, the rest must also be mundane.

Point 3: Read. I will not get back to you, You need to brush up on the current state of research. My beliefs? You know nothing about my beliefs. I am not a believer. Unproven theories are not considered "fiction", they are theories until proven or dis-proven. Once dis-proven they are history.

Point 4: Agreed

Point 5: You are correct. We have not encountered anything (yet?). But to draw a conclusion that there is no intelligence out there based on our limited exploration is rather an assumption.

As to whether the ET hypothesis is correct. Now you show that you are a "believer" in the impossibility of extraterrestrials. This is not being skeptical, or expressing a doubt, it is quite clear that you do not accept the "possibility".
I am mildly skeptical. I am open to the possibilities, especially because of the simultaneous radar/visual sightings, the volume of sightings by multiple witnesses and the historical evidence of sightings for hundreds of years. I find it difficult to write this all off. As to what all this means, I don't know, but something is going on as far as I am concerned. ET? I have no idea.

Evidence? The US government has never stated that UFO's do not exist. They have only said they pose no threat to national security. The military has sent fighters to intercept UFO's that have been visually and radar confirmed. I think that constitutes evidence that something unidentified was in the air at the time. I have not gone to the extraordinary for an explanation. I am still unconvinced either way.

When you stated that people were talking about things that are pure conjecture, your reply was stated as fact. It is not fact! You do not know that it has never happened. That is conjecture. See my point?

Healthy skepticism is a good thing. It demands evidence to sway one way or the other. To flatly deny the possibility is just as flawed as to claim UFO's are spacecraft from outerspace and piloted by extraterrestrials. There is no proof either way.

Hopup

reply to post by ayame2008


Please don't read into my posts things I have not said. I have made no claims about ET. My only point to any of my responses to this thread have been that I do NOT have a belief one way or the other.

I do, however, get perturbed at both "believers with wild claims" and non-believers that refuse to consider possibilities.

There a skeptics and then there are "non-believers". Non-believers and believers are the opposite side of the same coin.

Until the believer can present hard evidence to his side of the question, I will remain skeptical. Until the non-believer can convince me that all reports are mistaken, I will remain skeptical.

This is my last post concerning this thread.

Read the posts and not between the lines for something that is NOT there, please.

Hopup

Originally posted by Hopup Dave
reply to post by sufusci

 

Point 1: My point is this: You made statements that are just as much conjecture on your part as any believer makes: ie: How do you know, scientifically, that no group of humans has ever been contacted by aliens or other occupants of UFO's? You cannot know this for a fact, anymore than I can know for a fact that it has occurred.

I think you misunderstand science. Science is about observation, hypothesis, experimentation and revision, not about one off events. And if it had happened there would be a record. I am not talking about small groups, im talking happening in front of thousands, unequivocally, with multiple live video cameras and a "take me to your leader" scene. Perhaps that is where you misunderstand?

Originally posted by Hopup Dave
reply to post by sufusci

 

Point 2: I did not claim 20% were ET. 20% is unexplained. Your statement seemed to indicate that because 80% were mundane, the rest must also be mundane.

Yes absolutely. Jumping to claims about aliens is like claiming that santa really did drop off those presents under the tree. There is no evidence either way, so any sane person would assume the mundane over supernatural.

Point 3: Read. I will not get back to you, You need to brush up on the current state of research. Unproven theories are not considered "fiction", they are theories until proven or dis-proven. Once dis-proven they are history.

If it can't be tested it's not science. If it can't be tested in the foreseeable future, its not useful to make theory. Theory is only useful when it's testable. You should stop worrying about whether time travel is possible and focus on whether our current theory of quantum physics that makes it theoretically possible is correct. For every 1 correct theory about quantum physics there are equally 1000 wrong ones, and it will be surprising if current quantum theories hold up at all to most physicists. I should know I work with quantum physicists every day

Point 5: You are correct. We have not encountered anything (yet?). But to draw a conclusion that there is no intelligence out there based on our limited exploration is rather an assumption.

I believe there is ET intelligence out there. Fermis paradox says there should be. There is no evidence (of high standard) that they have visited, and this is what this is about. IF they have visited, why would they not announce to us?

Evidence? The US government has never stated that UFO's do not exist. They have only said they pose no threat to national security. The military has sent fighters to intercept UFO's that have been visually and radar confirmed. I think that constitutes evidence that something unidentified was in the air at the time. I have not gone to the extraordinary for an explanation. I am still unconvinced either way.

UFO's do not equal ET intelligence. There are plenty of mundane explanations, but without a way to replicate the phenomona, we call them UNIDENTIFIED. Its pretty simple really. This leads into my original question: if they are here, why haven't they contacted us - why would they fly around and ALLOW us to see them if they won't contact us? Its illogical.

Healthy skepticism is a good thing. It demands evidence to sway one way or the other. To flatly deny the possibility is just as flawed as to claim UFO's are spacecraft from outerspace and piloted by extraterrestrials. There is no proof either way.

I do not deny their existence. There has never been any evidence presented that I have seen (and I have looked) that proves they have ever been here. This is why I asked my original question: if they ARE here (and fermis paradox says they should be) why have they not contacted us?

// sufu sci