U.N. to Appoint Earth Contact for Alien Visitors

Interesting 180

reply to post by Ross 54

Sorry about the broken link, not sure what happened; hopefully this one will work, though it itself refers to the link Phage published:

Boing Boing link

reply to post by liquidself


The article concludes with the following statement:
"Besides, if aliens really do reach out, it's likely that the scientists who receive the message will likely call Paul Allen first."

Again who is to say that a scientist will receive the first message. And of course, it is possible that many people may have already had face to face contact with aliens, perhaps going back thousands of years.

While most religions continue to put planet earth and humans at the center of the universe in terms of significance, it seems like most scientists place themselves as the presumed "top of planetary importance".

But if there are aliens who are advanced beyond our technology, our science may look like kindergarten to them. So scientists might be the last humans they might have any interest in communicating with (assuming they would have any reason to communicate with us in the first place)

I also have to laugh at the thought of some scientist having a face to face meeting with an alien, and saying:

"Just a sec, I have to call Paul Allen at SETI. You have violated our protocol by not calling us from your home planet using radio signals of absolutely unfathomable power. I am sure he will have a bone to pick with you!"

Bogus claim. This is absolutely not true. The truth is she will use the conference to discuss the problems posed by "space debris mitigation, near-Earth objects (asteroids) and the coordination mechanism for the use of space technology in the United Nations system," Not greet Aliens folks. Sorry to be the party pooper.

I think it will be nice to learn what is actually said/done at the announcment planned. Very strange that so many media outlets can get this wrong and a complete 180 is done on the topic. Maybe there are some things we don't know yet that wil enlighten us on both sides of the subject when the meeting concludes.

I hate that the media can possibly get things so wrong and then spread them this way, It may be possible that they weren't wrong, but the context was changed on them - without - notice after surveying public reaction to the story.

I suppose anything is possible at this point.

reply to post by bluestreak53


I d have to agree the idea of first alien contact being necessarily conducted through any specifically bureacratically appointed inidividual seems amusing; but judging from the context she was basically saying its more logically in someone else's ballcourt. This is where a bit of oddness creeps in, since her speciality does seem to cover near-earth objects, (presumably the larger the better?) such that her dept. must have to consider the possibility, no matter how small, that an unidentified near earth object (UNOB (lol)?) could be of extra-solar sentient origin. Admittedly its probably not what she does on a day to day basis, but still her area would have to cover it.

I see that we can add the Daily Mail newspaper (UK) to the list of mainstream media that supposedly got this story wrong yesterday. Every reputable source added to this list makes the current reversal seem more suspect. If all were misled by someone from the UN, or the true story proved too embarrassing, and so was withdrawn and denied, (not really so unfamiliar a behavior in a political context, is it?) the newspapers have a serious grievance against that organization, or someone in it, for making them look rather foolish. The only circumstance I can conceive of, where the original story wouldn't have been journalistically confirmed by additional sources, is if it came from the UN itself as a proper-appearing press release or communication. Ross

reply to post by Ross 54

You speak as if each news outlet independently investigate and posted the story. That's not the way it works. A story like this gets distributed by a single source and the other outlets just repeat it. Most of the outlets repeat it verbatim. Others change the wording slightly.

It appears that this one originated from Newscore.
www.newscore.com...

reply to post by Phage

Maybe because in none of few actual quotes provided is anything said about anyone being appointed as "contact" for extraterrestrials.

Wrong again...this is starting to become a bit of a habit with you and this topic isn't it.

www.sott.net...

The United Nations was set today to appoint an obscure Malaysian astrophysicist to act as Earth's first contact for any aliens that may come visiting. Mazlan Othman, the head of the UN's little-known Office for Outer Space Affairs (Unoosa), is to describe her potential new role next week at a scientific conference at the Royal Society's Kavli conference centre in Buckinghamshire.

news.bbc.co.uk...

Radio interview with Professor of space science John Zarnecki, who is organising a Royal Society conference next week to discuss the issue.

A space ambassador could be appointed by the United Nations to act as the first point of contact for aliens trying to communicate with earth.

Oh dear...shall i go on?

You know, just five seconds of searching produced pages of results, where many more than a 'few' reports are indeed using the word 'contact', in them.

At this point, regardless of the validity of the story or not, saying that reports mentioning 'contact' or 'alien contact' or 'first contact' do not exist, is incorrect.

I suggest you actually look before you post next time.

Phage; Can't access the contents of the Newscore website you link to. It pointedly says access is by invitation only. It still seems very odd, no matter how the story propagated, that someone, or more than one didn't check back with the concerned parties and get their version of the facts before publishing what seems like a very unusual story. Ross

reply to post by Ross 54


Don't worry, thought you were talking to me.

2nd.

reply to post by spikey

No.
Can you not read what I wrote?

in none of few actual quotes provided is anything said about anyone being appointed as "contact" for extraterrestrials

You have quoted from the articles. Please provide a quote from someone involved. Do you understand what a quote is? It is a direct statement from someone directly involved. Othman said nothing about a contact for extraterrestrials being appointed.

The John Zarnecki statement came out today and I said that yesterday so don't you think it's a bit disingenuous to bring him up in the context of my statement? In any case, he is not a member of the UN or UNOOSA. He is a professor. What difference if he thinks a space ambassador could be appointed? Perhaps in your personal lexicon could means will. But he does not say even that in the BBC interview, he certainly does not say Othman is slated to be it. And is certainly not talking about direct contact.
news.bbc.co.uk...

It is now pretty clear where this whole thing arose.
______beforeitsnews/story/191/062/Towards_a_scientific_and_societal_agenda_on_extra-terrestrial_life.html

reply to post by Ross 54

It was the weekend. They tried to contact Othman but she was not available. They went ahead with publishing it.

The UN didnt notice African rebels raping and killing women and children less than a mile away from their Protection so how do they propose to do anything usefull with an unkown personality type potentially millions of miles away. Like learning to run before you walk.

Surely the Queen of England or Bob Geldoff is the first point of call for ET, they arent going to understand Chinese or Russian. Its also lucky that they didnt introduce themselves when George W Bush was on the throne of America, that could have been a really awkward conversation.

reply to post by fixer1967


Can you please enlighten me what this "listing" you are referring to would be about? How important is it for any present or future ET emissary?

Perhaps now that this is being promoted as a "hoax", maybe we should focus on the question of who it was that started the hoax?

Was it someone in the UN, some "media insider", or perhaps the ETs themselves?

just asking...

reply to post by bluestreak53

There is no hoax.
Most probably a gross sensationalistic distortion of reality.
From the MSM. Imagine that. They got something wrong. How unusual.

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by bluestreak53

 

There is no hoax.
Most probably a gross sensationalistic distortion of reality.
From the MSM. Imagine that. They got something wrong. How unusual.

edit on 9/27/2010 by Phage because: (no reason given)

How unusual indeed. And here we are going along thinking that the mass media is a trusted source for anything.

Only a trusted source for the sheep. Bah, Bah...

The question might be, when do they EVER get anything right on any question related to UFOs perhaps? How can they get anything right when official policy is to mislead people on this?

reply to post by superluminal11


I agree with you...good comment...

I really wish this story hadn't taken the turn that it has, however it is good to know that we can bring things like this to ATS and have them researched by many interested individuals. We would all have eventually learned of the turn in the story, but not with the interesting dialogue given in this forum. I was hoping that this article would hold true, even to give a small step in the direction of learning more about what is not on this planet - in the way of living, intelligent beings and, potentially, their technology.

I also hope that more of these type (UFO, E.T.) stories begin showing up in the media, with more sustained truth than this one, so that more people will become aware of the possibilty and probability that we are not remotely alone in this corner of our Galaxy/Universe. It is amazing how distorted the media is and how many people will not believe anything unless it is given through such an outlet. Surely information on these topics in the MSM would wake up some of the slumberers.