Is the ET belief the same as the belief in trolls, fairies, goblins, and pixies of the medieval time

Is the ET belief the same as the belief in trolls, fairies, goblins, and pixies of the medieval time?

The only purely honest answer is: unknown.

By looking into a mirror there is a reasonable probability for life to form elsewhere, and to evolve to intelligent beings, but at some point in their technological development "the system could become unstable, and the intelligent life destroys itself.
We have only been walking around in a speck of geoligicle time compared to the dinosaurs.had the dinosaurs not been killed of 65 mya, it's unlikely that mankind would have evolved.
Like Dr. Stephen Hawking says, intelligence may not be the ultimate result of evolution and may actually be a mutation that hinders the survival of our species.
It is possible that what we equate as intelligence could turn out to be a evolutionary dead end.

reply to post by MathematicalPhysicist



I have thought and reflected on this subject more and more over the last few hours and have come to a conclusion in my own mind concerning the OP. (original post, not poster)

The issue here is not whether these two comparatives are relatively the same, because frankly, it's completely illogical to even attempt to reach such a conclusion, because both considerations are, for all "practical scientific purposes", completely hypothetical and indeed, unfounded.

either one of two possibilities exists via the motive for this original post.

a) sheer trolldom (to prey on the weak minded for attention or psychotic satisfaction)

b) possibly, in so many words (way too many IMO) the poster was specifically attributing a specific type, and possibly a progressive level of delusional thinking, as a result of an irrational "belief system" in both the case of UFO subculture, as well as those who in times past, found themselves immersed a considerable subculture of dragons, faeries, elves & trolls.

If the later is the case, it's a ridiculous and over generalized, ultra broad sweeping, non scientific and nonsensical "belief system" unto itself, to think that such a level of uniform fanaticism could indeed exist in ANY observed social cross section, given almost any psychological context. A younger person might even shout out "get real!", but I seriously doubt it deserves as much attention.

For such "fanaticism" to exist in all cases, the odds would be overwhelmingly against such a uniform correlation. Silly to even consider it a possibility. What you could do however is to make listed attributive comparisons between each, further deriving specific pathologies, motivations and manifestations in an effort to create a theoretical basis for your postulations.

Originally posted by yeti101

as I understand it creating wormholes is theoretically possible. 2 major problems though

1. you would need a "wormhole gate" at each location in the galaxy so they would need to travel through normal space first and build the gate near earth. Then they can activate the gate at their home planet and take the shortcut here.

This shouldn't be a problem for a civilization capable of interstellar travel. I'd say, interstellar travel is more of a possibility than actually replicating wormholes in the real world. Besides, there is no need for that when such a civilization can achieve more efficient means of travel (quantum entanglement comes to mind).

Originally posted by yeti1012. It takes a bonkers amount of energy to create even a wormhole a few microns in diameter never mind big enough so a craft could travel through it. Its like the power of an entire star or something crazy.

That is very ambiguous, and the real answer is: We truly do not know. What we possibly do know is that it requires exotic matter that has a negative mass, which contradicts known laws of physics at this time. That is why they only exist in the realms of pure mathematics and science fiction.

Originally posted by yeti101but still you cant really argue with the fact we don't know everything. We don't fully know the possibilities so its a weak argument for skeptics to use. Like i said i agree with your other points

We may not know the full possibilities, but we have a good idea. Regardless of the method used, it would still require VAST energy expenditure for just a one-way trip to Earth, and the thought of ET's embarking on multiple round trips with the intent to just spy on us sounds, to put it bluntly, ridiculous.

Come on how could you forget the all time greatest, Alcubierre warp drive?

Its the only way to travel !!!!

".........Interestingly enough, it is you who believe in ET without any form of evidence, while we have scientific evidence that there is NO life within 20 light years of us. Logically, we can conclude that no civilization would traverse such distances only to observe us. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, in which you and the many ET believers are lacking a great deal in."

My question is do you know exactly where you are? Seriously, where are you in the universe at this moment?
Exact definitions as to time, place and dimension. Can you give them? Can you even come close?
Your science and physics is so limited. Use your imagination. Einstein did and the universe changed. Or are you going to tell me Einstein only discovered what was already there. I disagree - There is nothing there until 'the mind'
perceives it, sees it, defines it, And in fact creates it! Again as I have said before and will say again "There is no absolute provable reality"

Belief in gnomes, goblins, nymphs, etc is still very much alive amongst occultists. Exploring the inner worlds is facinating and does create an awareness of the numerous levels of existence, from which a lot of phenomena(including UFOs) can manifest.

There are several differences between believing in UFO's and believing in fairies and other creatures like that.

1. Unlike fairies, UFO's have solid evidence to back them up.
2. Unlike fairies, UFO's are relevent enough in peoples lives for the government to make 995 page books trying to proove that in one case, a weather balloon, not a saucer crashed in New Mexico.
3. Unlike fairies, E.T.'s are a hypothesis, not the fruits of someones imagination.

I don't know where you got this one.

Originally posted by MathematicalPhysicist

Originally posted by yourmaker
I just want to touch on this.
Isn't it theoretically possible to create some sort of constant energetic reaction rather then using fuels?

Nope, because every stage of the reaction there is some energy lost as heat according to the second law of thermodynamics.

Can't heat be converted into anything energetic itself?

Originally posted by Turiddu
Good post.

Yes, I believe the modern conception of "aliens" and "UFOs" are modern, space-age, versions of the age old fairy tales people use to believe in.

A hundred years ago people saw the Virgin Mother in their farm yard, today they see little grey creatures sneaking into their bedroom.

Both are merely figments of the imagination or the result of hallucinations, mental illness, deliberate lying etc..

Centuries ago when people had nightmares and sleep paralysis they use to blame it on demons, spirits or things like the "old hag", today they blame it on alien abduction.

edit on 8-7-2011 by Turiddu because: (no reason given)

The huge difference Mr Skeptic is that unlike what in the past was just tales, here you can see yourself and record with a camera and basically have much bigger means of showing you see what you see and not some fairy tale...

So what's your point of coming here? To tell how much they are not? Strange reason to register. It's OK I also don;t think many of the cases are true but like thousand times, saying all is a fake and lie is kind of dumb

Originally posted by MathematicalPhysicist
Source
This is the only planet that can possibly sustain any sort of life within a 20 light year radius of us, and it does not.

I can give you perfect UNARGUABLE reason for why this is so wrong to think and if any scienist is thinking that so EARLY he's an idiot. Of course there are idiots among science community too.

When I was 12th grade my Astronomy textbook on the part with Pluto says: Pluto is a planet, pluto has one satellite: Charon. What's today? Pluto is a dwarf planet or planetoid, it has THREE moons: Charon, Nix, Hydra. I can now burn the School Texbook so to say.

When this claim was made - we have yet to do the probes on Europa, as for things within 20 light years. Until we are able to scan every corner of the 20 ly area this is ridiculous. Another: Some time ago was found that life can exist in arsenic environment, just proof how life may exist where we do not suspect. So much for idiot scientists and their rush claims there is no life - if there is truly no life this is a lucky guess NOT any PROOF. But until more research is made, some scientists need to be muted for disinformation and filling wrong things into people's heads.

In other words, saying EVER life doesn't exist elsewhere is wrong because you will never be able to make a round trip of the universe to know that.

Where is the respect to trolls, fairies, goblins, and pixies? They don't exist? I'm sure if you spent the time to research, I'm sure there are old stone buildings, statues, damns, bridges, that have a folklore connection to it being built by trolls.

Here is a link to one I know of off the top of my head in Hawai'i:

Menehune Fish Pond

I'm sure there are similar tales all over the World.

Like someone said earlier in the thread a lot human deformities can explain the image or labeling of someone as a troll. Or even women in Salem, Massachusetts being labeled as witches...

How about people who live high in the Andes Mountains and can sprint up and down the mountain with sandals? Carrying a pack? They must be magical too?

With the mentioning of two regions of the World as examples, the Pacific and South America, do you not think in those cultures there are Legends? Are the Legends true?

Without going to deep, the reaction by people seeing a white man for the first time, might think this white guy is an alien! So to the OP who are these trolls, fairies, goblins, and pixies in medieval times you speak of?

Midieval Times aka the Middle Ages was when massive Castles started popping up all over Europe, which reminds me of Dracula. Vampires....must be aliens too? Oh wait the whole idea was largely influenced by an actual person Vlad III the Impaler who was in the Order of the Dragon. In Latin, Dragon is Drac, and Vlad III the Impaler is the son of Vlad II the Impaler, thus earning the association of Son of Dragon, or in Latin, Dracula.
en.wikipedia.org...

Another mythical and very popular fat man in a red suit and white beard, has his own actual origins too.



So let's try and show some respect to Myths and Legends as well as everything and anything else that is out there in the vastness of Space.

reply to post by MathematicalPhysicist

Granted, there is a small 5% that cannot be explained by scientific means, that does not imply they are alien controlled space-craft of interstellar origins. It is much more reasonable and logical to believe, without evidence, they are top-secret military technology, although it is quite faulty as that would imply that military scientists have a great deal of knowledge that is unknown to scientists in academia or in the private industry.

No that's nonsense. Any rational and intelligent person cannot explain those physical characteristics by any technology available here on earth. Period.

Google: 1976 Tehran UFO

Google: Paul R Hill and look at his resume and read his book Unconventional Flying Objects

Google: John E Mack and look at his resume and read his book Abduction

Google: COMETA report

Google: ufoskeptic.org and remember that skeptic =

One who practices the method of suspended judgment, engages in rational and dispassionate reasoning as exemplified by the scientific method, shows willingness to consider alternative explanations without prejudice based on prior beliefs, and who seeks out evidence and carefully scrutinizes its validity.

That should get you started in demonstrating that the UFO business is not just crackpots and misidentifications. Also, I'd like to point out that in our history it's not always been "top secret scientists" who made some great discovery. Einstein was fairly poor and worked on his theories in his spare time. He was a "no one" before people realized how revolutionary his ideas were. I would give the private industry and academic institutions more credit. It's those folks who really pump out the work and then I'm sure some of them wind up perhaps working for the military trying to stretch their ideas to the limit at some point. But there is no indication that we are dealing with Earthly technology. Also, in the past, "secret aerospace technology" eventually becomes public after a decade or two.

For a skeptic like yourself I would highly recommend a book called "Beyond UFOs" by Jeffrey Bennett. He does a very nice job of talking about our options when confronting the Fermi Paradox!

I think what's going on here is that there is something greater at stake in terms of knowledge. In order to explain some aspects of close encounters we must dwelve into the tough subject of consciousness and what it truly is. That's really what it comes down to. How does the Quantum World interact with our world? Is consciousness contained only in your brain or is it something much more profound and fundamental? I would highly recommend 2 books to explore ideas that might help one understand what's going on with this whole UFO/alien thing:

MAYA The World as Virtual Reality by Richard L Thompson

Supersizing The Mind by Andy Clark


Also, apologies for trying to cram so many thoughts in at once. The frustrataing thing is that there is never any definitive proof in "how we definie it." However, perhaps it would be wise for mankind to consider putting ego aside and "change our definitions" so we can all go after the mystery that so intrigues us. I believe "aliens" or other conscious beings (perhaps beings of thought) cannot give us any "concrete proof" of their existence. It would violate our free will of how we want to develop our civilization.

Trolls exist and that I am sure of. Have you seen the Elenin posts?

Originally posted by Scramjet76
reply to post by MathematicalPhysicist

 

One who practices the method of suspended judgment, engages in rational and dispassionate reasoning as exemplified by the scientific method, shows willingness to consider alternative explanations without prejudice based on prior beliefs, and who seeks out evidence and carefully scrutinizes its validity. .......

Einstein was fairly poor and worked on his theories in his spare time. He was a "no one" before people realized how revolutionary his ideas were. ........ .

I think what's going on here is that there is something greater at stake in terms of knowledge. In order to explain some aspects of close encounters we must dwelve into the tough subject of consciousness and what it truly is. That's really what it comes down to. How does the Quantum World interact with our world? Is consciousness contained only in your brain or is it something much more profound and fundamental? .........

YES, Excellent response with some familiar and still profound concepts.
But I still must ask can you prove any reality without 'a mind' perceiving and defining such a reality. Another words if a tree falls in the woods and no one is there to hear it is there a sound. Logically you will deduce of course there is a sound and it could be recorded and measured. But if it is not in some way recorded or measured by some means - Can you really prove a sound occurred? And by the same token if aliens are visiting us they can say you can not prove it because they can not be seen or perceived by most. Does that mean humans who do perceive alien beings or consciousness are crazy. Or are they just more aware of reality?
And then again: 'There is no provable reality' Or is there?

reply to post by MathematicalPhysicist

Not just mathematics, but physical evidence (experimentation) as well. Can you elaborate on that? According to which math was the helicopter an impossibility? Mathematics is never wrong, our use of axioms, however, has been and will be proven wrong, but mathematics is not to be faulted for that.

Mathematics is a tool. It is as wrong as the user of it. Im sure, you dont need me to tell you that helicopters were considered an impossibility before 1904 when the first was created. I.e. the math was not developed enough to establish a working model to support a rotary lifted object until this happened. Math is wrong just as many times as people are wrong. Math is formulated from conscious, & erroneous thought. Our brains can not account for what we do not know.

Bacterial life does not imply intelligent life. Yes, we may find the star systems within 20 light years of us filled with bacterial life, but no signs of intelligent life capable of interstellar travel have yet to be found. If any intelligent life were to look in our solar system, they would detect intelligent life within an instant even though we are not capable of interstellar travel, with all of our satellites and probes, it is kind of difficult to leave no trace at all.

This does not add up to me. In order to come to the conclusion that no intelligent life has been found on anything within 20 l.y., one has to assume that humans are the only intelligent life form. Its not advisable to assume. Even here on our own earth the conditions that differing species need in order to survive, is a very wide range. We have creatures that are incredibly intelligent (shown to use reasoning and deduction) that do not breath air (octopus). Bacteria not intelligent? Im sorry but I do not believe this. Please dont get me wrong, I am sure plenty of abduction cases are caused by mental disorders, but im also fairly certain some are not. "The Fourth Kind" and its background is a very interesting place to start.

And, yet, no signs of a civilization that is capable of interstellar travel. Why is that?

Well, in order to answer this I need clarification. Do you believe that we would truly be able to see signs of intelligent life? With what tools? Our Telescopes? The same telescopes that are barely picking up stars (which i would hope you understand just how much smaller intelligent life is than a star)? The same ones that cannot see into the Planets, and instead we count planets by flickers in the stars light? You see, we know nothing, and life is everywhere. Adaptation makes all things possible. Just because a planet is not like ours, does not mean intelligent life does not exist on it, and nor does it mean intelligent life needs Oxygen, water and moderate average temperature.

Originally posted by MathematicalPhysicist

Originally posted by splittheatom
Really, your source is the daily mail?

You won't find knowledge that is considered common sense among astronomers in peer-reviewed articles, but you will in layman articles such as the media and newspapers.

Possibly one of the most unintelligible newspapers in the world.
Here's anothersource. Or is this not credible enough?

Originally posted by splittheatomPlus this is from 4 years ago, there has been many more discoveries and theories make since this story.

This source is from Oct 2010, is that recent enough for you?

Originally posted by splittheatomWhat I'm saying is that scientists just don't know. I am not making claims that ET's do exist, what I am saying is that they could exist anywhere, we don't have the proof for it yet for or against.

Sure, scientists aren't certain whether the planets within 20 light years of us have bacterial life or not, but we can be certain that they don't harbor ANY advanced ET civilizations that are capable of interstellar travel. Not one satellite or other forms of robotics found that are not man-made. No trace of intelligent life capable of interstellar travel on a planet heavily implies that the planet does not host any intelligent life.

Originally posted by splittheatomWhat you are doing, is making claims, backed up by no sources in your OP, and the only source you can throw me is an article from a newspaper which is 4 years old.

Ah, yes, I'm the one making claims after we conclude from the many years of closely examining the many planets that due possibly hold intelligent life show no signs of it at all, while the ones who claim ET's are here and contradict all laws of physics are more factual?

Originally posted by splittheatomYou have your right to voice your opinion, but please don't try to pass it off as fact.

My opinion is based off countless observations of different stars that show no form of intelligent life that is capable of interstellar travel, which would normally leave a MAJOR footprint, while yours is based off of science-fiction and speculation.

I had to stop reading the thread at this point to comment, I will continue after. First I think your OP and subsequent posts are assumptive in the same way that once upon a time it was assumed that the sun revolved around the earth. That is an old argument, I know but it is a tried and true one for a reason. When I was a child we could not see beyond much beyond our own solar system and look how far we have come since then. In my mothers lifetime we went from being impossible to reach earths orbit to landing on the moon.

You site an article written for Discovery News (here) as being credible, it should be noted that it is a blog written by a student, and that the big wigs at NASA who held a press conference about these discoveries could only say we don't know if life exists on any of the goldilocks planets. Her points maybe valid and they maybe garbage, my point is that we do not know. We cannot even physically see these planets yet not even with our best technology, so as silly as it would be for me to say that there is life or even intelligent life on one of those planets it is equally silly for you to say there isn't and claim it as fact. It really isn't that difficult to say "I don't know". What we do know is that more scientists than not, concur that it is more likely than not, that life exists beyond earth and even tentatively venture that there is intelligent life beyond earth. Is there proof? No, at least not yet, nor is there proof that we are the only intelligent life.

I would ask a philosophical question of you. Do you think that humanity will one day be advanced enough to go beyond the moon, maybe even mars, maybe out of our own solar system? Do you think that our curiosity about other intelligent life in the universe and our drive to explore and discover may be basic traits of intelligence? Keep in mind our knowledge of physics is expanding.

Originally posted by yourmaker
Can't heat be converted into anything energetic itself?

Random molecular motion (heat) is the byproduct of energy that has been used to do work, and the energy lost as heat during conversion is useless for all practical purposes due to its high potential. A physiological parallel: Think of how your body digests food, converts the majority into energy, and the rest into filtering your body of toxins in the form of waste and fecal matter.

Originally posted by Imtor
I can give you perfect UNARGUABLE reason for why this is so wrong to think and if any scienist is thinking that so EARLY he's an idiot. Of course there are idiots among science community too.

Much of science is inferred, and according to the many scans done by SETI of the many stars in our galactic neighborhood, there are no signs of intelligent life forms that ARE capable of interstellar travel. We aren't capable of interstellar travel, however, we would still be considered intelligent life forms. We can barely keep ourselves hidden in our solar system with all the probes and satellites around, so, we can infer that a civilization capable of interstellar travel would be instantaneously detected upon a short time of observing their solar system.

Originally posted by ImtorWhen I was 12th grade my Astronomy textbook on the part with Pluto says: Pluto is a planet, pluto has one satellite: Charon. What's today? Pluto is a dwarf planet or planetoid, it has THREE moons: Charon, Nix, Hydra. I can now burn the School Texbook so to say.

Obviously, that is how science works and is developed. However, have any of the laws of thermodynamics and energy conservation been changed ever since their inception? Nope. We can, therefore, conclude that they are quite accurate and consistent with the physical world. These two established laws are primarily what make interstellar travel feasibly impossible.

Originally posted by ImtorWhen this claim was made - we have yet to do the probes on Europa, as for things within 20 light years. Until we are able to scan every corner of the 20 ly area this is ridiculous. Another: Some time ago was found that life can exist in arsenic environment, just proof how life may exist where we do not suspect. So much for idiot scientists and their rush claims there is no life - if there is truly no life this is a lucky guess NOT any PROOF. But until more research is made, some scientists need to be muted for disinformation and filling wrong things into people's heads.

Again, bacterial life or even intelligent life such as ourselves, does not imply that they are capable of interstellar travel. Also, astronomers haven't bothered with stars that are unlike our star and only have exoplanets that are hostile to all forms of life orbiting them. For the many possible exoplanets that have been observed, we can conclude that they do not harbor any intelligent lifeforms that are CAPABLE of interstellar travel.

Originally posted by ImtorIn other words, saying EVER life doesn't exist elsewhere is wrong because you will never be able to make a round trip of the universe to know that.

Never implied that. Intelligent life can very well exist either 8 light years or 56 light years away from us, but, saying that intelligent lifeforms that are capable of interstellar travel in a 20 light year radius is intellectual dishonesty and patently incorrect. Unless, of course, you believe there is a conspiracy amongst all astronomers and a cover-up?

Originally posted by derst1988Mathematics is a tool. It is as wrong as the user of it. Im sure, you dont need me to tell you that helicopters were considered an impossibility before 1904 when the first was created. I.e. the math was not developed enough to establish a working model to support a rotary lifted object until this happened. Math is wrong just as many times as people are wrong. Math is formulated from conscious, & erroneous thought. Our brains can not account for what we do not know.

The math was actually correct. Theoretically, helicopters and planes were a possibility. However, arrogant physicists and mathematical physicists (not exactly mathematicians) said it was impossible and would only be possible in the realm of abstract mathematics, just like how many hold the exact belief of wormholes today. However, I truly doubt two bike mechanics are ever going to find the exotic matter needed to accomplish interstellar travel while building and using an efficient space machine, simultaneously. There is a difference when a concept is theoretically possible and experimentally (physically) possible.

Originally posted by derst1988This does not add up to me. In order to come to the conclusion that no intelligent life has been found on anything within 20 l.y., one has to assume that humans are the only intelligent life form. Its not advisable to assume. Even here on our own earth the conditions that differing species need in order to survive, is a very wide range. We have creatures that are incredibly intelligent (shown to use reasoning and deduction) that do not breath air (octopus). Bacteria not intelligent? Im sorry but I do not believe this. Please dont get me wrong, I am sure plenty of abduction cases are caused by mental disorders, but im also fairly certain some are not. "The Fourth Kind" and its background is a very interesting place to start.

Again, what do you consider intelligent life in this context? What I consider it is intelligent lifeforms capable of interstellar travel, which is the only conclusion that can account for the alleged ET visitation of Earth. Astronomers have observed all sun-life stars (other stars are too hot or cool to sustain life), and they have not found any exoplanet that harbors intelligent life that is capable of interstellar travel, as it would only take a few observations to trace such a civilization. Humans are not capable of interstellar travel, and if a civilization that is on our level in terms of knowledge and science observed the solar system, it would rather simple to conclude that Earth harbors life, thanks to all of the robots we have floating around the solar system. This implies that there is intelligent life not capable of interstellar travel we are not aware of, which is irrelevant, or that intelligent life forms capable of interstellar travel are beyond 20 light years from Earth.

Originally posted by derst1988Well, in order to answer this I need clarification. Do you believe that we would truly be able to see signs of intelligent life? With what tools? Our Telescopes? The same telescopes that are barely picking up stars (which i would hope you understand just how much smaller intelligent life is than a star)? The same ones that cannot see into the Planets, and instead we count planets by flickers in the stars light? You see, we know nothing, and life is everywhere. Adaptation makes all things possible. Just because a planet is not like ours, does not mean intelligent life does not exist on it, and nor does it mean intelligent life needs Oxygen, water and moderate average temperature.

Actually, many organizations (SETI comes to mind) have powerful, multi-million dollar telescopes to observe many stars that are in our "galactic neighborhood". Granted, we cannot observe the exoplanets around them and must use inferences, we would easily find by use of other methods (such radio signaling) intelligent life that is capable of interstellar travel. Now, if all we did were find a bunch of hunter-gatherers that would be considered intelligent, that does nothing for the ET visitation claims, does it? It would be near impossible for a civilization capable of interstellar travel to hide all traces of its existence.

Originally posted by Kali74I would ask a philosophical question of you. Do you think that humanity will one day be advanced enough to go beyond the moon, maybe even mars, maybe out of our own solar system? Do you think that our curiosity about other intelligent life in the universe and our drive to explore and discover may be basic traits of intelligence? Keep in mind our knowledge of physics is expanding.

I do not speak based on science or infallibly, just out of my own humble opinion. I truly believe that humans will not go beyond Mars in terms of space travel. Robots, which have a high failure rate, perhaps, but not humans. The fuel requirements, the food, water, which only add to the fuel requirement, compound that with any space particle hitting a very vital part of the ship. There are too many obstacles to overcome and resources to expend for such little gain and benefit. Also, accomplishing interstellar travel would require the cooperation of all humans on Earth, which I believe, is just impossible. We will kill ourselves in a nuclear holocaust before we ever get along and solve all of the possible technical problems that make interstellar travel impractical.

reply to post by MathematicalPhysicist


astronomers can't tell you if there's any interstellar capable civs within 20ly. they just don't know, they have no way of knowing. Nobody on earth does. Its wrong to say there is and its wrong to say there isn't. There is only one correct factual answer and that is... we don't know. Do you understand?