A new and intriguing theory of where UFOs may originate from, and return to...

reply to post by InfaRedMan
I'm with you on that.

IDH has more current acceptance (it seems) than ETH, but we're all like 12th Century farmers wondering where swallows come from in summer. Then again, at least the 12th Century farmers had the guano to know for sure that swallows were in the skies.

Originally posted by Kandinsky
reply to post by InfaRedMan

 

I'm with you on that.

IDH has more current acceptance (it seems) than ETH, but we're all like 12th Century farmers wondering where swallows come from in summer. Then again, at least the 12th Century farmers had the guano to know for sure that swallows were in the skies.

Hello MR. K
I thought "guano" was bat poop.

Actually, it would seem obvious why the one of the ETH/ETPH/ITH "seems" more palatable than the others. Namely that's because all the skeptics have done is tell us that it would be impossible to travel those distances for the last 30 years. I certainly never made the contention that one technology or the other was more difficult to develop and use, just that I tend to go with the ETPH/IDH on a "gut" level because our own science shows real, yet completely experimental, possibilities in these areas. Seems simple, but admittedly, it's all just entertaining hypothesis at this time. So many things though, simply do not make sense with respect for Alfred's paper concerning the physical/paranormal nature of this sort of fortean thing.

Originally posted by MasterOfSparkzThis is sheer speculation and contains NO fact whatsoever. Don't be fooled by this empty statement. It is utterly delusional to think that you could scientifically make such a progressive statement concerning a life form, or a time frame, you know absolutely NOTHING about. We don't even know if there is a life form at all, or whether any other life within the universe is subject to "time" or "distance" in the same way we are, or any other law within our physics science. The bottom line is: WE DO NOT KNOW and it is beyond mentally ill to think we can KNOW such things with any type of progressive certainty.

If you can prove that our understanding of the laws of physics are not consistent in the Andromeda galaxy or some other part of our galaxy, the burden of proof is on you to prove it. We don't know if there is intelligent life-forms in our galactic neighborhood, yes, but our lack of evidence in any of the stars that we have observed carries implications as well. The energy requirements to traverse the great distances between the stars remains constant, whether these alleged ET's are doing so by bending the space-time fabric or by conventionally accelerating to relativistic speeds. If you can prove otherwise, then do so. Unlike belief in ET visitation, which thrives on speculations such as those found in your posts and eye-witness testimony, science is proved by countless experiments in order to make progress. In the case of ET',s there isn't any shred of credible evidence to suggest that we are being visited by beings capable of interstellar travel.

Originally posted by MathematicalPhysicist

Originally posted by MasterOfSparkzThis is sheer speculation and contains NO fact whatsoever. Don't be fooled by this empty statement. It is utterly delusional to think that you could scientifically make such a progressive statement concerning a life form, or a time frame, you know absolutely NOTHING about. We don't even know if there is a life form at all, or whether any other life within the universe is subject to "time" or "distance" in the same way we are, or any other law within our physics science. The bottom line is: WE DO NOT KNOW and it is beyond mentally ill to think we can KNOW such things with any type of progressive certainty.

If you can prove that our understanding of the laws of physics are not consistent in the Andromeda galaxy or some other part of our galaxy, the burden of proof is on you to prove it. We don't know if there is intelligent life-forms in our galactic neighborhood, yes, but our lack of evidence in any of the stars that we have observed carries implications as well. The energy requirements to traverse the great distances between the stars remains constant, whether these alleged ET's are doing so by bending the space-time fabric or by conventionally accelerating to relativistic speeds. If you can prove otherwise, then do so. Unlike belief in ET visitation, which thrives on speculations such as those found in your posts and eye-witness testimony, science is proved by countless experiments in order to make progress. In the case of ET',s there isn't any shred of credible evidence to suggest that we are being visited by beings capable of interstellar travel.

Without understanding technology that you cannot even imagine, how can you make such a foolish and grandiose statement for all life in all the Universe? No friend, I am afraid the burden of proof will ALWAYS be yours, as you have chosen an illogical path. You cannot discover what has already been tested and proved, but then again, you KNEW that. This is all just ploy debate or argument on your behalf, you have NOTHING to state here with respect to the posted subject matter. Both your posts contain more speculation than any other post within this thread. That's because you have chose to build our speculative future on an absolutely failing past, hence your illogical path. Science cannot help you with this one Sir, as it has NOTHING to test or compare this to. That does not mean it cannot exist, it simply means you don't have a clue at this time.

Originally posted by MathematicalPhysicist
It does not matter if they are thousands or millions of years advanced. The energy requirement and the resources needed to accomplish interstellar travel remains constant. It is quite delusional to accept the notion that Aliens are partaking in multiple round trips of interstellar travel just to abduct humans and perform lewd experiments.

Stuck in the box thinking. Do you really think out of date physics is the limiting factor in what is possible? BS alert!

You do not KNOW that. Pure speculation.

Originally posted by MasterOfSparkz
It does fall apart in some (many) areas of UFO Subculture however. In that what is reported many times as something with a possible, or "part" paranormal explanation, often times does not just dissolve or dematerialize, but rather in some way is reported to interact physically with witnesses. If that only means them "touching" something.

Although the inter-dimensional stuff and plasma critters explain many UFO sightings, some of the material out there seems to indicate a very physical presence. I base that conclusion on hundreds of reports from many military sources. So many pilots and radar readings have led to what appear to be physical encounters with UFOs. There have been aircraft lost and lots more.

Tim goods book Need to Know: UFOs, the Military and Intelligence is a good source book. Tim has gathered lots of great examples.

Whew... Shaking hands with a Plasma being, might feel like your crawling on your hands and knees over a bed of hot fiery coals.

Does anybody sell any plasma resistant hand gloves?

reply to post by MasterOfSparkz


Excellent reading MOS, thank you very much for the OP and the link.

S&F for you, and

reply to post by Pimander


The one single thing if anything, that this thread and my general participation on ATS the last couple of weeks has brought me face to face with, is a welcome renewed hunger for relative knowledge pertaining to these subjects.

Naturally, that also implies, that I'm one helluva ignorant bastid, relatively speaking of course.


There is so much to learn!

...and really, isn't that the fun part? All the digging and subsequent knowledge that our motivating interest in each subject brings?

I am going to start, HONESTLY, learning about this applicable "Plasma" so I can feel as though I am better equipped to entertainingly engage such considerations. I would imagine that Plasma itself is a definite property basis for many expanded and modified applications, but the "how" and the "what", I wouldn't have a clue. I'll just start at physics.org or another scholastic freebie and see what's up. I am really not talking "Ball Lightening" here, but rather current technology applications/reviewed hypothesis & theory relating to the natural world.

That's why I really don't "get" the pseudo scientific snobbery that one encounters in the typical armchair or "lay" skeptic. It makes no sense to attack or defend that which has no "proved" basis in our human reality. If something is openly conjecture bound, and hypothesis rich, as most Fortean knowledge and considerations frequently are, why in the name of completely wasted time and effort do people see a need to "toot their horn" in such a meaningless and indeed, seemingly irrational way?

Originally posted by MasterOfSparkzWithout understanding technology that you cannot even imagine, how can you make such a foolish and grandiose statement for all life in all the Universe?

Until this technology that I cannot even imagine materializes itself beyond the realm of eye-witness testimony, it is only logical to come to the conclusion that our current understanding of the physical world, however incomplete that may be, is accurate.

Originally posted by MasterOfSparkzNo friend, I am afraid the burden of proof will ALWAYS be yours, as you have chosen an illogical path.

It is not I who is claiming extraterrestrial, multi-dimensional beings are visiting Earth.

Originally posted by MasterOfSparkzBoth your posts contain more speculation than any other post within this thread.

Again, it is not I who is asserting the ridiculous claim, which has no credible evidence to support it, that ET's that are possibly multi-dimensional are visiting Earth.

Originally posted by MasterOfSparkzThat's because you have chose to build our speculative future on an absolutely failing past, hence your illogical path.

It's called extrapolation and it is much more logical than being deluded into the nonsensical claim that aliens are visiting our planet.

Originally posted by MasterOfSparkzScience cannot help you with this one Sir, as it has NOTHING to test or compare this to. That does not mean it cannot exist, it simply means you don't have a clue at this time.

Using that logic, why don't we scrap Einstein's theory of relativity? Obviously, we do not know if the speed of light is the universal speed limit, and it is truly bold of us as lowly and ignorant humans to theorize such claims, correct?

Also, why do "believers" seem to love to compare their delusions and beliefs in the ET phenomena to experimentally proven, scientific facts? There is as much evidence for ET's as there is for trolls, fairies, pixies, and goblins.

Can you explain how traveling between dimensions works? And please show the amount of energy used to move an object of same proportions from one point to another using both methods. Thanks.

Originally posted by PimanderStuck in the box thinking. Do you really think out of date physics is the limiting factor in what is possible? BS alert!

You do not KNOW that. Pure speculation.

Inference ≠ speculation. Our understanding of the physical world may not be complete or even close to it, but it has been consistent thus far. What is truly pure speculation is the belief in multi-dimensional, alien beings. We have plenty of experimental evidence for the current laws of physics. Does any sort of credible evidence exist to scrutinize that aliens are visiting the planet from a different dimension?

Originally posted by MathematicalPhysicist

Originally posted by PimanderStuck in the box thinking. Do you really think out of date physics is the limiting factor in what is possible? BS alert!

You do not KNOW that. Pure speculation.

Inference ≠ speculation. Our understanding of the physical world may not be complete or even close to it, but it has been consistent thus far. What is truly pure speculation is the belief in multi-dimensional, alien beings. We have plenty of experimental evidence for the current laws of physics. Does any sort of credible evidence exist to scrutinize that aliens are visiting the planet from a different dimension?

Your problem is that you have no ability to think outside the box. In your mind, everything is black or white, proven or false. You have a big problem though as well in that you round up or down, so to speak, and you call things which are speculation fact, while calling other peoples speculation false. Why not just call it what it is, speculation. The only person who can be wrong, is the person who thinks they're right.

Originally posted by wiseman3000

Originally posted by MathematicalPhysicist

Originally posted by PimanderStuck in the box thinking. Do you really think out of date physics is the limiting factor in what is possible? BS alert!

You do not KNOW that. Pure speculation.

Inference ≠ speculation. Our understanding of the physical world may not be complete or even close to it, but it has been consistent thus far. What is truly pure speculation is the belief in multi-dimensional, alien beings. We have plenty of experimental evidence for the current laws of physics. Does any sort of credible evidence exist to scrutinize that aliens are visiting the planet from a different dimension?

Your problem is that you have no ability to think outside the box. In your mind, everything is black or white, proven or false. You have a big problem though as well in that you round up or down, so to speak, and you call things which are speculation fact, while calling other peoples speculation false. Why not just call it what it is, speculation. The only person who can be wrong, is the person who thinks they're right.

...and that's just it. It's *SO COMICAL*. You do your very best to make certain that you superimpose the fact that you, yourself, have a million questions and know very little about what you are speculating, and these pseudo scientific bozos STILL persist in asking questions that are COMPLETELY out of context with respect to the thread you have presented. It's truly sheer trolldom.

It speaks of a deep underlying psychological PROBLEM. I certainly would not be too quick or proud to wave that flag.

Originally posted by MathematicalPhysicist

Originally posted by MasterOfSparkzWithout understanding technology that you cannot even imagine, how can you make such a foolish and grandiose statement for all life in all the Universe?

Until this technology that I cannot even imagine materializes itself beyond the realm of eye-witness testimony, it is only logical to come to the conclusion that our current understanding of the physical world, however incomplete that may be, is accurate.

No, it DOES NOT. Science has proved itself far too revisionary for that bucket to even begin to hold water. No logic contained in that statement.

Originally posted by MasterOfSparkzNo friend, I am afraid the burden of proof will ALWAYS be yours, as you have chosen an illogical path.

It is not I who is claiming extraterrestrial, multi-dimensional beings are visiting Earth.

I have never once claiming anything of the sort. That is a bold faced lie. Quote me where I have.

Originally posted by MasterOfSparkzBoth your posts contain more speculation than any other post within this thread.

Again, it is not I who is asserting the ridiculous claim, which has no credible evidence to support it, that ET's that are possibly multi-dimensional are visiting Earth.

see above:

Originally posted by MasterOfSparkzThat's because you have chose to build our speculative future on an absolutely failing past, hence your illogical path.

It's called extrapolation and it is much more logical than being deluded into the nonsensical claim that aliens are visiting our planet.

see above: (you're mind is so rusty friend. It's like it barely works...put a little oil on those cogs man! Omega 3 works wonders!)

Originally posted by MasterOfSparkzScience cannot help you with this one Sir, as it has NOTHING to test or compare this to. That does not mean it cannot exist, it simply means you don't have a clue at this time.

Using that logic, why don't we scrap Einstein's theory of relativity? Obviously, we do not know if the speed of light is the universal speed limit, and it is truly bold of us as lowly and ignorant humans to theorize such claims, correct?

Many aspects of Einsteins theory of relativity are being scrapped by the day Sir. For you to not know or be aware of as much speaks volumes for your true credibility. Contemporary Physics should not be likened to a "classic car show" Sir. Stick with the concept of NOW if you are going to draw on scientific understanding and practice.

We are not however, that's because we are intelligently speculating about matters we don't make claims that we know all about. Very sad Sir. Lets get that thing upstairs online and WORKING!

Also, why do "believers" seem to love to compare their delusions and beliefs in the ET phenomena to experimentally proven, scientific facts? There is as much evidence for ET's as there is for trolls, fairies, pixies, and goblins.

See above: (you're almost in the hopeless category Sir, but I'll remain vigilant in the interest of you coming up to speed with respect for your ability to COMPREHEND WHAT I HAVE WRITTEN.) Get with it man! To entertain and discuss a hypothesis is NOT an indication that one "believes" in anything. Are you honestly not aware that the true test of an intelligent mind is to hold and examine two completely conflicting ideas simultaneously?

Originally posted by cluckerspud
Can you explain how traveling between dimensions works? And please show the amount of energy used to move an object of same proportions from one point to another using both methods. Thanks.

Exactly! There isn't one person in this thread that could honestly suggest that one method is more probable than the other. Highly speculative material.

IRM

reply to post by InfaRedMan


Hi, interesting thread, perhaps "travelling" can be accomplished without the necessity of matter, thus reducing energy required down to a quantum level and allowing multiverse inversion to become a reality.

Regards.

Originally posted by InfaRedMan

Originally posted by cluckerspud
Can you explain how traveling between dimensions works? And please show the amount of energy used to move an object of same proportions from one point to another using both methods. Thanks.

Exactly! There isn't one person in this thread that could honestly suggest that one method is more probable than the other. Highly speculative material.

IRM

Sir, can I ask you a question? Why should we "need" or "have to" have this absolute understanding in order to introduce this new hypothesis to anyone with respect to our mutual curiosity?

I would be willing to bet a year's wages that you yourself are curious about MANY THINGS that you yourself don't have the type of understanding you are claiming that we should here.

You are not accomplishing a thing here IRM. just being an OBVIOUS TROLL.

Two words: Get REAL.

Originally posted by MasterOfSparkz
Sir, can I ask you a question? Why should we "need" or "have to" have this absolute understanding in order to introduce this new hypothesis to anyone with respect to our mutual curiosity?

We don't "need" or "have to" have an "absolute understanding" of your theory. How about a "basic" understanding?
Something to work with?! What information or data can we compare to show the 2 methods energy use. This would be a helpful start in speculating which is more probable.

Originally posted by cluckerspud

Originally posted by MasterOfSparkz
Sir, can I ask you a question? Why should we "need" or "have to" have this absolute understanding in order to introduce this new hypothesis to anyone with respect to our mutual curiosity?

We don't "need" or "have to" have an "absolute understanding" of your theory. How about a "basic" understanding?
Something to work with?! What information or data can we compare to show the 2 methods energy use. This would be a helpful start in speculating which is more probable.

So, like anyone else on this forum has the responsibility to, if your interest in said new hypothesis intrigues you, get with it and do what you need to do for YOURSELF. Why should I have to do that for you?

I don't require that understanding to surface level examine the fundamental information contained in this document, and neither does anyone else. If you feel there is a need for missing information that would further edify YOUR positioning on that matter, get with it.

Originally posted by MasterOfSparkz
So, like anyone else on this forum has the responsibility to, if your interest in said new hypothesis intrigues you, get with it and do what you need to do for YOURSELF. Why should I have to do that for you?

I don't require that understanding to surface level examine the fundamental information contained in this document, and neither does anyone else. If you feel there is a need for missing information that would further edify YOUR positioning on that matter, get with it.

Well, I am interested in how you arrived at the conclusion that transcending dimensions is more probable than traveling far distances. I looked forward to an interesting discussion, but it seems my comments are being interpreted as friction and I get the feeling that you would rather wish I bug off. I can do that. Sorry I asked questions. Goodbye.