Buzz Aldrin observed strange objects on the moon as well as unidentifiable craft , and has gone on record to describe them.

Can there be logical explanations?

Yes But I truly do not think Governments are ready to tell us.
While not restricting my views to our solar system.
To think we are alone is to ignore mathematics.

Where's Houellebecq when you need him?

>>Can there be logical explanations?<<

Can there be logical explanations?

Cheers,

Tony

What do you mean by *our* "solar sytem"?

Harelipped or harebrained?

"Can there be logical explanations?"

So what if there can be? What makes our logic the last word?

Well this one came a gutza.
As you know WW we have form,not willing to restart it, but waiting for your statement of the truth in it.
Know the wait will be eternal, however UNKIND posts changes nothing.
You put a very real question with some merit in it.
In time we will talk much of this, humanity that is.
Maths see, counting the trillions of planets maths says we are not alone.
Do not take it to heart good subject.

I'm sure the ALP policy makers are from another planet. They have been since about 1972. The Greens most likely came down in the last meteorite shower.

With modern technology a lot of things can be photo-shopped so even real pictures of UFO's don't carry much weight.Lights flashing across the sky is not proof of a superior intelligence.I've seen no good close up shots of these craft nor real evidence of alien existnce.

If they are here they must be very advanced because they must be able to either travel faster than the speed of light or be capable of time travel.

You'd better hope that they are nice tolerant aliens because humans on this planet are pretty stupid,selfish,cruel and destructive.What have we done to our less intelligent primate relatives and to our own humanity?

Photo shopped, a lot of that goes on with u tube.
The universe is where the good dead go, or was that all b/s.
I suppose if we are hear, there is not much stopping another form of intelligent life being somewhere else.
The voyager 1 & 2 are still going after something like 40 + years. And still in contact with us earthlings. Although the signal takes something like 17 hours to reach earth. That was the satellites with a picture of a man and woman on board, just in case it got apprehended. It is now passing through the last frontier. In a few more years, it will be in an area that no one knows what to expect.
So if there is someone out there they must be some considerable distance away.

Arjay,

The British government had a department to record ufo sightings over a 50 year time span, so obviously they felt a need to investigate the reports of sightings.

America also had operation Blue Book.

In 1952 the sightings over Washington D.C. made headlines in the newspapers, accompanied by photos. These sightings were also observed by many people, and Truman ordered an immediate investigation.

In an effort to suppress panic when the report went public, the explanation given to the public was that there had been an inversion layer which distorted views of a normal sky.

Many ufo reports have been personal accounts [cranks had a field day], but there have been reports made many times of unexplained sightings by pilots and other credible witnesses.

Many billions of dollars have been spent in an effort to discover if there is life other than on our own planet.
Yes, you're right, we're all the things you have stated- could anything top that?

579,

Think it's good that we are trying to establish whether life exists elsewhere, and are not limited to only thinking about our own planet.

Who can deny how many exciting possibilities our tentative thrusts beyond earth may reveal?

Maybe we need to occasionally to give thought to matters beyond our own sphere. Expand our thinking as we expand our horizons.

At the moment we are limited by a lack of means to quickly overcome distance, but many different ideas to redress this are already in the experimental stage. After all, it has only taken us one century to progress enough to put men on the moon, and growth is exponential, so imagine where we could be be in one more century.

Yes WW if I were younger I'd want to be an astronaut, & go explore.

However, perhaps we should remember, that when we see a cockroach, or a mouse, peep out from under something, we reach for the surface spray, or the mouse trap & the cheese.

It is the timid, who don't stick their nose out, that get to chew on your groceries, not the bold.

Hasbeen,

And then there's the bacteria, billions of whom live on you and in you....absorbing life-giving nourishment...and, for the most part, we're not even mindful of it.

Beetles and bacteria are stunningly successful species as far as longevity goes. When all is said and done, everything on earth has evolved in harmony with the earth's properties. "Life" out there somewhere could take any shape.

WW, the Fermi paradox sums up our current position:

>> The size and age of the universe incline us to believe that many technologically advanced civilizations must exist. However, this belief seems logically inconsistent with our lack of observational evidence to support it. Either:

(1) The initial assumption is incorrect and technologically advanced intelligent life is much rarer than we believe, or :

(2) Our current observations are incomplete and we simply have not detected them yet, or:

(3) our search methodologies are flawed and we are not searching for the correct indicators. <<

WW, I have been a member of the NSW Astronomical Society for longer than I care to remember. I have spent thousands of hours looking through a scope at the night sky....I don't believe I have ever seen a UFO that did not obey the laws of physics as we know them. I have not seen objects escape from our atmosphere, but I have seen a thousand enter our atmosphere.

My computer and 3 million other personal PC’s help SETI analyze data retrieved from radio scopes even as we speak. Over the 40 odd years that the SETI type pregame has run there were a handful of intriguing signals detected. The most famous of these was the "Wow" signal picked up n 1977. However, none of these signals was ever detected again. Single anomalies.

WW, on the atheist thread Dave was banging on with absolute assurance there is no creator. As I mentioned, I am an agnostic, but as I have gazed at our night skies I often wonder why the rest of the universe is active but silent. As for aliens living on the moon, they are just as likely to be in your spare bedroom.

Sonofgloin,

"on the atheist thread Dave was banging on with absolute assurance there is no creator."

Really, which 'Dave' is that? Could you supply a quote supporting that assertion.

David

As much as I thought I had my say,may be it bought the thread back to life, it deserves consideration.
It was sharp remarks from you indy that bought me back.
Mate why the constant nasty of subject, slings.
Apart from it being the best you can do how do you add to a thread.
Why not start one,say why I am constantly rude?
Individual you are not impressing any one, your next original thought if it ever comes will be your first.

Sonofgloin,

Absolutely fascinated that you've spent so many hours watching the night sky. Rather envious too, as I've only seen it with the naked eye.

I remember the wow incident, and how excited we were that maybe, just maybe, another entity was trying to communicate with us.

I understand that when the square kilometre telescope is completed we will have much more raw data. Will you be part of Peerless too?

Even here on earth it has been found that certain forms of bacteria thrive only in a methane environment. In the ocean we have life which has adapted to live only near fumaroles and at depths where the pressure would crush us.
We mostly don't understand the language of the animals on our own planet. Even plants can communicate with each other. Predators seem to communicate telepathically when hunting in a pack.

The Fermi paradox is certainly intriguing. Could it be that there is a way of communicating which we are yet to discover?

Wow, who to believe?...the crackpots who say we didn't get to the moon or the crackpots who say there was a welcoming committee when we got there.

Imagine there is a conspiracy to keep the evidence found on Apollo 11 from the public. How many 100s or 1000s would be involved. And in a land where you can get fame AND fortune for providing evidence that the president got a blow job in the oval office, not one of those 1000s cracks the silence. Really?

So no ET on the moon. (by the way, if there were creatures on the moon what would they be called...mooners, lunatics?).

Is there other life in the solar system? Well perhaps. Maybe there's some green sludge in the caps of Mars. Or prawns in the lakes of one of Saturn's moons.

But intelligent life....not a chance. I sometimes even wonder if there is intelligent life in the inner solar system.

With the opening up of space to private concerns, may give space travel a significant boost. The distances involved may need refueling stations to increase cruising speeds, by several thousand miles / second.
Go carts on mars, all interesting experiments.
If any one ever introduces themselves or not is a matter of wait and see. We are here so i don't see why there would not be other intelligent life-forms somewhere

Well perhaps there is alien life after all Poirot. We see everything so differently, it is hard to believe we are from the same species, or from the same planet.

You say everything on earth has developed in harmony. This is a greenie dream of course, but totally wrong.

Every where I have been, from tropical reef to cold snowy bush, it is more like war. The adage of survival of the fittest is just so true.

I like wild gardens, & approximately 20% of mine has grown from bird dropped seed, which makes it ever changing, depending on what rain forrest or woodland species are flouring this year. Lesser plantings just disappear, never to be seen again.

It is however a constant battle to keep down some species, with mulberries being the worst. They will crowd out everything if allowed. Cobblers pegs are another, which suddenly appeared, & would eliminate everything else if not controlled.

My hundreds of meters of untouched river bank display this constant & vicious battle. A species can dominate it for a year or so, only to be totally eliminated by something else in just a year or two. Harmony is the last word I would use to describe nature.

If we do find another species out there, I agree it could take any form. Harmony is about the last thing I would expect in any long term interaction.

Hasbeen,

"Harmony" was perhaps the wrong choice of description.

What I meant was that life on earth has evolved according to the properties of earth.

Do you really consider that I don't glean the battle royal that's constantly raging in nature for survival?

Worldwatcher>> The Fermi paradox is certainly intriguing. Could it be that there is a way of communicating which we are yet to discover?<<

WW,I don't know about intriguing, but it is the Fermi Paradox.

I understand what you are saying about other life forms evolving other types of genetic or technological societies...but if they are composed of matter what they do and what they produce must conform to the universal laws of physics. Physics can be manipulated and it is that manipulation that we are looking for. Now if we were looking for a creator we would want physics defying stuff as opposed to the manipulation of physics. But in saying all of that we don’t know, or are even close to knowing.

Worldwatcher>> I understand that when the square kilometre telescope is completed we will have much more raw data. Will you be part of Peerless too?<<

If that’s part of the SKA project, I don’t know a lot about it.

Atheists Foundation of Australia Inc >> Really, which 'Dave' is that? Could you supply a quote supporting that assertion.<<

You really have a bug bear about “Dave”, is it too familiar for an atheist of your standing?

Anyway to answer your question……no I cannot supply a quote to qualify that assertion…...I made it up in a mad moment of putting two and two together.

But it is not my fault Dave, primarily because I asked you to qualify your position on your “believers can kiss my atheism “ Xmas thread, but you chose to argue with supposed stalkers, not just one, but you managed to find two.

Not my fault that I don’t know what you think….but your incorporated Atheists of Australia by definition plainly takes a stand against a creator.

If I am wrong and you think there might be a creator, …forgive me sport. Could it be the new Incorporated Agnostics of Australia? If so I might join Dave.

Just to clarify…the reason you challenged me is because I asserted that you believe there is no creator, so could you tell me what days of the week you will believe in a creator….and on which days you are an atheist?

Mhaze>> But intelligent life....not a chance. I sometimes even wonder if there is intelligent life in the inner solar system.<<

Mh, as I have attempted to explain to Atheist Dave, you can't be absolute right now. There well may be life in the universe, or there might not.

Your second statement is spot on though.

Sonofgloin,

"no I cannot supply a quote to qualify that assertion"

Gee! What a surprise.

David

Cmon David, just tell me if you believe that there may be a creator? You can do it champ.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZXeuojL_FQ Here you will see Bob Jacobs who is retired US Airforce show video supposedly of a UFO disabling one of their missiles.There have been many reports of this happening both in the USA and Russia.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ouhP6jy4GFA Again this is not proof but we have many ex- Military swearing that it has happened.

There is no absolute proof but a lot of anticdotal evidence as above.Does other intelligent life exist in our Galaxy? The mathematical probability says yes and we probably are not that special.

Sonofgloin,

If you showed any inclination to read and comprehend I would explain it all again. But you haven't, you don't so I won't. Please check back on the Christmyth thread and read slowly. All will be revealed many times over.

David

AFoLI>> All will be revealed many times over <<

But obviously not from David. Just a yes or no answer Dave, do you believe it is possible that there is a creator?

sonofgloin: "Mh, as I have attempted to explain to Atheist Dave, you can't be absolute right now. There well may be life in the universe, or there might not."

Errr, yes but my point was only as concerns this solar system as is the question in the original post. I think we can be absolutely certain there is no intelligent life on these 9 (or so) planets other than that which exists on number 3.

As to the universe...who knows. We stand a chance of answering that question as regards our particular galaxy in the next millennium or three. But the distances to other galaxies are so monumental that finding or talking to anything that might be there seems spectacularly unlikely.

As to our galaxy, I'd guess there isn't anything out there either. There might have been in the past but if a civilisation existed now that was even 2 or 3000 yrs ahead of us (a mere blink in time) they'd have long since made contact or sent their robot fact-finders.
Check out the theories behind the Great Filter .... http://hanson.gmu.edu/greatfilter.html

Sonofgloin,

I believe it is possible that a very long line of invisible turtles resting on a giant elephant is holding the earth in place. I believe it is possible that fairies are really at the bottom of the garden, Bigfoot exists as do leprechauns. I believe it is possible that your comprehension will improve over time. Are you agnostic regarding these examples?

There are arguments against holding such beliefs which lower the possibility of them being true to being highly improbable. Personal gods or creator gods are in this category.

Anything is possible, but what is probable is another matter. It would be unwise to base ones life on what is highly improbable.

Language is a valuable tool, try to not abuse it.

It would be a good idea to continue this discussion in the Christmyth thread and let opinions about extraterrestrials continue here uninterrupted.

David

AFoAI>> I believe it is possible that a very long line of invisible turtles resting on a giant elephant is holding the earth in place. I believe it is possible that fairies are really at the bottom of the garden, Bigfoot exists as do leprechauns. I believe it is possible that your comprehension will improve over time. Are you agnostic regarding these examples?.<<

David, I am simply asking for a single statement of belief. I

t should be "there is no god, I am an atheist". Instead you refer to the Brothers Grimm. So whether I post on this thread, or on your thread, I won't get an answer will I?.....haven't so far and my last few posts can't be more specific, Dave do you have another atheist on the team that I could talk to sport?

>>Can there be logical explanations?<<

Here's your logical explanation right here:

http://stuffucanuse.com/fake_moon_landings/moon_landings.htm

>>Not my fault that I don’t know what you think….but your incorporated Atheists of Australia by definition plainly takes a stand against a creator.

If I am wrong and you think there might be a creator, …forgive me sport. Could it be the new Incorporated Agnostics of Australia? If so I might join Dave.

Just to clarify…the reason you challenged me is because I asserted that you believe there is no creator<<

No Gimli: the reason Dave challenged you is because you asserted that he was absolutely assured there is no creator:

>>on the atheist thread Dave was banging on with absolute assurance there is no creator<<

Dave probably takes issue with your conflation of belief and certain knowledge - and the logical implication that atheism is a gnostic position.

http://reason-being.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/chart.png

Gnostic comes from Ancient Greek - it means 'pertaining to knowledge'. I think it is possible to know some things with absolute certainty like 2 + 2 = 4. I am gnostic on the subject of arithmetic: I think you can have certain knowledge about the solution to an arithmetic problem. When it comes to religion things get a bit fuzzier: I believe in a god (of sorts) but I admit that I cannot have certain knowledge about god's existence - merely faith. I am agnostic on the subject of religion.

Theism is also from the Greek and refers to a belief in god. Atheism is simply a lack of belief in God. Whether or not people are certain about their beliefs is a whole different question. I believe in God so I'm theistic but my belief is dependent on faith so I'm agnostic - I'm an agnostic theist. Dave doesn't believe in God but his disbelief is equally dependent on faith - if he had a conclusive disproof of God he'd have published it and we'd have heard about it - so Dave is also agnostic. He is an agnostic atheist.

I have never met a gnostic atheist although I'm sure they're out there. Gnostic theists are more common - people who claim that it is possible to have certain knowledge of God's existence. Yuyutsu - one of the more interesting characters around here with an interest in theology - seems to hold a gnostic position. So does our runner but I recommend you avoid feeding the troll. But mostly I meet agnostics of either persuasion: people who don't sit on the fence and often have strongly-held beliefs - but admit that they can't be absolutely certain.

Cheers,

Tony

Sonofgloin,

"Dave (David) do you have another atheist on the team that I could talk to sport?"

Sure, lots of them, but none that could breech your self-imposed impenetrable mental barrier to logic any better than I can.

Of course, protesting too much as you do, is a very good indication I have already achieved that.

David

Worldwatcher, I was not aware the Buzz Aldrin “observed strange objects on the moon as well as unidentifiable craft, and has gone on record to describe them”.

I have met Buzz Aldrin and have had the marvelous opportunity to discuss his adventures. I’ve never heard or seen such written accounts; can you provide some support for these comments?

What I have been exposed to is reports of the “optical flashes” some space travelers have experienced which we now know to be “neutrino strikes” on the optical nerve.

I’m not sure about your request for “logical explanations” but would suggest that physics can address most issues.

So why don’t you post some specific questions that OLO’ers may be able to address rather than some speculative stuff that remains unsubstantiated?

Tony Lavis>> I admit that I cannot have certain knowledge about god's existence - merely faith. I am agnostic on the subject of religion<<

Tony, being agnostic is basically denying that something is knowable. At present, right now, how can any thinking multi cell animal deny the existance of a creator....or extraterestial life for that matter.

Dave wants to play semantics with language. If you are agnostic....you deny a creator, but he does not want to say that for some reason, anyway it gives me something to do while I wait for my plane.

>>If you are agnostic....you deny a creator, but he does not want to say that for some reason<<

He does not want to say that because it's wrong: if you are agnostic you admit the possibility of a creator even if you don't believe in him. Have you paid attention to anything I just wrote?

Cheers,

Tony

Tony Lavis,

None of this is important but this is not correct. "if he had a conclusive disproof of God he'd have published it and we'd have heard about it - so Dave (David) is also agnostic. He is an agnostic atheist."

Atheists do not claim to have conclusive proof that a god does not exist. They don't even look for such proof. The burden of proof is on the proposer of the existence of gods to deliver the evidence.

I'm philosophically agnostic on not just gods, but nearly everything. I live my live, the same as you and everyone else on the planet who can think, drawing conclusions from the highest probability of a statement being true, false or indeterminate. And to halt the accusation that a gods existence is indeterminate, is only a philosophical stance, not one based in practicality.

The agnostic argument is a red-herring thrown around by the faithful to make themselves feel better. It is also used by those unwilling to admit agnosticism about near everything and those frightened they may be making the wrong decision is they commit to atheism. It is also used by people who do not understand that mixing philosophy with reality does not necessarily enlighten.

Atheists consider all these positions pointless, meaningless and an interference in understanding that the bad parts of religion need addressing and curing.

If I said, which is true, all religious people are agnostic in regard to their beliefs, would that help anything. Answer..no and the same answer is for atheism.

I find arguments based around whether or not one is an agnostic, well...errr, stupid. Most atheists think the same.

David

Things have taken a fascinating turn and I find Tony's position eminently reasonable, whereas David's is anchored in the faith known as realism. David keeps on talking about himself precisely as if he had an enduring soul that was able to think objectively apropos reality, as if he was more than a construct of his time and place within a discrete culture. He talks about "the world", but what world is this? The world for David is not the "real" the way it is for, say, a whale, or krill; the world of sensation is a completely artificial construct built over the real and his logic derives from that. All his "thinking", utterly derivative, in which he places his faith, partakes of the reality he was born into.
What is it that thinks? What is the self that's more than a construct? That can occupy a critical stance apropos that which it is immersed in? Nay, evolved and inalienable from? How is it that David commands this critical-distance between "himself" and the phenomenal world of which he's (a)part?
It's not merely out of conceit that Gods are evoked to make sense of the human sense of the world. The analytic philosophical tradition, of which David is (nominally, and probably unwittingly) a part, has long since taken its omniscient logic for granted. Whereas Tony, quite rightly, applies his agnosticism across the intellectual spectrum.
The only retreat for David, and the New Atheists, is pragmatism. But in that case he must reflect on his politics, and on the good life about which he is (apparently) uncritically pragmatic. Agnostics humbly acknowledge all this; New Atheists elide it.
David is merely my rhetorical figure and "realistically" this applies to all of us.

Squeers,

Allow me to put it in a way that all might understand. I have conceded that internal observation of sensory input and drawing conclusions from it is the way I see how the physical world appears to operate. It may not behave in that manner but all other ways are guesses with their basis in a multitude of concepts drawn from the human central processing unit; that is the brain/mind unit.

There appears to be no mind without brain and this function results most probably from interchange with the assumed outside world through the senses. This also may be an illusion but it is the most consistent and best predictable illusion we have
.
I don’t find it useful to sail to close to solipsistic notions when my illusion is screaming at me that some disregard this at the cost of the happiness of other life forms that fit a consistent description that they are aware of their surroundings in common with my own thoughts.

It’s not worth arguing this point and I don’t intend to even discuss it further.

David

Spindoc,

As a newbie I don't know how to post links yet, but if you google this - Buzz Aldrin's dialogue with Nasa, you can find out more about this.

He was also on t.v. a while back discussing what he and Armstrong observed, and would think the interview was pretty recent, as he had white hair, and looked to be in his 70's.The programme was aired on the Discovery Science channel on foxtel.
The details hadn't been made public until Nasa released transcripts when the freedom of information act authorised it. Until then he and other astronauts who were interviewed in the same programme I watched stated that they were forbidden to go public about their various sightings.

I plan on trying to find a copy of the dialogue between Apollo and Nasa on that first flight as soon as I have some spare time, and will pass on to you where to find it.

I consider myself to be a fairly rational person. I don't think religion or personal belief in any god have a place in this discussion. On the subject of UFOs, however, I would like to state that I have in fact seen one - that is, I (and my young son) have seen a flying object that, to this day, I have not been able to identify.

While driving home in an inner city suburb, we witnessed a triangular pattern of red lights (shaped much like an iron plate). We differ on the number of lights. I saw five, he says there were six. No flashing and no 'headlight'. The lights moved in unison, so we can safely assume they were one object. What grabbed our attention was the way the lights moved, their speed and the fact there was no perceivable engine noise.

I deliberately turned the car down several streets, changing direction, thinking that perhaps the lights were a reflection of some kind, but it made no difference. Then, just as we neared home, the object sped off and was gone in seconds. I have never seen anything move so fast.

Naturally, I scanned the news for the next few days, wondering if any other 'crazies' had seen what we saw, but there were no reports of anything unusual.

I am not saying we saw an alien spacecraft - whatever that may be. However we did see an object that was completely un identifiable, behaved in ways that were not usual or explainable and it flew. Ergo, we saw a UFO.

I am not a conspiracy theorist, though I have a healthy respect for the energy and passion of those who are. But to this day, whenever the subject of UFOs comes up, my son and I smile at each other. We know what we saw. We just can't explain it.

It boggles belief that mankind assumes we are the only 'intelligent' life in the universe. This same arrogance is responsible for so many of the ills we are inflicting upon ourselves and our own planet.

The saying goes there's nothing new under the Sun. The mind boggles when considering that there are many Suns out there. The question as to other intelligence being out there is a no brainer.
We were just unlucky here on Earth that the Aliens who came here around 1972 infiltrated the ALP. Obviously they were simply other life rather than intelligence.

Scribbler,

Often the description given by pilots and astronauuts have described the lights as being red, rather than white as many people claim.

I don't mind being laughed at so will share my story, with the proviso added that we were a very young married couple.

One night we were woken by a strange noise unlike any we had heard before, and through the curtains saw flashing lights which moved along our street. Summoning up our courage, after it had moved further away, with hearts racing, we dared to go see, and truly expected to see aliens, as reported sightings were quite common at the time.

It was a street sweeping machine working at night. You're allowed to laugh, and so did we, but with relief. Took a long time to fess up to anyone else about that incident in our lives.

worldwatcher,

Don't be so quick to dismiss the possibility that aliens might possess spacecraft that exactly resemble street sweepers....!!

: )

Worldwatcher I have also had a "could it be aliens" experience.

I was single handed out in the middle of the Solomon Sea. It was a perfect night, crystal clear, with a very light breeze. The sea was like a mill pond, with barely a ripple, just the sort of night you dream of when thinking of going cruising in a yacht, but almost never see. It was magic with the yacht gliding silently through the smooth dark sea.

Still it is hot up there, so I was sitting in the cockpit, about 8.30Pm, having a coffee, & thinking what a wonderful world, when the eastern sky started to brighten. Yes, so what, I've seen plenty of moon rises. But this was different.

Soon the entire sea to the east was lit up, & I could have read by the light. It was too much to be just the moon. I thought cruise ship, just below the horizon, but no, they don't get up to that area, although they should, it's so beautiful.

It got even brighter, & I actually thought aliens/space ship. The hair on the back of my neck was standing on end, when the first little arc of the moon emerged from the sea. I let out a long breath, & only then realised I had been holding it.

I laughed at myself for thinking spaceship, but it was a nervous laugh. It was quite an experience, but too frightening to be fun. I have seen lots more moon rises at sea & ashore, but never anything like that one.

Thanks for the response, David. Right out of the Dan Dennett handbook.
The problem is that from the scientific understanding, so far, the brain can't account for the mind. Indeed there are numerous colleagues of Dennett's who are now willing to seriously consider some form of dualism, and argue that Dennett et al cleave to a materialistic position that is not merely reductive, but has no empirical substance; indeed that their obstinacy amounts to a kind of religious fanaticism.
The truth is that the so-called hard problem of consciousness remains a complete mystery that science is nowhere near solving, or even appreciating. To go on insisting that there can only be a physicalist account of consciousness, causal closure, when even an adequate theory remains to be posited, looks like foolishness to me (I note the Science Show is doing a segment on issue of qualia next week).
Moreover, given the dubious nature of sensual register and perception, and that its findings are couched in irredeemably equivocal language, agnosticism does seem to me the way to go. Having said that, my agnosticism has little tolerance for the concept of god, or gods, especially as they are invoked by our crazy religions and scriptures. I can imagine other more rational possibilities, however, and don't consider I'm in a position to discount anything--though I do practically discount any of the gods conjured up so far.
I agree, though, that we needn't trouble ourselves about the question of god in any scientistic sense; and it's otherwise merely a crutch, a convention, or a pragmatic construct. I'd rather focus on the hear and now, and that's why I think its vital that any worldview be subject to scrutiny as to its ethical/political derivation and extrapolation.
I agree that realism is "the most consistent and best predictable illusion we have", but it's a mistake to underestimate the various influences, personal and cultural, which compromise and distort it.

But I'm off topic and rather busy; perhaps we can discuss it another time.

I've had experiences such as those mentioned which brought at least a question mark of what is it to mind even one where a light-white doorway curtain blowing gently in the breeze convinced me it was a ghost which certainly took my breath away. It had the appearance of rushing at me. (Very young at the time) That one taught me a valuable lesson that the mind can be tricked very easily.

But one I have not been able to explain and I think of it every time a subject like this arises happened when I was in my teen’s way out in the remote outback.

It was a warm night, no wind and crystal clear sky with no lights anywhere within visibility and I was lying on my back looking at the cosmos on a clay-pan (small flat-area with no topsoil). This wasn't a dramatic occurrence, just interesting and unexplained.

An average star sized object suddenly moved slowly for a distance of about 5 degrees in one direction. It then stopped and stayed in that position for maybe a few minutes (fine detail has been lost through time) and eventually moved off, from memory, at right angles to the previous direction. No other stars moved abnormally at all at the time of the ‘encounter’.

My eyesight then gave perfect vision without glasses. It has gone downhill since then.

Satellites don’t behave like this and I know of no other phenomenon that does. It could have been a localised inversion layer in the atmosphere distorting the air but beside that, no other explanation has ever been forthcoming. I don’t know if inversion layers can act in such a localised manner where close-by other stars are not involved. Maybe someone here can help.

I did have at the time half-serious thoughts that it could have been some kind of extra-terrestrial craft even though I knew the physics involved would make that highly unlikely.

The sighting certainly made me aware that we are susceptible to making instant and long-term assumptions without supporting evidence. It was a good lesson in that regard.

David

David,

Some indigenous children from the outback told me they often see these, and call them mim-mim lights, and said if one tries to move closer toward them, they keep moving away. The kids were explaining their lives in a remote area, and weren't scared of the lights - it was just one more facet of their lives.
They were very scared of Featherfoot, but that's another story.

Here's another 'could be aliens' experience, and also a real encounter with an 'unexplained phenomenon'.

About 25 years ago I was driving alone, at night, on a rough dirt track between Balranald and Mungo National Park. When I noticed a single light bobbing along, first on one side, then the other, I didn't think 'aliens', but 'min min light'. I started to freak out but was too scared to stop and check it out. Then the motor-bike overtook me.

The real encounter was with the 'Cape Barren Guns' on Flinders Island, Bass Strait. On a clear day, the sound was like distant cannon fire - a naval battle just beyond the western horizon. One resounding salvo was followed by another, and they appeared to be from slightly different directions (as in opposing fleets) though that may have been a psychological assumption. Bright sunny day, but following a few days of stormy weather. How did I know what a naval battle sounded like - war films of course! I can't remember how long it went on for - a least an hour or more; we stopped paying attention after a while.

There is an 1880's written account of the 'Cape Barren Guns', and in fact it's an example of a long-known world wide phenomenon, occurring near shallow seas (eg near the mouth of the Ganges where it's known as the Barisal Guns). The cause is still debated.

In the 1970s a physicist named William Corliss produced a sourcebook of historical records of unusual natural phenomena 'Strange Phenomena', and various similar books (now findable on-line). There are quite a lot of records of various sorts of unexplained phenomena from Australia

worldwatcher,

Yes, I am and was very aware of Min Min lights. They tend to be in the distance at or near ground level. I was looking straight up.

I personally think Min Min lights have their explanation in some kind of fluorescent gas, maybe ball lighting but mainly by distant camp fires. The light of a camp-fire looks incredibly bright from a very long way away on a dark night without the moon or artificial lights interfering with the blackness.

Looking at the after effects of a big crop fire at night could easily be mistaken for a city in the distance. Not surprised at all that some folk who are not used to the experience of being in isolated areas at night could make all kinds of claims that a more experienced person might not.

I have spent considerable time in remote and semi-remote areas and have never encountered a light of which the source was not known. It’s not a boast but I'm very observant as a part of my make-up.

The best experience of an Explained Flying Object I've had was watching the space shuttle on a path behind the Space Station getting ready to dock. They were separated by about 15 degrees and far brighter than any satellite I have seen. I think from memory this was the Space Shuttle that disintegrated on re-entering the atmosphere on the way back to earth. There are lots of sad things happening all the time but that was definitely a sad occasion.

David

Tony Lavis>> Have you paid attention to anything I just wrote?<<

Yes, but I disagree.

Re UFO's in our atmosphere, with hundreds of thousands of sightings and the proliferation of image capturing devices, we do not have one image that is regarded by the astronomical or scientific community as valid.

Re all the landings and abductions, crop circles, cow autopsies and other claimed UFO interaction, not one iota of evidence left behind.

But so many credible individuals have a single UFO event to recount, but not a molecule of physical proof.

quite ironic that so many leave the possibility of aliens open while denying flatly the existence of demons. Plenty of mass murderers, child molestors etc that point to more than just adamic nature. I suppose the admission of demons requires soul searching and action while believing in ufos allows you to still live in denial and fantasy.

David,
I stand corrected. It is Min Min lights. Which raises an interesting thought. Did the children pronounce the term incorrectly, or did my ears translate it differently?

Have you read my post regarding how this can lead to complete misunderstanding and confusion? In this instance it was amusing that my partner heard huevos [eggs] as Jueves [Thursday]. But it can also be dangerous where one person is insulted by another who thinks they are pronouncing a word correctly, and in so doing offer a perceived insult.

If it could remain without any corruption,one world language would appear to be the ideal.

Sure,

Nearly 20 000 illegal aliens this year.

For the other type, just ask Bob Brown (the alien whisperer).

>>Yes, but I disagree.<<

On which point?

* That gnostic means 'able to have certain knowledge' and agnostic means 'not able to have certain knowledge'.

* Or that theist means 'believing in god' and atheist means 'not believing in god'.

Cheers,

Tony

Aliens, gods, fairies, devils, demons, leprechauns....

There is no evidence at all for any of these invisible beings on Earth, but we don't know who or what exists on other planets in our solar system.

Until we have absolute proof, it is all just fiction.

Spindoc,

I picked up this doco presented by Dr. Steven Greer, entitled UFO Disclosure Project.

On YouTube I also found a couple of clips by the man you were lucky enough to have met - Buzz Aldrin.

There is so much about this subject - arguments both for and against, that it left me wondering just who and what one can discern as being the truth.

Four hours later, and I'm none the wiser, but it was all food for thought, and I still find the the subject matter fascinating. Enough that when time allows, I'll keep sifting through the reams of material posted on the 'net.

One thing I do believe though, is that governments tend to keep truth from the people, and have to wonder why they think it necessary. This naturally leads to suspicion and assertions by many that there is a cover-up. Well that is nothing new. If governments mislead us over matters directly affecting us in our daily lives [i.e. the economy for one] they are capable of misleading us on anything.

Dear worldwatcher,

In ancient times the only people that existed
in written history were the inhabitants around
the Meditteranean. With expansionism - new peoples
were conquered. With advancement of technology
exploration expanded even further, finding new
inhabited continents with different cultures and
people of different appearance.

So if different civilisations can exist on our planet
why can't there be other planets with other civilisations?
And if our explorations now expand into space who's to
say that we won't find other more advanced civilisations
on other planets with the capability to travel through space.

Who is to say that our phenomenal development of technology
in the past few decades is not the result of aliens
educating select people on our planet to develop this
technology in an attempt that in the near future they may
reveal themselves to us.

Science fiction whether written or on film is already
preparing us for a probable future, and as past history has
proven, science-fiction of yesteryear is reality today.

Lexi I think you will find most of us believe there can be other intelligent life, & probably is, somewhere in the universe. Weather any of it is close enough to us, for us to ever make contact is another question.

Compared to what we had when I was a boy, [I remember listening to test broadcasts from the UK, which came & went continually] our modern communications are pretty good. Shouldn't we have been able to detect something with this technology?

Of course our best may be not much better than smoke signals compared to what we will develop in years to come, so perhaps we are asking too much now.

Perhaps it will only be our kids kids that will learn an answer.

Lexi my dear,

I agree with you, why dismiss the theory as one held by crackpots without proof which can explain otherwise. This holds true for those who stand on both sides of the argument.

Sure, some of the sightings have had rational explanations put forward, but isn't it unwise to hold that all sightings can therefore have them?

To confidently assume that we are alone when we are only at the beginning of space exploration demonstrates to me arrogance or possibly the inability to expand their thinking by those who make this assertion.

If we are simply evolved from prehistoric beginnings, how is it that some of the older civilisations displayed remarkable building techniques - some of which cannot be replicated today even with our more sophisticated knowledge, tools and machinery?

Hasbeen could be right - think it won't be proved in our lifetime, but our kids kids could well look back and wonder how we couldn't see it? Oh how I wish we could make a breakthrough before I die!

worldwatcher,

Yes it was a highlight of my career to meet Aldrin and others. I worked for a technology supplier to NASA from mid 60’s to 75 and had “guest technology supplier” status for a number of launches, including Apollo 11, 12, 13 and some Gemini shots.

There were many unresolved reports of astronauts experiencing “flashes”, white clouds”, “round white objects”, “streaks” and “blue diamonds”, particularly during early Apollo missions when the causes we not known.

Later missions didn’t mention them because the causes were subsequently identified as SA particles, possibly neutrinos, striking the optic nerve. This is why there were so many different and sometimes large visual manifestations.

Like so many CT’s there is a gradual build up of people filling in blanks, embellishing data, re-explaining a known truth and in this case, mixing up the myths with the movies, Buzz Aldrin himself appeared in one of the Transformer movies.

What you end up with is a mix of fact and fiction. If you read the transcripts of “alleged” alien confirmation by astronaut conversations, the real stuff is liberally mixed up with those same movie scripts. There is nothing mysterious about lost communications in those times, half the mission was in radio silence due to lunar orbits.

Don’t forget that many ex-NASA specialists published books, so the commercial factors also play a $$$$ part.

All things considered, I knew no one at that time that who ever noted anything out of order, alien discoveries or spaceships. Don’t forget that this secrecy business is rubbish; half the bloody planet was monitoring these missions, especially the Ruskis, hence so much coded traffic. I just don’t buy it.

That said, I’m sure there must be other life forms out there. The problem remains that by the time we get to them, or they get to us, we will both be extinct. It’s still over 150,000 light years across just our own galaxy.

Spindoc,

How lucky you were to be involved at that time. Whether all the reports of sighting have a rational explanation or not, you'd have to admit it was an exciting time for us earthlings.

I visited Kennedy Space Centre at Cape Canaveral as a tourist, and was amazed at how something so small had flown beyond our earth's sphere and returned safely. I took quite a few photos, and looking once more at them reminds me of what a marvellous achievement that was.

Now I'm waiting for someone to discover a worm hole to bridge that 150 light year gap :).
p.s. had to put :) in 'cos I've just learned it means a smile.

worldwatcher,

I share your enthusiasm and interest in all things related to our universe but our galaxy is 150,000 light years across not 150 light years, it is also 15,000 light years deep. More awesome still is the distance to our next nearest galaxy Andromeda, a mere 2.2m light years away.

If you are interested in the physics behind it you can visit some of the many CERN information sites.

I’m not sure about worm holes but you might keep an eye on string theory, M theory and supersymetry as potential breakthrough areas. Sadly none of these solve the limit of light speed, at least in the short term.

Remember that it took our physicists some 63 years to prove the existence of the Higgs particle even though the math’s pointed to its discovery.

But hey! Watch this space

Spindoc,

Seems I misread your figures. Even so the mind boggles at the distances you describe.

I've heard Michio Kaku describe string theory. As very much a layman, I at times find it difficult to follow the physics, but Dr. Kaku has the knack of putting his theories into terms which are more easily understood by people like myself.

Thanks for the heads up - I will check out the CERN sites too.

I remember there was great excitement in scientific circles when the Higgs particle was detected last year. I'd been following reports on the Hadron collider experiments with some trepidation, as nobody seemed quite sure what the results would be. Even eminent scientists were disagreeing over what the possible consequences could be weren't they?
Now I'll be checking out supersymmetry too.

It is at times like this that I wish I had taken my education further when I had the opportunity to do so. I was just too darn anxious to get out into the world and earn money. I find it's very difficult to play catchup now

Spindoc,

Would also like to hear any thoughts you have about HAARP.

worldwatcher,

Not sure if you mean the civilian/military HAARP project itself or the conspiracy theories surrounding it? It seems that as soon as the word “military” is seen in collaborative research the blogosphere goes bananas.

This is all about radio frequency research (light photon particles) and their interaction with the ionosphere. The conspiracy theorists demonstrate that they don’t have a clue about chemistry let alone physics, nor do they understand about the modern military, they are again just trying to fill a gap in their own ignorance.

If it makes you feel any better. The CERN LHC cost ten billion dollars, involving 128 nations, it is 27 kms long, the collectors alone weigh in at 2,500 tonnes each, the liquid helium coolant for the superconductor magnets would fill many Olympic swimming pools and it requires a stand alone power station to run it.

It does daily ten hour collider runs, accelerating dual loops of protons/hadrons (heavy particles) to 99.99999 % of light speed requiring 14 Tera e/V (electron volts). Every nanosecond several million protons are collided in bursts and in a year this would be just enough to fill a pin head.

And these conspiracy nuts think they have a handle on potential military use of ionasphereic radio frequency to find and bombard enemy submarines in WATER?

Satellite location of any ship/sub has been in place since the 1950’s. They can locate any vessel by its impact on the earth’s magnetic field and by its hull/propeller acoustic fingerprint.

Hope this helps.

Thanks Spindoc,

Seems little is known about the research at HAARP, and I found they themselves are not very forthcoming with information. I guess it's only natural that some members of the public immediately jump to conspiracy theories.
Have to say there's a lot of money being spent on weather research up there, and the fact that it is a civilian/military installation could lead one to believe it may not be the only thing being researched?
Like most all things, eventually we may learn the truth.
Until then I have an open mind.