Aliens haven't visited. Why are so many smart people insisting otherwise?
nymag.com
nymag.com
Whether it's hiding Aliens or (more realistically) some really nasty secrets from the Cold War Era, You got the army independently operating a structure on home soil, syphoning public money without having to answer to no one.
Taking the words of Government officials who have the blessing of the military to "whistleblow" is just not good enough.
We currently have no evidence otherwise, and our best hopes (in my lifetime atleast) are finding ocean dwelling creatures on moons in the solar system that have no technology capable of reaching Earth.
It's just outrageous to think we are a unique possibility in the entire universe given how many stars and galaxies we have discovered.
Firstly, the universe's infinity is not a settled matter; current cosmology suggests it's vast but finite, but of course, there's no absolute answer to this (yet). I'd also look to the Drake Equation when considering this point, which illustrates the myriad factors and sheer number of uncertainties involved in the development of "advanced civilisations".
So, yeah: while advanced civilisations are certainly possible, they may not be as probable as you suggest, even in a universe brimming with stars and planets.
It's important to underscore just how big the universe is
There may be some more life out there. But even with lightspeed engines they are so far away as to not really exist in a meaningful sense.
With our limited technology w/r/t space, they are functionally non-existent
And yet once again were here, already taking the unfounded conspiracy more seriously than it deserves to be.
And in fact, I see the causes being the same. People are losing control. Losing the excitement of the capitalist consumer treadmill. Searching for answers and clarity. What would solve all of my problems that the single largest shift in human history! Jesus's return! I mean aliens!
Luckily, no skeptic of the UFO narrative has just the government's word as evidence to the contrary.
What's weird is that the same people claiming you shouldn't trust the government when it denies the UFO narrative are using the government and its integrity to argue that Grusch et. al must be telling the truth, that Grusch is a man of unquestioned integrity and honor and no one would just go in front of Congress and tell lies. The same government which has apparently been orchestrating a sprawling conspiracy of lies and psy-ops around UFOs for almost a hundred years, but for some weird reason respects the bureaucracy enough that they'll just let Grusch blow the lid off of the whole affair.
Even though that hasn't really happened yet. I'm sure it'll happen any day now.
You can't have it both ways.
However I do not accept Aliens that have visited us or hiding. To keep something like this under wraps to this very day is extremely unlikely!
This is coming from someone who has seen a 'UFO' but it does not mean its Alien from another planet. The LIKELY example is advanced and/or hidden tech. I can only assume.
Aliens, as portrayed with big eyes in their hovercrafts, etc... go in the same category as loch ness monster, bigfoot, fairies, god, and the darn flying spaghetti monster!
The sci-fi element was that if they visited before even the dinosaurs, and mined some special material that, as an example, was some rare material that allowed for faster than light travel, we would never know. The other aliens that have the technology would never even bother to visit a planet incapable of interaction with the wider universe.
Nice 'science fiction'
Personally this does not change my thought process. Hollywood might be interested in knowing more of this fiction. Who knows maybe, like many of their recent films, they will dump something out in 2026 with bad CGI.
Both are kind of lazy conplainy takes about the entire genre.
Visits from actual beings (that overwise stay incognito), travelling tens or even thousands of light years, hyperadvanced sci-fi technologies like FTL and invisibility (suggested above) and so on, not so much.
If we're going for "with magic, anything's possible" (but just substitute magic with "technology") then sure...
In the last century lots of things that were considered science fiction has become normal parts of our lives. And not that long ago "aliens don't exist" was the default and only crazies believed in them. Now it's mainstream that there is a high probability at least somewhere in the universe, the only argument needed is that we exist, so of course it could happen again or before. We're not as special as we like to think. We've had hearings regarding UFOs (yes, yes, I know it doesn't imply aliens) in the congress.
But if you want to reduce it to magic go ahead. And the part you quoted was regarding them choosing not to communicate with us, if that wasn't clear.
All of those things are within the laws of physics.
>And not that long ago "aliens don't exist" was the default and only crazies believed in them.
The latter is still the case now.
And infrared doesn't? That said it wasn't always in the laws of physics, and they may still be wrong, they have changed in the last century.
> The latter is still the case now.
I'm not sure most people would agree with you, more likely to answer "I don't know, maybe". I find it very strange when people are so certain about uncertain topics, difficult to relate.
Still, you can find explanations fitting the observations. Like the ant analogy, a scientist is not going to try to communicate with ants. They want to observe without disturbing the ants too much, even if the scientist doesn't take too much precautions to make themselves completely invisible.
See people trying to communicate with dolphins, monkeys, chimps, octopuses, cats, dogs, crows, ...
It's not given that other life forms would be interested in us, they might've learned what they needed a long time ago. And now we're just part of their environment. Or they realize we're too stupid and would just try to kill them so they don't.
Ants do communicate, a lot in fact (chemically). How else would they coordinate the colony?
Yet I don't remember hearing about scientists trying to communicate with them, announce our presence, or exchange ideas.
I'm not trying to say there are beings living among us on a spectrum we don't know about, but it's an interesting thought and anyone dismissing it with certainty are closed-minded.
In my experience those people are rarely interesting and can only discuss very shallow topics from perspectives they've been told by others. What's the weather like? Who's fucking who? How's the super bowl going? Especially when they're antagonistic in their rhetoric. Thinking outside the box and pondering the what ifs in life is the only reason we got out of the caves.
The problem with theories that cannot be tested is, that once you accept them arbitrary things follow from them. That teopot could influence the thoughts of our politicians for example.
While I have nothing against a little bit of fantasy, it is always important to keep the understanding that those are in fact stories and that they appeal to certain people precisely because they are literally detached from this harsh reality. Don't get me wrong, you can also be fascinated with the possibility of there being aliens without having to believe in them being already here.
But my point was that in this case we can say: yeah, there is some unaccounted mass (observation) let's form explainations about what it could be (theory). There are only so many things with mass we know in our solar system, so it being a other planet is a reasonable assumption. It being a invisible giant unicorn-shaped teapot is not.
If you have a theory without an observation it is called a story. And now someone would bring up eyewitness accounts or declassified airforce videos and call them observations. The point here is that you need to go from observation to theory and not the other way around. If every unidentified flying object is extraterrestrial life you are gonna be wrong a lot of times, just because there is a big likelihood of unidentified flying objects being of terrestrial origin (or them not even be objects in the first place).
That means you got a needle/haystack problem there and front-loading the theory like that isn't gonna help.
Because we do not know what it is we could assume it is anything, it could also be Kurt Cobain, Elvis Presley and Jim Morrison in a pink whirlpool in space.
But just because we can't as of now disprove that theory, doesn't mean it is a good one, unless we judge entertainment value. White spots on the map of knowledge seem to have an attraction on people that feel the need to put the most colorful, most exciting things there.
seems easy to check - just send an HTTP request, and see if you get an HTTP 418 back.
Law > theory > prediction / hypothesis > conjecture > crazy people shit
Entertaining crazy people shit, while entertaining to some people, is little more than word salad bullshit.
Yeah, but we have a pretty good idea, that Hollywood style capabilities and magic like invisibility is not part of reality.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8xJ13pAZNw
Or one of those insects that look like sticks or leaves?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tettigoniidae#/media/File:Katy...
Actually, i'm pretty convinced we do know, with very high probability of being right.
Our knowledge of physics is limited, but seems to be advanced enough (cfr relativity and astronomical distances) to make it likely that if there is someone else, they're just too far way, or else we're too uninteresting to be visited or else if we would be interesing enough, it takes so much technological advances to cross galactical distances, that humanity would be wiped out by the visitors before we even realise what's going on.
Dad told me he believed there were aliens because he said the colonel made it a point to say that he knew this to be true, and I believe it to be true as well, because Dad trusted this guy. It goes without saying we typically believe our parents if they tell us things. None of this had anything to do with facts, and everything to do with trust, which is formed from a person to person exchange. Most of what Dad did for the Air Force remained a secret till his death, and I do know he was absolutely obsessed with airplanes and math. To believe a mistruth about something we care so much about is possible, but unlikely.
So, sometimes knowledge is what we have as stories and we can either choose to believe, or not. That is faith. We don't need facts to back up our faith in personally knowing a thing to be true or not. Besides, if there are aliens, it would probably be better if the general population didn't have hard facts to ensure it became general knowledge, because at that point the speculation faucet is wide open. It's far better to let people believe what they will, without it affecting civilization in a radical way.
Maybe there are aliens and maybe there aren't. As my local AI alien just said to me, "Ultimately, beliefs about extraterrestrial life often come down to personal perspectives and interpretations of available information, as well as the trust placed in sources of information, whether they be firsthand experiences, anecdotal accounts, or scientific findings."
No. It doesn't. I don't believe my mom when she says she saw angels and I don't believe my dad saw creatures that the cameras magically didn't pick up. I need to just stop reading this thread. People believing whatever they want is fine but this ad hoc delusional justification is killing my soul
Or let's go back to ultra modern times. Nuclear warheads are shockingly small. Imagine telling something at the turn of the 20th century that soon a weapon the size of a small table would have a kill radius of multiple miles. I mean you can obviously imagine it, but it seems kind of silly to think about being actually real, until it turns out it is.
So there are two possibilities now. (1) Now we've finally reached that point, that we will only ever reach once, where our knowledge is advanced enough such that there will no longer any major revolutionary discoveries made. Or (2) we're just like every other generation throughout time who assumed that what they knew was, more or less, the peak of what's knowable (or at least not fundamentally wrong) only to have their own ignorance demonstrated with marked clarity in times yet to come.
Beyond the philosophical there are countless technical reasons to also think this is the case. Like you mention astronomy, yet so much of what's going on out there remains a complete mystery. Disharmony between the really big and really small aspects of the universe, whatever 'dark matter' and 'dark energy' truly are, the fact that observed galaxies are moving at rates far different than expected by relativity or Newtonian mechanics (including after factoring in whatever dark matter may be), that a big-bang would require a mysteriously convenient faster-than-light inflationary period to actually work, and countless other issues. So many things are breaking at scale, that it seems highly reasonable to assume that there remain yet many revolutionary and worldview-shifting discoveries to be made.
But we do know what is possible given the universe we can see. There is no magic left; the god of the gaps has been made so small that it can only live down in the quantum foam.
> Nuclear warheads are shockingly small. Imagine telling something at the turn of the 20th century that soon a weapon the size of a small table would have a kill radius of multiple miles.
Einstein published On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies in 1905, so that puts us close enough to the turn of the 20th century to state as a fact that at least a handful of well-read scientists would have no problem imagining what you proposed.
"...It seems probable that most of the grand underlying principles [of physics] have been firmly established and that further advances are to be sought chiefly in the rigorous application of these principles to all the phenomena which come under our notice. It is here that the science of measurement shows its importance — where quantitative work is more to be desired than qualitative work. An eminent physicist remarked that the future truths of physical science are to be looked for in the sixth place of decimals."
Notably Michelson was the first person to experimentally observe a shocking key fundamental of relativity, outside the scope of this post. But he was so convinced that there was "no magic left, etc, etc" that he (and everybody else) actually thought his experimental result was due to a miscalibration or lack of precision in his results. So convinced was he of this, that he casually rejected his own results which would only be explained decades later - coincidentally, partly in the paper you seemingly randomly referenced here!
Knowing the specific structure of the atom is _not_ required for this. The point was to prove that something was not necessarily 'magic' and the example selected was a bad example, because we can actually show that people were on the cusp of figuring it out themselves and would not have a hard time following an ELI5 overview. Are you providing information they do not have at hand? Yes. Will a reasonably well-read person of the era understand your explanation of how such a device would work? Yes.
---
"Imagine telling something at the turn of the 20th century that soon a weapon the size of a small table would have a kill radius of multiple miles. I mean you can obviously imagine it, but it seems kind of silly to think about being actually real, until it turns out it is."
---
So yes, give somebody from an era an absolute ton of information on things they had 0 knowledge of and 0 reason to think existed, and sure - they can begin to understand how a nuclear weapon might actually be viable. And that's the point. And the same will undoubtedly be true for countless other discoveries as we continue to advance our understanding of the universe. Something like e.g. faster than light travel is obviously easy to imagine today, but we still have 0 knowledge of anything* that might enable it, let alone how such things might work, and so it remains strictly in the domain of fantasy. Yet 50 years from now, it might simply be something everybody takes for granted. Because we don't know what we don't know.
* - not strictly true, but you probably think it is - and this is outside the context of this post in either case.
So yeah, some smart people keep insisting because historically, saying stuff like "it can't be done", "it doesn't exist", "there is no more to be discovered, uncovered, disclose" turned out to be wrong.
Then, there's also Space. And they keep finding cave systems and whole cities below forests. It's crazy!
And I have absoluteley no idea what I'm talking about. I've barely seen anything at all, and had practically zero conversations with people.
And have you heard about all the things parents are hiding from their kids?
Skepticism and questioning are a good thing. Keep scanning the skies.
But mostly to sell books and speaking engagements.
Maybe to keep the public riled up -- the same conspiracy nuts who believe Q-Anon are also the same ones who believe UFOs. Dominate the news cycle for a couple weeks and get the rubes to show-up en mass to Area 51 where they can be easily detained or hit with facial recognition.
Move or take more observations, repeat, and be sure it's not you. ;]
Meanwhile there are simple rocks in desert that we cannot transport even today with our modern equipment. Was there previous civilization from Earth who more capable or some visitors, who knows, but we are not the most capable ones yet.
As far as I am aware, modern humanity is by far the most capable civilisation that has ever existed on earth as far as moving rocks is concerned. The only thing beating us right now is glaciers and tectonic activity.
It's worth mentioning that there is often a white supremacist or pro-colonialist dimension to these theories. Rarely does anyone question whether the Greeks built their architecture, for instance, but according to these people it's simply not possible for the Egyptians to have built the pyramids.
There are some granite blocks that weigh over 1000 tons. We’re told that these were transported from hundreds of miles away, across mountain and over a river. Historians are not engineers so they don’t understand what they’re saying.
If we were to move those blocks now we would need to build massive crane around it, that would move on tracks (ones you see in harbors).
In this video they transport 340 ton rock. Pretty massive project and they used satellite data to find route without any uphill..
https://youtu.be/vCW0suiGZKQ?si=NM05HEQtRwDGCaHV
Somehow those ancient blocks were carved and transported thousands of years ago. How it was done and by who is unknown.. I think it’s understandable if someone picks the alien explanation as the most plausible answer. Personally I can entertain any idea but I wouldn’t bet on anything.
> There are some granite blocks that weigh over 1000 tons. We’re told that these were transported from hundreds of miles away, across mountain and over a river. Historians are not engineers so they don’t understand what they’re saying.
I am still unsure which ancient blocks you're referencing though. Stonehenge? Could you link to them, or a picture, or where in the world they are so I can google it?
This is the closest I could find: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/largest-manmade-bl... but this one was not moved because it was too big (and is also limestone which i'm pretty sure is sedimentary)
There is this story about moving 80 ton statue, even this wasn’t a small task for modern people.
https://www.lonelyplanet.com/news/ramses-ii-grand-egyptian-m...
Unfinished Obelisk is 1500 tons but it’s still in the quarry, I wonder how they planned to even lift it up
“It would require approximately 19,753 people to lift a 1000-ton granite boulder, given the assumptions made regarding average lift capacity and efficiency factors. This is a theoretical estimate and assumes perfect conditions where all individuals can contribute equally and simultaneously, which may not be feasible in reality due to the physical space required and coordination challenges.
1. *Weight of the Boulder*: 1000 tons (US tons) = 2,000,000 pounds (lbs) since 1 ton = 2,000 lbs.
2. *Average Lift Capacity per Person*: The average untrained adult can safely lift about 135 pounds (deadlift, which is a reasonable approximation for lifting something off the ground) without training. However, for trained individuals, this number can be significantly higher. Let's use the untrained capacity for a conservative estimate.
3. *Safety and Efficiency Factors*: When lifting heavy objects, especially with many people, not everyone will be able to lift their maximum capacity due to the awkward shape of the object, grip issues, coordination, and safety concerns. Thus, we might apply a safety factor to ensure we're considering a realistic scenario. Let's assume 75% efficiency to account for these factors.”
But you can’t fit that many people under the rock. If you wanted to use chains to help lifting it would require something better than wine ropes. Even chain made from copper wouldn’t hold it.
That fallen Ramses statue is rose granite.
Another mystery is how this statue was created. Because it’s so symmetrical and smooth we would have to use machinery in order to do it.
A quick look around I found this site: http://www.catchpenny.org/movebig.html that suggests ways it was moved.
Quick TLDR. They don't lift it, they dig under it. Either constructing a canal, and putting a weighted barge beneath it. Then remove the ballast so the barge lifts up the weight. For overland they do a similar thing, but with a sled, pour a lubricant under the sliders, and then pull. Apparently 2 people can pull 1 Ton this way. So 500 people pulling the sled. (They had approx 2000 people working on a similar project) Also they used shallow ramps over long distances to raise it up.
There was also a modern thing when they moved a lighthouse.
The 80 ton statue was difficult because they wanted to do it with minimal people, and with minimal disruption, and quickly. If you had 2000 people working 5 days a week, 3 years to do it in, and the legal ability to dig up the road/canal etc it can be done. The amazing thing to me is how much priority Ancient Egyptians gave building these monuments, seems like the most important thing they were doing. I guess it gets easier to deal with planning permission when your absolute ruler says "Do it".