Previous · 1 . . . 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · Next Author
Message 1107847 - Posted: 20 May 2011, 3:33:26 UTC - in response to Message 1107844.Last modified: 20 May 2011, 3:36:18 UTC
You find a manuscript page from a novel. It has 2 words on it in the upper right hand corner... the words.. "It was"...
Now this could be A Tale of Two Cities orrrr it could just be some idiot trying to write a mystery novel(it was a dark and stormy night)
without more information we really can't tell what is meant by any of what you show other than wild guesses and assumptions based of facts that clearly aren't present
People have been seeing "UFOs" since the dawn of man. So you are going to tell me that Egyptians, in the case of this argument, didn't see them? I don't think everything we see today are UFOs (alien ships), but why wouldn't they have seen something if not just once or twice? that would easily account for why we don't see constant pictures of them spread around walls of pyramids or the likes. I truly believe UFOs exist, though not in numerous forms like people claim today. So for only one or two or even five of them to appear on a small section of a wall doesn't surprise me at all. If UFOs or aliens or spaceships did visit Earth in the past, then it makes perfect sense for them to only show up in a hand full of places and not constantly (especially if it happened only once or twice etc...)
EDIT: With that said, I think we have only uncovered a very small fraction of the ancient Egyptian cities and structures. After sitting unattended for a few thousand years in the desert and sand, its very possible that many of these ancient structures have been buried deep within the sand.
ID: 1107847 · ignorance is no excuseSend message
Message 1107855 - Posted: 20 May 2011, 3:57:07 UTC - in response to Message 1107847.
sure people see unidentified things all the time. This doesn't make them alien as its been repeatedly explained before. Unidentified does not mean alien it just means we haven't got enough information yet. the best alien encounters "light shows" always have the alien heading for an individual. the object stops then slowly moves either left or right then rapidly heads off in the direction it came. What people always misinterpret is the angle of approach. We assume something is flying right at us. It probably isn't. If you looked at the "object" from above you'd have seen a jet fighter flying close to directly at you. then it makes a 180 turn which from the ground makes the "object" appear to almost be motionless. then the plane accelerates in the opposite direction. This isn't a big mystery.
Wait you say there was no sound. unless that plane is within a couple miles you won't hear a thing. remember that distance at night are impossible to tell. All these people see are a light. Its more than 10 feet away but how far they cant tell.
Heck I've even seen a video of a supposed alien approaching an apollo mission. I assume it was filmed by an Astronaut. If the conspiracy theorist would have asked NASA scientists instead of speculating on the nature of the aliens desire to meet us, they'd have realized it was a piece of space junk or a meteor that like the jet fighter approached the ship at a supposed angle that looks like it was heading straight for them. It wasn't. Again without a point of reference its impossible to visually tell the direction of approach of objects. This object obviously was coming at the Earth at a fairly low angle and basically bounced back off the atmosphere. What looks like the object slowing to a stop is nothing more than it approaching the low end of a hyperbola before it left on its journey back into space.
Sometimes its best to just look at the simple answers. Everyone thinks they are Sherlock Holmes and they'll solve the case through elimination of all logical conclusions and if the only conclusion is impossible it still must be true. The sad fact is most UFO hunters choose willingly to ignore the truth and logical explanations because they are to easy. Preferring to believe in the unbelievable makes a better story than not. ____________
ID: 1107855 · Chris S Volunteer testerSend message
Joined: 19 Nov 00Posts: 31452Credit: 12,187,878RAC: 28,666
Message 1107894 - Posted: 20 May 2011, 11:07:12 UTC 99.9% of all UFO sightings can be explained logically. It is the 0.1% that is the problem. All major countries in the world have encounters on their files that simply cannot be explained with todays knowlege. I still tend to think that we were visted in the past, but as I have said before, I cannot prove it, nor can anyone disprove it (so far). You pays your money, and you takes your choice.
The BIG problem is that if there ever was an earth landing by extraterrestrials, who confirmed that it was through them that we came to be, all the major world religions would collapse overnight. Perhaps that is why they won't do that, or perhaps they are not there in the first place.
ID: 1107894 · C OlivalSend message
Message 1108135 - Posted: 21 May 2011, 3:14:32 UTC - in response to Message 1107894.
The distance between stars is too vast for living tissue to survive a space trip, however robotic life would be able to survive such trip. Lets send a probe to GlieseD to see if that planet is indeed habitable. Gliese is 20 ligth years from Earth, very close to the sun. ID: 1108135 · ignorance is no excuseSend message
Message 1108199 - Posted: 21 May 2011, 5:38:39 UTC - in response to Message 1108135.
its hard enough to get a probe accurately to Pluto. You want to send one unaided to A star light years away. At least in the solar system we can ignore the galactic wind and he galactic drift that would occur in the 40,000 years it would take to get there
ID: 1108199 · Jason SafoutinVolunteer testerSend message
Message 1108235 - Posted: 21 May 2011, 10:45:48 UTC - in response to Message 1108199.
Without having looked at the statistics of the Voyager probes, how far have they gone so far?
ID: 1108235 · C OlivalSend message
Message 1108332 - Posted: 21 May 2011, 16:02:10 UTC - in response to Message 1108199.
I would imagine the probe sent to GlieseD would use a fusion propulsion system, not Ion or fission propulsion. I do think sustained fusion will become a reality, hopefully in the next 40 years, fusion will reactors become comercially feasible and those can be applied to propulsion systems as well for spaceships. ID: 1108332 · Chris S Volunteer testerSend message
Message 1108335 - Posted: 21 May 2011, 16:06:24 UTC Last modified: 21 May 2011, 16:08:37 UTC
Voyagers 2ID: 1108335 · C OlivalSend message
Message 1108343 - Posted: 21 May 2011, 16:16:08 UTC - in response to Message 1108235.
Distance from Earth 17,402,516,601 KM
116.32863837 AU Distance from the Sun 17,522,106,103 KM
117.12804482 AU Roundtrip Light Time from the Sun 32:14:57
hh:mm:ss and counting
for Voyager 1
and for Voyager 2
Distance from Earth 14,191,072,317 KM
94.86145926 AU Distance from the Sun 14,271,842,109 KM
95.40137197 AU Roundtrip Light Time from the Sun 26:17:52
hh:mm:ss and counting the above information can be seen at:
http://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/where/index.htmlID: 1108343 · Chris S Volunteer testerSend message
Message 1108353 - Posted: 21 May 2011, 16:34:37 UTC Nice link, thanks :-)
VoyagersID: 1108353 · Johnney Guinness Volunteer testerSend message
Joined: 11 Sep 06Posts: 3092Credit: 2,492,538RAC: 2,569
Message 1108448 - Posted: 21 May 2011, 22:04:26 UTC Last modified: 21 May 2011, 22:07:17 UTC
With todays very best technology, it would still take thousands of years to get to our nearest star.
I said it earlier in this thread, science is about to change due to discoveries i have made during my research. One of the discoveries i made is going to change space travel in ways you can't imagine. The stuff you watched in Star Trek all your life........well my friends, its about to become REAL!!! Once i go public with my scientific findings, travel to Mars will be just something you do during the afternoon to pass time. Once i go public, travel to other stars will become possible in maybe a year or two.
Its all about to change guys, and nobody see's it coming. Except me, and the people who read the messages i post here in the SETI science forum. I'm giving you a glimpse of the future, before anyone else.
ID: 1108448 · William RothamelSend message
Message 1108546 - Posted: 22 May 2011, 2:17:49 UTC - in response to Message 1108448.
I can't wait ??
Accelerating at just one g would get you to the nearest star in just a few years. Cosmic rays might doom any human inhabitant of the space ship however.ID: 1108546 · Johnney Guinness Volunteer testerSend message
Message 1108616 - Posted: 22 May 2011, 9:03:07 UTC - in response to Message 1108546.Last modified: 22 May 2011, 9:15:11 UTC
Accelerating at just one g would get you to the nearest star in just a few years. Cosmic rays might doom any human inhabitant of the space ship however.
Daddio my old friend,
Here is a hint of what will be possible once i go public.
Try to understand the physics of this Daddio. If i'm correct about my scientific findings, you will be able to accelerate a machine at hundreds or thousands of G's for short periods of time taking your ship close too the speed of light. But inside the vehicle, the passengers will just experience normal standard G-forces in a controlled environment. For the flight crew inside the ship, they won't experience the massive force being exerted on the ship itself.
Sounds like science fiction, doesn't it? Well its about to happen! I'm not making this up Daddio, you have known me for many years now. We have spoken many times on the phone. You know i'm a grounded scientifically minded guy. Its real Daddio, i'm at this for years now and i have finally cracked it! I'm just working out the final physics of how it will work. I would not make a false claim like this unless i was absolutely sure about the physics of what i'm suggesting. I don't have the money to develope or build anything big. I can only put the concept out into the public domain and see what other's can do with the new physics.
ID: 1108616 · William RothamelSend message
Message 1108676 - Posted: 22 May 2011, 13:49:33 UTC - in response to Message 1108616.
Don't forget F=ma at relatively low speeds and humans can tolerate maybe less than a dozen G for any length of time.
Also there is no perpetual motion machine and the second law of thermodynamics , I can state with certainty, will not be repealed.
Theory must be verified with experiments and careful measurements in order to be accepted..ID: 1108676 · Johnney Guinness Volunteer testerSend message
Message 1108696 - Posted: 22 May 2011, 14:58:27 UTC - in response to Message 1108676.Last modified: 22 May 2011, 15:03:26 UTC
Theory must be verified with experiments and careful measurements in order to be accepted..
If i told you the answer Daddio, would you argue with me and dispute the answer and quote a thousand reasons why i'm wrong? Or using very simple physics, if i give you part of the solution, would you accept the scientific explanation if it makes logical sense, but goes against mainstream science? And i promice i will use your formula F=ma
ID: 1108696 · PKII Send message
Joined: 28 May 07Posts: 138Credit: 1,480,003RAC: 2,569
Message 1108756 - Posted: 22 May 2011, 17:26:46 UTC - in response to Message 1086579.Last modified: 22 May 2011, 17:27:35 UTC
The History channel recently ran a TV series called "Ancient Aliens"; http://www.history.com/shows/ancient-aliens....
The History channel lately in my opinion are showing the quality of shows that are on the SyFy channel. Not to be believed.ID: 1108756 · Lint trap Send message
Joined: 30 May 03Posts: 859Credit: 26,298,899RAC: 14,111
Message 1108766 - Posted: 22 May 2011, 17:42:02 UTC - in response to Message 1108756.
The History channel lately in my opinion are showing the quality of shows that are on the SyFy channel. Not to be believed.
I think THC is just tossing out ideas, sort of a 'food for thought'.
Occasionally you get a steak, but more often than not you get a box of Cracker Jacks.
ID: 1108766 · aka_SamVolunteer testerSend message
Message 1108809 - Posted: 22 May 2011, 19:05:21 UTC - in response to Message 1108766.Last modified: 22 May 2011, 19:06:21 UTC
I'd say that at least one person posting to this thread has some experience with THC. :P
ID: 1108809 · OzzFan Volunteer testerSend message
Joined: 9 Apr 02Posts: 13581Credit: 29,948,406RAC: 16,233
Message 1108810 - Posted: 22 May 2011, 19:09:14 UTC - in response to Message 1108766.
The problem is too many people assume The History Channel is authoritative on facts of history. They owe it to their viewers to only show facts and not conjecture.ID: 1108810 · Lint trap Send message
Message 1108850 - Posted: 22 May 2011, 20:35:20 UTC - in response to Message 1108810.
The problem is too many people assume The History Channel is authoritative on facts of history. They owe it to their viewers to only show facts and not conjecture.
:) People forget it's TV???
Start with that point of view...it will go a long ways towards resolving some far flung ideas.
ID: 1108850 · Previous · 1 . . . 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · Next Message boards : SETI@home Science : Ancient Aliens - What's the proof?
Previous · 1 . . . 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · Next Author
Message 1107847 - Posted: 20 May 2011, 3:33:26 UTC - in response to Message 1107844.Last modified: 20 May 2011, 3:36:18 UTC
You find a manuscript page from a novel. It has 2 words on it in the upper right hand corner... the words.. "It was"...
Now this could be A Tale of Two Cities orrrr it could just be some idiot trying to write a mystery novel(it was a dark and stormy night)
without more information we really can't tell what is meant by any of what you show other than wild guesses and assumptions based of facts that clearly aren't present
People have been seeing "UFOs" since the dawn of man. So you are going to tell me that Egyptians, in the case of this argument, didn't see them? I don't think everything we see today are UFOs (alien ships), but why wouldn't they have seen something if not just once or twice? that would easily account for why we don't see constant pictures of them spread around walls of pyramids or the likes. I truly believe UFOs exist, though not in numerous forms like people claim today. So for only one or two or even five of them to appear on a small section of a wall doesn't surprise me at all. If UFOs or aliens or spaceships did visit Earth in the past, then it makes perfect sense for them to only show up in a hand full of places and not constantly (especially if it happened only once or twice etc...)
EDIT: With that said, I think we have only uncovered a very small fraction of the ancient Egyptian cities and structures. After sitting unattended for a few thousand years in the desert and sand, its very possible that many of these ancient structures have been buried deep within the sand.
ID: 1107847 · ignorance is no excuseSend message
Message 1107855 - Posted: 20 May 2011, 3:57:07 UTC - in response to Message 1107847.
sure people see unidentified things all the time. This doesn't make them alien as its been repeatedly explained before. Unidentified does not mean alien it just means we haven't got enough information yet. the best alien encounters "light shows" always have the alien heading for an individual. the object stops then slowly moves either left or right then rapidly heads off in the direction it came. What people always misinterpret is the angle of approach. We assume something is flying right at us. It probably isn't. If you looked at the "object" from above you'd have seen a jet fighter flying close to directly at you. then it makes a 180 turn which from the ground makes the "object" appear to almost be motionless. then the plane accelerates in the opposite direction. This isn't a big mystery.
Wait you say there was no sound. unless that plane is within a couple miles you won't hear a thing. remember that distance at night are impossible to tell. All these people see are a light. Its more than 10 feet away but how far they cant tell.
Heck I've even seen a video of a supposed alien approaching an apollo mission. I assume it was filmed by an Astronaut. If the conspiracy theorist would have asked NASA scientists instead of speculating on the nature of the aliens desire to meet us, they'd have realized it was a piece of space junk or a meteor that like the jet fighter approached the ship at a supposed angle that looks like it was heading straight for them. It wasn't. Again without a point of reference its impossible to visually tell the direction of approach of objects. This object obviously was coming at the Earth at a fairly low angle and basically bounced back off the atmosphere. What looks like the object slowing to a stop is nothing more than it approaching the low end of a hyperbola before it left on its journey back into space.
Sometimes its best to just look at the simple answers. Everyone thinks they are Sherlock Holmes and they'll solve the case through elimination of all logical conclusions and if the only conclusion is impossible it still must be true. The sad fact is most UFO hunters choose willingly to ignore the truth and logical explanations because they are to easy. Preferring to believe in the unbelievable makes a better story than not. ____________
ID: 1107855 · Chris S Volunteer testerSend message
Joined: 19 Nov 00Posts: 31452Credit: 12,187,878RAC: 28,666
Message 1107894 - Posted: 20 May 2011, 11:07:12 UTC 99.9% of all UFO sightings can be explained logically. It is the 0.1% that is the problem. All major countries in the world have encounters on their files that simply cannot be explained with todays knowlege. I still tend to think that we were visted in the past, but as I have said before, I cannot prove it, nor can anyone disprove it (so far). You pays your money, and you takes your choice.
The BIG problem is that if there ever was an earth landing by extraterrestrials, who confirmed that it was through them that we came to be, all the major world religions would collapse overnight. Perhaps that is why they won't do that, or perhaps they are not there in the first place.
ID: 1107894 · C OlivalSend message
Message 1108135 - Posted: 21 May 2011, 3:14:32 UTC - in response to Message 1107894.
The distance between stars is too vast for living tissue to survive a space trip, however robotic life would be able to survive such trip. Lets send a probe to GlieseD to see if that planet is indeed habitable. Gliese is 20 ligth years from Earth, very close to the sun. ID: 1108135 · ignorance is no excuseSend message
Message 1108199 - Posted: 21 May 2011, 5:38:39 UTC - in response to Message 1108135.
its hard enough to get a probe accurately to Pluto. You want to send one unaided to A star light years away. At least in the solar system we can ignore the galactic wind and he galactic drift that would occur in the 40,000 years it would take to get there
ID: 1108199 · Jason SafoutinVolunteer testerSend message
Message 1108235 - Posted: 21 May 2011, 10:45:48 UTC - in response to Message 1108199.
Without having looked at the statistics of the Voyager probes, how far have they gone so far?
ID: 1108235 · C OlivalSend message
Message 1108332 - Posted: 21 May 2011, 16:02:10 UTC - in response to Message 1108199.
I would imagine the probe sent to GlieseD would use a fusion propulsion system, not Ion or fission propulsion. I do think sustained fusion will become a reality, hopefully in the next 40 years, fusion will reactors become comercially feasible and those can be applied to propulsion systems as well for spaceships. ID: 1108332 · Chris S Volunteer testerSend message
Message 1108335 - Posted: 21 May 2011, 16:06:24 UTC Last modified: 21 May 2011, 16:08:37 UTC
Voyagers 2ID: 1108335 · C OlivalSend message
Message 1108343 - Posted: 21 May 20
11, 16:16:08 UTC - in response to Message 1108235.
Distance from Earth 17,402,516,601 KM
116.32863837 AU Distance from the Sun 17,522,106,103 KM
117.12804482 AU Roundtrip Light Time from the Sun 32:14:57
hh:mm:ss and counting
for Voyager 1
and for Voyager 2
Distance from Earth 14,191,072,317 KM
94.86145926 AU Distance from the Sun 14,271,842,109 KM
95.40137197 AU Roundtrip Light Time from the Sun 26:17:52
hh:mm:ss and counting the above information can be seen at:
http://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/where/index.htmlID: 1108343 · Chris S Volunteer testerSend message
Message 1108353 - Posted: 21 May 2011, 16:34:37 UTC Nice link, thanks :-)
VoyagersID: 1108353 · Johnney Guinness Volunteer testerSend message
Joined: 11 Sep 06Posts: 3092Credit: 2,492,538RAC: 2,569
Message 1108448 - Posted: 21 May 2011, 22:04:26 UTC Last modified: 21 May 2011, 22:07:17 UTC
With todays very best technology, it would still take thousands of years to get to our nearest star.
I said it earlier in this thread, science is about to change due to discoveries i have made during my research. One of the discoveries i made is going to change space travel in ways you can't imagine. The stuff you watched in Star Trek all your life........well my friends, its about to become REAL!!! Once i go public with my scientific findings, travel to Mars will be just something you do during the afternoon to pass time. Once i go public, travel to other stars will become possible in maybe a year or two.
Its all about to change guys, and nobody see's it coming. Except me, and the people who read the messages i post here in the SETI science forum. I'm giving you a glimpse of the future, before anyone else.
ID: 1108448 · William RothamelSend message
Message 1108546 - Posted: 22 May 2011, 2:17:49 UTC - in response to Message 1108448.
I can't wait ??
Accelerating at just one g would get you to the nearest star in just a few years. Cosmic rays might doom any human inhabitant of the space ship however.ID: 1108546 · Johnney Guinness Volunteer testerSend message
Message 1108616 - Posted: 22 May 2011, 9:03:07 UTC - in response to Message 1108546.Last modified: 22 May 2011, 9:15:11 UTC
Accelerating at just one g would get you to the nearest star in just a few years. Cosmic rays might doom any human inhabitant of the space ship however.
Daddio my old friend,
Here is a hint of what will be possible once i go public.
Try to understand the physics of this Daddio. If i'm correct about my scientific findings, you will be able to accelerate a machine at hundreds or thousands of G's for short periods of time taking your ship close too the speed of light. But inside the vehicle, the passengers will just experience normal standard G-forces in a controlled environment. For the flight crew inside the ship, they won't experience the massive force being exerted on the ship itself.
Sounds like science fiction, doesn't it? Well its about to happen! I'm not making this up Daddio, you have known me for many years now. We have spoken many times on the phone. You know i'm a grounded scientifically minded guy. Its real Daddio, i'm at this for years now and i have finally cracked it! I'm just working out the final physics of how it will work. I would not make a false claim like this unless i was absolutely sure about the physics of what i'm suggesting. I don't have the money to develope or build anything big. I can only put the concept out into the public domain and see what other's can do with the new physics.
ID: 1108616 · William RothamelSend message
Message 1108676 - Posted: 22 May 2011, 13:49:33 UTC - in response to Message 1108616.
Don't forget F=ma at relatively low speeds and humans can tolerate maybe less than a dozen G for any length of time.
Also there is no perpetual motion machine and the second law of thermodynamics , I can state with certainty, will not be repealed.
Theory must be verified with experiments and careful measurements in order to be accepted..ID: 1108676 · Johnney Guinness Volunteer testerSend message
Message 1108696 - Posted: 22 May 2011, 14:58:27 UTC - in response to Message 1108676.Last modified: 22 May 2011, 15:03:26 UTC
Theory must be verified with experiments and careful measurements in order to be accepted..
If i told you the answer Daddio, would you argue with me and dispute the answer and quote a thousand reasons why i'm wrong? Or using very simple physics, if i give you part of the solution, would you accept the scientific explanation if it makes logical sense, but goes against mainstream science? And i promice i will use your formula F=ma
ID: 1108696 · PKII Send message
Joined: 28 May 07Posts: 138Credit: 1,480,003RAC: 2,569
Message 1108756 - Posted: 22 May 2011, 17:26:46 UTC - in response to Message 1086579.Last modified: 22 May 2011, 17:27:35 UTC
The History channel recently ran a TV series called "Ancient Aliens"; http://www.history.com/shows/ancient-aliens....
The History channel lately in my opinion are showing the quality of shows that are on the SyFy channel. Not to be believed.ID: 1108756 · Lint trap Send message
Joined: 30 May 03Posts: 859Credit: 26,298,899RAC: 14,111
Message 1108766 - Posted: 22 May 2011, 17:42:02 UTC - in response to Message 1108756.
The History channel lately in my opinion are showing the quality of shows that are on the SyFy channel. Not to be believed.
I think THC is just tossing out ideas, sort of a 'food for thought'.
Occasionally you get a steak, but more often than not you get a box of Cracker Jacks.
ID: 1108766 · aka_SamVolunteer testerSend message
Message 1108809 - Posted: 22 May 2011, 19:05:21 UTC - in response to Message 1108766.Last modified: 22 May 2011, 19:06:21 UTC
I'd say that at least one person posting to this thread has some experience with THC. :P
ID: 1108809 · OzzFan Volunteer testerSend message
Joined: 9 Apr 02Posts: 13581Credit: 29,948,406RAC: 16,233
Message 1108810 - Posted: 22 May 2011, 19:09:14 UTC - in response to Message 1108766.
The problem is too many people assume The History Channel is authoritative on facts of history. They owe it to their viewers to only show facts and not conjecture.ID: 1108810 · Lint trap Send message
Message 1108850 - Posted: 22 May 2011, 20:35:20 UTC - in response to Message 1108810.
The problem is too many people assume The History Channel is authoritative on facts of history. They owe it to their viewers to only show facts and not conjecture.
:) People forget it's TV???
Start with that point of view...it will go a long ways towards resolving some far flung ideas.
ID: 1108850 · Previous · 1 . . . 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11 · Next Message boards : SETI@home Science : Ancient Aliens - What's the proof?