The Extra-Terrestrial Hypothesis

#1
I am skeptical of the Extra-Terrestrial Hypothesis both as an explanation for UFOs and reported "abductions."

However, I suspect that the reasons I am skeptical are different than the reasons other people are skeptical. For example I often hear it argued that Aliens wouldn't travel hundreds of thousands of light years just to play games in the sky and other similar arguments based on assumptions about Alien psychology. I don't think any arguments that project human psychology on Aliens are valid.

There are two reasons I am skeptical:

1. According to our best evidence faster-than-light travel is not possible, making the distance between habitable planets to large for interstellar travel.

2. According to our best evidence the odds of spontaneous generation of life are ridiculously low, such that we would not expect it to have occurred anywhere else in the universe. And even if it is did occur, the odds that intelligent life capable of building interstellar spacecraft would have evolved are lower still.

So I am curious, if you subscribe to the ET Hypothesis how would you deal with my evidence to the contrary? And if you are skeptical of the ET Hypothesis, why are you skeptical?
 
#2
I am skeptical about the idea of extraterrestrial intelligences visit us because no UFO or abduction case is conclusive, at best we get is that we do not know what that flying object or what strange experience.

On your reasons to be skeptical about extraterrestrial hypothesis, however I disagree.

1. Maybe it is possible travel using wormholes or other manipulations of space-time, so that the aliens would not travel faster than light, but they would travel less space than light.

2. According to the evidence, the organic molecules are relatively common in space, may the odds that an intelligent civilization appears to be very low, but the universe is very large.
 
#3
On your reasons to be skeptical about extraterrestrial hypothesis, however I disagree.

1. Maybe it is possible travel using wormholes or other manipulations of space-time, so that the aliens would not travel faster than light, but they would travel less space than light.

2. According to the evidence, the organic molecules are relatively common in space, may the odds that an intelligent civilization appears to be very low, but the universe is very large.
I am not saying it is inconceivable that there are ways to travel faster than light that we are unaware of. Rather that based on our current evidence and understanding it cannot be done. Therefore until there is some positive evidence that it can be done, I will remain skeptical.

On your second point, organic molecules (i.e. molecules containing carbon) are not synonymous with life. As far as I know there is no evidence that life, even "simple" bacteria, exist on other planets and spontaneous generation of life has never been observed and based on our current knowledge practically impossible (i.e. ridiculously unlikely).
 
#4
I am not saying it is inconceivable that there are ways to travel faster than light that we are unaware of. Rather that based on our current evidence and understanding it cannot be done. Therefore until there is some positive evidence that it can be done, I will remain skeptical.
Ok, but I think it is best to examine the UFO and abduction cases on their own merits, regardless of what we consider possible or not.

On your second point, organic molecules (i.e. molecules containing carbon) are not synonymous with life. As far as I know there is no evidence that life, even "simple" bacteria, exist on other planets and spontaneous generation of life has never been observed and based on our current knowledge practically impossible (i.e. ridiculously unlikely).
I know, but considering that the universe is very large, the probability that there is life elsewhere is higher than the probability that only the Earth contains life. Besides the spontaneous generation of life has had to occur at least once, if that has not been observed, it is because the new living beings would be quickly absorbed by life already present.
 
#5
1. According to our best evidence faster-than-light travel is not possible, making the distance between habitable planets to large for interstellar travel.
That does make the idea seem less likely, but it's not IMHO the best argument.

Let's say that we, here on Earth, discovered tomorrow a way to travel faster than light, and we'd like to use that technology to explore and look for other life. Let's further say that the technology is relatively cheap. How would we go about the exploration? Assume we can visit one star each day, look at its planets, and see whether there's life. This is a hopelessly optimistic scenario, but let's go with it. At that rate, it would take us over a billion years just to explore the stars in our galaxy alone. And there are tens of billions, or hundreds of billions, of galaxies.


2. According to our best evidence the odds of spontaneous generation of life are ridiculously low, such that we would not expect it to have occurred anywhere else in the universe
I don't know about that one - life on Earth popped up about as early in Earth's history as it was possible for it. A few hundred million years for the Earth to form, and for the solar system to settle down so we're not being constantly pelted with rocks and comets from space, then water to accumulate, then life happened pretty quickly after that. Life has been here for about 3.8 billion years according to our best estimates.

But even with life that's common enough to have several intelligent species just in our galaxy, and even with cheap faster than light travel, it's still not practical to find that other life.
 
#6
Ok, but I think it is best to examine the UFO and abduction cases on their own merits, regardless of what we consider possible or not.
I don't have a problem with examining them on their own merits, but to point to an ET explanation there has to be actual evidence that they are ET in nature given the reasons to believe that they can't be ET. Just noting that they are strange and unexplained would not be sufficient.

I know, but considering that the universe is very large, the probability that there is life elsewhere is higher than the probability that only the Earth contains life. Besides the spontaneous generation of life has had to occur at least once, if that has not been observed, it is because the new living beings would be quickly absorbed by life already present.
Even though the universe is very large and very old, it isn't large enough or old enough to make life probable. The late Robert Shapiro estimated the odds of spontaneous generation at 1 in 10^100,000,000,000. Francis Crick had a much more optomistic estimate of 1 in 10^40,000 In contrast the estimated number of atoms in the observable universe is 10^82
 
Last edited:
#7
I don't have a problem with examining them on their own merits, but to point to an ET explanation there has to be actual evidence that they are ET in nature given the reasons to believe that they can't be ET. Just noting that they are strange and unexplained would not be sufficient.



Even though the universe is very large and very old, it isn't large enough or old enough to make life probable. The late Robert Shapiro estimated the odds of spontaneous generation at 1 in 10100,000,000,000. Francis Crick had a much more optomistic estimate of 1 in 1040,000 In contrast the estimated number of atoms in the observable universe is 1082
You should use (for example) the ^ symbol for powers.
I think you intended your numbers to be: 10^100,000,000,000, 10^40,000 and 10^82 ?
 
#9
Some of the theoretical arguments against the existence of other life much less other intelligent life, or if it actually exists its ability to get here, seem persuasive.

But real data, evidence, always trumps theory in my opinion. These cases were real events occurring to real people that presented as described. The testimony and other evidence can't reasonably be dismissed just because they appear fantastic. Especially with good observers like pilots and police officers whose testimony would otherwise be accepted in a court of law. The burden is on the skeptic to credibly demonstrate how these are actually misperceptions, hallucinations, errors, hoaxes, useless anecdotes, etc.

In the absence of that the reasonable conclusion is that some people have observed strange apparently structured material objects in the atmosphere that give the strong impression of being vehicles.

The best cases stand on their own merits as evidence that on some rare occasions what seem to be alien vehicles appear to humans, sometimes producing physical effects including radar returns, radio interference, ground traces and leaving images preserved on photographic film or electronic media. In my opinion the extraterrestrial hypothesis remains plausible as the explanation.

Just a sampling of the best data:

The 1947 Kenneth Arnold sighting
Except for the WWII "foo fighters", this begins the modern era of UFOs. A good analysis is at http://www.martinshough.com/aerialphenomena/Arnold%20analysis2.pdf . There do not seem to be any valid optical, geometric, geographical, psychological or other reasons to doubt the major features of Arnold's sighting as reported and they are internally consistent. The analysis results in a range of 16-20 miles, a minimum length of 70-90 feet, and a speed of 890 to 1200 mph. Arnold described the objects as trimmed-off in the rear thin shiny "saucer-like" discoids reflecting sunlight blindingly like metal at certain angles.

http://www.ufoevidence.org/cases/case116.htm The Chiles-Whitted Case - Montgomery, Alabama, United States - July 24, 1948 - UFO Evidence

http://www.ufoevidence.org/cases/case92.htm The Nash-Fortenberry Sighting (aircraft encounter with formation of UFOs) - Virginia, United States - July 14, 1952 - UFO Evidence

http://www.ufoevidence.org/cases/case665.htm The RB-47 UFO Encounter - Gulf Coast Area, United States - July 17, 1957 - UFO Evidence

http://www.ufoevidence.org/cases/case90.htm Socorro / Zamora UFO Incident - Socorro, New Mexico, United States - April 24, 1964 - UFO Evidence

http://www.ufoevidence.org/cases/case104.htm Coyne Helicopter Incident - Mansfield, Ohio, United States - October 18, 1973 - UFO Evidence

http://www.ufoevidence.org/cases/case86.htm The Cash-Landrum Case - Huffman, Texas, United States - December 29, 1980 - UFO Evidence

http://www.ufoevidence.org/cases/case287.htm Japan Air Lines Flight 1628 Over Alaska - Alaska, United States - November 17, 1986 - UFO Evidence

http://www.ufoevidence.org/cases/case1125.htm Belgium Triangle UFO Sightings - Belgium - October, 1989 - UFO Evidence

http://www.ufoevidence.org/cases/case277.htm Illinois Triangle UFO Sighting (by multiple police officers) - Illinois, United States - January 5, 2000 - UFO Evidence

UFO studies

The 1999 French Cometa committee report, summarized at http://www.cufos.org/cometa.html . An in-depth study of UFOs, covering many aspects of the subject, especially questions of national defense. The study was done over several years by an independent group at the Institute of Advanced Studies for National Defense, or IHEDN, and by other qualified experts from various fields.

http://www.nicap.org/papers/92apsiee.htm Fifty-Six Aircraft Pilot Sightings Involving E-M Effects - Haines (1992)
Abstract: "Reports of anomalous aerial objects (AAO) appearing in the atmosphere continue to be made by pilots of almost every airline and air force of the world in addition to private and experimental test pilots. This paper presents a review of 56 reports of AAO in which electromagnetic effects (E-M) take place on-board the aircraft when the phenomenon is located nearby but not before it appeared or after it had departed. These effects are not related to the altitude or airspeed of the aircraft. The average duration of these sightings was 17.5 minutes in the 37 cases in which duration was noted. There were between one and 40 eye witnesses (average = 2.71) on the aircraft. Reported E-M effects included radio interference or total failure, radar contact with and without simultaneous visual contact, magnetic and/or gyro-compass deviations, automatic direction finder failure or interference, engine stopping or interruption, dimming cabin lights, transponder failure, and military aircraft weapon system failure. There appears to be a reduction of the E-M energy effect with the square of increasing distance to the AAO. These events and their relationships are discussed. This area of research should be concentrated on by other investigators because of the wealth of information it yields and the physical nature of AAO including wavelength/frequency and power density emissions".

http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc622.htm Interference with Aircraft Equipment (Sturrock Panel Report) - UFO Evidence
Summary: Richard Haines presented a summary of his extensive research into pilot-UFO-sighting reports. He now has a catalog of over 3,000 pilot reports, of which approximately 4% involve transient electromagnetic effects associated with the presence of strange objects.
 
#10
IMO the idea that earth is the only place that sentient life exists is a good candidate for most idiotic idea by a human - ever. That anyone can suggest that and be taken seriously doesn't say much for the current state of human development. On the other hand, the question of whether or not any of those lifeforms have visited earth is another thing altogether. A valid other ting.
 
#11
IMO the idea that earth is the only place that sentient life exists is a good candidate for most idiotic idea by a human - ever. That anyone can suggest that and be taken seriously doesn't say much for the current state of human development. On the other hand, the question of whether or not any of those lifeforms have visited earth is another thing altogether. A valid other ting.
Are you including the beings met in near-death experiences as evidence here? They certainly do not exist on earth.
Otherwise, I wonder what evidence you have.
 
#12
I am skeptical of the Extra-Terrestrial Hypothesis both as an explanation for UFOs and reported "abductions."

However, I suspect that the reasons I am skeptical are different than the reasons other people are skeptical. For example I often hear it argued that Aliens wouldn't travel hundreds of thousands of light years just to play games in the sky and other similar arguments based on assumptions about Alien psychology. I don't think any arguments that project human psychology on Aliens are valid.

There are two reasons I am skeptical:

1. According to our best evidence faster-than-light travel is not possible, making the distance between habitable planets to large for interstellar travel.

2. According to our best evidence the odds of spontaneous generation of life are ridiculously low, such that we would not expect it to have occurred anywhere else in the universe. And even if it is did occur, the odds that intelligent life capable of building interstellar spacecraft would have evolved are lower still.

So I am curious, if you subscribe to the ET Hypothesis how would you deal with my evidence to the contrary? And if you are skeptical of the ET Hypothesis, why are you skeptical?
I'm extremely skeptical, too. Why? Because, as I've mentioned elsewhere, the number of credible sightings are out-the-roof: thousands and thousands a year . . . which would mean that not only are aliens travelling faster than the speed of light or else through wormholes or whatever, but many, many, many of them - thousands - are . . . not just one or two groups every few years . . . yet all these thousands of aliens are still not fully revealing themselves . . . This is pretty difficult to accept in the ET sense.

Source: Dimensions by Vallee.
 
#14
Time and time again we have verified spirits who have related that "aliens" exist, that they are part of the afterlife. As far as I am concerned, that ends the question.

Where they exist and if they come here to earth, I could care less. If they can make it here, they can do pretty much whatever they like. I tend to be concerned with things I can control not those I can't.
 
#15
IMO the idea that earth is the only place that sentient life exists is a good candidate for most idiotic idea by a human - ever. That anyone can suggest that and be taken seriously doesn't say much for the current state of human development.
You are going to have to back that up with some sort of reasoning or evidence. Just saying something is stupid doesn't make it so.
 
#16
I'm extremely skeptical, too. Why? Because, as I've mentioned elsewhere, the number of credible sightings are out-the-roof: thousands and thousands a year . . . which would mean that not only are aliens travelling faster than the speed of light or else through wormholes or whatever, but many, many, many of them - thousands - are . . . not just one or two groups every few years . . . yet all these thousands of aliens are still not fully revealing themselves . . . This is pretty difficult to accept in the ET sense.

Source: Dimensions by Vallee.
To me that is not a good reason to be skeptical. We have no reason to think that ETs would have similar motives and psychology to us. I don't think it is fair to doubt ETs because they if they exist they are not acting in a manner you would act if you were in their shoes.
 
#17
Some of the theoretical arguments against the existence of other life much less other intelligent life, or if it actually exists its ability to get here, seem persuasive.

But real data, evidence, always trumps theory in my opinion. These cases were real events occurring to real people that presented as described. The testimony and other evidence can't reasonably be dismissed just because they appear fantastic. Especially with good observers like pilots and police officers whose testimony would otherwise be accepted in a court of law. The burden is on the skeptic to credibly demonstrate how these are actually misperceptions, hallucinations, errors, hoaxes, useless anecdotes, etc.
Those are evidence of an odd phenomenon, UFOs. But none of that evidence speaks much to ETs as the source of the phenomenon. They could just as easily ghosts or demons or whatnot. I am not saying that every one of these cases is a hoax or an error but strange stuff alone won't make me believe in Aliens given the contrary evidence against them.
 
#18
I don't know about that one - life on Earth popped up about as early in Earth's history as it was possible for it. A few hundred million years for the Earth to form, and for the solar system to settle down so we're not being constantly pelted with rocks and comets from space, then water to accumulate, then life happened pretty quickly after that. Life has been here for about 3.8 billion years according to our best estimates.
It is true that life popped up on earth very quickly, but we have no reason to think that was anything other then very, very, good luck. The other possibility is that life came to earth on a comet or a meteor from some other world where it originated (panspermia) but we don't have any evidence, yet, that life can survive interplanetary journey through space. If the current experiment testing whether life can survive such a trip produces positive results, I will change my tune.
 
#20
Excuse this question because I am relatively new here, but what are "verified spirits"?
Discarnates who have provided incarnates with information that can only be known to the the spirit and the person(s) in communication. This survival of death communication is typically accomplished with the assistance of a medium.
 
Top