UFOs & Extraterrestrial Life

If the variety of life on earth is anything to go by, life from other planets could have developed in all sorts of different environments and resulted in some very different life forms... I mean look at trees and insects and spiders and reptiles... perhaps on a water covered planet the dominant intelligent form of life might be something like the octopus on earth... or the dolphin, or maybe it looks more like some of the species that have been extinct for thousands or millions of years... for some reason on their planet they didn't face the problem that removed them from the gene pool.

Maybe different gravity, different air pressure, different chemical makeups of land, sea, or air led to totally different forms of life... maybe they are all plant based or reptile based or insect based... maybe even energy based.

The real question you have to ask is why do the alien species travel the stars... is it conquest.... is it just raw materials to keep their civilisation growing... is it curiosity... keeping in mind that while Star Trek suggests it is curiosity... it normally either turns into conquest or trying to find resources that are useful.

Lets face it... it is probably mining companies that will reach out the most... but I think most in the mining industry have a rather amusing view of space... I saw a programme on space colonisation where these guys were talking about asteroids and the mineral wealth they contain... what they don't mention that the asteroid fields you see in movies like Star Wars are bullshit... if you had to dodge and weave like that through a real asteroid field there would be so much mass there that it would relatively rapidly collapse and form major bodies like moons or planets.

If our asteroid belt looked like the one in Star Wars there would be more rocky material in our solar system than there is matter in the sun. The orbital distance of the asteroid belt is huge... if it was full of matter lots more planets would have been formed.

The reality is that you could be standing on an asteroid in our asteroid belt and not see another asteroid at all, or if you did it would be a tiny tiny dot.

The fact is that there are a few big asteroids that might be worth a visit but the idea of zipping from one to another mining valuable metals and stones is bullshit the distances would be enormous.

Most likely one big rock will be mined completely.... anything valuable will be launched on a trajectory passed earth that could be intercepted and collected... any rubbish material could be ground up into powder and launched in the opposite direction you wanted to move and therefore used as propellent to get to the next target asteroid.

At best the alien life will be bacteria in this solar system, though some moons with oceans are potentially interesting subjects to talk about.

nomadski wrote:
I have said before , that I personally  have no problems in accepting the possibility of alien life on other planets........  Given the large number  of reliable cases involving police or military witnesses . Together with radar evidence .

And landing traces etc.

From many countries . I think that the possibility  that some of these UFO's are of extraterrestial origin exists

The ETH is by far the best view.

I have no problem thinking about alien abductions being true . Since our alien visitors seem to be ethical in conduct . Returning people unharmed .

Not in all cases.....

( 1 )  Blaming fails in radar and aircraft and even nuclear silo on alien intervention . Rather than malfunctions and human error . The story sometimes involved gremlins . In the machine . But aliens are more believable..

No, I don't think so...not to most people.

Walther von Oldenburg wrote:
Distances between even closest stars are so astronomically huge that they are almost inaccessible with our laws of physics.

Our understanding of the laws and probably gravity specifically.

A civilization that is advanced enough to travel efficiently at faster than light speed is probably so advanced that it could simply create matter out of nothing - if it can't then for every planet with inteligent life there are 1,000s possibly 10,000s of planets without it - I do not even count moons, comets, asteroids etc.

True, interstellar travel means access to almost unlimited material resources. A naturally habitable world, however, is so rare it might be worth fighting over.

GarryB wrote:
The main problem is that the universe is huge and most of it is expanding away from us at an enormous rate...

Well, our galaxy is "staying put" from our perspective and is probably large enough, with more than enough possible habitable planets, for ETs to appear.

....most of the stories I read about encounters with aliens I think are probably drug or alcohol related....

Not according to investigators. Most witnesses are ordinary but credible people with no issues like that nor much (if any) prior knowledge of the phenomenon. Witnesses include professors, pilots, businessmen etc.

why is it always some yokel in the middle of nowhere with grease smeared on his camera lens so he can never take a decent photo...

There have been a number of clear photographs. As for sightings in less populated areas, that may be due to ET trying to minimize the risk of detection, or detection by many.

I think statistically there has to be alien life throughout the universe,

Right and the bulk of intelligent ET life is almost certainly much older, inasmuch as civilization here is a mere few thousand years old.
Btw for a remarkably insightful look at this whole subject--one that really cuts through the bs we've been told for so long--see this. It's just a POD book, because no standard trade publisher would dare touch something this controversial:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/1949483185/ref=tmm_pap_new_olp_0?ie=UTF8&condition=new8qid=&sr=

Wormholes require energies that are beyond galactic in scale. So wormhole engineering would be akin to super-massive black hole
engineering. No sentient lifeform is going to be engaged in such scales of reality manipulation.

If wormholes exist then they likely formed around the time of the big bang as imperfections aka quantum fluctuations in the space-time
before it underwent what is known as hyperinflation (a process we know basically f*ck all about). The super-massive black holes
at the centers of galaxies are likely to be such primordial phenomena and not due to any stellar collapse process. These primordial
black holes would have seeded the galaxies. BTW, the so-called black hole solutions to the GR equations are actually pure vacuum solutions
with not source stress-energy tensor. So GR allows for black holes to be pure space-time structures. The cult of the point mass source
never properly solved these equations and has foisted the myth that there must be a point mass source because the Ricci tensor becomes
infinite. Proper point mass solutions derived in the last 15 years debunk this early 1900s hand-waving BS.

The notion that humans are unique in the universe as sentient beings is utter garbage. There are way too many Earth-like planets for
Earth to be a singularity. However, I doubt that sentient alien life visits Earth for anal-probing. It is interesting how in every historical period
there are similar claims being made but with different "perps" that reflect current views of reality. Back in the middle ages we had
women claiming that they were raped by incubus demons. Now we have them claiming that they were anally probed by aliens. Same
story with different dressing.

nomadski wrote:I watched TV programmes  about UFO abduction case of Betty and Barney Hill . I believe they reported being abducted in 1961

Yes on September 19 of that year. It's long been a classic case.

They also reported that the  "aliens " had told them where they had come from . By drawing a star map . This star map recently validated to be zeta reticuli .

The aliens showed Betty Hill a star map, which she later drew from memory (subconscious). Some time later Marjorie Fish interpreted the stars in the lower right as Zeta 1 and 2 Reticuli.

nomadski wrote:Ok , I am layman . In plain English , from theoretical perspective , do wormholes  exist now ?

Maybe not but there may be alternatives like gravitational field propulsion, advocated by Morrison.
I doubt aliens really need our genes or have a hydridization program. As The Alien Plan for Earth shows, the phenomenon while real is very deceptive.

starman wrote:

nomadski wrote:Ok , I am layman . In plain English , from theoretical perspective , do wormholes  exist now ?

Maybe not but there may be alternatives like gravitational field propulsion, advocated by Morrison.
I doubt aliens really need our genes or have a hydridization program. As The Alien Plan for Earth shows, the phenomenon while real is very deceptive.

Based on GR it is routinely asserted that gravity propagates at the speed of light. This is not good enough to be proof.
Nobody has ever actually measured the speed of gravity. Previous papers on the subject have invoked the theory (GR) to
interpret observational measurements leading to a logical circularity. One cannot use a theory to prove itself. Measurements
have to be totally objective and independent.

Galaxy dynamics simulation are done using Newton's equations. Nobody uses GR to do such calculations. GR is not even used to solve
for two and three body problems. Newton's equations are time independent and the speed of gravity is infinite. Considering
the scale of galaxy and multiple galaxy interaction domains, the speed of light would manifest all sorts of "retarded" potential
effects. But nobody does these simulations with weak field limit of GR equations cast with retarded potentials. This smells.

There is actually no reason for "gravitons" (GR does not support such entities since it is not a proper, quantizable field theory)
to have the speed of photons. The scale of the universe is rather consistent with gravitons having a speed much, much larger than
photons. If this is true, then it is conceivable that super-fast warp bubbles can be produced which carry EM entities (spaceships,
humans) much faster than the speed of light. Physical laws are not broken because the space-time bubble in the propagating
warp is intact and not flowing. Ironically, the vacuum GR equation solutions indicate that such space-time bubbles are possible
and can displace the universal space-time in which they are imbedded. We have static solutions that point to such structures. But
I am inferring that transient or stationary solutions of this form exit as well. Non-static solutions are likely not to have
a fully formed event horizon at the interface of these two space-time domains. This is good for the health of humans trying to
use such warp bubbles to travel. In spite of all the nonsense you see in GR textbooks, the event horizon is not some coordinate
singularity, but is an actual physical singularity (an infinite red-shift surface) as can be demonstrated by its invariance under
coordinate transformations. Singular coordinate transforms merely move the event horizon singularity somewhere else. This is not
any proof of it not being a physical singularity. Anyway, all geodesics reach the speed of light at the horizon. Moving massive
objects at the speed of light means E=mc^2 and anti-matter-matter type annihilation.

If you are worried about god making earth a prison... there is enough matter in this galaxy to keep us sorted for likely more than the expected lifespan of our star... there is a British TV comedy called Red Dwarf where a routine flight in an enormous cargo vessel transporting ore and other material has a radiation leak and the one surviving crew member who survives because he is in time stasis as a punishment for bringing a cat on board, is released from stasis 3 million years later... his cat seems to have had kittens and over multiple generations have mutated into a humanoid cat like creature... if humans survive 3 million years what will we look like?

I mean it can certainly be assumed that some biological systems in our bodies could be replaced to improve performance... I mean eyes with super high resolution that can see beyond the visible spectrum to see in the dark with a zoom lense etc etc... even the addition of eyes in the back of your head and sides of your head so you have a 360 degree view of the world... improved lungs so you can breathe almost anywhere... including underwater... improved stomach that can process any food stuffs and extract all the right material to keep the body in good nick but reject excesses of things like sugar or fat when not needed and just flush them out of the body. Redesign the bowels and bladder to more efficiently use water in the body so you don't need to drink so much, and an alternative method of cooling the body instead of sweating that doesn't waste water... A skin upgrade that makes you less vulnerable to cuts or damage... I don't think natural evolution will get much of a chance, as artificial upgrades are likely the easiest and quickest and most reliable way of getting it done.

Hell, if they can find a way of changing the DNA so that new cells don't degrade over time so when you are 90 years old your skin is new and young and all your organs and bits and bobs are upgraded the same as they were when you were 19, so you just stayed young forever... well imagine that... the population would expand exponentially because far fewer people would be dying, so the requirement to expand the human race out into other star systems would become rather urgent.

You might even get people living permanently in space, so personal upgrades could be different... you don't need legs in space... taking them off could reduce body weight by 20-30kgs for some people, and it makes you smaller, better able to fit into smaller spaceships... perhaps replace both legs with one arm and one hand, so you could have three hands and three arms... your bottom hand could be used to hold yourself in place, while you do work with the other two hands... replacing legs with two hands would be tricky because two hands instead of feet would need an extra brain and set of eyes to be used to the full, but using the brain power you use to control both legs... balance, walking and running etc etc, it should be able to manage controlling one hand by feel instead of needing eyes and serious concentration like your hands require most of the time.

Perhaps having one leg with a hand instead of a foot might be the optimum solution... the hand can grab, but the leg is much more powerful than an arm so pushing off with a single leg would propel you around a relatively large space station quite efficiently... you could flip over in flight and stop yourself with the hand grabbing any rails and the leg slowing you down more efficiently than an arm and you have both arms free to hold things or whatever...

nomadski wrote:
Earth scientists recently discussed using genetic engineering , as a means of modifying earth organisms, in populating Mars. So why should an alien race, not be interested in creating hybrids for purpose of populating other worlds?

Claims of "hydridization" probably reflect ET deception because there's no evidence, to my knowledge, that this is happening. Have you seen any half human, half grey ETs lately?

@ kvs And since we have found so many Earthlike planets. With similar or even identical chemistry, then this evolution may exist there too!

Known exoplanets are only "earthlike" in a broad sense. Spectroscopic studies may soon reveal the atmospheric composition of Trappist and other worlds, but the chemical makeup of exoplanets is not currently known.

nomadski wrote:
But I think governments are hiding the truth. About possible visitations. Take for example the British incident at Rendlesham forest. Margaret Thatcher, when interviewed about it, said that  " you can not tell the people!".....

IMO Roswell remains the best example of this. In his latest book on the subject KDR seems almost skeptical, not because there's a better explanation (or any at all) but because of the lack of real physical evidence or documentation. But that can be explained by the ongoing coverup.

starman wrote:

nomadski wrote:
Earth scientists recently discussed using genetic engineering , as a means of modifying earth organisms, in populating Mars. So why should an alien race, not be interested in creating hybrids for purpose of populating other worlds?

Claims of "hydridization" probably reflect ET deception because there's no evidence, to my knowledge, that this is happening. Have you seen any half human, half grey ETs lately?

@ kvs And since we have found so many Earthlike planets. With similar or even identical chemistry, then this evolution may exist there too!

Known exoplanets are only "earthlike" in a broad sense. Spectroscopic studies may soon reveal the atmospheric composition of Trappist and other worlds, but the chemical makeup of exoplanets is not currently known.

Actually there are many Earth-like planets. Their main variation is their size. Their surface chemical composition is determined by spectroscopy.
Not by guessing.

Their composition is determined by physics. These planets have similar orbits around similar yellow stars with basically the same chemical composition
reflecting the number of star formation cycles after the Big Bang that they formed. So it is 100% certain that these planets have water and
carbon. They are nothing like Titan (a hydrocarbon moon formed around a gas giant, which reflect the composition of the gas giant) or some
other planet with substantially different chemical composition.

The number of "Earths" (not even Earth-like) planets out there is vast. I used to scoff at Star Trek and its M-class planets as if they are ubiquitous.
But the astronomy of the last 30 years has established that they are ubiquitous. The only difference from Star Trek is that not all of them will have
advanced humanoid civilizations. That is just fantasy. But the probability of several planets with intelligent and even technological life in our
own galaxy is is very high. Not near zero as based on the ignorant estimates from 40+ years ago.

I used to scoff at Star Trek and its M-class planets as if they are ubiquitous.
But the astronomy of the last 30 years has established that they are ubiquitous. The only difference from Star Trek is that not all of them will have
advanced humanoid civilizations.

You can still scoff at the original Star Trek regarding the number of hot women aliens that can't resist Kirk... and the fact that the Universe seems to uniformly speak 20th century english as standard... a common theme of US movies... foreigners all know English... if you shout it at them loud enough they understand... in fact in private they speak english but in strong foreign accents when they are on their own...

nomadski wrote:First we assume that lack of tangible evidence is accidental.

I certainly don't assume that.

This assumption is not warranted. Since the visitors may want to keep their presence a secret .

That's most likely. It's hard to interact with us and our world to the extent they do without leaving some evidence, but it's never sufficient to conclusively prove their presence.

A lot of the abductees only recall their experiences under hypnosis. Looks like they were sedated or imobalised at that time. It seems good policy to keep hidden, from a violent and vicious species like man.

I don't think ETs were any better when at a comparable phase of development. Judging by mutilation cases and those in which abductees were traumatized, they're often not benign.

Also we assume that we can detect their technology. They may be sufficiently more advanced than humans, for their technology to appear to us as natural phenomenon.

In theory yes but there have been many, many sightings of unusual flying craft, and occupants. Many witnesses report familiar technology. Considering that the phenomenon is generally marginalized despite all that--due to lack of conclusive proof in the public domain--it doesn't appear necessary to be fully hidden to avoid much attention.

kvs wrote:
Actually there are many Earth-like planets.  Their main variation is their size.

They're "earthlike" in the sense of being within an order of magnitude or so of Earth's mass. 

Their surface chemical composition is determined by spectroscopy.

Spectroscopy is a good way to determine atmospheric composition--the fastest way to see if a planet is inhabited.

Their composition is determined by physics.  These planets have similar orbits around similar yellow stars with basically the same chemical composition
reflecting the number of star formation cycles after the Big Bang that they formed.   So it is 100% certain that these planets have water and
carbon.   They are nothing like Titan (a hydrocarbon moon formed around a gas giant, which reflect the composition of the gas giant) or some
other planet with substantially different chemical composition.

It's my understanding that generally, the more recently formed a star/planetary system is, the more likely it is to have high metallicity. I wonder though, if some Population II systems could've "lucked out" and become habitable a billion or more years before life appeared here. Maybe it was possible close to the centers of globular clusters or the galactic center where heavier elements probably tended to migrate.

The number of "Earths" (not even Earth-like) planets out there is vast..... 

Dunno if we can say "vast" but it's statistically highly likely they exist, even if none have been actually verified. But for those who take UFOlogy seriously, that may not be necessary.

But the probability of several planets with intelligent and even technological life in our
own galaxy is is very high.    Not near zero as based on the ignorant estimates from 40+ years ago.

Yes that seems virtually certain or there wouldn't be a UFO phenomenon.

nomadski wrote:
I think the mutilation cases you refer to, are most likely caused by US government, obtaining samples from domestic animals, to check for radiation fallout after atmospheric nuke tests. And results on human food chain. Samples are taken from organs, at constant exposure to soil or grass. I think this got mixed up with UFO phenomenon.

No I don't think so. There are cases in which witnesses saw UFOs or ETs in the act of taking or dismembering animals. There's no need for the government to secretly mutilate animals to check for radiation fallout (which incidentally hasn't been a problem for many years) or other environmental poisoning. They could get all the samples they need from a slaughterhouse.

As regards familiar technology. This is not the case. Indications are, that humans are subject to a form of mind control. They are given images that already exists in their mind. But some senses are more difficult to control. Such as sound or the sense of touch. Think of it like, when a veterinarian, puts blindfold on a sedated animal, to calm it down. But the animal can still feel or hear. I think the standard images of the public for the aliens, is false. I don't think we know, what they look like! The idea of recording brain function, remotely, has been done recently. By a device similar to a CT scan. So technically it is possible to remotely record or transmit to a brain.

True, ETs themselves might not really use familiar technology. But judging by the number of sightings of such gear, they certainly want us to think they do. The Alien Plan for Earth has an explanation for that. I doubt many reported aliens are genuine in the sense of being naturally evolved or representative of a real ET group. In 1973 there was a report of a fishlike alien, and other bizarre forms.

I have a logical problem with fish. A fish can never solve a rubic cube problem. I think any self respecting alien, should be able to play chess!

Octopus are some of the smartest known animals are are able to problem solve to get food. They had experiments where they put food into jars with clear lids... the octopus very quickly grabbed the jar and picked it up and applied force in different directions to get inside the jar and managed to rapidly open the lid and get the food inside. If you designed a cube and took the time to train them I am sure they could manage a simple cube fairly quickly...

And really if you think about it the only difference between water and air is density, so a planet with a super thick gas atmosphere could have marine like animals that can fly around like they are swimming in the lower atmosphere... other planets don't need to be exactly like earth for life to start... on Earth itself there have been about 6 reboots where 90+ percent of all life died out and was replaced by an enormous range of new life and new species on land and at sea.... the first extinction was critical because the first extinction was created by photosynthesis which added a massive amount of free oxygen into the atmosphere that killed off most of the existing life forms of the time, but it introduced a chemical element that was massively reactive and energy rich... equally it was dangerous and toxic for most existing life of the time... without that extinction we would not exist... and there were 4 more after that... right now a lot of species are being wiped out but that is perfectly normal... it does not matter what we do extinction will occur because it is a natural process... just like humans being born, getting old, and dying... though we are fighting that too.

GarryB wrote:
Octopus are some of the smartest known animals are are able to problem solve to get food. They had experiments where they put food into jars with clear lids... the octopus very quickly grabbed the jar and picked it up and applied force in different directions to get inside the jar and managed to rapidly open the lid and get the food inside.  If you designed a cube and took the time to train them I am sure they could manage a simple cube fairly quickly...

I recall at least one sci fi series, The Tripods Trilogy, in which the invaders of Earth were highly evolved octopoids. They came from a world with higher gravity hence more volatiles like water, which meant terrestrial evolution didn't have much scope and octopoids filled the advanced niches.
Btw there was an old UFO report about a man attacked by a large octopus-like creature but that sort of thing is very much the exception.

..... so a planet with a super thick gas atmosphere could have marine like animals that can fly around like they are swimming in the lower atmosphere...

The catch is, to have a very thick atmosphere a planet would need high gravity--not conducive to the evolution of flight.