The Futility of the Search For Extraterrestrial Intelligence

First, there is no evidence of alien craft in that article. So, let's get passed that, at least.

From there, I'm fine with suggesting that there are events that we don't fully understand. We don't know everything there is to know. That is ALWAYS true with science, and every scientist will state that up front. But, that does not improve the odds that there are aliens who have figured out how to defy everything we know about physics and have decided to come to this particular planet.

So, adding up all the times people say "maybe" just doesn't get beyond zero.

Also, this article references Hynek as an important supporter of the possibility of alien craft. However, after his time on Project Bluebook, he went back to strongly doubting this idea. I would be happier by a lot if people's opinions were presented with serious honesty.

Finally,

- it IS a fact that this article was written in the context of a congressional move to drum up money for more UFO investigation - which undoubtedly is beneficial to DoD, as it involves sensing and analysis. Let's remember that we have NO CLUE how much is being spend in this area today, as our DoD is deadly serious about knowing what is flying around and not telling us their budget.

- our DoD is NEVER going to release anything that shows our full capability to sense and identify objects on Earth's surface, in our atmosphere, in our waters or in space. We already know full well that they don't do that.

- what has been released has been in response to requests from high places for the release of this kind of material. It's not the Navy or ?? carrying out an effort to inform the public of UFOs. If they thought there were UFOs flying around, do you really think this is how the world would be informed??

 

How about a study by some real scientists using scientific protocols all of which your high school 'debunker' must be unaware

https://www.theblackvault.com/docum...-the-science-behind-the-nimitz-ufo-encounter/

Robert Powell, Richard Hoffman, Morgan Fiel in the fall of 2017 founded a non profit organization
Called the Scientific Coalition of UAP studies. Over 120 members, 28% of membership are PHDs,
professors from Universities, NASA employees, people who are in the defense industry, people who
are in the high tech industry. Over half the SCUS membership have advanced degrees

He utterly destroys your premise.

Listen to the whole thing. but note 33:47 where Greenwald asks Powell about West claim on the camera 'darting off to the left and losing lock'

He DESTROYS Mick West

 

LOL!!! You are SO desperate. Mick West has a university degree and has published papers.

The point, of course, is that that is total overkill in what is needed to debunk "go fast".l

That's true for "go fast".

That is a TOTAL BS movie, dubbed to hell and uninterpretable.

More importantly, you ONCE AGAIN don't even know what video I'm proving to be debunked.

You think you can get through this on switching videos, quoting stories, misquoting those on Project Bluebook, and other total nonsense.


I'm pointing out that "go fast" is debunked.

And, all you try to do is dodge, dodge, dodge.

 

Real science

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1uY47ijzGETwYJocR1uhqxP0KTPWChlOG/view

 

No, you just dodged an interview with someone who debunks Mick West.

ANd you won't even listen, you say it's 'bs'.

I could say the same thing about west, anyone can say that about anything.

That's not science.

Science is curiosity, it's cautious but curious.

For someone who claims to love science, you sure act in ways unbecoming of a scientist.

Check out my other reply, a 270 page forensic analysis of the Nimitz UFO Encounter

 

You are a mystery to me.

You profess to be a man of science.

But no scientist I know of would come to a conclusion about UAPs based on the testimony of Mick West.

Powell, in the video which is not a video, it's an audio file, Robert Powell, in great detail, explains what Mick West
and others like him are missing in there conclusions, all of which are not done as the result of an investigation. They are done
from hasty guessing or hasty analysis. I just sent you a 270 page forensic study. If Mick West was serious about it, he would have done something similar. Powell confronted West on this very point, and West didn't want to bother.

There are many people who have to be interviewed, radar data, FLIR data, visual testimony by trained pilots, more than one video,
circumstances, pertinent personnel to be factored in before you can come to any real conclusion. Even then, the best conclusion you can come to is whether the object is banal, or compelling in the sense of a real UAP.

How can you not know this?

How can you profess to be a man of science and put all your eggs into the Mick West basket?

 

The info that has come out in the past 4 years came out because of a whistleblower. Luis Elizondo worked for an agency that investigated these encounters sponsored by Harry Reid in 2007. In 2017 he quit because he felt the government was not being forthcoming enough with the public.

I’m sure you will automatically discredit Elizondo without bothering to watch any of the dozens of interviews he’s done, and claim you follow the facts.

 

If you have something that pertains to "go fast", then CITE IT.

Otherwise, all you are doing is dodging, again.

 

More crap as you once again do NOTHING but dodge.

It's not Mick West you have to refute.

It's high school math.

Got that? High school math.

 

I'm fine with forcing out the reports that UFOlogists believe in. Why wouldn't I be?

I'm just pointing out that:
- the "go fast" video is trivial to debunk if you got an intro to trigonometry in high school.
- UFOlogists still include that as one of their shining lights of "evidence".

The problem here is that UFOlogists are willing to promote debunked nonsense as if it is evidence.

Why should I trust anything any UFOlogist says when THAT is the treatment of the truth as they see it.

And again, I'm fine with anything any pilot reports. They have a record of honesty. However, what they say about their sightings can not be taken as the final word on those objects.

Remember that officials in the Navy do not make that claim. I'm with THEM.

And, I'm certainly not going to accept claims from some UFOlogist who still tries to sell me "go fast" as piloted by little green men, without even being willing to discuss that vid.

 

Luis Elizondo is not a UFOlogist by any stretch of the imagination.

 

Well, I didn't look him up, as I'm rarely bothered by people providing information for the public! So, good for him!

 

You should really look him up.

You seem to care enough about the topic to spend time arguing over the authenticity of videos that are just a sliver of the topic.

There is a much bigger picture that you are missing. You are standing at the edge of a forest arguing over whether or not one piece of of it is a tree.

 

I know there is a ton of stuff.

The thing about the "go fast" video is that 60 Minutes and others always include that vid and they consistently include no guests who have any inclination other than to promote the presence of aliens.

The fact that the "go fast" video is easily debunked says something significant about both the media and the UFO movement.

I don't have anything to add to the millions of narratives of people who are so sure they encountered aliens or have a blurry nighttime movie of a hubcap.

 

The fact that you know Nick West but not Luis Elizondo shows that you have a very narrow view on this subject.

Logic can only get you so far without information. The information you’ve sequestered yourself to on this topic is extremely biased.

 

False premise.

Powell, who invited West for debate, but West refused, DESTROYED his 'premise'.

Got that?

Hmmmm?

FALSE PREMISE

Got that?

 

Lue Elizondo was actually part of the government's somewhat secret, but later revealed to the public UAP investigation program as his job!

 

I did. Your premise is false.

Proving his 'math' is acquiescing to a false premise, that his math proves something, it doesn't.

How do I know that is true? Iisten to the audiotape, below.

Robert Powell, Richard Hoffman, Morgan Fiel in the fall of 2017 founded a non profit organization
Called the Scientific Coalition of UAP studies. Over 120 members, 28% of membership are PHDs,
professors from Universities, NASA employees, people who are in the defense industry, people who
are in the high tech industry. Over half the SCUS membership have advanced degrees

He utterly destroys your premise.

https://www.theblackvault.com/docum...-the-science-behind-the-nimitz-ufo-encounter/

Listen to the whole thing. but note 33:47 where Greenwald asks Powell about West claim on the camera 'darting off to the left and losing lock'

He DESTROYS Mick West

Real Science: a 270 forensic study on the Nimitz 2004 videos

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1uY47ijzGETwYJocR1uhqxP0KTPWChlOG/view

"I am not a scientist" -- Mick West

 

It's not about aliens.

It's about this: refuting your premise that its' 'all schlock' and every explanation on all that's been reported is 'banal'.

That is false.

You put all your argument eggs in West's basket.

That's not a scientific approach.

IF you rebut and say, 'it's not about science' it's about math'. Science is not required, that's just false.

No, that's a false premise. Math is just a part of it.

It's about forensic science.

Got it? Math, alone, doesn't get you there.

Now, you really should take some time and listen to the audiotape.

Listen to the whole thing. but note 33:47 where Greenwald asks Powell about West claim on the camera 'darting off to the left and losing lock'

And, no, it's not bs. Sorry. What's BS is your claiming it's BS when it isn't.

https://www.theblackvault.com/docum...-the-science-behind-the-nimitz-ufo-encounter/

a 270 page forensic study on the Nimitz 2004 videos, because that's what FORENSIC science requires, AN INVESTIGATION.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1uY47ijzGETwYJocR1uhqxP0KTPWChlOG/view

 

"Desperate" and "LOL" are expressions of emotion. Emotion doesn't support a scientific premise. It's a cheap debate trick called 'posturing'.

Hardly the stuff of science.

IF Mick West had some serious credentials, then why didn't he put them in his bio?

But, in a video he admitted he wasn't a scientist, so on matters of forensic science, it would not be wise to put all your argument's eggs in his basket.

Why? Because you'd be wrong, if you did.

And you are, indeed, wrong.

And, by the way, what is his degree? and please link to some of his papers.

Thank you,

 

Your premise is predicated on the falsehood that it's 'trivial to debunk' because someone not a scientist pretending to do forensic science claims all that is needed is trig.

And, you believe him.

Generalities, generalities. Some do, some don't. Ignore them.

If you want to argue that there are crazies in the world of Ufology, that's true.

There are crazy people everywhere, even a few crazy doctors in the Trump camp.

I just ignore them. But, making hay out of it is a waste of time and beside the point.

But you're perfectly willing to take West's word as the final word.

In a forensic analysis, the pilots testimony belongs in any such analysis, among many other factors, to be examined
for what they are, letting the chips fall where they may, but they must be considered, and not just the pilots, but all pertinent
personnel, the radar people, etc.

They have gone from 'there is no such thing and we don't care about them' to 'we are studying them and they are real, whatever they are'.

that's progress.

And who might that be?

You pepper your arguments with unscientific, loaded words.

Surely, you can do better than that.

 

I cited Mick West (whom you can't even spell), for one reason - he is one of those who debunked the "go fast" video, requiring no more than the use of high school math and the information on the pilot's display.

Do you have information that pokes holes in this debunking?

If so, I'm very interested. So far, I have found none.

As you well know, it's really not necessary to search for more people who believe in alien air traffic. There are plenty of people making various claims of what they've seen. Even Buzz Aldrin thought he saw aliens.

What is missing is actual analysis and interpretation. Even the usually reputable 60 Minutes program TOTALLY ignored that, not inviting even one person to point out that these Navy videos are debunked as evidence of aliens.

 

The "go fast" video isn't relevant to the big picture.

 

True. But, the issue isn't what his job was.

Today, the "go fast" video is used as clear evidence of alien traffic in our airspace. Yet, that video is easily debunked.

This is a problem for UFOlogy. There are lots of pieces of evidence and claims of sightings. If UFOlogy is legitimate, false information would not continue to be promoted.



Luis Elizondo is strongly associated with these videos and touts his credentials in movies he produces and stars in.

If he were such an honest expert, he wouldn't be accepting as evidence a video that has been debunked. Instead, he'd clean the UFOlogy house of the various pieces of false evidence and reclaim the legitimacy of UFOlogy.

 

Please cite where ANY of these individuals countered the clear debunking of the "go fast" video.

As for West not being a scientist, that's just plain silly. West would much more accurately be described as an engineer with significant experience in photography and other related technical fields.

First, analyzing "go fast" does not require anything that could possibly be called science.

Second, not one of the other claimants, pilots, etc., is a scientist, either.