So there's nuance here. Let's define "Aliens" as "non human sentiences". Personally, I think ET hypothesis is valid. Maybe you feel UT (ultra-terrestrial) hypothesis makes more sesne. Or "ED" ( extra-dimensional, as opposed to "from another planet/galaxy").
Facts: there's abundance of testimony that would secure conviction in court regarding abductions, encounters (of variosu "kinds"), and "multi-sensor data".
Truth is, it goes back centuries, before we could concievably have "RE'd" (reverse-engineered) anything similar. So there has to be something external to our current human civilization (not so surprising, how can you explain how megalithic 100-ton bricks structures were build by "primitives").
Yes, this is "provocative" (perhaps) for some on HN. That's the point. not adversarial, but simply to "provoke" a thought - rather, a question - "what is" the nature of reality? The existence of a "higher"/superior/more technological sentient intelligence interacting with us and our planet is a natural pairing with that question.
Belief is important. Because, your personal experience constitutes, for others, a belief. And that's much of the "evidence" we have.
Trend seems clear in gestalt: disclsoure is coming. So I ask here to take the pulse of this "intellectual/technical/curious/secular" (corase categroties) community. Do you believe this is real? If so, why? If not, why not?
If we were to get "DISCLOSURE" (ie, the "government authroity" of a "respect country" stating unequivocally that the reality of "alien" contact is true) woudl your ontology/worldview be "shattered" or "robust", or "otehr"?
*why so many "airquotes"? I recognize the plurality of meanings and layers of baggage associated with different terms. THe air-quotes are simply a glib nod to such multiplicity. Take as such, s'il vous plais.
Basically this post is to serve as a historical marker for taking the temperature of a significant collective in the "pre-disclosure" era. So this is your chance to record your official viewpoint, before it all comes down. What you say?
I am very interested.
There's a really good chance that the speed of light is the universal speed limit. If that's the case, then interstellar travel isn't going to be worth it for resources because the time and energy it takes to do it will almost certainly eclipse what you're going to gain from the trip. Especially if that trip is going to take thousands/millions of years.
The reality is that if you have the energy and resources to move a significant population to another star system, you're going to have to solve permanent space habitation; and if you did that, why the hell do you need to go anywhere?
"Shits and giggles" just doesn't seem like much of a reason to load the next 300 generations of your family into an interstellar RV.
reply