It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.


Thank you.




Could they really keep ETs secret?

page: 5
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in


posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 10:45 PM



Actually, we know that fables and superstitions exist as artifacts of Psychology.

Not really.
Perhaps in some ambiguous somewhere in the vast reaches of our galaxy or Universe, but, stopping in for slurpees slushee drinks and some cattle mutilations on the way to Wolf359?

Psychology has no effect on biology.

Why, prey tell, would ET want to go to a Red Dwarf? NOT a very interesting star.

Actually, red dwarfs can support habitable planets as far as we know as well as any other. Tidally locked planets in a habitable zone have been nicknamed "Eyeball Earths" (google it).

In fact the closet habitable planet to the Earth is likely around an M-class star aka red dwarf:

Definitions: An Earth-like planet is a 0.5 to 1.4 Earth radii planet orbiting within the habitable zone of the star. η Earth (Eta Earth) is the stellar frequency of Earth-like planets. δ Earth (Delta Earth) is the mean distance between Earth-like planets. p10 Earth is the probability of an Earth-like planet within 10 light years from Earth.

In fact M-stars have a higher percentage of habitable zone planets compared to stars like our sun (48% for M-Stars compared to ~22% for F, G and K stars more like our Sun/Sol.)

In fact one star: Gliese 667 hosts THREE:

Kasting, James F., Kopparapu, Ravi, Ramirez, Ramses R., & Harman, Chester 2013, ArXiv e-prints: Remote Life Detection Criteria, Habitable Zone Boundaries, and the Frequency of Earthlike Planets around M and Late-K Stars

Add to this, the fact that M-stars make up the largest percentage of stars overall in our galaxy (80%)....

....and yes, they would be very interesting to an alien species looking for life since they are more likely to host a habitable zone planet and there simply are a lot more of them.

Here are some known habitable zone planets around M-stars.

They're some of our best candidates habitable planets.

If you're working with probabilities you might want to stay abreast of the data.
Just a tip.

edit on 22-12-2013 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 22 2013 @ 10:54 PM



Like I said, the jury is still out on the map. There are interesting recent discoveries which I talked about in another thread but nothing definitive yet.

Rushing to judgement on it in the 1970s is why a lot of serious people in astronomy back away from it as they do the whole UFO subject.

There is a difference between y'all and me; You want something "definitive". in "proven", a "sure thing"...the "Ideal Switch". Doesn't exist, all we have are approximations, probabilities. And, all we can do is select for the best probability.

And, in that "Rush to judgment" what was the error rate?

Here's the thing: Aliens, of any type, whether it be saucer flying, probe wielding grays or simple alien microbes have not been confirmed to exist anywhere.

Until then, it is a leap to say that they in fact exist anywhere because it will be an extraordinary thing if/when they are discovered!

Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence.

Now you and I know that at least the latter is likely around the nearby stars based on probability.

But probability alone does not present extraordinary evidence. It's not evidence at all. It's a prediction as you said. One which awaits future data to confirm or refute it.

Another place where you and I differ is that you believe that probability of at least some life around the nearby stars means that intelligent, technological aliens are -probably- visiting us.

Do you not see where you're taking a light-year sized leap?

We don't know the atmospheres of the habitable zone planets on the Hill Map. We don't know for a fact that they have any life. We don't know if intelligence is the inevitable end result of biological evolution or a rarity, we don't know how common it is for intelligent life to develop interstellar travel, I could go on but you are skipping over or glossing over a LOT of unknowns.

And that, is what is commonly called rushing to judgement with inadequate data. There simply is NOT ENOUGH data on which to say anything one way or the other about intelligent space-faring civilizations around the nearby stars yet.

Can we be patient?

posted on Dec, 23 2013 @ 01:04 AM


Can we be patient?

Again, you are seeking an absolute; it does not exist!

The very best we can ever have is high probability, and you go through life using probability for every single major decision you make. When you decide to do something, your decision is based on your collection of "historic data" for such decisions, your expectations then become the set of historical outcomes. The new data is added to the collection. rinse and repeat for any and all things you do. Probability is the core of sentient operation.

You say I "jump to conclusions"; and I say that my conclusion is a valid Bayesian inference. You have established conservative scientific protocol to rely upon. I will not argue with that which is a well established and proven model and system.

However, there are alternate methods that can speed up the process, some of these methods were not practical even as recent as 15 - 20 years ago. Today with modern data processing we can "sift" through much more data in a far short time. We can run complex computations and actually find the real world probabilities of any given event or phenomenon.

Again; The map and experience of the Hill's is very definitely not a random occurrence, nor is it made up. The map itself, while a biased selection, does fit highly probable stars into a predetermined "geometric template". The fact that these stars do fit with such precision is astonishing, and has the effect of increasing the probabilities far more dramatically than most can imagine.

Patients? Oh Hell NO! I don't think Earth has the time.

posted on Dec, 23 2013 @ 03:21 AM
Ok, regarding the idea that perhaps the 'greys' or other aliens or abduction phenomena could perhaps be planted, this is a relevant link;

The Hypothesis


and further on



Clandestine research into thought manipulation has NOT stopped, despite CIA protestations that it no longer sponsors such studies. Victor Marchetti, 14-year veteran of the CIA and author of the renown expose, THE CIA AND THE CULT OF INTELLIGENCE, confirmed in a 1977 interview that the mind control research continues, and that CIA claims to the contrary are a "cover story." The Central Intelligence Agency was not the only government agency involved in this research. Indeed, many branches of our government took part in these studies - including NASA, the Atomic Energy Commission, as well as all branches of the Defense Department.



I recommend reading the entire piece as it reveals just how advanced the technques and technologies available for the implantation of false memories were, some 40-50 years ago.

posted on Dec, 23 2013 @ 03:50 AM

Interesting thread. S&F.

I suppose secrets - by their very nature - are only known about when either uncovered or accidently revealed. On that basis, I suppose we don't have any idea how good governments truly are at keeping secrets.

That said, I think the only way a government or goverments could keep a secret this big is if only a very small group of people knew about it. I guess it's entirely plausible that a small, elite group could keep ET secret - but then that raises the question of what value that knowledge would actually have if you were unable to do very much with it to maintain it's secrecy?

^^ THIS.

In order to understand the ET biology, technology, etc the best and brightest would need to be in the program but the fact is the best and brightest would reveal the program knowingly or unknowingly.

In order for them to be the best and brightest they'd have to do a lot of networking outside of the program, publishing outside the program, etc. And the nature of doing this would eventually reveal the program. This has happened plenty of times with classified stuff. It just can't be kept secret long.

The more people who know, the higher the risk that the program would be exposed in multiple ways. The less people who know, the less access you have to the scientific world.
edit on 23-12-2013 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 23 2013 @ 09:45 AM
reply to post by cuckooold

I know those who have experiences are not listened to. But will continue to speak up.

Is it a astral or mind thing? Or a physical? Or both, at different times. Skyfloating has a thread on this, and I brought up some points over and over, because yes it is astral or a sense of being pulled at times.
But its also physical.

Greys, grey or pink colored greys, because they're not all grey colored. But they are roughly the same type of being. And have similar faces at least. The pink colored one I saw had a twiggy type body.

But right in front of me, when I opened the glass sliding door in the middle evening, roughly after 8 pm. Inches in front of me, right there in plain sight, face to face, for a couple solid seconds of staring at each other, in which I felt oddly interested, calm, but intense alert feeling building, yet passed some kind of test, it felt like. Then he leapt to the side, twisting and vanished.

That night....very interesting dreams of ufo's, and family abductions and being told they don't do time, but this day took 9 days to complete. And being given a questionaire.

Its not a program or suggestion someone like a black op or para miliatary, is putting in our minds.

Though some level of ET or lower frequency ET works with them, real ET's are way over their heads.

Out of my 5 boys, 2 of them, the second oldest who is now 23, and the youngest, who is now 12, also saw a grey at the glass sliding doors and at the windows. They identified a look similar to this each time:

People can keep trying to guess its this or that, maybe it makes them sleep better at night. But some of us know otherwise, 100%, underscored with emphasis.

Edit to add yet again: the thing that was very interesting in actually having ET at the door, is for a couple of years I kept saying, show yourselves, why sneak around at night and kidnap us, knock would you? And things to this affect. But irony is most people who would say that would be horrified and scared out of their trees if they saw a grey, perhaps less so with the human types, but they work together often, in our case. I have a feeling it was reaction they were looking for.
edit on 23-12-2013 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 23 2013 @ 01:53 PM

reply to post by cuckooold


I wouldn't be horrified or scared. I'd be elated. Can you send them to my place for a chat and perhaps coffee?

I'd have a plethora of questions for them.


posted on Dec, 23 2013 @ 10:28 PM
reply to post by Unity_99

I don't really understand what you are getting at here, nor how it relates to the link I posted.

Technologies like this;







and this;



, all seem indicative of a human presence (if not all humans and no ET) during the abduction process. I cannot recommend this link enough, and think anyone who believes they may be the victim of an abduction read this with an open mind.

posted on Dec, 25 2013 @ 04:22 AM
>Could they really keep ETs secret?

No they couldn't. Those who "want" to know can learn quite easily that ETs are indeed real. What would be nice would be to get a good understanding of the situation (who, how many, why, what, etc.) but that I'm sure some indeed want to keep the truth secret...

top topics

<< 2  3  4   >>

log in