Has first contact already happened?

Off topic discussion zone.

Moderators: winston, another_commander, Cody

User avatar
Lestradae
---- E L I T E ----
---- E L I T E ----
Posts: 3092
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:30 pm
Location: Vienna, Austria

Has first contact already happened?

Post by Lestradae » Fri Jul 25, 2008 8:45 am

Has first contact already happened?

One of the astronauts who where amongst the first to walk on the moon, Dr. Edgar Mitchell, claims in an interview that contact with aliens has been established since an alien accident happened in Roswell sixty years ago.

This is not your usual UFO-nut. This is a guy who has been on the moon, has an academic career of fourty years and is connected to the higher circles of NASA, military and intelligence community in the US ...

Perhaps this is interesting?

Have a look here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhNdxdveK7c

... or here:

http://www.kerrangradio.co.uk/goout.asp ... onaut.html

By the way, the "alien photograph" in the article was already proven to be fake - but it has nothing to do with Mitchell`s interview, apparently the newspaper added it in for "flavour" ...

Could this be it? :shock:

Potentially intrigued

L

User avatar
Commander Mysenses
Deadly
Deadly
Posts: 214
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 9:30 am
Location: Devon, a backward little planet scourged by evil weather

Re: Has first contact already happened?

Post by Commander Mysenses » Fri Jul 25, 2008 9:20 am

Lestradae wrote:This is not your usual UFO-nut. This is a guy who has been on the moon, has an academic career of fourty years and is connected to the higher circles of NASA, military and intelligence community in the US ...
Nothing there that precludes him from being a nutcase!

... Verifiable evidence?

User avatar
JohnnyBoy
---- E L I T E ----
---- E L I T E ----
Posts: 490
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 9:41 pm
Location: West Sussex, UK (rich agricultural)

Post by JohnnyBoy » Fri Jul 25, 2008 9:48 am

"Sometimes I think we're alone in the universe, and sometimes I think we're not. In either case the idea is quite staggering."
- Arthur C. Clarke
"That's no vicious Treeoid. That's my wife."

User avatar
JohnnyBoy
---- E L I T E ----
---- E L I T E ----
Posts: 490
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 9:41 pm
Location: West Sussex, UK (rich agricultural)

Post by JohnnyBoy » Fri Jul 25, 2008 8:49 pm

Lestradae wrote:This is not your usual UFO-nut.
Lestradae, you might want to take a look at Ed Mitchell's background. He seems to be missing the healthy dose of scepticism that objective science normally requires...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edgar_Mitc ... _interests
"That's no vicious Treeoid. That's my wife."

User avatar
Lestradae
---- E L I T E ----
---- E L I T E ----
Posts: 3092
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:30 pm
Location: Vienna, Austria

..

Post by Lestradae » Fri Jul 25, 2008 9:24 pm

Hi JohnnyBoy,

hm, I don`t find anything in his "other interests" that gives me the idea that he is missing scepticism.

Interest in parapsychology is not as absurd as some people would have it, that those phenomena basically exist at least at a micro-level has been proven in many studies - it`s just that the macro-effects do not seem to be repeatable under laboratory conditions and don`fit into mainstream science thinking ...

That might just mean that today`s laboratory conditions and mainstream science thinking are the problem, not nescessarily the phenomenon ... for an 18th century scientist, stones falling from the sky or radioactive materials wouldn`t have been repeatable in their laboratories, too, and were discredited by then`s sceptics mainstream science thinking.

Well, one day we might know, I`m agnostic concerning the alien interpretation of the UFO phenomenon - I say, could be, but nothing proven yet ...

8)

L

User avatar
Commander Mysenses
Deadly
Deadly
Posts: 214
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 9:30 am
Location: Devon, a backward little planet scourged by evil weather

Post by Commander Mysenses » Fri Jul 25, 2008 11:53 pm

I am less agnostic about Alien vistations than I am about an omnipotent deity... but that's not saying much!

User avatar
JohnnyBoy
---- E L I T E ----
---- E L I T E ----
Posts: 490
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 9:41 pm
Location: West Sussex, UK (rich agricultural)

Post by JohnnyBoy » Sat Jul 26, 2008 8:21 am

@Lestradae - You make a very good point; at least Ed Mitchell has conducted many years of 'conventional' science before permitting himself to wander 'off the beaten track'.

I suppose that I've conditioned myself to roll my eyes when I discover people who think that 'parapsychology', 'alien visitations' or 'faith healing' is some kind of alternative to conventional science. Richard Dawkins expresses this wonderfully... http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?doc ... 3140975017
"That's no vicious Treeoid. That's my wife."

User avatar
Lestradae
---- E L I T E ----
---- E L I T E ----
Posts: 3092
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:30 pm
Location: Vienna, Austria

..

Post by Lestradae » Sat Aug 02, 2008 8:48 am

JohnnyBoy wrote:I suppose that I've conditioned myself to roll my eyes when I discover people who think that 'parapsychology', 'alien visitations' or 'faith healing' is some kind of alternative to conventional science.
Well, me too. I don`t think those topics are or even could be an "alternative" to science - but that they could turn out to be parts of nature not yet properly understood from a scientific viewpoint one day.

I don`t believe in "the supernatural" (whatever that would be?) at all, but alien visitations, psychic abilities and faith healing could be perfectly natural phenomena ...
Richard Dawkins expresses this wonderfully... http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?doc ... 3140975017
I really like Richard Dawkins thinking, but he goes overboard more than sometimes. The problem is, that he stops thinking in empiric terms when it comes to the "paranormal", ignores all data he doesn`t like, and puts forth as an argument that "those phenomena don`t fit into the scientific worldview" ...

If a theory doesn`t fit the data, you change the theory, not the data, or so would I propose.

User avatar
Cmdr James
Commodore
Commodore
Posts: 1269
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2007 10:43 pm
Location: Berlin

Post by Cmdr James » Sat Aug 02, 2008 8:59 am

They could be parts os nature not yet understood, but there is no (valid) evidence for the paranormal.

There has been a huge amount of research into psychic abilities and so on, and believe me, most scientists would love it if there were some proof -- it would open huge new areas of research, and insight into the science of nature. But there isnt. Honestly, the evidence for the paranormal is extremely sketchy and really at this point deserves to be written off as crackpottery.

User avatar
JohnnyBoy
---- E L I T E ----
---- E L I T E ----
Posts: 490
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 9:41 pm
Location: West Sussex, UK (rich agricultural)

Re: ..

Post by JohnnyBoy » Mon Aug 04, 2008 11:57 am

Lestradae wrote:I really like Richard Dawkins thinking, but he goes overboard more than sometimes. The problem is, that he stops thinking in empiric terms when it comes to the "paranormal", ignores all data he doesn`t like, and puts forth as an argument that "those phenomena don`t fit into the scientific worldview" ...
Yeah, he falls into this trap every time he says "Darwinian evolution is simply fact..."

Thing is, science shouldn't ever declare that it has uncovered 'facts' because this closes the door to updating or refining those 'facts' when new evidence is discovered.

But I'll still be watching him tonight on Channel 4 at 8pm in "The Genius of Charles Darwin".
"That's no vicious Treeoid. That's my wife."

User avatar
JohnnyBoy
---- E L I T E ----
---- E L I T E ----
Posts: 490
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 9:41 pm
Location: West Sussex, UK (rich agricultural)

Re: ..

Post by JohnnyBoy » Thu Aug 21, 2008 10:06 pm

JohnnyBoy wrote:But I'll still be watching him tonight on Channel 4 at 8pm in "The Genius of Charles Darwin".
Completely off-topic: I don't know if anyone missed any of the episodes of TGOCD, but some kind soul has posted all three on YouTube - http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p ... FD85CBC4A4
"That's no vicious Treeoid. That's my wife."

User avatar
Erai
Dangerous
Dangerous
Posts: 65
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 10:09 am
Location: Utrecht (Poor Industrial, Anarchy)

Re: ..

Post by Erai » Fri Aug 22, 2008 11:40 am

JohnnyBoy wrote:
Lestradae wrote:I really like Richard Dawkins thinking, but he goes overboard more than sometimes. The problem is, that he stops thinking in empiric terms when it comes to the "paranormal", ignores all data he doesn`t like, and puts forth as an argument that "those phenomena don`t fit into the scientific worldview" ...
Yeah, he falls into this trap every time he says "Darwinian evolution is simply fact..." (...)
I suppose that's mostly to pre-empt the "It's just a theory" bullcrap of dim-witted Hovindians and Boucaillists like Ben Stein or Harun Yahya.

But he has gone to great lengths to try to explain that in science "facts" rank lower than the theories that explain the underlying principles behind them :)

User avatar
Lestradae
---- E L I T E ----
---- E L I T E ----
Posts: 3092
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 10:30 pm
Location: Vienna, Austria

...

Post by Lestradae » Fri Aug 22, 2008 9:06 pm

he has gone to great lengths to try to explain that in science "facts" rank lower than the theories that explain the underlying principles behind them
That`s dogmatics, not science.

User avatar
JohnnyBoy
---- E L I T E ----
---- E L I T E ----
Posts: 490
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 9:41 pm
Location: West Sussex, UK (rich agricultural)

Re: ...

Post by JohnnyBoy » Fri Aug 22, 2008 9:16 pm

Lestradae wrote:That`s dogmatics, not science.
I thought that this was Dogmatics....

Image
"That's no vicious Treeoid. That's my wife."

User avatar
JensAyton
Grand Admiral Emeritus
Grand Admiral Emeritus
Posts: 6657
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 2:43 pm
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by JensAyton » Fri Aug 22, 2008 9:51 pm

I believe you are mistaken.

Image

Post Reply