The most astonishing aspect of all extra-terrestrial phenomena is the huge number of intelligent people who are determined to deny it all; and they often do it with a vehemence that defies rationality. Why do they need to do that?
shareI am very open minded and I do believe in extra-terrestrial life but(and it's a big one), where is the evidence that we are being visited? Science has proven time and time again that eyewitness testimony is not very reliable. What is really interesting is not that there is a very unlikely possibility of aliens abducting people but the fact that such a belief exists.
sharePrecisely. The thing I am curious about is, of course historically there must have been a 'Day 1'... when someone first reported to have seen aliens in some forms. But when did people start to report that aliens abduct humans? I don't see it so likely but maybe there would be a study about the rationale behind that. Why the abductions? Or, for example, what would the need be, I mean the need of the 'aliens' to harm people, scare them, the reason to make people (that are not abducted) suffer, or the moment they are hypnotized, why making them levitate, breaking their vertebrae...
Or someone may have studied the percentage of people according to whom aliens abduct humans, compared to the percentage of people just seeing aliens....
....I am really astonished by this belief that they need to abduct people
There have been people looking into that, actually. For the most part, we find a few interesting things:
1. Alien sightings and alien abductions tend to increase after the release of a sci-fi film.
2. The reported appearance of aliens and of their spacecraft has changed over time, usually mirroring the most popular "aliens" seen in the movies or reported in papers. For instance, nobody ever saw a "flying saucer" until a newspaper man misquoted a witness - afterwards everybody saw them.
3. The rise in reported alien abductions coincides with a DECREASE in the reports of demonic possession/attacks/abductions.
All of which points to a few obvious ideas: people have always experienced these kinds of things. In the past they attributed them to ghosts and demons. As science fiction became more popular, more and more people started attributing them to aliens. And as the popular image of aliens changes, the reports of "victims" and "witnesses" change to match them.
The only rational conclusion is that it's all a delusion. Real world occurrences don't generally change to match the expectations of witnesses.
The only rational conclusion is that it's all a delusion. Real world occurrences don't generally change to match the expectations of witnesses.
I would argue with this - the only rational conclusion is that a vast majority of these events are the result of delusion and error; however, it is not rational to write off every possible such event as delusion with no further investigation.
While I agree that alien abduction is almost entirely false, stemming from a combination of sleep paralysis and cultural reference, other elements of the UFO mythos have a great deal more veracity.
I think people need to open their minds and think about alien life, instead of deitising them? Just look at this planet and the diversity of life; so many species, all shapes and sizes. But when people talk about 'Aliens' its like they're talking about ONE thing. It looks very likely that the universe is teeming with life, just like Earth. So aliens will look like just about any shape or form you can think of.
But what about behaviour? Once again we tend to deitise them again- 'why would they travel light years just to abduct; slay cattle etc.. well, all I can say is; dont underestimate cruelty and thug mentalty. Thugs and yobs may be all over the Universe; just because a species has access to faster then light transportation, dont assume they will all be benevolent scientists at the controls. Do banks robbers know how their fast car works? Or how a cell phone/mobile phone work?
Your post is entirely poorly-thought-through conjecture.
..And judging from your use of grammar here, your not really one to comment are you.
My post was/is thoroughly thought out and hard for most people to understand. Its all about perspective really. Broaden you mind (s)
Nothing wrong with my grammar. If I were using a more synthetic language like German, the hyphenated phrase could be rendered with a single word. Being as English is so analytical, I'm stuck with the hyphens.
Your post remains as first noted.
Okay- if you can spare the time and can be bothered to engage your higher powered neurons to one as lowbrow as myself- why do you think that of my post? The logic within it is irrefutable. Please do it-try and go through every part with a fine toothed mind.
And then- lets be sensible?
Yes,there probably are thugs all over the universe however I doubt they would be sent
on intergalactic missions. Can you imagine an Earth mission sending thugs to meet
an alien race? Do you think that aliens are so advanced that all the thugs have
their own craft and wander around the universe making a nuisance of themselves.
The other poster is right,your post is poorly considered and total rubbish.
You have a poor imagination. Your making assumptions that it will all be ceremonial and reverential. That will be possible of course.
"Can you imagine an Earth mission sending thugs to meet
an alien race? " - I can imagine an Earth in thousands of years where stellar travel is available to bad people. Do the Taliban NOT have helicopters and technology?
"Do you think that aliens are so advanced that all the thugs have
their own craft and wander around the universe making a nuisance of themselves. " No- I think that SOME aliens probably can or do.
You are underestimating the probably universal qualities of -bad/evil/mischievousness, and deifying US and possible others.
Poorly considered, my bottom!
Your? Don't you mean "you're" as in "you are"??
How you can attempt to pick at this persons grammar when your own is so poor is amazing to me.
Grammar: The difference between knowing your *beep* and knowing you're *beep*
The 'your' should be 'you're' criticism is fine-I was typing in a hurry, the computer was counting down to switch off. I've actually picked up on people for the 'you're' thing.
But, you're wrong thinking I was criticising their grammar-I wasn't; I was picking at their logic.
No I'm not and yes you were...
..And judging from your use of grammar here, your not really one to comment are you.
My post was/is thoroughly thought out and hard for most people to understand. Its all about perspective really. Broaden you mind (s)
The first thing you would notice about an alien is the smell. Coming from totally different biochemistries, they would smell like the worst dung heap drenched in horrible chemicals. Next thing would be poison and then microscopic lifeforms either eating away at nearby humans or the aliens, or probably both. We or they wouldn't have any defense against microorganisms like bacteria of totally different lifeforms. And no, aids is not proof that aliens visited earth.
I see alien life is likely, but there is not even a theoretical idea how faster than light speed would be possible. Something to do with causality, like you push a button but the effect already happened before you pushed the button to cause it. So the galaxy might be teeming with life, but they would simply be unable to interact with us in a meaningful way.
The most implausible thing about alien abductions is this though: If they can manipulate minds to make you forget, they already have vast knowledge about humans. They would not need to undertake absolutely cruel or useless experiments. And advanced technology implies that they are rational in some kind of way.
there must have been a 'Day 1'... when someone first reported to have seen aliens in some forms.
I think intelligent people deny it because intelligent people realise what scandal and reputation an alleged "fourth kind occurance" can afflict upon their lives if it is NOT denied. Ignorance is bliss otherwise you would be labelled a "nutter" for lack of a better word!
shareThis is an fascinating topic.
I think it's interesting that SO many people have seen things in the sky that they can't explain away...police officers, pilots, doctors...people you would trust on any other given topics. Yet they say "Hey, so I saw something out of the ordinary in the sky," and people call *beep* Eff that.
People are scared of what it could be, and the possibility that it's visitors from another planet challenges religion as we know it...for those of us who have seen something, (many of us don't claim to know what) but it takes the same amount of faith to consider it comes from a different place as it does to believe there's a giant, invisible god in the sky.
God will save us God loves us love Jesus hahahahah that is even funnier
shareNobody is really probing the heart of my statement, which was essentially: 'why the need to deny ET with a vehemence bordering on ferocity'.
No intelligent and discerning individual could possibly uphold a belief in God, yet most don't challenge members of religious groups the way they do believers in extra-terrestrial phenomena. That is what really puzzles me.
Half of this planet vigorously maintains the existence of a concept far more incredible than extra-terrestrial visitation and have done for millennia, yet they have been both tolerated, and accepted as sane by the other half. Is it that they are all afraid of the Spanish Inquisition? Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!
Think the reason for universal acceptance of "God" is the fact that not very long ago the numbers doubting this belief were far less than what they are now. There was not enough scientific facts to back up the contradiction either and above all else the religious factions were far more powerful and radical.
With regards to the belief in alien life forms, i suspect the biggest downside is the fact that there is no concrete proof to suggest that they exist. There is no solid evidence, such as carbon dating suggestig the fossils are older than 2000years old, as opposed to any religious nut would have you believe. TO be honest, its a no brainer really. There isn't any evidence for existence of god either but the written word being preached as God's word has been going on for so long that it would not change easily. Even now I believe the numbers still are in favour of those who believe in God than those who aren't.
I think even if there was concrete proof of thier existence, it would take a lot more than just one such occurence for people to believe in it as for those who will be in denial will not just change their belief system with one single thread of evidence.
Raj
No intelligent and discerning individual could possibly uphold a belief in God, yet most don't challenge members of religious groups the way they do believers in extra-terrestrial phenomena. That is what really puzzles me.
I'm sorry to have to reply to you in this fashion, but I cannot tolerate accusations based on misreading; not even misinterpretation, just plain carelessness. I said: '…yet most don't challenge…'; I did not say 'the entire atheistic population of the planet'. Furthermore: God, in it's many presupposed incarnations, is being shoved down our throats left, right and center on a daily basis, and unless it's because its rules are starting wars – as they do so often – then they rarely make the front page of the periodicals; hence my continuing incredulity. My personal opinion is that 'God' should be kept out of religion, because it's an inconceivable concept for our intelligence to grasp; whereas most religions are readily assimilate-able, by even the dimmest of intellects; and fundamentally, most have a great deal of good to offer society.
shareInstead of answering I'm just going to use a quote from The Mothman prophecies movie:
John Klein: I think we can assume that these entities are more advanced than us. Why don't they just come right out and tell us what's on their minds?
Alexander Leek: You're more advanced than a cockroach, have you ever tried explaining yourself to one of them?
To jerkovicdubravko,
that pretty much nails it, doesn't it? Although I think sheep rather than cockroaches is probably nearer the mark.
The essential issue however is not to confuse material advancement with spiritual advancement; this is where it all gets treacherous. Maybe sheep have a spiritual side that we don't see/don't care about. To stay with your movie analogues: the locker scene in MIB 2 always strikes me as poignant.
With the size of the universe their would have to be life somewhere else.
The problem with aliens actually visiting earth are several.
Firstly most life will probably be plants or animals or microbes.
Secondly, unless aliens have far advanced technology the time to travel to earth would make it unlikely to occur.
Third, even if they had the technology the chances of discovering earth would be very small.
You forgot unmanned (unalienned) vehicles ;)
shareIt's probably because, despite many accounts of abduction by aliens, there is no concrete evidence.
________________________________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAIJ3Rh5Qxs