where do you sit on ancient astronaut theory?

[EBodious]

Most of us learned about the discovery of germs in school. Even if we didn't, we have grown up with naturalism, and most of us apply naturalism to our daily lives, most of the time -- even those who reserve a special corner of the universe where naturalism breaks down.

When somebody proposes an idea, such as germs, we can instinctively think of ways to prove it for ourselves if we want to. We know the routine for assigning -- and accepting -- burden of proof. Both natural and supernatural causes of AIDS were declared in the 1980's. I think that most people could have guessed which one was likely to be accompanied by evidence, and which one wasn't. We're smarter than you give us credit for.

We know the routine for demons and witchcraft as well: Avoid the burden of proof, and try to hand it away like a dead raccoon, if somebody tries handing it to us.

So I think we know that there are two diametrically opposing approaches to burden-of-proof: One welcoming, and the other hostile. And we have developed good instincts for knowing which approach is likely to be applicable in a given situation.

We know that the line can't be crossed, but within either realm, burden of proof becomes applicable. For instance, believers in witchcraft might argue amongst one another about particular details, and might demand proof in the form of referring to an authoritative book of witchcraft.

Precisely. To continue with the AIDS analogy, the two views you mention may or may not both be based on faith, depending entirely on how you define the term, but in no way at all are they intellectually equivalent.The idea that modernity forces beliefs on us in precisely the same way that history somehow did may be appealing to some, but it's just not a justifiable assertion. Most of us have moved on, to some significant extent.

one thing that you guys may not be fully appreciating is how real the idea of demons and witchcraft was back then in europe and america. i like the germ vs. demons analogy. it is really hard for modern people to realize how conditioned we are by growing up in a scientific thinking society. living in a world where the earth was known to be flat (by most westerners) and in the center of the universe and the phenomenon of 'light' only was possible thru fire, made for a fundamentally different pre-conceived world-view for the average person. remember, at the time, blood-letting was considered to be good medical/scientific practice (it makes sense, you drain out the contaminated /possessed bad blood.). germ theory would be laughed at as pseudo-science.



...so, naturally, aliens would have been confused for 'angels.'

 

[BassyBill]

On the contrary, I understand very well how "real" demons and the like were back then, and the difference between beliefs then and now. That's what science has done. It hasn't just replaced earlier beliefs with something in the same category. It has superseded them.

 

[EBodious]

superseded them? well sure, if you think modern medicines are somehow 'better' than leeches...

maybe we can just agree to disagree!

 

[jmattbassplaya]

You read me wrong? I was saying potty to that idea.

An experiment that takes millennia? I find that difficult to swallow. What would be the point in wasting all those resources on something that would take so long, especially because if their own culture took so long to develop, they would know of the enormous time spans involved. Plus, if you think they imparted some knowledge to us vis-a-vis stone monuments, they contaminated the experiment.

I was just having fun with the idea of aliens doing actually doing something like that and why.

As far as that experiment taking that much time - who's to say those aliens experience time the same way we experience it? For them one earth year could feel like a day. But obviously this is one of the reasons why I don't buy into this pseudo science nonsense - there are no facts but only guesses and assumptions.

 

[Papa Dangerous]

I am unfamiliar with the history channel program and the such that seems to be discussed in the first few comments, but I have a few opinions on the matters I seen discussed.

First being time traveling. In order to travel faster than light we would obviously have to move faster than light. Light has NO mass. In order to for us to travel, we would need some type of vehicle. Vehicles are going to have a large sum of mass to begin with, thus moving faster than the speed of light would theoretically be impossible. The "trick" to time traveling seems to be presented through the ideas of a worm holes or some way of cutting corners through space that allows a person to get from point A to point B in a shorter amount of time than once perceived. However, this does not explain how to revisit the past to events that have already occurred, more or a less a way of traveling faster. To visit the past does not really plausible in my mind. Once an action is complete, it is complete. I cannot undue a motion I made about 2 minutes ago.

Aliens are something very believable. I highly doubt humans are the only form of life out there, even single cell organisms outside of Earth are aliens. The typical "gray alien" that most people are familiar with tend to have a big head, with two slanted ovalish eyes; two arms, a torso, and two legs and walks on those two legs. If many believers of alien life do believe this type of alien does exist, there is something very interesting about this. If you think about all the life forms on Earth, how many of them have a head, two arms, a torso, and walk upright on two legs as their predominant mode of transportation? Well, just one, and that is the human. Three theories I have heard about this is that aliens are related to humans somehow, another other suggests that aliens are humans from the future, and third, these aliens are what humans have called "gods" over the history of belief in religion. We are "made in their image;" they (space crafts) are in ancient art; they dwell in the sky where these ships come from and we cannot really explain if either or does or does not exist.

 

[Papa Dangerous]

You read me wrong? I was saying potty to that idea.

An experiment that takes millennia? I find that difficult to swallow. What would be the point in wasting all those resources on something that would take so long, especially because if their own culture took so long to develop, they would know of the enormous time spans involved. Plus, if you think they imparted some knowledge to us vis-a-vis stone monuments, they contaminated the experiment.

An experiment that takes a millennia to us would be nonsensical. However, who says "time" is the same thing to say a much more advanced species? Imagine going to sleep... time FLIES like crazy. What feels like mere moments can be ten hours. Bears hibernate all winter, so I am sure time passes by them very quickly. Perhaps aliens have a similar experience.

Perhaps it is not an experiment at all. Perhaps aliens whom installed knowledge amongst humans knew what they were doing from the get go. They might have done it galaxies far away and know the typical result. Perhaps they have a reason for instilling this knowledge upon us.

 

[BassyBill]

superseded them? well sure, if you think modern medicines are somehow 'better' than leeches...

maybe we can just agree to disagree!

Of course - I'm always happy to do that.

But when your doc tells you that you need a heart bypass - well, good luck with them leeches, folks.

 

[Valiant Bandit]

...or, as others have said:

Having an open mind is a good thing, just make sure it's not so open that your brain falls out.

People that buy into this clap-trap have experienced the "brain falling out" syndrome. They have BELIEVED so hard that reality no longer matters to them, no amount of hard evidence will sway them from the religious-like fervor of their convictions, no matter how out of touch with anything resembling reality they may be.

That's why I say my beliefs are subject to change at any time. The point is we don't know so we try to know.

I play a game when I watch that show, called count the fallacies. It's full of them, especially appeals to authority, and arguments from ignorance. I think the History Channel as a whole has become quite a joke. If they want to go for outlandish entertainment, and validating unsupported conspiracy theories to spear head their programming, I think they need to at least change their name.

At least TLC stopped calling itself The Learning Channel. I think History Channel needs to do the same, because it's sad that some people actually take them as an authority on history.

I don't have cable where I live now. But when I lived with my in-laws a year ago, I was appalled at the "History Channel". They're throwing out all these conspiracy theories with ZERO proof/evidence. At least the 9/11 conspiracy theory has proof and evidence...Sheesh.

one thing that you guys may not be fully appreciating is how real the idea of demons and witchcraft was back then in europe and america. i like the germ vs. demons analogy. it is really hard for modern people to realize how conditioned we are by growing up in a scientific thinking society. living in a world where the earth was known to be flat (by most westerners) and in the center of the universe and the phenomenon of 'light' only was possible thru fire, made for a fundamentally different pre-conceived world-view for the average person. remember, at the time, blood-letting was considered to be good medical/scientific practice (it makes sense, you drain out the contaminated /possessed bad blood.). germ theory would be laughed at as pseudo-science.



...so, naturally, aliens would have been confused for 'angels.'

I like your post there. I completely agree.

superseded them? well sure, if you think modern medicines are somehow 'better' than leeches...

maybe we can just agree to disagree!

Exactly. Again let's be realistic here - in the big scheme of things, we have little to no knowledge about space considering how old it is and how much of it there is.

I was just having fun with the idea of aliens doing actually doing something like that and why.

As far as that experiment taking that much time - who's to say those aliens experience time the same way we experience it? For them one earth year could feel like a day. But obviously this is one of the reasons why I don't buy into this pseudo science nonsense - there are no facts but only guesses and assumptions.

Right. For all we know, aliens may live to be tens of thousands of years old somewhere. And there are little facts, just speculations.

I am unfamiliar with the history channel program and the such that seems to be discussed in the first few comments, but I have a few opinions on the matters I seen discussed.

First being time traveling. In order to travel faster than light we would obviously have to move faster than light. Light has NO mass. In order to for us to travel, we would need some type of vehicle. Vehicles are going to have a large sum of mass to begin with, thus moving faster than the speed of light would theoretically be impossible. The "trick" to time traveling seems to be presented through the ideas of a worm holes or some way of cutting corners through space that allows a person to get from point A to point B in a shorter amount of time than once perceived. However, this does not explain how to revisit the past to events that have already occurred, more or a less a way of traveling faster. To visit the past does not really plausible in my mind. Once an action is complete, it is complete. I cannot undue a motion I made about 2 minutes ago.

Aliens are something very believable. I highly doubt humans are the only form of life out there, even single cell organisms outside of Earth are aliens. The typical "gray alien" that most people are familiar with tend to have a big head, with two slanted ovalish eyes; two arms, a torso, and two legs and walks on those two legs. If many believers of alien life do believe this type of alien does exist, there is something very interesting about this. If you think about all the life forms on Earth, how many of them have a head, two arms, a torso, and walk upright on two legs as their predominant mode of transportation? Well, just one, and that is the human. Three theories I have heard about this is that aliens are related to humans somehow, another other suggests that aliens are humans from the future, and third, these aliens are what humans have called "gods" over the history of belief in religion. We are "made in their image;" they (space crafts) are in ancient art; they dwell in the sky where these ships come from and we cannot really explain if either or does or does not exist.

Which is why I love Battlestar Galactica . When they "jump" to locations, they don't move. Rather it is space around them moves by causing a rift or something...Man now I don't remember. Ugh


I hate the fact that when people think of Aliens, they're bi-pedal and resemble humans. That's so narcisstic (spelling) . Maybe some of them are just clouds of energy, who knows?? I guess that's why I thought Star Trek The Original Series was kind of lame. Whatever foreign race they encountered looked just like people with tiny differences.

 

[pacojas]

Star Trek The Original Series[/I] was kind of lame. Whatever foreign race they encountered looked just like people with tiny differences.

EXACTLY!!!!!!!

 

[Jazz Ad]

The typical "gray alien" that most people are familiar with tend to have a big head, with two slanted ovalish eyes; two arms, a torso, and two legs and walks on those two legs. If many believers of alien life do believe this type of alien does exist, there is something very interesting about this.

I don't find it really interesting, except to show limited our imagination can be. Intelligence is a trait of our evolution and is pretty much limited to humans. So is bipedy.

Think about it. We share at least 40 % of our DNA with any other form of life on Earth. We're closely related with fungus, lizards, oak trees and lice because we all come from the same early group of bacteries. Still, amongst billions of closely related forms of life, we're the only one that chose the way of intelligence and we've developed it over barely 5 million years, to compare with the 13 billion year age of the universe.

Even with convergent evolution taken into account (provided aliens share pretty much similar conditions as we get on Earth), it is extremelly unlikely that another form of life, even very highly evoluted would develop what we call intelligence as its mean of survival, with so many other successful examples of species that used another. In the grand scheme of things and from what we know, intelligence seems to be an accident just like life was.

 

[Buxtehude]

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence; however, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

Carl Sagan

I have seen exactly ZERO proof of ANY kind, extraordinary or otherwise. Total hokum.

Carl Sagan was "one of them". How ironic that a real alien was the major debunker. He also planted the fossil record so that gullible people would believe in evolution. He is now in heaven, sitting on a cloud, playing blackjack with Hendrix and Frank Sinatra.

 

[Buxtehude]

And if aliens helped with technology, how come so many people use flat wound strings?

 

[mcblahflooper94]

Ask Niel Peart. I'm sure he has something to say about this *cough* 2112 *cough*

 

[hrodbert696]

To clarify on the germs vs. witches issue:

The point is on how the ordinary person believes what they believe. In most fields of knowledge, there is a dichotomy between the expert and the layperson. Among themselves, communities of experts determine a set of rules which establish what they will and will not accept as the truths of their field of knowledge. They then communicate these doctrines to the laypeople.

Laypeople largely take these doctrines on faith, based on the authority vested in the experts. They generally have only a loose idea of the rules which determined the doctrines and rarely have actually followed the evidence and arguments which led the experts to endorse any given position. Few, if challenged on the truth of a given doctrine, could actually provide the evidence for it - rather, they will show that it is what they were taught in school... or in church.

My point is NOT that the actual evidence that exists for germs, for demons, or for aliens is all equal and that it's a toss-up what one chooses to believe in. Every field of knowledge has evolved over time and if I get sick, I'd much rather have the services of a 21st century doctor than a 15th century doctor. I am sure the evidence for germs is much much stronger than the evidence for demons - provided one is among the "experts" who have the training to understand the evidence.

However, it is not irrational to place some faith in the best-trained experts your society has to offer, when seeking information in a field outside your own experience or expertise. Doing so does not make people "irrational," and therefore it also follows (and fits observation) that in real life, all of us live and act on the basis of beliefs and assumptions that we cannot actually prove to be correct.

 

[Diplowmatt]

I think the myan calendar was cut short with the death of the myan civilization.

 

[BassyBill]

To clarify on the germs vs. witches issue:

The point is on how the ordinary person believes what they believe. In most fields of knowledge, there is a dichotomy between the expert and the layperson. Among themselves, communities of experts determine a set of rules which establish what they will and will not accept as the truths of their field of knowledge. They then communicate these doctrines to the laypeople.

Laypeople largely take these doctrines on faith, based on the authority vested in the experts. They generally have only a loose idea of the rules which determined the doctrines and rarely have actually followed the evidence and arguments which led the experts to endorse any given position. Few, if challenged on the truth of a given doctrine, could actually provide the evidence for it - rather, they will show that it is what they were taught in school... or in church.

My point is NOT that the actual evidence that exists for germs, for demons, or for aliens is all equal and that it's a toss-up what one chooses to believe in. Every field of knowledge has evolved over time and if I get sick, I'd much rather have the services of a 21st century doctor than a 15th century doctor. I am sure the evidence for germs is much much stronger than the evidence for demons - provided one is among the "experts" who have the training to understand the evidence.

However, it is not irrational to place some faith in the best-trained experts your society has to offer, when seeking information in a field outside your own experience or expertise. Doing so does not make people "irrational," and therefore it also follows (and fits observation) that in real life, all of us live and act on the basis of beliefs and assumptions that we cannot actually prove to be correct.

That's all logical and I do take your point. But the point I was trying to make is that "faith" in your 21st century doctor, for example, is not the same sort of thing at all as mediaeval faith in demons. The mechanisms by which the two types of faith operate and the processes by which authority is granted are very different in the two cases, so much so that the two phenomena are actually qualitatively different rather than just quantitatively different. We might call both "faith" but they're really not the same thing.

Or to put it another way, it's not just that there is more evidence for germs than demons. It's the fact that the evidence itself is of a totally different nature. And I think the major contribution to that has come from the scientific method. My apologies if I didn't make this sufficiently clear before - I think you will get what I was trying to say now.

 

[Tituscrow]

Did I really just read a post about 'germs v witches'? Dear oh dear.

Btw, 'germs' is a term coined by the domestic hygiene/cleaning product industry and has no scientific basis. Please refer to them as pathogenic microbes from now on. Might as well join in with the pedantry

Btw, bassybill...what price a home defeat today? Mackems with new manager to impress an' all...

 

[BassyBill]

Ha ha - I used the term "microbes" in post #136 and then caved in later.

(And yeah - I've been cursing our luck since hearing about O'Neill's appointment. I suspect the inevitable will happen this afternoon.)
/derail

 

[fdeck]

one thing that you guys may not be fully appreciating is how real the idea of demons and witchcraft was back then in europe and america.

It's still real to some extent for most people. And even during that time, Plato's "royal lie" was well known to scholars. As Bill says, our appreciation of what it means to say that something is real, has changed. Germ theory was not laughed out as pseudo-science, because there was no reference against which to even have a term such as pseudo-science.

An interesting difference is that in the dark ages, not only did people live amidst a pantheon of spirits, but those spirits were regional. The spirits in Baghdad were different from those of Rome. There were perhaps 3000 different competing "theories" of spirits. Today, there is exactly one prevailing theory for the cause of chicken pox. That's an astounding shift in how society thinks as a collective body.

There was a concept such as pseudo-theology, however. Many ideas were suppressed or dismissed because they disagreed with supernatural notions. Newton abandoned his theories about the stability of planetary systems because he thought that he was reaching into the domain of theology. Much of biology research was feared to be "playing god."

 

[makkE]

The existence of intelligent life on other planets is certain.
Them reaching us is highly unlikely - it's safe to say it's impossible, given the probable distances between two civilizations.

Even if they could overcome the problem of fuel when propelling a vessel to near light speed (more mass = more fuel, but more fuel = more mass), the theory of relativity will stretch time is such a way, that hundreds of thousands of years would have passed on their home planet before they could return. There is no sense in that.
On a side note, scrap ramjets, they are proven to be impossible.

So from all astronomers know today with 99% certainty (all the wormhole/dimension ideas are hypothesises, not theories that have repeatedly been approved), a visit from an alien ship is practically impossible.