Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

There Are Aliens, but Probably Not Here

fakenous.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 106 posts

Re: There Are Aliens, but Probably Not Here

#21

Post by goatse-4-u »

zikzak wrote: post #11

Time for me to sound crazy. I won't comment on the debunking. I am sure there's a logical explanation but I am not qualified to make decisions using the evidence I have (which is often true of people on both sides of the discussion, here, generally). I terms of "are they here", it isn't totally crazy to imagine an AI that can self replicate it's frame, and use this ability to explore the galaxy. When it finds places…

That's a Von Neumann probe. Good idea, but to my knowledge there aren't any here.

The craft being observed (all over the world) are from a breakaway civilization. They were developed within the last century, possibly with the aid of extraterrestrials via an archeological finding or even direct communication, but that's an unknown for me.

I do however know the names of most of these craft, and once you know the names there is more detailed information out there including close-up images. They are quite cool, but to my knowledge are entirely terrestrial. The USG may try an alien false flag as a ploy for funding in the near future.

Re: There Are Aliens, but Probably Not Here

#22

Post by api »

SerLava wrote: post #18
jlkuester7 wrote: post #9

It is nice to see some more rational explanations for these videos (instead of the constant alien/ufo drivel from most media outlets). The thing that still confuses me, though, is how these videos became a thing in the first place. We are not talking about some random civilians with a Polaroid trying to get pics of a lake monster. The Navy has (presumably high-tech) equipment for finding and tracking airborne phenome…

I don't feel like it can be much of a coincidence that there is a new branch of the US military with a currently low yearly expenditure compared to the other branches, which could potentially be the source of incredibly lucrative private contracts to corporations with former generals sitting on their boards.

Bingo. There have been anomalous radar tapes, sightings, and videos since the 50s. Why is this suddenly an issue?

Re: There Are Aliens, but Probably Not Here

#23

Post by RobertoG »

SerLava wrote: post #15
ctvo wrote: post #13

A person without actual expertise dismisses numerous accounts by trained pilots who saw this first hand by Googling for YouTube explanations and calling these witnesses liars or incompetents. Does this person happen to work in tech?

Well, the Pentagon sent us a video of a blurry dot. So it must have been an alien space ship moving 16,000 miles per hour through atmosphere but not heating the air at all

Not really, what you have is videos and testimonies of surprising things, not of aliens.

"The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not 'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

Isaac Asimov

Re: There Are Aliens, but Probably Not Here

#25

Post by ncallaway »

zikzak wrote: post #11

Time for me to sound crazy. I won't comment on the debunking. I am sure there's a logical explanation but I am not qualified to make decisions using the evidence I have (which is often true of people on both sides of the discussion, here, generally). I terms of "are they here", it isn't totally crazy to imagine an AI that can self replicate it's frame, and use this ability to explore the galaxy. When it finds places…

> I do not think that is what is going on but it is certainly a possibility. Very remote, of course.

I agree and put in Bayesian terms it seems to me that the prior for “aliens are here, and are hiding from us, but are hiding badly” should be non-zero but very low.

The kind of evidence we have seen should just our priors upward very slightly, but has too many other (more likely) potential explanations to have a significant impact for me.

Re: There Are Aliens, but Probably Not Here

#26

Post by gdubs »

jlkuester7 wrote: post #9

It is nice to see some more rational explanations for these videos (instead of the constant alien/ufo drivel from most media outlets). The thing that still confuses me, though, is how these videos became a thing in the first place. We are not talking about some random civilians with a Polaroid trying to get pics of a lake monster. The Navy has (presumably high-tech) equipment for finding and tracking airborne phenome…

I’ve always been more on the skeptic side, FWIW — but the two pilots on 60 Minutes came across as very credible. And they — and others — claimed to have seen these things with their own eyes. The one pilot described the object as being around the same size as their fighter jet. I’m not arguing it’s “aliens” — just saying that while we’ve only seen grainy weapons-tracking footage, there seems to be a decent number of pilots who have seen similar objects first-hand. Not sure we can dismiss it as equipment glitches.

Re: There Are Aliens, but Probably Not Here

#27

Post by dau »

ncallaway wrote: post #25
zikzak wrote: post #11

Time for me to sound crazy. I won't comment on the debunking. I am sure there's a logical explanation but I am not qualified to make decisions using the evidence I have (which is often true of people on both sides of the discussion, here, generally). I terms of "are they here", it isn't totally crazy to imagine an AI that can self replicate it's frame, and use this ability to explore the galaxy. When it finds places…

> I do not think that is what is going on but it is certainly a possibility. Very remote, of course. I agree and put in Bayesian terms it seems to me that the prior for “aliens are here, and are hiding from us, but are hiding badly” should be non-zero but very low. The kind of evidence we have seen should just our priors upward very slightly, but has too many other (more likely) potential explanations to have a signi…

How do you come to the conclusion that they are hiding badly? Assuming they are there and they are in fact hiding, I think they are pretty good at it. Or do you have reliable photo or video evidence that suggests otherwise? :-)

Re: There Are Aliens, but Probably Not Here

#28

Post by mellosouls »

ctvo wrote: post #13

A person without actual expertise dismisses numerous accounts by trained pilots who saw this first hand by Googling for YouTube explanations and calling these witnesses liars or incompetents. Does this person happen to work in tech?

The pilots are expert in flying and no doubt in-the-moment aerial observation; but its not clear why we need to take their opinion as final and impartial in post-event video analysis.

Re: There Are Aliens, but Probably Not Here

#29

Post by [deleted] »

jlkuester7 wrote: post #9

It is nice to see some more rational explanations for these videos (instead of the constant alien/ufo drivel from most media outlets). The thing that still confuses me, though, is how these videos became a thing in the first place. We are not talking about some random civilians with a Polaroid trying to get pics of a lake monster. The Navy has (presumably high-tech) equipment for finding and tracking airborne phenome…

[deleted]

Re: There Are Aliens, but Probably Not Here

#30

Post by soared »

gdubs wrote: post #26
jlkuester7 wrote: post #9

It is nice to see some more rational explanations for these videos (instead of the constant alien/ufo drivel from most media outlets). The thing that still confuses me, though, is how these videos became a thing in the first place. We are not talking about some random civilians with a Polaroid trying to get pics of a lake monster. The Navy has (presumably high-tech) equipment for finding and tracking airborne phenome…

I’ve always been more on the skeptic side, FWIW — but the two pilots on 60 Minutes came across as very credible. And they — and others — claimed to have seen these things with their own eyes. The one pilot described the object as being around the same size as their fighter jet. I’m not arguing it’s “aliens” — just saying that while we’ve only seen grainy weapons-tracking footage, there seems to be a decent number of…

OP's point is in that situation the government should/would have data gathered from onboard sensors about the UFOs. A fighter jet costs hundreds of millions of dollars, so we'd expect there to be various sensors with recordings of these objects, rather than just pilot's eyesight and memory.
Post reply on HN