The Book Of THoTH

Lets set aside the question of whether advanced galactic societies would have the slightest interest in our wars, WMD, our pollution problems, our reproductive systems or our cows butts.

The real question is, how would they know about us at all?

There is only one way that they can tell from interstellar distance that intelligent creatures inhabit this planet....RADIO.

Our radio signals travel at the speed of light, and this means that even with infinitely fast spacecraft, the aliens cant be much farther off than 15 light-years to have reached our lovely planet by 1947,(Rosswell).

The number of star systems within 15 light-years is about three dozen.

There would have to be 10 billion technically sophisticated societies in the Galaxy to have a reasonable chance of finding one camped out among the nearest three dozen stars. Thats optimism of a high level indeed.

What about warp drive? Lightspeed? Maybe the aliens can create wormholes and get here in essentially no time?

It doesnt matter. Ill worry about how they got here once Im convinced that theyve really made the scene.

To get here they need to know were we are!!!

Approximately half the U.S. population suspects that extraterrestrials have come to our planet.

While I certainly expect that the Galaxy is home to many advanced societies, the quality of the evidence has so far failed to convince me that any of them have emissaries on our planet.


SETI "winning the lottery"....?


Consider the 1938 radio broadcast of War of the Worlds. Some Americans mistook the fictional Martian invasion for news, and fled their homes. Would a real discovery of extraterrestrials occasion a breakdown in public order?

This seems highly unlikely to me.

Picking up a signal from space is different from watching aggressive aliens land in the pastures. Its difficult to imagine galactic beings would ever charge across the dark deserts between the stars merely to harass the inhabitants of a small planet.

To detect a signal from other worlds would be wondrous. It would show that the appearance of life on this world and its slow, uncertain path to us - creatures that can comprehend their own existence - is not some improbable miracle, but a frequent occurrence.

In the 17th century, when early telescopes were revealing great clouds of stars, French mathematician and philosopher Blaise Pascal wrote that the enormity of space terrified him. Space is enormous.

To learn that others are out there would be a comfort.


This is such a controversial, and emotional, topic that its mere mention guarantees a storm of Web chat and high voltage PMs.



In the end, of course...

... the matter of alien visitation will be decided by the evidence, not by the intensity of opinion.

No , Haz , I disagree.... One way we can tell from distance that there may be creatures out there ... is RADIO

How the beep do we know what intelligence is out there ... or what they use?

Easy, they seeded this planet....

Reminds me of the old story about the remote amazonian tribe that was sure there were no people anywhere in the world other than those they knew about. They were certain because all people they knew used drums for distance communication and the farthest people they knew of had never heard drums from outside the known area.

I can just imagine how nonplussed they were when non-drum using outsiders came in from nowhere... "how did they find us?" must certainly have been a popular question

Concatenative error is sneaky... one crumbly foundation stone in the logic pyramid and sooner or later the whole thing falls in. In this case the weak stone is the unwarranted assumption that if we have to do things a certain way, for certain reasons, others have to as well.

That tribe weren't explorers, nor obviously had they ever encountered any... the motivation of explorers was therefor not even considered in their thinking. Who knows what motivations and methods we're excluding simply because we have no concept or experience of them?



Tiger

Good point , Newbs....

So how could the aliens learn that high IQ creatures crawl the Earth?

For them to see the Great Wall of China, the lights from our cities, or even the cities themselves, would be extremely difficult.

But as virtually every reader of these posts knows, our radio signals are dead giveaways of terrestrial technology. The aliens could "hear" us far more easily than they could see us.

Ok..!?

With radio technology slightly more advanced than our own, Homo sapiens is detectable out to a distance of roughly 50 light-years. Within that distance are about 5,000 stars.


The year 2010 will mark the 50th anniversary of humanitys strangest scientific quest, the use of giant radiotelescope dishes to listen for radio messages from alien beings in space.

So far, the search has been a complete bust. The radioastronomers keep listening, but the stars arent talking to us ... not yet, anyway.

Odds are that nobody out there knows we are here, if they exist at all, so nobody is actually trying to signal us. Any signal received by us, will be an accident.


What this indicates to me is that if they (advanced ETs) are out there, they most likely arent close, as relates to interstellar distance, to our solar system.

It doesnt mean that there arent any ETs out there, but it does seem to indicate that the galaxy isnt chock full of technologically advanced civilizations as one sees in Star Trek.


Ok...Back to your post.

If not radio...light?

One approach, variously proposed by Tim Castellano (NASA), Ray Villard (Space Telescope Science Institute), and yours truly, is to assume that some ambitious alien astronomers using the transit technique have detected Earth.

In other words, they have found our world because it blocks a small amount of light as it passes in front of the Sun as seen by them.

This once-a-year eclipse is an event that both we, and any extraterrestrials who have observed it, will know.

The inteligent aliens might choose to send their laser flashes in our direction during these transits, on the assumption that we were clever enough to figure out the synchronization scheme.

Of course, this requires that the aliens have precise knowledge of the distance to our solar system, and the Suns motion through space. For an advanced society, that might not be too much to ask.

In other words, with a collection of mirrors, a small laser, and a computer to run it all, a knowledgeable and entrepreneurial extraterrestrial could produce detectable signals with only as much power as a handful of batteries could supply.



Bottom line...With radio technology slightly more advanced than our own, Homo sapiens is detectable out to a distance of roughly 50 light-years.

Within that distance are about 5,000 stars. And each day, a fresh stellar system is exposed to signals from Earth.

EDIT> patched the botched quote code (WT)

So who says they "found us" other than by sheer happenstance? Perhaps they came out to this backwoods section of a spiral arm for no purpose other than to belnatz retafanses, and they simply chose this little planet to rest on in between excursions. From there the word got around the civilised parts of the galaxy... "you simply have to go out there, the place is just darling, and the natives are so quaint"

No doubt that amazonian tribe's leaders were sure that the presence of the outsiders had to be somehow all about "the people".



Tiger

You have defeated yourself in the first sentence, kitty.

You "said" that those who dont "believe" in Aliens are wrong.

You invoke science in your post, yet you state that those who dont believe are wrong.

Belief has nothing to do with science.Evidence is not something you can observe. That is called an observation.

Evidence is the establishment of a proof based upon the observation, a proof accepted by the scientific method.

What is missing in the Alien entusiast's repetoire is a single datum of experience. No one has any experience, nor, if they claim one, has documented it to any scientific criterion, which would even lead one to conclude that aliens even exist, let alone that they have found us.

The simplest explanation, in this case, your simplest explanation, is a lazy one, and completely non-scientific.

For your part, you speculate, saying that the Great Pyramid is evidence of alien life (?)...Occam's Razor, I assume?


If you want to believe, white kitty, thats fine.

If an alien on Earth enthusiast simply came out and made it clear he wanted to talk about his or her beliefs, that would be fine.

But when you come out and state facts which are in no way fact...you can expect the empiricists in the audience to point out the fallacy in your position.

Hi White Tiger, please would you tell me what this phrase of yours
"belnatz retafanses" means as I am a bit dim today.

Many Thanks SB

Haz you state


"You "said" that those who dont "believe" in Aliens are wrong."


However Haz nothing you have said proves that YOU are correct either IMHO

HAZ- For about the umpteenth time, I'm not a believer.

As far as I've seen the only believer posting is yourself, as a believer in some overarching authority and/or value in "science". Lets put a little perspective on it... the race survived a whole lot longer without science than it has with it's dubious "benefits".

And I said absolutely no such thing. I have plenty of my own words in my mouth. You can keep yours in your own, thanks. You might want to read the actual words that I typed.

The value of the currently fashionable scientific method over the long term is still very much unestablished. And that is by it's own standards which consider bean counting as paramount.

If science rings your chime and offers you something you value, more power to you. It's far from the most important or valuable thing in the world to the great majority of humanity though.

Personally, I don't care what science demands, nor if it find it or not. It's of no more note than what the vatican decrees, nor is it much different in kind, imo.

Seatbelt - it's just two meaningless words I made up to illustrate that there are things about the world that we don't have words for, and that just having words doesn't mean there is any understanding involved in their use.



Tiger

Seatbelt...The mistake most aliens on Earth believers make is that they come out and say that aliens exist and they are here...a conclusion that is ridiculous, and completely unsubstantiated.

Expect to be challenged in that case.

If you want to believe, thats fine.


If an "alien on Earth belever" simply came out and made it clear he wanted to talk about his or her beliefs, that would be fine.

But when you come out and state facts.. which are in no way fact...you can expect the empiricists in the audience to point out the fallacy in your position.


Like I said...there has to be direct irrefutable evidence that any UFO seen on radar is indeed alien technology, at the exclusion of any and all other possible explanations.

The scientific method is tough, not relying on any belief, speculation, or extrapolation.

Hmmm...lets make an argument where none exists. Not really. Most aliens that exist here have little or no reason to validate anything. Some of us know we are human, as well. Where would there be any benefit to anyone to argue about it?

It is an age old argument (cloaked in many robes) and one that will be met by the same stone walls that have been existant for umpteen years, and it does not change any truth for anyone, until it does.

If you think the path is paved in algorithmic rhymes or quantum theory, you must believe the creator pretty inflexable or maybe you do not believe in a creator at all. Does not make one bit of difference. Mostly I find this kind of talk boring and unproductive.

Where are you talking about what brings us together? If you gonna find a flaw where do you speak about the solution? These are things that concern me.

Personally, I believe we will not find any real and lasting answers until we speak honestly with one another and listen. I am a product of all that I have known and all whom I have known...why would I venture further for the next answer and how honest would it be?

We are more alien to ourselves.

This question pre-supposes that human beings were here first and thus needing finding by a later party onto the scene. On what basis should we assume that?

Have you considered the possibility that maybe they can travel through space as easily as we walk into the other room of our house? If the universe is infinite, you can only assume that there are civilizations far more advanced than we could ever comprehend.

Actually it's extremely easy. I used it almost daily for several decades. It's just a tool, like any other. Where it's applicable, it's rather valuable, but in the many places and circumstances where it's the wrong tool, it's as worthwhile as a hammer when a board needs to be cut.

As pointed out in the other thread, it relies on belief, speculation and extrapolation in nearly every step of the process. Try again, you're not doing particularly well at peddling the scientism watchtower leaflets so far.



Tiger

This discussion reminds me of Carl Sagan on TV saying regarding ET & space ships, something like "there is not one shred of evidence for this." This is a REALLY stupid comment and apparently no one caught it! I've seen this many many times on TV.
My response to Carl and others is "Not one shred of evidence WHERE? Have you search the whole world Carl, every little "nook and cranny"? Did you even look thoroughly in your back pocket? Did you use a microscope? And do you know everything about this sort of evidence that would enable such a conclusion?"
We all are so hypnotized by our media and culture that there is very little chance of figuring important things out. What has passed for "the scientific method" is riddled with big holes.
A possible place to start would be to ask each person responding here how much time they spent in the last month watching regular movies and TV. The person that has watched the least is the most likely one to be on target.
Everybody needs to think for themselves, but most of us allow the TUBE etc. to do our thinking for us. Here's just one small piece of evidence. There is more, MUCH more but one needs to learn how to look.

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

Or for those with dialup:
http://ovnis-usa.com/SONS/EdgarMitchell ... rd2008.mp3

Sometimes..''Empty pots make the loudest noise'' ..

I dont have to "try again"...! For the interested in the scientific method, here it is...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

There...


Now, if its ok with the MOD kittycat,..back on topic...

Remember back in 1977 (THE wow SIGNAL)when Jerry Ehman, a project volunteer at SETI witnessed a startlingly strong signal received by the telescope. He quickly circled the indication on a printout and scribbled the phrase “Wow!â€

The aliens have a drive for their craft that is powered by gossip, as we know gossip is the fastest thing in the known universe....

No really.... there is no such thing as ET! we are the only life in the universe..
How many is it? 500 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 stars or something. its just not enough stars for any other life to have formed and surpassed our obvious superior intellect...

Trust everyone
We are alone

First, the discoverers should verify that the signal is really extraterrestrial and artificial, not man-made interference or natural, cosmic static.

and whos to say they use analog transmission? perhaps they use base 2 (binary) transmissions or base 8 (hexadecimal) transmissions or some other means of transmissions. or they are piggybacking upon natural transmissions, making them exceptionally hard to find.
this is in addition to the billions of radio wavelengths available to transmit upon,not including the rest of the EM spectrum, which can also transmit info.

other means that we cannot currently detect may be in use as well, IE interdimensional transmissions (supported by string theory) for "ship to shore" communications. explanation: shore doesnt know where ship is until ship transmits to the static shore. then a fix upon the ship (or the ship transmits its coordinates) can be made and communication can ensue. thus a channel can be made for such communications without dispersing to the rest of the universe. it is feasible to suppose that some other civilization has surpassed us in many ways, scientifically.

/*edit*/to add:
The scientific method is tough, not relying on any belief, speculation, or extrapolation.

you mean like global warming? which is a perpetuated lie so researchers can keep their funding (they find the results needed to keep their funding regardless of the actual results),despite a measured decline in temp over the last 10 years and a small increase in co21 levels. or how about evolution? there isnt any real evidence (other than extrapolation) in the fossil record or experimentation to support this. however it is harped on as true and the only valid explanation (et experimentation is equally valid but ignored, with the same evidence sets). Gregor Mendel disproved evolution in the 1850's with his genetic experiments. evolution was revived ~1939 with the theory of radiation induced mutations. however, experiments with fruit flies over 50,000+ generations have failed to produce a single useful mutation (or a new species), and lots of useless or detrimental mutations (1 antenna, missing legs,no mouth etc).it isnt until the GM era that new species are starting to crop up under scientific observation.

This is just my two penneth ( or cents! )

Haz...consider this....

We tend to think of 100 years as a long time, and we tend to measure time in earth years because it fits with our bodies and the environment. One hundred times around the sun is an awfully long time , its more than a human usually lives and if it regards light , the light has travelled an awfully long in those 100 years.
But it is only a long way and a long time because it is in relationship to a human.

If we lived for 1000 years , would a 100 years be too long to travel?

We see hear measure and analyse everything as it relates to a human , and then we put human aspects on to aliens.
What if these aliens are bigger , live much longer , have more intelligence , more interdimensional ability and more resources. ?
We measure distance in space in units of years... the time it takes for us to go around the sun. To analysis that time as whether it is a short or long time in relationship to the percentage of a human life.

To travel 100 years is a long time for someone who is unlikely to live until they are 100 .

In addition to these respective ratios , it depends on the method of travel , the source and resource of the energy and the intelligence .

Nothing that we know lives for 10,000 of OUR years , and has the intelligence to travel thousands of OUR light years .

That certainly doesnt mean that they dont exist or that the only way they can detect us is sound waves.

When we look for planets that may have life on them , we look for stuff that would sustain life , atmosphere , light, gravity , pressure and lots besides.


I am not too sure if I want to be around when these guys arrive , some days I do , other days I dont.

Isn't the crux of the original point "they can't come here, because we can't get there" ? it's always going to be a dangerous move assuming anything about any ET modus operandi. If we scaled the history of the earth down to a single day, then we humans don't appear until about 10 minutes to midnight, which gives a long time for any other life to have had a field day with it's understanding of tech and methods needed to investigate what is a remarkable planet and supporting life systems (atmosphere,moon etc). So I can understand the attraction of this rock to interstellar voyagers.

Stan has a good few answers, eloquently put as always, if you'd like to read that Haz.


http://www.v-j-enterprises.com/sf-ufo-why1.html

Quoting Newbs:

I am not too sure if I want to be around when these guys arrive , some days I do , other days I dont. [/quote]

I feel very certain that I have see one of these visitors...... and I can honestly say Newbs, that I agree w/your statement. Call me a chicken, but I think I like the world as we thought we knew it........... just us here. Less complicated and scary.
It's just a thought ......... but I also realize we humans will one day out grow our little world here on planet Earth. Seems to be the natural order of things.

I can honestly say, I hope I never see another............ 'cuz I'm not so brave and my heart can only take one encounter like that. A) they may never show up in droves............ or B) they just might and we better have our heads on right when they do.

Ps... I realize I didn't answer, 'how did they find us'. I tend to veer off topic w/my little two cents.

There's plenty of evidence they are not craft of ours, just read up on all the military sightings.

You call Tiger 'kitty' one more time and no one will listen to you.

Haz please show our Mods some respect.

Thanks kira and crux, but lets don't fall for it. Standard troll tactic when losing is to make the convo about people and personalities to sidetrack from the losing argument.



Tiger

Haz, you use the word "alien". If you take a second to think on that word it will reveal that an "alien" is a being that is utterly different to us. That is what the word implies. Yet many of us humans continue to insist that such "aliens" must be similar to us in all manner of ways. We insist that their motivations must be similar to ours, that their technology must be recognisable to us, that they should look something like us... and so forth and so forth. Why is this? How can we make a single assumption about something that we have absolutely no knowledge of? Can you see the contradiction? So, if we know nothing about these putative beings then anything becomes possible. I suggest to you that good science would not include the highly restrictive postulates which you seem to be applying.

Either you are demanding that they are quite like us - in which case your question is relevant and easy to answer, OR we must discard that demand in which case your question is irrelevant. Allow me to elucidate:

If the ostensible "aliens" are quite a bit like us: look like us, think like us, etc. then there is good reason to assume that we are related to them. Given the vastness of space and all the infinite possibilities of what COULD BE, if they are like us then there is a good chance it is becasue we are related to them. And if you cracked your mind open just a sliver to indulge the ancient astronaut hypothesis you'll find one very handy explanation of how this could all work and your question could be thus answered. To wit: they know we are here becasue they put us here.

If on the other hand you agree that an "alien" is something possibly unlike us in any imaginable way then you'll find your question is irrelevant. If we don't know anything about their life-form, anything about their technology, anything about their state of advancement or anything about their motivations then your whole question just gets ridiculous. Any number of postulates would easily satisfy your question. Like:
"They can travel instantly across the space/time continuum by flipping into time/space where one sees the warp in the fabric of space/time based upon the size of the object. They flit from object to object looking for life forms. They feed off the electromagnetic emanations our bodies make when we feel strong emotions. They want to keep feeding and don't want to be discovered and so have zero interest in making contact or being observed. Occasionally they slip up and we see something."
I just sucked that out of my thumb (obviously) but the point is quite simply that you cannot invoke the word "alien" and still have the luxury of assuming anything about them. Otherwise they are not "alien", they are in some way a known quantity.

So, my friend Haz, when last did YOU spend time with an "alien" such that you came to know so much about what their technology is like and what their motivations are? You MUST have done or otherwise you wouldn't be so sure about the strictures that you pose in your opening question.
Either that or you HAVEN'T spent any time with any "aliens" and so you actually have no basis for your self-defeating assumptions and you are being utterly unscientific and your question is moot.

Can't have it both ways, I'm afraid.

Have a nice day now!

I have heard Haz's question asked many times before, but never as eloquently answered.
Thanks Zingdad...

Hi Zingdad, an excellent answer, so much so that I think I might copy and paste
it so I can use it in the future

SB

I keep wanting to reply to the question

"How did they find us " ...... Tasty ! ... a bit like chicken ! ...