reply to post by unb3k44n7
Right off the bat you start with a paragraph that makes no sense.
It's unexplained because there is not enough scientific evidence to tell us what they are and how they work etc.
"Actual UFOs" cannot be identified. This is why they they unidentified flying objects. We cant say they are "MOST LIKELY" craft flown by
extraterrestrial beings because there is not enough solid evidence to prove that. Is it "POSSIBLE" - Yes. "MOST LIKELY" - No. I'd choose different
"Solid evidence" is something that's subjective to you. You may not think there's any solid evidence but others may strongly disagree. There's more
than enough evidence to reach a conclusion as to what's most likely vs. what's less likely. We do it all the time in all walks of life.
Juries in a trial could never reach a verdict if they didn't reach a conclusion as to what's most likeLY or what's less likely beyond any reasonable
Detectives reach a conclusion as to what's most likely and what's less likely based on the available evidence and then they investigate.
We do it all the time in science. We have to because we don't have the technology to test certain things. For example, the Higgs Boson has been
debated for years before the LHC. Scientist came to a conclusion based on the available evidence and some debated that we would find the Higgs Boson
while others said it wouldn't happen.
You said Parallel Universes is just hearsay. Again, this is just a lie. It's not just hearsay. There's evidence to support the conclusion that
parallel universes exist. For instance, if you accept the Many Worlds Interpretation and you don't think collapse of the wave function occurs. There's
a lot of math that points to this and some look at things like the recent data from Planck Satellite.
The point is, people are reaching conclusions based on available evidence. Not wishful thinking, not hearsay but "solid evidence" that they can look
over and then say based on the available evidence this is what's most likely and this is probably less likely based on the evidence.
There's MOUNTAINS of evidence to look over and evaluate what's most likely or what's less likely the case with U.F.O.'s. Again, I say:
1. My own experience.
2. Alien Abductions
3. Close Encounters (these are of the 3rd kind)
4. Trace Evidence
5. The fact that Hawking, Kaku, Mitchell and many others have reached the conclusion that Aliens exist based on things like exoplanets and
extremophiles. I can't limit the technology of an Alien Civilization based on our current understanding of Physics.
This is just a small portion of some of the evidence.
This is science. This is what we do all the time. If we didn't we couldn't debate the issues like quantum gravity, string theory, M-theory, the
holographic principle, parallel universes and more. You reach a conclusion based on the available evidence as to what's most likely and what's less
likely then both sides are debated.
For instance, there's a lot of evidence that points to a universe with more than 4 dimensions. The things is we don't have the technology to confirm
or deny this yet and this will be one of the things that's tested when the LHC is back up. Well, scientist don't just stick their heads in the sand
and say we can't reach a conclusion as to what's most likely or what's less likely. They debate these issues all the time and some have come to a
conclusion that we must live in a world with more than 5 dimensions in order to make certain observations or scientific theories work.
There's no reason why you can't reach a conclusion that extraterrestrial visitation has occurred and some of these UFO's have an extraterrestrial
origin based on the available evidence. The problem is most people dismiss evidence in favor of a personal belief. If you stick your head in the sand
and ignore abduction cases, trace evidence, close encounters, video, pictures and more of course you can live in denial because you're just dismissing
evidence not based on any logic or reason but a pre-existing belief about the subject.
There's growing evidence that we're extraterrestrials based on Panspermia. Some have reached the conclusion that Panspermis has occurred and some
support Abiogenesis. So you have a debate on this issue BECAUSE PEOPLE HAVE REACHED A CONCLUSION AS TO WHAT'S MOST LIKELY AND WHAT'S LESS LIKELY BASED
ON THE AVAILABLE EVIDENCE.
edit on 14-3-2014 by neoholographic because: (no reason given)