This seems to be true in many cases... BUT

what about all the military personnel and even astronauts and pilots who claim to have seen them? Not to mention police officers and the like? As a matter of fact, there's a large group of pilots who are demanding release of information concerning objects they've seen and if you look at the Disclosure Project, there's a large quantity of trained personnel in there. Not saying the ETH hypothesis is valid, but the idea that all the people who claim to have seen UFOs are whacked and crackpots is ridiculous and just a copout by Hawkins. He is a genius, but it doesnt mean he isnt prone to bad judgment or ignorance.

Hmm. The web site for the project you mention appears to require you to log in to get info? With donations? Other material available at a cost. Where am I looking on the web site for the info you mention? Nice to see such stuff out in the open.

What about them? As I have already pointed out, Hawking was clearly referring to people who claim to have had close contact with actual aliens, not people who wondered about something unexpected they'd seen in the sky.

Indeed. Thank goodness nobody has suggested this...

...Least of all Hawking. As someone else has already pointed out, he at least deserves the respect of being referred to by his name.

My apologies! Yes, I agree that the people who talk about "Greys" and "Lizard Men" and such have clearly seen one too many scifi movies... and if these are the people Hawking refers to as being crackpots, I would have to agree. Either that, or they are just out to make money/gain notoriety.

I remember watching a documentary a few years ago that discussed abduction and so on. One person who believed in abductions argued that the abductees' accounts do not resemble any science fiction. As she was speaking, they showed comics and stills from films (such as Close Encounters) which were extremely similar to abductees' accounts. Which was amusing.

I'm fairly certain he was. If we look at the quote again:

What he's doing here is humorously looking at encounters from the aliens' point of view, assuming the ETH was indeed correct. If they were visiting the Earth on a fairly regular basis, we'd expect them to be meeting all sorts of people, including people who can use a camera, and people who will be taken seriously because they have a reputation for being reliable. Instead they seem to restrict their social activities to lonely people in lonely locations. Reliable pilots and so on only ever seem to get fleeting glimpses of their craft - so fleeting that they might just as easily be some atmospheric phenomenon rather than alien spacecraft.

or maybe they have seen "Greys" and "Lizard Men" . . . Wouldn't that be a hoot if some day we discovered that to be true. I guess I wouldn't know what to say. "my mistake, so sorry"

That's like saying, wouldn't it be a hoot if someday we discovered the moon really was made of green cheese?

__________________
-----
Todd (Bowie, MD, US, North America, Earth, Sol System, Vega region, Local Bubble, Orion arm, Milky Way Galaxy, Local Group, Virgo A Cluster, Virgo supercluster, the universe in which spock is clean shaven)

Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.

personal page: http://blog.astrosketches.info

Alas, not so good for grilled cheese sandwiches I fear--how about some Velveeta, much tastier . . . (you're right, that would be a hoot too)

Probably less a "hoot" than hissing sounds and silent stares.

__________________
A person's name, or a mark representing it, as signed personally or by deputy, as in subscribing a letter or other document.

What are you trying to say there buddy--out with it now--j

Already did, although it works better if the order of the antecedents is "Lizard Men" and "Greys".

__________________
A person's name, or a mark representing it, as signed personally or by deputy, as in subscribing a letter or other document.

I see, that works alright--j

To quote Brian Josephson: "Their opinion of parapsychology research is not based on evaluation of the evidence but on a dogmatic belief that all research in this field is false."

That's all I see here. Dogma.

http://www.tcm.phy.cam.ac.uk/~bdj10/...PWprofile.html

Now, I find Josephson to be a real breath of fresh air. It's a damn shame that more people share this view. The current dogma embraced by "mainstream" scientists will actually hinder science -- just as Aristotle did thousands of years ago.

For an alternate view of things, you could take a read of 'Supernatural' by Graham Hancock. He takes a look at the scene from a new perspective & uses his investigative skills to offer a very interesting possibility.

Now I know there are those among you who will 'hrmph' at it being Graham Hancock, but he tends to make his points using evidence & research. I've yet to see a thoroughly presented dismissal of his ideas about the history of civilisation & he is part of a group of researchers who try to base what they say in reality.

In Supernatural he approaches the subject of our 'inner' world & in the process, crosses the 'Alien' path.

__________________
* Never doubt there is Truth; just doubt that you have it!

Was it the grilled cheese sandwich that got you going friend??

Hubris, actually.

There is a bit of that going on around here, it is amusing at times-take care Brad--joe

I find it sad, actually.

Are there cranks and hoaxes in the paranormal field? Yes. But there are people out there, who are working hard to find out more about the Universe and its mysteries. And, once again, it's good to see someone like Josephson working, doing the research . . . instead of deriding and name-calling.

138 posts so far, squabbling over something so petty.

Speaking of shameful and painful to read...