A Featured article today on
Space.com.

Ya'll know what I think...
what say ye?

Do current "rigorous" astrophysics really support this?

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

I linked to the Haisch article in another thread. I think he some very interesting ideas.

http://www.ufoskeptic.org/JBIS.pdf

The www.NARCAP.org web site explains some of the stigma which attaches to the UFO/UAP problem.

While I keep Haisch's site bookmarked(and have cited him before), I'd not seen the JBIS article until this morning. And I agree; I find his ideas on the matter more balanced than most scientists'.
But your post went largely ignored (surprised?) in that other thread and since credible(?) space.com published the article today, I felt it needed its own thread.

We'll see how it goes...

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

It's an interesting piece, but it is, IMHO, a little self-contradicting
So they are saying there should be ETs all around us and we should have met them. Ok, but...
They argue that there are some (a few) high quality reports and the scientific community has just ignored them. I'm far from an expert, but that does not wash with my opinion. I've seen some serious investigations of some of these and have never seen one that was close to proving something. If these guys are scientists, and they don't like the work other scientists have done (or not done), then pick a high quality case, do an investigation, and get it published in a referred journal.

__________________
At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

One Earth, One Sky - IYA 2009
All moderation in purple

Agreed, which is why I look for such articles as this; some that are helping to lend credibility to the issue.
Don't forget that the "little green men" laugh-factor is pervasive to this day, with many giving it a low a priori probability to start. Hence, very little serious scientific inquiry has been done.
I'm optimistic, though, we continue to see these sorts of news pieces about "life out there" and ETs, and IMHO they serve as a desensitizing mechanism.

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

Haisch and Puthoff are desperately trying to find a way of reducing inertia, with the aim perhaps of inventing a reactionless drive;

I wish them luck, but doubt they will be successful.

This pdf
http://www.ufoskeptic.org/JBIS.pdf
suggests that extraterrestrials might already have similar technology, making getting to Earth easier than one might suppose; they then suggest that alien intelligences would fly around the skies of Earth with all their lights on, showing themselves to small groups but hiding from the governments and scientists of the world in order to 'prepare' us mentally for eventual contact?

That seems a pretty unusual strategy if you don't mind me saying so. Dear Mr ET, we need proper contact now, not all this sneaking around.

__________________
New Orion's Arm Site . The Starlark . Against a Diamond Sky (OA Novella Collection) . OA Flickr set

I'm curious, what do you mean by "desperately?"

I don't mind, but Part 6. Inferring an ET Strategy, dealt rather well with this aspect, I think. I see no reason why we shouldn't infer that an exceedingly advanced species possesses an equally advanced ethical base, lending credence to a couple of the hypotheses described. Then again, if they're anything like us, chances are they're paraoid and secretive. :wink:

Haisch's "Some Thoughts on Keeping it Secret" is relevant and interesting too.

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

The ET Equation, Recalculated.


Now, I thought about posting this in the PX forum. :wink:

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

Reactionless drives are fringe ideas; these people have been writing papers on related topics for years, with no results. In this paper they consider the situation that might occur if one or another of the blind alleys they have been exploring turns out to enable interstellar travel of some sort; they then extend this thinking to suggest that the bizzare apparent behaviour of unidentified aerial phenomena is 'ethical' and a prparation for eventual overt contact.
Well, many of the people who experienced the great UFO flaps of the 1950's are not prepared for contact, but instead they are nearly all dead now. There would be nothing rational or ethical about persuing such a 'leaky embargo' strategy for decade after decade;
and of couse nothing of the sort has been happening.

Despite the opinions expressed in this paper, all UFO reports are in fact the result of misidentifcation of natural phenomena or man made phenomena, hoaxes or hallucinations.
There is no need to have an extraterrestrial hypothesis at all.

__________________
New Orion's Arm Site . The Starlark . Against a Diamond Sky (OA Novella Collection) . OA Flickr set

Bernard Haisch is a UFO "free-energy" crackpot. Its unfotunate his article has gotten so much media play and attention. His assertions that prevalent thinking in cosmology and physics shold have us believe that extraterrestrials are visiting earth are simply not true. In fact, its precisely the opposite. What we know about the universe and its underlying physics makes it very unlikely that E.T. is here and attempting to phone home.

__________________
Anything may be possible, but not everything actually is. Some things are true and some things are not. Wisdom is knowing the difference.

All I know is that I dont believe we are alone in this universe, I dont even think we are alone in the Milky Way

I agree, so much space... we can't be alone!

couse that would be wasting space!

__________________
GCS/S d(+) s+:+ a--- C++(+++)>$ W+++>$ L>+ M+>++ w++ P+>++ tv@ PS b+ DI+ G e-> h! r-- !z+

~Jorge Schrauwen

Well, the likelihood that there is extraterrestrial life eslewhere in the universe is pretty high. But for exactly the same reasons this is likely, it is improbable that E.T. has dropped in for a visit here. This is the mistake Mr. Haisch makes in his article.

__________________
Anything may be possible, but not everything actually is. Some things are true and some things are not. Wisdom is knowing the difference.

Yeah, I believe that there are billions and billions of alien life (sentient and non-sentient) out there and millions upon millions of alien civilizations existing at the same time but STILL...I doubt that any alien race have discovered us

talking about vacuous commentary... mr "algorithms" do you have anything else besides your invective commentary to show us how exactly Bernard Haisch is a crackpot or did you just wanted to amaze us with your less than brilliant insights into the impossibilities of the underlying physics of the Universe that "we" currently know?

so according to your logic, the fact that the existence of ET life in the Universe is extremely high is proportional to the improbability of them visiting us. that is not logical at all. in fact, the mistake you made in your argument was creating a perfectly baseless and senseless oxymoron.

WHY do you consider it necessary to continue to "berate" others opinions on this board. We certainly don't do that to you. All that we've ever asked is that you provide EVIDENCE to support your claims. And it seems like every time we ask, you come back with some "form" of insult. If you don't understand why we consider "free energy" to be woowoo, just say so without the personal conmmentary.

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

Mr. Outcast,

I suggest that you do a little personal research on Mr. Haisch and his flight-by-night outfit he calls the "California Institute for Physics and Astrophysics."

As for my reasoning about the probability of E.T., let me explain it in simple terms...

Given the vast size and sheer scale of the universe, there may be innumerable places where life might have originated and evolved into intelligent creatures. But it is this very same vast size and and sheer scale that makes it very unlikely that any extraterrestrial intelligence would have found us and then traveled over incredible distances to drop in for a visit. The number of places and the distances we are talking about are beyond our own human comprehension. Consequently, there is an inverse relationship between the likelihood of extraterrestrial intelligence elsewhere in the universe and the possibility of E.T. dropping by earth to phone home.

__________________
Anything may be possible, but not everything actually is. Some things are true and some things are not. Wisdom is knowing the difference.

I disagree.
We ourselves are already ETs.
Are you suggesting that either we are the first and only species to have accomplished this, or are you saying that no further breakthroughs in propulsion will occur, at least none that might be supported by Haisch's "fringe ideas," to make interstellar travel more feasible?
Actually, IMHO, it is those very fringe ideas that often bring about discovery. What comes to mind is a recent remark I made about how often what was once Science Fiction is now Science Fact.

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

Who is this "we" you're talking about, RAF? Are you a "mouthpiece" of some sort?
And what are you on about with the EVIDENCE thing? Did Outcast make some claim about the ETH being factual?
And did you see algorithms provide any "EVIDENCE" to support his, what appeared to be, pseudoskeptical stockshelf remark about "free energy crackpots?"
I suggest both of you read the definition of "skeptic," from Haisch's site no less:
"Skeptic - One who practices the method of suspended judgment, engages in rational and dispassionate reasoning as exemplified by the scientific method, shows willingness to consider alternative explanations without prejudice based on prior beliefs, and who seeks out evidence and carefully scrutinizes its validity."

Now, neither your nor algorithm's response strikes me as a "dispassionate .... willingness to consider alternative explanations...." No, instead I see the usual missives about "crackpots" and "woowoos."

Are all these scientists "crackpots and woowoos" too? And what about Frank Drake's "recalulating" article I linked too? Should I consider him a "crackpot" or "woowoo" too?
I think Outcast's abrasiveness stems from continually seeing this kind of nonsensical response flaunted in the name of "skepticism" and "science."

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

I did, and you know what I found?
Haisch was among many "crackpots and woowoos" presenting at the AIAA Joint Propulsion Conference 2001.
According to that, the "crackpots and woowoos" are everywhere! NASA offices, US Dept of Energy, and countless Contractors immersed in "free energy" propulsion research!

What's a "woowoo" to do?

In not many more words, Haisch's the "Speed of Light Limit Argument" is more convincing, and certainly more skeptical.

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

So Haisch did an univited fifteen minute conference presentation? Big deal. Doesn't make the man any more credible on this subject. Of course, what's interesting is his association with the "California Institute for Physics and Astrophysics." It doesn't really exist. Its an office and a website - nothing more. It sounds fancy, but its just an empty suit.

The man bases his claims that we are currently being visited by E.T. upon his belief that our "friends" travel via wormholes and branes. And you find that more "convincing.?!?"

Here is his paper: http://www.ufoskeptic.org/JBIS.pdf

Sorry but, the man is a crackpot. Perhaps a smart crackpot. But a crackpot just the same.

__________________
Anything may be possible, but not everything actually is. Some things are true and some things are not. Wisdom is knowing the difference.

This started to look interesting until it devolved into indignation and who can play by the rules better than whom.

Nonetheless, with all the billions of billions of opportunities, it seems likely to me that life is elsewhere. Trying to quantify that seems pointless in the face of almost no data. I don't automatically assume such life is on the train to technology. This earth did fine without "intelligent" life for billions of years.

DOlphins and elephants are smart, but how long would it take for them to evolve into something technological like us, and what environmental evolutionary pressure would cause it? CHimps are darn smart, and given their close relation and their existing predeliction to tool use, given a long while they might evolve into something us-like. It happened once already. But why should I assume that would happen universally? Evolution is all about surviving and replicating. Technological intelligence is only one path. There is nothing less evolved about a whale than us. She fits her environment just fine - at least until WE destroy it.

But even so, I suspect there are other technologically intelligent life out there. But then there is the problem of getting it here for the visit. It is a mighty long trip even to the next door neighbor. It is not a given we will ever find magic worm holes to attach or space ships to - Scotty notwithstanding. The energy needed to bend space is huge, and to tear a hole in it, and a hole you can control to boot requires energies and forces of unimaginable scale. Yes of course I could be proven wrong tomorrow, but space warping and what not falls on the less likely end of the spectrum in my humble view.

But lets say ET has leaped all those hurdles. He now is here flying about our night sky appearing mostly as a bright light, but occasional interacting with a trailer park here or there. As a card carrying rural myself and one who might fall in the category of "w**** trash" I feel I can use the term. Once I get the plumbing 100% I will be waiting for ET though.

I gotta think either ET has the capability to get here but is so stunningly incompetent he gets spotted all the time when he would prefer to hide. Or he really wants us to know he is there but is so stunningly incompetent he can't figure out how.

I suppose they might be trying to lay it on us slowly to lessen the blow, but really, would even they think 50 years of peek-a-boo was an effective strategy? Perhaps young ook''lk will lose his license when dad finds out he did a bat turn and three blinks over Phoenix in the family cruiser, but I would like to think ET could do better.

But maybe they are just supremely patient and work on a glacial time scale like HArry Turtledove's lizards. So possibly the reports are true and some of us really have been abducted. All they seem to care about is our genitals. Granted, many of us are the same way. But wouldn't it make more sense to explore our other parts? When we disect something new, we look at all the other stuff too. The again maybe I am being too homo-centric. Or is that sapio-centric?

"It's sapiens to be homo." WHose line was that? Heinlein maybe?

SO if there is life elsewhere, and if it is intelligent, and if it is technological, and if it overcomes the huge problem of interstallar travel, and if it finds us, and if it is not stunningly incompetent really does want to neet us, and if it never sees the Anna Nicole show, and if they lose theur shyness in my remaining years, I suppose it is possible I might see ET.

I genuinely hope I see ET in my lifetime, and I am not so sure I have all that many years left in which it might happen, but it would be thrilling. Damned unlikey but thrilling.

I must take "partial" responsibility for that, and I apologize.

You've "put your finger" on why I have a problem with the idea of "alien visitors". Just look at all the "if's" in that paragraph. With the exception of the Anna Nichole "if" , all of the other "if's" have to actually happen or else there are no "visiting ET's".

How many "if's" are too many? I get real suspicious at one.

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

According to California Institute for Physics and Astrophysics there are numerous Research Fellows and PostDoc Fellows. Have you checked with any of them to substantiate your "empty suit" claim? Or are we to accept what you say and consider them crackpots too?
Moreover, was Haisch not Science Editor for Astrophysical Journal for almost 10yrs? Should we now consider such an apparently refereed journal as "fringe full o' crackpots?"
Additionally: How do you know his was an "univited fifteen minute conference presentation?" Can you tell us if either of the NASA offices', or the Dept. of Energy's, presentations were invited and more than fifteen minutes?
Ah, no matter, according to NASA themselves, they sponsored that conference. And at least considers Haisch's ideas among other "emerging intriguing physics."
But wait, should we now consider NASA as fringe for doing so?

Thanks, I read the JBIS paper; hence the reason I started this thread.
But I find nowhere in his work a "belief" in our "friends," as you put it. All he has said is that according to recent astrophysics observations, we should take the idea more seriously than in the past.
And what I find convincing is his apparent objectivity.
Are you suggesting, then, that he has some ulterior motives in forwarding the ETH?

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

If you review the resumes of those individuals listed as "CIPA-Funded External Research Fellows," you'll note that not a one lists any association with California Institute for Physics and Astrophysics. In fact, only one listed as a "CIPA Postdoctoral and Senior Postdoctoral Fellow" includes CIPA in his resume.

CIPA is a fake organization. Its a storefront office with a website. It is not engaged with original research. Nor is it associated with any university. Haisch's wife, Marsha Sims, is listed as the "executive administrator." And its currently broke.

So it appears. There's probably a good reason why he is no longer serving in this capacity. He also served as the editor of the less respected Journal of Scientific Exploration for twelve years and got bumped there about the same time. You'll notice he doesn't list this disreputable association in his current resume. Probably an interesting story there to follow up on.

Most conferences of this type provide an opportunity for a myriad of people to briefly present their unpublished papers or posters. That's what the agenda you provided describes. These are usually offerred on a first-come, first-served basis, with only modest scrutiny. Nothing wrong with it, but you don't have to be a rocket scientist to get a spot on the agenda. Of course, the real question to ask is why Mr. Haisch's participation in other professional conferences so limited.

Actually, Mr. Haisch has been involved with "UFOlogy" for a very long time and can be accurately labeled a non-skeptical believer. He's dabbled in crop circles, abductions and sightings. He often wraps his views carefully in the guise of a skeptic, but that's just a rhetorical trick he employs in the hopes of being taken seriously.

But the main problem with Haisch's claims in this most recent article is that they're just plain wrong. Haisch claims that "our best modern physics and astrophysics theories predict that we should be experiencing extraterrestrial visitation." This is patently wrong. There is nothing about modern cosmology that infers that E.T. is here on earth. Therein lies the problem with Mr. Haisch's claims. He just makes it up and then fails to justify his assertions.

'nuff said

__________________
Anything may be possible, but not everything actually is. Some things are true and some things are not. Wisdom is knowing the difference.

It’s sad that this topic is so emotionally charged and divisive, because I think the evidence poses a genuinely intriguing question for our time…one that requires a cool head to assess with proper scientific skepticism. I try not to submit to ‘belief’ or ‘disbelief’ in this matter, but having witnessed an unexplained aerial phenomenon at a young age, I do tend to think there is something happening that we haven’t accounted for yet (I witnessed a pair of lights in the sky, with five of my neighbors, execute fast acute-angle maneuvers, in formation, in broad daylight for about a minute one day, and I’ve still never seen anything that might account for it).

Historically, Fermi's Paradox was presented in response to the growing consensus among scientists, over fifty years ago, that our galaxy should be teeming with intelligent life, and in fact, that the galaxy should have been completely colonized by now. To which Fermi responded, well, 'Where are they?'

Many took this argument at face value, and figured, 'since they're not walking down the street right now, they mustn't exist at all.'

Those who consider the issue for more than the five seconds it takes to reach that assumption, suggest that perhaps they -are- here, but they're staying somewhat out of our awareness because we're obviously not quite ready to meet them. This answers Fermi's Paradox, if you're willing to accept this explanation.

It could be that extraterrestrial 'people' are appearing in our skies to get us ready for contact, sociologically. If they are, it's working. Over the last fifty years, the percentage of people who believe that extraterrestrial craft are visiting our planet has risen to over 50%.

It's also worth noting that astronomers have accumulated enough spectral data from the stars in our vicinity to suggest that there could be Earth-like planets around most stars. Combine that with current data suggesting that simple life forms may exist right now on Mars...and the prospect of intelligent alien life visiting us seems more like a strong possibility, imo.

If we accept that the evolution of intelligent life in our system is not a miraculously unlikely event, then our best guess describes a galaxy that has been teeming with intelligent life for millions of years. Ours is a fairly young system in our galaxy, so we'd be the new kids on the block. In fact, several species may have had plenty of time to survey the entire galaxy long ago, encountering each other along the way, as well as developing planets in the process. So they would know how to do this without compelling us to violence, either toward them or ourselves. And two attributes I think you could count on a million year-old interstellar civilization having, are patience and subtlety. That sure seems to fit the 'sighting' paradigm of the last few decades like a glove.

I find that the more I think about how I would handle making first contact with a primitive planet like ours, if I were an advanced alien intelligence, the more it resembles what's actually happening.

For example--consider the topic of 'physical evidence,' the 'smoking gun' most scoffers demand as proof before they accept the idea of alien visitations. They want a ufo to look over at the lab. Well, if an advanced race of creatures were slowly prepping us for first contact, they sure as heck wouldn't slip up and leave a chunk of impossible technology sitting on our front lawn. We can count on this much--if such folks have been doing this kind of thing for a few hundred thousand years or more, there's not going to be any incontrovertible evidence of their presence until they're good and ready to be known to us.

Here's my hunch on this matter--if we are being prepped for contact, I bet my socks they're waiting until we trust the eyewitness accounts -of our own people-, before they come a-knockin'. It only stands to reason--how can they expect us to be trusting of Them, in any way, if we can't even trust each other. Right?

We have a mountain of testimony from qualified observers as well as respectable laymen, and heaps of photographic evidence to back them up. Shame on us if we're too cynical to take a step back and say 'y'know, there might be something to this, let's keep an open mind til we know enough to arrive together at a sound conclusion.' Isn't that what the spirit of scientific investigation is all about?

But have you checked with any of the Fellows themselves to validate your assumption based on what is listed on CIPA's website?
Are you suggesting that CIPA lists these people, as well as the countless scientific articles they've published, to advance a "fake organization?"
To what end?
At most, I suspect you'll discover legitamacy; at least, you'll alert those "fellows" to Haisch's use of their work in promoting his "fake organization."

A little follow-up produced Haisch's resume.
According to this, you didn't even look at his resume, and yet felt compelled to suggest "probably a good reason" he got "bumped." :-?

Sorry, algorithms, but this reinforces my opinion that here you exhibit pseudoskepticism in a shameless degree.

Yeah, I attend such Expos and Conferences for the Public Works, Paving and Engineering communities often. But never are they on a "first come first serve" basis. More often than not one (or one's organization) must have at least an Associate Membership with one or another groups in order to "present." And it seems logical that NASA, having sponsored the conference in question, would have at least "weeded out" any pseudoscience so as to gather pertinent and reaslitic ideas and possibilities, not waste time allowing "crackpots" to present themselves. Oh, but wait, according to Haisch's resume, he was a Lockheed staff scientist for 20yrs. Do "crackpots" maintain such tenure within such institutions? Is he lying?



I'd like to see something that might convince me that he can be "accurately labeled a non-skeptical believer." Your bolded opinions aren't enough.

Quote:

But the main problem with Haisch's claims in this most recent article is that they're just plain wrong. Haisch claims that "our best modern physics and astrophysics theories predict that we should be experiencing extraterrestrial visitation." This is patently wrong. There is nothing about modern cosmology that infers that E.T. is here on earth. Therein lies the problem with Mr. Haisch's claims. He just makes it up and then fails to justify his assertions. 'nuff said

Not really, I'd like to know how he is "patently wrong."
I started this thread precisely to find out others' ideas and insight into these theories that he claims support the ETH.
Just making such an assertion in bold isn't very scientific, and certainly not very skeptical, in the correct sense of the word, of course.

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

Indeed it is!
Excellent post, scourge!

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

Mr. A-DIM,

You want to keep ignoring one simple fact, the "California Institute for Physics and Astrophysics" doesn't really do anything. Its not involved in original research. It has no staff to speak of other than Haisch's wife. Its not associated with any colleges or universities. Simply posting people's names and resumes on a website doesn't make it so. CIPA is just something Haisch attaches to his own resume. It sounds fancy, prestigious and official.

You'll notice that Mr. Haisch isn't gainfully employed in the field of physics or astrophysics today. Perhaps he once had a future in the field when he was younger, but appears to have fallen from grace, probably due to his outlandish crackpot ideas, his asssociation with UFOs and cropcircles, and his questionable promotion of CIPA. In this respect, he's much like Tom VanFlandern who devolved from astrophysics to computer consulting, but still uses his former credentials to promote his crackpot ideas about exploding planets and faces on Mars through his "MetaResearch" website.

As for Haisch's case...he doesn't make it. He simply states that's what is now being generated in the fields of physics, astrophysics and cosmology supports the concusion that earth is being visited by E.T. He makes some vague references to superstring dimensions, wormholes and branes and then leaves us guessing as to how to associate these with E.T. on earth. The gullible and uninformed read this stuff and believe it at face value.

But the fact is that studies into superstring dimensions, wormholes and branes say nothing about the possibility that earth is being visited by E.T. Nothing whatsoever. For that matter, neither has Mr. Haisch, really, except to give the gullible and believers hope that the funny lights in the sky they sometimes hear about is E.T. coming to offer us salvation. I hope you've renewed your membership in Heaven's Gate and are ready for them.

Algorithms

__________________
Anything may be possible, but not everything actually is. Some things are true and some things are not. Wisdom is knowing the difference.