With both the existence of pure theory and applied evidence supporting the plausibility of the UFO extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH) – where the UFO remains a UFO after appropriate expert analysis has failed to find a more terrestrial explanation – lets look at a few snippets of the phenomena, this time the endless stalemate between those supporting the UFO ETH, and those sceptical debunkers of the UFO ETH starting with the most basic of all arguments, UFOs can not be extraterrestrial because there are no extraterrestrials; never have been.
Whether you’re a UFO ETH (extraterrestrial hypothesis) supporter, a UFO ETH debunker, or you don’t give a damn either way about the UFO ETH at all (so then why are you reading this?), you’d be aware that overall the professional scientific community, including for some odd reason SETI (Search for ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence) scientists – the very clan who profess an intense interest in ETI – pooh-pooh the very notion of the UFO ETH. That the scientific communities and scientists in general (there are exceptions) dismiss the UFO ETH (extraterrestrial hypothesis) as pseudoscience and total bunk is understandable, but illogical. The scientists’ anti UFO ETH arguments don’t stand up to logical scrutiny. To adequately come to terms with the UFO ETH one needs to have a ‘deep time’ perspective; not just one of here and now or last week, month, year, decade or even centuries ago.
OBJECTION #1: We are the proverbial IT – there are no other alien life forms, therefore there can be no other advanced extraterrestrial civilizations, therefore UFOs can not have anything to with extraterrestrial intelligence.
ANSWER: Not even a UFO ETH skeptic SETI (Search for ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence) scientist of my acquaintance would argue we’re the proverbial IT – it would make a mockery of his own chosen career path.
With 13.7 billion years to play with since the origin of our Universe (the Big Bang event); with billions of stars in our own galaxy alone; with billions of galaxies scattered throughout the cosmos each with billions of stars therein, with extra-solar planets being discovered around many of those stars in our own galaxy (and by implication other galaxies as well); with the chemical elements required for life commonplace throughout the Universe; with the principles of Darwinian evolution given as universal, what odds that we are really the proverbial IT? And what are the implications for extraterrestrial UFOs?
When it comes down to the UFO extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH), it’s only our own Milky Way Galaxy we need concern ourselves with. Even I acknowledge that though extraterrestrial civilizations exist in other galaxies, travel times between galaxies quickly exceed any logical transit times available, even when invoking a “Star Trek” warp drive. Interstellar travel, travel within the confines of our own galaxy, however is quite another matter. Still, our own galaxy gives us some ten billion years to play around with; billions and billions of stars and no doubt planets, those abundant chemical elements, and Darwinian principles. Again, it would be a very brave soul to suggest, given those sorts of statistics, that we are, even in our own galaxy, the proverbial ‘It’; not just the new kid on the block, but the first and only kid on the block.
Some people say that terrestrial life is the only life in the cosmos, therefore, whatever UFOs are, they can’t have anything to do with aliens. That’s despite the fact that there are ‘billions and billions’ of possible sites in the Universe where life could take hold, evolve and ultimately boldly go.
So are we alone in the Universe? That’s a question that’s been asked by millions over the eons, without, to date resolution. Of course the word ‘alone’ implies alone in the sense of whether or not there exists elsewhere in the cosmos our rough equals; more likely as not betters. We want to get to know our neighbours across the street, not their pets, or their plants. The standard gut-feeling answer to the question usually revolves around how vast the Universe is, and surely, given the billions and billions of stars in our galaxy and the existence of billions and billions of galaxies each with billions and billions of stars, etc. and the vastness of time, surely we can’t be the proverbial IT.
There’s unfortunately one slight flaw in that statistical approach. There’s a rather long chain of events that have to happen, hurdles to be jumped, in order to get from the elements of star-stuff to biological cosmic neighbours. Depending on whom you talk to, that chain can be extremely long indeed. The point is, if any one factor in that chain of causality has a very low probability of coming to pass, it matters not one bit whether or not all the other factors are extremely probable. The overall result is going to be low. If any one factor is as close to zero as makes no odds, then the overall answer will also be as close to zero as makes no odds. Certainty multiplied by certainty multiplied by certainty multiplied by certainty multiplied by zero multiplied by certainty multiplied by certainty multiplied by certainty ultimately equals zero!
It’s been pointed out by others, and I tend to have to agree, that astronomers (being physical scientists) tend to be much more optimistic and supportive of the notion that advanced life forms in the Universe - extraterrestrial intelligences - are a dime-a-dozen. That’s relative to biologists (being life scientists), who considerably hedge their bets and who it must be said are presumably better qualified to pass judgments. So, taking things from a more biological perspective, what’s what? Well, very low probabilities, when multiplied by vast numbers, still yield positive numbers. In other words, we might be faced with a ‘rare Earth hypothesis’ but not a ‘unique Earth hypothesis’.
So in summary to that first objection that only terrestrial life exists: 1) The Universe is a bio-friendly Goldilocks Universe – we’re here after all. 2) There is plenty of real estate in the cosmos that could give rise to and host hardy microbial life forms. 3) The appropriate chemicals, organic chemicals, and biochemicals; appropriate life producing and sustaining chemistry full stop, are present throughout the cosmos. 4) There’s been a massive amount of time for life to originate, evolve, survive, thrive and migrate. So IMHO, the first objection fails.
No comments:
Post a Comment