Right Here on Our Planet
Wednesday December 5, 2007
I found an article that the theorists might find interesting. ET Phone Home written by Larry Klaes, deals with the age old search for extraterrestrial intelligence, but with a slightly different angle. He asserts that even though we have no proof of ET life, science has made major advancements in knowledge of biology, chemistry, and the makeup of stars and other worlds, and now they are able to determine what kind of life may be out there, and where this life might be found.
Though some good points are brought out by the author, this is, in my opinion, a case of not seeing the forest for the trees. He is making the mistake that many mainstream scientists make: the only way that two worlds will meet is if we find it via communications contact, or we go out there to find it. Maybe this meeting of worlds has already happened. What about the many well documented cases of alien abduction? The mass of UFO photographs, and video film? The many cases of well investigated UFO sightings by respected individuals? Folks, we don't have to go too far to find extraterrestrial life... the proof is right here on our own planet.
Comments
Larry Klaes writes about a “biology ands psychology student” …who stood up in front of a class…. I’m surprised that Larry was able to spell Astrobiology. This individual’s slurred ramblings do not deserve mention in any context as it relates to the scientific study of UFOs. Instead, what is needed is someone to herald in a new mass consciousness devoted to the immersion of scientific study of the very real UFO phenomenon and its related evidence. Larry, go do your homework.
David
We have been rather arrogant, I think, to assume that life elsewhere in this galaxy would have to form under similar conditions to our own planet. I think we have also made the mistake of assuming that E.T intelligence would undoubtedly use the same sorts of radio frequencies that we would to communicate across the stars.
An alien intelligence is just that – alien. We simply cannot make the mistake of ‘assuming’ anything regarding its behaviour. Yet we do, time and time again. It does rather infuriate me to see ‘scientific’ individuals telling us what E.T would and would not do.
However, we in the ufo community should not also make the mistake of assuming that E.T is already here. For the record, I know that true ufos do exist – I have seen them up close on a number of occasions. I also believe that the abduction phenomenon is real. But I do not think that we have enough evidence to support the conclusion that these phenomenon are the result of an active E.T presence on our planet.
I do not deny that the intelligence behind these things is ‘alien’ at least in the sense that it is not human, but that at the moment, the extraterrestrial hypothesis is just that – a hypothesis.
Dear Mikhal,
In reading your comment I am comfortable that we’ve left the absurd ramblings of Larry Klaus and have begun a dialogue worthy of time spent.
Larry’s statement, “Pang showed how and why the makeup of virtually every organism on Earth might be the standard for most other life throughout space” is arrogant, baseless and devoid of scientific construct. I am also infuriated and confused over the scientific community’s consistent approach to applying present day physics, chemistry, biology et al to phenomenon which is not yet understood. There are many stars in our galaxy that are millions of years older than earth. If one assumes the possibility of the existence of alien life then one must also assume the possibility that they are more advanced then us. Scientific arguments propagated by ‘scientists’ like Pang are faulty in their logic for failing to incorporate the premise of the above assumption. This is what infuriates and confuses me.
Mikhal, I agree with you that we cannot assume that E.T. is already here - without evidence. If I may, your statement “But I do not think that we have enough evidence to support the conclusion that these phenomenon are the result of an active E.T presence on our planet” is confusing. You just stated that “I know that true UFOs do exist – I have seen them up close on a number of occasions.” If you’ve seen them then that is evidence. Although not every UFO type phenomenon is a result of active E.T. presence on our planet, some is.
Your last paragraph is also confusing in light of your disclosure of having seen a UFO. Your statement then remarking that “for the record, I know that true UFOs do exist – I have seen them up close on a number of occasions” premises that by “true UFOs” you mean ones not from earth. By that very admission then it is only fair to say that the “extraterrestrial hypothesis” is not just a hypothesis, but one actually stronger than the non-extraterrestrial hypothesis.
I should probably clarify what I mean by ‘true’ UFOs.
I’ve witnessed a number of unusual objects and lights in the skies over the years, all of which I would class as UFOs - they were and remain unidentified. However, because these objects were observed at a distance or for extremely short durations, or perhaps they did not display significant signs of abnormal behaviour, then I am reluctant to classify them as ‘true’ UFOs. In these cases we cannot completely rule out a conventional explanation - even though a conventional explanation is not apparent.
Then we come to ‘true’ UFOs - objects or lights that are observed and simply have no possible conventional explanation. As we are all aware, the vast majority of UFO sightings can be readily explained to a reasonable degree, but there exists a significant percentage that cannot. Of this percentage, I would say that an even smaller number of these sightings represent ‘true’ UFOs.
It is these sightings that I believe give us the greatest chance of understanding the nature and origin of the UFO phenomenon.
So I am certain (because I have seen the evidence with my own eyes) that there does exist a very real unknown aerial phenomenon here on Earth - but I do not believe that we have sufficient evidence as to the origin of this phenomenon.
As I have said, I do think that the intelligence behind the phenomenon is ‘alien’ but I question whether we are dealing with ‘aliens’ in the conventional sense i.e. beings from another world physically flying here in spacecraft.
I hope that makes sense.
I think this is a superfluous discussion. We know that E.T.’s and even the technology is already here. Only, if you want, not official.