Even the UFO Extraterrestrial Hypothesis (ETH) cannot be so it’s not; okay it could be however it still isn’t; do not disturb me with facts, my mind is constructed; and if it’s all pseudo science and I just take care of authentic science Dissertaço de Mestrado. Trust me with this – I’m a scientist! And now most of us understand boffins ‘ are 100% honest and right 100 percent of their moment!
Many professional scientists, along with other sceptics, if of course if they consider UFOs in any respect, happen to be pre conditioned to consider about them in regard to the lunatic fringe, nutters who take on any and all pseudo-science connected to the paranormal and aren’t worth the attention, or even if worthy, afterward worthy at an adverse sense since merely some thing to ridicule. They prefer to at a way ‘pour water on a drowning man’ and pat them in the trunk as how superior they’re comparative to this astrology-minded; the wonderful unwashed group that believe dinosaurs and humans coexisted together.
Primarily, let us dump this sceptics, professional and otherwise, since their dual regular figures to handling most of pseudo-science or most of paranormal issues alike. Actually so sceptics just have one benchmark – no shades of gray. 1 size fits all. That’s to say, regardless of what the anomaly, it’s crap. Sceptics just bulge together that is paranormal, and also call it pseudo science as some other sceptics’ website or monograph will more than adequately demonstrate – all pseudoscience is nonsense and all = all.
SETI (that’s the Search for ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence) scientists tend to poo-poo ufology buffs for failing to come up with a UFO ETH (extraterrestrial hypothesis) smoking gun, or
compelling evidence, especially physical evidence for hardcore UFOs, in over six decades. That’s one topic. Of course they conveniently forget that SETI is entirely based on theory and SETI hasn’t produced a smoking gun conclusive of the existence of ETI either, over a near equal five decades of searching. But that’s another topic. However, both topics are in fact equal in that neither has produced a smoking gun that’s ‘murdered’ the alien and provided a corpse for study. In fact, the amount of SETI evidence, including physical evidence, is but a short story compared to the full length UFO novel.
There is one other up-close-and-personal reason SETI scientists dump on the UFO ETH and/or ‘early astronauts’ is because they have a vested interest in SETI. They have spent careers, building equipment designed to look for alien intelligence out there, often been made fun of by other scientists (and the American Congress) in their hunt for ‘little green men’. It would be a serious blow to their egos, careers, reputations and an actual downright embarrassment if ET proven to be down here all along. So, it’s almost a natural reaction to rubbish any alternative idea. We’ve seen that any number of times in the history of science – Darwinian evolution vs. Lamarckian evolution; the Big Bang cosmology vs. the Steady State cosmology; catastrophism vs. uniformitarianism in geology. Debates have often been controversial, personal and bitter. So it’s interesting to note that when I communicate some of my unorthodox ideas to a well known SETI scientist, if I get under his skin, at worst I get no response; at best one that starts with “Dear Mr. Prytz”. Now if I say something he considers sensible (by his standards) the reply is “Dear John”. That’s a bit of a double standard too in its own right.
Now when it comes to SETI vs. the UFO ETH, that’s not to say SETI scientists shouldn’t continue to do SETI – they should – nothing ventured, nothing gained. But it gains them nothing to reject out of hand the rival idea that ET is or was down here are well as being up there.
Quite apart from SETI, the majority of scientists, especially physical scientists, usually poo-poo the UFO ETH with a there’s ‘no signs’ mantra. But such scientists leave themselves wide open to the double standard. Many a scientist will profess a firm belief in something that has absolutely ‘no evidence’ of any kind, conveniently forgetting that they have rubbished other people’s beliefs for having faith in six impossible things that appear on their dining room table prior to breakfast. And so we see here the beginnings of more general double standards.
A prime example of how some scientists have their lack of evidence and belief too is with respect to religion. Even as recently as 2009, a public opinion poll found that a significant (albeit minority) percentage of scientists had a belief in a God that was up close and personal in their lives. There’s not the slightest bit of evidence, physical or otherwise, that God exists. There’s absolutely no evidence for any deity (monotheistic or polytheistic), yet many scientists have no trouble accepting on faith and having a belief in a deity (or deities) sight unseen by anyone and everyone. No one verifiable has seen the monotheistic deity God and all the polytheistic deities are apparently, according to scholars, entirely mythological. Go figure. This essay could just as easily been constructed around a theme of double standards with respect to God: Show Me the Evidence!’ There simply is no.