Spirits, ghosts, and that kind of stuff

[FredH]

If we do, it will most likely be through telescopic observation of other worlds, detecting biosignatures or technosignatures in their atmospheric spectra or surface details, or through SETI detecting interstellar broadcasts signals. UFO beliefs have nothing to do with the scientific search for alien life; they're just ancient beliefs in demons and ghoulies and fairy folk dressed up with the surface trappings of the space age.

As a ten-year-old who loved Close Encounters, for a while there I was a full-blown “We Are Not Alone” alien-visitation believer — until I watched Cosmos (and later read the book). Carl Sagan saved me!

(Though once in a while there is an incident that makes me wonder. The Betty & Barney Hill thing always seemed odd to me.). (But by all means, Christopher, blow it up!)

 

[Christopher]

As a ten-year-old who loved Close Encounters, for a while there I was a full-blown “We Are Not Alone” alien-visitation believer — until I watched Cosmos (and later read the book). Carl Sagan saved me!

Me too -- not just Cosmos, but his scholarly writing on the subject.

(Though once in a while there is an incident that makes me wonder. The Betty & Barney Hill thing always seemed odd to me.). (But by all means, Christopher, blow it up!)

I think the Hill account was one of the first times the "Gray alien" image, the one based on popular-science-magazine conjectures about future human evolution, showed up in a claimed UFO encounter, and the prominence of the Hill account in pop culture probably helped popularize that image.

 

[Set Harth]

Me too -- not just Cosmos, but his scholarly writing on the subject.

By any chance do you mean The Demon-Haunted World?

 

[rocketscientist]

All this talk about Mormonism. If you haven't seen Heretic yet, it is a really good film.

Is that the one with Hugh Grant?

 

[MarcKle1964]

I might just do that. Thanks.


I mean one day though It would be nice to find actual evidence of otherworldly life.... Just to be optimistic about it.

Maybe they have with the Martian meteorite with fossilized bacteria. But extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

Maybe they have with the Martian meteorite with fossilized bacteria. But extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

Quite correct.

But if true why not go public about it?

 

[Christopher]

Maybe they have with the Martian meteorite with fossilized bacteria. But extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

The hypothesis that the structures in that meteorite were fossilized bacteria has been heavily disputed. The claim is based pretty much exclusively on the appearance of the features, which by itself is not enough to be conclusive. Some studies have shown that similar features can be created through non-biological processes.

But 8f true why not go public about it?

Again, nobody's hiding anything. All the research regarding meteorite AL84001 has been conducted openly, and scientists have been debating it with each other in public for nearly 30 years now. There's just insufficient evidence to settle the question one way or the other. We'd probably have to go to Mars and do a lot of searching and testing to do that. Even then, it could take decades to be sure.

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

Again, nobody's hiding anything. All the research regarding meteorite AL84001 has been conducted openly, and scientists have been debating it with each other in public for nearly 30 years now. There's just insufficient evidence to settle the question one way or the other. We'd probably have to go to Mars and do a lot of searching and testing to do that. Even then, it could take decades to be sure.

Wouldn't there be some non destructive way to get inside it and take samples?

 

[MarcKle1964]

The hypothesis that the structures in that meteorite were fossilized bacteria has been heavily disputed. The claim is based pretty much exclusively on the appearance of the features, which by itself is not enough to be conclusive. Some studies have shown that similar features can be created through non-biological processes.

Again, nobody's hiding anything. All the research regarding meteorite AL84001 has been conducted openly, and scientists have been debating it with each other in public for nearly 30 years now. There's just insufficient evidence to settle the question one way or the other. We'd probably have to go to Mars and do a lot of searching and testing to do that. Even then, it could take decades to be sure.

That meteorite is an anomaly, as was one of the 1976 Viking Mars Lander experiments which tested positive for life while a second similar test failed to find it. We definitely need to go in person with a lab or two on the mothership in orbit about. And Buzz Aldrin's Mars Cycler in action to make supplying and crew changes easier.

What would Spock say about two anomalies from the same world?

 

[Nerys Myk]

What would Spock say about two anomalies from the same world?

"Fascinating"

 

[Christopher]

Wouldn't there be some non destructive way to get inside it and take samples?

Huh? They already did -- that's how they found the suspected fossils in the first place, and how a 2022 NASA study was able to conclude that the formations were probably created through geological processes instead of biological ones. https://astrobiology.nasa.gov/news/an-update-from-alh84001/

Seriously, where are you getting these assumptions from? What in the world gave you the idea that nobody had taken samples from it?

What would Spock say about two anomalies from the same world?

He would say that a world is a very large place and could easily contain many unrelated anomalies. Just because a given observer is only aware of two things is not evidence that they are objectively connected.

As for the Mars Lander experiment, I do think the initial results are of interest, as I've heard credible arguments that the followups were inadequate in some way (I forget how). But it's hardly anomalous for different tests of the same thing to produce different results; that's an integral part of the scientific process, to retest things and determine whether the results are repeatable. If the second and later tests give different results than the first test did, that means the first results may have been a fluke or an error. A result is only accepted if it's verified multiple times.

 

[theenglish]

I mean one day though It would be nice to find actual evidence of otherworldly life.... Just to be optimistic about it.

Liu Cixin would disagree. He believes there is plenty to be scared about if aliens ever did come to Earth. Even if they're benevolent, their mere existence would completely destroy human civilization as we know it. Imagine if the East India Company were aliens in spaceships and the Earth was Asia or Africa.

 

[Christopher]

Liu Cixin would disagree. He believes there is plenty to be scared about if aliens ever did come to Earth. Even if they're benevolent, their mere existence would completely destroy human civilization as we know it. Imagine if the East India Company were aliens in spaceships and the Earth was Asia or Africa.

But history shows that doesn't have to happen. Once, China and the Islamic world were far more advanced than Europe, but when Europe obtained their advanced technologies and knowledge like gunpowder, the printing press, the magnetic compass, and decimal numerals, it didn't eradicate European society but advanced it enormously. The reason Europe devastated so many other societies wasn't because it was more technologically advanced; that's a copout people use to hide from the fact that the reason Europe devastated so many other societies was that it actively tried to eradicate them. China and the Middle East were more advanced than Europe but didn't believe European culture had to be destroyed, so Europe was able to thrive using the knowledge it gained from them.

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

Seriously, where are you getting these assumptions from? What in the world gave you the idea that nobody had taken samples from it?

I had assumed, incorrectly I might add that they thought it would destroy the rock if they did that, so thought no one had tried

 

[Christopher]

I had assumed, incorrectly I might add that they thought it would destroy the rock if they did that, so thought no one had tried

Any meteorite is already just the surviving fragment of a much larger rock, since the rest would've been burned away by atmospheric friction. And you can't study the interior composition or structure of a rock without slicing it in half or taking core samples. That doesn't "destroy" it. Cutting a rock in two doesn't make it stop being a rock, it just makes it two smaller rocks.

The suspected nanobacteria were discovered in the first place with an electron microscope, which would have probably have required taking a very thin slice out of it to make the microscope slide. Presumably they had to cut into the interior of the meteorite to find them, because any surface detail would probably have been melted or ablated away by atmospheric friction.

 

[Roundabout]

Oh I don't know I'm torn about the Roswell story, if there was really nothing to it why is it something no one official will acknowledge one way or the other, if it really is nothing?

Believe it or not, in the 1990s the U.S. Air Force released two official reports about Roswell, one in 1994 and another in 1997.

The reports basically declared that there was nothing otherworldly to see there, so move along.

The reports offered the more likely and reasonable explanation that the Roswell phenomenon was actually high altitude weather balloon experiments and parachute tests using crash dummies, that the military had conducted in the New Mexico area around that time period.

I remember when the USAF released the 1997 report, it held a press conference about the report.

I saw the press conference on tv. It was kind of surreal. Here was this clean cut serious Air Force officer engaging the press in what was essentially a matter that had more to do with urban legend and folklore. It was amusing to see the air force officer trying to keep a straight face when he was thrown some of the more wacky questions from the reporters.

You can download the reports as PDF. Roswell Report and The Roswell Report: Case Closed .

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

Believe it or not, in the 1990s the U.S. Air Force released two official reports about Roswell, one in 1994 and another in 1997.

The reports basically declared that there was nothing otherworldly to see there, so move along.

The reports offered the more likely and reasonable explanation that the Roswell phenomenon was actually high altitude weather balloon experiments and parachute tests using crash dummies, that the military had conducted in the New Mexico area around that time period.

I remember when the USAF released the 1997 report, it held a press conference about the report.

I saw the press conference on tv. It was kind of surreal. Here was this clean cut serious Air Force officer engaging the press in what was essentially a matter that had more to do with urban legend and folklore. It was amusing to see the air force officer trying to keep a straight face when he was thrown some of the more wacky questions from the reporters.

You can download the reports as PDF. Roswell Report and The Roswell Report: Case Closed .

I gotta ask why the crash test dummies from a a high altitude balloon? What were they trying to test?

 

[Nerys Myk]

I gotta ask why the crash test dummies from a a high altitude balloon? What were they trying to test?

Impact damage on something?

 

[Christopher]

The Scientific American Frontiers episode I linked to above gives a good overview of what really happened in Roswell.

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

Impact damage on something?

Lots of damage from high altitude then I guess