Mr. Gate, we don't know if complex life is unlikely. Our basis of comparison is minimal.
It might be really common.
There might also be an inherent conflict between adaptability and inventiveness on one side, and instability and chaos on the other. Civilisations capable of making more powerful weapons may be prone to self-annihilation.
But that's all I'm saying. We don't know.
Life may be common and may be really uncommon.
If it is really uncommon, it's possible that we are most advanced civilisation in the universe. It's not a totally ridiculous assertion.
We may never know...
Look in any astronomy textbook before 1992. The book will tell you that solar systems & planets like the Earth are incredibly rare. "The Earth is Special".
We now know that planets -- and even planets like the Earth -- are incredibly common. The Earth is not special.
There was no evidence that planets were common ... until they were discovered to be common. That happened as soon as we got instruments sensitive enough to detect them.
Ditto life.
Once there are instruments sensitive to detect bio-signatures (e.g. spectroscopic evidence of DNA), then it will be detected. It will probably happen within the decade. We're not special.
The Great Filter could be one of many things:
1 - Very rare abiogenesis (the precise circumstances by which self-replicating organisms can come about are rare and/or subject to extreme chance. For example, I've seen it posited that a large Moon to flex the crust in order to have sufficient activity (radioactive minerals close to the surface and/or volcanic activity that's just right and not too much) could be necessary. Not sure how likely that is) 2 - Very rare evolution of communicative intelligence (we, as a species, only turned up very late in the day and by chance that an ecological niche opened up that was compatible with evolving intelligence.) 3 - Limited Lifespan (intelligent life becomes dependent on a whole lot of things, including not destroying itself, and its capacity to change its own environment in such a way that its own continued existence gets limited becomes too great) 4 - Dark Forest (the first intelligence to get interstellar travel destroys all others simply because the capacity for destruction from new, immature intelligences, is too dangerous. Thus any surviving intelligences stay very very quiet) 5 - No Interstellar Travel (The distances between stars are just too great. There is no FTL and sublight travel is economically unviable, even for seedships) 6 - Timing (The conditions for intelligent life to evolve are very dependent on such things as second generation stars, having sufficient time to develop, not having serious destructive events, and it is only recently that such conditions have come about) 7 - All of the above.
There are 2,000,000,000,000 galaxies. Each galaxy contains ~ 100,000,000,000 stars. Most stars have multiple planets, say ~5.
So, there are ~ 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets in the Universe. And these planets will have evolved over many 1,000, 000,000,000 years. There is plenty of opportunity for very rare events to have happened many, many times.
(I think of your list, only 5 is likely to be correct -- though that does not mean we cannot detect life because we may gain evidence via spectroscopy. In fact, I think that is much the most likely bio-signature. Point 3 is certainly true, though we know life on Earth has persisted over 3.7 Gyrs, only a bit shorter than age of the Earth)
Must go, now.
Many 1,000, 000,000,000 years? I thought the universe was only about 14,000,000,000 years old.
I find it bad form to do that "Must go" thing. If you are going to make a post which is part of a conversation either give an opportunity to respond or don't post.
Life formed almost immediately* after the Earth formed. You don't need many billions of years to get the ball rolling.
*geologically speaking.
Unless life came to Earth from elsewhere - a perfectly respectable hypothesis.
There’s a view that the first X billion years were too volatile for life to sustain itself in any reasonable way, and that away from the fringes of the Galaxy this remains true today. But it still leaves a lot of time and space to play with.
To me if the UFO phenomenon is confirmed as legit by the US government (I should say President at this point given who else already spoke), it seems obvious to me that they were probably here before we were. Play your own game as to what that means.
OMG.
I hadn't realised you're a mad person.
Your posts have to date been relatively sensible (if overlong).
Mr. Gate, we don't know if complex life is unlikely. Our basis of comparison is minimal.
It might be really common.
There might also be an inherent conflict between adaptability and inventiveness on one side, and instability and chaos on the other. Civilisations capable of making more powerful weapons may be prone to self-annihilation.
But that's all I'm saying. We don't know.
Life may be common and may be really uncommon.
If it is really uncommon, it's possible that we are most advanced civilisation in the universe. It's not a totally ridiculous assertion.
We may never know...
Look in any astronomy textbook before 1992. The book will tell you that solar systems & planets like the Earth are incredibly rare. "The Earth is Special".
We now know that planets -- and even planets like the Earth -- are incredibly common. The Earth is not special.
There was no evidence that planets were common ... until they were discovered to be common. That happened as soon as we got instruments sensitive enough to detect them.
Ditto life.
Once there are instruments sensitive to detect bio-signatures (e.g. spectroscopic evidence of DNA), then it will be detected. It will probably happen within the decade. We're not special.
The Great Filter could be one of many things:
1 - Very rare abiogenesis (the precise circumstances by which self-replicating organisms can come about are rare and/or subject to extreme chance. For example, I've seen it posited that a large Moon to flex the crust in order to have sufficient activity (radioactive minerals close to the surface and/or volcanic activity that's just right and not too much) could be necessary. Not sure how likely that is) 2 - Very rare evolution of communicative intelligence (we, as a species, only turned up very late in the day and by chance that an ecological niche opened up that was compatible with evolving intelligence.) 3 - Limited Lifespan (intelligent life becomes dependent on a whole lot of things, including not destroying itself, and its capacity to change its own environment in such a way that its own continued existence gets limited becomes too great) 4 - Dark Forest (the first intelligence to get interstellar travel destroys all others simply because the capacity for destruction from new, immature intelligences, is too dangerous. Thus any surviving intelligences stay very very quiet) 5 - No Interstellar Travel (The distances between stars are just too great. There is no FTL and sublight travel is economically unviable, even for seedships) 6 - Timing (The conditions for intelligent life to evolve are very dependent on such things as second generation stars, having sufficient time to develop, not having serious destructive events, and it is only recently that such conditions have come about) 7 - All of the above.
There are 2,000,000,000,000 galaxies. Each galaxy contains ~ 100,000,000,000 stars. Most stars have multiple planets, say ~5.
So, there are ~ 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets in the Universe. And these planets will have evolved over many 1,000, 000,000,000 years. There is plenty of opportunity for very rare events to have happened many, many times.
(I think of your list, only 5 is likely to be correct -- though that does not mean we cannot detect life because we may gain evidence via spectroscopy. In fact, I think that is much the most likely bio-signature. Point 3 is certainly true, though we know life on Earth has persisted over 3.7 Gyrs, only a bit shorter than age of the Earth)
Must go, now.
Many 1,000, 000,000,000 years? I thought the universe was only about 14,000,000,000 years old.
I find it bad form to do that "Must go" thing. If you are going to make a post which is part of a conversation either give an opportunity to respond or don't post.
Life formed almost immediately* after the Earth formed. You don't need many billions of years to get the ball rolling.
*geologically speaking.
Unless life came to Earth from elsewhere - a perfectly respectable hypothesis.
Yeah, that's another interesting theory. It also implies a high occurrence rate, given it happened so early.
Not if the seeds for life were already present on the Earth at its formation.
French Europe Minister Clément Beaune has accused the UK of blocking fishing rights. He said the EU could respond with "reprisals" in financial services.
"French Europe minister seeks another 5 minutes of media fame in the British press" is how that should read.
He pops up sporadically and says the same things, while the Commission (who actually are the ones we should be listening to) don't seem to have too many issues at present.
Are we still using the phrase fully vaccinated given how efficacious the vaccines are even after one dose? Comparing how many people are protected is more important.
Yep the FT VACCINE TRACKER is
Perhaps you could write a "reader letter" explaining why they shouldn't
My favorite part of the FT Vaccine tracker is total doses given
China 229m US 229M EU 133M UK 47M Cuba 1 (Not 1m, 1,000 or even 100 or 10 just one) lucky bugger
On aliens. I understand there is a lot of chatter about right now. Can anyone kindly direct me to a non-partisan, non-technical, non-loony summary article or website on what exactly is happening? Cheers.
This series of videos (1/3) from last week is a panel from the mainstream media in the US interviewing Lue Elizondo, who headed the Pentagon’s investigative unit into UFO.
There are any number or articles and videos from the likes of NY Times and NBC discussing the congressional process and with interviews with the senior individuals I mentioned earlier.
Crazy rants from lunatics on YouTube isn't real news.
What about ex heads of the CIA? Ex presidential candidates? Ex US cabinet members? Ex senate majority leaders?
And again - Ex. Why not current?
2 theories: either exes are at liberty to spout whatever nonsense pops into their heads, or currents are unduly constrained by their status from saying things which are actually reasonable and credible.
FPT - Philip “In decreasing order of plausibility:
1: They said something innocent that is misconstrued by loons to be aliens. 2: They said something dishonest for a political agenda, eg to get more money to Defence. 3: Some other explanation. 98: They are loons. 99: Mulder was right, the truth is out there”
It’s a nice sunny day and it’s always good fun to sit and chat about the Great Filter, the Drake Equation, the Dark Forest etc... even better with a cider in hand.
There’s a more immediate question that I was hoping this forum of political experts could help me with? Why in the last year have a quite unusual collection of senior US political figures gone on the record to make quite extraordinary claims about UFOs? And started a very major congressional study into the topic, that has now squarely caught the attention of the US mainstream media?
The statements include there being A LOT of multi point evidence (including satellite visuals, radar, sonar, close range videos) of them being tangible intelligently controlled, high tech objects (rather than glitches or misidentified balloons). That they can break the sound barrier without causing sonic booms? Can pull G force in the many hundreds. Leave no visible infrared signature from a propulsion system? Can traverse easily between air and water. That they interfere quite regularly with US military assets. That the US does not have air superiority over its own landmass AND UFO’S HAVE EVEN REMOTELY DEACTIVATED US NUKES.
Philip prefers to not engage his brain with this topic rather than look carefully at what is being said by whom. Fair enough. It’s a hard topic.
As for the rest of you, if this is all made up, what possible reason is there for such a conspiracy between political adversaries? Because that conspiracy itself would be the story of our time too.
So the theory is that aliens flew to Earth across uncountable billions of miles of space to... screw with us?
Or, more precisely, to screw with just one country on Earth?
Why?
Which theory is more plausible:
1. People on YouTube have got the wrong end of the stick and fallen for conspiracies.
2. Alien life has flown billions of years to essentially film an 👽 version of Impractical Jokers in order to prank people but not reveal themselves or do anything.
Mr. Gate, we don't know if complex life is unlikely. Our basis of comparison is minimal.
It might be really common.
There might also be an inherent conflict between adaptability and inventiveness on one side, and instability and chaos on the other. Civilisations capable of making more powerful weapons may be prone to self-annihilation.
But that's all I'm saying. We don't know.
Life may be common and may be really uncommon.
If it is really uncommon, it's possible that we are most advanced civilisation in the universe. It's not a totally ridiculous assertion.
We may never know...
Look in any astronomy textbook before 1992. The book will tell you that solar systems & planets like the Earth are incredibly rare. "The Earth is Special".
We now know that planets -- and even planets like the Earth -- are incredibly common. The Earth is not special.
There was no evidence that planets were common ... until they were discovered to be common. That happened as soon as we got instruments sensitive enough to detect them.
Ditto life.
Once there are instruments sensitive to detect bio-signatures (e.g. spectroscopic evidence of DNA), then it will be detected. It will probably happen within the decade. We're not special.
The Great Filter could be one of many things:
1 - Very rare abiogenesis (the precise circumstances by which self-replicating organisms can come about are rare and/or subject to extreme chance. For example, I've seen it posited that a large Moon to flex the crust in order to have sufficient activity (radioactive minerals close to the surface and/or volcanic activity that's just right and not too much) could be necessary. Not sure how likely that is) 2 - Very rare evolution of communicative intelligence (we, as a species, only turned up very late in the day and by chance that an ecological niche opened up that was compatible with evolving intelligence.) 3 - Limited Lifespan (intelligent life becomes dependent on a whole lot of things, including not destroying itself, and its capacity to change its own environment in such a way that its own continued existence gets limited becomes too great) 4 - Dark Forest (the first intelligence to get interstellar travel destroys all others simply because the capacity for destruction from new, immature intelligences, is too dangerous. Thus any surviving intelligences stay very very quiet) 5 - No Interstellar Travel (The distances between stars are just too great. There is no FTL and sublight travel is economically unviable, even for seedships) 6 - Timing (The conditions for intelligent life to evolve are very dependent on such things as second generation stars, having sufficient time to develop, not having serious destructive events, and it is only recently that such conditions have come about) 7 - All of the above.
There are 2,000,000,000,000 galaxies. Each galaxy contains ~ 100,000,000,000 stars. Most stars have multiple planets, say ~5.
So, there are ~ 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets in the Universe. And these planets will have evolved over many 1,000, 000,000,000 years. There is plenty of opportunity for very rare events to have happened many, many times.
(I think of your list, only 5 is likely to be correct -- though that does not mean we cannot detect life because we may gain evidence via spectroscopy. In fact, I think that is much the most likely bio-signature. Point 3 is certainly true, though we know life on Earth has persisted over 3.7 Gyrs, only a bit shorter than age of the Earth)
Must go, now.
Many 1,000, 000,000,000 years? I thought the universe was only about 14,000,000,000 years old.
I find it bad form to do that "Must go" thing. If you are going to make a post which is part of a conversation either give an opportunity to respond or don't post.
Life formed almost immediately* after the Earth formed. You don't need many billions of years to get the ball rolling.
*geologically speaking.
Unless life came to Earth from elsewhere - a perfectly respectable hypothesis.
There’s a view that the first X billion years were too volatile for life to sustain itself in any reasonable way, and that away from the fringes of the Galaxy this remains true today. But it still leaves a lot of time and space to play with.
To me if the UFO phenomenon is confirmed as legit by the US government (I should say President at this point given who else already spoke), it seems obvious to me that they were probably here before we were. Play your own game as to what that means.
OMG.
I hadn't realised you're a mad person.
Your posts have to date been relatively sensible (if overlong).
moonshine /ˈmuːnʃʌɪn/
noun (informal) 1. foolish talk or ideas. "whatever I said, it was moonshine"
FPT - Philip “In decreasing order of plausibility:
1: They said something innocent that is misconstrued by loons to be aliens. 2: They said something dishonest for a political agenda, eg to get more money to Defence. 3: Some other explanation. 98: They are loons. 99: Mulder was right, the truth is out there”
It’s a nice sunny day and it’s always good fun to sit and chat about the Great Filter, the Drake Equation, the Dark Forest etc... even better with a cider in hand.
There’s a more immediate question that I was hoping this forum of political experts could help me with? Why in the last year have a quite unusual collection of senior US political figures gone on the record to make quite extraordinary claims about UFOs? And started a very major congressional study into the topic, that has now squarely caught the attention of the US mainstream media?
The statements include there being A LOT of multi point evidence (including satellite visuals, radar, sonar, close range videos) of them being tangible intelligently controlled, high tech objects (rather than glitches or misidentified balloons). That they can break the sound barrier without causing sonic booms? Can pull G force in the many hundreds. Leave no visible infrared signature from a propulsion system? Can traverse easily between air and water. That they interfere quite regularly with US military assets. That the US does not have air superiority over its own landmass AND UFO’S HAVE EVEN REMOTELY DEACTIVATED US NUKES.
Philip prefers to not engage his brain with this topic rather than look carefully at what is being said by whom. Fair enough. It’s a hard topic.
As for the rest of you, if this is all made up, what possible reason is there for such a conspiracy between political adversaries? Because that conspiracy itself would be the story of our time too.
So the theory is that aliens flew to Earth across uncountable billions of miles of space to... screw with us?
Or, more precisely, to screw with just one country on Earth?
Why?
Which theory is more plausible:
1. People on YouTube have got the wrong end of the stick and fallen for conspiracies.
2. Alien life has flown billions of years to essentially film an 👽 version of Impractical Jokers in order to prank people but not reveal themselves or do anything.
Yeah dude, I know that. I'm just bored and bad at following my personal rules about not reacting to obvious cranks.
Mr. Gate, we don't know if complex life is unlikely. Our basis of comparison is minimal.
It might be really common.
There might also be an inherent conflict between adaptability and inventiveness on one side, and instability and chaos on the other. Civilisations capable of making more powerful weapons may be prone to self-annihilation.
But that's all I'm saying. We don't know.
Life may be common and may be really uncommon.
If it is really uncommon, it's possible that we are most advanced civilisation in the universe. It's not a totally ridiculous assertion.
We may never know...
Look in any astronomy textbook before 1992. The book will tell you that solar systems & planets like the Earth are incredibly rare. "The Earth is Special".
We now know that planets -- and even planets like the Earth -- are incredibly common. The Earth is not special.
There was no evidence that planets were common ... until they were discovered to be common. That happened as soon as we got instruments sensitive enough to detect them.
Ditto life.
Once there are instruments sensitive to detect bio-signatures (e.g. spectroscopic evidence of DNA), then it will be detected. It will probably happen within the decade. We're not special.
The Great Filter could be one of many things:
1 - Very rare abiogenesis (the precise circumstances by which self-replicating organisms can come about are rare and/or subject to extreme chance. For example, I've seen it posited that a large Moon to flex the crust in order to have sufficient activity (radioactive minerals close to the surface and/or volcanic activity that's just right and not too much) could be necessary. Not sure how likely that is) 2 - Very rare evolution of communicative intelligence (we, as a species, only turned up very late in the day and by chance that an ecological niche opened up that was compatible with evolving intelligence.) 3 - Limited Lifespan (intelligent life becomes dependent on a whole lot of things, including not destroying itself, and its capacity to change its own environment in such a way that its own continued existence gets limited becomes too great) 4 - Dark Forest (the first intelligence to get interstellar travel destroys all others simply because the capacity for destruction from new, immature intelligences, is too dangerous. Thus any surviving intelligences stay very very quiet) 5 - No Interstellar Travel (The distances between stars are just too great. There is no FTL and sublight travel is economically unviable, even for seedships) 6 - Timing (The conditions for intelligent life to evolve are very dependent on such things as second generation stars, having sufficient time to develop, not having serious destructive events, and it is only recently that such conditions have come about) 7 - All of the above.
There are 2,000,000,000,000 galaxies. Each galaxy contains ~ 100,000,000,000 stars. Most stars have multiple planets, say ~5.
So, there are ~ 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets in the Universe. And these planets will have evolved over many 1,000, 000,000,000 years. There is plenty of opportunity for very rare events to have happened many, many times.
(I think of your list, only 5 is likely to be correct -- though that does not mean we cannot detect life because we may gain evidence via spectroscopy. In fact, I think that is much the most likely bio-signature. Point 3 is certainly true, though we know life on Earth has persisted over 3.7 Gyrs, only a bit shorter than age of the Earth)
Must go, now.
Many 1,000, 000,000,000 years? I thought the universe was only about 14,000,000,000 years old.
I find it bad form to do that "Must go" thing. If you are going to make a post which is part of a conversation either give an opportunity to respond or don't post.
Life formed almost immediately* after the Earth formed. You don't need many billions of years to get the ball rolling.
*geologically speaking.
Unless life came to Earth from elsewhere - a perfectly respectable hypothesis.
There’s a view that the first X billion years were too volatile for life to sustain itself in any reasonable way, and that away from the fringes of the Galaxy this remains true today. But it still leaves a lot of time and space to play with.
To me if the UFO phenomenon is confirmed as legit by the US government (I should say President at this point given who else already spoke), it seems obvious to me that they were probably here before we were. Play your own game as to what that means.
OMG.
I hadn't realised you're a mad person.
Your posts have to date been relatively sensible (if overlong).
moonshine /ˈmuːnʃʌɪn/
noun (informal) 1. foolish talk or ideas. "whatever I said, it was moonshine"
BTW, the American abbreviation for "Joseph" is NOT "Jo" but instead good old "Joe".
As in Uncle Joe. Why you Brits are dropping the "e" is a mystery to me.
Note that the most famous Joseph in British political history, Joseph Chamberlain, was known to his contemporaries, in the UK and out, as "Pushful Joe". NOT Jo.
1997 Labour: spend £650,000 on wallpaper for one residence and bill it to the taxpayers. 2021 Tories: Spend on wallpaper but don't bill the taxpayers. 2021 Labour: Everybody lose your freaking minds.
First doses matter more than fully vaccinated does and the UK is at about 50% for that.
Wales is at 56.4%
The latest US Census, published yesterday, is 331,449,281. I am not sure how many of the 12M+ undocumented migrants that includes. I'd guess that 340M is a good round number to go with.
French Europe Minister Clément Beaune has accused the UK of blocking fishing rights. He said the EU could respond with "reprisals" in financial services.
Lol, what reprisals? There is no deal for financial services. It's just bullshit for gullible rubes like you.
FPT - Philip “In decreasing order of plausibility:
1: They said something innocent that is misconstrued by loons to be aliens. 2: They said something dishonest for a political agenda, eg to get more money to Defence. 3: Some other explanation. 98: They are loons. 99: Mulder was right, the truth is out there”
It’s a nice sunny day and it’s always good fun to sit and chat about the Great Filter, the Drake Equation, the Dark Forest etc... even better with a cider in hand.
There’s a more immediate question that I was hoping this forum of political experts could help me with? Why in the last year have a quite unusual collection of senior US political figures gone on the record to make quite extraordinary claims about UFOs? And started a very major congressional study into the topic, that has now squarely caught the attention of the US mainstream media?
The statements include there being A LOT of multi point evidence (including satellite visuals, radar, sonar, close range videos) of them being tangible intelligently controlled, high tech objects (rather than glitches or misidentified balloons). That they can break the sound barrier without causing sonic booms? Can pull G force in the many hundreds. Leave no visible infrared signature from a propulsion system? Can traverse easily between air and water. That they interfere quite regularly with US military assets. That the US does not have air superiority over its own landmass AND UFO’S HAVE EVEN REMOTELY DEACTIVATED US NUKES.
Philip prefers to not engage his brain with this topic rather than look carefully at what is being said by whom. Fair enough. It’s a hard topic.
As for the rest of you, if this is all made up, what possible reason is there for such a conspiracy between political adversaries? Because that conspiracy itself would be the story of our time too.
So the theory is that aliens flew to Earth across uncountable billions of miles of space to... screw with us?
Or, more precisely, to screw with just one country on Earth?
Why?
Which theory is more plausible:
1. People on YouTube have got the wrong end of the stick and fallen for conspiracies.
2. Alien life has flown billions of years to essentially film an 👽 version of Impractical Jokers in order to prank people but not reveal themselves or do anything.
I was agreeing with you in case that wasn't clear.
Mr. Gate, we don't know if complex life is unlikely. Our basis of comparison is minimal.
It might be really common.
There might also be an inherent conflict between adaptability and inventiveness on one side, and instability and chaos on the other. Civilisations capable of making more powerful weapons may be prone to self-annihilation.
But that's all I'm saying. We don't know.
Life may be common and may be really uncommon.
If it is really uncommon, it's possible that we are most advanced civilisation in the universe. It's not a totally ridiculous assertion.
We may never know...
Look in any astronomy textbook before 1992. The book will tell you that solar systems & planets like the Earth are incredibly rare. "The Earth is Special".
We now know that planets -- and even planets like the Earth -- are incredibly common. The Earth is not special.
There was no evidence that planets were common ... until they were discovered to be common. That happened as soon as we got instruments sensitive enough to detect them.
Ditto life.
Once there are instruments sensitive to detect bio-signatures (e.g. spectroscopic evidence of DNA), then it will be detected. It will probably happen within the decade. We're not special.
The Great Filter could be one of many things:
1 - Very rare abiogenesis (the precise circumstances by which self-replicating organisms can come about are rare and/or subject to extreme chance. For example, I've seen it posited that a large Moon to flex the crust in order to have sufficient activity (radioactive minerals close to the surface and/or volcanic activity that's just right and not too much) could be necessary. Not sure how likely that is) 2 - Very rare evolution of communicative intelligence (we, as a species, only turned up very late in the day and by chance that an ecological niche opened up that was compatible with evolving intelligence.) 3 - Limited Lifespan (intelligent life becomes dependent on a whole lot of things, including not destroying itself, and its capacity to change its own environment in such a way that its own continued existence gets limited becomes too great) 4 - Dark Forest (the first intelligence to get interstellar travel destroys all others simply because the capacity for destruction from new, immature intelligences, is too dangerous. Thus any surviving intelligences stay very very quiet) 5 - No Interstellar Travel (The distances between stars are just too great. There is no FTL and sublight travel is economically unviable, even for seedships) 6 - Timing (The conditions for intelligent life to evolve are very dependent on such things as second generation stars, having sufficient time to develop, not having serious destructive events, and it is only recently that such conditions have come about) 7 - All of the above.
There are 2,000,000,000,000 galaxies. Each galaxy contains ~ 100,000,000,000 stars. Most stars have multiple planets, say ~5.
So, there are ~ 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets in the Universe. And these planets will have evolved over many 1,000, 000,000,000 years. There is plenty of opportunity for very rare events to have happened many, many times.
(I think of your list, only 5 is likely to be correct -- though that does not mean we cannot detect life because we may gain evidence via spectroscopy. In fact, I think that is much the most likely bio-signature. Point 3 is certainly true, though we know life on Earth has persisted over 3.7 Gyrs, only a bit shorter than age of the Earth)
Must go, now.
Many 1,000, 000,000,000 years? I thought the universe was only about 14,000,000,000 years old.
I find it bad form to do that "Must go" thing. If you are going to make a post which is part of a conversation either give an opportunity to respond or don't post.
Life formed almost immediately* after the Earth formed. You don't need many billions of years to get the ball rolling.
*geologically speaking.
Unless life came to Earth from elsewhere - a perfectly respectable hypothesis.
There’s a view that the first X billion years were too volatile for life to sustain itself in any reasonable way, and that away from the fringes of the Galaxy this remains true today. But it still leaves a lot of time and space to play with.
To me if the UFO phenomenon is confirmed as legit by the US government (I should say President at this point given who else already spoke), it seems obvious to me that they were probably here before we were. Play your own game as to what that means.
OMG.
I hadn't realised you're a mad person.
Your posts have to date been relatively sensible (if overlong).
moonshine /ˈmuːnʃʌɪn/
noun (informal) 1. foolish talk or ideas. "whatever I said, it was moonshine"
You hadn't realised?
And anyway we have seen that from the vast majority of documentaries on the subject such as Close Encounters, War of the Worlds, etc that the aliens always land in the US so not sure what point you're trying to prove.
BTW, the American abbreviation for "Joseph" is NOT "Jo" but instead good old "Joe".
As in Uncle Joe. Why you Brits are dropping the "e" is a mystery to me.
Note that the most famous Joseph in British political history, Joseph Chamberlain, was known to his contemporaries, in the UK and out, as "Pushful Joe". NOT Jo.
I always, as a Brit, considered Joe the male abbreviation, and Jo the female version. Has that changed?
BTW, the American abbreviation for "Joseph" is NOT "Jo" but instead good old "Joe".
As in Uncle Joe. Why you Brits are dropping the "e" is a mystery to me.
Note that the most famous Joseph in British political history, Joseph Chamberlain, was known to his contemporaries, in the UK and out, as "Pushful Joe". NOT Jo.
I always, as a Brit, considered Joe the male abbreviation, and Jo the female version. Has that changed?
FPT - Philip “In decreasing order of plausibility:
1: They said something innocent that is misconstrued by loons to be aliens. 2: They said something dishonest for a political agenda, eg to get more money to Defence. 3: Some other explanation. 98: They are loons. 99: Mulder was right, the truth is out there”
It’s a nice sunny day and it’s always good fun to sit and chat about the Great Filter, the Drake Equation, the Dark Forest etc... even better with a cider in hand.
There’s a more immediate question that I was hoping this forum of political experts could help me with? Why in the last year have a quite unusual collection of senior US political figures gone on the record to make quite extraordinary claims about UFOs? And started a very major congressional study into the topic, that has now squarely caught the attention of the US mainstream media?
The statements include there being A LOT of multi point evidence (including satellite visuals, radar, sonar, close range videos) of them being tangible intelligently controlled, high tech objects (rather than glitches or misidentified balloons). That they can break the sound barrier without causing sonic booms? Can pull G force in the many hundreds. Leave no visible infrared signature from a propulsion system? Can traverse easily between air and water. That they interfere quite regularly with US military assets. That the US does not have air superiority over its own landmass AND UFO’S HAVE EVEN REMOTELY DEACTIVATED US NUKES.
Philip prefers to not engage his brain with this topic rather than look carefully at what is being said by whom. Fair enough. It’s a hard topic.
As for the rest of you, if this is all made up, what possible reason is there for such a conspiracy between political adversaries? Because that conspiracy itself would be the story of our time too.
So the theory is that aliens flew to Earth across uncountable billions of miles of space to... screw with us?
Or, more precisely, to screw with just one country on Earth?
Why?
Which theory is more plausible:
1. People on YouTube have got the wrong end of the stick and fallen for conspiracies.
2. Alien life has flown billions of years to essentially film an 👽 version of Impractical Jokers in order to prank people but not reveal themselves or do anything.
I was agreeing with you in case that wasn't clear.
Mr. Gate, we don't know if complex life is unlikely. Our basis of comparison is minimal.
It might be really common.
There might also be an inherent conflict between adaptability and inventiveness on one side, and instability and chaos on the other. Civilisations capable of making more powerful weapons may be prone to self-annihilation.
But that's all I'm saying. We don't know.
Life may be common and may be really uncommon.
If it is really uncommon, it's possible that we are most advanced civilisation in the universe. It's not a totally ridiculous assertion.
We may never know...
Look in any astronomy textbook before 1992. The book will tell you that solar systems & planets like the Earth are incredibly rare. "The Earth is Special".
We now know that planets -- and even planets like the Earth -- are incredibly common. The Earth is not special.
There was no evidence that planets were common ... until they were discovered to be common. That happened as soon as we got instruments sensitive enough to detect them.
Ditto life.
Once there are instruments sensitive to detect bio-signatures (e.g. spectroscopic evidence of DNA), then it will be detected. It will probably happen within the decade. We're not special.
The Great Filter could be one of many things:
1 - Very rare abiogenesis (the precise circumstances by which self-replicating organisms can come about are rare and/or subject to extreme chance. For example, I've seen it posited that a large Moon to flex the crust in order to have sufficient activity (radioactive minerals close to the surface and/or volcanic activity that's just right and not too much) could be necessary. Not sure how likely that is) 2 - Very rare evolution of communicative intelligence (we, as a species, only turned up very late in the day and by chance that an ecological niche opened up that was compatible with evolving intelligence.) 3 - Limited Lifespan (intelligent life becomes dependent on a whole lot of things, including not destroying itself, and its capacity to change its own environment in such a way that its own continued existence gets limited becomes too great) 4 - Dark Forest (the first intelligence to get interstellar travel destroys all others simply because the capacity for destruction from new, immature intelligences, is too dangerous. Thus any surviving intelligences stay very very quiet) 5 - No Interstellar Travel (The distances between stars are just too great. There is no FTL and sublight travel is economically unviable, even for seedships) 6 - Timing (The conditions for intelligent life to evolve are very dependent on such things as second generation stars, having sufficient time to develop, not having serious destructive events, and it is only recently that such conditions have come about) 7 - All of the above.
There are 2,000,000,000,000 galaxies. Each galaxy contains ~ 100,000,000,000 stars. Most stars have multiple planets, say ~5.
So, there are ~ 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets in the Universe. And these planets will have evolved over many 1,000, 000,000,000 years. There is plenty of opportunity for very rare events to have happened many, many times.
(I think of your list, only 5 is likely to be correct -- though that does not mean we cannot detect life because we may gain evidence via spectroscopy. In fact, I think that is much the most likely bio-signature. Point 3 is certainly true, though we know life on Earth has persisted over 3.7 Gyrs, only a bit shorter than age of the Earth)
Must go, now.
Many 1,000, 000,000,000 years? I thought the universe was only about 14,000,000,000 years old.
I find it bad form to do that "Must go" thing. If you are going to make a post which is part of a conversation either give an opportunity to respond or don't post.
Life formed almost immediately* after the Earth formed. You don't need many billions of years to get the ball rolling.
*geologically speaking.
Unless life came to Earth from elsewhere - a perfectly respectable hypothesis.
There’s a view that the first X billion years were too volatile for life to sustain itself in any reasonable way, and that away from the fringes of the Galaxy this remains true today. But it still leaves a lot of time and space to play with.
To me if the UFO phenomenon is confirmed as legit by the US government (I should say President at this point given who else already spoke), it seems obvious to me that they were probably here before we were. Play your own game as to what that means.
OMG.
I hadn't realised you're a mad person.
Your posts have to date been relatively sensible (if overlong).
moonshine /ˈmuːnʃʌɪn/
noun (informal) 1. foolish talk or ideas. "whatever I said, it was moonshine"
You hadn't realised?
My bad I didn't think it through.
Since when has "my bad" been an acceptable alternative for "my fault" or "my error"? It's annoying. From across the pond I guess?
The USA actually overtook us today in terms of doses/population*. They won't stay ahead.
* If you accept population figures of 67,886,004** & 331002647 as the raw populations
** ONS uses 66,796,807 as the estimate.
All adults first dose by end of July will be hit very very easily.
According to Our World In Data we are very, very narrowly ahead of the USA on a same-date basis.
If we went for targets of all vaccinated by end May, end June and end July (with 12 weeks kept for second doses) then what would be the RRR for those?
Assuming an 11 week gap (That's what we're using and is baked in anyway now) & 50 million target
Doses/day -
End of May 756,913 (461,612 firsts / 372,076 seconds) End of June 544,602 (248,561 firsts/ 296,041 seconds) End of July 432,509 (168,297 firsts / 264,212 seconds)
Daily doses (Total) December average 51,216 January average 276,174 February average 403,596 March average 469,988 April average 437,864
So just like everywhere else from late June then...
I suspect there will be facemasks still required in some pubs, certainly inside and until all are vaccinated
Not from 21 June without breaching road map. If pubs do this it will be through their choice and they will get a stinging TripAdviser review from me if they do.
ALL RESTRICTIONS will end on 21st June. Boris has said so.
In the real world, when they have to pull back from this utterly arbitrary declaration there will be hell to pay.
Not that I care. I have just booked train tickets for my son to come and visit once we drop into level 2 on 17th May. But which point I won't have seen him in 7 months. Can't wait!
On aliens. I understand there is a lot of chatter about right now. Can anyone kindly direct me to a non-partisan, non-technical, non-loony summary article or website on what exactly is happening? Cheers.
This series of videos (1/3) from last week is a panel from the mainstream media in the US interviewing Lue Elizondo, who headed the Pentagon’s investigative unit into UFO.
There are any number or articles and videos from the likes of NY Times and NBC discussing the congressional process and with interviews with the senior individuals I mentioned earlier.
Crazy rants from lunatics on YouTube isn't real news.
What about ex heads of the CIA? Ex presidential candidates? Ex US cabinet members? Ex senate majority leaders?
And again - Ex. Why not current?
Current Senate Intelligence Vice Chair (who has been saying it since before the election when Chair)?
I asked the question so I’ll give my answer.
I think Trump started the ball rolling down the hill and it now can’t be easily stopped. Any number of past presidents no doubt had eye brow raising evidence they could have released but didn’t. Trump for whatever reason broke the precedent. Whether there was new info or just a typically unorthodox perspective from him I don’t know.
But it was on his watch that the DOD formally confirmed the legitimacy of what are now known as the Pentagon videos. And then undertook the most widespread briefing of the topic in Washington ever, sharing military telematics, photos and videos willy nilly with hundreds of not thousands of people. And allowed people like David Fravor and Lue Elizondo to go on the record.
The point was reached that too many figures in Washington had seen evidence that deeply concerned them. “Oh my god, this isn’t us. We’d better have a full transparent inquiry into this. Is it China?” Answer: Well no, obviously it’s not China.
Whether trump rolling the ball down the hill was a good idea none of us yet know. But it’s odd for political obsessives to pretend that this is not going on, given it’s the thing that is without doubt most preoccupying the thoughts of the US President right now, given either:
A) the joint chiefs structure has completely broken down and the US government is very publicly investigating their own secret tech America’s enemies have leap frogged it by a quite staggering distance with no whisper it was happening, the worst intelligence failure of all time that ends American hegemony. C) it’s someone else.
Mr. Gate, we don't know if complex life is unlikely. Our basis of comparison is minimal.
It might be really common.
There might also be an inherent conflict between adaptability and inventiveness on one side, and instability and chaos on the other. Civilisations capable of making more powerful weapons may be prone to self-annihilation.
But that's all I'm saying. We don't know.
Life may be common and may be really uncommon.
If it is really uncommon, it's possible that we are most advanced civilisation in the universe. It's not a totally ridiculous assertion.
We may never know...
Look in any astronomy textbook before 1992. The book will tell you that solar systems & planets like the Earth are incredibly rare. "The Earth is Special".
We now know that planets -- and even planets like the Earth -- are incredibly common. The Earth is not special.
There was no evidence that planets were common ... until they were discovered to be common. That happened as soon as we got instruments sensitive enough to detect them.
Ditto life.
Once there are instruments sensitive to detect bio-signatures (e.g. spectroscopic evidence of DNA), then it will be detected. It will probably happen within the decade. We're not special.
The Great Filter could be one of many things:
1 - Very rare abiogenesis (the precise circumstances by which self-replicating organisms can come about are rare and/or subject to extreme chance. For example, I've seen it posited that a large Moon to flex the crust in order to have sufficient activity (radioactive minerals close to the surface and/or volcanic activity that's just right and not too much) could be necessary. Not sure how likely that is) 2 - Very rare evolution of communicative intelligence (we, as a species, only turned up very late in the day and by chance that an ecological niche opened up that was compatible with evolving intelligence.) 3 - Limited Lifespan (intelligent life becomes dependent on a whole lot of things, including not destroying itself, and its capacity to change its own environment in such a way that its own continued existence gets limited becomes too great) 4 - Dark Forest (the first intelligence to get interstellar travel destroys all others simply because the capacity for destruction from new, immature intelligences, is too dangerous. Thus any surviving intelligences stay very very quiet) 5 - No Interstellar Travel (The distances between stars are just too great. There is no FTL and sublight travel is economically unviable, even for seedships) 6 - Timing (The conditions for intelligent life to evolve are very dependent on such things as second generation stars, having sufficient time to develop, not having serious destructive events, and it is only recently that such conditions have come about) 7 - All of the above.
There are 2,000,000,000,000 galaxies. Each galaxy contains ~ 100,000,000,000 stars. Most stars have multiple planets, say ~5.
So, there are ~ 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets in the Universe. And these planets will have evolved over many 1,000, 000,000,000 years. There is plenty of opportunity for very rare events to have happened many, many times.
(I think of your list, only 5 is likely to be correct -- though that does not mean we cannot detect life because we may gain evidence via spectroscopy. In fact, I think that is much the most likely bio-signature. Point 3 is certainly true, though we know life on Earth has persisted over 3.7 Gyrs, only a bit shorter than age of the Earth)
Must go, now.
Many 1,000, 000,000,000 years? I thought the universe was only about 14,000,000,000 years old.
I find it bad form to do that "Must go" thing. If you are going to make a post which is part of a conversation either give an opportunity to respond or don't post.
Life formed almost immediately* after the Earth formed. You don't need many billions of years to get the ball rolling.
*geologically speaking.
Unless life came to Earth from elsewhere - a perfectly respectable hypothesis.
There’s a view that the first X billion years were too volatile for life to sustain itself in any reasonable way, and that away from the fringes of the Galaxy this remains true today. But it still leaves a lot of time and space to play with.
To me if the UFO phenomenon is confirmed as legit by the US government (I should say President at this point given who else already spoke), it seems obvious to me that they were probably here before we were. Play your own game as to what that means.
OMG.
I hadn't realised you're a mad person.
Your posts have to date been relatively sensible (if overlong).
moonshine /ˈmuːnʃʌɪn/
noun (informal) 1. foolish talk or ideas. "whatever I said, it was moonshine"
You hadn't realised?
And anyway we have seen that from the vast majority of documentaries on the subject such as Close Encounters, War of the Worlds, etc that the aliens always land in the US so not sure what point you're trying to prove.
True, except that in the autobiographical account on which War of the Worlds was based, they landed in Southern England.
Mr. Gate, we don't know if complex life is unlikely. Our basis of comparison is minimal.
It might be really common.
There might also be an inherent conflict between adaptability and inventiveness on one side, and instability and chaos on the other. Civilisations capable of making more powerful weapons may be prone to self-annihilation.
But that's all I'm saying. We don't know.
Life may be common and may be really uncommon.
If it is really uncommon, it's possible that we are most advanced civilisation in the universe. It's not a totally ridiculous assertion.
We may never know...
Look in any astronomy textbook before 1992. The book will tell you that solar systems & planets like the Earth are incredibly rare. "The Earth is Special".
We now know that planets -- and even planets like the Earth -- are incredibly common. The Earth is not special.
There was no evidence that planets were common ... until they were discovered to be common. That happened as soon as we got instruments sensitive enough to detect them.
Ditto life.
Once there are instruments sensitive to detect bio-signatures (e.g. spectroscopic evidence of DNA), then it will be detected. It will probably happen within the decade. We're not special.
The Great Filter could be one of many things:
1 - Very rare abiogenesis (the precise circumstances by which self-replicating organisms can come about are rare and/or subject to extreme chance. For example, I've seen it posited that a large Moon to flex the crust in order to have sufficient activity (radioactive minerals close to the surface and/or volcanic activity that's just right and not too much) could be necessary. Not sure how likely that is) 2 - Very rare evolution of communicative intelligence (we, as a species, only turned up very late in the day and by chance that an ecological niche opened up that was compatible with evolving intelligence.) 3 - Limited Lifespan (intelligent life becomes dependent on a whole lot of things, including not destroying itself, and its capacity to change its own environment in such a way that its own continued existence gets limited becomes too great) 4 - Dark Forest (the first intelligence to get interstellar travel destroys all others simply because the capacity for destruction from new, immature intelligences, is too dangerous. Thus any surviving intelligences stay very very quiet) 5 - No Interstellar Travel (The distances between stars are just too great. There is no FTL and sublight travel is economically unviable, even for seedships) 6 - Timing (The conditions for intelligent life to evolve are very dependent on such things as second generation stars, having sufficient time to develop, not having serious destructive events, and it is only recently that such conditions have come about) 7 - All of the above.
There are 2,000,000,000,000 galaxies. Each galaxy contains ~ 100,000,000,000 stars. Most stars have multiple planets, say ~5.
So, there are ~ 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets in the Universe. And these planets will have evolved over many 1,000, 000,000,000 years. There is plenty of opportunity for very rare events to have happened many, many times.
(I think of your list, only 5 is likely to be correct -- though that does not mean we cannot detect life because we may gain evidence via spectroscopy. In fact, I think that is much the most likely bio-signature. Point 3 is certainly true, though we know life on Earth has persisted over 3.7 Gyrs, only a bit shorter than age of the Earth)
Must go, now.
Many 1,000, 000,000,000 years? I thought the universe was only about 14,000,000,000 years old.
I find it bad form to do that "Must go" thing. If you are going to make a post which is part of a conversation either give an opportunity to respond or don't post.
Life formed almost immediately* after the Earth formed. You don't need many billions of years to get the ball rolling.
*geologically speaking.
Unless life came to Earth from elsewhere - a perfectly respectable hypothesis.
There’s a view that the first X billion years were too volatile for life to sustain itself in any reasonable way, and that away from the fringes of the Galaxy this remains true today. But it still leaves a lot of time and space to play with.
To me if the UFO phenomenon is confirmed as legit by the US government (I should say President at this point given who else already spoke), it seems obvious to me that they were probably here before we were. Play your own game as to what that means.
OMG.
I hadn't realised you're a mad person.
Your posts have to date been relatively sensible (if overlong).
moonshine /ˈmuːnʃʌɪn/
noun (informal) 1. foolish talk or ideas. "whatever I said, it was moonshine"
You hadn't realised?
My bad I didn't think it through.
Since when has "my bad" been an acceptable alternative for "my fault" or "my error"? It's annoying. From across the pond I guess?
» show previous quotes Blimey, for once I actually agree with HYFUD. By elections are not predictive of a whole lot, though FWIW I think the Tories will still struggle to win Hartlepool. Even if they were to win there and win in WM, they will not win in London, and may be thumped.
As far as Scotland is concerned, the feeling on the ground seems like the big news will be a setback for the SNP. How big a setback, I am not sure, but the tide is definately running away from them and Labour and the Lib Dems rather than the Tories will be the beneficiaries. Alba may get in, but effectively they are damaging the SNP vote, not extending it. The post election fall out amongst the Nationalists could be very bitter indeed. The Tories without Ruth are also going backwards
So, in judging the overall national picture, the Tories will probably be able to point to WM and maybe Wales and Hartlepool and want to downplay London and Scotland. Labour will highlight London and possibly Scotland and downplay WM and possibly Hartlepool. The Lib Dems will not be massacred and could be on for a respectable result overall, but masking very poor results in Wales and parts of England with a solid performance elsewhere. Overall, my feeling is that it will be a bit curates egg for all the parties, with no real overall winner, even if the spin decides otherwise.
How does ALBA hurt SNP, they are only on the list and SNP get almost no seats on List, any seats ALBA get will be from unionists. You do not seem to understand how it works at Holyrood and it will in fact strengthen independence parties a lot. Once court cases are over it is likely Sturgeon will be gone and even if not her feet will be held to the fire by Alba and she will possibly lose many to them if she continues as previously. Looking like a really good election for independence supporters , which to cover the continuing ignorance on here, does not mean SNP.
No SNP majority as in 2011 before the legal 2014 independence referendum, then no legal indyref2 will be allowed by the UK government.
Union matters are reserved to Westminster so UDI as Salmond wants would of course not work either
FPT - Philip “In decreasing order of plausibility:
1: They said something innocent that is misconstrued by loons to be aliens. 2: They said something dishonest for a political agenda, eg to get more money to Defence. 3: Some other explanation. 98: They are loons. 99: Mulder was right, the truth is out there”
It’s a nice sunny day and it’s always good fun to sit and chat about the Great Filter, the Drake Equation, the Dark Forest etc... even better with a cider in hand.
There’s a more immediate question that I was hoping this forum of political experts could help me with? Why in the last year have a quite unusual collection of senior US political figures gone on the record to make quite extraordinary claims about UFOs? And started a very major congressional study into the topic, that has now squarely caught the attention of the US mainstream media?
The statements include there being A LOT of multi point evidence (including satellite visuals, radar, sonar, close range videos) of them being tangible intelligently controlled, high tech objects (rather than glitches or misidentified balloons). That they can break the sound barrier without causing sonic booms? Can pull G force in the many hundreds. Leave no visible infrared signature from a propulsion system? Can traverse easily between air and water. That they interfere quite regularly with US military assets. That the US does not have air superiority over its own landmass AND UFO’S HAVE EVEN REMOTELY DEACTIVATED US NUKES.
Philip prefers to not engage his brain with this topic rather than look carefully at what is being said by whom. Fair enough. It’s a hard topic.
As for the rest of you, if this is all made up, what possible reason is there for such a conspiracy between political adversaries? Because that conspiracy itself would be the story of our time too.
So the theory is that aliens flew to Earth across uncountable billions of miles of space to... screw with us?
Or, more precisely, to screw with just one country on Earth?
Why?
Perhaps for same reason us Earthlings are posting here on PB? Sheer freaking boredom!
FPT - Philip “In decreasing order of plausibility:
1: They said something innocent that is misconstrued by loons to be aliens. 2: They said something dishonest for a political agenda, eg to get more money to Defence. 3: Some other explanation. 98: They are loons. 99: Mulder was right, the truth is out there”
It’s a nice sunny day and it’s always good fun to sit and chat about the Great Filter, the Drake Equation, the Dark Forest etc... even better with a cider in hand.
There’s a more immediate question that I was hoping this forum of political experts could help me with? Why in the last year have a quite unusual collection of senior US political figures gone on the record to make quite extraordinary claims about UFOs? And started a very major congressional study into the topic, that has now squarely caught the attention of the US mainstream media?
The statements include there being A LOT of multi point evidence (including satellite visuals, radar, sonar, close range videos) of them being tangible intelligently controlled, high tech objects (rather than glitches or misidentified balloons). That they can break the sound barrier without causing sonic booms? Can pull G force in the many hundreds. Leave no visible infrared signature from a propulsion system? Can traverse easily between air and water. That they interfere quite regularly with US military assets. That the US does not have air superiority over its own landmass AND UFO’S HAVE EVEN REMOTELY DEACTIVATED US NUKES.
Philip prefers to not engage his brain with this topic rather than look carefully at what is being said by whom. Fair enough. It’s a hard topic.
As for the rest of you, if this is all made up, what possible reason is there for such a conspiracy between political adversaries? Because that conspiracy itself would be the story of our time too.
If mainstream media are reporting that UFOs have deactivated nukes then please provide a mainstream source like CNN etc saying that.
Not some batshit crazy lunatic on YouTube.
The interview I sent was with the NY Times and NBC with the person formerly charged by the DOD and Congress to impartially assess the evidence. Since he made that statement, Harry Reid has in writing confirmed his credentials.
You can keep throwing around mental health slurs on this topic if it makes you sleep soundly but it doesn’t answer my question, why so many senior individuals in the US are suddenly going on the record about this.
Until it's reported somewhere other than YouTube I think the simple answer is: they're not.
It's exceedingly easy on YouTube to take things people have said and twist them into giving a completely different picture. Total mendacious crap.
This is being discussed on a daily basis on mainstream news channels in America and the reputable print press there.
Mr. Gate, we don't know if complex life is unlikely. Our basis of comparison is minimal.
It might be really common.
There might also be an inherent conflict between adaptability and inventiveness on one side, and instability and chaos on the other. Civilisations capable of making more powerful weapons may be prone to self-annihilation.
But that's all I'm saying. We don't know.
Life may be common and may be really uncommon.
If it is really uncommon, it's possible that we are most advanced civilisation in the universe. It's not a totally ridiculous assertion.
We may never know...
Look in any astronomy textbook before 1992. The book will tell you that solar systems & planets like the Earth are incredibly rare. "The Earth is Special".
We now know that planets -- and even planets like the Earth -- are incredibly common. The Earth is not special.
There was no evidence that planets were common ... until they were discovered to be common. That happened as soon as we got instruments sensitive enough to detect them.
Ditto life.
Once there are instruments sensitive to detect bio-signatures (e.g. spectroscopic evidence of DNA), then it will be detected. It will probably happen within the decade. We're not special.
The Great Filter could be one of many things:
1 - Very rare abiogenesis (the precise circumstances by which self-replicating organisms can come about are rare and/or subject to extreme chance. For example, I've seen it posited that a large Moon to flex the crust in order to have sufficient activity (radioactive minerals close to the surface and/or volcanic activity that's just right and not too much) could be necessary. Not sure how likely that is) 2 - Very rare evolution of communicative intelligence (we, as a species, only turned up very late in the day and by chance that an ecological niche opened up that was compatible with evolving intelligence.) 3 - Limited Lifespan (intelligent life becomes dependent on a whole lot of things, including not destroying itself, and its capacity to change its own environment in such a way that its own continued existence gets limited becomes too great) 4 - Dark Forest (the first intelligence to get interstellar travel destroys all others simply because the capacity for destruction from new, immature intelligences, is too dangerous. Thus any surviving intelligences stay very very quiet) 5 - No Interstellar Travel (The distances between stars are just too great. There is no FTL and sublight travel is economically unviable, even for seedships) 6 - Timing (The conditions for intelligent life to evolve are very dependent on such things as second generation stars, having sufficient time to develop, not having serious destructive events, and it is only recently that such conditions have come about) 7 - All of the above.
There are 2,000,000,000,000 galaxies. Each galaxy contains ~ 100,000,000,000 stars. Most stars have multiple planets, say ~5.
So, there are ~ 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets in the Universe. And these planets will have evolved over many 1,000, 000,000,000 years. There is plenty of opportunity for very rare events to have happened many, many times.
(I think of your list, only 5 is likely to be correct -- though that does not mean we cannot detect life because we may gain evidence via spectroscopy. In fact, I think that is much the most likely bio-signature. Point 3 is certainly true, though we know life on Earth has persisted over 3.7 Gyrs, only a bit shorter than age of the Earth)
Must go, now.
Many 1,000, 000,000,000 years? I thought the universe was only about 14,000,000,000 years old.
I find it bad form to do that "Must go" thing. If you are going to make a post which is part of a conversation either give an opportunity to respond or don't post.
Life formed almost immediately* after the Earth formed. You don't need many billions of years to get the ball rolling.
*geologically speaking.
Unless life came to Earth from elsewhere - a perfectly respectable hypothesis.
There’s a view that the first X billion years were too volatile for life to sustain itself in any reasonable way, and that away from the fringes of the Galaxy this remains true today. But it still leaves a lot of time and space to play with.
To me if the UFO phenomenon is confirmed as legit by the US government (I should say President at this point given who else already spoke), it seems obvious to me that they were probably here before we were. Play your own game as to what that means.
OMG.
I hadn't realised you're a mad person.
Your posts have to date been relatively sensible (if overlong).
moonshine /ˈmuːnʃʌɪn/
noun (informal) 1. foolish talk or ideas. "whatever I said, it was moonshine"
You hadn't realised?
And anyway we have seen that from the vast majority of documentaries on the subject such as Close Encounters, War of the Worlds, etc that the aliens always land in the US so not sure what point you're trying to prove.
True, except that in the autobiographical account on which War of the Worlds was based, they landed in Southern England.
Near Woking. Which may prove there is no intelligent life out there...
BTW, the American abbreviation for "Joseph" is NOT "Jo" but instead good old "Joe".
As in Uncle Joe. Why you Brits are dropping the "e" is a mystery to me.
Note that the most famous Joseph in British political history, Joseph Chamberlain, was known to his contemporaries, in the UK and out, as "Pushful Joe". NOT Jo.
I always, as a Brit, considered Joe the male abbreviation, and Jo the female version. Has that changed?
It has not.
Though Jo Grimond was always Jo. And that was quite a long time ago now.
FPT - Philip “In decreasing order of plausibility:
1: They said something innocent that is misconstrued by loons to be aliens. 2: They said something dishonest for a political agenda, eg to get more money to Defence. 3: Some other explanation. 98: They are loons. 99: Mulder was right, the truth is out there”
It’s a nice sunny day and it’s always good fun to sit and chat about the Great Filter, the Drake Equation, the Dark Forest etc... even better with a cider in hand.
There’s a more immediate question that I was hoping this forum of political experts could help me with? Why in the last year have a quite unusual collection of senior US political figures gone on the record to make quite extraordinary claims about UFOs? And started a very major congressional study into the topic, that has now squarely caught the attention of the US mainstream media?
The statements include there being A LOT of multi point evidence (including satellite visuals, radar, sonar, close range videos) of them being tangible intelligently controlled, high tech objects (rather than glitches or misidentified balloons). That they can break the sound barrier without causing sonic booms? Can pull G force in the many hundreds. Leave no visible infrared signature from a propulsion system? Can traverse easily between air and water. That they interfere quite regularly with US military assets. That the US does not have air superiority over its own landmass AND UFO’S HAVE EVEN REMOTELY DEACTIVATED US NUKES.
Philip prefers to not engage his brain with this topic rather than look carefully at what is being said by whom. Fair enough. It’s a hard topic.
As for the rest of you, if this is all made up, what possible reason is there for such a conspiracy between political adversaries? Because that conspiracy itself would be the story of our time too.
If mainstream media are reporting that UFOs have deactivated nukes then please provide a mainstream source like CNN etc saying that.
Not some batshit crazy lunatic on YouTube.
The interview I sent was with the NY Times and NBC with the person formerly charged by the DOD and Congress to impartially assess the evidence. Since he made that statement, Harry Reid has in writing confirmed his credentials.
You can keep throwing around mental health slurs on this topic if it makes you sleep soundly but it doesn’t answer my question, why so many senior individuals in the US are suddenly going on the record about this.
Until it's reported somewhere other than YouTube I think the simple answer is: they're not.
It's exceedingly easy on YouTube to take things people have said and twist them into giving a completely different picture. Total mendacious crap.
This is being discussed on a daily basis on mainstream news channels in America and the reputable print press there.
With respect,
I think your perception of what media is “mainstream” and “reputable” may be somewhat distorted.
On aliens. I understand there is a lot of chatter about right now. Can anyone kindly direct me to a non-partisan, non-technical, non-loony summary article or website on what exactly is happening? Cheers.
This series of videos (1/3) from last week is a panel from the mainstream media in the US interviewing Lue Elizondo, who headed the Pentagon’s investigative unit into UFO.
There are any number or articles and videos from the likes of NY Times and NBC discussing the congressional process and with interviews with the senior individuals I mentioned earlier.
Crazy rants from lunatics on YouTube isn't real news.
What about ex heads of the CIA? Ex presidential candidates? Ex US cabinet members? Ex senate majority leaders?
And again - Ex. Why not current?
Current Senate Intelligence Vice Chair (who has been saying it since before the election when Chair)?
I asked the question so I’ll give my answer.
I think Trump started the ball rolling down the hill and it now can’t be easily stopped. Any number of past presidents no doubt had eye brow raising evidence they could have released but didn’t. Trump for whatever reason broke the precedent. Whether there was new info or just a typically unorthodox perspective from him I don’t know.
But it was on his watch that the DOD formally confirmed the legitimacy of what are now known as the Pentagon videos. And then undertook the most widespread briefing of the topic in Washington ever, sharing military telematics, photos and videos willy nilly with hundreds of not thousands of people. And allowed people like David Fravor and Lue Elizondo to go on the record.
The point was reached that too many figures in Washington had seen evidence that deeply concerned them. “Oh my god, this isn’t us. We’d better have a full transparent inquiry into this. Is it China?” Answer: Well no, obviously it’s not China.
Whether trump rolling the ball down the hill was a good idea none of us yet know. But it’s odd for political obsessives to pretend that this is not going on, given it’s the thing that is without doubt most preoccupying the thoughts of the US President right now, given either:
A) the joint chiefs structure has completely broken down and the US government is very publicly investigating their own secret tech America’s enemies have leap frogged it by a quite staggering distance with no whisper it was happening, the worst intelligence failure of all time that ends American hegemony. C) it’s someone else.
So just like everywhere else from late June then...
I suspect there will be facemasks still required in some pubs, certainly inside and until all are vaccinated
Not from 21 June without breaching road map. If pubs do this it will be through their choice and they will get a stinging TripAdviser review from me if they do.
ALL RESTRICTIONS will end on 21st June. Boris has said so.
In the real world, when they have to pull back from this utterly arbitrary declaration there will be hell to pay.
Not that I care. I have just booked train tickets for my son to come and visit once we drop into level 2 on 17th May. But which point I won't have seen him in 7 months. Can't wait!
All LEGAL restrictions - it says.
So wearing of masks etc will not be legally enforced and I don't expect the government to renege on this.
However - my concern is that voluntary guidance will still be issued and despite this being voluntary only businesses and the like will continue to act as though they are legal requirements and, in effect, make them mandatory. The effect will be that we drag our heels from these restrictions at a slower pace that is necessary and businesses should be called out for this in some way.
FPT - Philip “In decreasing order of plausibility:
1: They said something innocent that is misconstrued by loons to be aliens. 2: They said something dishonest for a political agenda, eg to get more money to Defence. 3: Some other explanation. 98: They are loons. 99: Mulder was right, the truth is out there”
It’s a nice sunny day and it’s always good fun to sit and chat about the Great Filter, the Drake Equation, the Dark Forest etc... even better with a cider in hand.
There’s a more immediate question that I was hoping this forum of political experts could help me with? Why in the last year have a quite unusual collection of senior US political figures gone on the record to make quite extraordinary claims about UFOs? And started a very major congressional study into the topic, that has now squarely caught the attention of the US mainstream media?
The statements include there being A LOT of multi point evidence (including satellite visuals, radar, sonar, close range videos) of them being tangible intelligently controlled, high tech objects (rather than glitches or misidentified balloons). That they can break the sound barrier without causing sonic booms? Can pull G force in the many hundreds. Leave no visible infrared signature from a propulsion system? Can traverse easily between air and water. That they interfere quite regularly with US military assets. That the US does not have air superiority over its own landmass AND UFO’S HAVE EVEN REMOTELY DEACTIVATED US NUKES.
Philip prefers to not engage his brain with this topic rather than look carefully at what is being said by whom. Fair enough. It’s a hard topic.
As for the rest of you, if this is all made up, what possible reason is there for such a conspiracy between political adversaries? Because that conspiracy itself would be the story of our time too.
So the theory is that aliens flew to Earth across uncountable billions of miles of space to... screw with us?
Or, more precisely, to screw with just one country on Earth?
On aliens. I understand there is a lot of chatter about right now. Can anyone kindly direct me to a non-partisan, non-technical, non-loony summary article or website on what exactly is happening? Cheers.
This series of videos (1/3) from last week is a panel from the mainstream media in the US interviewing Lue Elizondo, who headed the Pentagon’s investigative unit into UFO.
There are any number or articles and videos from the likes of NY Times and NBC discussing the congressional process and with interviews with the senior individuals I mentioned earlier.
Crazy rants from lunatics on YouTube isn't real news.
What about ex heads of the CIA? Ex presidential candidates? Ex US cabinet members? Ex senate majority leaders?
And again - Ex. Why not current?
Current Senate Intelligence Vice Chair (who has been saying it since before the election when Chair)?
I asked the question so I’ll give my answer.
I think Trump started the ball rolling down the hill and it now can’t be easily stopped. Any number of past presidents no doubt had eye brow raising evidence they could have released but didn’t. Trump for whatever reason broke the precedent. Whether there was new info or just a typically unorthodox perspective from him I don’t know.
But it was on his watch that the DOD formally confirmed the legitimacy of what are now known as the Pentagon videos. And then undertook the most widespread briefing of the topic in Washington ever, sharing military telematics, photos and videos willy nilly with hundreds of not thousands of people. And allowed people like David Fravor and Lue Elizondo to go on the record.
The point was reached that too many figures in Washington had seen evidence that deeply concerned them. “Oh my god, this isn’t us. We’d better have a full transparent inquiry into this. Is it China?” Answer: Well no, obviously it’s not China.
Whether trump rolling the ball down the hill was a good idea none of us yet know. But it’s odd for political obsessives to pretend that this is not going on, given it’s the thing that is without doubt most preoccupying the thoughts of the US President right now, given either:
A) the joint chiefs structure has completely broken down and the US government is very publicly investigating their own secret tech America’s enemies have leap frogged it by a quite staggering distance with no whisper it was happening, the worst intelligence failure of all time that ends American hegemony. C) it’s someone else.
Or D) It's something else.
It’s hard to say what (d) might be without seeing the same evidence seen by the ex CIA heads, NID and senate Intelligence committee that have made these statements. I come back to the same point, that the growing chatter in US political and intelligence circles about this is very odd indeed.
FPT - Philip “In decreasing order of plausibility:
1: They said something innocent that is misconstrued by loons to be aliens. 2: They said something dishonest for a political agenda, eg to get more money to Defence. 3: Some other explanation. 98: They are loons. 99: Mulder was right, the truth is out there”
It’s a nice sunny day and it’s always good fun to sit and chat about the Great Filter, the Drake Equation, the Dark Forest etc... even better with a cider in hand.
There’s a more immediate question that I was hoping this forum of political experts could help me with? Why in the last year have a quite unusual collection of senior US political figures gone on the record to make quite extraordinary claims about UFOs? And started a very major congressional study into the topic, that has now squarely caught the attention of the US mainstream media?
The statements include there being A LOT of multi point evidence (including satellite visuals, radar, sonar, close range videos) of them being tangible intelligently controlled, high tech objects (rather than glitches or misidentified balloons). That they can break the sound barrier without causing sonic booms? Can pull G force in the many hundreds. Leave no visible infrared signature from a propulsion system? Can traverse easily between air and water. That they interfere quite regularly with US military assets. That the US does not have air superiority over its own landmass AND UFO’S HAVE EVEN REMOTELY DEACTIVATED US NUKES.
Philip prefers to not engage his brain with this topic rather than look carefully at what is being said by whom. Fair enough. It’s a hard topic.
As for the rest of you, if this is all made up, what possible reason is there for such a conspiracy between political adversaries? Because that conspiracy itself would be the story of our time too.
If mainstream media are reporting that UFOs have deactivated nukes then please provide a mainstream source like CNN etc saying that.
Not some batshit crazy lunatic on YouTube.
The interview I sent was with the NY Times and NBC with the person formerly charged by the DOD and Congress to impartially assess the evidence. Since he made that statement, Harry Reid has in writing confirmed his credentials.
You can keep throwing around mental health slurs on this topic if it makes you sleep soundly but it doesn’t answer my question, why so many senior individuals in the US are suddenly going on the record about this.
Until it's reported somewhere other than YouTube I think the simple answer is: they're not.
It's exceedingly easy on YouTube to take things people have said and twist them into giving a completely different picture. Total mendacious crap.
This is being discussed on a daily basis on mainstream news channels in America and the reputable print press there.
With respect,
I think your perception of what media is “mainstream” and “reputable” may be somewhat distorted.
You are Donald J Trump and I claim my $1000 cheque.
So just like everywhere else from late June then...
I suspect there will be facemasks still required in some pubs, certainly inside and until all are vaccinated
Not from 21 June without breaching road map. If pubs do this it will be through their choice and they will get a stinging TripAdviser review from me if they do.
ALL RESTRICTIONS will end on 21st June. Boris has said so.
In the real world, when they have to pull back from this utterly arbitrary declaration there will be hell to pay.
Not that I care. I have just booked train tickets for my son to come and visit once we drop into level 2 on 17th May. But which point I won't have seen him in 7 months. Can't wait!
All LEGAL restrictions - it says.
So wearing of masks etc will not be legally enforced and I don't expect the government to renege on this.
However - my concern is that voluntary guidance will still be issued and despite this being voluntary only businesses and the like will continue to act as though they are legal requirements and, in effect, make them mandatory. The effect will be that we drag our heels from these restrictions at a slower pace that is necessary and businesses should be called out for this in some way.
I wouldn’t be surprised if mask wearing remains commonplace, like it was, prepandemic, in parts of Asia. I’m not personally bothered by that.
Damn, can he not fall down some more stairs or something? To lose that bet on the upside seems unlucky.
Very good news for the future of America considering the apparent hyperpartisan split of recent years though.
Perhaps even some Republicans now want to put the manic partisanship of recent years behind them. For now at least.
Maybe we'll see that at home soon too? People moving on from 52/48 splits and anger at 11/10.
Unfortunately, though, the detail of the polling doesn't support that. From what I've seen, Biden's net positive represents overwhelming Democrat support, overwhelming Republican hostility, and broad Independent approval (this mainly based on the stimulus package and vaccine rollout). I am not sure there is yet a suggestion of an end to the partican era, although we can but hope.
Yes, but remember that a third of the electorate register/self -describe as Independents. (Though less than 10% of the electorate don't incline towards one party or the other.)
So just like everywhere else from late June then...
I suspect there will be facemasks still required in some pubs, certainly inside and until all are vaccinated
Not from 21 June without breaching road map. If pubs do this it will be through their choice and they will get a stinging TripAdviser review from me if they do.
ALL RESTRICTIONS will end on 21st June. Boris has said so.
In the real world, when they have to pull back from this utterly arbitrary declaration there will be hell to pay.
Not that I care. I have just booked train tickets for my son to come and visit once we drop into level 2 on 17th May. But which point I won't have seen him in 7 months. Can't wait!
There's nothing arbitrary about it. It's a date based on the vaccine rollout and to be perfectly honest it's ludicrously cautious not optimistic to be pulled back from.
Anyone vaccinated by 31 May will be protected by 21 June. That's going to be pretty much everybody at risk of hospitalisation let alone death from this disease.
Off Topic - just how long MUST we wait, until OGH is given some mark of royal favor (or favour if you prefer) for his services to The Great British Public?
Surely he's earned a life peerage?
Lord Smithson has a nice ring. Or maybe Lord Punter?
All I ask, in return for this helpful suggestion, is to be made Her Majesty's Honorary Consul. That way, I can get a consular license plate - about the only way to dodge traffic tickets in Seattle!
FPT - Philip “In decreasing order of plausibility:
1: They said something innocent that is misconstrued by loons to be aliens. 2: They said something dishonest for a political agenda, eg to get more money to Defence. 3: Some other explanation. 98: They are loons. 99: Mulder was right, the truth is out there”
It’s a nice sunny day and it’s always good fun to sit and chat about the Great Filter, the Drake Equation, the Dark Forest etc... even better with a cider in hand.
There’s a more immediate question that I was hoping this forum of political experts could help me with? Why in the last year have a quite unusual collection of senior US political figures gone on the record to make quite extraordinary claims about UFOs? And started a very major congressional study into the topic, that has now squarely caught the attention of the US mainstream media?
The statements include there being A LOT of multi point evidence (including satellite visuals, radar, sonar, close range videos) of them being tangible intelligently controlled, high tech objects (rather than glitches or misidentified balloons). That they can break the sound barrier without causing sonic booms? Can pull G force in the many hundreds. Leave no visible infrared signature from a propulsion system? Can traverse easily between air and water. That they interfere quite regularly with US military assets. That the US does not have air superiority over its own landmass AND UFO’S HAVE EVEN REMOTELY DEACTIVATED US NUKES.
Philip prefers to not engage his brain with this topic rather than look carefully at what is being said by whom. Fair enough. It’s a hard topic.
As for the rest of you, if this is all made up, what possible reason is there for such a conspiracy between political adversaries? Because that conspiracy itself would be the story of our time too.
If mainstream media are reporting that UFOs have deactivated nukes then please provide a mainstream source like CNN etc saying that.
Not some batshit crazy lunatic on YouTube.
The interview I sent was with the NY Times and NBC with the person formerly charged by the DOD and Congress to impartially assess the evidence. Since he made that statement, Harry Reid has in writing confirmed his credentials.
You can keep throwing around mental health slurs on this topic if it makes you sleep soundly but it doesn’t answer my question, why so many senior individuals in the US are suddenly going on the record about this.
Until it's reported somewhere other than YouTube I think the simple answer is: they're not.
It's exceedingly easy on YouTube to take things people have said and twist them into giving a completely different picture. Total mendacious crap.
This is being discussed on a daily basis on mainstream news channels in America and the reputable print press there.
Great. Should be possible to link to a New York Times reputable article then rather than crazy conspiracies on YouTube. Do you have such a link?
So just like everywhere else from late June then...
I suspect there will be facemasks still required in some pubs, certainly inside and until all are vaccinated
Not from 21 June without breaching road map. If pubs do this it will be through their choice and they will get a stinging TripAdviser review from me if they do.
ALL RESTRICTIONS will end on 21st June. Boris has said so.
In the real world, when they have to pull back from this utterly arbitrary declaration there will be hell to pay.
Not that I care. I have just booked train tickets for my son to come and visit once we drop into level 2 on 17th May. But which point I won't have seen him in 7 months. Can't wait!
All LEGAL restrictions - it says.
So wearing of masks etc will not be legally enforced and I don't expect the government to renege on this.
However - my concern is that voluntary guidance will still be issued and despite this being voluntary only businesses and the like will continue to act as though they are legal requirements and, in effect, make them mandatory. The effect will be that we drag our heels from these restrictions at a slower pace that is necessary and businesses should be called out for this in some way.
I wouldn’t be surprised if mask wearing remains commonplace, like it is in parts of Asia. I’m not personally bothered by that.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not bothered either if it is voluntary by individuals. What I would be bothered by is businesses insisting, or even requesting, wearing masks of its customers. Voluntary yes, mandatory no.
BTW, the American abbreviation for "Joseph" is NOT "Jo" but instead good old "Joe".
As in Uncle Joe. Why you Brits are dropping the "e" is a mystery to me.
Note that the most famous Joseph in British political history, Joseph Chamberlain, was known to his contemporaries, in the UK and out, as "Pushful Joe". NOT Jo.
I always, as a Brit, considered Joe the male abbreviation, and Jo the female version. Has that changed?
It has not.
Though Jo Grimond was always Jo. And that was quite a long time ago now.
True. Wonder why. Was it some kind of aristo thing?
So just like everywhere else from late June then...
I suspect there will be facemasks still required in some pubs, certainly inside and until all are vaccinated
Not from 21 June without breaching road map. If pubs do this it will be through their choice and they will get a stinging TripAdviser review from me if they do.
ALL RESTRICTIONS will end on 21st June. Boris has said so.
In the real world, when they have to pull back from this utterly arbitrary declaration there will be hell to pay.
Not that I care. I have just booked train tickets for my son to come and visit once we drop into level 2 on 17th May. But which point I won't have seen him in 7 months. Can't wait!
All LEGAL restrictions - it says.
So wearing of masks etc will not be legally enforced and I don't expect the government to renege on this.
However - my concern is that voluntary guidance will still be issued and despite this being voluntary only businesses and the like will continue to act as though they are legal requirements and, in effect, make them mandatory. The effect will be that we drag our heels from these restrictions at a slower pace that is necessary and businesses should be called out for this in some way.
I wouldn’t be surprised if mask wearing remains commonplace, like it was, prepandemic, in parts of Asia. I’m not personally bothered by that.
Others can do what they want, mine’s going on a bonfire on 21 June. I lived in Asia a decade, I am well practiced with mask wearing, not just for pathogens but pollution. I’ll take whatever measures are appropriate for the risk environment at any time. Public mask wearing in the uk is no longer appropriate.
Vaccine anecdote. Just got jabbed (AZ) but the centre looked like it wasn't using anywhere near its full capacity (lots of empty vaccination booths). I know it has also been closing every day at about 6pm.
The centre is based at an athletics track that my daughter trains at with the local athletics club. They have taken over the middle and one of the bends of the track so only 300m is usable. I just received an email from the athletics club to say that evening training sessions will be going on whilst the vaccination centre is still open. I imagine they must be anticipating increased supply. Good news if so.
Mr. Gate, we don't know if complex life is unlikely. Our basis of comparison is minimal.
It might be really common.
There might also be an inherent conflict between adaptability and inventiveness on one side, and instability and chaos on the other. Civilisations capable of making more powerful weapons may be prone to self-annihilation.
But that's all I'm saying. We don't know.
Life may be common and may be really uncommon.
If it is really uncommon, it's possible that we are most advanced civilisation in the universe. It's not a totally ridiculous assertion.
We may never know...
Look in any astronomy textbook before 1992. The book will tell you that solar systems & planets like the Earth are incredibly rare. "The Earth is Special".
We now know that planets -- and even planets like the Earth -- are incredibly common. The Earth is not special.
There was no evidence that planets were common ... until they were discovered to be common. That happened as soon as we got instruments sensitive enough to detect them.
Ditto life.
Once there are instruments sensitive to detect bio-signatures (e.g. spectroscopic evidence of DNA), then it will be detected. It will probably happen within the decade. We're not special.
The Great Filter could be one of many things:
1 - Very rare abiogenesis (the precise circumstances by which self-replicating organisms can come about are rare and/or subject to extreme chance. For example, I've seen it posited that a large Moon to flex the crust in order to have sufficient activity (radioactive minerals close to the surface and/or volcanic activity that's just right and not too much) could be necessary. Not sure how likely that is) 2 - Very rare evolution of communicative intelligence (we, as a species, only turned up very late in the day and by chance that an ecological niche opened up that was compatible with evolving intelligence.) 3 - Limited Lifespan (intelligent life becomes dependent on a whole lot of things, including not destroying itself, and its capacity to change its own environment in such a way that its own continued existence gets limited becomes too great) 4 - Dark Forest (the first intelligence to get interstellar travel destroys all others simply because the capacity for destruction from new, immature intelligences, is too dangerous. Thus any surviving intelligences stay very very quiet) 5 - No Interstellar Travel (The distances between stars are just too great. There is no FTL and sublight travel is economically unviable, even for seedships) 6 - Timing (The conditions for intelligent life to evolve are very dependent on such things as second generation stars, having sufficient time to develop, not having serious destructive events, and it is only recently that such conditions have come about) 7 - All of the above.
There are 2,000,000,000,000 galaxies. Each galaxy contains ~ 100,000,000,000 stars. Most stars have multiple planets, say ~5.
So, there are ~ 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets in the Universe. And these planets will have evolved over many 1,000, 000,000,000 years. There is plenty of opportunity for very rare events to have happened many, many times.
(I think of your list, only 5 is likely to be correct -- though that does not mean we cannot detect life because we may gain evidence via spectroscopy. In fact, I think that is much the most likely bio-signature. Point 3 is certainly true, though we know life on Earth has persisted over 3.7 Gyrs, only a bit shorter than age of the Earth)
Must go, now.
Many 1,000, 000,000,000 years? I thought the universe was only about 14,000,000,000 years old.
I find it bad form to do that "Must go" thing. If you are going to make a post which is part of a conversation either give an opportunity to respond or don't post.
Life formed almost immediately* after the Earth formed. You don't need many billions of years to get the ball rolling.
*geologically speaking.
Unless life came to Earth from elsewhere - a perfectly respectable hypothesis.
There’s a view that the first X billion years were too volatile for life to sustain itself in any reasonable way, and that away from the fringes of the Galaxy this remains true today. But it still leaves a lot of time and space to play with.
To me if the UFO phenomenon is confirmed as legit by the US government (I should say President at this point given who else already spoke), it seems obvious to me that they were probably here before we were. Play your own game as to what that means.
OMG.
I hadn't realised you're a mad person.
Your posts have to date been relatively sensible (if overlong).
moonshine /ˈmuːnʃʌɪn/
noun (informal) 1. foolish talk or ideas. "whatever I said, it was moonshine"
You hadn't realised?
And anyway we have seen that from the vast majority of documentaries on the subject such as Close Encounters, War of the Worlds, etc that the aliens always land in the US so not sure what point you're trying to prove.
True, except that in the autobiographical account on which War of the Worlds was based, they landed in Southern England.
Surrey wasn't it? Well at least they would feel at home.
Off Topic - just how long MUST we wait, until OGH is given some mark of royal favor (or favour if you prefer) for his services to The Great British Public?
Surely he's earned a life peerage?
Lord Smithson has a nice ring. Or maybe Lord Punter?
All I ask, in return for this helpful suggestion, is to be made Her Majesty's Honorary Consul. That way, I can get a consular license plate - about the only way to dodge traffic tickets in Seattle!
That's actually a very good point.
OGH is certainly worthy of an OBE for his tireless (and unpaid) service to public understanding of politics over the last 15+ years.
Off Topic - just how long MUST we wait, until OGH is given some mark of royal favor (or favour if you prefer) for his services to The Great British Public?
Surely he's earned a life peerage?
Lord Smithson has a nice ring. Or maybe Lord Punter?
All I ask, in return for this helpful suggestion, is to be made Her Majesty's Honorary Consul. That way, I can get a consular license plate - about the only way to dodge traffic tickets in Seattle!
That's actually a very good point.
OGH is certainly worthy of an OBE for his tireless (and unpaid) service to public understanding of politics over the last 15+ years.
Has he made the required donation to the Conservative Party?
FPT - Philip “In decreasing order of plausibility:
1: They said something innocent that is misconstrued by loons to be aliens. 2: They said something dishonest for a political agenda, eg to get more money to Defence. 3: Some other explanation. 98: They are loons. 99: Mulder was right, the truth is out there”
It’s a nice sunny day and it’s always good fun to sit and chat about the Great Filter, the Drake Equation, the Dark Forest etc... even better with a cider in hand.
There’s a more immediate question that I was hoping this forum of political experts could help me with? Why in the last year have a quite unusual collection of senior US political figures gone on the record to make quite extraordinary claims about UFOs? And started a very major congressional study into the topic, that has now squarely caught the attention of the US mainstream media?
The statements include there being A LOT of multi point evidence (including satellite visuals, radar, sonar, close range videos) of them being tangible intelligently controlled, high tech objects (rather than glitches or misidentified balloons). That they can break the sound barrier without causing sonic booms? Can pull G force in the many hundreds. Leave no visible infrared signature from a propulsion system? Can traverse easily between air and water. That they interfere quite regularly with US military assets. That the US does not have air superiority over its own landmass AND UFO’S HAVE EVEN REMOTELY DEACTIVATED US NUKES.
Philip prefers to not engage his brain with this topic rather than look carefully at what is being said by whom. Fair enough. It’s a hard topic.
As for the rest of you, if this is all made up, what possible reason is there for such a conspiracy between political adversaries? Because that conspiracy itself would be the story of our time too.
If mainstream media are reporting that UFOs have deactivated nukes then please provide a mainstream source like CNN etc saying that.
Not some batshit crazy lunatic on YouTube.
The interview I sent was with the NY Times and NBC with the person formerly charged by the DOD and Congress to impartially assess the evidence. Since he made that statement, Harry Reid has in writing confirmed his credentials.
You can keep throwing around mental health slurs on this topic if it makes you sleep soundly but it doesn’t answer my question, why so many senior individuals in the US are suddenly going on the record about this.
Until it's reported somewhere other than YouTube I think the simple answer is: they're not.
It's exceedingly easy on YouTube to take things people have said and twist them into giving a completely different picture. Total mendacious crap.
This is being discussed on a daily basis on mainstream news channels in America and the reputable print press there.
Great. Should be possible to link to a New York Times reputable article then rather than crazy conspiracies on YouTube. Do you have such a link?
Or is this all pie in the sky YouTube bullshit?
I have done many times. The NY Times ran a front page about this last year. You didn’t notice because you were too busy pissing your pants about covid. I sent several NBC articles and segments only last week and a WashPo article about a week earlier. When you are ready to engage your brain in this, I’m sure you’ll be able to use the wondrous powers of the internet to find them.
BTW, the American abbreviation for "Joseph" is NOT "Jo" but instead good old "Joe".
As in Uncle Joe. Why you Brits are dropping the "e" is a mystery to me.
Note that the most famous Joseph in British political history, Joseph Chamberlain, was known to his contemporaries, in the UK and out, as "Pushful Joe". NOT Jo.
I always, as a Brit, considered Joe the male abbreviation, and Jo the female version. Has that changed?
It has not.
Although it’s consider polite these days to use the neutral form Jo/e unless you have been informed otherwise in writing
Mr. Gate, we don't know if complex life is unlikely. Our basis of comparison is minimal.
It might be really common.
There might also be an inherent conflict between adaptability and inventiveness on one side, and instability and chaos on the other. Civilisations capable of making more powerful weapons may be prone to self-annihilation.
But that's all I'm saying. We don't know.
Life may be common and may be really uncommon.
If it is really uncommon, it's possible that we are most advanced civilisation in the universe. It's not a totally ridiculous assertion.
We may never know...
Look in any astronomy textbook before 1992. The book will tell you that solar systems & planets like the Earth are incredibly rare. "The Earth is Special".
We now know that planets -- and even planets like the Earth -- are incredibly common. The Earth is not special.
There was no evidence that planets were common ... until they were discovered to be common. That happened as soon as we got instruments sensitive enough to detect them.
Ditto life.
Once there are instruments sensitive to detect bio-signatures (e.g. spectroscopic evidence of DNA), then it will be detected. It will probably happen within the decade. We're not special.
The Great Filter could be one of many things:
1 - Very rare abiogenesis (the precise circumstances by which self-replicating organisms can come about are rare and/or subject to extreme chance. For example, I've seen it posited that a large Moon to flex the crust in order to have sufficient activity (radioactive minerals close to the surface and/or volcanic activity that's just right and not too much) could be necessary. Not sure how likely that is) 2 - Very rare evolution of communicative intelligence (we, as a species, only turned up very late in the day and by chance that an ecological niche opened up that was compatible with evolving intelligence.) 3 - Limited Lifespan (intelligent life becomes dependent on a whole lot of things, including not destroying itself, and its capacity to change its own environment in such a way that its own continued existence gets limited becomes too great) 4 - Dark Forest (the first intelligence to get interstellar travel destroys all others simply because the capacity for destruction from new, immature intelligences, is too dangerous. Thus any surviving intelligences stay very very quiet) 5 - No Interstellar Travel (The distances between stars are just too great. There is no FTL and sublight travel is economically unviable, even for seedships) 6 - Timing (The conditions for intelligent life to evolve are very dependent on such things as second generation stars, having sufficient time to develop, not having serious destructive events, and it is only recently that such conditions have come about) 7 - All of the above.
There are 2,000,000,000,000 galaxies. Each galaxy contains ~ 100,000,000,000 stars. Most stars have multiple planets, say ~5.
So, there are ~ 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets in the Universe. And these planets will have evolved over many 1,000, 000,000,000 years. There is plenty of opportunity for very rare events to have happened many, many times.
(I think of your list, only 5 is likely to be correct -- though that does not mean we cannot detect life because we may gain evidence via spectroscopy. In fact, I think that is much the most likely bio-signature. Point 3 is certainly true, though we know life on Earth has persisted over 3.7 Gyrs, only a bit shorter than age of the Earth)
Must go, now.
Many 1,000, 000,000,000 years? I thought the universe was only about 14,000,000,000 years old.
I find it bad form to do that "Must go" thing. If you are going to make a post which is part of a conversation either give an opportunity to respond or don't post.
Life formed almost immediately* after the Earth formed. You don't need many billions of years to get the ball rolling.
*geologically speaking.
Unless life came to Earth from elsewhere - a perfectly respectable hypothesis.
There’s a view that the first X billion years were too volatile for life to sustain itself in any reasonable way, and that away from the fringes of the Galaxy this remains true today. But it still leaves a lot of time and space to play with.
To me if the UFO phenomenon is confirmed as legit by the US government (I should say President at this point given who else already spoke), it seems obvious to me that they were probably here before we were. Play your own game as to what that means.
OMG.
I hadn't realised you're a mad person.
Your posts have to date been relatively sensible (if overlong).
moonshine /ˈmuːnʃʌɪn/
noun (informal) 1. foolish talk or ideas. "whatever I said, it was moonshine"
You hadn't realised?
And anyway we have seen that from the vast majority of documentaries on the subject such as Close Encounters, War of the Worlds, etc that the aliens always land in the US so not sure what point you're trying to prove.
True, except that in the autobiographical account on which War of the Worlds was based, they landed in Southern England.
Yes I saw that. Which took me browsing-wise to The Village of the Damned, also set in southern England and truly a scary film. I can still see the last scene in my mind right this minute!
Off-topic - Any Lovejoy fans out there (books not TV)? I'm trying to recall which book it is where there is a buried Victorian engine in a tunnel, complete with a silver locomotive - can anyone help?
So just like everywhere else from late June then...
I suspect there will be facemasks still required in some pubs, certainly inside and until all are vaccinated
Not from 21 June without breaching road map. If pubs do this it will be through their choice and they will get a stinging TripAdviser review from me if they do.
ALL RESTRICTIONS will end on 21st June. Boris has said so.
In the real world, when they have to pull back from this utterly arbitrary declaration there will be hell to pay.
Not that I care. I have just booked train tickets for my son to come and visit once we drop into level 2 on 17th May. But which point I won't have seen him in 7 months. Can't wait!
All LEGAL restrictions - it says.
So wearing of masks etc will not be legally enforced and I don't expect the government to renege on this.
However - my concern is that voluntary guidance will still be issued and despite this being voluntary only businesses and the like will continue to act as though they are legal requirements and, in effect, make them mandatory. The effect will be that we drag our heels from these restrictions at a slower pace that is necessary and businesses should be called out for this in some way.
I wouldn’t be surprised if mask wearing remains commonplace, like it was, prepandemic, in parts of Asia. I’m not personally bothered by that.
Others can do what they want, mine’s going on a bonfire on 21 June. I lived in Asia a decade, I am well practiced with mask wearing, not just for pathogens but pollution. I’ll take whatever measures are appropriate for the risk environment at any time. Public mask wearing in the uk is no longer appropriate.
Very difficult, a mask and glasses and behind the ear hearing aids. Get mixed up with one another. And I can't let go of my walking stick to sort them out!
BTW, the American abbreviation for "Joseph" is NOT "Jo" but instead good old "Joe".
As in Uncle Joe. Why you Brits are dropping the "e" is a mystery to me.
Note that the most famous Joseph in British political history, Joseph Chamberlain, was known to his contemporaries, in the UK and out, as "Pushful Joe". NOT Jo.
I always, as a Brit, considered Joe the male abbreviation, and Jo the female version. Has that changed?
It has not.
Although it’s consider polite these days to use the neutral form Jo/e unless you have been informed otherwise in writing
Remember that dancing Douggie attacked the propriety of the SNP. You couldn't trust the word of the leader he said, no smoke without fire he said, breaches of the ministerial code demand resignation he said.
Off Topic - just how long MUST we wait, until OGH is given some mark of royal favor (or favour if you prefer) for his services to The Great British Public?
Surely he's earned a life peerage?
Lord Smithson has a nice ring. Or maybe Lord Punter?
All I ask, in return for this helpful suggestion, is to be made Her Majesty's Honorary Consul. That way, I can get a consular license plate - about the only way to dodge traffic tickets in Seattle!
BTW, the American abbreviation for "Joseph" is NOT "Jo" but instead good old "Joe".
As in Uncle Joe. Why you Brits are dropping the "e" is a mystery to me.
Note that the most famous Joseph in British political history, Joseph Chamberlain, was known to his contemporaries, in the UK and out, as "Pushful Joe". NOT Jo.
I always, as a Brit, considered Joe the male abbreviation, and Jo the female version. Has that changed?
It has not.
Although it’s consider polite these days to use the neutral form Jo/e unless you have been informed otherwise in writing
What?
Like a meeting happened and we werent all included. Jo is female Joe is male.
Are we still using the phrase fully vaccinated given how efficacious the vaccines are even after one dose? Comparing how many people are protected is more important.
Yep the FT VACCINE TRACKER is
Perhaps you could write a "reader letter" explaining why they shouldn't
My favorite part of the FT Vaccine tracker is total doses given
China 229m US 229M EU 133M UK 47M Cuba 1 (Not 1m, 1,000 or even 100 or 10 just one) lucky bugger
Ross is not important in Scotland , this could be the election that sees Anas Sarwar and Labour bounce back and they are likely to be far more damaging to the SNP and independence , than Ross and the conservatives
With respect to JoE Biden's approval ratings, while his legislative successes have clearly helped his cause, methinks the REAL reason behind his popularity, is simply that he is NOT Donald Trump.
Cannot tell you how many rowdy, radical, lefty friends have told me, how RELIEVED they are to have a moderate, stodgy, steady president.
A brave new world can wait. At least until we've had a chance to catch our breath.
FPT - Philip “In decreasing order of plausibility:
1: They said something innocent that is misconstrued by loons to be aliens. 2: They said something dishonest for a political agenda, eg to get more money to Defence. 3: Some other explanation. 98: They are loons. 99: Mulder was right, the truth is out there”
It’s a nice sunny day and it’s always good fun to sit and chat about the Great Filter, the Drake Equation, the Dark Forest etc... even better with a cider in hand.
There’s a more immediate question that I was hoping this forum of political experts could help me with? Why in the last year have a quite unusual collection of senior US political figures gone on the record to make quite extraordinary claims about UFOs? And started a very major congressional study into the topic, that has now squarely caught the attention of the US mainstream media?
The statements include there being A LOT of multi point evidence (including satellite visuals, radar, sonar, close range videos) of them being tangible intelligently controlled, high tech objects (rather than glitches or misidentified balloons). That they can break the sound barrier without causing sonic booms? Can pull G force in the many hundreds. Leave no visible infrared signature from a propulsion system? Can traverse easily between air and water. That they interfere quite regularly with US military assets. That the US does not have air superiority over its own landmass AND UFO’S HAVE EVEN REMOTELY DEACTIVATED US NUKES.
Philip prefers to not engage his brain with this topic rather than look carefully at what is being said by whom. Fair enough. It’s a hard topic.
As for the rest of you, if this is all made up, what possible reason is there for such a conspiracy between political adversaries? Because that conspiracy itself would be the story of our time too.
So the theory is that aliens flew to Earth across uncountable billions of miles of space to... screw with us?
Or, more precisely, to screw with just one country on Earth?
Why?
Perhaps for same reason us Earthlings are posting here on PB? Sheer freaking boredom!
BTW, the American abbreviation for "Joseph" is NOT "Jo" but instead good old "Joe".
As in Uncle Joe. Why you Brits are dropping the "e" is a mystery to me.
Note that the most famous Joseph in British political history, Joseph Chamberlain, was known to his contemporaries, in the UK and out, as "Pushful Joe". NOT Jo.
I always, as a Brit, considered Joe the male abbreviation, and Jo the female version. Has that changed?
It has not.
Although it’s consider polite these days to use the neutral form Jo/e unless you have been informed otherwise in writing
What?
Like a meeting happened and we werent all included. Jo is female Joe is male.
In this area there's a bloke called Nic. Always find that confusing.
With respect to JoE Biden's approval ratings, while his legislative successes have clearly helped his cause, methinks the REAL reason behind his popularity, is simply that he is NOT Donald Trump.
Cannot tell you how many rowdy, radical, lefty friends have told me, how RELIEVED they are to have a moderate, stodgy, steady president.
A brave new world can wait. At least until we've had a chance to catch our breath.
Through this lens, Biden-ism is an old fashioned steady as she goes doctrine. The pause between courses in a restaurant. What’s the next big thing after Trumpism then?
With respect to JoE Biden's approval ratings, while his legislative successes have clearly helped his cause, methinks the REAL reason behind his popularity, is simply that he is NOT Donald Trump.
Cannot tell you how many rowdy, radical, lefty friends have told me, how RELIEVED they are to have a moderate, stodgy, steady president.
A brave new world can wait. At least until we've had a chance to catch our breath.
Through this lens, Biden-ism is an old fashioned steady as she goes doctrine. The pause between courses in a restaurant. What’s the next big thing after Trumpism then?
FPT - Philip “In decreasing order of plausibility:
1: They said something innocent that is misconstrued by loons to be aliens. 2: They said something dishonest for a political agenda, eg to get more money to Defence. 3: Some other explanation. 98: They are loons. 99: Mulder was right, the truth is out there”
It’s a nice sunny day and it’s always good fun to sit and chat about the Great Filter, the Drake Equation, the Dark Forest etc... even better with a cider in hand.
There’s a more immediate question that I was hoping this forum of political experts could help me with? Why in the last year have a quite unusual collection of senior US political figures gone on the record to make quite extraordinary claims about UFOs? And started a very major congressional study into the topic, that has now squarely caught the attention of the US mainstream media?
The statements include there being A LOT of multi point evidence (including satellite visuals, radar, sonar, close range videos) of them being tangible intelligently controlled, high tech objects (rather than glitches or misidentified balloons). That they can break the sound barrier without causing sonic booms? Can pull G force in the many hundreds. Leave no visible infrared signature from a propulsion system? Can traverse easily between air and water. That they interfere quite regularly with US military assets. That the US does not have air superiority over its own landmass AND UFO’S HAVE EVEN REMOTELY DEACTIVATED US NUKES.
Philip prefers to not engage his brain with this topic rather than look carefully at what is being said by whom. Fair enough. It’s a hard topic.
As for the rest of you, if this is all made up, what possible reason is there for such a conspiracy between political adversaries? Because that conspiracy itself would be the story of our time too.
So the theory is that aliens flew to Earth across uncountable billions of miles of space to... screw with us?
Or, more precisely, to screw with just one country on Earth?
Why?
Perhaps for same reason us Earthlings are posting here on PB? Sheer freaking boredom!
Can't imagine how boring immortality would be.
Living to 300 might get boring. Living to 300 million could be quite fun. You could play all sorts of games like who could evolve the most amusing species or society.
With respect to JoE Biden's approval ratings, while his legislative successes have clearly helped his cause, methinks the REAL reason behind his popularity, is simply that he is NOT Donald Trump.
Cannot tell you how many rowdy, radical, lefty friends have told me, how RELIEVED they are to have a moderate, stodgy, steady president.
A brave new world can wait. At least until we've had a chance to catch our breath.
Through this lens, Biden-ism is an old fashioned steady as she goes doctrine. The pause between courses in a restaurant. What’s the next big thing after Trumpism then?
AOC?
The obvious answer isn’t it but I just don’t think she can win there.
With respect to JoE Biden's approval ratings, while his legislative successes have clearly helped his cause, methinks the REAL reason behind his popularity, is simply that he is NOT Donald Trump.
Cannot tell you how many rowdy, radical, lefty friends have told me, how RELIEVED they are to have a moderate, stodgy, steady president.
A brave new world can wait. At least until we've had a chance to catch our breath.
Absolutely this. Just not having to wake up wondering what insanity the current occupant of the Oval Office will tweet today has been such a relief.
BTW, the American abbreviation for "Joseph" is NOT "Jo" but instead good old "Joe".
As in Uncle Joe. Why you Brits are dropping the "e" is a mystery to me.
Note that the most famous Joseph in British political history, Joseph Chamberlain, was known to his contemporaries, in the UK and out, as "Pushful Joe". NOT Jo.
I always, as a Brit, considered Joe the male abbreviation, and Jo the female version. Has that changed?
It has not.
Though Jo Grimond was always Jo. And that was quite a long time ago now.
True. Wonder why. Was it some kind of aristo thing?
Jo Grimond was educated at Eton; so was Boris's brother Jo. Another case for the Ofsted inspectors.
BTW, the American abbreviation for "Joseph" is NOT "Jo" but instead good old "Joe".
As in Uncle Joe. Why you Brits are dropping the "e" is a mystery to me.
Note that the most famous Joseph in British political history, Joseph Chamberlain, was known to his contemporaries, in the UK and out, as "Pushful Joe". NOT Jo.
I always, as a Brit, considered Joe the male abbreviation, and Jo the female version. Has that changed?
It has not.
Although it’s consider polite these days to use the neutral form Jo/e unless you have been informed otherwise in writing
Wouldn't it make more sense IF you're worried about giving offense, to NOT use ANY nickname, unless the person uses it themselves (as in case of Joe Biden) OR you are otherwise 100% sure it's ok?
For example, somehow get the feeling that you - Charles - MIGHT be offended if someone you didn't know called you "Charlie" or "Chuck"?
With respect to JoE Biden's approval ratings, while his legislative successes have clearly helped his cause, methinks the REAL reason behind his popularity, is simply that he is NOT Donald Trump.
Cannot tell you how many rowdy, radical, lefty friends have told me, how RELIEVED they are to have a moderate, stodgy, steady president.
A brave new world can wait. At least until we've had a chance to catch our breath.
Through this lens, Biden-ism is an old fashioned steady as she goes doctrine. The pause between courses in a restaurant. What’s the next big thing after Trumpism then?
AOC?
The obvious answer isn’t it but I just don’t think she can win there.
FPT - Philip “In decreasing order of plausibility:
1: They said something innocent that is misconstrued by loons to be aliens. 2: They said something dishonest for a political agenda, eg to get more money to Defence. 3: Some other explanation. 98: They are loons. 99: Mulder was right, the truth is out there”
It’s a nice sunny day and it’s always good fun to sit and chat about the Great Filter, the Drake Equation, the Dark Forest etc... even better with a cider in hand.
There’s a more immediate question that I was hoping this forum of political experts could help me with? Why in the last year have a quite unusual collection of senior US political figures gone on the record to make quite extraordinary claims about UFOs? And started a very major congressional study into the topic, that has now squarely caught the attention of the US mainstream media?
The statements include there being A LOT of multi point evidence (including satellite visuals, radar, sonar, close range videos) of them being tangible intelligently controlled, high tech objects (rather than glitches or misidentified balloons). That they can break the sound barrier without causing sonic booms? Can pull G force in the many hundreds. Leave no visible infrared signature from a propulsion system? Can traverse easily between air and water. That they interfere quite regularly with US military assets. That the US does not have air superiority over its own landmass AND UFO’S HAVE EVEN REMOTELY DEACTIVATED US NUKES.
Philip prefers to not engage his brain with this topic rather than look carefully at what is being said by whom. Fair enough. It’s a hard topic.
As for the rest of you, if this is all made up, what possible reason is there for such a conspiracy between political adversaries? Because that conspiracy itself would be the story of our time too.
Reid is an old man, who recently suggested that the Chinese, Russians... and the French were in on it. The other guy appears to be another species of grifter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_the_Stars_(company)
With respect to JoE Biden's approval ratings, while his legislative successes have clearly helped his cause, methinks the REAL reason behind his popularity, is simply that he is NOT Donald Trump.
Cannot tell you how many rowdy, radical, lefty friends have told me, how RELIEVED they are to have a moderate, stodgy, steady president.
A brave new world can wait. At least until we've had a chance to catch our breath.
Through this lens, Biden-ism is an old fashioned steady as she goes doctrine. The pause between courses in a restaurant. What’s the next big thing after Trumpism then?
AOC?
The obvious answer isn’t it but I just don’t think she can win there.
Not 2024 but 2028 maybe?
I think the answer is it depends if a highly centralised economy and less liberal society will be necessary to combat climate change, or if by 2028 technology has largely conquered the problem.
FPT - Philip “In decreasing order of plausibility:
1: They said something innocent that is misconstrued by loons to be aliens. 2: They said something dishonest for a political agenda, eg to get more money to Defence. 3: Some other explanation. 98: They are loons. 99: Mulder was right, the truth is out there”
It’s a nice sunny day and it’s always good fun to sit and chat about the Great Filter, the Drake Equation, the Dark Forest etc... even better with a cider in hand.
There’s a more immediate question that I was hoping this forum of political experts could help me with? Why in the last year have a quite unusual collection of senior US political figures gone on the record to make quite extraordinary claims about UFOs? And started a very major congressional study into the topic, that has now squarely caught the attention of the US mainstream media?
The statements include there being A LOT of multi point evidence (including satellite visuals, radar, sonar, close range videos) of them being tangible intelligently controlled, high tech objects (rather than glitches or misidentified balloons). That they can break the sound barrier without causing sonic booms? Can pull G force in the many hundreds. Leave no visible infrared signature from a propulsion system? Can traverse easily between air and water. That they interfere quite regularly with US military assets. That the US does not have air superiority over its own landmass AND UFO’S HAVE EVEN REMOTELY DEACTIVATED US NUKES.
Philip prefers to not engage his brain with this topic rather than look carefully at what is being said by whom. Fair enough. It’s a hard topic.
As for the rest of you, if this is all made up, what possible reason is there for such a conspiracy between political adversaries? Because that conspiracy itself would be the story of our time too.
So the theory is that aliens flew to Earth across uncountable billions of miles of space to... screw with us?
Or, more precisely, to screw with just one country on Earth?
Why?
There's at least one false assumption here - who says that only the US has ever seen these objects?
If we were an advanced alien species, I see no reason why we wouldn't have a few nature reserves/scientific observation posts, but instead of our small scale stuff, do it to an entire planet.
My head says that these UFOs are very much of a human origin, but it's fun to imagine the other unlikely but possible explanation.
I asked the Conservative Party chairman twice about what appeared to be careful use of the *present* tense in her answer that Conservative party funds "are not being used" to fund Downing Street flat renovation.
FPT - Philip “In decreasing order of plausibility:
1: They said something innocent that is misconstrued by loons to be aliens. 2: They said something dishonest for a political agenda, eg to get more money to Defence. 3: Some other explanation. 98: They are loons. 99: Mulder was right, the truth is out there”
It’s a nice sunny day and it’s always good fun to sit and chat about the Great Filter, the Drake Equation, the Dark Forest etc... even better with a cider in hand.
There’s a more immediate question that I was hoping this forum of political experts could help me with? Why in the last year have a quite unusual collection of senior US political figures gone on the record to make quite extraordinary claims about UFOs? And started a very major congressional study into the topic, that has now squarely caught the attention of the US mainstream media?
The statements include there being A LOT of multi point evidence (including satellite visuals, radar, sonar, close range videos) of them being tangible intelligently controlled, high tech objects (rather than glitches or misidentified balloons). That they can break the sound barrier without causing sonic booms? Can pull G force in the many hundreds. Leave no visible infrared signature from a propulsion system? Can traverse easily between air and water. That they interfere quite regularly with US military assets. That the US does not have air superiority over its own landmass AND UFO’S HAVE EVEN REMOTELY DEACTIVATED US NUKES.
Philip prefers to not engage his brain with this topic rather than look carefully at what is being said by whom. Fair enough. It’s a hard topic.
As for the rest of you, if this is all made up, what possible reason is there for such a conspiracy between political adversaries? Because that conspiracy itself would be the story of our time too.
Reid is an old man, who recently suggested that the Chinese, Russians... and the French were in on it. The other guy appears to be another species of grifter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_the_Stars_(company)
Rubio isn’t old or retired. In fact he’d have a right to think he has another reasonable run at President left him.
Off Topic - just how long MUST we wait, until OGH is given some mark of royal favor (or favour if you prefer) for his services to The Great British Public?
Surely he's earned a life peerage?
Lord Smithson has a nice ring. Or maybe Lord Punter?
All I ask, in return for this helpful suggestion, is to be made Her Majesty's Honorary Consul. That way, I can get a consular license plate - about the only way to dodge traffic tickets in Seattle!
That's actually a very good point.
OGH is certainly worthy of an OBE for his tireless (and unpaid) service to public understanding of politics over the last 15+ years.
So just like everywhere else from late June then...
I suspect there will be facemasks still required in some pubs, certainly inside and until all are vaccinated
Not from 21 June without breaching road map. If pubs do this it will be through their choice and they will get a stinging TripAdviser review from me if they do.
ALL RESTRICTIONS will end on 21st June. Boris has said so.
In the real world, when they have to pull back from this utterly arbitrary declaration there will be hell to pay.
Not that I care. I have just booked train tickets for my son to come and visit once we drop into level 2 on 17th May. But which point I won't have seen him in 7 months. Can't wait!
All LEGAL restrictions - it says.
So wearing of masks etc will not be legally enforced and I don't expect the government to renege on this.
However - my concern is that voluntary guidance will still be issued and despite this being voluntary only businesses and the like will continue to act as though they are legal requirements and, in effect, make them mandatory. The effect will be that we drag our heels from these restrictions at a slower pace that is necessary and businesses should be called out for this in some way.
I wouldn’t be surprised if mask wearing remains commonplace, like it is in parts of Asia. I’m not personally bothered by that.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not bothered either if it is voluntary by individuals. What I would be bothered by is businesses insisting, or even requesting, wearing masks of its customers. Voluntary yes, mandatory no.
Precisely nobody was wearing masks at the pub I visited on Saturday, save for the waiting staff. By June we'll be at no significant risk and they won't be required. The sorts of people who will want to continue with them are unlikely to be frequenting pubs.
I have been out canvassing in various parts of the Totnes constituency the past few weeks. Many hundreds of voters met. What is really striking is that very, very few people have changed their vote from the 2019 General. A few ex-Tories returning to the fold, who in 2019 were staying with a personal loyalty to Sarah Wollaston. But otherwise, those who love Boris still love Boris, those who hate Boris still hate Boris.
I have been out canvassing in various parts of the Totnes constituency the past few weeks. Many hundreds of voters met. What is really striking is that very, very few people have changed their vote from the 2019 General. A few ex-Tories returning to the fold, who in 2019 were staying with a personal loyalty to Sarah Wollaston. But otherwise, those who love Boris still love Boris, those who hate Boris still hate Boris.
I asked the Conservative Party chairman twice about what appeared to be careful use of the *present* tense in her answer that Conservative party funds "are not being used" to fund Downing Street flat renovation.
The fact that he wouldn't say yes paradoxically means that Mr Ross is a man of integrity and honour. Saying yes to that question would mean you either have to be a liar or a gullible fool
Are we still using the phrase fully vaccinated given how efficacious the vaccines are even after one dose? Comparing how many people are protected is more important.
It's the standard terminology.
But remember that those stats are actually 25% more as adults are only 80% of the population.
I have been out canvassing in various parts of the Totnes constituency the past few weeks. Many hundreds of voters met. What is really striking is that very, very few people have changed their vote from the 2019 General. A few ex-Tories returning to the fold, who in 2019 were staying with a personal loyalty to Sarah Wollaston. But otherwise, those who love Boris still love Boris, those who hate Boris still hate Boris.
FPT - Philip “In decreasing order of plausibility:
1: They said something innocent that is misconstrued by loons to be aliens. 2: They said something dishonest for a political agenda, eg to get more money to Defence. 3: Some other explanation. 98: They are loons. 99: Mulder was right, the truth is out there”
It’s a nice sunny day and it’s always good fun to sit and chat about the Great Filter, the Drake Equation, the Dark Forest etc... even better with a cider in hand.
There’s a more immediate question that I was hoping this forum of political experts could help me with? Why in the last year have a quite unusual collection of senior US political figures gone on the record to make quite extraordinary claims about UFOs? And started a very major congressional study into the topic, that has now squarely caught the attention of the US mainstream media?
The statements include there being A LOT of multi point evidence (including satellite visuals, radar, sonar, close range videos) of them being tangible intelligently controlled, high tech objects (rather than glitches or misidentified balloons). That they can break the sound barrier without causing sonic booms? Can pull G force in the many hundreds. Leave no visible infrared signature from a propulsion system? Can traverse easily between air and water. That they interfere quite regularly with US military assets. That the US does not have air superiority over its own landmass AND UFO’S HAVE EVEN REMOTELY DEACTIVATED US NUKES.
Philip prefers to not engage his brain with this topic rather than look carefully at what is being said by whom. Fair enough. It’s a hard topic.
As for the rest of you, if this is all made up, what possible reason is there for such a conspiracy between political adversaries? Because that conspiracy itself would be the story of our time too.
So the theory is that aliens flew to Earth across uncountable billions of miles of space to... screw with us?
Or, more precisely, to screw with just one country on Earth?
Why?
I should note that I remain a sceptic, but consider it from the opposite angle. We do send probes out to other planets/beyond to see what's there. As we get more advanced and have mapped out more of the solar system, we'll likely send things much further. These will be, initially at least, autonomous/pre-programmed (as there would be too much lag to control directly) and will send data back. If we happen to visit, remotely, a planet with life on then it will initially be with relatively small craft taking images, spectroscopic analyses of the surface etc. Now at present these are slow, lumbering rovers, but if we came to suspect that there was potentially intelligent life on another planet, we'd probably want to do some surveillance with something fast moving and hard to spot, to see what we were encountering before announcing ourselves. It would be a long period before we were able to act on any data received by sending further probes or a manned mission (as the probes/spacecraft would take a long time to get there after we decided to send them). Things flopping about on Earth with no followup is not a ridiculous thing to happen if there was to be surveillance from alien lifeforms.
However, reasonable questions in that case would be: - Why enter the atmosphere - can't it all be done remotely, from orbit? Plausible explanation - to actually gather some samples of air/earth/water etc - Why not better at hiding the probes from us? Plausible explanation - the probes are well hidden using the technologies on the originating planet (e.g. they're invisible in the part of the spectrum that organisms there can sense, they just happen to be visible at what we consider visible wavelengths). - Why is this mostly happening in the US? Well, the aliens are mostly picking up Netflix and Disney+/Hollywood output and so conclude that very little of interest happens outside the US
I still think there are many, many more likely explanations for what has been observed, but I don't think the apparent 'screwing with us' is, in itself, that odd if the explanation is more unlikely.
FPT - Philip “In decreasing order of plausibility:
1: They said something innocent that is misconstrued by loons to be aliens. 2: They said something dishonest for a political agenda, eg to get more money to Defence. 3: Some other explanation. 98: They are loons. 99: Mulder was right, the truth is out there”
It’s a nice sunny day and it’s always good fun to sit and chat about the Great Filter, the Drake Equation, the Dark Forest etc... even better with a cider in hand.
There’s a more immediate question that I was hoping this forum of political experts could help me with? Why in the last year have a quite unusual collection of senior US political figures gone on the record to make quite extraordinary claims about UFOs? And started a very major congressional study into the topic, that has now squarely caught the attention of the US mainstream media?
The statements include there being A LOT of multi point evidence (including satellite visuals, radar, sonar, close range videos) of them being tangible intelligently controlled, high tech objects (rather than glitches or misidentified balloons). That they can break the sound barrier without causing sonic booms? Can pull G force in the many hundreds. Leave no visible infrared signature from a propulsion system? Can traverse easily between air and water. That they interfere quite regularly with US military assets. That the US does not have air superiority over its own landmass AND UFO’S HAVE EVEN REMOTELY DEACTIVATED US NUKES.
Philip prefers to not engage his brain with this topic rather than look carefully at what is being said by whom. Fair enough. It’s a hard topic.
As for the rest of you, if this is all made up, what possible reason is there for such a conspiracy between political adversaries? Because that conspiracy itself would be the story of our time too.
Reid is an old man, who recently suggested that the Chinese, Russians... and the French were in on it. The other guy appears to be another species of grifter. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_the_Stars_(company)
Rubio isn’t old or retired. In fact he’d have a right to think he has another reasonable run at President left him.
Right now, Senator Marco Rubio is eating the dust of two other Sunshine State GOP presidential hopefuls: Governor Ron DeSantis and Senator Rick Scott.
FPT - Philip “In decreasing order of plausibility:
1: They said something innocent that is misconstrued by loons to be aliens. 2: They said something dishonest for a political agenda, eg to get more money to Defence. 3: Some other explanation. 98: They are loons. 99: Mulder was right, the truth is out there”
It’s a nice sunny day and it’s always good fun to sit and chat about the Great Filter, the Drake Equation, the Dark Forest etc... even better with a cider in hand.
There’s a more immediate question that I was hoping this forum of political experts could help me with? Why in the last year have a quite unusual collection of senior US political figures gone on the record to make quite extraordinary claims about UFOs? And started a very major congressional study into the topic, that has now squarely caught the attention of the US mainstream media?
The statements include there being A LOT of multi point evidence (including satellite visuals, radar, sonar, close range videos) of them being tangible intelligently controlled, high tech objects (rather than glitches or misidentified balloons). That they can break the sound barrier without causing sonic booms? Can pull G force in the many hundreds. Leave no visible infrared signature from a propulsion system? Can traverse easily between air and water. That they interfere quite regularly with US military assets. That the US does not have air superiority over its own landmass AND UFO’S HAVE EVEN REMOTELY DEACTIVATED US NUKES.
Philip prefers to not engage his brain with this topic rather than look carefully at what is being said by whom. Fair enough. It’s a hard topic.
As for the rest of you, if this is all made up, what possible reason is there for such a conspiracy between political adversaries? Because that conspiracy itself would be the story of our time too.
So the theory is that aliens flew to Earth across uncountable billions of miles of space to... screw with us?
Or, more precisely, to screw with just one country on Earth?
Why?
Who says they're from outside our planet, let alone our solar system? With my fortean hat on, I would note that human folklore has for millennia had accounts of encounters with extra-human entities. They variously get labelled as angels, demons, fairies, elves etc, and some of the accounts of "being taken away by the fairies" match some of the modern accounts of "abduction by aliens". There have been historical or folklore accounts of unexplained aerial phenomena, going back to the Book of Ezekiel if not before. In the late 19th century and early 20th centuries, there were accounts of "mystery airships" all over the world.
Now, I am not saying I believe that there are entities that share our world with us that we perceive in these ways, but it seems to me to be a hypothesis no less plausible than that aliens have travelled across the vast gulf between the stars just to "tease" us, as Douglas Adams put it[1].
As a fortean, I don't particularly subscribe to any theory. But if I were pressed to state a preference, I can't help but think that all reports of fortean/"paranormal"/"supernatural" phenomena tend to point in the direction of the simulation hypothesis, and emanate from the entities that built and maintain our simulation. I hope we will continue to be entertaining to them.
[1] “Teasers are usually rich kids with nothing to do. They cruise around looking for planets that haven’t made interstellar contact yet and buzz them.” “Buzz them?” Arthur began to feel that Ford was enjoying making life difficult for him. “Yeah,” said Ford, “they buzz them. They find some isolated spot with very few people around, then land right by some poor unsuspecting soul whom no one’s ever going to believe and then strut up and down in front of him wearing silly antennas on their head and making beep beep noises.”
I have been out canvassing in various parts of the Totnes constituency the past few weeks. Many hundreds of voters met. What is really striking is that very, very few people have changed their vote from the 2019 General. A few ex-Tories returning to the fold, who in 2019 were staying with a personal loyalty to Sarah Wollaston. But otherwise, those who love Boris still love Boris, those who hate Boris still hate Boris.
Please file under #Anecdote:ForWhatIt'sWorth
By next weekend all will be revealed
Alien visitation ?
What about MY theory, that Boris is himself a space alien? (Like Trumpsky!)
BTW, the American abbreviation for "Joseph" is NOT "Jo" but instead good old "Joe".
As in Uncle Joe. Why you Brits are dropping the "e" is a mystery to me.
Note that the most famous Joseph in British political history, Joseph Chamberlain, was known to his contemporaries, in the UK and out, as "Pushful Joe". NOT Jo.
I always, as a Brit, considered Joe the male abbreviation, and Jo the female version. Has that changed?
It has not.
Although it’s consider polite these days to use the neutral form Jo/e unless you have been informed otherwise in writing
Wouldn't it make more sense IF you're worried about giving offense, to NOT use ANY nickname, unless the person uses it themselves (as in case of Joe Biden) OR you are otherwise 100% sure it's ok?
For example, somehow get the feeling that you - Charles - MIGHT be offended if someone you didn't know called you "Charlie" or "Chuck"?
I'd say that your practice is your choice, and if there are consequences you also choose those.
And it's not really worth the kremlinology.
The most famous Jo in British History is probably either Joseph of Nazareth, or Joe 90.
Comments
I hadn't realised you're a mad person.
Your posts have to date been relatively sensible (if overlong).
He pops up sporadically and says the same things, while the Commission (who actually are the ones we should be listening to) don't seem to have too many issues at present.
China 229m
US 229M
EU 133M
UK 47M
Cuba 1 (Not 1m, 1,000 or even 100 or 10 just one) lucky bugger
Cash for mates, 1990s sleaze has returned
1. People on YouTube have got the wrong end of the stick and fallen for conspiracies.
2. Alien life has flown billions of years to essentially film an 👽 version of Impractical Jokers in order to prank people but not reveal themselves or do anything.
/ˈmuːnʃʌɪn/
noun (informal)
1. foolish talk or ideas.
"whatever I said, it was moonshine"
You hadn't realised?
BTW, the American abbreviation for "Joseph" is NOT "Jo" but instead good old "Joe".
As in Uncle Joe. Why you Brits are dropping the "e" is a mystery to me.
Note that the most famous Joseph in British political history, Joseph Chamberlain, was known to his contemporaries, in the UK and out, as "Pushful Joe". NOT Jo.
2021 Tories: Spend on wallpaper but don't bill the taxpayers.
2021 Labour: Everybody lose your freaking minds.
& 50 million target
Doses/day -
End of May 756,913 (461,612 firsts / 372,076 seconds)
End of June 544,602 (248,561 firsts/ 296,041 seconds)
End of July 432,509 (168,297 firsts / 264,212 seconds)
Daily doses (Total)
December average 51,216
January average 276,174
February average 403,596
March average 469,988
April average 437,864
In the real world, when they have to pull back from this utterly arbitrary declaration there will be hell to pay.
Not that I care. I have just booked train tickets for my son to come and visit once we drop into level 2 on 17th May. But which point I won't have seen him in 7 months. Can't wait!
I asked the question so I’ll give my answer.
I think Trump started the ball rolling down the hill and it now can’t be easily stopped. Any number of past presidents no doubt had eye brow raising evidence they could have released but didn’t. Trump for whatever reason broke the precedent. Whether there was new info or just a typically unorthodox perspective from him I don’t know.
But it was on his watch that the DOD formally confirmed the legitimacy of what are now known as the Pentagon videos. And then undertook the most widespread briefing of the topic in Washington ever, sharing military telematics, photos and videos willy nilly with hundreds of not thousands of people. And allowed people like David Fravor and Lue Elizondo to go on the record.
The point was reached that too many figures in Washington had seen evidence that deeply concerned them. “Oh my god, this isn’t us. We’d better have a full transparent inquiry into this. Is it China?” Answer: Well no, obviously it’s not China.
Whether trump rolling the ball down the hill was a good idea none of us yet know. But it’s odd for political obsessives to pretend that this is not going on, given it’s the thing that is without doubt most preoccupying the thoughts of the US President right now, given either:
A) the joint chiefs structure has completely broken down and the US government is very publicly investigating their own secret tech
C) it’s someone else.
Union matters are reserved to Westminster so UDI as Salmond wants would of course not work either
Which may prove there is no intelligent life out there...
I think your perception of what media is “mainstream” and “reputable” may be somewhat distorted.
So wearing of masks etc will not be legally enforced and I don't expect the government to renege on this.
However - my concern is that voluntary guidance will still be issued and despite this being voluntary only businesses and the like will continue to act as though they are legal requirements and, in effect, make them mandatory. The effect will be that we drag our heels from these restrictions at a slower pace that is necessary and businesses should be called out for this in some way.
Anyone vaccinated by 31 May will be protected by 21 June. That's going to be pretty much everybody at risk of hospitalisation let alone death from this disease.
Surely he's earned a life peerage?
Lord Smithson has a nice ring. Or maybe Lord Punter?
All I ask, in return for this helpful suggestion, is to be made Her Majesty's Honorary Consul. That way, I can get a consular license plate - about the only way to dodge traffic tickets in Seattle!
Or is this all pie in the sky YouTube bullshit?
The centre is based at an athletics track that my daughter trains at with the local athletics club. They have taken over the middle and one of the bends of the track so only 300m is usable. I just received an email from the athletics club to say that evening training sessions will be going on whilst the vaccination centre is still open. I imagine they must be anticipating increased supply. Good news if so.
OGH is certainly worthy of an OBE for his tireless (and unpaid) service to public understanding of politics over the last 15+ years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayor_Quimby
115 dying an hour in India but likely to be a lot more
This is just terrible
And I can't let go of my walking stick to sort them out!
Says man who spends way too long on Internet forum obsessed with psephology… at least it’s a profitable hobby!
Pillock.
Cannot tell you how many rowdy, radical, lefty friends have told me, how RELIEVED they are to have a moderate, stodgy, steady president.
A brave new world can wait. At least until we've had a chance to catch our breath.
For example, somehow get the feeling that you - Charles - MIGHT be offended if someone you didn't know called you "Charlie" or "Chuck"?
The other guy appears to be another species of grifter.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_the_Stars_(company)
There's at least one false assumption here - who says that only the US has ever seen these objects?
If we were an advanced alien species, I see no reason why we wouldn't have a few nature reserves/scientific observation posts, but instead of our small scale stuff, do it to an entire planet.
My head says that these UFOs are very much of a human origin, but it's fun to imagine the other unlikely but possible explanation.
Here is the transcript of this part of the interview. https://twitter.com/LOS_Fisher/status/1387055491042320387/photo/1
Please file under #Anecdote:ForWhatIt'sWorth
But remember that those stats are actually 25% more as adults are only 80% of the population.
However, reasonable questions in that case would be:
- Why enter the atmosphere - can't it all be done remotely, from orbit? Plausible explanation - to actually gather some samples of air/earth/water etc
- Why not better at hiding the probes from us? Plausible explanation - the probes are well hidden using the technologies on the originating planet (e.g. they're invisible in the part of the spectrum that organisms there can sense, they just happen to be visible at what we consider visible wavelengths).
- Why is this mostly happening in the US? Well, the aliens are mostly picking up Netflix and Disney+/Hollywood output and so conclude that very little of interest happens outside the US
I still think there are many, many more likely explanations for what has been observed, but I don't think the apparent 'screwing with us' is, in itself, that odd if the explanation is more unlikely.
Time for the next chapter in the Girther Conspiracy.
I understand that Boris peaked at 17st 3lb and NOT the 17st 7lb that @Philip_Thompson claimed.
There are people who know.
Now, I am not saying I believe that there are entities that share our world with us that we perceive in these ways, but it seems to me to be a hypothesis no less plausible than that aliens have travelled across the vast gulf between the stars just to "tease" us, as Douglas Adams put it[1].
As a fortean, I don't particularly subscribe to any theory. But if I were pressed to state a preference, I can't help but think that all reports of fortean/"paranormal"/"supernatural" phenomena tend to point in the direction of the simulation hypothesis, and emanate from the entities that built and maintain our simulation. I hope we will continue to be entertaining to them.
[1] “Teasers are usually rich kids with nothing to do. They cruise around looking for planets that haven’t made interstellar contact yet and buzz them.” “Buzz them?” Arthur began to feel that Ford was enjoying making life difficult for him. “Yeah,” said Ford, “they buzz them. They find some isolated spot with very few people around, then land right by some poor unsuspecting soul whom no one’s ever going to believe and then strut up and down in front of him wearing silly antennas on their head and making beep beep noises.”
UK vaccine status: I think we've ~11m doses stockpiled, equally split AZ and Pfizer + tiny bit Moderna.
This makes projections harder.
Constrained supply = only one narrow path.
Plentiful supply = options (tiny, tiny violin, I know).
I think we're going to see a big week.
https://twitter.com/PaulMainwood/status/1387041551885373446?s=20
WOULD explain a great deal . . .
And it's not really worth the kremlinology.
The most famous Jo in British History is probably either Joseph of Nazareth, or Joe 90.