Some brief thoughts on Secrecy, Human Subjugation and Alien Propaganda.
IF an ETI were to land, with the intent of subjugating mankind, incorporating the planet into some galactic empire all "they" would have to do is point to the decades of government censorship on issues of UFO/UAP.
Really, it would be that easy.
"they" come down, all flash and pizazz; showing off some new-cool techno-jewelrysaying, "hey, we come in peace, but you first have to get rid of your current leaders." And then the "masses" reply Why? and then "they" say "well, geez, you see, we really want ya'll to come and join our galactic empire, in fact, we've wanted this for some time. The deal-o you see, is that your leaders, have been sayin, like no- and even been denying that we're here. We think they just want to be holdin' on to their power, and not carin' a bit 'bout the normal people, like You. So, get'em out of the way, and we'll let ya'll join our empire (as junior members at first) and we all can live in peace and harmony and all that jazz."
At this point, the middle and lower classes overthrow the current power elite: The world delves into even "more" inter species wars and death: meanwhile the Aliens sit back and wait, 'till we've all but killed ourselves. There will not be much resistance, as there won't be many left.
Of course, this is just a thought, an intellectual tinker toy, in-which to play. But, it is also something that should be considered some what seriously. The affect of "aliens" coming down today, and saying "your leaders, have been keeping you enslaved, for their own gain, we bring you peace and harmony and lots of honey- as long as you sign on the dotted line" well, I think the "elite" would be in for a serious issue. In fact, I think it would be as easy as buying Manhattan for a handful of beads.
In the end, this is another reason for disclosure.
Showing posts with label uaps. Show all posts
Showing posts with label uaps. Show all posts
Monday, August 29, 2011
Monday, August 22, 2011
volume = 4/3 π r3
Nothing of real importance today, as the work is still on going. In the mean time, I came across this video. I am not a big fan of the History Channel, but this does seem a bit interesting.
Monday, August 1, 2011
Putting the Horse before the Cart.
While working on my own contributions to the exo-field, I have come across several disheartening instances of well intentioned individuals putting the cart-way before the horse. Unfortunately, the vast majority of people associated with exo-politics, UAPs, UFOs, ETIs and the such; take for granted the scant reliable evidence to be had, is in itself undeniable "proof" of Aliens, UFOs and a world-wide cover up. These overstatements are unfortunate due to the fact that for the majority of those outside of the exo-community, UAPs, UFOs and ETIs are not a forgone conclusion. In other words, most people not only "don't" believe in UFOs, but they seriously doubt the existence of life outside of this pale blue dot. We still live in a world, where people seriously put forward dinosaur bones were placed there by (g)od as a means of testing our faith.
Further, with people purporting to have "seen" "heard" and "been abducted by" aliens (not UFOs) it causes the rest of the community much distress, as it paints everyone with an accepting brush, that "he" believes he has been abducted, when in actual fact, "he" just wants to do some real science and research into the phenomenon.
Alas, though I digress from the original intent, I would like to swing back around to the meaning of open-science. Last week I posted a short video clip of The Ocean Explorer Peter Lindberg. This is an example of "open-ish" science. He found something interesting, decided to throw it out there and now there are several hundred interested souls. It may be a bunch of rocks, or something else- It doesn't matter, because in the end, regardless of everything, this small portion of the ocean floor, will have been mapped, studied and cataloged. So, even if it turns out to be just a really cool undersea rock formation, science has been pushed forward by that much. Additionally, I believe in one of my first posts, I wrote about Copenhagen Sub-orbitals and their launch of an open source rocket on June 3rd. Again, this is something the exo-community should take seriously! And there are also the countless open science sites, where the community could participate in cataloging, defining and basically "doing" real science.
The above are all examples of what I mean, when I call for an exo-community lead, "open science" group. We could do research into UAPs, UFOs and ETIs while, also doing related science which benefits all. Further, if after decades of research, we are forced to concede that the ETI hypothesis is not viable, we will have contributed a great deal to the scientific community regardless.
Further, with people purporting to have "seen" "heard" and "been abducted by" aliens (not UFOs) it causes the rest of the community much distress, as it paints everyone with an accepting brush, that "he" believes he has been abducted, when in actual fact, "he" just wants to do some real science and research into the phenomenon.
Alas, though I digress from the original intent, I would like to swing back around to the meaning of open-science. Last week I posted a short video clip of The Ocean Explorer Peter Lindberg. This is an example of "open-ish" science. He found something interesting, decided to throw it out there and now there are several hundred interested souls. It may be a bunch of rocks, or something else- It doesn't matter, because in the end, regardless of everything, this small portion of the ocean floor, will have been mapped, studied and cataloged. So, even if it turns out to be just a really cool undersea rock formation, science has been pushed forward by that much. Additionally, I believe in one of my first posts, I wrote about Copenhagen Sub-orbitals and their launch of an open source rocket on June 3rd. Again, this is something the exo-community should take seriously! And there are also the countless open science sites, where the community could participate in cataloging, defining and basically "doing" real science.
The above are all examples of what I mean, when I call for an exo-community lead, "open science" group. We could do research into UAPs, UFOs and ETIs while, also doing related science which benefits all. Further, if after decades of research, we are forced to concede that the ETI hypothesis is not viable, we will have contributed a great deal to the scientific community regardless.
Monday, July 25, 2011
Disclosure?
If and When disclosure comes, I would imagine it will be something like this and not governments actually coming out.
If you want to help out, or just follow this interesting development, check out their Facebook Page
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
Perspective
Note: The following piece is a collection of meandering thoughts: It is not in the least bit analytical.
I was traveling home from a trip to the north of Germany, trying to sleep away some of the insistently boring landscape. As one is apt to do, when confronted by miles and miles of farm land, my mind started to drift and meander. Ideas, thoughts, images began to flow: not all of them coherent. However, one sequence of thoughts / images did escape the trash bin of my mind, to form a fairly coherent narrative.
I was traveling home from a trip to the north of Germany, trying to sleep away some of the insistently boring landscape. As one is apt to do, when confronted by miles and miles of farm land, my mind started to drift and meander. Ideas, thoughts, images began to flow: not all of them coherent. However, one sequence of thoughts / images did escape the trash bin of my mind, to form a fairly coherent narrative.
Follow me if you will -and I will show you the world in a grain of sand.
One man, sitting on a train with approximately 300 other people.
One train, out of several dozen moving throught out Germany.
One country, of about 80 million people in Europe.
One continent*, of about 855 million people.
One world, of about 7 billion people.
One planet, of 8* in our solar system.
One sun, of about 200 billion stars in our galaxy.
One question, are we alone?
In perspective, in context, the absurdity of saying "we're alone" should be self evident. How utterly arrogant is it to say, "we are the sole arbiters of logic, reason and understanding" To proclaim to the heavens above "I think, therefore I am- And I am the only capable of thought and reason" Yes, the inverse would be true too; to proclaim "we're not alone" and I know it because, I can think, reason and deduce.
Dare I say, the only "reasonable" course to take, is one of agnostic skepticism, armed with our clumsy, but trustworthy, sword of scientific method? It seems to be the only solution is just that- after all, it is all we have.
Friday, July 8, 2011
Special Announcement::
Monday, July 4, 2011
Ministry of Defense UAP statistics. (overview)
In December of 2000, the Defense Intelligence Analysis Staff of the British MOD complied a report on UAP sightings over the United Kingdom. Contained within this report, amongst other insightful tidbits: were the annualized numbers of sightings from 1959 through 1997. Now it occurred to me, that these data provided by the MOD, were bound to be more reliable than data collected by private organizations: primarily based on the fact that the ratio of pranksters, and bored drunken youngsters would be of representative insignificance. That is to say, it is easy for a bored teen to prank a private organizations, as compared to the British Ministry of Defense. Further, the two years which will be discussed presently, are from a time just before "the internet" became widely available to universities, let alone private connections. Lastly, these years also present a time, of a slightly more "conservative" Briton (as compared to contemporary society.) And as such, are probably some of the more reliable numbers to be found in regards to UAP sightings.
The MOD technical report's annualized "event reports" for 1977 and 1978 were chosen for this brief meta-analysis, as they represent one of the more striking contrasts of the whole 36 year period. Ideally, a deeper analysis should be made of the whole period, with the goal of teasing out any predictive qualities which might be contained therein.
1977 - 1978
In the year 1977 there were 425 reported sightings to the MOD. In the year 1978 there were nearly twice as many.(750) The first and most pertinent question to be asked about these data, would be, what was the cause of the seemingly dramatic increase in UAP sightings between those two years? One approach to addressing this question would be to compile all atmospheric data for the corresponding years, and compare any such anomalous events from year on year. By comparing these data from year on year, any corollary between weather phenomenon (as suggested in the MOD report) and Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon could be found. This is something which is being done presently; however, and as always, I am more than open to volunteers and suggestions to this path of investigation.
For this brief analysis however, a social-cultural perspective has been used. Choosing to research any possible correlations between the reported UAP events and that of cultural / social events is in the real of "overview" at best, and at worst could lead down false paths of investigation. Having that said though, there are some interesting cultural events which do seem to have played (at least to some extent) a part in the increase of UAP sightings over the United Kingdom. In the following Headlined sections, some of the more interesting (possible) causes will be highlighted.
Hollywood (as acting agent.)
Star Wars
UK 27 December 1977
Close Encounters.
UK 13 March 1978
Now it would seem, with these two movies alone, the collective consciousness of the UK would be literally buzzing with the idea of UFOs / UAPs. And to some extent I am sure that is correct; however, this would be another area, where looking into later years, and other theatrical releases would be of benefit. Further, to reiterate what was said earlier, these numbers are UAP events reported thttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifo the Ministry of Defense, and not that of the local radio show.
Space Programs.
Soviet satellite Cosmos 954 burns up in Earth's atmosphere.
Soyuz 28 (Aleksei Gubarev, Vladimir Remek) is launched on a rendezvous with Salyut 6
Charon, a satellite of Pluto, is discovered.
The U.S. scientific satellite Seasat is launched.
A massive short circuit in Seasat's electrical system ends the satellite's scientific mission.
The above events too could hold a key to the increase in reported sightings, though again, they alone may not offer a full explanation. Further, as an aside, this year (1978) NASA was pretty much ran over by the Soviet space program: That is to say, during this time, the soviets had several successful launchers, whereas NASA had only one, and if failed after 10 days.
Religion.
August 6 – Pope Paul VI dies in Rome.
August 26 – Pope John Paul I succeeds Pope Paul VI as the 263rd Pope.
September 28 – Pope John Paul I dies after only 33 days of papacy.
October 16 – Pope John Paul II succeeds Pope John Paul I as the 264th pope.
The above almost speaks for itself as for relevance; it is of note however, that Briton, does have a rather mixed history with the Catholic Church.
___________________________________
As stated before, the above is more of a thumbnail sketch, a "meta-analysis" of cultural / social causes to mass UAP / UFO sightings. Any predictive qualities, (unlike the atmospheric proposal) would be difficult, at best to define. Further, evaluating social causes to these sightings is a rather subjective affair; making it harder to concretely say: When popes die, people see UFOs.(or the reverse, when people see UFOs, popes die.) What would be of note, and worthy of further research would be a combination of the two meta-analysis (cultural and atmospheric) combined with a greater data-set (the whole 36 year period). This would provide a fuller picture of the "current" situation, and perhaps allow elements of predictability to emerge.
The MOD technical report's annualized "event reports" for 1977 and 1978 were chosen for this brief meta-analysis, as they represent one of the more striking contrasts of the whole 36 year period. Ideally, a deeper analysis should be made of the whole period, with the goal of teasing out any predictive qualities which might be contained therein.
1977 - 1978
In the year 1977 there were 425 reported sightings to the MOD. In the year 1978 there were nearly twice as many.(750) The first and most pertinent question to be asked about these data, would be, what was the cause of the seemingly dramatic increase in UAP sightings between those two years? One approach to addressing this question would be to compile all atmospheric data for the corresponding years, and compare any such anomalous events from year on year. By comparing these data from year on year, any corollary between weather phenomenon (as suggested in the MOD report) and Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon could be found. This is something which is being done presently; however, and as always, I am more than open to volunteers and suggestions to this path of investigation.
For this brief analysis however, a social-cultural perspective has been used. Choosing to research any possible correlations between the reported UAP events and that of cultural / social events is in the real of "overview" at best, and at worst could lead down false paths of investigation. Having that said though, there are some interesting cultural events which do seem to have played (at least to some extent) a part in the increase of UAP sightings over the United Kingdom. In the following Headlined sections, some of the more interesting (possible) causes will be highlighted.
Hollywood (as acting agent.)
Star Wars
UK 27 December 1977
Close Encounters.
UK 13 March 1978
Now it would seem, with these two movies alone, the collective consciousness of the UK would be literally buzzing with the idea of UFOs / UAPs. And to some extent I am sure that is correct; however, this would be another area, where looking into later years, and other theatrical releases would be of benefit. Further, to reiterate what was said earlier, these numbers are UAP events reported thttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifo the Ministry of Defense, and not that of the local radio show.
Space Programs.
Soviet satellite Cosmos 954 burns up in Earth's atmosphere.
Soyuz 28 (Aleksei Gubarev, Vladimir Remek) is launched on a rendezvous with Salyut 6
Charon, a satellite of Pluto, is discovered.
The U.S. scientific satellite Seasat is launched.
A massive short circuit in Seasat's electrical system ends the satellite's scientific mission.
The above events too could hold a key to the increase in reported sightings, though again, they alone may not offer a full explanation. Further, as an aside, this year (1978) NASA was pretty much ran over by the Soviet space program: That is to say, during this time, the soviets had several successful launchers, whereas NASA had only one, and if failed after 10 days.
Religion.
August 6 – Pope Paul VI dies in Rome.
August 26 – Pope John Paul I succeeds Pope Paul VI as the 263rd Pope.
September 28 – Pope John Paul I dies after only 33 days of papacy.
October 16 – Pope John Paul II succeeds Pope John Paul I as the 264th pope.
The above almost speaks for itself as for relevance; it is of note however, that Briton, does have a rather mixed history with the Catholic Church.
___________________________________
As stated before, the above is more of a thumbnail sketch, a "meta-analysis" of cultural / social causes to mass UAP / UFO sightings. Any predictive qualities, (unlike the atmospheric proposal) would be difficult, at best to define. Further, evaluating social causes to these sightings is a rather subjective affair; making it harder to concretely say: When popes die, people see UFOs.(or the reverse, when people see UFOs, popes die.) What would be of note, and worthy of further research would be a combination of the two meta-analysis (cultural and atmospheric) combined with a greater data-set (the whole 36 year period). This would provide a fuller picture of the "current" situation, and perhaps allow elements of predictability to emerge.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Critique of UFO / UAP Research.
A Brief Critique of UFO Research and some suggestions of future course.
A troubling aspect of current research seems to be a tendency to apply exotic theories and explanations to the physics of UFOs / UAPs. Further, these theories are presented without first looking into the possibility that current technology may account for some (if not all) of the observed phenomenon. A case in point would be radar returns (or lake thereof) from encountered UAPs.
Though I am hopeful that duel static passive radar, as described by Peter Davenport may be of use; the point being made here has more to do with "radar" being some sort of defining variable between what is "real" and what is not. Leslie Kean and many others put forward these "5%" figures of UAPs which have been observed visually (often by multiple witnesses) and also were monitored and recorded by ground radar systems. Granted, the 5% which has both radar and witness evidence would be the logical place to being research; lack of radar returns should not mean that the visually observed phenomenon be discounted. The reason why these occurrences of witness only observations should not necessarily be discounted is based on the simple fact that stealth technology does exist. Not only does the technology exist to render aircraft virtually invisible to radar returns, the technology is practically "commercial" in availability. As of this writing, known states which posses this technology are: USA, Russian Federation, and China. Presumably the United Kingdom and pretty much every NATO member at this point, either has in operation or soon will the same stealth capabilities.
Almost needless to say, being "invisible" to radar is something that science and engineering overcame nearly thirty years ago; in which case, not having radar returns, does not necessarily "mean" anything. On the other hand, it does still go, that having some sort of returned signature from ground based radar stations could be used as a "further" validation- but lack of returns should not be used to dismiss observations.
The radar problem is but one example of where research should take into account our current abilities, and what light they might shed on the observed phenomenon. Unfortunately, "often" researchers construct theories without taking a good accounting of the current state of the art; and thus base subsequent (maybe logically derived) conclusions on a faulty premise.
Update: DIY Science.
I have yet to hear anything back from anyone in regards to requests for thoughts, proposals and suggestions on implementing a true "open" science project. At this point I have posted on several more forums, sites and social sites with the same request. It is slowly becoming apparent that the UAP community in many ways is a passive / perhaps closed community which does not like to engage in these types of discussions. My next step will be to present some of the ideas which I have formed to pre-established communities, which might take an interest. i.e Amateur Astronomers, Open Source Hardware, 3d printing communities. I am still hopeful to gather a team of like minded (science minded) individuals who feel a project like this is worth the doing. Will keep things updated as they progress.
A troubling aspect of current research seems to be a tendency to apply exotic theories and explanations to the physics of UFOs / UAPs. Further, these theories are presented without first looking into the possibility that current technology may account for some (if not all) of the observed phenomenon. A case in point would be radar returns (or lake thereof) from encountered UAPs.
Though I am hopeful that duel static passive radar, as described by Peter Davenport may be of use; the point being made here has more to do with "radar" being some sort of defining variable between what is "real" and what is not. Leslie Kean and many others put forward these "5%" figures of UAPs which have been observed visually (often by multiple witnesses) and also were monitored and recorded by ground radar systems. Granted, the 5% which has both radar and witness evidence would be the logical place to being research; lack of radar returns should not mean that the visually observed phenomenon be discounted. The reason why these occurrences of witness only observations should not necessarily be discounted is based on the simple fact that stealth technology does exist. Not only does the technology exist to render aircraft virtually invisible to radar returns, the technology is practically "commercial" in availability. As of this writing, known states which posses this technology are: USA, Russian Federation, and China. Presumably the United Kingdom and pretty much every NATO member at this point, either has in operation or soon will the same stealth capabilities.
Almost needless to say, being "invisible" to radar is something that science and engineering overcame nearly thirty years ago; in which case, not having radar returns, does not necessarily "mean" anything. On the other hand, it does still go, that having some sort of returned signature from ground based radar stations could be used as a "further" validation- but lack of returns should not be used to dismiss observations.
The radar problem is but one example of where research should take into account our current abilities, and what light they might shed on the observed phenomenon. Unfortunately, "often" researchers construct theories without taking a good accounting of the current state of the art; and thus base subsequent (maybe logically derived) conclusions on a faulty premise.
Update: DIY Science.
I have yet to hear anything back from anyone in regards to requests for thoughts, proposals and suggestions on implementing a true "open" science project. At this point I have posted on several more forums, sites and social sites with the same request. It is slowly becoming apparent that the UAP community in many ways is a passive / perhaps closed community which does not like to engage in these types of discussions. My next step will be to present some of the ideas which I have formed to pre-established communities, which might take an interest. i.e Amateur Astronomers, Open Source Hardware, 3d printing communities. I am still hopeful to gather a team of like minded (science minded) individuals who feel a project like this is worth the doing. Will keep things updated as they progress.
Monday, June 13, 2011
Social Disintegration and ETIs.
This weeks post will be a short thought experiment; after which I will reiterate my requests for "like minded" volunteers to start the first International UAP Research Group. What would happen to western society in general, if and when it becomes common* knowledge that UFOs / UAPs are commanded and controlled by Extraterrestrial intelligences? Which institutions do you think would be the first to fall, and which would survive?
The institutions which would fail, may seem self evident; but, as often is the case, in the exopolitical community there is too much emphasis placed on the obvious and not the subtle. The obvious would entail: Banking and all of its affiliated parts, Science (industry) and many universities, Aerospace industry (in general and maybe only at first) and various other sectors fragile to sudden shocks. Government for the most part would not be one of them. The idea of others being out there, if anything, would drive people closer to their power base for protection and succor. The collapse or social disintegration as speculated before, would occur culturally and only if it were proved to be too rigid to the introduction of a new paradigm.
Generally speaking these are the areas which have been discussed as having the most to lose from total disclosure. Science, Aerospace and especially Banks all have something to lose if the general populace becomes united from a(n) "in your face" disclosure event. It is clear these ares would fight tooth and nail to insure their survival, and in fact go to great lengths to forestall any kind of legitimate discourse on ETIs and disclosure in general.
However, this is where I would like to turn this into a true thought experiment and pose the question: Which areas would actually thrive and grow under disclosure? In whose interest would it be to have the UAP and ETI question resolved?
Naturally, the "meta" benefactor would be the human race as in the words of Arthur C Clarke- Two possibilities exist: Either we are alone in the Universe or we are not. Both are equally terrifying. Unfortunately, our current geo-political climate is not as such, conducive to the better part of the curious man- rather it is caught up in the "real" politic of the now. I will not proffer any speculation now, rather that is for the reader to think about! And, once thought about, and some sector divined (which I am sure there must be at least one) go out and educate, support and promote them to the forefront; as it will be those areas that have something to gain from total disclosure which will be the true bastions of progress.
-I am still "trying" to form a working group as to how to bring applied science to UFO/UAP research. I have sent several emails, and have yet to receive a reply: Namely from Peter Davenport. on his dual static passive radar idea. The longer this takes, the longer disclosure takes.
*What I mean by common, is much akin to that of the CIA smuggling cocaine into LA. Everyone living in Southern California knew of their involvement five years before it became news. (and even then, it took MSM another 3 years to report on it)
The institutions which would fail, may seem self evident; but, as often is the case, in the exopolitical community there is too much emphasis placed on the obvious and not the subtle. The obvious would entail: Banking and all of its affiliated parts, Science (industry) and many universities, Aerospace industry (in general and maybe only at first) and various other sectors fragile to sudden shocks. Government for the most part would not be one of them. The idea of others being out there, if anything, would drive people closer to their power base for protection and succor. The collapse or social disintegration as speculated before, would occur culturally and only if it were proved to be too rigid to the introduction of a new paradigm.
Generally speaking these are the areas which have been discussed as having the most to lose from total disclosure. Science, Aerospace and especially Banks all have something to lose if the general populace becomes united from a(n) "in your face" disclosure event. It is clear these ares would fight tooth and nail to insure their survival, and in fact go to great lengths to forestall any kind of legitimate discourse on ETIs and disclosure in general.
However, this is where I would like to turn this into a true thought experiment and pose the question: Which areas would actually thrive and grow under disclosure? In whose interest would it be to have the UAP and ETI question resolved?
Naturally, the "meta" benefactor would be the human race as in the words of Arthur C Clarke- Two possibilities exist: Either we are alone in the Universe or we are not. Both are equally terrifying. Unfortunately, our current geo-political climate is not as such, conducive to the better part of the curious man- rather it is caught up in the "real" politic of the now. I will not proffer any speculation now, rather that is for the reader to think about! And, once thought about, and some sector divined (which I am sure there must be at least one) go out and educate, support and promote them to the forefront; as it will be those areas that have something to gain from total disclosure which will be the true bastions of progress.
-I am still "trying" to form a working group as to how to bring applied science to UFO/UAP research. I have sent several emails, and have yet to receive a reply: Namely from Peter Davenport. on his dual static passive radar idea. The longer this takes, the longer disclosure takes.
*What I mean by common, is much akin to that of the CIA smuggling cocaine into LA. Everyone living in Southern California knew of their involvement five years before it became news. (and even then, it took MSM another 3 years to report on it)
Monday, June 6, 2011
ETIs and The Incompleteness Theorem.
In last week's post, I commented on the improbability of Extraterrestrial Intelligences (ETIs) being able to stop by our planet on a "whim" and settle down for a chat and probing. The doubt arises from the ability of any sentient being to be able to "know" a completely foreign language (without even the most rudimentary basis of comparisons) and use to it convey anything of meaning. However, the last post did not state it was impossible, and more importantly did state that after some time, some type of mutual "meaningful" communication might be had. I further contended that even the seemingly universal language of mathematics might not be enough, due to our incomplete understanding or the very real possibility that two sets of sciences, mutually exclusive, developed in isolation from one another may turn out to be incompatible; at least in the short term. This incompatibility, brings us to the thrust of this weeks post: Kurt Gödel's incompleteness theorem.
Kurt Gödel's incompleteness theorem in essence states:
or in other words: It is possible to have a true statement (mathematically) not only without proof, but by its very nature unable to be proven. Now, most mathematicians will shudder at the next few lines; and I do not intend to convolve this theorem with some misguided attempt to "prove" ETIs, UAPs, UFOs exist; rather, I would like to offer the following more as a thinking point, an intellectual nugget to ponder. If these phenomenon are dimensional in nature, as some would contend: how could their existence(or lack there of) be proven without a complete dimensional model? It would seem this argument alone necessitates an agnostic approach to all UAP/UFO phenomenon; as to dismiss these events out of hand, would seem premature and counter logical.
I will not draw this post out, as there are "things" afoot! Hopefully, by next week I will have some things of import to discuss.
Kurt Gödel's incompleteness theorem in essence states:
1. If the system is consistent, it cannot be complete.
2. The consistency of the axioms cannot be proven within the system.
or in other words: It is possible to have a true statement (mathematically) not only without proof, but by its very nature unable to be proven. Now, most mathematicians will shudder at the next few lines; and I do not intend to convolve this theorem with some misguided attempt to "prove" ETIs, UAPs, UFOs exist; rather, I would like to offer the following more as a thinking point, an intellectual nugget to ponder. If these phenomenon are dimensional in nature, as some would contend: how could their existence(or lack there of) be proven without a complete dimensional model? It would seem this argument alone necessitates an agnostic approach to all UAP/UFO phenomenon; as to dismiss these events out of hand, would seem premature and counter logical.
I will not draw this post out, as there are "things" afoot! Hopefully, by next week I will have some things of import to discuss.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)