UFO Sighting Over San Diego-Fact or Fiction
- Thread starter Steve Williams
- Start date
I do not think we are alone. In the vastness of space and the Universe and other solar systems, how could one possibly conclude there might not be other life forms.(In fact, in my single days, I may have met a few of them). Now why they would want to come to Earth is a whole other conversation
With computers we can "create" dinosaurs, the end of the world and other ultra realistic scenes...when a dot shows up on a picture with terrible quality the news is talking about ufos...
We are definitely NOT alone in the universe.
There are definitely UFO's.
Just because people see or capture something with a camera that they do not understand does NOT mean any of their UFO's have ever been from some other planet.
Any species with the technology to get to Earth from "there" would know they would be wasting their resources and wouldn't bother making the trip unless of course they wanted the planet, and if that were the case, we probably wouldn't still be here.
There are definitely UFO's.
Just because people see or capture something with a camera that they do not understand does NOT mean any of their UFO's have ever been from some other planet.
Any species with the technology to get to Earth from "there" would know they would be wasting their resources and wouldn't bother making the trip unless of course they wanted the planet, and if that were the case, we probably wouldn't still be here.
Gary You and I need to see After Earth with Will and Jaden Smith because it seems to answer that question
Correct me if I'm mistaken here but you seem to be saying that the exploitation motivation is fundamental to life, not the exploration one?
I would call this a "free publicity" UFO. Above a "haunted" barn, lady's camera "broke" after one shot, she does not want to be identified. Media swallowed it hook, line and sinker. She said UFO was motionless.
Their are many real UFO's, but this one has red flags.
Their are many real UFO's, but this one has red flags.
I'm not saying that exploitation is fundamental, I'm saying the struggle for survival is. If they needed the planet, we would be unsuccessful defending it. How could we defend the planet when they have technologies we only dream about? Our winning only happens in sci-fi flicks.
They would not come here just to say hello to a relatively undeveloped species. Their coming here to say hello would be like a human taking a walk in the jungle to have a conversation with a chimpanzee. It's not going to happen. They would want more.
Last edited:
Seems to me rather differently - there's much more to life than 'survival'. Also characterizing it as 'the struggle' seems rather lop-sided. Maybe that's just me.
Yes but this rather begs the question - what would give them such a 'need'? To me need suggests compulsion as in 'I need a fix'. And compulsion suggests exploitation. So what could be of value to them here in terms of their biological requirements, not their psychological ones? Presumably if they needed oxygen or food matter they'd have other means of getting them rather than stealing?
You presuppose attack though which puzzles me. If they're advanced that far in technology, wouldn't they also be enlightened enough to understand that 'what goes around, comes around' ?
Quite possibly not, yet wouldn't they be interested in observing development? That happens in at least one Star Trek movie.
Has happened here on earth as far as I'm aware - Jane Goodall springs to mind.
Opus, I am an admitted cynic, but I am confident in the philosophy.
If the aliens destroyed their planet or used up its resources, they would need a new place to live. Survival is critical no matter how advanced the civilization is, and I am positive they would do whatever is necessary to survive including killing us and taking the planet for themselves. As far as the "struggle" is concerned, I am simply using the same terms Charles Darwin used in titling his renowned text, the FULL title being, "On the Origin of the Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life" which was later shortened to "On the Origin of the Species."
An advanced species would not at all consider "what goes around comes around." That's really a BS karma statement made by superstitious or religious people to help them feel better about having been defeated or wronged in some manner.
Yeah, I know all about watching developing species and the Star Trek Prime Directive--which the Enterprise and the Federation of Planets disregarded in every single episode. To "not interfere with developing planets and civilizations" they should have allowed the underdog planets to be destroyed by the stronger species attacking them. Think of the Romulans and Kilingons--not exactly the friendliest of folks traveling the galaxies.
A species that could get here would have no need for the knowledge along the lines of Jane Goodall research. That sort of stuff would have been learned by them in many bygone millennia.
If the aliens destroyed their planet or used up its resources, they would need a new place to live. Survival is critical no matter how advanced the civilization is, and I am positive they would do whatever is necessary to survive including killing us and taking the planet for themselves. As far as the "struggle" is concerned, I am simply using the same terms Charles Darwin used in titling his renowned text, the FULL title being, "On the Origin of the Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life" which was later shortened to "On the Origin of the Species."
An advanced species would not at all consider "what goes around comes around." That's really a BS karma statement made by superstitious or religious people to help them feel better about having been defeated or wronged in some manner.
Yeah, I know all about watching developing species and the Star Trek Prime Directive--which the Enterprise and the Federation of Planets disregarded in every single episode. To "not interfere with developing planets and civilizations" they should have allowed the underdog planets to be destroyed by the stronger species attacking them. Think of the Romulans and Kilingons--not exactly the friendliest of folks traveling the galaxies.
A species that could get here would have no need for the knowledge along the lines of Jane Goodall research. That sort of stuff would have been learned by them in many bygone millennia.
Last edited:
this sums it up best for me.....
“If aliens ever visit us, I think the outcome would be much as when Christopher Columbus first landed in America, which didn’t turn out very well for the Native Americans.”
? Stephen Hawking
“If aliens ever visit us, I think the outcome would be much as when Christopher Columbus first landed in America, which didn’t turn out very well for the Native Americans.”
? Stephen Hawking
I take it not a cynic in the original Greek philosophical tradition, but rather in the sense of applying a negative psychological bias to all observations ? If so then this does explain your perspective very well.
I just falsified your hypothesis - I'm neither religious nor superstitious.
What makes you think its a belief? I see it in action - when people intend harm to others it eventually rebounds on them. I've noted it in myself. Others might call it 'unintended consequences' but they're talking essentially about the same thing ISTM.
I used to accept it as a belief though - from the Bible where its taught by people like Jesus ('He who lives by the sword, dies by the sword') and the apostle Paul ('As you sow, so shall you reap').
I used to accept it as a belief though - from the Bible where its taught by people like Jesus ('He who lives by the sword, dies by the sword') and the apostle Paul ('As you sow, so shall you reap').
I guess with the entry of the bible into the discussion I will have to agree to disagree. I can't get into a biblical discussion.
I only mentioned the Bible because you mentioned belief. Just as in audio, belief is a convenient distraction here.
So are you going to deny that your particular claim of 'BS' to karma's been falsified?
So are you going to deny that your particular claim of 'BS' to karma's been falsified?
There is no karma.
Certain types of actions may sometimes bring about certain types of reactions, but that's all it is. It isn't karma.
Certain types of actions may sometimes bring about certain types of reactions, but that's all it is. It isn't karma.
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |