Gary Lesley's absolute *Favorite* news source of all
time is Fox News. Because, well, because they are
"Reporting" that UFOs/UAPs are real...
https://youtu.be/sVGLHxqN3C4?si=nGOQcDkGnyGF8E5V
JTEM wrote:
Gary Lesley's absolute *Favorite* news source of allwhat is the latest news on ufos? i have not been keeping up.
time is Fox News. Because, well, because they are
"Reporting" that UFOs/UAPs are real...
https://youtu.be/sVGLHxqN3C4?si=nGOQcDkGnyGF8E5V
Dinosaur farts have made it to Alpha Cent by now.Google: Escape Velocity
In alt.paranormal jojo <f00@0f0.00f> wrote:
JTEM wrote:
Gary Lesley's absolute *Favorite* news source of allwhat is the latest news on ufos? i have not been keeping up.
time is Fox News. Because, well, because they are
"Reporting" that UFOs/UAPs are real...
https://youtu.be/sVGLHxqN3C4?si=nGOQcDkGnyGF8E5V
Trump probably said it best.
I dont beleeb in ufos an alyins mysel but dat
OBAMA better stop talkin about it like its real or he
will gits inna trouble coz dats highlee classified!!
At least you dont get burned at the stake now for talking about
peoples that were not in the bible.
JTEM wrote:
Gary Lesley's absolute *Favorite* news source of all
time is Fox News. Because, well, because they are
"Reporting" that UFOs/UAPs are real...
https://youtu.be/sVGLHxqN3C4?si=nGOQcDkGnyGF8E5V
what is the latest news on ufos? i have not been keeping up.
Trump probably said it best.
On 8/18/26 10:13 AM, jojo wrote:
JTEM wrote:
Gary Lesley's absolute *Favorite* news source of all
time is Fox News. Because, well, because they are
"Reporting" that UFOs/UAPs are real...
https://youtu.be/sVGLHxqN3C4?si=nGOQcDkGnyGF8E5V
what is the latest news on ufos? i have not been keeping up.
The link is literally to a news story on UFOs that was
published a day ago!
Gary Lesley's absolute *Favorite* news source of all
time is Fox News. Because, well, because they are
"Reporting" that UFOs/UAPs are real...
https://youtu.be/sVGLHxqN3C4?si=nGOQcDkGnyGF8E5V
If UFOs were real (as in ET), then there would be incontrovertible
evidence for them, but as there is no such evidence, it is at least a
"sure bet" that they are not real, but fully explainable by other
prosaic phenomenon.
Dawn
If UFOs were real (as in ET), then there would be incontrovertible
evidence for them, but as there is no such evidence, it is at least a
"sure bet" that they are not real, but fully explainable by other
prosaic phenomenon.
Dawn
At dinner one night a friend of mine -- a college prof and long-time
expert in the field of mathematical logic -- told me that he was sure
of some things. "If there was a tiger loose on campus...", he
argued, "I would hear about it pretty fast; since I havent heard
any such thing in the past hours I am sure there is no tiger
loose on campus".
Incontrovertible logic. ;)
By the same logic, I countered, if some company was dumping toxic
chemicals near you, you expect to know about it right away?
Sorry. There's a buck in it for someone.
In the my world (kaggle.com/kymhorsell1 "AI proving ground" owned by
Google these days) most classical reasoning is found to be fatally flawed
in many ways.
In classical reasoning if you can't prove a proposition it is discarded.
It's often considered false. The underlying assumption is that you
know everything essential, you know everything that follows from
that, and if you dont know something and cant see that it fits
with what you know then it is wrong. It is "impossible". It is "false".
This worked fine for geometry (a system that is fully defined from
the start with 5 immutable rules) for the Ancient Greeks. So it must work fine for the real world, now. :)
Bzzzt.
The big technical problem is called "over-fitting". It often happens in training AI models. You feed a model a bunch of images supposedly a cross-section of everything they will be called on to make a decision
about in future, so they will perform well. But the trouble is the
training data sets them up for failure. They perform well on the data
they've seen but they chaotically perform very poorly (aka "brittle")
on data they have not seen or even sometimes data that is just sightly different from what they've seen. A classic example -- some face
recognition programs get thrown off by people drawing eyes on their foreheads.
You often see the following pattern. An AI program is trained on one
example after another and seems to get better and better and better at understanding what they're looking at. Then they are given totally new
things to look at and maybe initially they seem to know what is
what. Then suddenly they start making wild decisions and seem -- in
the end -- to be far worse than a similar AI that received no training
at all.
Over-fitting. Got too close to the subject matter. Everything looks
like a nail.
I like to argue that whole chunks of modern society -- including
e.g. things like "organised science" and "what everyone knows" -- are
good examples of over-fitting.
Humans, being basically still little children, like to feel empowered
by thinking they know things. They know how X will behave under some circumstance or they know what is likely to be around the next corner,
what happens in a family restaurant, or the questions the teacher will
ask in the next pop quiz.
But they dont. Nothing is really known. It's all guessed at. That's
the nature of reality. Oftentimes your unlucky number comes up on
anything you think you know and it fails.
It turns out no matter how silly it sounds, there are little animals
living on your hands that cause diseases. I don't know how many
expectant mothers died because doctors continued to dis-believe in
germs even quite a long time after they had been shown to exist and to
at least be potentially the cause of infections seen in and after
childbirth.
But this is just a symptom of the problem we're looking at here.
Sometimes a coder finds an error in a computer program (read
"organised science" if you like :) that seems so fundamental they
wonder how the H*k it fooled them for so long it was actually working
and producing correct answers.
Silly little children.
On 8/19/2026 12:14 AM, R Kym Horsell wrote:
If UFOs were real (as in ET), then there would be incontrovertible
evidence for them, but as there is no such evidence, it is at least a
"sure bet" that they are not real, but fully explainable by other
prosaic phenomenon.
Dawn
At dinner one night a friend of mine -- a college prof and long-time
expert in the field of mathematical logic -- told me that he was sure
of some things. "If there was a tiger loose on campus...", he
argued, "I would hear about it pretty fast; since I havent heard
any such thing in the past hours I am sure there is no tiger
loose on campus".
Incontrovertible logic. ;)
By the same logic, I countered, if some company was dumping toxic
chemicals near you, you expect to know about it right away?
Sorry. There's a buck in it for someone.
In the my world (kaggle.com/kymhorsell1 "AI proving ground" owned by
Google these days) most classical reasoning is found to be fatally flawed in many ways.
In classical reasoning if you can't prove a proposition it is discarded. It's often considered false. The underlying assumption is that you
know everything essential, you know everything that follows from
that, and if you dont know something and cant see that it fits
with what you know then it is wrong. It is "impossible". It is "false".
This worked fine for geometry (a system that is fully defined from
the start with 5 immutable rules) for the Ancient Greeks. So it must work fine for the real world, now. :)
Bzzzt.
The big technical problem is called "over-fitting". It often happens in training AI models. You feed a model a bunch of images supposedly a cross-section of everything they will be called on to make a decision
about in future, so they will perform well. But the trouble is the
training data sets them up for failure. They perform well on the data they've seen but they chaotically perform very poorly (aka "brittle")
on data they have not seen or even sometimes data that is just sightly different from what they've seen. A classic example -- some face recognition programs get thrown off by people drawing eyes on their foreheads.
You often see the following pattern. An AI program is trained on one example after another and seems to get better and better and better at understanding what they're looking at. Then they are given totally new things to look at and maybe initially they seem to know what is
what. Then suddenly they start making wild decisions and seem -- in
the end -- to be far worse than a similar AI that received no training
at all.
Over-fitting. Got too close to the subject matter. Everything looks
like a nail.
I like to argue that whole chunks of modern society -- including
e.g. things like "organised science" and "what everyone knows" -- are
good examples of over-fitting.
Humans, being basically still little children, like to feel empowered
by thinking they know things. They know how X will behave under some circumstance or they know what is likely to be around the next corner,
what happens in a family restaurant, or the questions the teacher will
ask in the next pop quiz.
But they dont. Nothing is really known. It's all guessed at. That's
the nature of reality. Oftentimes your unlucky number comes up on
anything you think you know and it fails.
It turns out no matter how silly it sounds, there are little animals
living on your hands that cause diseases. I don't know how many
expectant mothers died because doctors continued to dis-believe in
germs even quite a long time after they had been shown to exist and to
at least be potentially the cause of infections seen in and after childbirth.
But this is just a symptom of the problem we're looking at here.
Sometimes a coder finds an error in a computer program (read
"organised science" if you like :) that seems so fundamental they
wonder how the H*k it fooled them for so long it was actually working
and producing correct answers.
Silly little children.
This is why UFOs do not exist:
https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap260819.html
Some other guy:https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap260819.html
This can't be a meteor. It's going up, meteors go down.
It's obviously a rocket-powered UFO alien space ship. With
ET's on board. Probably they are Greys.
I'm sorry. I'm blind and have to read this stuff by a voice-reading
browser which aint fast. So a lot of details (such as how long
it takes to type a reply :) I will skip.
Some guy:
Some other guy:https://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap260819.html
This can't be a meteor. It's going up, meteors go down.
It's obviously a rocket-powered UFO alien space ship. With
ET's on board. Probably they are Greys.
Another little problem with the prev 70y of "research". People
arguing about single datapoints.
You dont really hear scientists talking about each dot in a plot --
it's the overall pattern that is the information part.
It's almost like "the establishment" is creating some kind of diversion
by emphasising one case or another. Everyone without sufficient
training seems to get excited that one data-point is green or another
one has pointy sparkles.
Not at all important.
But if you want to *validate* some individual datapoint, an easy way
is to see what reaction the establishment has to it. According to "the
lore" they know something about the subject even if maybe they dont
know as much as they think or would like to.
In my neck of the woods I like to photograph the mostly small aircraft
that follow funny little lights in the sky. It seems to be some kind
of "in plain sight" strategy the local AF or govt has been taking
since at least the 60s. One of my pseudo-cousins was at Westall highschool and she recounted at one memorable Xmas dinner how little planes seemed to chase off whatever it was that landed (in some stories) or just
hovered (other stories). She had some neat things to say about the interrogation techniques used by the people that arrived to interview everyone after they went to the newspapers with the story. Their
laughable and mutually contradictory arguments to what happened told her
it was all being taken v serious by people that had seen it dozens of
times before. And she was only a kid at the time. But that's all another story.
Some of the planes nowadays seem to "know" they are at the approx same
level as the little dots. So not "Chinese satellites" which is one govt-approved description of what they're chasing. Some planes seem
to appreciate there is some "risk" involved in tracking head-on toward
the location of a dot and it's apparently best practice to sidle up to
one at an angle and aim to miss it by a good margin. "It will get the message" seems to be the message.
But the best data is the pattern overall dots on the graph make and
the reasoning why that pattern happens.
E.g. for ufo sightings we know some times of the day see more
sightings. That may be due to (at least partly) "observer behaviour"
e.g. driving home after work relatively sober with nothing much to do
except look at the sky over the freeway.
But some interesting things seem to be captures as well. E.g. at dusk
-- a favourite time for seeing things in the sky -- the sky directly
above you is pointing toward the past track of the Earth in its orbit
around the sun. (E and W also point to other interesting locations
called Lagrange points; but I'll leave that for later as well). It's
one of the best ways to approach the planet -- if one was to fly in
from somewhere else -- by following along in the orbit and then
turning left at the "terminator" if you want to go into the daylight
part of the planet on landing, or turn right to go into the nighttime
part.
The pattern of "many sightings at dusk" suggests an approach following
the Earth along in its orbit. No fancy single point can tell you
anything like that. Unless someone spoke to a UFO pilot, which I'm
assured by numerous anonymous posters can't happen because they dont
exist. :)
So. Look at what military aircraft do when they see the same things
you do.
But look most at the pattern not the indiv points.
Get out of following "case histories" like it's an exercise in
armchair Sherlock-Holmesing.
It aint. It might be as important as the discovery of germs. Maybe more.
If UFOs were real (as in ET), then there would be incontrovertible
evidence for them
but as there is no such evidence, it is at least a
"sure bet" that they are not real, but fully explainable by other
prosaic phenomenon.
you have not provided any information about the latest news on ufos.
This can't be a meteor. It's going up, meteors go down.
It's obviously a rocket-powered UFO alien space ship. With
ET's on board. Probably they are Greys.
On 8/19/26 2:07 AM, Samuel Spade wrote:
This can't be a meteor. It's going up, meteors go down.Don't anyone Google: Straw man argument
It's obviously a rocket-powered UFO alien space ship. With
ET's on board. Probably they are Greys.
On 8/19/26 2:07 AM, Samuel Spade wrote:
This can't be a meteor. It's going up, meteors go down.Don't anyone Google: Straw man argument
It's obviously a rocket-powered UFO alien space ship. With
ET's on board. Probably they are Greys.
On 8/18/26 11:15 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
If UFOs were real (as in ET), then there would be incontrovertible
evidence for them
That's just an assertion. It's not even an argument. You can't
dictate reality, sweet cheeks!
but as there is no such evidence, it is at least a "sure bet" that
they are not real, but fully explainable by other prosaic phenomenon.
Even if there's only a 1-in-a-million chance per year that an
alien civilization might send technology our way, consider that
there's already been more than 2,000 million years since the
Great Oxidation Event.
If there's only a 1-in-10-million-chance per year for aliens
to send a probe or equivalent, that's 200 craft.
A 1-in-a-billion?-a At least two were sent...
The problem isn't one of "Did they send anything," it's one
of "How the heck could we hope to find them?"
If something was sent here 500 million years ago, what
would it look like now?-a Chances are it landed in the
ocean anyways...
It would be far easier to spot their home world, assuming
it still hosts life, than it would be to spot their craft
here on earth.
No, we're best served by searching for BIOLOGY and not
craft...
If ET is real and visiting here, then it is not logically impossible...
that they could show up at the end (to be polite) of the next Super
Bowl's halftime show. Of course, that stuff doesn't happen (does it?)
ET probably exists, but interstellar travel is almost surely a physical impossibility. It is carbon alone (at least according to conventional thinking) that produces life (and, by extension consciousness), and as
all (well, nearly all) life needs food, air & water, getting all of that
on some sort of spaceship for a 100,000 year or long journey is just impossible. You can Google "tyranny of the rocket equation" for more information, and Google AI will explain it all.
In alt.paranormal Dawn Flood <Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com> wrote:
...
...
If ET is real and visiting here, then it is not logically impossible
that they could show up at the end (to be polite) of the next Super
Bowl's halftime show. Of course, that stuff doesn't happen (does it?)
ET probably exists, but interstellar travel is almost surely a physical
impossibility. It is carbon alone (at least according to conventional
thinking) that produces life (and, by extension consciousness), and as
all (well, nearly all) life needs food, air & water, getting all of that
on some sort of spaceship for a 100,000 year or long journey is just
impossible. You can Google "tyranny of the rocket equation" for more
information, and Google AI will explain it all.
This is why I pointed out "everyday reasoning" is so flawed.
Numerous assumptions are made. Any of them are wrong then the
conclusion is wrong. Any assumptions are missed the conclusion is wrong.
The most obvious is the old mental model of "the aliens live 100,000
light years away".
This makes people feel safe. But the aliens have a 10 billion year
head start on us. To judge by the earth, life started early.
Even some of the group weak thinkers assume Panspermia. I.e. it
started early and spread everywhere.
So if it's taken us 4 billion years to get to where we are now,
the older parts of our Milky Way prob go to the same place 10 billion
years ago.
We are thinking of jumping to the moon and Mars. They did that 10 billion years ago.
What have they been doing in the meantime?
To judge from humanity they have been growing lots of babies and
spreading out to new horizons to exploit as much of the universe as
they can.
I.e. they are here. They are in the Oort cloud (2000 AU out).
The Kuiper belt. Probably on the moons of the outer planets.
In the asteroid belt. Mining comets. Everywhere.
As some scientists have argued it's not a matter of if they are
here but how many are here. Probably Avi Loeb's "trillion" aliens
around the solar system is a bit high. Some data I've posted
elsewhere might indicate maybe 100 billion.
As for the "rocket equation". LOL. Only applies to rockets.
There are at least 4 kinds of propulsion systems that dont get
into fancy physics. They typically are classified as to where the
propellant comes from and where the energy to throw it out the back
comes from. "Rockets" are called "I squared" systems because both
the propellant and energy are inboard. I.e. finite. Such as system
probably can not make it to another system apart from kicking off
and then drifting for a long time.
More likely interstellar propulsion would be E^2 -- i.e. the
mass to throw and the energy to throw it coming from outside the spacecraft.
A typical system might use a lightsail propelled by super giant lasers
on some convenient moon.
Very workable systems have been proposed to get micro spacecraft to
the nearest stars in under 20y -- practially a routine long-term interplanetary mission. :)
But, anway, who has to go to the nearest stars? Just go knocking on
some local doors in the asteroid belt.
But probably it'd be better to do a lot of growing up first. Dont
go bothering the neighbours if you dont have anything interesting to
say. They'll just pull the blinds down and pretend not to be home.
.
You are free to believe that interstellar space travel is a physical possibility; I don't.
Dawn
On 8/19/2026 5:11 PM, R Kym Horsell wrote:
In alt.paranormal Dawn Flood <Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com> wrote:
...
...
If ET is real and visiting here, then it is not logically
impossible
that they could show up at the end (to be polite) of the next
Super
Bowl's halftime show.-a Of course, that stuff doesn't happen
(does it?)
ET probably exists, but interstellar travel is almost surely a
physical
impossibility.-a It is carbon alone (at least according to
conventional
thinking) that produces life (and, by extension
consciousness), and as
all (well, nearly all) life needs food, air & water, getting
all of that
on some sort of spaceship for a 100,000 year or long journey
is just
impossible.-a You can Google "tyranny of the rocket equation"
for more
information, and Google AI will explain it all.
This is why I pointed out "everyday reasoning" is so flawed.
Numerous assumptions are made. Any of them are wrong then the
conclusion is wrong. Any assumptions are missed the conclusion
is wrong.
The most obvious is the old mental model of "the aliens live
100,000
light years away".
This makes people feel safe. But the aliens have a 10 billion year
head start on us. To judge by the earth, life started early.
Even some of the group weak thinkers assume Panspermia. I.e. it
started early and spread everywhere.
So if it's taken us 4 billion years to get to where we are now,
the older parts of our Milky Way prob go to the same place 10
billion
years ago.
We are thinking of jumping to the moon and Mars. They did that
10 billion
years ago.
What have they been doing in the meantime?
To judge from humanity they have been growing lots of babies and
spreading out to new horizons to exploit as much of the
universe as
they can.
I.e. they are here. They are in the Oort cloud (2000 AU out).
The Kuiper belt. Probably on the moons of the outer planets.
In the asteroid belt. Mining comets. Everywhere.
As some scientists have argued it's not a matter of if they are
here but how many are here. Probably Avi Loeb's "trillion" aliens
around the solar system is a bit high. Some data I've posted
elsewhere might indicate maybe 100 billion.
As for the "rocket equation". LOL. Only applies to rockets.
There are at least 4 kinds of propulsion systems that dont get
into fancy physics. They typically are classified as to where the
propellant comes from and where the energy to throw it out the
back
comes from. "Rockets" are called "I squared" systems because both
the propellant and energy are inboard. I.e. finite. Such as system
probably can not make it to another system apart from kicking off
and then drifting for a long time.
More likely interstellar propulsion would be E^2 -- i.e. the
mass to throw and the energy to throw it coming from outside
the spacecraft.
A typical system might use a lightsail propelled by super giant
lasers
on some convenient moon.
Very workable systems have been proposed to get micro
spacecraft to
the nearest stars in under 20y -- practially a routine long-term
interplanetary mission. :)
But, anway, who has to go to the nearest stars? Just go
knocking on
some local doors in the asteroid belt.
But probably it'd be better to do a lot of growing up first. Dont
go bothering the neighbours if you dont have anything
interesting to
say. They'll just pull the blinds down and pretend not to be home.
.
As far as modern Science is concerned, the Conservation Laws
apply everywhere throughout our Universe.-a As such, F = ma is not
only true here; it is also true everywhere.-a Once again, look at
the "rocket equation"; spacecraft do not move themselves, rather,
something must push them (a force) to accelerate (a cause).
Along the way, any sentient beings on board must breath, eat,
drink and poop, not to mention a whole host of other things.
Ditto for light sails; they don't steer themselves, and any
computers controlling them would need energy, also!
You are free to believe that interstellar space travel is a
physical possibility; I don't.
Dawn
i believe that we can indirectly travel very fast, by making
space move around us, than us move through space.
You are free to believe that interstellar space travel is a physical possibility; I don't.
Dawn
In alt.paranormal Dawn Flood <Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com> wrote:
You are free to believe that interstellar space travel is a physical
possibility; I don't.
Dawn
LOL.
Sounds like your mind has been made up for some time and is
ready, willing and to ignore anything to the contrary.
On 8/19/2026 9:21 PM, R Kym Horsell wrote:
In alt.paranormal Dawn Flood <Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com> wrote:Absolutely not! But, "ei incumbit probatio qui dicit."
You are free to believe that interstellar space travel is a physicalLOL.
possibility; I don't.
Dawn
Sounds like your mind has been made up for some time and is
ready, willing and to ignore anything to the contrary.
R Kym Horsell wrote:
In alt.paranormal jojo <f00@0f0.00f> wrote:i am pretty sure the human species, maybe not as it is in its
i believe that we can indirectly travel very fast, by makingYou'd imagine intelligent life should be able to do better than a dum
space move around us, than us move through space.
ol rock. :)
current form, will spread across the universe.
R Kym Horsell wrote:
In alt.paranormal jojo <f00@0f0.00f> wrote:i am pretty sure the human species, maybe not as it is in its
i believe that we can indirectly travel very fast, by makingYou'd imagine intelligent life should be able to do better than a dum
space move around us, than us move through space.
ol rock. :)
current form, will spread across the universe.
Maybe google "reductio ad absurdum" instead.
In alt.paranormal Dawn Flood <Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/19/2026 9:21 PM, R Kym Horsell wrote:
In alt.paranormal Dawn Flood <Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com> wrote:Absolutely not! But, "ei incumbit probatio qui dicit."
You are free to believe that interstellar space travel is a physicalLOL.
possibility; I don't.
Dawn
Sounds like your mind has been made up for some time and is
ready, willing and to ignore anything to the contrary.
Telling that the language is dead.
--
List of fallacies
Argument from incredulity - when someone can't imagine something to be true, and therefore deems it false, or conversely, holds ...
-- wiki
Sure. I do not believe that fire-breathing dragons are real, and
therefore, the "shoe" (or, rather, sandal, in my case) fits!
Dawn
In alt.paranormal Dawn Flood <Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com> wrote:
Sure. I do not believe that fire-breathing dragons are real, and
therefore, the "shoe" (or, rather, sandal, in my case) fits!
Dawn
You seem to have many outdated ideas.
On 8/20/2026 10:30 PM, R Kym Horsell wrote:
In alt.paranormal Dawn Flood <Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com> wrote:
Sure. I do not believe that fire-breathing dragons are real, andYou seem to have many outdated ideas.
therefore, the "shoe" (or, rather, sandal, in my case) fits!
Dawn
Ha! When was Humanity last on the Moon? (Of course, we all know the
answer to that!) We're going back, and soon, but when will the first
trip to Mars happen?? (Answer: probably never.) Time will tell, of course!! When it happens, only then will I "believe", but, I'll
probably be long dead before such happens, and it probably won't, ever.
Dawn
In alt.paranormal jojo <f00@0f0.00f> wrote:
R Kym Horsell wrote:
In alt.paranormal jojo <f00@0f0.00f> wrote:i am pretty sure the human species, maybe not as it is in its
i believe that we can indirectly travel very fast, by makingYou'd imagine intelligent life should be able to do better than a dum
space move around us, than us move through space.
ol rock. :)
current form, will spread across the universe.
You might not be looking in the right direction. :)
If the folks looking at panspermia and organic chemistry that's
been going on across the universe for billions of years are right
then we are not much different from what has been landing on
trillions of earthlike and other planets for the last 13+ billion years.
Someone did a calculation based on what they think they understand
from quantum theory. Supoosedly one of the 2 best theories about
how the universe operates that we have.
One basic idea is that things can't assume just any value.
A lightglobe can't emit just any amount of light. It comes in energy
packets. Like pebbles rather than a river.
The math is complicated but it can be calculated that a cubic meter
of universe can only be in 1 of about 10^55 states. That is,
a 1 with 55 0's after it.
Sounds like a lot. But when you sit down and figure it out all
the possible cubic meters can be stuffed in an cube only 100 lightyears
on a side.
You are curled up in one of those cubes. You identical twin with
the opposite handedness is curled up on the other. :)
And the galaxy is a lot bigger than 100 LY on a side.
If ET is real and visiting here, then it is not logically impossible
that they could show up at the end (to be polite) of the next Super
Bowl's halftime show.
ET probably exists, but interstellar travel is almost surely a physical impossibility.
You are free to believe that interstellar space travel is a physical possibility; I don't.
In alt.paranormal Dawn Flood <Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/20/2026 10:30 PM, R Kym Horsell wrote:
In alt.paranormal Dawn Flood <Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com> wrote:
Sure. I do not believe that fire-breathing dragons are real, andYou seem to have many outdated ideas.
therefore, the "shoe" (or, rather, sandal, in my case) fits!
Dawn
Ha! When was Humanity last on the Moon? (Of course, we all know the
answer to that!) We're going back, and soon, but when will the first
trip to Mars happen?? (Answer: probably never.) Time will tell, of
course!! When it happens, only then will I "believe", but, I'll
probably be long dead before such happens, and it probably won't, ever.
Dawn
Huh? Dont really see the connection. But let's play along.
Define your terms. "Humanity" or an individual human being in a spacesuit?
On the surface or in orbit?
The rest is just speculation. Various companies have various objectives
and hard to tell what a real timetable is because capitalism means
never being able to plan what the boss will ask next. :)
As for the black part of the equation, what the military shuttle has been doing these past years when the civilian one got shut down -- I dont know. It's even possible the US military doesnt know. They sometimes get
trapped into a dead-end course where a program runs and runs and
runs but no-one really knows what is going on, all the people authorised to know are dead, and there is no legal means to change anything let alone
does anyone in the govt "know" it is still running.
On 8/19/26 5:21 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
If ET is real and visiting here, then it is not logically impossible
that they could show up at the end (to be polite) of the next Super
Bowl's halftime show.
Wrong. It's actually rather implausible. Their tech would have to
already be here, and monitoring us, to know that there's anything
special about the Superbowl, or even that here is such a thing
as football... or Sundays...
You're simply imposing YOUR small mind, YOUR myopia, your ability
to see beyond your own goddamn self...
The planet has been hosting DETECTABLE life for billions of years.
If they spotted us a billion years ago and it took them 100 million
years to reach us, traveling at sub light, they arrived at least
900,000,000 years TOO SOON to witness a Superbowl.
ET probably exists, but interstellar travel is almost surely a
physical impossibility.
There are bacteria that have survived long enough to reach the
nearest galaxies to us, if you want to say that Dwarf Galaxies
count.
As I've already explained without any hope of you ever grasping
the concepts here, we should be searching for microbes.
Scientists do this all the time (looking for bacteria, both living and dead)! And, no, bacteria cannot survive in interstellar space (that is, "between stars") for centuries at a time, no way, no how. For starters, interstellar space is REALLY cold (around 3 to 4 Kelvin), and is full of radiation, which destroys DNA/RNA. And, so, if the extreme cold does
not kill them, the radiation will, guaranteed. As for any fossilized remains making it to Us, such is a physical possibility but a really,
really remote one!
Dawn
In alt.paranormal Dawn Flood <Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com> wrote:
...
Scientists do this all the time (looking for bacteria, both living and
dead)! And, no, bacteria cannot survive in interstellar space (that is,
"between stars") for centuries at a time, no way, no how. For starters,
interstellar space is REALLY cold (around 3 to 4 Kelvin), and is full of
radiation, which destroys DNA/RNA. And, so, if the extreme cold does
not kill them, the radiation will, guaranteed. As for any fossilized
remains making it to Us, such is a physical possibility but a really,
really remote one!
Dawn
Again you are claiming something is "impossible" because you
dont seem to have the background. This is a fallacy of incredulity.
Scientists everyday discover bacteria are very tough.
Extremophiles can live in all kinds of environments from
high-radiation, high-acidity, low temp, high temp (some
live in boiling water).
And the information is published everyday. Apparently none
of it gets past your internal censor. :)
On 8/22/2026 10:49 PM, R Kym Horsell wrote:
In alt.paranormal Dawn Flood <Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com> wrote:
...
Scientists do this all the time (looking for bacteria, both living and
dead)! And, no, bacteria cannot survive in interstellar space (that is, >>> "between stars") for centuries at a time, no way, no how. For starters, >>> interstellar space is REALLY cold (around 3 to 4 Kelvin), and is full of >>> radiation, which destroys DNA/RNA. And, so, if the extreme cold does
not kill them, the radiation will, guaranteed. As for any fossilized
remains making it to Us, such is a physical possibility but a really,
really remote one!
Dawn
Again you are claiming something is "impossible" because you
dont seem to have the background. This is a fallacy of incredulity.
Scientists everyday discover bacteria are very tough.
Extremophiles can live in all kinds of environments from
high-radiation, high-acidity, low temp, high temp (some
live in boiling water).
And the information is published everyday. Apparently none
of it gets past your internal censor. :)
Then give me any citation that says that a bacteria can survive at 3 to
4 Kelvin for centuries on end in an environment with high doses of radiation.
On 8/21/2026 12:28 AM, R Kym Horsell wrote:...
...You seem to have many outdated ideas.Ha! When was Humanity last on the Moon? (Of course, we all know the
answer to that!) We're going back, and soon, but when will the first
...Huh? Dont really see the connection. But let's play along.
In my opinion, no human being will ever walk, drive or otherwise be on
the surface of Mars, as in "never", even if one or more governments
devote tens of trillions of dollars to the project in terms of today's "dollars".
Dawn
In alt.paranormal Dawn Flood <Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/22/2026 10:49 PM, R Kym Horsell wrote:
In alt.paranormal Dawn Flood <Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com> wrote:
...
Scientists do this all the time (looking for bacteria, both living and >>>> dead)! And, no, bacteria cannot survive in interstellar space (that is, >>>> "between stars") for centuries at a time, no way, no how. For starters, >>>> interstellar space is REALLY cold (around 3 to 4 Kelvin), and is full of >>>> radiation, which destroys DNA/RNA. And, so, if the extreme cold does
not kill them, the radiation will, guaranteed. As for any fossilized
remains making it to Us, such is a physical possibility but a really,
really remote one!
Dawn
Again you are claiming something is "impossible" because you
dont seem to have the background. This is a fallacy of incredulity.
Scientists everyday discover bacteria are very tough.
Extremophiles can live in all kinds of environments from
high-radiation, high-acidity, low temp, high temp (some
live in boiling water).
And the information is published everyday. Apparently none
of it gets past your internal censor. :)
Then give me any citation that says that a bacteria can survive at 3 to
4 Kelvin for centuries on end in an environment with high doses of
radiation.
LOL.
I did, at the bottom of the prev post.
Your filter was working fine and just ignored it.
Fact is, such has not happened.
-- Dawn, 22 Aug 2026 21:12:00 -0500dead)! And, no, bacteria cannot survive in interstellar space (that is, >>> "between stars") for centuries at a time, no way, no how. For starters, >>> interstellar space is REALLY cold (around 3 to 4 Kelvin), and is full of >>> radiation, which destroys DNA/RNA. And, so, if the extreme cold does
not kill them, the radiation will, guaranteed. As for any fossilized
remains making it to Us, such is a physical possibility but a really,
really remote one!
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-026-10871-3
In alt.paranormal Dawn Flood <Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com> wrote:
Fact is, such has not happened.
You're getting confused again. You were predicting it would never happen.
--
-- Dawn, 22 Aug 2026 21:12:00 -0500dead)! And, no, bacteria cannot survive in interstellar space (that is, >>>> "between stars") for centuries at a time, no way, no how. For starters, >>>> interstellar space is REALLY cold (around 3 to 4 Kelvin), and is full of >>>> radiation, which destroys DNA/RNA. And, so, if the extreme cold does
not kill them, the radiation will, guaranteed. As for any fossilized
remains making it to Us, such is a physical possibility but a really,
really remote one!
Scientists Find Evidence of Ancient Microbial Life on Mars
NASA Astrobiology, 10 Aug 2026
The fact that a small (about 4-pound) meteorite from a planet contains large numbers of bacteria suggests that such ...
[One of ~3000 similar Bing items].
Scientists Revived Life Frozen for 32000 Years: In 2005, scientists ... Economic Times, 27 Jul 2026
NASA scientists made a groundbreaking discovery deep inside Alaskan permafrost. They defrosted 32,000-year-old ...
[One of ~17000 similar Bing items].
Life After Impact: Scientists Discover Microbes Thrived in a Meteorite ... sciencenewstoday.org, 17 Sep 2025
In a landmark study published in Nature Communications, researchers from Linnaeus University in Sweden, together ...
Ancient Microbes Revived By Scientists After 100 Million Years Under ... IFLScience, 28 Aug 2025
Scientists discovered that communities of microbes living beneath the seafloor are able to survive in rock sediments ...
Bacteria Found on Asteroid Has Shocking Origin
Science Times, 26 Nov 2024
Scientists studying asteroid samples retrieved from space were stunned to discover microorganisms on a piece of the ...
How Dormant Bacteria Return to Life (Rudner Lab)
Chemical Biology PhD, 30 Apr 2023
Inert, sleeping bacteria - or spores - can survive for years, even centuries, without nutrients, resisting heat, UV ...
A Microorganism With a Taste for Meteorites Could ...
Universe Today, 5 Dec 2019
A new study by a team astrobiologists shows how certain types of extreme bacteria thrive ...
Ice age bacteria brought back to life
New Scientist, 25 Feb 2005
A bacterium that sat dormant in a frozen pond in Alaska for 32,000 years has been revived by NASA scientists. Once ...
Bacteria revived after 250m years
The Guardian, 19 Oct 2000
Bacteria trapped inside crystals of rock salt for 250m years have been brought back to life, US scientists say today.
Eternal life
New Scientist, 18 Oct 2000
A Lazarus bacterium which thrived millions of years before dinosaurs walked the Earth has been brought back to life. ...
R Kym Horsell wrote:
In alt.paranormal jojo <f00@0f0.00f> wrote:
R Kym Horsell wrote:
In alt.paranormal jojo <f00@0f0.00f> wrote:i am pretty sure the human species, maybe not as it is in its
i believe that we can indirectly travel very fast, by makingYou'd imagine intelligent life should be able to do better than a dum
space move around us, than us move through space.
ol rock. :)
current form, will spread across the universe.
You might not be looking in the right direction. :)
If the folks looking at panspermia and organic chemistry that's
been going on across the universe for billions of years are right
then we are not much different from what has been landing on
trillions of earthlike and other planets for the last 13+ billion years.
Someone did a calculation based on what they think they understand
from quantum theory. Supoosedly one of the 2 best theories about
how the universe operates that we have.
One basic idea is that things can't assume just any value.
A lightglobe can't emit just any amount of light. It comes in energy
packets. Like pebbles rather than a river.
The math is complicated but it can be calculated that a cubic meter
of universe can only be in 1 of about 10^55 states. That is,
a 1 with 55 0's after it.
Sounds like a lot. But when you sit down and figure it out all
the possible cubic meters can be stuffed in an cube only 100 lightyears
on a side.
You are curled up in one of those cubes. You identical twin with
the opposite handedness is curled up on the other. :)
And the galaxy is a lot bigger than 100 LY on a side.
well so far there is no discrete theory of gravity yet, its a continuum, spacetime.
In alt.paranormal Dawn Flood <Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com> wrote:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-026-10871-3
Forgive me. If you are an adult then you can find these thing via
google given the merest hint e.g. blaring headlines from the science mags.
In my opinion, no human being will ever walk, drive or otherwise be on
the surface of Mars, as in "never", even if one or more governments
devote tens of trillions of dollars to the project in terms of today's "dollars".
Scientists do this all the time (looking for bacteria, both living and dead)!
And, no, bacteria cannot survive in interstellar space (that is,
"between stars")
On 8/22/26 10:12 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
Scientists do this all the time (looking for bacteria, both living and
dead)!
No they don't.
The pattern goes like this:
#1. Identify what to look for, what tells you "This is life!"
#2. Find it.
#3. Bend over backwards to explain why your test is invalid, why
you didn't really find anything.
And, no, bacteria cannot survive in interstellar space (that is,
"between stars")
That's a straw man. What science insists is that bacteria CAN and
HAS survived dormant for longer than 100,000,000 years, and some
claim a quarter of a billion years. In rock.
Gary Lesley's absolute *Favorite* news source of all
time is Fox News. Because, well, because they are
"Reporting" that UFOs/UAPs are real...
https://youtu.be/sVGLHxqN3C4?si=nGOQcDkGnyGF8E5V
On Mon, 17 Aug 2026 22:45:36 -0400, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
Gary Lesley's absolute *Favorite* news source of all"UFOs are real" is practically a tautology. So is extraterrestrial intelligence.
time is Fox News. Because, well, because they are
"Reporting" that UFOs/UAPs are real... >>https://youtu.be/sVGLHxqN3C4?si=nGOQcDkGnyGF8E5V
For some reason, though, we have no evidence of it. So wtf is going
on?
On 8/22/26 10:12 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:
Scientists do this all the time (looking for bacteria, both living and
dead)!
No they don't.
The pattern goes like this:
#1. Identify what to look for, what tells you "This is life!"
#2. Find it.
#3. Bend over backwards to explain why your test is invalid, why
you didn't really find anything.
And, no, bacteria cannot survive in interstellar space (that is,
"between stars")
That's a straw man. What science insists is that bacteria CAN and
HAS survived dormant for longer than 100,000,000 years, and some
claim a quarter of a billion years. In rock.
On Mon, 17 Aug 2026 22:45:36 -0400, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
Gary Lesley's absolute *Favorite* news source of all"UFOs are real" is practically a tautology. So is extraterrestrial intelligence.
time is Fox News. Because, well, because they are
"Reporting" that UFOs/UAPs are real... >>https://youtu.be/sVGLHxqN3C4?si=nGOQcDkGnyGF8E5V
For some reason, though, we have no evidence of it. So wtf is going
on?
On 8/23/2026 7:34 PM, R Kym Horsell wrote:
In alt.paranormal Dawn Flood <Dawn.Belle.Flood@gmail.com> wrote:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-026-10871-3
Forgive me. If you are an adult then you can find these thing via
google given the merest hint e.g. blaring headlines from the
science mags.
Honey, what things?-a The OP was about some news story from Fox,
and then things drifted into the physical impossibility of
interstellar space travel (my view), at least with respect to
things that are living and wish to continue to live!
Dawn
On Mon, 17 Aug 2026 22:45:36 -0400, JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:
Gary Lesley's absolute *Favorite* news source of all
time is Fox News. Because, well, because they are
"Reporting" that UFOs/UAPs are real...
https://youtu.be/sVGLHxqN3C4?si=nGOQcDkGnyGF8E5V
"UFOs are real" is practically a tautology. So is extraterrestrial intelligence.
For some reason, though, we have no evidence of it. So wtf is going
on?
Must be funny to be talking at people that act like you have
on alt.climate-change.
Must be funny to be talking at people that act like you have
on alt.climate-change.
*** UPDATE ***
OK. Longer answer.
You might ask ChatGPT or similar bot what the commonality is
between English-speaking countries and others.
It's often been noted that certain happenings are treated much more differently in some countries than others.
But a longer answer is -- the while sphere of paranormal events may
be very much intertwined. Maybe not all the same thing, but very
closely related.
This is what researchers in key areas say from time to time.
And looking at the numbers it seems to be true.
In data science a lot is made of "domain knowlege" -- what numbers
are describing. But you don't need to know that at all.
An interesting experiment -- call it a psychology experiment -- is
to take a bunch of numbers with no explanations attached, and give
them to a statistician, sociologist, psychologist and anyone else
that can reliably pick out robust patterns in data.
Ask them is there a robust pattern in the data.
This has been done many many times with paranormal data. Kaggle
for many years called on people to upload their data no matter what it was and have the millions of experts on their rolls take a look at it.
I took a look at some of it. Other people did as well.
| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 74 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 122:44:38 |
| Calls: | 1,194 |
| Files: | 1,352 |
| Messages: | 290,379 |