Edgar Mitchell, 6th man to walk on the moon, says we have been visted by aliens.

[CoachBo]

This isn't the only wacky thing Mitchell believes in:

Mitchell's interests include consciousness and paranormal phenomena. During the Apollo 14 flight he conducted private ESP experiments with his friends on Earth. In early 1973, he founded the nonprofit Institute of Noetic Sciences (IONS) to conduct and sponsor research into areas that mainstream science has found unproductive, including consciousness research and psychic events.

Remote healing

Mitchell says that a teenage remote healer who lives in Vancouver and uses the pseudonym Adam Dreamhealer, helped him heal of kidney cancer at a distance. Mitchell said that while he never had a biopsy (the definitive test for cancer), "I had a sonogram and MRI that was consistent with renal carcinoma." Adam worked (distantly) on Mitchell from December of 2003 until June of 2004, when the "irregularity was gone and we haven't seen it since".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edgar_Mitchell

The alien stuff, he claims, doesn't come from first hand knowledge, but rather "insiders" in the Roswell community.  That's pretty dubious, I think. 

I'm of the personal opinion that their is life beyond Earth, but I highly doubt that little gray men have traveled here.

Two words for you, Roy:

Sam Cassell.

Just saying ...

 

[rickyfan3.0...]

Please.

[Kwhit10]

I personally believe there are other life forms out their but unless these aliens have mastered forms of travel that can essentially get them places faster than light speed (teleport/worm holes etc) then it would be very difficult for them to travel here.  I've read (can't find source at the moment) that the next possible planet to have advanced light is many many light years away from us (100+) that would mean even if they can travel the speed of light it would take them 100+ years to reach us.  So either they can travel with alternate means or can live very very long.

Also another tid bit I find interesting is as long as we have lived on this planet our DNA has not evolved chemically.  Everything on this planet is made of the same nucleotides and chemical make up, just our biology is different.  It is highly possible that the parts of DNA that make us have also came to this planet from somewhere else on an asteroid or comet perhaps.  This is also why searching for alien life may be difficult since we would be searching for evidence that relates to the chemical make up of humans and these alien life forms may contain an entirely different chemical genome and we wouldn't know what we were looking at if it was staring us in the face.

But this is another topic that can be debated til the end of time, until there is hard evidence it can't be proven one way or another.

Also UFO's most definitely exist, anything in the sky can be an unidentified object, just because it is unidentified doesn't mean it's alien.  

[Edgar]

of course we have
and they play hoops

....

now seriously i think they exist
but unless some of them knoks my door or white house door one of this days
I will keep my beleives on hold.

[cordobes]

THE REPTILIANS

WHO ARE THEY REALLY

http://www.greatdreams.com/reptlan/reps.htm

[Edgar]

Come on People

Main thing here is how do u trust a guy with that name???

[guava_wrench]

I personally believe there are other life forms out their but unless these aliens have mastered forms of travel that can essentially get them places faster than light speed (teleport/worm holes etc) then it would be very difficult for them to travel here.  I've read (can't find source at the moment) that the next possible planet to have advanced light is many many light years away from us (100+) that would mean even if they can travel the speed of light it would take them 100+ years to reach us.  So either they can travel with alternate means or can live very very long.

There are articles every year describing findings of closer stars with planets and even planets relatively similar to ours. I read about a new finding less than a month ago. Finding planets is so fundamentally difficult, that we could be missing a lot.

100 years is a very short amount of time. 10,000 years is even a short amount of time. But if there actually were visitors, they would have been living and reproducing for so long in their isolated space craft they could even be a different species already from their ancestors they left behind.

The idea that we have been visited multiple times seems rather preposterous, unless there is some Battlestar Galactica fleet out there hiding behind the moon.

[nickagneta]

Why is it that just because we cannot conceive of a type of travel that could transport spacecraft between star systems at a speed much faster than that of the speed of light, or posssibly instantaneously, do so many believe that it is an impossibility?

I think that type of thinking is as closed minded as the idea that the world was flat and could in no way be anything other than flat 350 years ago simply because the great minds of that time couldn't envision or explain how it could be round.

Technology, if translated into a mathematical equation, proceeds exponentially forward, not linearly. Just because there are 118 elements in our Periodic Table of Elements doesn't mean that there aren't other elements out there, elements that could produce unheard of results when used properly.

Just because we don't have access to highly efficient fission power or fusion power of any type, really, doesn't mean another society hasn't. Just because we don't have access to anti-matter and have even begun to contemplate it's usuage as a power source doesn't mean others who have a billion year head start on us don't and haven't. Just because we haven't discovered a way to harness and control one of the largest energy resources in the universe, gravity, doesn't mean it hasn't been done elsewhere.

I mean how many of you realize that gravity effects the passage of time?

I know there are so many tremendous minds that visit this site and to think that so many have such a definitive view of such matters is disturbing to me. I find Edgar Mitchell to be a very credible source as I do the governments that have released video and documentation regarding the matter. I'm surprised more do not.

[guava_wrench]

Why is it that just because we cannot conceive of a type of travel that could transport spacecraft between star systems at a speed much faster than that of the speed of light, or posssibly instantaneously, do so many believe that it is an impossibility?

I think that type of thinking is as closed minded as the idea that the world was flat and could in no way be anything other than flat 350 years ago simply because the great minds of that time couldn't envision or explain how it could be round.

Wrong. There had long been people who believed the earth was spherical, since the classical Greeks. Even Aristotle suggested it. Educated people have long felt the earth was a sphere, even around the fall of the Roman Empire.

It is also a fallacy to compare modern conclusions with pre-scientific conclusions.

Technology, if translated into a mathematical equation, proceeds exponentially forward, not linearly. Just because there are 118 elements in our Periodic Table of Elements doesn't mean that there aren't other elements out there, elements that could produce unheard of results when used properly.

Just because we don't have access to highly efficient fission power or fusion power of any type, really, doesn't mean another society hasn't. Just because we don't have access to anti-matter and have even begun to contemplate it's usuage as a power source doesn't mean others who have a billion year head start on us don't and haven't. Just because we haven't discovered a way to harness and control one of the largest energy resources in the universe, gravity, doesn't mean it hasn't been done elsewhere.

Nice ideas to think about, but if the reality is, like it seems to be, that there are hard limitations to matter and energy in our universe, whimsical speculation won't change that. Of course, with our limited development we are many paradigms behind where we would be if we are still working on these problems in 10,000 years, so we can't even conceive of many realities in a sensible way.

I mean how many of you realize that gravity effects the passage of time?

I know there are so many tremendous minds that visit this site and to think that so many have such a definitive view of such matters is disturbing to me. I find Edgar Mitchell to be a very credible source as I do the governments that have released video and documentation regarding the matter. I'm surprised more do not.

There are crack pots in every field, especially as some grow older.

He said he was "90 per cent sure that many of the thousands of unidentified flying objects, or UFOs, recorded since the 1940s, belong to visitors from other planets". If he had hard data, why only 90%?

The reason is he didn't get the information from Nasa, but from a now deceased unnamed source from Roswell who "confided" in him and he allegedly got confirmation from an unnamed Pentagon source. Not particularly solid.

Nevertheless, I would not be shocked if we are visited by unmanned probes. I can see us sending out such probes eventually to far away planets that look like they could have life. I would be surprised if we have been visited by life from other planets.

[nickagneta]

Wrong. There had long been people who believed the earth was spherical, since the classical Greeks. Even Aristotle suggested it. Educated people have long felt the earth was a sphere, even around the fall of the Roman Empire.

It is also a fallacy to compare modern conclusions with pre-scientific conclusions.

Just because very few educated and advanced thinking minds theorized that the world was round back in those days does not change that the wide viewed and accepted knowledge at that time was that the world was flat.

And how is it a fallacy to compare modern conclusions to pre-scientific conclusions?

Please explain because just stating it does not make it so. My analogy was that although back in time the widely perceived view was that a certain scientific fact was one thing when it was clearly another.

The same holds true today. What is perceived as fact now is not always so. What was perceived and widely acknowledged as impossible just decades ago is commonplace today. Why can it not be so about travel through space or of different types of energy or different types of elements or matter?

Nice ideas to think about, but if the reality is, like it seems to be, that there are hard limitations to matter and energy in our universe, whimsical speculation won't change that. Of course, with our limited development we are many paradigms behind where we would be if we are still working on these problems in 10,000 years, so we can't even conceive of many realities in a sensible way.

I find your desciptions of my ideas as wrong, fallacy, and whimsical rather condescending considering the nature of our conversation and where it is taking place. Exponential progress and attaining of knowledge is the reason we are typing away speaking to each other in this medium, a medium that if explained to the normal person just 30 years ago people might very well have been called science fiction, wrong, fallacy, or a whimsical idea.

Dark matter was a whimsical theory invented by Zwicky in 1933. For over 40 years most experts dismissed the notion. Then our ability to observe the universe through satelite telescopes showed it might exactually exist. 2 years ago photos showed gravitational pulling of objects far abroad from something that wasn't there. Now it is a fairly widely held theory that dark matter makes up more of the universe than any other substance.

Could it be that humankind's current thinking that they know so much of what is and what isn't about physics and/or matter is rather an arrogant stance considering our exposure to such a microcosmically tiny area of the universe?

There are crack pots in every field, especially as some grow older.

He said he was "90 per cent sure that many of the thousands of unidentified flying objects, or UFOs, recorded since the 1940s, belong to visitors from other planets". If he had hard data, why only 90%?

The reason is he didn't get the information from Nasa, but from a now deceased unnamed source from Roswell who "confided" in him and he allegedly got confirmation from an unnamed Pentagon source. Not particularly solid.

Nevertheless, I would not be shocked if we are visited by unmanned probes. I can see us sending out such probes eventually to far away planets that look like they could have life. I would be surprised if we have been visited by life from other planets.

I said I find the man credible and the governments that have released extraterrestrial information and UFO documentation also credible. It doesn't mean the man is right. But considering he has been exposed to top secret information that you and I can only ever dream of reading about, I will find him credible until proven otherwise.

And again, crackpot? Why so negative. The man is obviously intelligent enough to have been one of the few people in human kind to ever walk on another planetoid. Many of the great minds or people that released new information were considered to be wrong at first or strange or cursed or witches or wizards. Many had at the time modern so called experts calling them all sorts of names. And yet names like Gallileo, DaVinci, Newton, Bohr, Einstein and others live on while those so called experts in those fields names are now forgotten.

Can you fathom a billion years?

A billion years ago earth was in the Precambrian Period, a period that covers over 90% of the world's history. It was a time when multicelled organisms were just forming here. Yet, if there existed at that time a society out there that was currently at the point in their evolution where we are today and had similar technology, do you think it impossible that they wouldn't have figured out a way to travel not only from star system to star system but from galaxy to galaxy?

If we in our current state can already theorize about wormhole travel and space folding why is it so inconceivable that a society with a billion year head start couldn't have not only theorized it but made it a reality?

[kgiessler]

Well, just like there were people that thought the earth was round...there are people that believe in extraterrestrial life...so I'm not sure what the point of that statement was, unless to infer that these people are most likely right.

Although there are, what appears to be, finite limitations on matter and energy, our methods of harvesting and using them are growing exponentially. 

[zerophase]

the universe is a big place. to think that we are the only life forms when we haven't even landed a person on mars is rediculous. if aliens are really visiting us, their tech is far more advanced than anything we could ever fatom. therefore we shouldn't worry about it. if they were to attack us, we would all just die.

[cordobes]

There was never a time where the wide accepted knowledge was that the world was flat. That myth was created and popularized in the 19th century, due to a book about Columbus written by an America fictional writer. The British Historical Association listed it as the second of 20 most common errors in history. When Portugese sailors began the high-sea explorations in the 13th century, anyone who'd argue the flat earth conception would be labeled as crazy, just like today. And we're talking about fishermen, shipping entrepreneurs and the likes, not scholars. 

[guava_wrench]

Wrong. There had long been people who believed the earth was spherical, since the classical Greeks. Even Aristotle suggested it. Educated people have long felt the earth was a sphere, even around the fall of the Roman Empire.

It is also a fallacy to compare modern conclusions with pre-scientific conclusions.

Just because very few educated and advanced thinking minds theorized that the world was round back in those days does not change that the wide viewed and accepted knowledge at that time was that the world was flat.

Not 'very few' educated people. Anyway, we can agree that the misconception about how widespread the flat earth misunderstanding isn't actually the issue.

And how is it a fallacy to compare modern conclusions to pre-scientific conclusions?

The point being that there is a difference between people just making up stuff and people using some kind of methodology.

Please explain because just stating it does not make it so. My analogy was that although back in time the widely perceived view was that a certain scientific fact was one thing when it was clearly another.

I agree 100% with the sentiment. I have no choice but to agree because the spirit of what you said is irrefutable though I missed the forest for the trees in the earlier post on the flat earth stuff (which is a pet peeve of mine).

The same holds true today. What is perceived as fact now is not always so. What was perceived and widely acknowledged as impossible just decades ago is commonplace today. Why can it not be so about travel through space or of different types of energy or different types of elements or matter?

Nice ideas to think about, but if the reality is, like it seems to be, that there are hard limitations to matter and energy in our universe, whimsical speculation won't change that. Of course, with our limited development we are many paradigms behind where we would be if we are still working on these problems in 10,000 years, so we can't even conceive of many realities in a sensible way.

I find your desciptions of my ideas as wrong, fallacy, and whimsical rather condescending considering the nature of our conversation and where it is taking place. Exponential progress and attaining of knowledge is the reason we are typing away speaking to each other in this medium, a medium that if explained to the normal person just 30 years ago people might very well have been called science fiction, wrong, fallacy, or a whimsical idea.

I actually meant to agree with you on my last sentence above, though it wasn't obvious. My point at the end was that we have no idea what models we will be working with in 100, 1,000, or 10,000 years. Many of limitations that make sense in our current model might not be limitations a couple of models down the road. That was meant to agree with your comments about possible travel options, while at the same time, I wanted to keep explicit how fanciful the speculation was.

Dark matter was a whimsical theory invented by Zwicky in 1933. For over 40 years most experts dismissed the notion. Then our ability to observe the universe through satelite telescopes showed it might exactually exist. 2 years ago photos showed gravitational pulling of objects far abroad from something that wasn't there. Now it is a fairly widely held theory that dark matter makes up more of the universe than any other substance.

Could it be that humankind's current thinking that they know so much of what is and what isn't about physics and/or matter is rather an arrogant stance considering our exposure to such a microcosmically tiny area of the universe?

Theories like that are generated to explain observations that are inconsistent with orthodox model. Such a theory is not generally accepted until there is enough weight behind them to incorporate them into the bigger model because scientists are pretty conservative. But theorizing Dark Matter is not just some ad hoc addition or whimsical speculation.

There are crack pots in every field, especially as some grow older.

He said he was "90 per cent sure that many of the thousands of unidentified flying objects, or UFOs, recorded since the 1940s, belong to visitors from other planets". If he had hard data, why only 90%?

The reason is he didn't get the information from Nasa, but from a now deceased unnamed source from Roswell who "confided" in him and he allegedly got confirmation from an unnamed Pentagon source. Not particularly solid.

Nevertheless, I would not be shocked if we are visited by unmanned probes. I can see us sending out such probes eventually to far away planets that look like they could have life. I would be surprised if we have been visited by life from other planets.

I said I find the man credible and the governments that have released extraterrestrial information and UFO documentation also credible. It doesn't mean the man is right. But considering he has been exposed to top secret information that you and I can only ever dream of reading about, I will find him credible until proven otherwise.

And again, crackpot? Why so negative. The man is obviously intelligent enough to have been one of the few people in human kind to ever walk on another planetoid. Many of the great minds or people that released new information were considered to be wrong at first or strange or cursed or witches or wizards. Many had at the time modern so called experts calling them all sorts of names. And yet names like Gallileo, DaVinci, Newton, Bohr, Einstein and others live on while those so called experts in those fields names are now forgotten.

I do not claim that I know he is a crackpot. I do not even claim that he is an eccentric, which is also common even among intelligent people. My point was that he has provided nothing but allusions to second hand information from personal conversations. Those are his explicit claims, not that he saw smoking gun government files. In his interview he implies that there is some dialogue going on between authorities and ETs.

Can you fathom a billion years?

A billion years ago earth was in the Precambrian Period, a period that covers over 90% of the world's history. It was a time when multicelled organisms were just forming here. Yet, if there existed at that time a society out there that was currently at the point in their evolution where we are today and had similar technology, do you think it impossible that they wouldn't have figured out a way to travel not only from star system to star system but from galaxy to galaxy?

I agree and disagree with the sentiment. I agree with the point, as I also made in my ealier post, that we can't conceive of what we will understand in 10k years. There could be other life forms -- in fact, probabilistically, the odds are there probably are -- that reached that point a billion years ago. The problem is whether such travel is possible or impossible is unrelated to technology. It could be impossible in principle, though we like to imagine possibilities.

If we in our current state can already theorize about wormhole travel and space folding why is it so inconceivable that a society with a billion year head start couldn't have not only theorized it but made it a reality?

I don't know much about wormholes outside of Sci Fi.

[Finkelskyhook]

Doesn't some wacko named Noory have an all night talk show that nobody listens to about this subject?