UFO is told to down a US missile
- Thread starter ar81
- Start date
GregBurch
Addon Developer
Actually, cases like Mitchell's would make a very interesting study. The guy is obviously 1) very intelligent and 2) has significant technical education. On the one hand, it's easy to see how people who just don't have the mental ability to think critically fall prey to hoodoo. And, on the other hand, it's also relatively easy to see how people who may be intelligent, but simply don't have a formal education in how the real world works, have these kind of ideas take root in their mind.
Someone like Mitchell, though, is a different case. Not only does he have to have had a lot scientific and technical knowledge to be able to do what he did when he was younger, but he also had to have the ability to think critially. A working hypothesis would be that one or both of two factors can lead to a hoodoo infection in a mind like Mitchell's: 1) while he may have a great deal of knowledge of the results of the scientific endeavor, he may well be fairly ignorant of the history of science, and therefore doesn't have a good model in his mind of how scientific understanding has come to be; and/or 2) he has a very highly compartmentalized mind, in which he applies critical thinking only to a very narrow set of mental activities.
There are a good number of neuropsychological PhDs to be had in these questions ...
Someone like Mitchell, though, is a different case. Not only does he have to have had a lot scientific and technical knowledge to be able to do what he did when he was younger, but he also had to have the ability to think critially. A working hypothesis would be that one or both of two factors can lead to a hoodoo infection in a mind like Mitchell's: 1) while he may have a great deal of knowledge of the results of the scientific endeavor, he may well be fairly ignorant of the history of science, and therefore doesn't have a good model in his mind of how scientific understanding has come to be; and/or 2) he has a very highly compartmentalized mind, in which he applies critical thinking only to a very narrow set of mental activities.
There are a good number of neuropsychological PhDs to be had in these questions ...
ar81
Active member
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2008
- Messages
- 2,357
- Reaction score
- 8
- Points
- 38
- Location
- Costa Rica
- Website
- www.orbithangar.com
I do not believe in magic, I believe in technology. Sometimes technology begins with a vision of the impossible, like going to the moon (Jules Verne) or the existence of communication satellites (Arthur C. Clarke).
If you travel in time to middle age and you carry a gas powered electric generator and you make your stereo to sound and you use an artificial fog machine, you could pretend to be a magician, a wizard. Ancient priests used to create tricks in their temples, that used chemistry and physics to create a religious experience, similar to the one you would have in Universal Studios or Disney World, to attract believers and make money.
So what is magic for middle age people is technology for us. The difference is the same difference between scifi and fantasy. Scifi belongs to the realm of possible while fantasy belongs to the realm of impossible. The impossible is a subjective concept.
Last year I saw a UFO that challenges all I know about aerodynamics and physics.
Unregard of the fact that it is alien, not alien or something else, or even if it exists, I am more interested about knowing HOW to make such a craft that exists as a vision of the future.
Perhaps the difference of approach here is that you think about truth, while I think about how to achieve impossible. When I was told that I could teach Orbiter to kids younger than 12, I challenged the impossible and got to make a 7 year old kid to pilot and reach orbit. So their idea of truth was true until I proved that mine was true. So truth is an idea that can be challenged, no matter how much critical thinking you have, a fact can put down ideas that resulted of interpretation of facts. I do not believe "truth" exists, only "interpretation of facts".
If you travel in time to middle age and you carry a gas powered electric generator and you make your stereo to sound and you use an artificial fog machine, you could pretend to be a magician, a wizard. Ancient priests used to create tricks in their temples, that used chemistry and physics to create a religious experience, similar to the one you would have in Universal Studios or Disney World, to attract believers and make money.
So what is magic for middle age people is technology for us. The difference is the same difference between scifi and fantasy. Scifi belongs to the realm of possible while fantasy belongs to the realm of impossible. The impossible is a subjective concept.
Last year I saw a UFO that challenges all I know about aerodynamics and physics.
Unregard of the fact that it is alien, not alien or something else, or even if it exists, I am more interested about knowing HOW to make such a craft that exists as a vision of the future.
Perhaps the difference of approach here is that you think about truth, while I think about how to achieve impossible. When I was told that I could teach Orbiter to kids younger than 12, I challenged the impossible and got to make a 7 year old kid to pilot and reach orbit. So their idea of truth was true until I proved that mine was true. So truth is an idea that can be challenged, no matter how much critical thinking you have, a fact can put down ideas that resulted of interpretation of facts. I do not believe "truth" exists, only "interpretation of facts".
Coolhand
Addon Developer
hmm, well however credible, or not, that you find his testimony on that interview to be, it was just that, testimony... and not even of a first hand account. The UFO community are jumping all over this but he still hasn't presented any evidence, no papers, photos, alien heads in jars, etc...
Nope. There is never any tangible evidence.
Whenever I read/hear about UFO encounters and such, I automatically assume it's bogus. I just don't believe we are visited by aliens here on Earth.
But at the same time, its fun to speculate:
When I consider the size and age of the universe, I can't help but think; 'What if a civilization out there is 10.000 years ahead of us? And have discovered the means to travel everywhere in a timely manner?' Why could they not visit us?
As Stephen Hawking said; 'We don't have the GUT yet, warp-drive still can't be ruled out.'
OTOH, maybe I have just watched too much Stargate. :rofl:
"The Daedalus has arrived, get ready to beam them up!"
Whenever I read/hear about UFO encounters and such, I automatically assume it's bogus. I just don't believe we are visited by aliens here on Earth.
But at the same time, its fun to speculate:
When I consider the size and age of the universe, I can't help but think; 'What if a civilization out there is 10.000 years ahead of us? And have discovered the means to travel everywhere in a timely manner?' Why could they not visit us?
As Stephen Hawking said; 'We don't have the GUT yet, warp-drive still can't be ruled out.'
OTOH, maybe I have just watched too much Stargate. :rofl:
"The Daedalus has arrived, get ready to beam them up!"
Coolhand
Addon Developer
Well there is 'evidence'... Photos, videos radar reports, Cattle mutilations - even apparently some human mutiliations - ugh. Of course no one knows exactly what any of it is evidence of. I've seen some excellent evidence of something that i can't identify in the sky first hand and i have another witness to back that up. i don't know what exactly it was though and neither does my friend. Ar81 also claims to have seen something, but again he doesn't know what that was.
As we can see though, all evidence can be debunked in the eyes of the public or made up completely, no matter how real or unreal. if an alien spacecraft landed on the whitehouse lawn tomorrow and a bunch of greys popped out and said hi and few away again, there would still be people who would refuse to believe that it ever happened, just like people believe that we never went to the moon.
If that landing was broadcast on TV i'd be looking for the telltales of CGI for sure. you'd probably have a whole new field of conspiracy theories debunking the landing and saying it was a massive hoax by the government for their own sinister ends.
Yes, it is fun to speculate.
Aaaaaanyway... The NASA reps response to Kerrang's call is pretty funny. Poor guy, seems totally dumbfounded. lol.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSOSLC-U5cU&feature=related"]YouTube - Nasa Response re: Edgar Mitchell interview on Kerrang Radio[/ame]
As we can see though, all evidence can be debunked in the eyes of the public or made up completely, no matter how real or unreal. if an alien spacecraft landed on the whitehouse lawn tomorrow and a bunch of greys popped out and said hi and few away again, there would still be people who would refuse to believe that it ever happened, just like people believe that we never went to the moon.
If that landing was broadcast on TV i'd be looking for the telltales of CGI for sure. you'd probably have a whole new field of conspiracy theories debunking the landing and saying it was a massive hoax by the government for their own sinister ends.
Yes, it is fun to speculate.
Aaaaaanyway... The NASA reps response to Kerrang's call is pretty funny. Poor guy, seems totally dumbfounded. lol.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSOSLC-U5cU&feature=related"]YouTube - Nasa Response re: Edgar Mitchell interview on Kerrang Radio[/ame]
