NASA Moonwalker claims alien cover-up

[eveningsky339]

Traveling lightyears to create a few crop circles, to show us a few lights in the sky and say "hello" just to disappear quickly once again, and all that for many decades, is anything but plausible.

What if their thought process is completely alien to ours? (Yes, that was a pun.) Perhaps to them creating a crop circle is the highest form of ascendancy.

At any rate, I find myself on the skeptical side, but I find myself to be more open than most. Then again, I also believe in God, which apparently is also the stuff of legend... I'm swimming in superstitions, aren't I?

 

[T.Neo]

Presenting UFO conspiracies as science is nothing more than presenting belief.

Incorrect. UFO-nuts present pseudoscientific claims, based on dubious and/or false evidence.

 

[Moonwalker]

What if their thought process is completely alien to ours? (Yes, that was a pun.) Perhaps to them creating a crop circle is the highest form of ascendancy.

Creating a crop circle is the highest form of ascendancy within the news temporarily. Not that I don't like crop circles. I think that its all through humanly creators are really talented. They are great artists :speakcool:

At any rate, I find myself on the skeptical side, but I find myself to be more open than most. Then again, I also believe in God, which apparently is also the stuff of legend... I'm swimming in superstitions, aren't I?

It depends on how you define "god".

It is of course obvious, to humans who like to use their sense organs, that a creation does indeed exist. Otherwise we would deny evolution, deny the universe and ourselves. Everything that happens is a reaction of a cause or a chain of causes. Behind everything there is a logic that sooner or later could be explained or not, depending on how we act to find it out. So the big bang and the forces that define how matter reacts, the entire nature, might be called "god". But I don't think it has anything to do with to believe, but with to observe and realize. With rationality. I personally don't believe. I either know or don't know. And there is a lot that can be known and not known about the nature around us. But anything else in a religious sense is nothing more than human imagination and myths. Just take immaculate conception, dividing the ocean, afterlife, paradise containing 72 virgins for example and so on. Just nonsense.

---------- Post added at 03:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:43 PM ----------

Incorrect. UFO-nuts present pseudoscientific claims, based on dubious and/or false evidence.

It's what those UFO-nuts deeply believe in, just like people believe in the Apollo fake (that has all been "scientifically" revealed...) or in immaculate conception. Nothing more than belief.

 

[T.Neo]

It's what those UFO-nuts deeply believe in, just like people believe in the Apollo fake or in immaculate conception. Nothing more than belief.

Yes, but they present it as science.

If you believe something, it's your right to do so. Don't go around being a moron about it, and let others be.

And now, I leave the thread before it fully ignites...

 

[XLR82SPACE]

I'm with T.Neo, he makes since, I guess thats why its best not to discuss religion and politics. It causes chaos with to many oppinions out there. For Christains thats why God said in the Bible that we must all work it out for ourselves (meaning religion). There are 3 catogories of individual when it comes to personal belief, *Religious,*Athiest,*Agnostic. The question is which category do you choose to be involved with. If there is a God or Devil , I definately would choose pardise over hell, so I guess that throws Athiestism out the door, and as for being Agnostic. Well, lets just say, that something started everything right down to mass and molicule even before the big bang. God said in Genisis let there be light, but we know that the big bang took place. As for myself "let there be light" may have been God creating the big bang. Although, I guess he still is. That was what on day 6 or 7. Yet, it is still hapening regularly throughout the cosmos on telescopes. Then if that is the case one must wonder whats going on. Then later in scripture it says that one year to man as if a thousand years to God. Then there are other things like parting the sea. Very hard to comprehend, but there again how do you explain scientist as we speak diveing and recovering roman military and chariot artifacts from where it was said to have taken place?? I think there are things that will never be answered in full. I guess it was meant to be left like that. I know this, I'd rather be right now to be told later I was right and to make it to wherever, than to be wrong now and be told later that I lost everthing. Why gamble with time and infinity If there is something to it. Why loose it all?? After all the cosmo is bigger than we are, and there is something out there bigger than that. Why play a game with it? Something to think about. Science and religion is bad chemistry. Science will never admit that God exist, and Christains will never believe that science did the work of God, thus causing a clash. I think that the truth is that they both acompany each other more than both parties want to give credit for.

 

[simonpro]

My lord, that's incredibly hard to read.

Anyway, what's with the 3 categories? What if I'm a Muslim or a Jew?
Still, believing in made up things is good fun, be them aliens or otherwise. I used to believe that ghostbusters was real.

 

[XLR82SPACE]

Your right, I guess when I referred to "Christans", I meant a "believer" for any "God" . Hope that makes the sentence a little more clear. My Bad! I went back and edited that, Thanks!

 

[Saturn V]

If we look at the issue of "life out there" in terms of statistical probability, it does give one pause for thought.

Even allowing for there being only a 1% chance of life elsewhere, there would still be something on the order of 1,000,000,000 planets in the Milky Way alone that could have given rise to life of one sort or another.

Now, again allowing for a 1% chance that of those 1,000,000,000 planets, life had evolved to a level at least comparable to our own, there are still 10,000,000 planets which may contain civilizations on a par with something like what you'd find on Earth.

Extrapolating a bit further, of those 10,000,000 planets, if only 1% gave rise to civilizations 100 years more advanced than we are, you're still talking about 100,000 other worlds, and so on...

I find it very egocentric to believe that we're "it" in the whole of the known universe.

As for whether another civilization has ever visited Earth, I can't definitively say (any more than anyone else here can), but I'm certainly open to the possibility.

But given our penchant for capturing, caging or killing what we fear or don't understand, I'd be a little reluctant to stroll down "Main Street" in broad daylight myself.

 

[XLR82SPACE]

Satun V, Just sitting here thinking too. To kind of add to your post if you don't mind.
When Kennedy give the going to the moon speach, it was stated that for us to do that, we had to invent or come up with new type of alloys to do so. WE just happened to have on hand the ellements to do so favorably. How do we not know IF, and I say if thinking like you that there are that 100,000 or less civilizations out there
thousands a years ahead of us. Depending the makeup of the planet, they may have "saucers" to fly around in but No element available to them to be able to even choose to go even Low Orbit for there planet. They may or could just kinda be stuck there. No way to get into space without catastrophy geting back down. Something to think about. All of our planets are made of all kind of differant materials.

 

[Moonwalker]

The question is which category do do choose to be involved with.

None regarding my person. I'm not a believer, not even what's called atheist since those who call themselves atheists are also believer. I'm a knower regarding a few things, and I'm ignorant regarding a lot of other things. But I don't need to peg on a course, belief / a religion or ideology. I just need my common sense to go through life.

For those who can't deal without categories just put me into the mammal division, although there are significant differences. But that's at least a valid non-fictive category.

Science and religion is bad chemistry. Science will never admit that God exist, and Christains will never believe that science did the work of God, thus causing a clash. I think that the truth is that they both acompany each other more than both parties want to give credit for.

Science and religion is not comparable, nor is it combinable. The only similarity is that both are interested in the truth of the world but in different ways. The difference already begins with the impartial objective stare of science and its network of information and observation, while religion discusses delicate topics by compulsion and warfighting under a cloak of superstitiousness. Religion is armchair-speculation suitable for brains that stroll through fog. Science unveils where religion conceals and seeks refuge in tautology. That "god has done it" is nothing more than an admission of ignorance. Science respects the power of the human intellect. Science, well natural science isn't even interested in religion or has anything to do with it. While religion does derate the power of the human intellect and claims that humans are incapable to understand the world entirely. Religion is the try to suppress rationality, but luckily fewer and fewer since even the church has realised that science proves the power of the human intellect and its importance to our daily life almost day by day.

Science has the potential to expose the secrets of the universe/nature, or God if you will. Religion has not such a potential to move forward. Religion is a guidline for individuals but does paralyse nations and prevents progress. You can see this in countries with less development due to combining religion and state.

Separating religion and state is based on the same reason why separating religion and science: rationality. Religion is a private, personal thing which has no place in (natural) science and politics for certain and valid reasons. That's why German ESA astronaut and physicist Reinhold Ewald just last week replied in a German TV show to the question "do you believe in god?": "Well that's a personal thing that doesn't have anything to do with my profession and the mission I did in space"

 

[insanity]

There are 3 catogories of individual when it comes to personal belief, *Religious,*Athiest,*Agnostic. The question is which category do you choose to be involved with. If there is a God or Devil , I definately would choose pardise over hell, so I guess that throws Athiestism out the door, and as for being Agnostic. Well, lets just say, that something started everything right down to mass and molicule even before the big bang.

What you are talking about is Pascal's Wager The problem with belief based on a reward is that if God was omnipotent then it would know you are believing solely for the promise of an after-life which defeats the purpose of faith. Also, it limits God to two possibilities, either reward for belief or non existence- if God is infinite any attempt to limit God to an A or B proposition suffers the logical fallacy of the false dilemma.

God said in Genisis let there be light, but we know that the big bang took place. As for myself "let there be light" may have been God creating the big bang. Although, I guess he still is. That was what on day 6 or 7. Yet, it is still hapening regularly throughout the cosmos on telescopes. Then if that is the case one must wonder whats going on. Then later in scripture it says that one year to man as if a thousand years to God. Then there are other things like parting the sea. Very hard to comprehend, but there again how do you explain scientist as we speak diveing and recovering roman military and chariot artifacts from where it was said to have taken place??

First, I have no idea what you are talking about here. Second, cite some credible science that backs up your claim. Third, your statement seems to dismiss any non-Semantic God even though advancements in quantum physics presents a compelling case for Eastern philosophies like Hinduism.

As for the rest of your post, I tend to agree that people artificially drive wedges between science and religion. I think it is because many proponents of both seem to neglect the fact that we are not able to answer every question without making an assumption about the "beginning". There is always going to be room for uncertainty, faith, and doubt. Religion can provide meaning and science can provide context.

Personally, I'd rather invest my time in being a good human being than worrying about rather or not I'm worshiping the proper god in the proper way. I have a lot of trust in the scientific method because it produces observable results. I've got a serious problem with religion being used to spread fear, hate, and ignorance though because anyone that certain of their 'rightness' should be feared.

 

[Urwumpe]

Also, it has to be said that Christian fundamentalists often claim, that the scientific history of the world is similar to Genesis, but this is fundamentally wrong. you can't just say "Let there be light = Big Bang" and then go on and ignore the rest. It is all or nothing. And in that context, the order how God created things in the Genesis is not the same how science can prove how things came into being.

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CH/CH801.html

There has to be a strong distinction between science and religion, because both are opposing each other. Science is the elimination of belief - if you have to guess or believe in a hypothesis, you should better find a theory that works without this hypothesis and document the uncertainty, instead of ruining your theory with guess work. Religion is not even just faith. It is commanding faith, even contrary to what you experience everyday. True religion would be knowing, that gravity does not exist and live by that - considering any hardship that comes from this foolish behavior as test of faith by a god.

 

[eveningsky339]

Perhaps I'm going on a tangent here, but bear with me.

Science is simply the study of the physical universe-- matter, energy, etc. If it all boils down, that's what we're left with.

Spirituality involves everything outside of science's reach. I do not say religion because religion is simply organized spirituality.

The two do not conflict, supposing one is "right" about aspects of both.

 

[insanity]

Perhaps I'm going on a tangent here, but bear with me.

Science is simply the study of the physical universe-- matter, energy, etc. If it all boils down, that's what we're left with.

Spirituality involves everything outside of science's reach. I do not say religion because religion is simply organized spirituality.

The two do not conflict, supposing one is "right" about aspects of both.

I leave room for belief because even our best science still has uncertainty (by definition). I just get really put off by people who think that their answer is worth the killing and subjugation of others.

 

[Hielor]

None regarding my person. I'm not a believer, not even what's called atheist since those who call themselves atheists are also believer. I'm a knower regarding a few things, and I'm ignorant regarding a lot of other things. But I don't need to peg on a course, belief / a religion or ideology. I just need my common sense to go through life.

This is the "agnostic" category.

 

[Saturn V]

With respect to "belief"...

If there's even a 1% possibility () that what I posted earlier is anywhere near the truth, doesn't that seem more like grand design than pure chance?

Eveningsky is right. Science and belief are not at odds or mutually exclusive. They seem to be more "hand in hand."

 

[Moonwalker]

This is the "agnostic" category.

Agnosticism is an ideology which especially emphasises the finiteness of human knowledge, just like religion does. That I don't know a lot of things doesn't mean I won't know them in the future. The agnostic would say he'll never know or its not answerable.

Science is simply the study of the physical universe-- matter, energy, etc.

Is there anything else than a physical universe?

Science and belief are not at odds or mutually exclusive. They seem to be more "hand in hand."

Belief is an individual thing that doesn't have anything to do with natural science.

 

[Saturn V]

Belief is an individual thing that doesn't have anything to do with natural science.

That is not my..."belief."

 

[Hielor]

That is not my..."belief."

Science, by definition, isn't just belief in something for which you have no proof or reason.

 

[Moonwalker]

That is not my..."belief."

And not science