I take it you guys have all see the haiti UFO (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=up5jmbSjWkw) video by now.

So where did all the water come from?

So where did all the water come from?

Maybe it was big enough that some ice was still in the core?

Some 600 now reported to be sick,

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7001897.stm

I take it you guys have all see the haiti UFO (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=up5jmbSjWkw) video by now.
This post (http://www.skepchick.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=17147&sid=8fc5ad102c0557958cd0abd578054826) on the Skepchick web site suggests it might be part of a viral marketing campaign for the upcoming Cloverfield (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloverfield) movie.

Good C-2-C tonight featuring an astronomer who works for the Vatican. Touched on many of the subjects discussed in this thread. Can't say I concur with all the points of view expressed, but found many of the responses (and also non-responses) interesting and sometimes illuminating. If you can catch the rebroadcast or stream/DL it, I recommend giving it a listen.(paraphrasing)
G.N. to Guest: Why are we here?

Guest: Some questions are so wonderful that an answer just wouldn't do them justice.

Well, what you put in spoilers there sure is illuminating... :confused:

Larry King Live - UFOS: ARE THEY FOR REAL? (http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2007/11/12/lkl.ufo.real.cnn?iref%3Dvideosearch) Part 1. 18:03

UFOS: ARE THEY FOR REAL? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KS2bZ_TIzmY&feature=related ) Part 2. 5:46

UFOS: ARE THEY FOR REAL? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8DnXOPp500&feature=related) Part 3. 8:38

I just listened to the segment again, and for the record it actually went a bit more like this... (paraphrasing again)G.N.: When you look out into the vastness of space [at all the planets and stars], do you ever ask yourself why they are there?

Guest: Yes...

G.N.: Do you ever give yourself an answer?

Guest: Some questions are so wonderful that no answer would do them justice.

Sounds like a politician...

^LOL.
Sounds like our astronomer has been reading too much Eastern religion...

Fair enough. Just thought the discussion might be of interest since it had so many tie-ins here. My bad. (Previous posts removed in the interests of thread preservation.)

No need to apologize, I did find it interesting, that's what I like about this thread, the odd, bizarre, unusual stuff that gets posted here.

I finally watched The Time Machine (2002) despite all the bad reviews. Even with its obvious plot, script, directing, and acting flaws, I was entertained. The movie had a sense of humor and the special effects were great. I especially liked the bit about the moon.

IB

Saw Time Machine earlier today. I was a bit disappointed in the story line as well as the ending. The special effects were good, but the plot never really developed and was no comparison to the original. It is a totally different story with few similarities to the classic. Perhaps I was disappointed because I expected a similar story line.

It was good for what it was. I also found it entertaining as long as the brain was turned off, which I find easier to do as time goes by.

It was good for what it was. I also found it entertaining as long as the brain was turned off, which I find easier to do as time goes by.

A highly destructive movie...I had to double-up on my Zoloft the next morning...

No need to apologize, I did find it interesting...Roger that. Much of what was discussed has already been covered here in depth-- expanding and parellel universes, space-time continuums, temporal paradoxes, extraterrestrial civilizations, dwarf planets, extra-solar planetary systems and whatnot.

As far as time-related movies are concerned... haven't seen Time Machine (either version) in quite awhile, but these didn't seem too bad (spoilers).

Can we please stop talking about "The Time Machine" in the Time Machine thread? We're getting dangerously off-topic. ;)

:p

....Much of what was discussed has already been covered here in depth-- expanding and parellel universes, space-time continuums, temporal paradoxes, extraterrestrial civilizations, dwarf planets, extra-solar planetary systems and whatnot.

What? You guys have been talking about all that stuff for the last 5.7 years? That sounds interesting. I wish I had known.

Speaking of a Time Machine...how about a 30 year old Time Machine?

Spielberg's Close Encounters of the Third Kind was released Tuesday in a 30 year Anniversary Edition on DVD/BD.

Question: does it still hold up after all this time?
I haven't had time to watch the entire movie yet, but I did take a quick peek at the famous "stopped at the Railroad Crossing to look at a map" scene.
It still works IMO.
The lights, the row of mailboxes going berserk, the pickup cab's contents flying around...Dreyfuss's character jumps when the flashlight suddenly comes back on (perfectly timed)...:eek:
Yowza!:cool:

Anybody seen the new release yet?

Hi all…

I have a question for the brainiacs that participate in this thread. Below is a link to an interesting theory that appears to be applicable to particle level physics. If this theory pans out, what are its implications, if any, regarding cosmology?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2007/11/14/scisurf114.xml&CMP=ILC-mostviewedbox

Thanks!

You boys up for a new theory of everything? (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2007/11/14/scisurf114.xml&CMP=ILC-mostviewedbox)

What do you think?

Either Gus or Pronto Pup must be in an alternate universe, same link in both posts. :p

Oh, crap! I'm in an alternate universe where Pronto Pup didn't post the same article I was reading!!

NASA moonwalker claims alien contact covered up: http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,24070088-13762,00.html

Hmm...

NASA moonwalker claims alien contact covered up: http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,24070088-13762,00.html

That's a hard one to just dismiss out of hand. Not your typical supermarket rag story.

That's a hard one to just dismiss out of hand. Not your typical supermarket rag story.

My humble opinion is that Mitchel ,although one of the twelve men to walk on the moon, like all of us, is not without fault. He only quotes heresay. I just can't believe a cover up of this magnitude exists.

Art

My humble opinion is that Mitchel ,although one of the twelve men to walk on the moon, like all of us, is not without fault. He only quotes heresay. I just can't believe a cover up of this magnitude exists.

Art

"I Want To Believe" --- Maybe now that Mulder and Scully are back together they could investigate for us. :D

Actually, I do agree that in order to keep a lid on such a thing over that many years would have required a massive amount of co-ordination by so many agencies and individuals to render it virtually impossible.

I just wonder what his motive might be at this point. Why damage your credibility and achievements now?

Where the heck are Bob and Dean when we need them to ferret out the truth?

<This rhetorical question is for thread old-timers>

Walking on the moon..??

Walking on the moon..??

That would certainly beat anatomically unpleasant alien exams.

"I Want To Believe" --- Maybe now that Mulder and Scully are back together they could investigate for us. :D

That probably would have made a better movie. :D

Actually, I do agree that in order to keep a lid on such a thing over that many years would have required a massive amount of co-ordination by so many agencies and individuals to render it virtually impossible.


Not necessarily. In this case, you have the simple outrageousness of it all working in your favor. If the information is kept highly compartmentalized, the risk for any leaks is low, and any leakers can be marginalized and isolated by a number of means. There would be protocol established for any number of scenarios. Anything short of actual physical evidence could be dealt with, and you would have the natural skepticism of the public assisting you in quashing any rumors. Why, you could even put out an official sounding "Blue Book" to put the official government stamp of approval on denying the whole silly thing. Case closed.

The standard protocol of "deny, deny, deny, and let the story peter out" would of course have to change if any physical evidence is actually discovered and made known to the public at large. If it couldn't be discredited, say by calling it a "weather balloon" or something, then they could simply say the decades long coverup was done for reasons of "national security". Certainly, we've seen that the masses will accept and forgive just about anything if you claim that caveat. ;)

The inability to wrap our minds around the concepts of 1) alien visitation, and 2) government knowledge and coverup of the same, is a powerful ally in keeping the lid on. Just because we can't accept that it has happened doesn't mean it hasn't happened. Dr. Mitchel's remarks are just one more piece of evidence on that side of the board.

^ Well, you are probably right. After all, I've seen National Treasure 2-Book of Secrets so now I know that things have been kept hidden from us!

I had a discussion about this with a friend of mine who is a mechanical engineer and works for a local power company. He is the ultimate for logical explanations for things.

Even he is willing to accept that there may be some truth to the claims and that it has taken some 60 years to condition the public into accepting "E.T." as a possible friendly lifeform. There would be tremendous cultrual/religious shock that would have to be delt with.

My personal feeling, and I've probably said it in this thread a few thousand posts back, is that there's so much circumstantial evidence that we've been visited by somebody, that it's highly likely it's happened. And, because they have the best detection equipment, the government would probably know about it if it had happened. And, for a variety of reasons ranging from, yes, national (and world) security concerns all the way up to massive upheaval of the worldwide religious apple cart, the government would have tried to keep any knowledge of alien contact secret. It's what they do when they don't know what else to do.

But it's also my opinion that if we have indeed been visited by aliens, they didn't get here by spacecraft from the far reaches of our physical space. We know that faster-than-light travel is probably impossible within the physics of our universe as we know it. Instead, perhaps they're inter-dimensional travelers, able to blink in and back out of our four dimensional space, which is why tracking them for more than a few minutes with visual and radar ultimately fails. Makes more sense to me that's who these dudes are, that is if there's any sense to be made of it at all. :)

archiguy, That theory is very much like the one I have. Except for one thing.
It's Us that's popping in and out.

archiguy, That theory is very much like the one I have. Except for one thing.
It's Us that's popping in and out.

I had that problem in my teens - except it had nothing to do with aliens. ;)

Arch,

Can you provide me with a link or links to this "circumstantial evidence?"

Arch,

Can you provide me with a link or links to this "circumstantial evidence?"

Only the thousands upon thousands of sightings and reports over the years, not all of which can be conveniently explained. (I even know a very compelling story myself, but it's never been "published".) I'd gladly provide you with a link to every one, if I had a couple of months of free time to compile them, but the AVS servers would collapse. ;)

Where the heck are Bob and Dean when we need them to ferret out the truth?

<This rhetorical question is for thread old-timers>
It's like this, Joseph old friend.

Forget "aliens". Forget "space travel". Forget "time travelers". Forget all of that. And try to look at it with a much less narrow perspective.

In 1942, South Pacific islanders witnessed airplanes flying overhead for the very first time.
What did they report when they saw this? They reported seeing "large silver birds" in the sky. That is because they could not conceive of what they were actually seeing. They had no conception of an "airplane". So they reported seeing the only thing they could relate to. Birds.

Shouldn't we learn from their mistake. If we see what is truly an unexplainable anomaly in the sky, why should we assume it's the only thing we can relate to. Why not accept the possibility that what we are witnessing is inconceivable (at present anyway) rather than jumping to the conclusion that it's a "space alien from another planet".

Only the thousands upon thousands of sightings and reports over the years, not all of which can be conveniently explained. (I even know a very compelling story myself, but it's never been "published".) I'd gladly provide you with a link to every one, if I had a couple of months of free time to compile them, but the AVS servers would collapse. ;)

Oh, sorry....I thought you might have discovered a site with good info on evidence.:o

It's like this, Joseph old friend.

Forget "aliens". Forget "space travel". Forget "time travelers". Forget all of that. And try to look at it with a much less narrow perspective.

In 1942, South Pacific islanders witnessed airplanes flying overhead for the very first time.
What did they report when they saw this? They reported seeing "large silver birds" in the sky. That is because they could not conceive of what they were actually seeing. They had no conception of an "airplane". So they reported seeing the only thing they could relate to. Birds.

Shouldn't we learn from their mistake. If we see what is truly an unexplainable anomaly in the sky, why should we assume it's the only thing we can relate to. Why not accept the possibility that what we are witnessing is inconceivable (at present anyway) rather than jumping to the conclusion that it's a "space alien from another planet".
Stop making sense, Bob.:D

Thanks, oink.

In your previous post you asked for "evidence", oink.

I'm not going to suggest that the following is or is not evidence. Like a certain cable news network I'm going to report and you decide. :)

But if this is not evidence then it seems to me someone needs to provide us a plausible explanation for why Charles and Calvin said what they did on the "secret tape"...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascagoula_Abduction#The_.22Secret_Tape.22

Hey Bob, the most important thing for me is that you're back, and in fine form! AVS needs you!

P.S. Rent Mad Men and get caught up on the first season, so that you can start watching the second season, which started this week. It's a really neat show, very different in its pacing.

P.S. Rent Mad Men and get caught up on the first season, so that you can start watching the second season, which started this week. It's a really neat show, very different in its pacing.

I'd second that suggestion, but if you get the HD On Demand channel, you can watch them all in HD (first season is still up, and second season episodes are shown with a one-day delay from the AMC channel). That's really the way to see that show.

That probably would have made a better movie. :D



Not necessarily. In this case, you have the simple outrageousness of it all working in your favor. If the information is kept highly compartmentalized, the risk for any leaks is low, and any leakers can be marginalized and isolated by a number of means. There would be protocol established for any number of scenarios. Anything short of actual physical evidence could be dealt with, and you would have the natural skepticism of the public assisting you in quashing any rumors. Why, you could even put out an official sounding "Blue Book" to put the official government stamp of approval on denying the whole silly thing. Case closed.

The standard protocol of "deny, deny, deny, and let the story peter out" would of course have to change if any physical evidence is actually discovered and made known to the public at large. If it couldn't be discredited, say by calling it a "weather balloon" or something, then they could simply say the decades long coverup was done for reasons of "national security". Certainly, we've seen that the masses will accept and forgive just about anything if you claim that caveat. ;)

The inability to wrap our minds around the concepts of 1) alien visitation, and 2) government knowledge and coverup of the same, is a powerful ally in keeping the lid on. Just because we can't accept that it has happened doesn't mean it hasn't happened. Dr. Mitchel's remarks are just one more piece of evidence on that side of the board.

I think it's highly unlikely that any government entity is in possession of convincing physical evidence sufficient to meet a properly stringent empirical standard of "proof," but that doesn't mean a reasonable standard of logic cannot have lead to limited speculative conclusions. However, in this instance, what would be the point of sharing them?

Thanks, oink.

In your previous post you asked for "evidence", oink.

I'm not going to suggest that the following is or is not evidence. Like a certain cable news network I'm going to report and you decide. :)

But if this is not evidence then it seems to me someone needs to provide us a plausible explanation for why Charles and Calvin said what they did on the "secret tape"...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascagoula_Abduction#The_.22Secret_Tape.22

Very interesting story. I never read that story before. The only way to explain it in my opinion is if they knew they were being taped, or they at least assumed that they might be taped and so kept up a front.

Oh, sorry....I thought you might have discovered a site with good info on evidence.:o

Personally, I have doubts about the whole "bear sh@tting in the woods" thing. Never witnessed it myself, a fuzzy photograph won't convince me, and I'm unaware of any contemporaneous, confirming reports by independent, multi-jurisdictional police witnesses, or hundreds of civilian flight officers and their military counterparts, some of whom have been entrusted with the care and feeding of nuclear weapons.

My humble opinion is that Mitchel ,although one of the twelve men to walk on the moon, like all of us, is not without fault. He only quotes heresay. I just can't believe a cover up of this magnitude exists.

Art

I agree with you, but it is true that other astronauts have made claims as well, just not as bold as Mitchell.

The most fascinating claim was by Armstrong where he "supposedly" said there was an alien base on the dark side of the moon. This can't be backed up of course, but it's still fun to read about.

it always exist on the novels...

Very interesting story. I never read that story before. The only way to explain it in my opinion is if they knew they were being taped, or they at least assumed that they might be taped and so kept up a front.
I agree. In my way of thinking that would be about the only plausible explanation.
But I can tell you this. I live about a hundred miles down the coast from where this happened. And after talking to people in Pascagoula who had some familiarity with it I'm convinced that it was unlikely that they had been aware of the sheriff's practice of using the tape recorder. So that leads me to believe that if they suspected they might be recorded then it was because they were smart enough to have surmised this as being a possibility. The problem I have with that is these two do not appear to be brain surgeons or rocket scientists. So it would not be in character for them. Also, Allen Hynek had an extensive interview with them. And he came away from it positively convinced that they had experienced "something really out of the ordinary" and that it was no hoax.

This is something I always like to share with those who become interested in this topic, cnikirk. It's a short interview with Allen Hynek. As you may be aware, Hynek is the astronomer who the Air Force hired to oversee it's Project Blue Book. If you found the Mississippi case interesting I think you'll find this interesting as well...

http://www.cufon.org/cufon/hynekint.htm

Addendum: One last point, cnikirk. What makes this incident significant to me is that it's not like so many other sightings in that these two cannot be accused of mistaking what they saw for an airplane, Venus, swamp gas, a weather balloon, northern lights, etc etc etc. At least not unless they were so unbelievably drunk that they couldn't tell all that from something that was grabbing them by the arm and taking them inside of something. :D
So, this one is not a case of mistaken identification. It either happened as they said or it's a hoax. And I have been following this one for almost 40 years now and so far I have seen nothing about it to indicate to me that it was a hoax. That is not to say it can't be a hoax. Only that I have not been provided with any reason to believe that it is.

Hey Bob, the most important thing for me is that you're back, and in fine form! AVS needs you!

P.S. Rent Mad Men and get caught up on the first season, so that you can start watching the second season, which started this week. It's a really neat show, very different in its pacing.
Thanks so much for the kind words, Joe.
I just stop in occasionally to get good tips from ya'll for adding DVD's to my Blockbuster queue.
I was presently surprised this time to see the Time Machine movie being discussed.
I liked it okay but I think the 1960 George Pal version was better (it's been over a year since I got to say that last :D)

In 1942, South Pacific islanders witnessed airplanes flying overhead for the very first time.
What did they report when they saw this? They reported seeing "large silver birds" in the sky. That is because they could not conceive of what they were actually seeing. They had no conception of an "airplane". So they reported seeing the only thing they could relate to. Birds.

Good example, but this can be used to make a case for exactly opposite of what you suggest.

The pacific islanders were at a technologically backward state so that they couldn't comprehend the airplane. As per the example, there DOES exist a section of people who can not only visualize the airplane, but also build and use it. So that indicates two different civilizations - one technologically backward and the other advanced. Barring the weather balloon, optical illusion explanations, isn't exactly what is being observed in case of UFOs ?



Shouldn't we learn from their mistake. If we see what is truly an unexplainable anomaly in the sky, why should we assume it's the only thing we can relate to. Why not accept the possibility that what we are witnessing is inconceivable (at present anyway) rather than jumping to the conclusion that it's a "space alien from another planet".

We are unable to build or understand the dynamics (very fast motion, directly lifing up, swift change in speed and direction etc) of the UFOs. So doesn't it point to a technologically advanced civilization ? (again, I am assuming you weed out all those balloon etc cases). Since we know all the technology that is existing on the earth, doesn't it mean UFO is from an alien civilization ? (Unless of course, there is some secret program going on and some people have knowledge to advanced technology that they haven't shared with the rest of the world)

Good example, but this can be used to make a case for exactly opposite of what you suggest.

The pacific islanders were at a technologically backward state so that they couldn't comprehend the airplane.
Set your pet dog in front of you. Read him the Declaration of Independence. And then ask him if he was able to comprehend it.
I think it's safe to say that canines will never possess the capacity to "know" the Declaration of Independence?

Now, envision a ladder with a billion steps on it. And each higher step of that ladder represents a higher capacity to "know" all which is in existence. Let's say the dog is standing on a step of the ladder somewhere near the bottom. The Pacific Islander a few steps higher. And you and me are on a step higher than the Islander.
Can we even conceive of what might be standing near the top of that ladder?
The answer is actually no we cannot. No more than the dog can conceive of what the Islander can. Or the Islander can conceive of what we can.

No, if an unexplainable aerial phenomenon is witnessed I absolutely do not limit the nature of it to necessarily be something humans can even conceive of. The concept of "technologically advanced creatures" may have absolutely no relevance to what the nature of it actually is.
We may not even have the capacity to know what it is. We may be like a school of minnows who all of a sudden find themselves in the presence of a scuba diver. They don't have any capacity to know what the scuba diver is either. When they're in the presence of a scuba diver I doubt whatever is running through their pea-picking little minds has any relevance to what a scuba diver actually is. The same could easily be the case with us.

The reason that's not a perfect analogy is that we've reached the state of sentience where we can ask the appropriate questions, we have a relatively complete understanding of the physical laws that make up our universe, and most importantly we no longer cede explanation of any phenomena we don't immediately understand to mythical god(s) or conveniently religious dogma. Or, at least some of us don't and thank God for it, or we'd still be living in blissful ignorance along with those Islanders. Come to think of it.... maybe that's not such a bad idea. ;)

I don't have a pet dog. What's this thread about?

The reason that's not a perfect analogy is that we've reached the state of sentience where we can ask the appropriate questions, we have a relatively complete understanding of the physical laws that make up our universe
That was the "Dean position" in the debate which consumed the whole first several years of this thread. :D

My point has always been that "our state of sentience" as you describe it may be like the intellectual capacity of a slug in comparison to what all is out there that we have no capacity to know or comprehend. And may never have any capacity to comprehend.
We may catch a glimpse of it in the sky like the minnows see that scuba diver, but that may be the sum total of our knowledge of it for for ever and ever amen.

I don't have a pet dog. What's this thread about?
It's about the movie "Time Machine" as per the forum rules of course. :D

p.s. don't let DOBE fool you, cnikirk, he was present for the whole pea-picking thread. :D

Set your pet dog in front of you.
...
little minds has any relevance to what a scuba diver actually is. The same could easily be the case with us.

I agree with everything you say in this post !

My point has always been that "our state of sentience" as you describe it may be like the intellectual capacity of a slug in comparison to what all is out there that we have no capacity to know or comprehend. And may never have any capacity to comprehend.
We may catch a glimpse of it in the sky like the minnows see that scuba diver, but that may be the sum total of our knowledge of it for for ever and ever amen.

I understand the point, and it's tempting to consider, but I honestly think we've left that potential "age of innocence" behind. I find it harder to believe that we will ever run across something that we can't at least fit into the theoretical framework that's been built since Newton first got conked on the head with an apple and Copernicus got threatened with being burned at the stake for the audacity of claiming the earth orbited the sun. I also recognize the arrogance of that position; so be it. :)

minnows.... When they're in the presence of a scuba diver I doubt whatever is running through their pea-picking little minds has any relevance to what a scuba diver actually is.

That would be a UUO (Unidentified Underwater Object) to them. :)

I find it harder to believe that we will ever run across something that we can't at least fit into the theoretical framework that's been built since Newton first got conked on the head with an apple and Copernicus got threatened with being burned at the stake for the audacity of claiming the earth orbited the sun. I also recognize the arrogance of that position; so be it. :)
Oh this presents such delicious irony, archi.
Think about all those who came before Newton and Copernicus who said exactly what you're saying now. They too said "I find it hard to believe that we will ever run across something that we can't at least fit" into our scheme of things. ;)

Something just tells me in my gut that we will continually be saying that over and over for the next hundred kagillion years. And each time it will be followed by the discovery of some new Einstein'esque thing we never conceived of. :)

My goodness. It looks like the debate has started all over again.
I was about 10 years younger and 20 lbs lighter for the first Time Machine Thread debate.
I feel like George Foreman about to enter the ring again. :D

I agree. In my way of thinking that would be about the only plausible explanation.
But I can tell you this. I live about a hundred miles down the coast from where this happened. And after talking to people in Pascagoula who had some familiarity with it I'm convinced that it was unlikely that they had been aware of the sheriff's practice of using the tape recorder. So that leads me to believe that if they suspected they might be recorded then it was because they were smart enough to have surmised this as being a possibility. The problem I have with that is these two do not appear to be brain surgeons or rocket scientists. So it would not be in character for them. Also, Allen Hynek had an extensive interview with them. And he came away from it positively convinced that they had experienced "something really out of the ordinary" and that it was no hoax.

This is something I always like to share with those who become interested in this topic, cnikirk. It's a short interview with Allen Hynek. As you may be aware, Hynek is the astronomer who the Air Force hired to oversee it's Project Blue Book. If you found the Mississippi case interesting I think you'll find this interesting as well...

http://www.cufon.org/cufon/hynekint.htm

Addendum: One last point, cnikirk. What makes this incident significant to me is that it's not like so many other sightings in that these two cannot be accused of mistaking what they saw for an airplane, Venus, swamp gas, a weather balloon, northern lights, etc etc etc. At least not unless they were so unbelievably drunk that they couldn't tell all that from something that was grabbing them by the arm and taking them inside of something. :D
So, this one is not a case of mistaken identification. It either happened as they said or it's a hoax. And I have been following this one for almost 40 years now and so far I have seen nothing about it to indicate to me that it was a hoax. That is not to say it can't be a hoax. Only that I have not been provided with any reason to believe that it is.

Once again, very interesting. I just wish some "hard" evidence would surface. I'm not even sure what that would be, maybe a saucer crash in the middle of Manhattan or a piece of truly alien technology. Everything just seems to be hearsay.

Once again, very interesting. I just wish some "hard" evidence would surface. I'm not even sure what that would be, maybe a saucer crash in the middle of Manhattan or a piece of truly alien technology. Everything just seems to be hearsay.

Well, that's the issue isn't it? Perhaps such physical evidence does already exist, hidden away in a remote hanger at Area 51 or some such. How would we possibly know? If indeed such evidence exists, it's probably hidden behind so many firewalls that no Freedom Of Information request could even begin to burrow into the surface of The Truth. So, we're left to wait for the possible catastrophic failure of "their" technology to provide the physical evidence that might blow the lid off the coverup, something that would generate such instant massive media coverage (say, a crash in Manhattan) that no further efforts at coverup could be justified. That is, should a coverup exist at all; far from me to suggest that. ;)

So, we wait.

Once again, very interesting. I just wish some "hard" evidence would surface. I'm not even sure what that would be
What about this...

http://www.ufocasebook.com/Kansas.html

http://www.ufocasebook.com/ring42months.jpg

What about this...

http://www.ufocasebook.com/Kansas.html

http://www.ufocasebook.com/ring42months.jpg

There was actually a show on the history channel, I believe about this. They did soil tests and of course nothing unusual was found. Years had passed by then. I remember thinking that it was one of the more believable stories that you read about. Still it's a far cry from proof of ET.

The government conspiracy thing doesn't really work for me. Our government(U.S.) is bad about keeping secrets. I guess it would be believable if say, the only crash to ever occur was in the U.S. but surely others would have crashed in other countries where the government wouldn't be able to immediately confiscate the evidence.

I keep an open mind, but I think the chances that we have been visited are extremely low. It is quite entertaining to speculate :)

And then there's Lonnie Zamora.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwUY6N3Snb0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6MwRbZ5mp0&feature=related

Once again, very interesting. I just wish some "hard" evidence would surface. I'm not even sure what that would be, maybe a saucer crash in the middle of Manhattan or a piece of truly alien technology. Everything just seems to be hearsay.


But wait, there was that ship that crashed in London....oh wait, that was a Dr. Who episode. :D

Whenever I see or read reports from "credible" people, I find it hard to just dismiss them. As I said in an earlier post, what would be the motive? I know there are some people who will do just about anything for their 15 minutes of fame. Those typically are pretty easy to spot.

It is a report from someone who has something to lose in terms of professional reputation that catches my interest.

Oh this presents such delicious irony, archi.
Think about all those who came before Newton and Copernicus who said exactly what you're saying now. They too said "I find it hard to believe that we will ever run across something that we can't at least fit" into our scheme of things. ;)

Something just tells me in my gut that we will continually be saying that over and over for the next hundred kagillion years. And each time it will be followed by the discovery of some new Einstein'esque thing we never conceived of. :)

I forget whether it was Newton or Einstein, whose teacher adviced him not to take up career in Physics. "Everything that is to be discovered in Physics, has already been done so". Good for mankind Newton (or was it Einstein ?) did not take that advice !

The Mississippi thing didn't do it for me....a couple of hillbillies sippin' whiskey laced with Window Pane by kids.

And the Delphos Ring?:rolleyes:

sippin' whiskey laced with Window Pane


That's sounds like fun though.

The Mississippi thing didn't do it for me....a couple of hillbillies sippin' whiskey laced with Window Pane by kids.

And the Delphos Ring?:rolleyes:
I'm just not sure that whatever it is which is out there is elitist. My reason for questioning that comes from our own experience. Hell, we went all the way to Mars and would have been tickled to have even encountered microbes for heavens sake. And correct me if I'm wrong but I believe they're even lower down on the evolution scale than Mississippi hillbillies.

But just to be accurate, Pascagoula is on the Gulf Coast. There aint no hills in Pascagoula. Trust me because I'm a hillbilly who lives just down the same coast and there aint no hills here neither. :D

Hell, we went all the way to Mars and would have been tickled to have even encountered microbes for heavens sake. We may have...I believe NASA is bringing some of that Martian soil back here to good Ol' Earth.:eek:
Surely, nothing could possibly go wrong with that....:p


And correct me if I'm wrong but I believe they're even lower down on the evolution scale than Mississippi hillbillies.Are we taking bets here?


But just to be accurate, Pascagoula is on the Gulf Coast. There aint no hills in Pascagoula. Trust me because I'm a hillbilly who lives just down the same coast and there aint no hills here neither. :D
If you're a hillbilly, I'm the Pope.;)

Also, Allen Hynek had an extensive interview with them.

Hynek, hynek...Heck...Hayek!

...and that's exactly how Salma got involved in this thread a year or three ago, ala "What Would Salma Think?".

http://images.askmen.com/photos/salma-hayek/36438.jpg

^ Now, that is a heavenly body that needs no cover-up. In fact, might I just say, the less covered up, the better. :D

^You just had to remind me of her "performance" in From Dusk Till Dawn, didn't you?!?:eek::D

It's not about aliens, but somehow it fits: http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/08/15/bigfoot.body/index.html?iref=newssearch

^Bigfoot in Georgia?:eek:
We need to send Bob Wood to get to the bottom of this...

I live in the mountains of the Pacific NW (which is supposed to be a hot-spot for Mr. B.F.).
Believe me...there isn't any such thing here.
Every Fall, every tree stump, every trail, every rock has a guy with a gun sitting on it.
Deer and elk hunters leave no area safe for anything living and breathing air.
If there was a B.F. here, trust me, someone would have killed one looooong ago.

BTW, the latest B.F. rumor is that he is married to the Tooth Fairy....

Huh...so Georgia is where the offspring of this union ended up. :)

http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/2582/hestonapedc0.jpg

^^^ Georgia. Oh, the wicked irony. :D

http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/2582/hestonapedc0.jpg

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cornelius: Taylor, you are not in command here. Put down that gun!
George Taylor: Shut up! I'm trying to concentrate!

uh...sorry Chuck...

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hhwCB7TKbWTNMtXT8I9EfKkgbgYQD92LKD300

"Rocket Scientists Say We'll Never Reach the Stars"

http://www.wired.com/science/space/news/2008/08/space_limits?currentPage=2

In 1958, U.S. scientists explored the possibility of a spaceship propelled by dropping nuclear bombs out the back, a so-called nuclear-pulsed rocket. The research, called Project Orion, was killed by the signing of the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty and the budgetary requirements of the Apollo Project.

And to think it took a treaty to scuttle that idea. :p

Until we learn to fold space we'll never get anywhere, we better be happy with where we're at...oh, wait...we've already ruined it anyways.

uh...sorry Chuck...

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hhwCB7TKbWTNMtXT8I9EfKkgbgYQD92LKD300

What a disappointment!!!:eek:

Not even a damn dirty ape....:(

"Rocket Scientists Say We'll Never Reach the Stars"

http://www.wired.com/science/space/news/2008/08/space_limits?currentPage=2



And to think it took a treaty to scuttle that idea. :p

Until we learn to fold space we'll never get anywhere, we better be happy with where we're at...oh, wait...we've already ruined it anyways.

I agree that the atomic bomb method of propulsion was just bizarre. I always wondered what the "blast shield" would be made of - indestructatonium...? :p

But we could colonize the entire galaxy without faster-than-light travel if we put our minds to it, so says Marshall Savage in "The Millennial Project". You just aim the colony ships at a star system that looks like it's got habitable planets and accelerate them to some significant fraction of the speed of light, then let time dilation do the rest. The catch is, for the colonists, it's a one-way trip, gambling that 1) they'll get there alive and 2) they'll find a habitable planet waiting for them when they finally arrive. Using that approach, we can "seed" the stars with humanity's children, hopscotching from one newly formed colony to the next. There wouldn't be much communication between them, hundreds or thousands of years having past in the "parent" colony due to time dilation, so each one would vector mankind's history in a new direction. In a million years or so, we could colonize the whole galaxy that way, and we wouldn't need "warp drive" to do it. :)

But if we don't start seriously thinking about something like this, we are surely doomed as a sentient species. Every once in awhile, see, a big ol' rock from space comes hurtling in and the earth has a very bad day... just ask the dinosaurs. ;)

Yeah, well, every once in awhile some genius comes up with the idea of leaving Earth in a "spaceship" when things get bad here.
Apparently, after sh!tting in our nest, we are going back to the moon....and use it as a stepping stone to colonizing Mars.
All the while using taxpayer's money to fund their escape from Texas gathering of scientific research.
I am not making this up (although I wish I was).
Hopefully, our next Fearless Leader will re-direct NASA to using robots again.

I have to agree with Keenan, if we don't find a way to fold space or generate wormholes, we ain't goin' anywhere.

You just aim the colony ships at a star system that looks like it's got habitable planets and accelerate them to some significant fraction of the speed of light, then let time dilation do the rest.The best science fiction story to use this concept was "Tau Zero" by Poul Anderson. It used a Bussard Ramjet to scoop interstellar hydrogen for fuel, but unfortunately it suffered some damage and they were unable to deaccelerate. Not only that, but they also to keep the ramjet on to prevent the interstellar hydrogen from cooking them. The result was that they went faster and faster, getting closer and closer to the speed of light, while the time dilation ("tau") kept getting smaller and smaller.

The thing that stood out for me was a passage that went something like: "Clang! The ship vibrated as it passed through another galaxy...." :)

The best science fiction story to use this concept was "Tau Zero" by Poul Anderson. It used a Bussard Ramjet to scoop interstellar hydrogen for fuel, but unfortunately it suffered some damage and they were unable to deaccelerate. Not only that, but they also to keep the ramjet on to prevent the interstellar hydrogen from cooking them. The result was that they went faster and faster, getting closer and closer to the speed of light, while the time dilation ("tau") kept getting smaller and smaller.

The thing that stood out for me was a passage that went something like: "Clang! The ship vibrated as it passed through another galaxy...." :)

Good call! One of my favorite sci-fi books of all time! And a quick read as well, as I recall (I long ago "loaned" out my copy), less than 200 pages. Excellent use of "hard science" as a plot device.

"Rocket Scientists Say We'll Never Reach the Stars"

http://www.wired.com/science/space/news/2008/08/space_limits?currentPage=2


And to think it took a treaty to scuttle that idea. :p

Until we learn to fold space we'll never get anywhere, we better be happy with where we're at...oh, wait...we've already ruined it anyways.

Another "creative" nuclear application that didn't work out:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/systems/slam.htm

And my personal favorite:
http://www.aviation-history.com/articles/nuke-american.htm

Don't worry, the biosphere will ultimately shrug off the effects of our passing if we actually manage to cause our own extinction. Besides, is it really more arbitrarily random or unfortunately capricious for an extinction to result from the actions of a myopic intelligence than it is if a mindless object of sufficient mass and energy just happens to impact the planet?

Besides, is it really more arbitrarily random or unfortunately capricious for an extinction to result from the actions of a myopic intelligence than it is if a mindless object of sufficient mass and energy just happens to impact the planet?
Biologic ethics?
Thanx for giving me something to keep me awake tonite...:D

"Von Braun’s Spaceship sketches fetch $132,000"

http://tierneylab.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/14/von-brauns-spaceship/

Ah yes, those were optimistic times, weren't they? I remember being very disappointed when Pan Am went under because it meant there'd never be a Pan Am space clipper like in 2001... :(

The beauty of space in the star-forming region NGC 3603 - seen here in the latest Hubble Space Telescope image.

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b315/Deltoid/heic0715a.jpg

Then you have the Crab Nebula, in what looks like something out of a sci-fi movie. This, in another of the latest pictures from Hubble, just makes my skin crawl.

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b315/Deltoid/untitled-4.jpg

It is sad NASA doesn't plan on bringing the Hubble back after it goes out of service.
The single most important telescope in human history belongs in the Smithsonian for all time.
It completely re-wrote the book...

Those are stunning images, I've been sitting here for 15 mins just staring at them in wonderment, just amazing.

TNT was having an HD showing of The Time Machine today, and I finally was able to meet my commitment to watching it.

I'm still deciding whether or not I liked it. Certainly, as was pointed out may years (!) ago in this thread, the SFX were more sophisticated than the George Pal version. I guess I've just been too attacted to the origional.

I think one viewing of it was enough, though.

Cool image of our star: http://www.sungazer.net/1126.jpg

More can be found at the home site: http://www.sungazer.net/index.html

I mostly wanted to resurrect our beloved thread! Where are you, Robert Wood? :)

Cool image, thanks.

It's amazing to think that nothing, absolutely nothing happens here without that ball of fire out there, it's humbling...

Cool image, thanks.

It's amazing to think that nothing, absolutely nothing happens here without that ball of fire out there, it's humbling...

It is.

On a side note...there is a report out today that Stephen Hawking is very ill.:(

I mostly wanted to resurrect our beloved thread! Where are you, Robert Wood? :)

http://www.cartoonstock.com/lowres/cst0075l.jpg

^Maybe that is why we haven't heard from Bob...ABDUCTED!!!:eek::eek::D:D

A heart and soul check for these difficult times. For those that don’t have a heart and soul, a Time Machine is waiting to send you to a land far far away. ;)

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b315/Deltoid/cid_4329D5CB6BC2468AB5D0AC0F534A0AD.jpg

^ Best post I've seen in a long while, very nice, thanks.

^ Best post I've seen in a long while, very nice, thanks.

Agreed.:)

I love this. No matter what he does, she always ends up dying in every alternate future. This can explain the hardships of humans and how we still try, even when our cards are down.

Hello Time machine thread. It has been many many years since I regularly posted on here. It looks like some of the regulars that I remember from way back when are still here: Dobe, Aliens...

How is every one? Where is Dean Roddey, Robert Wood?

I have now traveled 8 years into the future. It is actually really interesting to re-read the beginning :)

Finally, we have a plan:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1269288/STEPHEN-HAWKING-How-build-time-machine.html

Finally, we have a plan:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1269288/STEPHEN-HAWKING-How-build-time-machine.html

:) I really like Hawking, thanks oink...
This post is also my first participation in this classic, epic thread. Do I really need to start from the first page?;)

Would you start reading a book from the middle, or watch a film starting half-way through? :p

Both were pretty ho-hum. A proper remake with current fx technology would do the book justice. Sometimes reading H.G. Wells I think he himself is a time traveler. Can you prove he is not?

:) I really like Hawking, thanks oink...

Me too, even if I can't wrap my head around a lot of this "light speed time travel" stuff...

I have the SH's Universe: Time Travel episode recorded so it'll probably cover that same material. Probably watch it tonight (I watched the Alien Life one last night). I'm more curious to see the third one, which is the history of the universe (beginning and how it might end).

My kid is excited about the Time Travel one....although somehow I don't think he'll grasp it (he's 8 1/2). If he does grasp it, I'm yanking him out of public school and getting him into some private one.

:) I really like Hawking, thanks oink...
This post is also my first participation in this classic, epic thread. Do I really need to start from the first page?;)Nah, just go back in time to when the thread started....calling Bob Wood....

Me too, even if I can't wrap my head around a lot of this "light speed time travel" stuff...Always been interested in astronomy.
Took a class in college many moons ago and it lit fire under me concerning this subject (I had a great professor).


I have the SH's Universe: Time Travel episode recorded so it'll probably cover that same material. Probably watch it tonight (I watched the Alien Life one last night). I'm more curious to see the third one, which is the history of the universe (beginning and how it might end).Yeah, DiscoveryHD has been running SH stuff for the last couple of weeks.


My kid is excited about the Time Travel one....although somehow I don't think he'll grasp it (he's 8 1/2). If he does grasp it, I'm yanking him out of public school and getting him into some private one.
Damn well better!:D

I know time travel into the past is impossible.. or at least never regularly accessible. If it was, I would've already done it, and 1 specific event in my life would be drastically different or altered in some way. I know this because I think about the "What if" to doing that nearly every day of my life. It is by this logic that I conclude that it'll never be possible during my lifetime, or it'll never be available to someone who doesnt have a billion dollars or is apart of some scientific community.

I know time travel into the past is impossible.. or at least never regularly accessible. If it was, I would've already done it, and 1 specific event in my life would be drastically different or altered in some way. I know this because I think about the "What if" to doing that nearly every day of my life. It is by this logic that I conclude that it'll never be possible during my lifetime, or it'll never be available to someone who doesnt have a billion dollars or is apart of some scientific community.

Well I don't know about yours, but I have some sort of similar "what if" moment of mine (i won't elaborate it's not the place). I can guarantee you that if travelling to the past would be made possible during my lifetime, I would go right there back to that moment, even if I would have to risk my life for it!

Now..I'll try to catch SH on discoveryHD for sure!:)

I am afraid the past is just too tense.

If I went back in time, to that certain moment, I would cut her fncking head off....

:) I really like Hawking, thanks oink...
This post is also my first participation in this classic, epic thread. Do I really need to start from the first page?;)

I recently e-mailed him ( I know, he probably recieves about a gazillion every day) to ask why he warned against efforts to make "contact" because ET's might be hostile.....as if any species with our violent proclivities would ever have a chance of surviving long enough to figure out how to get here from there in something considerably less than several hundred thousand years. :confused:

....
My kid is excited about the Time Travel one....although somehow I don't think he'll grasp it (he's 8 1/2). If he does grasp it, I'm yanking him out of public school and getting him into some private one.

Sometimes it is easier for kids to grasp concepts like these... I discuss time and tiem travel with my kids plenty (I know, we're an odd bunch), and they get some of the concepts much quicker than my friends.

OTOH, pre-MIT private school sure is costly. ;) :)

I recently e-mailed him ( I know, he probably recieves about a gazillion every day) to ask why he warned against efforts to make "contact" because ET's might be hostile.....as if any species with our violent proclivities would ever have a chance of surviving long enough to figure out how to get here from there in something considerably less than several hundred thousand years. :confused:It is important to remember, in a Universe with unlimited possibilites ANYTHING is possible.;)

It is important to remember, in a Universe with unlimited possibilites ANYTHING is possible.;)


Absolutely, but it seems to me that if a species of conquistadors was about to extend the reach of bloodthirsty hands, claws, tentacles, etc. beyond their local system, that would be the time for some far more advanced "neighbor" to drop the hammer on them. Up until that point, there'd be every chance they'd off themselves anyway. Why interfere with natural selection unless and until you must?

SH presumes that some alien civilization would only be a little more advanced than us and in that case would represent a threat. But It's doubtful they would be a little more advanced, more likely they'd be much more advanced and would probably consider us in the same way an adult considers a youngster. That is they would chuckle and encourage us but probably say "no we're not sharing all we know just yet, you're not ready"

SH presumes that some alien civilization would only be a little more advanced than us and in that case would represent a threat. But It's doubtful they would be a little more advanced, more likely they'd be much more advanced and would probably consider us in the same way an adult considers a youngster. That is they would chuckle and encourage us but probably say "no we're not sharing all we know just yet, you're not ready"As my momma use to say to me: never assume.;)

In this situation, I would have to agree with SH.
It is better to be safe than sorry.

And, no, we shouldn't be hostile.
However, a little bit of restraint would be prudent strategy.
After all, a mistake can be fatal.

As my momma use to say to me: never assume.;)

In this situation, I would have to agree with SH.
It is better to be safe than sorry.

And, no, we shouldn't be hostile.
However, a little bit of restraint would be prudent strategy.
After all, a mistake can be fatal.

Well yeah, we shouldn't be, but we are......and we've been continuously broadcasting unambiguous evidence of our hostility for many decades. It's a little late to put that particular cat back in the proverbial bag.

we've been continuously broadcasting unambiguous evidence of our hostility for many decades. It's a little late to put that particular cat back in the proverbial bag.
That is a good point.
But I am a "half-full" guy; I hope we can walk it back.;)

That is a good point.
But I am a "half-full" guy; I hope we can walk it back.;)

I hope so too. I actually think there's a good chance that Sagan had it right.

I actually think there's a good chance that Sagan had it right.There is no way to know for sure.
IF it happens before human extinction, it could save us.

One thing is reasonable certain, it would be seriously idiotic to fnck with galactic travelers.
Even if we were to plead ignorance or a lack of evolutionary brain-power, we could be doomed.
And, NO, I am not one of those Paranoids that are all the rage these days....;)

I see no reason why we automatically assume that more advanced understanding of physics, for example, would have any indication as to ultimate intent of that race. A race who has understood how to create and use wormholes, as the "common" theory on travel, doesn't mean they are more or less likely to be aggressive.

I highly doubt that humans are any more or less hostile than any other alien race. Hostility isn't tied to technology. If tommorow some genius here on Earth cracked space travel, you know we would be off and exploring. We wouldn't be more hostile, or less hostile, just because we gained a new technology and ability in the universe.

I totally disagree with the notion that because a race is more advanced in their technology, they are automatically a threat.

I totally disagree with the notion that because a race is more advanced in their technology, they are automatically a threat.Agreed.

I totally disagree with the notion that because a race is more advanced in their technology, they are automatically a threat.

I see your point, but the more technically advanced a civilization becomes the more they become a potential threat to themselves and other civilizations.

If a form of life is inherently hostile, it seems likely to me they will destroy themselves before they develop the technology to export their hostility beyond their own planet.

I totally disagree with the notion that because a race is more advanced in their technology, they are automatically a threat.

Agreed.


I don't know about that, throughout the history of our own planet hasn't that generally been the case though? The more technologically advanced have been the ones to be feared? Sounds like fairly sound logic to me.

I see no reason why we automatically assume that more advanced understanding of physics, for example, would have any indication as to ultimate intent of that race. A race who has understood how to create and use wormholes, as the "common" theory on travel, doesn't mean they are more or less likely to be aggressive.

I highly doubt that humans are any more or less hostile than any other alien race. Hostility isn't tied to technology. If tommorow some genius here on Earth cracked space travel, you know we would be off and exploring. We wouldn't be more hostile, or less hostile, just because we gained a new technology and ability in the universe.

I totally disagree with the notion that because a race is more advanced in their technology, they are automatically a threat.

I actually think we can make a few fairly safe, fundamental assumptions. For example: any intelligent species employing technology must have some anatomical adaptation capable of dexterously manipulating objects, ( at least early in it's evolution. ) I think it's also a safe assumption that space travel of any form can only be achieved by social creatures, because a high level of cooperation would be required to produce a technological system capable of escaping any planetary gravity well.

I also personally believe that ( assuming it's even possible ) practical interstellar conveyance is a really, really tough nut to crack, requiring an intimate, comprehensive understanding of the forces controlling our universe. I think it's likely that any species will have necessarily worked out how to effectively manage the resources of their local system before they figure out a practical means of traveling to another.

All of this obviously implies a high degree of cooperative effort, and while a certain level of aggression may be a universal prerequisite for individual survival in a competitive environment, I think an effective means of controlling/obviating the negative aspects of that drive may well be a prerequisite for the long-term survival of any intelligent species employing technology and social cooperation as a survival strategy.

I think a half-cocked attitude is likely incompatible with the kind of sustained, long-term cooperation required to develop interstellar space-faring capabilities.

I don't know about that, throughout the history of our own planet hasn't that generally been the case though? The more technologically advanced have been the ones to be feared? Sounds like fairly sound logic to me.

But our "society" may also be somewhat unique in that we have different countries, political agendas, religions, etc and are motivated by greed (for the most part) rather than the greater good of society.

There is nothing saying that another planet/race couldn't have one cohesive society with one (or no) religion, thus avoiding most of the conflicts that are the cause of so much grief here.

Of course, things such as this depends on if other races would have evolved "human" qualities that make us as violent and as pre-disposed as we are. Taking a look around at nature, mankind is about the only creature that purposely will kill another member of our own species for something as trivial as tennis shoes or an xbox. Other "lower" species may fight over mates or territory, but rarely will kill a member of their own species (or other species even) just for the fun of it (and not out of necessity). Humans may be "unique" in this regard, as we are burdened with human qualities such as greed, jealousy, fear, mistrust, religion, etc.

But our "society" may also be somewhat unique in that we have different countries, political agendas, religions, etc and are motivated by greed (for the most part) rather than the greater good of society.

There is nothing saying that another planet/race couldn't have one cohesive society with one (or no) religion, thus avoiding most of the conflicts that are the cause of so much grief here.

Of course, things such as this depends on if other races would have evolved "human" qualities that make us as violent and as pre-disposed as we are. Taking a look around at nature, mankind is about the only creature that purposely will kill another member of our own species for something as trivial as tennis shoes or an xbox. Other "lower" species may fight over mates or territory, but rarely will kill a member of their own species (or other species even) just for the fun of it (and not out of necessity). Humans may be "unique" in this regard, as we are burdened with human qualities such as greed, jealousy, fear, mistrust, religion, etc.

I was thinking more along the lines of earlier history, not so much contemporary. More along the lines of how early Europeans easily dominated the less advanced peoples of the New World, Africa, etc, and of how 200,000 years ago a superior species arose to dominance that ended up wiping out the then current inhabitants(Neanderthals) of the area of Europe.

The idea that other species in the universe might be so advanced as to be above and beyond human failings, being a threat, or a danger to other species, is only based on our own sociological views and experiences with our owned, clearly flawed, species. To think that other species from beyond our "shores" have not developed similarly, or worse even, is a baseless guess at best, hence why I believe Hawking urges caution, the old "better to be safe than sorry" approach. :D

To think that other species from beyond our "shores" have not developed similarly, or worse even, is a baseless guess at best, hence why I believe Hawking urges caution, the old "better to be safe than sorry" approach. :D

Being "safe" would require that we cease all electromagnetic emissions which could theoretically be detected at interstellar distances. That clearly ain't gonna happen, so his warning is rhetorical.

I have so much I'd like to add to this, I hope I have the time to do so... back to work for now... Enjoyable thoughts all.

... I also personally believe that ( assuming it's even possible ) practical interstellar conveyance is a really, really tough nut to crack, requiring an intimate, comprehensive understanding of the forces controlling our universe. ...

Of the many fine points, I wanted to do a quick reply to this one. While I do agree that the above is the most likely scenario, the first thought that came to my mind was a simple bird.

For a really long time man wanted to fly. However, we assumed that nut was impossible to crack, as every idea had failed. Yet somehow the simple bird, a creature with no mind like a human, could fly with ease. And not just one bird, virtually all of them. Those creatures have no idea whatsoever of any understanding of how. They just fly.

Do I think there is some giant flying brid on the way from Alpha Centauri? um, no. I don't know why that was the association that came to mind, but it did, and I wanted to share with the class. :)

The space birds would be kind of neat though. Imagine what Michael Bay could do with that! :)

The assumption that life exists on other planets beside Earth is a good one. All that is needed is water.

But the assumption that that life is more advanced than we are and even knows that Earth exists is a bad assumption. That life may be 500 million light years away.

The assumption that life exists on other planets beside Earth is a good one. All that is needed is water.

But the assumption that that life is more advanced than we are and even knows that Earth exists is a bad assumption. That life may be 500 million light years away.

Life as we know it needs water, you mean.

A lot of things have to happen for us to find any advanced civilization (or for them to find us). Keep in mind that the human species has been around a very very very short time (in the grand scheme of things), so not only would we/they have to be advanced enough to find each other, but we'd also have to exist at the same time.

The assumption that life exists on other planets beside Earth is a good one. All that is needed is water.

But the assumption that that life is more advanced than we are and even knows that Earth exists is a bad assumption. That life may be 500 million light years away.

Wait, are you chiding us for making unfounded assumptions, while presuming that we're the most advanced species within a vast region of space one billion light years across? :confused:

I don't know about that, throughout the history of our own planet hasn't that generally been the case though? The more technologically advanced have been the ones to be feared? Sounds like fairly sound logic to me.I would tend to agree with this. First, you have to wonder why they'd take the chance to visit us in the first place. Second, you'd have to assume if they achieved the ability to visit us from another galaxy, they'd already know pretty much everything about us. If they didn't, they'd be taking a risk, and a super advanced race would ultimately be ready to dole out an ass whoopin' on anyone they had to if they were going into the meeting blind.

Since we are not exactly known for peaceful interaction between differing social and cultural groups here on planet Bob, an alien race who may know this wouldn't visit without thoughts of eating our brains. So, I think they'd be hostile. There's no other reason to put themselves in harms way....unless they plan on an extended stay at District 9.

Wait, are you chiding us for making unfounded assumptions, while presuming that we're the most advanced species within a vast region of space one billion light years across? :confused:

No - that sounds like your assumption. Mine is that if there is a more advanced race of being - they may be so far away from us that the distance would be too great for them to even know we exist. There may be many worlds inhabited by humans in our own section of the universe, who are no further along in technology than we are.

Unfortunately, too many here take theoritical views as fact. Or believe the things they see in science fiction movies.

Life is not defined by us - human beings. Life can be defined as simple bacteria.

No - that sounds like your assumption. Mine is that if there is a more advanced race of being - they may be so far away from us that the distance would be too great for them to even know we exist. There may be many worlds inhabited by humans in our own section of the universe, who are no further along in technology than we are.

Unfortunately, too many here take theoritical views as fact. Or believe the things they see in science fiction movies.

Life is not defined by us - human beings. Life can be defined as simple bacteria.

I don't think anyone participating in this discussion takes any aspect of these highly speculative musings as "fact"........We may have differences of opinion about what we individually believe is more or less likely. For example, I don't think it's likely that our galaxy is inhabited by a number of intelligent humanoid species sharing our precise level of technology. It goes without saying that I could be completely mistaken.

Yeah, I don't think anyone takes anything said here as fact.

Although I do believe life is probably pretty common throughout the universe (in the form of bacteria or other simple organisms).

I feel intelligent life on the other hand would be a bit rare, and a lot of things have to happen in order for them to find us or us to find them. Keep in mind that although the human race has been around for awhile, it's only been a blink of an eye in the grand scheme of things. And we have only been "advanced enough" to look for extraterrestial signals or signs of life for what? 50 years, give or take? Intelligent civilizations could have lived and died out millions of years ago, or there could be life starting out now somewhere else that won't be to the point we are for a a few million years.

I personally think it would be almost impossible that the life on Earth is unique in the vastness of the universe. Most of us cannot even comprehend how big our galaxy is....let alone the universe which has billions of galaxies. Finding each other would be a challenge of course.

Of course, who knows how advanced a civilization could be? In theory, they could have evolved to where we are at millions of years ago....think of the progress we've made in the last 100 years. Assuming we can survive as a species, how advanced would we be in another 2 million years?

Fun to think about.

But the assumption that that life is more advanced than we are and even knows that Earth exists is a bad assumption. That life may be 500 million light years away.

And possibly traversed in the blink of an eye.


A lot of things have to happen for us to find any advanced civilization (or for them to find us).

Unless we were never lost. ;)

…if there is a more advanced race of being - they may be so far away from us that the distance would be too great for them to even know we exist.

There may be 10, 10 thousand, 10 million, 10 billion civilizations where that may be the case. There also may be 10, 10 thousand, 10 million, 10 billion civilizations where that may not be the case.

There may be many worlds inhabited by humans in our own section of the universe, who are no further along in technology than we are.

And further behind, not only in our known universe, but also the unknown universes. Of course the reverse applies as well.

And possibly traversed in the blink of an eye.




Unless we were never lost. ;)



There may be 10, 10 thousand, 10 million, 10 billion civilizations where that may be the case. There also may be 10, 10 thousand, 10 million, 10 billion civilizations where that may not be the case.

And further behind, not only in our known universe, but also the unknown universes. Of course the reverse applies as well.

Aliens, that's got to be one of the be longest posts I've ever seen that didn't actually say anything. Way to take a stand, dude! :p

Marshall Savage actually postulated the opposite regarding the eternal "Are We Alone?" question. Some scientists have theorized that it would take about 600 amino acid molecules to have to come together in precisely the right way to create a self-replicating molecule - the precursor to DNA. That would seem to have to be the fundamental building block of any kind of life that we can contemplate under our current understanding of the physical laws of the universe.

Now, 600 factorial is an awfully big number. In fact, it exceeds the number of stars estimated to be in our known universe by several orders of magnitude. The possibility of such a thing happening by sheer chance is so great that it's basically impossible, except that it actually happened here. Then another whole set of fantastic circumstances would have to be met for rudimentary life to become first sentient, than space-faring without being destroyed by natural disaster or, as it sometimes seems inevitable with us earthlings, destroying itself.

So, it's actually no great leap of imagination to speculate that yes, we are the only life forms - certainly the only intelligent species - in the galaxy, maybe even the whole universe. It's just math. ;)

I recently e-mailed him ( I know, he probably recieves about a gazillion every day) to ask why he warned against efforts to make "contact" because ET's might be hostile.....as if any species with our violent proclivities would ever have a chance of surviving long enough to figure out how to get here from there in something considerably less than several hundred thousand years. :confused:

Time dilation makes that possible. As long as you can approach a significant fraction of light-speed, time will slow down for you. Journeys of thousands of light years can be accomplished in mere decades. The faster you go, the more time you shave off your trip. Of course, that trip is one-way; by the time you get to your destination, everyone you left behind will have been dead for centuries. :( Or in some cases, perhaps involving an ex-wife or two, you might feel :)

Faster than light travel is likely to always be the stuff of science fiction. If we ever do become a truly interstellar species, doing it the hard, slow way will probably be how we'll colonize our neck of the stellar woods - hopping from star to star, leaving our civilization behind us at every stop to grow and hopefully thrive. The afore-mentioned Marshall Savage, a very smart guy, calculates it could take as little as a million years of this stellar leapfrogging to effectively colonize the whole Milky Way. Think of it - in a relatively short period of time, we could become the galactic version of kudsu!

I see your point, but the more technically advanced a civilization becomes the more they become a potential threat to themselves and other civilizations.

If a form of life is inherently hostile, it seems likely to me they will destroy themselves before they develop the technology to export their hostility beyond their own planet.

Depends on whether they are 'social' creatures. A race likely would not destroy itself if they have a common 'enemy'. As long as there was an 'evil' race nearby (threat), then they would not destroy themselves...the other race may manage it, however.

Time dilation makes that possible. As long as you can approach a significant fraction of light-speed, time will slow down for you. Journeys of thousands of light years can be accomplished in mere decades. The faster you go, the more time you shave off your trip. Of course, that trip is one-way; by the time you get to your destination, everyone you left behind will have been dead for centuries. :( Or in some cases, perhaps involving an ex-wife or two, you might feel :)

That's the problem with relativistic travel. Every journey is a one-way trip, and the motivation to do something like that would almost certainly be survival, not a quest for knowledge which cannot be shared. If you have a good handle on resources, there's really no reason to do that, so it would likely be a desperation move.

Faster than light travel is likely to always be the stuff of science fiction. If we ever do become a truly interstellar species, doing it the hard, slow way will probably be how we'll colonize our neck of the stellar woods - hopping from star to star, leaving our civilization behind us at every stop to grow and hopefully thrive. The afore-mentioned Marshall Savage, a very smart guy, calculates it could take as little as a million years of this stellar leapfrogging to effectively colonize the whole Milky Way. Think of it - in a relatively short period of time, we could become the galactic version of kudsu!

I think that presupposes the same kind of uncontrolled population growth and consumptive habits which have gotten us to where we are today. Hardly a good recipe for long-term success.

That's the problem with relativistic travel. Every journey is a one-way trip, and the motivation to do something like that would almost certainly be survival, not a quest for knowledge which cannot be shared. If you have a good handle on resources, there's really no reason to do that, so it would likely be a desperation move.

Possibly, or maybe just the urge to explore. I would postulate that if the means existed to make such a one-way colonization trip into the unknown, the number of applicants would far exceed the spaces available. A lot of people just want to get away, you know? ;)

I think that presupposes the same kind of uncontrolled population growth and consumptive habits which have gotten us to where we are today. Hardly a good recipe for long-term success.

Do you really see that changing any time soon? Those are the factors that will drive any human colonization effort, from Mars onward. In fact, one might argue that growth of population and consumption has provided the stimulus for technology to advance to today's level. The "Red Mars" series of books by Kim Stanley Robinson explores some of these pressures in terms of a hypothetical colonization of Mars, looking at both socio-political and commercial interests as drivers. Good stuff.

I wonder if NASA (or, at least, the Men in Black) secretly keeps tabs on this thread....

Possibly, or maybe just the urge to explore. I would postulate that if the means existed to make such a one-way colonization trip into the unknown, the number of applicants would far exceed the spaces available. A lot of people just want to get away, you know? ;)

Sure, but who's gonna pay-up for the construction costs of a world ship, ark, or even a less ambitious freezer? There's no return on investment unless you're along for the ride, because it's a one-way trip. Distance and relativistic effects would result in a complete loss of continuity between the original population and any "colonists" so there's really no motivation for any government or business entity to become involved in that kind of effort, unless it becomes a necessity....an act of desperation.

Do you really see that changing any time soon? Those are the factors that will drive any human colonization effort, from Mars onward. In fact, one might argue that growth of population and consumption has provided the stimulus for technology to advance to today's level. The "Red Mars" series of books by Kim Stanley Robinson explores some of these pressures in terms of a hypothetical colonization of Mars, looking at both socio-political and commercial interests as drivers. Good stuff.

I don't have any idea whether or not we'll change our habits, but it's becoming ever clearer, that unless we begin to reduce our impact on the very finite environment of Earth, we many never even begin to exploit the resources of our local system. Once we crack fusion, the game changes, and I think that will happen, but perhaps not as soon as we'd like to believe. I also think that either we'll get a handle on negative environmental impacts of human activity within a few decades, or nature will find a balance by killing off most of us. If we can't manage not to totally f#ck up a temperate self-regulating planet with a global ecosystem, how likely is it that we'll ever successfully colonize less hospitable worlds?

It's a completely wild guess based on nothing more than gut instinct, but I tend to believe any technology exploiting species will also need to clear some significant hurdles of enlightenment long before they ever have a chance to go flitting around the universe on a whim.

If we can't manage not to totally f#ck up a temperate self-regulating planet with a global ecosystem, how likely is it that we'll ever successfully colonize less hospitable worlds?
I like that sentence. Don't get me wrong - I'm about to go outside and throw my candy bar wrapper on the ground, but I still like the statement.

Remember, let's keep this thread "fun", that's why we're here.

larry

Remember, let's keep this thread "fun", that's why we're here.

larry

Neither of us were being "political," Larry. I knew exactly what he meant because I do it too. ;)

Sure, but who's gonna pay-up for the construction costs of a world ship, ark, or even a less ambitious freezer? There's no return on investment unless you're along for the ride, because it's a one-way trip. Distance and relativistic effects would result in a complete loss of continuity between the original population and any "colonists" so there's really no motivation for any government or business entity to become involved in that kind of effort, unless it becomes a necessity....an act of desperation.


There is that. We have Mars as a kind of "back-up" planet. We could terraform it, live and prosper there, and exploit what resources it has. But eventually, one might expect the human race to grow so wealthy and the population pressures so intense that both these planets will essentially be "used up" and the technology sufficiently evolved to allow us to consider spreading out. At that point, interstellar colonization, one-way as it is, may be considered an option. It's a long way off, for sure, unless there's a paradigm shift in a number of areas. Maybe we'll simply become wealthy and bored enough so that colonization ships and the cost of constructing them will be born willingly by the population. Or maybe people will self-finance their own trips.

But whenever and however the means come to exist, and as soon as it happens, there will be no shortage of volunteers.

But whenever and however the means come to exist, and as soon as it happens, there will be no shortage of volunteers.ONLY if there will be girls.:p

Seriously though, I am beginning to doubt "The Quest for New Frontiers" of the last thousand years was little more than a dash for cash.
Unless there is an economic payoff, I can't see humans doing jack-squat with space travel.

ONLY if there will be girls.:p

Seriously though, I am beginning to doubt "The Quest for New Frontiers" of the last thousand years was little more than a dash for cash.
Unless there is an economic payoff, I can't see humans doing jack-squat with space travel.

Yup. The "Moon shot" was as much a political statement as anything else. If it hadn't been for the Cold War, I don't think it would have happened.

Yup. The "Moon shot" was as much a political statement as anything else. If it hadn't been for the Cold War, I don't think it would have happened.

Sadly, I think that's probably true. The only way to get huge publicly financed projects done is to give them a military or national security justification, as in the construction of the Interstate highway system. If the military "needs" it, there is no expense too great, no challenge too daunting, and the public has been conditioned to willingly accept this state of affairs.

It will be interesting to see if commercial space flight ever catches on. You'd think there would be a finite pool of people willing to pay millions of dollars for a quick trip into low earth orbit.

It will be interesting to see if commercial space flight ever catches on. You'd think there would be a finite pool of people willing to pay millions of dollars for a quick trip into low earth orbit.
I agree.
Most people that have the $$$ to do this type of thing are somewhat risk-adverse....at least with their lives.
Also, it is going to take awhile before the images of Space Shuttles blowing up in everyone's mind disappears.
This vehicle Virgin is trying to use looks suspiciously like a SS.:rolleyes:

More reasons why we need to think this thru:
http://www.cracked.com/article_18547_6-reasons-space-travel-will-always-suck.html

More reasons why we need to think this thru:
http://www.cracked.com/article_18547_6-reasons-space-travel-will-always-suck.html


Enlightening article.

Here's a little bright spot as the shuttle fleet gets mothballed: http://www.csmonitor.com/Innovation/Horizons/2010/0527/Scramjet-powered-X-51A-Waverider-missile-breaks-Mach-6-record

Here's a little bright spot as the shuttle fleet gets mothballed: http://www.csmonitor.com/Innovation/Horizons/2010/0527/Scramjet-powered-X-51A-Waverider-missile-breaks-Mach-6-record

Very cool article.

Although I am a big fan of space exploration, the shuttles are obsolete (about 30 years ago;)).
Way, way too expensive, with little return (other than the Hubble fixes:)).

Very cool article.

Although I am a big fan of space exploration, the shuttles are obsolete (about 30 years ago;)).
Way, way too expensive, with little return (other than the Hubble fixes:)).


I once saw some photographs of the inside "business end" of a shuttle. It looked like a plumber's nightmare....... Way too much stuff to go wrong with the entire shuttle system.

It looked like a plumber's nightmare....... Way too much stuff to go wrong with the entire shuttle system.Agreed.

I already know all the answers. to the people worried about time travel. time is not some external phenomenon. we are in the physical we are just the pingpong riding the wave not moving in x direction just up and down as the wave passes through the medium. time is internal and it is affected and controlled by your perception. time exists uniquely to that individual. they can alter and travel within their minds throughout future and past events. but not in a form of this realm. sounds crazy but trust me whenever we are at that level of knowledge(where i have been at least in belief not the technical stuff ..yet.) and you can step back to get a broader perspective of what everything is was and will while never not and never having been it will most likely drive them into a perpetual hell to never see and end to anything and it just keeps going and going. its not cool you dont want that vision or experience. i know humans have capacity to be caring and thats damn sure what they did. let the ignorant bastards figure it out on their own. i mean why be sadistic.. if you can alter time matter existence how you want it not a challange or a potential difference there is no longer a point to be. zap im out. thats why ive made something for myself to do like mopping up water with a rake. sure it might be inefficient but its something to do. eventually ill get it all up. trying to give others a small boost so they see what i did. but just a peep cause im a nice guy why ruin the fun. my origin told me i did it cause i had nothing else left to do i thought i would give something a chance to experience one cycle of the madness to come from not and master their reality. that day of judgement is the day all conciousness is slaughtered because it must be so dont eat the apple off the tree of knowledge because ignorance truly is bliss

Someone far more intelligent than I suggested to me that time doesn't exist. If true, then the universe is a congealed mass and time and space are mere illusions of our consciousness.

It's an interesting concept.

well he would half way be correct but yes the phenomenon we refer to as time does exist though not in as detailed a description as it should. see you have the time it takes for a motor say running 100 watts to rotate x number of times @ which could vary depending on its enviroments and characteristics specific to that motor. that is what we base our daily functions off of , the rotation of the planet etc you know what i mean. so any how the other side of it is due to the individual observer, they have proven that for each person time flows differently not to say that for x number of people they may be exactly the same but generally older people perceive it the flow of time going much faster than a young person. it is due to some synapse or ...i cant remember exactly what it was called but it is the time it takes the electrical signal to travel from point a to b. you can do this your self by tapping a pencil or your finger subconciously ie start tapping it and forget about it someone else has to observe and relay that info to you later. i like that aspect because it means you as a individual can manipulate how you experience the flow of time internally which means for some people they get much more out of that amount of time than others. maybe not travel through it but if you are a talented person who stays busy you can acheive greatness as fast as you can discipline yourself to achieve it.:)
i got my perspective covered on a very very broad view from lots of angles. the key here is stay open minded. keep at the very least a constant acceleration.

Saw Time Machine earlier today. I was a bit disappointed in the story line as well as the ending. The special effects were good, but the plot never really developed and was no comparison to the original. It is a totally different story with few similarities to the classic. Perhaps I was disappointed because I expected a similar story line.

9 years ago or was it yesterday?

Wow! If time travel was really possible I would go back to 3-8-02 and warn mhetman that whatever he does , do not start this thread! I had a full head of (greyless) hair when this thread was started.Wonder how many of you now have kids that were just a twinkle in your eyes when this thread was started that are now reading this...In a couple of years ill probably have kids that will be posting thier views on time travel here.Well maybe time travel will be possible then...Maybe time travel is really now possible and one of you here is my great grandson....hmmmm:eek:

I once saw some photographs of the inside "business end" of a shuttle. It looked like a plumber's nightmare....... Way too much stuff to go wrong with the entire shuttle system.

NASA's thinking on this might be 'Keep everything exposed so you can monitor it's condition and fix it quickly'
Imagine something goes wrong and everything's covered with pretty white panels. Some of the early plane cockpits were a nightmare of mechanical fixtures.

NASA's thinking on this might be 'Keep everything exposed so you can monitor it's condition and fix it quickly'
Imagine something goes wrong and everything's covered with pretty white panels. Some of the early plane cockpits were a nightmare of mechanical fixtures. Take a look at this inside an Atlas Missile silo in 1962..

BTW, that's me holding the checklist in the front.

Take a look at this inside an Atlas Missile silo in 1962..

BTW, that's me holding the checklist in the front.

That equipment has an almost steampunk look to it.:D

That equipment has an almost steampunk look to it.:D

That's because the Atlas Missle (our first ICBM) was a liquid-fueled (LOX and RP-1) rocket.

We moved to solid fuel. Many of the Russian ICBMs were liquid fueled. It takes a long time to get a LF'd rocket up in the air. That's why we went to solid fuel rockets (ICBMs)

Take a look at this inside an Atlas Missile silo in 1962..

BTW, that's me holding the checklist in the front.

Interesting - what is the device with all the bolts in the top center. Looks like some type of regulator?

That's because the Atlas Missle (our first ICBM) was a liquid-fueled (LOX and RP-1) rocket.

We moved to solid fuel. Many of the Russian ICBMs were liquid fueled. It takes a long time to get a LF'd rocket up in the air. That's why we went to solid fuel rockets (ICBMs)

It took about 15-18 minutes with Atlas from "push the button to lift off." Not so bad when you had to factor in the LOx load.... The RP1 was always on board. The timing was less of an issue than the safety and volatility involved.

Interesting - what is the device with all the bolts in the top center. Looks like some type of regulator?

It's been nearly 50 years, but I think you are correct. It was an expansion device.

It took about 15-18 minutes with Atlas from "push the button to lift off." Not so bad when you had to factor in the LOx load.... The RP1 was always on board. The timing was less of an issue than the safety and volatility involved.

At the height of the Cold War, 15 minutes was a lifetime.

Exclusive: NASA Scientist Claims Evidence of Alien Life on Meteorite (http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/03/05/exclusive-nasa-scientists-claims-evidence-alien-life-meteorite/#ixzz1FjnE41nZ)

http://img203.imageshack.us/img203/5792/actualbacterium.jpg
A photograph taken through a scanning electron microscope of a CI1 meteorite (right) is similar in size and overall structure to the giant bacterium Titanospirillum velox (left), an organism found here on planet Earth, a NASA scientist said.

Exclusive: NASA Scientist Claims Evidence of Alien Life on Meteorite (http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/03/05/exclusive-nasa-scientists-claims-evidence-alien-life-meteorite/#ixzz1FjnE41nZ)

A photograph taken through a scanning electron microscope ...

That is pretty thin...

Exclusive: NASA Scientist Claims Evidence of Alien Life on Meteorite (http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/03/05/exclusive-nasa-scientists-claims-evidence-alien-life-meteorite/#ixzz1FjnE41nZ)

http://img203.imageshack.us/img203/5792/actualbacterium.jpg
A photograph taken through a scanning electron microscope of a CI1 meteorite (right) is similar in size and overall structure to the giant bacterium Titanospirillum velox (left), an organism found here on planet Earth, a NASA scientist said. Actually, that is the alien ear-wig controlling Charlie Sheen.

It's been nearly 50 years, but I think you are correct. It was an expansion device.

The mushroom shape is usually a pressure reduction valve of some type. I have mini versions around the shop.

Back to the film - This string made me curious enough to revisit the film. It didn't take long to remember why I never considered owning this one.