Comments by "TheRezro" (@TheRezro) on "" video.

@joost199207 It could be also slow approach tactic. Basically you show up on horizon, and then gradually come closer. So people would not be taken by surprise. Obviously they would react to reaction of approached specie accordingly. Directly flying on Earth would probably end with mass nuclear response, and for quite obvious reasons. So in short, we learn in future. But if you ask my they probably always were here. Especially because lack of FTL suggest von Neumann probes, and they generally work by autonomously building network activated when something interesting show up.
4
No. In fact scientist did consider such possibility (definitely SETI), though future research make it unlikely. Only non scientist think that scientist are those crazy people who deny everything, because of "logic" and "science" even if they see that opposite is true. Real scientists consider and test every possibility. In short when they see ghost, they don't act like idiots because those don't exist. Quite opposite, they ask how that thing defined as "ghost" work.. that they usually find as scam or misconception as the source is other story. After all sometimes improbable things are the things.
4
And on what you base that presumption? They could also deliberately pretend to not be artificial object, only relying on passive observations. Or they already are here and it was part of close approach tactic.
2
@Matt_10203 That is basically what scientist saying. SETI was interested in it due to some weird properties of it. Not only what Scot said, but also weird shape and metalic composition. They didn't find anything unusual though. Still such possibility wasn't entirely excluded.
2
@jeffvader811 To be specific they even couldn't. At least without decades of preparation. It moves with speed 26 km/s. Fastest object created by us (Voyager 1), with decades of gravitational catapulting has 17 km/s.
2
@ppsarrakis Sort of. I would say that everything is theoretically possible, but only proved or disproved is a fact. Though nothing is really proved or disproved for sure, so facts don't exist. Only things proved well enough to be base of future research.
2
@ExaltedDuck You mistake being employed for the task, with being a researcher in general. If you consider reputation before the discovery, then you are just blue collar man. I obviously don't have anything against scientist focusing on specific purpose, but anyone who call knowledge a "junk" can't be considered as real scientist. And for the note there are scientist employed to research paranormal, who obviously usually debunk hoaxes but still. As you should know. Greatest discoveries in history were considered as "junk" by some douchebags, at one point or another so it isn't really any argument here. Also no one deny that special claims need special proves, but it doesn't mean that such possibility disappear just because people decide to ignore it. Denying something also need prove that it don't exist, otherwise it is just a dogma and dogmas aren't science.
2
@wilhelmpurge8721 No. It isn't probable at all 0_0 There is not many ways something like "life after death" could be even a thing. Forcibly attaching probability to you faith, show only that your believes are weak. And in this case believes strain from the existing probability (established by real scientists). So you claim is either total bullshit, or a bad attempt of the joke what end with bullshit.
2
What sources you use? When I heard about it, thy always said that they only speculate over such possibility.
1
Galaxy has a center you know?
1
@keagannelka5137 Then you can compare relations between them.
1
Ok, before I even start watching it: As far I understand Oumuamua is really interesting case because it was unusually fast interstellar asteroid, what has also unusual "cigarette" shape what suggest that it could be alien space craft. Obviously after some proper research it become more and more unlikely, as for example it spin in a way more usual for real asteroids then a space craft. But it is still quite interesting case. So who know in the end?
1
Even Voyager 1 isn't fast enough..
1
@plasmaburndeath I'm not sure how that is relevant considering use of gravitational slingshot? But as far I understand all faster probes achieve that speed either on reentry or close orbit, so they are totally useless for that purpose. Fastest probe what did that on escape velocity was New Horizons, but it wasn't as fast as Voyager 1 what did that through gravity assist. Making fast enough probe would be titanic task, and no one really consider it seriously.
1
On what you base such claim?
1
@Proman642 Explanation accepted.
1
@Coovargo For the note what make nowadays Fermi Paradox irrelevant regard communication is the fact that highly compressed data transfer is almost indistinguishable from the buzz. Even SETI know that though they hope that they bump on some random analog signal.
1
@souravthakur1252 Kardashev scale is a nonsense. It was still made when everyone assumed that civilizations work like cancer, expanding like in 4X video game. When from modern perspective it is way more likely for civilization to develop in cybernetic brain (expansion of internet), and in fact decrees use of resources focusing on efficient development then wild expansion. In fact it is unlikely for any civilization to reach Type II. Even most advanced civilizations probably would be below I.
1
@Matt_10203 True, but still. Also it is probably not a space ship, but also it could be a space ship.
1
So you wish for nuclear winter?
1
That is basically van Neumann probe tactic 1 to 1.
1
@Slav4o911 First of all whole affair is because this rock was and basically still is "conspicuous", as it has some traits of theoretical spacecraft, even if they didn't find anything solid yet. Secondary, we have here mostly two types: Crazy people believing in alien conspiracies, and people who don't deny such possibility but acknowledging that whole affair was overblown. Number of denialist is quite small, because most scientist do consider such possibility. And I completely don't get your last argument? Famous Fermi Paradox needed to explain shocking lack of proves of alien civilizations regard expectations of scientists. Not the opposite. Also contrary to what crazies believe there is scientific theory of God. Just this debate is irrelevant to most research so most scientist prefer pragmatically to not believe in such entity. Anti-theist are small sect of people who only pretend to have science behind, as it is "flat erther" thing as there are no proves of that as much as for opposite claim.
1
You people do know that this thing was insanely fast? We probably would need launch operation decades earlier for that.
1
So why no one ever make that before? The conclusion of the project was that such thing would be too complex and costly, without much real gain.
1
@ExaltedDuck No. Only hypocritical thing here is that you call yourself the scientist and don't act as scientist denying point of science what is the research, dragging debate into personal zone. Also I don't deny your point about "shady journalism" but even here you forget that most articles mentioned possible spacecraft and weren't scientific by definition. Even if it was sensational journalism, some scientists (SETI) did consider such possibility, but didn't find anything conclusive. "It's not science, it's speculation" Hypothesis is first step in science. Also all sources what Scot described did fallow that pattern. First the possibility, later the analyze usually inconclusive. That journalism what isn't science overblown the conclusions, is irrelevant toward the science itself. "Occam's razor should lead us to look at the likelier explanations" No, it isn't how it work. Ockham write how to avoid circular proves, but didn't promote ignorance. Yes, you can't prove one theory with another theory (at least without specific reason), but fact that something is more probable isn't prove for anything. In fact making such assumptions break Ockham Razor as you use something what is still a theory as a argument. Obviously making practical assumptions for cases irrelevant to your research is another story. It is why most scientist is atheist, but not many is antitheist. And again, journalism isn't a scence by definition and what is "waste of resources" and "more realizable ideas and technology" are just your opinions. It is why history usually remember those who did go against "obvious things" (at the time) like Ether or Geocentric theory. Because in end, the proves are what matter in science.
1
You clearly miss the point. It isn't conspiracy nuts thing 0_0
1
@heliosprime6426 I mean that your poor attempt of joke is miss-targeted 0_0
1
@mikewade777 I know, but how that is relevant to the topic?
1
But still there is a probability..
1
@RusStarik Your logic is flawed. What theory that "we have only one rock with life on it" (specifically Rare Earth Hypothesis) is even relevant to theory that unusual aspects of "X" fit theoretical models of space ship? You can't prove or disprove theory with another theory. That is scientific method 1 to 1, and it is exactly what you argue here. Plus we have prove that it is probable. Statistical to be specific. It is why real scientists did investigate the case, and I seriously doubt you are one.
1
@dinkdok5204 Well, d'oh! I never claimed anything to be a fact. I argued only probability case. There is few statistical proves for at least probability that extraterrestrial life could possibly exist. Most famously Drake Equation, what even in most extreme Rare Earth Hypothesis interpretation still give at least few probable cases for our galaxy itself. Scale of the cosmos itself make probable that what did happen on Earth could happen somewhere else on (put here absurd number) of planet there is. On the other hand there is maybe few theories regard life after death, and most involving aliens or pseudo-science. I know maybe one what suggest that there is possibility that brain function could even react on outside signal, what generally is proved to not be the case. But that doesn't mean anything by itself, because some form of advanced system should be still involved, and not just possibility to detect signal. Obviously anything from that don't have any legit proves, or even concrete theoretical structure of how it could work (at least not involving aliens). So claims that it is more probable then hypothesis what at least has some calculations (and loop back) is bit ignoramus. Not that it wasn't transparent case of playing smart ass anyway 0_0 PS: I'm not sure what your believes has anything to do here? After all atheism technically don't exclude "life after death" possibility. it is only lack of believe in a deities. If we rely on such arguments, fact that I'm agnostic is at least somewhat relevant even if I wouldn't really use it, as it generally prove nothing.
1