Replies

"I was kind of goaded into my mocking mode, which is never very difficult to do."

Hey, but then you wouldn't be you! That would be most unfortunate. :)

"I don't believe that we have been visited by alien civilizations. I would like to see some proof before I do believe that."

I would say I don't believe that we have NOT been visited. All I know is that one can't logically dismiss the notion since they haven't personally seen a visitation.

"I happen to believe that limitations imposed by time and space preclude actual physical contact with an alien civilization, but would welcome proof that I am in error."

Imagine that it's the early 1940's, and there is this theory that there is something called an atomic chain reaction. Far out stuff being presented by a German Jewish expatriate to the President. You believe it's a fantasy - would you have been right or wrong? Prior to the Trinity blast, or Hiroshima, right or wrong is a matter of belief on YOUR part, not the scientists at Alamogordo. That's where FTL propulsion is at this point, but without an apparent government crash program to develop it, a la the Manhattan project. The first work by a Dr. Alcubierre opened the theoretical basis of warp drive physics, and in the ensuing decade it has been under refinement. Real stuff, admittedly exotic, but quite real. Will warp drives be developed by humanity in our lifetimes? Who knows? But it is a sure bet that science is beginning to realize for the umpteenth time that barriers are meant to be broken. FTL travel is just another nut to crack.

"If contact is as wide-ranging and verifiable as some UFOlogists assert, I don't think a sliver of incontrovertible evidence is an unreasonable request."

Sometimes proof requires development. Sometimes proof is denied. I have not seen a platypus, except in pictures, but I don't feel I can wholesale deny the existence of the baffling creatures. Then again, I don't have to believe in absurdities that spring up like sown-together animals from a freak show, either. Once again, balance.

Once again, my philosophy is that our universe is not simply broken down into the physics we "understand" today or into some sort of pop-fiction notion of otherworldly things we can't yet truly know.

I'm very interested in what Petah Jennings has to say, but i suspect it will be merely entertainment. And it'll be Bush's fault! ;)

At a recent database demonstration a co-worker used a website on UFOs as part of her presentation. I casually joked, "Research for the lunatic fringe."

Shortly later this person, who is noticeably eccentric, e-mailed me a whole diatribe, about how narrow-minded I was and that I insulted her mother, who had received numerous visitations from extraterrestrials. She cited biblical encounters with angels (i.e. Jacob) as an example. In the end she told me, "Open your mind."

Opening my mind is one thing. But letting my brains fall out is something else. While I could accept the existence of unidentified flying objects -- the fact that they're unidentified would not make them, in my opinion, angels. Or that I am so holy for that kind of rapport with them.

As far as religion -- I often wonder why people are quick to dismiss the concept of a Supreme Being, but are quick, in fact eager, to believe in little green men with giant heads. Until anyone has actually seen them, I have to remain skeptical.