UFO UpDates
A mailing list for the study of UFO-related phenomena
'Its All Here In Black & White'
Location: UFOUpDatesList.Com > 2007 > Jul > Jul 29

Re: The Fermi Paradox

From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 15:11:28 +0000
Archived: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 23:18:30 -0400
Subject: Re: The Fermi Paradox


>From: Michael Tarbell <mtarbell.nul>
>To: ufoupdates.nul
>Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 23:21:26 -0600
>Subject: Re: The Fermi Paradox

>>From: Richard Hall <hallrichard99.nul>
>>To: ufoupdates.nul
>>Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 14:43:49 +0000
>>Subject: Re: The Fermi Paradox

>>>'The Fermi Paradox is a remarkably strong argument. You can
>>>quibble about the speed of alien spacecraft, and whether they
>>>can move at 1% of the speed of light or 10% of the speed of
>>>light. It doesn't matter. You can argue about how long it would
>>>take for a new star colony to spawn colonies of its own. It
>>>still doesn't matter. Any halfway reasonable assumption about
>>>how fast colonization could take place still ends up with time
>>>scales that are profoundly shorter than the age of the Galaxy.
>>>It's like having a heated discussion about whether Spanish ships
>>>of the 16th century could heave along at two knots or twenty.
>>>Either way they could speedily colonize the Americas.'

>>The Fermi Paradox is a remarkably blind and highly over-rated
>>off-the-wall proclamation. Clearly it is based on the
>>demonstrably false assumption that there is no evidence of alien
>>visitation. In fact there is a huge body of data strongly
>>suggestive of alien visitation. Where are they? Right under our
>>noses. The Fermi's of the workld badly need to study that data
>>very carefully.

>Unfortunately Dick, this will not serve to dismiss the Fermi
>Paradox. You say it is demonstrably false that there is no
>evidence of alien visitation. I will not press you to deliver
>that demonstration, but rather ask, why is the subject at all
>controversial? Why is the existence of extraterrestrial beings
>not completely obvious? I do *not* find them right under my
>nose.

>If you consider the Fermi Paradox trivial and/or resolved, I
>would be interested in hearing your arguments to that effect. I
>do not dispute the evidence for anomalous/non-human aerial
>phenomena, but I believe Fermi's question is well-posed
>nevertheless.

>Mike


Mike,

I don't follow your logic at all. In shorthand, the Fermi
Paradox is a proclamation by an uninformed scientist who, I feel
quite cetrtain, never investigated a single hardcore,
unexplained craft-like object UFO case. So when he asks where
are they, I say look right under your nose.

In The UFO Evidence, Vol. II, and lots of other places I have
fully documented the strong patterns of credibly reported craft-
like objects (geometrical configuration, portholes, beings,
etc., etc.) These strong reports are readily available to anyone
who makes even a healf-hearted effort to find them. So when
someone like Fermi argues from theory to say there are no
visitors, I (as an empiricist) say look at the evidence.

If you haven't looked at this evidence, I suggest that you do
so. As I said, there is lots of evidence strongly suggestive of
alien visitation. I didn't say proof, though it is tantamount to
that.


- Dick




Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast

See:

http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/


[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |

UFO UpDates Main Index

UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp


Archive programming by Glenn Campbell at Glenn-Campbell.com