In reference to: UFOs: Challenge to SETI Specialists
Nuclear Physicist / Lecturer Stanton T. Friedman 5/02
(
http://www.v-j-enterprises.com/sfufovsseti.html)
Point 1. A fair point, but what it has to do with the validity of SETI escapes me completely.
SETI people argue against ET already being here because of the vast distances involved.
”Our best rockets travel at about 10 miles per second. Even to reach the nearest other star system, Alpha Centauri, at about 4.2 light-years’ distance, would take such a rocket 60,000 years. There are about a thousand stars like the Sun within 100 light-years of us. To investigate them all with spacecraft would take millions of years and vast amounts of money.”(
http://www.seti.org/Page.aspx?pid=558#a3)
Freidman is merely pointing out that one years worth of acceleration at 1G will get you close to the speed of light – much less time if larger accelerations are used. Also that in the past, eminent scientists have wildly miscalculated – for example (1941) stating it was impossible for man to reach the moon (!), (1926) it was impossible to reach earth orbit (!), and (1903) impossible for man to fly without balloons (!). We must account for advances in technology – “the future is definitely NOT a mere extrapolation of the past”.
Point 2. Utter cobblers. Nobody at SETI (to my knowledge) assumes that radio is the ultimate means of communication, but at the moment it's the best bet we have.
”SETI researchers look for narrow-band signals, the type that are confined to a small (usually 1 Hz or less) spot on the dial…” (
http://www.seti.org/Page.aspx?pid=558#a3)
The distinctly unscientific assumption here is that this is how aliens would communicate with us… yeah, right…
Point 3. Again, totally irrelevant to the validity of SETI.
“3. Why do SS make proclamations about how aliens would behave (…)We hear such comments as that aliens, once radio contact is established, would teach us about all the secrets of the universe. Just why would an advanced technological civilization share its secrets with a primitive society”
(
http://www.v-j-enterprises.com/sfufovsseti.html)
”If E.T. is a decent (or at least competent) engineer, he'll use narrow-band signals as beacons to get our attention.
(…)
It's conceivable that an advanced and altruistic civilization will send us simple pictures and other information.
(…)
(ET) wouldn’t be aware that we had received their message…” (
http://www.seti.org/Page.aspx?pid=558#a3)
Point 4. Okay, now I know why you like Friedman. But again, no relevance to the validity of SETI.
This is starting to look a lot like a case of well-poisoning. So far he's attacking the SETI people, not the project.
Freidman is merely asking a question: “Why is it that SS take every opportunity to attack the notion of alien visitations without any reference to the many large scale scientific studies?” He then indicates the many studies conducted and that (for example) the Battelle study found 21.5% of 3201 cases were UNKNOWNS and that the greater the reliability of the reports, the greater the percentage of UNKNOWNS. Further , that statistical cross comparisons between the UNKNOWNS and the KNOWNS showed that the probability that the former were just missed KNOWNS was less than 1% for six different characteristics. Given this (and much more) research exists, Freidman states:
“The basic rules for the lack of attention to the relevant data by well educated, but ignorant-about-UFOs-professionals, especially SS, seem to be:
1. Don't bother me with the facts, my mind is made up.
2. What the public doesn't know, I won't tell them.
3. If one can't attack the data, attack the people; it is much easier.
4. Do one's research by proclamation. Investigation is too much trouble and nobody will know the difference anyway.
How else can one explain such totally baseless, but seemingly profound, proclamations as "The reliable cases are uninteresting and the interesting cases are unreliable. Unfortunately there are no cases that are both reliable and interesting." (See Sagan12).
The fact is that 35% of the EXCELLENT cases in BBSR14 were UNKNOWNS and therefore Interesting. Only 18% of the POOR cases were Unknowns. Surely professional scientists are supposed to base their conclusions on study of the relevant data, rather than proclamations?”
(
http://www.v-j-enterprises.com/sfufovsseti.html)
Point 5. Utterly irrelevant. This is getting silly.
Freidman is merely noting the seeming naivety of the SETI specialists when they claim that they don’t think anyone is “hiding” aliens.
“Is someone hiding aliens? We don't think so.’ (
http://www.seti.org/Page.aspx?pid=558#a3)
Freidman notes the security implications (weapons development), the huge size of the US “black budget” and the obvious government cover-up in this regard.
“The NSA had openly admitted withholding 156 UFO documents even from a Federal Court Judge given a high security clearance. When these were "released" more than 15 years later, only 1 or 2 lines per page were not covered by whiteout. I have received formerly classified CIA UFO documents on which only 8 words are not blacked out.
USAF General Carroll Bolender stated15 that "Reports of UFOs which could effect national security... are NOT part of the Blue Book System." One should note that the very high quality military monitoring systems operated by the Air Defence Command and the NRO and NSA produce data which is born classified and is not released to the public.”
] (
http://www.v-j-enterprises.com/sfufovsseti.html)
Point 6. Complete crap. And that's the polite considered version. No such assumptions are made. Everyone at SETI admits that it's a wild shot in the dark, that the likelihood of an alien civilization emitting radio waves in just the right time-frame for us to detect them is tiny, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't look.
If there are aliens visiting us then they
must have the capability to contact the SETI scientists. All they have to do is land at Mountain View!
“Without that data, they have no evidence to support the many assumptions they make about ETI. For example, it is assumed that there is intelligent life all over the place, that some of this life is more advanced than we are; but that ET communications and flight technology are stuck at the level of radio and chemical rockets, and ETs are trying to attract our attention via radio!! No evidence has been provided that any of these assumptions are true. And yet these same SS insist on ufologists providing them with an alien body!!”
] (
http://www.v-j-enterprises.com/sfufovsseti.html)
Point 7. His basic point here is "We shouldn't look because current technology is far less efficient than future technology will be, and the aliens should already know that we're here." At least, I think that was his point, it's hard to tell. Irrelevant drivel.
Freidman is merely making the point that if ET is really as advanced as some make out (as advanced as we are that is!), then they would not have to wait to pick up our radio signals to know we were here… signs of life would have been obvious well before that eventuality… indeed, we know from our own searches for extra-solar planets that we also would recognise signs of life WELL before we picked up any potential radio signals!
Point 8. He's starting to foam at the mouth a bit with this one, it really isn't an attractive quality.
Freidman is pointing out (again) the naivety of the SETI specialists. He makes the point about the propensity of humans for destructive hostility toward their own kind and asks why ET would not be wary of us – even hostile to us… rather than wanting to communicate their technology to us!
Point 9. I was tempted to use the laughing dog smiley for this one.
Freidman merely asks: “Why is it that SS seem to assume that aliens would want to deal with them?” ] (
http://www.v-j-enterprises.com/sfufovsseti.html)
He then makes the point that perhaps they might want to deal with our leaders rather than the SETI people!
Point 10. False appeal to statistics. Really, really, really, badly made point. Also irrelevant.
The point here I think is that if they were really serious SETI needs to search a little closer to home: “In fact the sphere centered on the sun and having a radius of only 54 light years includes 1000 stars of which about 46 seem to be sun-like and suitable for planets and life”
Point 11. Nobody takes the Drake equation seriously, and if he wants to argue with the people at SETI then he ought not to make up crap about them. They are fully aware, and make it clear to the public, that the majority of factors in the Drake equation are unknown, and the results are a wild guess. And yet again, completely irrelevant to the validity of SETI.
Ummm… is not Drake himself a director of SETI? He doesn’t believe in his own formulation? You amaze me!
Point 12. I've never heard such a proclamation, and it would indeed be silly. That would have been a good point if it had been relevant.
I am not sure about this point. Presumably Freidman knows of SETI specialists who have commented about ET not necessarily being humanoid and using that proclamation to form a negative opinion about humanoids seen associated with UFOs already here… Freidman merely implies that if the laws of physics and biology are universal, then humanoid IS a distinct possibility.
Point 13. Yeah, because public opinion should always be the basis for making rational scientific decisions.
Freidman states: “Two polls of engineers and scientists involved in research and development activities18 even showed that 2/3 of those who expressed an opinion believe that some UFOs are ET spacecraft.” ] (
http://www.v-j-enterprises.com/sfufovsseti.html)
Yet SETI uses such information for its own purposes:
“Most scientists support the search.” (
http://www.seti.org/Page.aspx?pid=558#a3)
Point 14. Given that UFO proponents are so fond of using those same accelerations to show that the pilots of UFOs couldn't be human I'm wondering who he's trying to debate with this point.
Actually I think you will find you are incorrect. UFO proponents state that (for example) right angle turns at speed are physics defying but not that this therefore means the pilots must not be human. Merely that the technological capability is not human.
Point 15. Fermi paradox? Really? Another wild guess, just like the Drake equation, that nobody takes seriously.
The Fermi paradox suggests that civilisations should have colonised the galaxy already, so where are they? SETI people uses the “So where are they” as if “they” are NOT already here. There is evidence that “they” ARE here.
Point 16. Yeah, we've seen in this thread just how critical of each other UFO proponents are.
Freidman merely notes the “cult-like” status of SETI people and UFO debunkers alike: “…almost cult-like atmosphere, with charismatic leadership, a strong dogma, and irrational resistance to outside or new ideas.” This is his opinion based on experience. I happen to agree with that opinion based on my own experiences in the forum, but of course you will disagree…that is the nature of cults.
His entire point seems to be to attack the SETI scientists rather than to actually address the validity of the SETI project. I was really hoping for better.
Then you have become tied up with his method of delivery and have then missed Freidman’s substantive points.
So, Rramjet, do you have anything to offer on why SETI is unscientific? Anything at all?
I have offered it in the above.
