“Science Alert”calls them “Mysterious Fast Radio Bursts” in their article:
The mystery of fast radio bursts (FRBs) continues to fascinate astronomers. No one is quite sure what's behind these super-short, super-intense radio wave pulses from deep space, but now astronomers have tracked down five FRBs to their home galaxies.
Hmmmm…. Considering the news coverage of the images of the so called UFO’s the next question one is likely to ask is answered here:
FRBs generate as much energy in a thousandth of a second as the Sun does in a year, and the more we discover about them, the more intriguing they get. They couldn't possibly be communications from alien lifeforms... could they? (Probably not, sorry.)
Yesterday I wrote about my notion that whatever it is we want to call them if they are really objects I saw lots of logical reasons to conclude they didn’t originate on Earth.
The comments and the poll indicated that readers were divided more or less into two groups, the believers and the non-believers (click to enlarge):
The “probably not” article (below) was published in February of 2020 well before all the renewed interest in alien craft visiting earth and is especially relevant now. It addresses the possibility proposed by some scientists that these radio bursts could be caused by radiation from alien spacecraft.
The article, well worth reading in it’s entirety, concluded with quotes about the value of wild ideas by physicist Paul Ginsparg of Cornell University:
"These discussions give non-scientists an indication of the sorts of the amazing observations being made, the fun that scientists have thinking about them, and the possibilities that are out there," Ginsparg told ScienceAlert.
"Wild speculation can sometimes inform the next generation of instrumentation, which can then either confirm or refute the wild hypothesis, or see something else entirely and unexpected. And that too is what makes science fun."
The difficulty lies in understanding the difference between pondering wild ideas as a thought exercise, and evidence based on data and prior experience, observation and conclusions.
Or, as Ginsparg put it, "in a discussion about string theory, a senior physicist once argued to me that one can't 'prove' there's no Santa Claus, but we have alternative ways of explaining the observed phenomena with fewer unnecessary assumptions."
So, for now, we'll be holding off on the aliens until the aliens tell us otherwise.
The unnamed physicist told Ginsparg there’s no way to prove with absolute certainty that Santa Claus doesn’t exist but I suggest that we can prove with 99.9 to the nth power percent that he doesn’t. I think we also ought to examine the question of what these “things” in the sky are by making the least unnecessary assumptions. Unfortunately in order to do this we are left with attempting to determine what they aren’t, to assessing the chances of them being due to known phenomena, and if we are unable to do this we have to ask ourselves what they are.
Scientists have told us that one mysterious distant cosmic phenomenon probably can’t be accounted for as evidence of extraterrestrial life, and we are still left not knowing for certain whether another phenomenon right here on Earth suggests that perhaps we aren’t the only intelligent beings in the universe. Not only that but that our (so-called) civilization has somehow posted a welcome sign piquing the interest of these beings enough to prompt them to become Earth tourists.
Click to enlarge image
Poll
103
votes
Show Results
How likely do you think it is that the US government is withholding information that would strongly suggest or prove these objects are extraterrestrial? 10 = Very likely to 0 = Very unlikely
103
votes
Vote Now!
How likely do you think it is that the US government is withholding information that would strongly suggest or prove these objects are extraterrestrial? 10 = Very likely to 0 = Very unlikely
Comments are closed on this story.