What A Load Of Rubbish!


Pro-UFO (as in supporting the UFO extraterrestrial hypothesis) and ancient astronaut buffs are satisfied to claim proof for extraterrestrials possessing after been, or presently are, right here as just plain folk, vacationers, scientists, colonizers, or what ever, sharing with us this Third Rock out from the Sun. Now a logical objection to this situation is that there is no apparent extraterrestrial detritus, garbage web sites, kitchen middens, or ruins of any sort they left behind. There is no fossil proof for any non-terrestrial critter or mythological and doable extraterrestrial hybrids (like centaurs, the sphinx or mermaids). There are no skeletons of E.T. itself as a result far uncovered. We've however to obtain the burial remains (if any) of an alien Cyclops.

That is not to say there are not some fairly weird fossils in the geological record, that is inside the strata of the rocks, but absolutely nothing that in the end cannot be interpreted as terrestrial and in Darwinian evolutionary terms. Trilobites for instance had been terrestrial.

As any palaeontologist is satisfied to point out, the fossils we do have quantity to only a tiny fraction of these nevertheless current inside the geological rock record all fossils (found or not) are but an extremely tiny fraction of all these critters (like plants) that after upon a time got fossilized. Of these that after upon a time got fossilized, quite a few have due to the fact been destroyed by organic forces these subsets, all these potentially undiscovered fossils, or fossils that no longer exist, are in turn but an ultra tiny fraction of all these critters who have ever lived and died. Most (almost all) critters when they die serve as meals for one thing else, even if just bacteria. They get biodegraded in one particular way or a different, the usual dust-to-dust and ashes-to-ashes situation. Translated, the odds that one particular lone (out of trillions) Joe Trilobite will ever have been fossilized, found and in the end offered to grace a museum show is astronomically against the grain. So, that would have to apply to E.T. as effectively. There may possibly effectively exist buried in the ground some bona fide E.T. artefact, even an E.T. itself, but that does no one any great if that artefact remains buried or far more most likely as not, has been destroyed more than geological eons by many and destructive organic geological processes.

In summary, if any such extraterrestrial artefacts and fossils exist, they are so handful of in quantity, so eroded, weathered, buried and/or biodegraded that the proverbial needle-in-the-haystack is quick pickings by comparison. If everyone is familiar with the History Channel's documentary series “Life Immediately after Folks”, infrastructure, when left unattended to the mercy and forces of nature and ravages of time do not survive all that lengthy just before crumbling to dust. It really is stated that “man fears time, but time fears only the pyramids”. Regardless of that observation, it really is apparent that time has in truth taken its toll on these ancient wonders at Giza in Egypt. In a different 50,000 years, possibly ten occasions that, even the pyramids will have been recycled back to sand as wind, rain, pollution and earthquakes strut their destructive stuff.

Nevertheless, possibly an amateur archaeologist or palaeontologist or just plain old fortunate prospector or person who takes place to appear at the proper spot at the proper time may possibly stumble onto the obtain of the century an extraterrestrial. Truly it would be the obtain, not just of the century, but of all time.

These exact same organic geological forces and biological agents would also strut their organic recycling and breakdown stuff on E.T.'s waste. But, apart from that probability, E.T. can and does have the choice of removing their personal detritus off our planet. 1 also desires to ask would we of necessity recognize and distinguish E.T.'s rubbish from all other types of human rubbish? Would there be any apparent variations that would recommend extraterrestrial rubbish is somehow various from that of human rubbish? If we would not straight away jump to a conclusion that a metal bolt we identified was extraterrestrial, would we then go to the difficulty and submit it to complicated evaluation, evaluation that would be necessary to confirm that this metal bolt of rubbish wasn't ordinary rubbish but extraordinary rubbish? I conclude that lack of E.T.'s garbage is not proof of a lack of E.T.

The lack of extraterrestrial rubbish dumps and artefacts could also effectively imply that E.T. cleans up following themselves (as opposed to prone-to-litter humans on which a lot of human prehistory is primarily based – excavations of our ancient garbage dumps, technically known as kitchen middens). The E.T. 'gods' (ancient astronauts) took all of their stuff with them when they left, like the finish goods of their genetic experiments (apart from their ultimate final solution – we humans and our hominoid ancestors which had died out on their personal), the hybrid half & halves (like the Minotaur) of our mythology.

Unless we humans start off launching our garbage into space, say towards ultimate incineration in the solar furnace effectively let's just say that choice is going to improve waste disposal prices many thousand fold and hence is not a realistic choice – for us. As a result, we have small choice but to use Planet Earth as a garbage dump – a lot to the delight of archaeologists who once again base a lot of ancient human history on just such detritus. But, as noted earlier, time, organic forces and biological agents in the end deal with most types of human waste – strong, liquid and gaseous.

There is however a different answer to a lack of E.T.'s rubbish. A technologically sophisticated E.T. is most likely equally sophisticated in recycling technologies. If you undertake interstellar voyages you'd much better be damned effective at recycling. Anyway, I do not recall everyone in 'Star Trek' for instance leaving behind their litter – an artifact, possibly like a book on Chicago's gangsters yes, but not rubbish! Even that book was a violation of the Prime Directive! E.T. would spend closer focus to guidelines and regulations.

No matter whether extraterrestrial artefacts have been eroded away by time or regardless of whether the ancient astronaut aliens neatly removed or recycled their detritus, any and all remaining physical proof as interpreted as proof for E.T. is going to hence be proof from our somewhat modern day eras, not the geological previous. That proof may possibly be contained inside human mythology or human archaeological relics that depict in one particular way or a different the 'gods', entities that could be alien beings – figurines, artworks, monuments, and so on. or the half & halves hybrids (like the stone monument of the Sphinx that rests close to the trio of these terrific but crumbling pyramids on the Giza Plateau in Egypt). Nonetheless, any archaeologist worth his or her salt will inform you that these are all the functions of humans. Some out-of-spot anomalous artefacts have been found but when anomalies or curiosities, they are not so entirely extraordinary as to make a strong case for the existence of aliens. But, in conclusion to that observation that all roads that point to extraterrestrial 'gods' had been paved by humans, effectively, absence of direct proof linking extraterrestrials on Earth is not the exact same as proof of extraterrestrials getting absence on Earth.

But speaking of artifacts connected to E.T. or ancient astronauts, there have been lots of authors, very apart from Erich von Daniken, who have produced careers out of pointing out archaeological proof suggestive of extraterrestrials. Now clearly a lot of that is embellishment, wishful considering and usually plain nonsense, but, as most of life's small mysteries are, this is not an either/or scenario. There are quite a few shades of gray right here and I've noticed very a handful of artifacts, in particular pictures, that are very suggestive of aliens in our previous, and of course if previous tense, why not present tense? Throw in mythology as a complement to archaeology and the proof for the ETH tightens.

Lastly, take into consideration your personal atmosphere – residence, perform, neighborhood. Inside that sphere that you exist in for the most aspect, what proof do you have that meteors exist? Has any meteorite landed in your back yard crashed into your spot of employment or for that matter anyplace inside your day-to-day atmosphere? What about an aircraft? You see these strange flying objects all the time however you obtain no artifact of them, an artifact falling to earth in your back yard, your spot of employment, or inside your neighborhood. You most likely have no actual physical piece of proof to prove meteors or aircraft exist. It really is all just an eyewitness reality on your aspect. Of course if you claim to see a 'shooting star' or a Boeing 747 fly overhead no one particular is most likely to rubbish your sighting. So, can we rubbish UFOs just since there are no artifacts to be conveniently had, rather just eyewitness testimony in the key?

Primarily based on your personal patch of turf, you have as a lot in the way of artifacts for E.T. as you have for meteors or airplanes (unless you have been unfortunate adequate to truly anger the gods and have a plane or meteorite land on your roof).

But wait, what about that July 1947 UFO crash at Roswell, New Mexico and other alleged incidents involving UFO crashes? However, even if correct, the alleged extraterrestrial artifacts are not in the hands of the scientific neighborhood. There are no peer-reviewed papers in scholarly journals on the studied remains. There is no literature complete cease in existence that is not controversial. The alleged artifacts are not on show in museums. Only the want-to-know elite have access, and they are not speaking. So, Roswell is a yes, but as proof optimistic, it really is a no-no – at least so far.

Nonetheless, there are modern day UFO artifacts of sorts. In geology, not all fossils are bones or shells. In truth not all fossils are even remains of living points, but rather events. For instance, there are fossilized rain drop impressions in now strong rock ditto ripple marks. But with respect to former living creatures, there are fossils of just their burrows, and far more regularly, just their footprints. A UFO 'footprint' is akin to a ground trace left behind following a UFO landing, like say the Socorro, New Mexico landing on 24 April 1964 as witnessed by neighborhood police officer Lonnie Zamora. Magnetic traces left behind on metal objects like automobiles or physiological effects incurred on human (or plant and animal) tissue is one thing else that can be dealt with and analyzed in a laboratory. So, in one particular manner of speaking, there are UFO 'artifacts'.

So hunting for UFO or ancient astronaut artifacts, is akin to the old needle-in-a-haystack quest. But that is one thing scientists employed in the scientifically reputable Search for ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence (SETI) quest can determine with. That needle/haystack argument is their fallback position when SETI scientists are pressed or pressured into explaining why they have not themselves detected E.T. (albeit out there and not right here) in more than 5 decades of looking the heavens for that artificial radio beam or optical beacon. They would state, and rightly so, that absence of proof is not the exact same issue as proof of absence. And so that pithy saying as well assists in coming to terms why UFOs (and ancient astronauts) are not rubbish. Absence of E.T.'s garbage is not the exact same issue of necessity as proof of E.T.'s absence.


Like it? Share with your friends!