Quote:
Originally Posted by renormalised
You still don't get a thing I have written, Steven. What I have said, all along, is this...we don't know. You are correct in stating that, presently, theory and such says it is incorrect and a false assumption. However, you're assuming that the present state of knowledge will continue on into the future, and that in itself is a logical fallacy. Where's your proof in that??
|
No Carl that is not what I am advocating. If you read my posts carefully you would note I use the terms now and current very deliberately.
I also mentioned the implications on causality if a premise is proven to be incorrect.
A premise is correct as it stands
now. You can't go faster than light as theory stands
now. A theory will be disproven through observation and experiment. Scientific method at work.
What you don't do is to assume the theory is incorrect to start with on the basis that it will be proven so in the future. That is an example of "argumentum ad ignorantiam" at work.
Quote:
You want to know where all this was coming from??. I wrote in an early post this....let's take this generalisation: assuming (for the sake of argument) that all these UFO's (or at least some of them) are exactly what they are, extraterrestrial spacecraft. If that's the case, what does that say about our present knowledge of physics and the possibility of FTL travel. Unless they live for many thousands of years and don't mind traveling at below c, it can only mean 2 things...
1) Our present knowledge of physics is seriously lacking in relation to this: i.e. they use methods we are not aware of,
or,
2)We can't see the forest for the trees: i.e. we have come up with a way but just don't realise it yet because we've been blinkered by what we presently believe to be the case.
In either case, what we should do is experiment and find out. Then whatever the outcome, we include that in our body of knowledge.
|
Or aliens don't exist.