|
There was a time that I believed most of what is purported to be "factual" and "eye-witness accounts" and I have since learned that what one person sees and perceives is not necessarily the same as the person next to them. A case in point: At an astrocamp in the early 90's a group of about a dozen amateurs witnessed one heck of a fireball. One of the witnesses stated that he observed it split into a least 2 pieces before extinguishing. I was standing next to him and watched it disappear and I did not see this but about half of our group agreed with him. Anther group of amateurs were observing 50 or so km away and after we spoke to them we discovered about the same ratio of split or no split. I know it is a simple story but shows that anecdotal evidence is not evidence at all... our brains interpret everything we see to make sense of the world. Mick viewed the fact that some saw one thing and that others saw another in two separate groups as evidence that in fact the meteor did break up overhead, and I do believe he is right. However in Brisbane another story was developing, witnesses also saw this slow moving meteor and reported it to radio stations and the like and it was immediately seized by the local UFO nutters as obvious evidence of UFO activity... these guy didn't witness it, most got their info 2nd and 3rd hand, yet they ruled the airwaves and print media as authorities. When we contacted the newspaper who printed the story and let them know that what was seen was not unidentified, had creditable witnesses who knew what it was, we got a response like "Oh, it was not a spaceship?" Their faces dropped and they didn't want to know us.
This year at the Queensland Astrofest Charlie Lineweaver spoke about "Are we Alone" and his argument was pretty convincing that there is no reason at all for the rise of intelligence. Over 200 million years the dinosaurs ruled the Earth with out the need for a superior intelligence. No other intelligence has arisen on this planet other than homo sapiens from Africa, despite the fact that several continents have been isolated for tens to hundreds of million years. The expectation that if there is no superior intelligence occupying the top of the tree then one must arise he referred to as the "Planet of the Apes fallacy" or some such. The only place that we know that intelligence arose appears to have only occurred once, and "trawling through material on the internet for proof" shows that that is very much in debate. Getting back to Charlie, he is very much of the opinion that non terrestrial (that is Earth) life is not a foregone conclusion because there is no reason that it should or has to occur.
I myself cannot believe that there is so much universe out there that life, even intelligent life, does not exist or did not exist or will not exist. I do find his arguments pretty convincing that there may be less that I had previously thought. Sadly this may mean that it is extremely unlikely that any other intelligence may visit us. I can hope, but I fear that he is on the right track.
BTW, I do remember those satellites Peter, and it was one of the coolest things I have ever seen.
I know a bit of a rant and gum flapping, and I expect many indignant responses and finger pointing. However that doesn't change the facts... No other intelligent life on this planet (yes, yes I know, dolphins and whales are clever and have large brains, but they have not filled that empty niche as supreme intelligence of the oceans), either now or any evidence there existed in the past and there has been ample opportunity.
|