The argument works just as well if you stipulate that it covers only sufficiently human-like complex life. The speculated existence of life composed of galaxy-scale non-baryonic matter or something doesn't affect at all the question of where all the other more prosaic life is.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_World_at_the_End_of_Time
I think of time lapse photography sequences as how a tree might see the world. The movement of animals too fast for it to react to in a similar, but larger-scale, way that flies are usually too fast and agile for humans to catch or swat.
Firat, the EM spectrum is radiative energy. Simple as that. It’s everywhere, and postulate that it isn’t detected because the Ascended Ones have moved to woo[0] technology, assume ms that woo tech doesn’t radiate anything in the EM spectrum, not even heat. That’s an even bigger lift.
Furthermore, this transition to woo technology occurred far enough into the past, that no evidence of pre-woo technology exists in the light cone[1] visible to Earth. Keep in mind, even Bronze Age development can be detect in atmospheric samples.[2]
Second, “formed from baryonic matter”? Are you postulating noncoporeal life? If so, I’m running a subscription service to educate people how to communicate these noncoporeal living beings. I take cash and Venmo.
[0] https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Woo
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_cone
[2] https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/11/why-536-was-worst-ye...
All parent was saying is that there could be life that look unlike anything that we currently know to be life. There could be organisms that are the size of solar systems, operating on such long time scales that we might not recognize it for life.
Anyways non-baryonic matter includes: neutrinos and free electrons, dark matter, supersymmetric particles, axions, and black holes.
Suppose there's a life form based on dark matter or black holes.
Dark matter... well given that we can’t even describe what it is, I’ll pencil that in as “maybe.”
Regardless, all of this is pointless speculation with no evidence to support, nor even inform this line of thought. One might as well be arguing about a pinhead’s carrying capacity of noncoporeal entities, the nutrient value of unicorn meat[0], or flat earth geography.
[0] While the meat itself is superficially similar to horse meat, it’s unfortunately poisonous due to the Unicorns’ Unfortunately, there’s none, due unusual biochemistry involving arsenic, lead, and polonium.
Intelligent clouds of dark matter just don't bear on the argument, whether they exist or not.
Maybe they're from a small African nation that's hiding their technology in plain sight. Maybe they're time travelers. Maybe they're the result of some distortion in the earth's magnetic field. Maybe they're aliens.
It's a scientific mystery but it doesn't get the proper funding and respect because of the stigma. This is a huge loss.
This seems unlikely, to put it mildly.
See my other comments with credible sources and the discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16002771
As expected, Sturrock found that astronomers who witnessed UFOs were more likely to be night sky observers. Over 80 percent of Sturrock’s respondents were willing to study the UFO phenomenon if there was a way to do so. More than half of them felt that the topic deserves to be studied versus 20 percent who felt that it should not. The survey also revealed that younger scientists were more likely to support the study of UFOs.
https://cosmosmagazine.com/space/why-we-should-take-ufo-sigh...
Over 80% say that they would study them, but there's no way to do that (in a scientific way). More than 50% say they should be studied. The majority did not conclude that they are extraterrestrial.
This isn't happening to the extent that it should because of the stigma involved, not because of the lack of evidence or lack of capability to investigate that evidence. There are no good hypothesis that fit within the framework any conventional scientific theory but that doesn't make the evidence any less reliable.
- There are UNIDENTIFIED flying objects
- (it would seem that) the scientific consensus is "we would like to investigate this, however we cannot"
- a small percentage of these UFOS are not explainable in conventional ways.
The rest are conjectures and speculations. Non-reproducibility is not the biggest issue, non-falsifiability is a bigger problem.
Scientists are saying: "we don't know, we should investigate, but we can't". You are saying: "they can't investigate, then it's obviously aliens"! I say they are Santa's little elves using camouflaged reindeer (this also explain the "flying lights": it's Rudolph's nose): prove my theory wrong.
TL;DR: if you can't scientifically study a phenomenon, or if no studies are done, science is not telling you what the phenomenon is. You can believe you know what that is, but it still just your belief.
You're putting words into my mouth. Nowhere have I said that scientists should investigate the extraterrestrial explanation of UFOs, they should investigate the phenomena without any preconceptions.
> Scientists are saying: "we don't know, we should investigate, but we can't".
They aren't saying that. They are saying there's a lack of funding and will. Take the time to read that article that I quoted:
https://cosmosmagazine.com/space/why-we-should-take-ufo-sigh...
We do not know that and it may very well be false.
Yeast was known of and observed for thousands of years, but was not discovered to be life until the 1800s. The signs of life were there, but were not recognized.
It is just our human bias to envision complexity as only occurring on earth-like planets, on human-like time and size scales, communicating over the EM spectrum, formed of baryonic matter...
We don't ask what Great Filter prevents the aliens from speaking English. But we might if English was the only language known on Earth. What languages other than DNA are spoken in the universe?