Harvard Professor Begins New Search For Alien Spaceships in Our Skies (cnet.com) 66
Harvard's controversial astronomer Avi Loeb is leading a new initiative, dubbed the Galileo Project, to check Earth's skies and the rest of the solar system for signs of extraterrestrial intelligence. From a report: The longtime astronomy professor, who became well-known for his belief that interstellar object Oumuamua was likely an alien probe, announced the details of his plan via a virtual press conference Monday. Officially, the initiative is described as "a transparent scientific project to advance a systematic experimental search for cross-validated evidence of potential astro-archaeological artifacts or active technical equipment made by putative existing or extinct extraterrestrial technological civilizations (ETCs)."
Translation: The plan is to use a variety of telescopes to look for alien spaceships, probes or other debris left behind by intelligent beings who weren't born on Earth. "What we see in our sky is not something that politicians or military personnel should interpret because they were not trained as scientists," Loeb told reporters. "It's for the science community to figure out... based on non-governmental data that we will assemble as scientists." The first phase of the project involves setting up a network of dozens of relatively small telescopes around the globe that will attempt to capture new images of unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP, the newly favored and more inclusive acronym designed to replace "UFOs").
Translation: The plan is to use a variety of telescopes to look for alien spaceships, probes or other debris left behind by intelligent beings who weren't born on Earth. "What we see in our sky is not something that politicians or military personnel should interpret because they were not trained as scientists," Loeb told reporters. "It's for the science community to figure out... based on non-governmental data that we will assemble as scientists." The first phase of the project involves setting up a network of dozens of relatively small telescopes around the globe that will attempt to capture new images of unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP, the newly favored and more inclusive acronym designed to replace "UFOs").
UAPs (Score:3)
1. Why are UFOs/UAPs seen mostly over the oceans?
2. Why near warships?
Is it selection effect, as perhaps only advanced military equipment has a chance of seeing and tracking them?
Re:UAPs (Score:4, Insightful)
This is a *reporting* effect. When a random person says he sees something in the sky, it's not newsworthy because everyone assumes he's a wacko so you don't hear about it. When a highly trained military pilot or weapons system officer sees something, it's more newsworthy because they are presumed to be more trustworthy as witnesses.
While I don't doubt the word of the military personnel, I don't necessarily they have the right skill set to understand something they see on their instruments that they haven't been trained to recognize. You'd want someone with a background in optics and perhaps photogrammetry.
Re:UAPs (Score:5, Insightful)
Everyone in the world has a phone in their pocket that exceeds the capabilities of a $500k camera and news van from 20 years ago. For every airman hitting 'record' on his $5M optical targeting system, there are probably 5,000,000 people with smartphones that could whip them out and record a UAP flying over their farm or whatever. Where's that footage?
Re: (Score:2)
Dude, there's a TON of footage of blurry dots moving in the sky. A TON. How can you doubt that these blurry dots are aliens? Isn't it obvious? Why else would they be blurry? That's how they try to hide!
Re: (Score:2)
Re:UAPs (Score:5, Interesting)
Also, there are lots of Amateur Astronomers out there with good equipment, in the dark, and experience identifying things. And yet I haven't heard of any reputable sightings by them.
I've had my UAP moment myself, for about 10s, as a big bright light shined down on me when I had my telescope out one night. When it finally went overhead, I could only then hear the jet engines. The landing headlight and glide path aligned perfectly over my location that night so that the plane's wingtips were washed out, and the noise didn't reach me until the jet was really close.
I've frequently driven back from dark sky sights and watched as Venus rose/set. With her near the horizon she can eerily "follow" you as you drive around, and if there are light clouds, look like it is accelerating very quickly.
Amateur astronomers can take good images of ISS flying overhead, I'm sure if there was a UAP nearby they'd have dozens of high quality photos on astrobin within hours!
This whole Loeb debacle just kicks dirt in the face of every serious researcher, including SETI researchers like Jill Tarter (inspiration for the Contact movie). If Loeb does get funding, hopefully it isn't stolen from real scientists. I guess if he builds his telescope network, we'll at least have lots of cameras tracking more meteor fireballs. https://fireballs.ndc.nasa.gov/
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Totally a covert government project, almost certainly some sort of directed energy weapon or decoy. Which is why the US government is talking so often and so loudly about it. We want other nations to know we have that technology, and they don't. I mean, when was the last time the US government admitted it was clueless about anything? Never. We don't do that.
Re: (Score:2)
The government "shared" that video over a decade after the event occurred (2004). I've seen explanations for most of that event and others that explain why all the "super-human" manuvers and such can be explained by the type of camera used and the point of view of the jets relaying the images. The simple
Re: (Score:2)
You seem oddly invested in this. Is belief in UFOs a crucial part of your personality? Does a belief that UFOs are aliens form the bedrock of who you are? I just don't get it. I mean, I'm not the one shutting myself down to other possibilities. In fact, I don't know, I don't really care, and I don't get people who do.
Re: (Score:2)
(in the off chance that you weren't a troll just trying to draw me offsides...) I already stated my belief on the subject in a previous post, so you assigning me an opinion doesn't work. I'm not a fan of the "I don't have an opinion of my own, but I like to shit on other people's opinion because it sooths me" mentality. Obviously it got you to this point in your life, so don't mess with success!
Re: (Score:2)
Huh? I'm not following any of this. What are you trying to say?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's even less coherent. Are you trying to have a conversation or are you just posing? Do you think someone else besides me is reading these comments? Do you imagine you have some sort of an audience? Are they... aliens?
Do the aliens think you are "cool?" Do they cheer when you "win" in a conversation?
Re: (Score:2)
One of you posts was sarcasm for an entire paragraph (your very first post that was a reply to my first post in this conversation). That actually makes it look like you are the person putting on a show. My performance was for
Re: (Score:2)
Why in the world would you think my post was sarcastic? This is a directed energy weapon or decoy. I was agreeing with you that it's probably some sort of covert government project. The reason it moves the way it does is because it isn't a physical object, it's an induced hot spot in the atmosphere. I think that's the most likely explanation, anyway, but of course I am open to other possibilities. Not aliens though. It's just not at all likely.
Also, I did not attack you. Not sure what you are even talking a
Re: (Score:2)
Now in the latest post, you're using the implication of autism as an insult (because there is zero reason to ask about it, not even that flimsy). Honestly, yes, I'm sure I'm on the autistic spectrum. Never been tested,
Re: (Score:2)
Since you felt insulted and I honestly did not mean any of it that way, all I have to add is that I'm sorry.
Re: UAPs (Score:2)
Just today somebody gave me their debit card to take a photo of the details so I can transfer money to them. (We were both in a hurry.)
Just guess how long it took to
(a) unlock the screen (multiple tries)
(b) find the right app
(c) get the damn focus, flash, lighting just right
(d) wait for the photo to be processed and saved?
If I ever witness strange and fleeting phenomena, I very much doubt that I will be in time to record them. Good thing then that I have not yet seen something recordworthy...
Re: UAPs (Score:1)
Unlock? Find the right app? Are you 80 years old? Raise phone, swipe once with thumb, there's your camera.
Re: (Score:2)
They're easy [go.com] enough [youtube.com] to find [youtube.com]. They're just not newsworthy.
Re: (Score:3)
The XKCD version of parents post: https://xkcd.com/1235/ [xkcd.com]
Re: UAPs (Score:1)
Everyone in the world has a phone in their pocket that exceeds the capabilities of a $500k camera and news van from 20 years ago.
Says the person who A) thinks UFO's are "mostly seen over the ocean" and B) obviously doesn't know anything about optics.
Truly; there are other sites for [the likes of] you.
Re: (Score:1)
The biggest change from past sightings is that now everyone has high-definition video cameras in their pockets. Most sightings will logically occur where those reporting the sightings have a valid excuse for not having any evidence.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
We don't know but if you wanted to hide on Earth and had advanced technology, under the ocean is the best place.
Re: (Score:2)
Because they are not tourists doing it for shits and giggles, more likely anthropological studies and gauging sociological development. Which would have not been so good for a change had they not heeded good advice. Will, the morons behind the morons on the boat, show some fucking common sense and realise any advanced star ship coming to earth is going to be way way way (I should do it ten times, once for each hundred thousand years) advanced than the ship and being aggressive mind bogglingly stupid. Why ne
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Did you forget your Meds today?
Yea he is probably chasing a crazy hypothesis. And I am sure it would be his dream job to get paid to hunt for UFO's. But I am not sure where you are going to subverting the politicians. If while his hypothesis are kinda nuts, but is willing to do the real science, where he finds a UFO and then can Identify it as something that isn't an Spaceship, say a unique weather condition, then the knowledge of man kind is improved.
Now if he going to be like the History Channel Guy,
Re: Appeal To Authority (Score:1)
I don't know who would give this crackpot any money for his "research".
Is this a trick question? I was thinking the same people who fund Bigelow, except they already know a lot more than this guy ever will.
They're not here, they're not coming (Score:3)
To the Salisbury Plain
Lights on the horizon
Patterns on the grain
Anxious eyes turned upward
Clutching souvenirs
Carrying our highest hopes
And our darkest fears
-Don Henley
But nothing will stop us from looking, hoping, seeking grant money
-me
Re: (Score:1)
But nothing will stop us from looking, hoping, seeking grant money
As it turns out, UFO's are just billionaires from other planets.
Back home they're still arguing if they're astronauts or not. They didn't fly the UFO here. They were just baggage.
Re: (Score:2)
Through Pioneer 10 and Voyager 1
We've launched our knowledge to other suns
Aspiring and reaching for the highest of beings
We've lost our search for the world's basic needs
-Warlord
Smokestacks (Score:1, Interesting)
Re: Smokestacks (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
I like Fred Hoyle's alternative non-physical method of travel - transmit the blueprint and intelligence, have the locals build you.
Re: (Score:2)
I like it as well, but even if aliens somehow possessed the technological and cultural knowledge to communicate effectively with us locals(*), what technology is it that would be simple enough for us heathens to build and simultaneously advanced enough to embody an alien intelligence?
(*) it's hard to learn a language and culture when your ping times are measured in millenia
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A space faring species in the galaxy could explore it in some 250 million years. That could be us or another species - if there is one. The first explorers would be robots, possibly carrying DNA or embryos if a hospitable planet is found. Our galaxy has 100–400 billion stars, plenty enough that at least one other hosts an intelligent species is likely. So: as we have not seen anything then either: they are good a hiding; or they destroy life on their planets through war or climate change - as we risk
Why now, did someone stop? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
He's buying at least one 1-meter telescope to dedicate to the project with the goal of 1MP images of any UAP's.
If somebody else is already doing this I haven't heard of it.
Fame and fortune, mostly fame (Score:3)
It's been almost four years, but I think Loeb was a reasonably respected astrophysicist/cosmologist before Oumuamua. The early data on Oumuamua showed an object that appeared to both accelerate and change directory. This would not be unprecedented for a rogue comet due to off-gassing or gravitational influence, but the data did not show that was happening (at that time). So Loeb posited that solar pressure could do it, but the object would have to be very large, thin, and low-mass to match not only the changes we were seeing, but also the light-curve data. He suggested that the values to make that work could not likely happen naturally and it would have to have been a manufactured object. Early on, he said that could not be ruled out but we'd have to wait for the data to be further analyzed.
But the tantalizing remote possiblity of a manufactured object grabbed headlines around the world, and Loeb was getting A LOT of attention. Unfortunately after the data was further analyzed and the possibility of off-gassing of elements not readily detectable seemed more likely, Loeb continued to push the alien artifact theory. It seems to me that the appeal of the spotlight was too much for Loeb to let go of.
I'm not saying this new effort is without merit. I'm not sure I really have an opinion on it, but given what looks like Loeb giving into fame, it reminds of the crap Dr. Steven Greer puts out there.
Re: (Score:3)
The early data on Oumuamua showed an object that appeared to both accelerate and change directory.
Are you saying it was pushd ???
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> none of these species have made a substantial enough quantity dyson swarms
Why would they waste their time with that?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: Why no dyson swarms? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Like what?
Who knows? That's the point. What are the odds that a physicist in the 60s exactly pinpointed the ideal energy source for an intergalactic civilization?
A Dyson sphere/swarm is certainly a novel idea. It seems optimal for a certain type of civilization given our current grasp on technology and understanding of physics. But, give a civilization thousands of years to develop beyond our current understanding and who knows what can be achieved. Maybe we'll be stealing energy from parallel universes, or harvest
Re: (Score:2)
Earth's skies? (Score:1)
"Harvard's controversial astronomer Avi Loeb is leading a new initiative, dubbed the Galileo Project, to check Earth's skies "
Which skies were they checking for the last couple of thousand years then?
low hanging fruit next-step idea: active broadcast (Score:2)
I would like to see funding and infrastructure to begin actively sending radio transmission broadcasts to candidate star systems, in the hopes of receiving a response.
It seems a low-hanging fruit next step. To try to determine if there are other civilizations out there, that are at or above our level of technological advancement.
It seems it would not be very expensive. A few tens of millions of dollars per year, globally, to "rent" time of radio telescopes that can support being used for broadcasting.
Perhap
Yeah, yeah. (Score:3)
'Cause everyone knows scientists don't inject their bias into their observations.
Not the way to do science (Score:1)
Starting with the conclusion is not the way to do science. As far as I know, there are no observations that might suggest an alien intelligence out there. Even Oumuamua can be explained by natural phenomena.
If there were some observations that couldn't be explained by science, then it might be time to start theorizing about aliens. But until then, this group is just going to be a nuisance to real scientists, who will have to spend time studying and challenging any claims of alien presence.
There are signs already! (Score:3)
By any means necessary (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Gotta get that funding.
Bingo! I think I need a 20-year study on this.
He just wants attention (Score:2)
Hmm, that's odd (Score:2)
If every unexplained observation were just dismissed as "got to be man made", "it's the Russians", or "freaky weather", there is a great deal of real science that we would miss. I recall the discovery of pulsars, which are distant objects that emit regular pulses of radio waves. It was "obvious" that the the so called LGMs (Little Green Men) must be some kind of military radar, or whatever. Until all that had been ruled out by careful observation. Then it turns out that there really are strange objects out
Haha (Score:2)
Hay-zus, I wish I had a gravy train like that. Maybe search for trolls under bridges or something.
Good luck with that... (Score:2)
"We're gonna search the skies for aliens"
Yah? Good luck with that...