Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by api 2094 days ago
Once a topic is associated with something fringe or woo-woo, it becomes extremely difficult to discuss it rationally.

Try bringing up the possibility that at least some small fraction of UFOs actually are extraterrestrial. We have a decent number of compelling radar/visual encounters that suggest something artificial with maneuvering and propulsion capabilities beyond anything we know how to achieve. They could be illusions, unknown natural phenomena, hoaxes, classified tech, or equipment failures, but they are anomalies nonetheless.

The Fermi paradox really is a paradox, especially now that we've found planets in habitable zones orbiting stars within "reasonable" (less than a thousand years) distance if one were traveling at a meaningful fraction of the speed of light. One possible solution to the paradox that is always left off the table is "they are in fact here, they're just not making overt contact." There are numerous rational reasons that an intelligence would choose not to "land on the White House lawn" from planetary protection protocols akin to ours to self-interested concerns about triggering a violent response from the demonstrably violent and rapidly technologically advancing inhabitants of Earth. We'd be no threat to them now, but give us another few hundred years and we could be capable of e.g. sending a relativistic impactor their way.

But nope... the fact that the UFO topic is linked to fringe, new age, and wacky stuff means that it can't be discussed and must be absolutely dismissed. Also means that if someone wishes to discredit a topic, all they have to do is get new agey woo woo types to start talking about it.

This is just how humans think. We use ideas as signifiers of group membership and apply primate in-group / out-group behavior to them. Scientists are human, so science is not immune. IMHO this tendency is one of our species' greatest weaknesses.

3 comments

I agree with much else said here about the failure -> crank -> taboo problem, but it bears noting that the Fermi paradox is not really a paradox. There is this https://arxiv.org/abs/1806.02404 . The 2 minute layman's version is that multiplying several to many very uncertain numbers "drives your error bars to the fringes". So, there is not some credible, high probability estimate that we are not (EDIT: locally) alone. Without that estimate there is no paradox.
> But nope... the fact that the UFO topic is linked to fringe, new age, and wacky stuff means that it can't be discussed and must be absolutely dismissed.

I think it's more that the recent claims about the UFOs (moving at hypersonic speeds but leaving no emissions nor heating the atmosphere) are so implausible that they don't fit our current understanding of physics.

I thought several of these did show infrared heating? Or maybe I'm thinking of a different case than you.

In any case a lack of heat is problematic. Even if they're using some unknown means of propulsion, the second law of thermodynamics is absolutely settled bedrock science. They must dump waste heat somewhere.

> We have a decent number of compelling radar/visual encounters that suggest something artificial with maneuvering and propulsion capabilities

No we don't. We have radar readings that are anomalous, and that could be aliens ... or dozens of other mundane explanations that are each more likely.