I just have a bachelor's degree in math and in physics so while I am not a high level expert, I do have some knowledge about space travel logistics and probability. The chance that there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe is very high based on the sheer number of planets that could support life and the massive amount of time life has had to develop in most of these places. The chance that any of that alien-to-Earth intelligent life has visited this planet is ridiculously low. So low that it is laughable to consider it a possibility. While there are planets within a dozen light years from us that could harbor life, most of them will not have intelligent life living on them, let alone life that is far more advanced than we are. It is difficult to estimate, but with the Milky Way being 100,000 light years across, I don't think it would be unreasonable to assume that the closest planet with highly intelligent life is generously 1000 light years away. The inhabitants of this possible planet aren't going to just randomly travel around to planets seeing if there is life there. They would have to first establish a way to observe a planet to assure there is life there before making the extreme effort of traveling to that planet. That "communication" of that information would take 1000 years to reach them. They would be seeing our planet 1000 years in the past (that in itself isn't an argument either way; it's just interesting). Let's assume they can travel at half the speed of light. That is highly improbable but we are still going to assume that. (That's over 13,000 times the speed of the space shuttle BTW). They have also found a way to deal with the nuclear bomb+ level of destructive power that colliding with even something small at that speed would inflict on their craft. They are also able to have an onboard energy source that will allow them to survive for 2000 years in the dead of space. Unless they have found a way to be immortal or have ridiculously long life spans, we are also talking about dozens of generations living and dying in space to complete this mission. And the time slowing due to this speed of travel would be essentially irrelevant. They go to this monumental effort requiring technology that absolutely dwarfs anything we have imagined and then they get here to just fly around in some cool patterns in front of only very low resolution cameras and abduct a few hicks to anally probe them? And BTW, if you are a Kip Thorne sycophant and want to bring up "wormholes" to me...just don't. That is even less likely to be possible and IF they did (that's a BIG "IF") the level of technology needed would mean that they would have absolutely no fear of us and would stridently attempt, nay succeed, to communicate with, integrate into, study, annihilate, and/or dominate us on a large scale and their presence would be well-known across the world.

That's an interesting thought that I (embarrassingly) didn't consider. It would make more sense.

Or it is an intentional hoax. A government creating an atmosphere of fear by intentional false information so citizens become more reliant on said government to protect them from unknown-scary-bad-thing (and also to distract the citizens from the corrupt behavior they are engaging in) is far more likely than this being actual highly advanced technology.

This seems like a contradiction.

Oh, to live in a world of such naivete and wonderment. To believe that life from another planet visiting us is more likely than deceptive fear-mongering by the corrupt people in government to the end of increasing control, power, and wealth. To believe that the people in government are there with the primary goal of making life better for the citizens and not just there to funnel tax dollars to themselves and their friends. Your benevolent overlords appreciate your confidence.

I'm a scientist through and through. Sufficient evidence of Aliens? Yep, I believe in aliens visiting earth now. Sufficient evidence for a deity? Yep, I believe in God now. And so on for ghosts, bigfoot, loch ness monster, etc. Skepticism is better than credulity. It is the credulous person who is "shocked" by something seemingly unexplainable and whose thoughts go to incredible and unbelievable explanations. The skeptic takes evidence at face value and then calmly seeks a rational explanation.

EDIT: Plus, who puts "lol" after describing someone's death?

I just can't take someone seriously who discounts the rational arguments of people who disagree with them as not knowing what they don't know but then makes multiple unfounded assumptions in every post they make. It has been a fine example of hypocrisy and begging the question logical fallacy, however, so I continue to follow for entertainment value.

I truly don't understand believing that the people in government being truthful and aliens being here on Earth as more likely than the people in government lying to you as a means of covering up information and/or further gaining control through fear. Far too many of you pro-alien guys are basing your positions on the assumption that the people in government are being honest.

Also, even if I required first hand evidence of the existence of fighter jets, I have that; as if I even needed to address such a silly comparison.

I know you don't.

Guys! Barack Obama said so. He wouldn't lie to you. I'm personally convinced.

I believe he means what I said earlier in the thread: UFOs are a nothing distraction so people argue about aliens and whether they're transgender or not whilst ignoring the very real corrupt shit going on in the world involving humans, money, and power.

The real hubris is among those who think we and our planet are worth visiting for this imaginary species that has mastered interstellar travel. It reminds me very much of religion. Religious people can't accept how truly insignificant they are and fabricate stories of omnipotent beings that care about them and fantastical places where they live forever. That's all this space alien crap is: a new type of religious belief. There aren't, and will never be, any hyper-intelligent beings from another planet visiting Earth. We have only other humans for intelligent interaction. If you can't get along with other humans, the aliens aren't going to like you either.

A reasonable scientist or skeptic, like myself (I have degrees in math and physics), doesn't require absolute proof, but does tend to require better evidence than most. Evidence that makes something 90% likely to be true is better than 10% likely, and I think everyone would agree with that. That is the issue I have here. Do I know absolutely that FTL travel (or even light speed travel) is impossible? No. But it is extremely unlikely; with my (humanity's) current knowledge, FAR less than a 1% chance. Is it possible that I don't know something that would increase that probability? Almost definitely. Is it likely that that something would increase the chance to more likely than not? Probably not. But even if we assume that another species elsewhere in the universe has mastered near, at, or faster than light-speed travel. The still wouldn't mean a 100% probability that they have come here. There are many other variables that are also extremely unlikely that have to be met for that to be the case. They would have to have a star of origin close enough to get here, even with extremely fast travel. And as you make the range larger to increase this probability, you have to make the travel speed faster, thereby decreasing the probability that they have achieved such speeds. Then, they have to choose to come see us. They could presumably have many inhabited and uninhabited planets to visit. Let's assume they want to see an inhabited planet to increase the chances they come here. But why choose our planet? Either they have lots of choices (due to lots of inhabited planets) and choosing us becomes less likely or they have few choices (due to relatively few inhabited planets) and the chance that such a civilization exists in close enough proximity decreases. Then we have the probability that such a civilization would have such extraordinary technology and would use it only to spy on some hicks in a cornfield. The more you actually consider these probabilities and then consider the probability of an explanation of terrestrial origin (which is just WAY higher), the more you realize how ludicrous believing these UFOs are alien crafts is. Is it impossible? No, it's just so unlikely that it doesn't warrant real consideration by a rationally thinking person.

Many of you keep bringing up airplanes, as if people denying that we could make a craft capable of flight is the same as denying the possibility of FTL travel. That is ridiculous and shows a severe lack of ability to properly evaluate the difficult of something (by both posters here and people who thought a flying craft was impossible). There were birds that weighed "more than air" that could fly. We had a working blueprint for how this might be possible before airplanes were invented. A closer example where the airplane argument would hold more water would be against someone saying "humans will never get to Mars".

.

You are absolutely correct. It is completely unnecessary and non-productive of me to fall to ad hominem. Please accept my apology. I don't find the topic "upsetting and ridiculous"; however, I do sometimes find the opinions of others to be ridiculous and the trust in people in government to be upsetting.

You aren't talking to the right kind of "science based people". Any true scientist will admit that there is a lot that they don't know and can't explain. And if they want to know, they investigate to find the truth or an explanation. They will frequently start with a hypothesis that is based on highest probability based on their current knowledge. What we don't like is when people create fantastical explanations that are far less likely than other explanations and act like all explanations are equally likely and all deserve equal consideration. So we want some evidence as to why the fantastical explanation deserves equal footing with a more logical and likely one. When I see something flying through the air, am I reasonable to assume that it being anti-gravity technology is equally likely to it using airfoil technology? When I see an invention on Earth, am I reasonable to assume that it being human, alien, chimpanzee, or dolphin technology are all equally likely? I would far prefer to say "I don't know" than stand cocksure behind some ludicrous supposition.

Skepticism over credulity.

I know you are being facetious to respond to Phil, but it brings up an interesting thing I've pondered for a while. If we assume that a planet has the "right" conditions for life (at least as far as carbon based lifeforms on Earth): within the correct size, within the correct zone from the correct kind of star, etc...what is the chance that life would "spring up" there? I actually believe it is pretty high. Under the correct conditions, I think the presence of water, a favorable atmosphere, and then abiogenesis given billions of years is fairly likely because given conditions similar to what we have had on Earth, the presence of life is the rule, not the exception. So I guess what I'm saying is that with so many other planets that meet these conditions in the galaxy and universe, there is almost definitely life on MANY other planets.

I'm intrigued. I am not aware of what factor Jupiter played but I am genuinely curious to learn.

No rational, thinking person could think UFOs don't exist, just like no rational, thinking person could think any of the UFOs are crafts from another planet. I hope they don't close this thread; it's highly entertaining and insightful for me.

And just like many of us don't know what we don't know, some of these types of arguments don't have a clear grasp on scales of difficulty and the concepts of orders of magnitude. To someone who does, these kind of arguments (like the Wright brothers argument) sound like this:
Me: "Nobody will ever skip a rock a billion times in one throw."
Guy: "People used to think someone would never skip a rock 30 times but at the World rock skipping contest, some guy skipped a rock 50 times! And computer models have shown how skipping one 500 times is possible!"

I don't understand the emphasis on this. A 100 light-year radius is FAR more space than a 100 light year diameter.