Philosophy is the career choice for people who can't do anything useful.
Scientifically speaking, no knowledge is absolute. If one drops a brick one trillion times and observes that each time it is released, it falls to the floor, the only absolute is that it happened one trillion times.
One may conclude that it will again happen on drop # 1,000,000,000,001, but there is no absolute certainty that it will. The value of science is not in finding absolute proofs, but in testing a theory often enough and thoroughly enough that a conclusion can be reached beyond any reasonable doubt.
E.g., it is safe to assume that the brick will continue to fall each time it is released, and to use that conclusion as a basis for planning. While it is not absolutely certain that the brick will fall on test # one-trillion-and-one, it is logical to consider it foolish to lie on the floor with one's head below the brick.
<hr>
Back on track, it is impossible to know for certain that there are alien races "out there". We can only make assumptions and deal in probabilities. As I pointed out in post # 11, our method of detecting extrasolar planetary systems is severely limited.
One day we'll develop new or at least vastly improved observational technologies that can directly see planets in orbit around other stars. E.g., a string of telescopes placed in orbit around Earth, and operating as a single unit, would easily resolve Earth-sized planets around stars tens of light-years away.
A similar chain of scopes located in Earth's orbit around the sun would have the theoretical resolving power to see cities on planets in the M-31 galaxy, or to read newspaper headlines on planets of nearby stars.
The premise is based on the standard laws of optics. Resolution is primarily a function of the diameter of the light-collecting optics. Ergo large mirrors have better resolving power than small mirrors. The important factor is that the mirror need not be one huge chunk of glass. Smaller mirrors spread out and operating synchronously have the same resolving power as one large mirror.
For instance, the
world's largest telescope mirror has a diameter of 27 feet. However, if one layed out a dozen 12" telescopes in an array that covers a 27-foot circle and operated them in sync, it would have essentially the same resolving power as the big one. The major difference would be the far lower light-gathering ability.
An operating example of the principle of arrays can be seen in this photo.
This is the NRAO's
Very Large Array of radiotelescopes in New Mexico. The array is equivalent in resolving power to a single dish the size of the array.
The principle is also seen in the
Keck Observatory, which uses two telescopes separated by several hundred feet operating as a single scope for interferometric analyses. One of its tasks is looking for extrasolar planets.
The major challenge of an orbiting array would be the technology to synchronize the scopes so that the data can be processed to achieve the resolution.
By the time we develop the ability to launch such a prodigious system, we might very well achieve the ability to go to other stars and see for ourselves ... or be brought to them by others who come from there.
Again I say that Earth MAY be unique, but most likely it is not. I have no doubt that planetary systems are common, and that there are others who share creation with us. It's safe to assume that some are far advanced beyond us, and take for granted things that we deem impossible.
Yes, I do believe that we have been and are being visited. My objection is to the pseudoscientific piffle exemplified by the "channeled" crap linked to in the OP, the M-person's drivel, and other nonsense that one might almost attribute to disinformation.
