I don't believe that scientific understanding is immutable, I just strongly believe that our conception of inertia, with its metric ton of evidence is correct, therefore discrediting the idea that this was an alien spacecraft capable of defying our conception of Inertia.
This does not rule out the possibility of UFOs with aliens in them, it just means that popular descriptions of what this particular event was are almost certainly wrong.
I understand that geocentrism was once the scientific consensus. This was obviously wrong. Arguments for geocentrism mainly centered on the lack of evidence of parallex, which wasn't found until the 1800s. But the main arguments weren't that it was physically impossible for a heliocentric system to exist, just that our world wasn't that way.
Sorry for any hostility. I probably need to log off.
This does not rule out the possibility of UFOs with aliens in them, it just means that popular descriptions of what this particular event was are almost certainly wrong.
Oh I agree. Plus, even if the descriptions were right, there are a lot of other more plausible phenomena that one could point to before going to inertialess drive.
Even if one wants to think it was aliens, then a decoy system using a stealth coating and light projection is a million percent more plausible, and I just pulled that out of my ass.
Sorry for any hostility. I probably need to log off.
Nah all good comrade. Sometimes it's fun to debate nerd out.
I don't believe that scientific understanding is immutable, I just strongly believe that our conception of inertia, with its metric ton of evidence is correct, therefore discrediting the idea that this was an alien spacecraft capable of defying our conception of Inertia.
This does not rule out the possibility of UFOs with aliens in them, it just means that popular descriptions of what this particular event was are almost certainly wrong.
I understand that geocentrism was once the scientific consensus. This was obviously wrong. Arguments for geocentrism mainly centered on the lack of evidence of parallex, which wasn't found until the 1800s. But the main arguments weren't that it was physically impossible for a heliocentric system to exist, just that our world wasn't that way.
Sorry for any hostility. I probably need to log off.
Oh I agree. Plus, even if the descriptions were right, there are a lot of other more plausible phenomena that one could point to before going to inertialess drive.
Even if one wants to think it was aliens, then a decoy system using a stealth coating and light projection is a million percent more plausible, and I just pulled that out of my ass.
Nah all good comrade. Sometimes it's fun to debate nerd out.