The Interplanetary Visitor Madness

Copyright 2019, InterAmerica, Inc.

So many improbabilities, and so little space for them all.

The evolutionary argument is a killer. Evolution is unique to Earth and all the appurtenances of this planet and this planet alone: the geology, the chemistry, the planet’s orbit and moon, the creatures and plants from which life emerges and progresses, et cetera, et cetera.

Darwin’s Theory only applies to Earth and only works for the Earth.

Thus no species elsewhere in the Universe will experience evolutionary progress, so any alleged visitor will not be as has been described or imagined by humans.

And when ETs engage, supposedly, in telepathy to communicate, they’d have to have the same brain configuration as humans, even as science sees telepathy as improbable:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telepathy

Then when a Navy pilot encounters a UFO being flown by extraterrestrials some think, those ETs would not respond as they do – fly away from the approaching aircraft.

They (the ETs) will not have that learned response. Running away from impact is an Earthian response, learned by experience here and only here.

ET’s would not have vocality like humans as they (the ETs) will not have an evolved (see above) larynx or other vocal physicalities as we do. Communication would be totally different, to the point of unrecognizability by us.

That goes for writing too. Writing here, on Earth, is an evolutionary tool also, developed by the human processes and practices over millennia, the tools for it and the writing itself, unique to Earth.

Alien aircraft would not have lights – a human development – or have colors as we do, the optical evolution unique to Earth and its Sun, not to mention the biology.

To go on is superfluous. ETs and UFOs containing ETs are so plainly ridiculous that to pursue the matter would be intellectual madness.

RR

One last nail in Bryan Sentes' weather explanation and the UFO oriented explanations for the 1561-1566 "Gazette" broadsheets

Copyright 2019, InterAmerica, Inc.

While my pal Bryan Sentes and many UFO aficionados have explanations for the drawings (above) in the Gazette newspapers of 1561 and 1566, those "explanations" are wrong.

Bryan uses the text to bolster his erroneous theses -- that the accounts are a kind of witness testimony for an unusual display of weather (meteorological) phenomena -- and ufology practitioners see the accounts as records of UFO warfare.

Both "explanations" are a lot of hooey.

I contend that the accounts are "editorial rabble-rousing" by the newspapers and "cartoonists" (the guys who provided the drawings) about the ongoing societal consternations of Luther's Reformation and the Catholic Churches Counter-reformation.

I've explained why, a number of times here (and elsewhere), for a long time now.

And here's why readers can discount Bryan's and ufology's hooey:

Nowhere outside the two Gazette "newspapers" (broad-sheets) are there any references to the so-called events: nothing from the University of Basel nor any source in Nuremberg.

No documents can be found, in the time period (1561 and 1566) that allude to the so-called wondrous, unique "sightings."

The web-site (linked below) notes that, in Nuremberg, "numerous men and women" saw the spectacle, not the population as a whole -- no city fathers, no military. nobody aside from "numerous" people -- and in Basel only "black orbs" were allegedly seen by a few.

https://www.astonishinglegends.com/astonishing-legends/2019/2/25/nuremberg-1561

That Bryan Sentes thinks the spectacle was registered by legitimate "journalism" strikes me as an academic conceit of his and the UFO explanation just one more example of a desire by UFO nuts to put UFOs everywhere, even atop an account of religious unrest.

Bryan will attempt to counter this posting, with his usual plethora of extraneous materials that do not pertain, no matter how much he strains to make them seem so.

But the matter is closed from my end.

The broadsheets are prescient "editorial cartoons" by "newspapers" of the time that may be likened to the National Enquirer.

RR