Aliens On Earth.com Resources for those who are stranded here UFOs | Paranormal | Area 51 People | Places | Random Top 100 | What's New Catalog | New Books Search... for keyword(s)   in Page Titles in Book Title/Author in Contents of Pages ---other searches--- Metacrawler Yahoo FAST Search Google Altavista Dogpile Inference Find Northern Light IWon.com MSN Search Las Vegas Sun Our Bookstore is OPEN Mothership -> UFO -> Updates -> 1999 -> Nov -> Here

From: Greg Sandow <gsandow@prodigy.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Nov 1999 11:49:18 -0500
Fwd Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 00:42:16 -0500
Subject: Re: Are We Alone? 


I've learned a lot from this thread. For one thing, I've
realized that there's an ideological -- and emotional -- bias
many people have toward believing that intelligence is the goal
of evolution. (Maybe it's a bias our culture has.) Dennis has
done us all a favor by reminding us that this is not a
scientific position -- or at least that it hasn't yet been
scientifically justified.

I'm reminded of my high school history classes, where we were
taught that American democracy was the goal of all history. It's
true that Mark Cashman gave a good scientific reason for
expecting development of some sort in evolution, given enough
time (he said that evolution allows successful traits to add up
cumulatively). But we still need to look at our intellectual,
ideological, emotional, and (as Peter Brookesmith pointed out)
our religious biases, before we draw what we think are
scientific conclusions.

But here's the second thing I've learned from this debate.
People are taking positions that are suspiciously related to
their position on UFOs. Peter, a skeptic, and Dennis -- who
gives most of his energy these days to skeptical arguments --
argue that intelligent life might be rare in the universe.
Weighing in more or less on the other side are David Rudiak,
who's often seen here supporting the Roswell alien-crash
scenario; Mark Cashman, who says the UFO evidence points to some
"objectively existing" phenomenon; and myself. I'm often seen
here arguing against abduction skeptics.

So maybe we're lining up in emotional ranks. Those of us who
favor (even a little) the idea that UFOs might be alien also
find ourselves favoring the idea that alien life might be
common. And some of us who don't think there's much evidence
that UFOs are alien also find ourselves fascinated by reasons to
believe there might not even be any alien life out there.
Coincidence?

These positions aren't necessarily linked -- SETI scientists
believe alien life is widespread but laugh at UFO reports. But
even here there's an emotional component to their beliefs. They
more or less have to believe alien life is common, since they're
spending their time, presitige, and funding to search for it.
Meanwhile, a smaller group of scientists who support space
colonization find it helpful to believe that there aren't any
other intelligent beings out there to get in our way.

None of this is big news, really. In all walks of life, almost
all of us find ourselves believing things that satisfy us
emotionally. But the obvious distribution of biases in our
current debate about life in the universe ought to teach us
something -- it should encourage all of us examine our
preconceptions about everything we think about.

Greg Sandow