>  JS> I do not believe we have been visited by aliens from outside our
 >  JS> solar system because of the distances involved. I don't think this
 >  JS> will ever happen.
 >  This line completely stunned me.   What problem do you see with
 > the 'distances involved'?   Some ship voyages used to take a year
 > or so using the wind and there are about 1000 stars within 50 ly
 > of earth.  Nothing impossible about it.  I only feel that it is
 > not a good arguement to hold.
None of the nearby stars have planets in a configuration that will
support life as we know it. We cannot see the planets (if any) but
we can detect a wobble from the star. This is a dead giveaway that
one or more planets exist in an orbit around the star.  We know of
no nearby stars that have such a wobble.
 >  JS> I do believe there is a possibility that we will establish contact
 >  JS> via radio some day with at least one other race within the next
 >  JS> thousand years.
 >  Exactly the same problem as above, even worst in some respect.
 > Communicating with a star 100 ly away would take 200 years per
 > message. Where as, a trip using relativitic velocities could get
 > real occupants to the other planet in a far shorter time (and not
 > with exceedingly large energies).
George, there seems to be a little confusion as to how time dilation
works... Only the clocks aboard the space craft itself are slowed down.
...Not those back on earth. If I sent you on a mission to a star system
1000 light years away, and you could manage to reach relativistic speeds,
it would still take you more (considerably more) than a thousand years
(by earth-time) to reach there. ...And the same amount of time to return.
I would have aged by more than 2000 years, although you may have aged less
than 100 years, depending on how close to c your ship was able to travel.
Time dilation only works for the traveler, not the home base of his
operations, and not for the people at the destination planet.
You as the traveler have NOT reached the destination star in any kind
of short time to do us back here on earth any good. ...And you will
find only your great, great, great grandchildren awaiting your return.
You would have done well to stay on your giant generations ship until
you found a suitable planet for your descendants to migrate to when
the earth is eventually consumed by Sol, in about another 5 billion
years from now. You do know what a "generations" ship is, don't you?
It is the only feasible way for man to go to the stars. ...Here is
one reason why... The closer to c a ship travels, the more energy the
ship is required to expend. A point is reached where it is impossible
to expend any more energy to go any faster. Even if vast amounts of
energy were available, the ship could never exceed .9c due to its
mass and the energy required to move that mass any faster. The fastest
speed measurement ever made of an object containing mass was that of a
receding quasar clocked at .75c. The energy source for this feat can
be attributed to the energy released at the time of the Big Bang itself.
 >  JS> I believe our very own technology is responsible for 99 percent
 >  JS> of all valid UFO sightings. ...In the form of aircraft our
 >  JS> government is keeping secret from us.
 > Not from what I read.  The government was just as confused as any
 > civilian back in 1952 (I have over 50 doc from the Central
 > Intelligence Agency from the year, and this agencies is lost to
 > explain the phenomena)
 >  JS> I say these things to you with the same regret a parent feels when
 >  JS> they disclose the truth about Santa Claus to their children.
 > Pity, there are obvious impossibilities about Santa Claus doing
 > his work every Christmas.
I agree. It would be much more romantic if Santa Claus really existed.
Such is life and reality, George. We cannot spend ALL our time in our
fantasies.
 >  JS> ...Now back to my normal speculation  about Martians and other
 >  JS> aliens. Have fun and enjoy your fantasies about aliens, but come up
 >  JS> for a breath of fresh air occasionally.
 > What is the purpose of moderating an echo, when you do not believe
 > the general contents of what is discussed.  This for me is merely
 > an interesting hobby amongst hobbies, justified by the shear
 > potential of the information available, if the hypothesis is true
 > (ie. greatest discovery in history, no doubt).
The purpose of moderating an echo is to maintain order and topical
reasoning. There is no law that says the moderator of a cooking
echo has to know how to cook. I moderate a UFO echo because I have
more than a layman's knowledge on the subject, and more than a layman's
knowledge of science and cosmology. The reason you were invited to join
the team as science officer is, you have a fresher knowledge, and the
math background needed to help insure some other rascal doesn't try
to pull the wool over our eyes with his manipulation of numbers and
false logic. ...But, have I hired a fox to guard the chicken coop? 
I too, have my fantasies, but I come up to breathe once in a while.
I read and write science fiction, but I don't live in that world all
of the time.
 > However, the Extraterrestrial/ufo connection is so extraordinary,
 > that I had on many occasions felt the urge to dismiss the
 > possibility out of hand. However, I feel its too important to let
 > go, unchecked.
Your urge to dismiss the possibility is a sign of sanity rising to
the surface. However, if you have the time to continue your UFO
investigations, it serves a useful purpose, and is a fun hobby.
 >  JS> No, Virginia, [...]!
Regards,
Jack
--- FMail 1.22
---------------