Stephen Hawkings UFO Blunder?

I haven't been adding to my Blog for so long, and I apologize for that. I was reading one of my favorite sites today, Alien UFO & The Paranormal Times, and I came across what I considered an interesting entry from another excellent site UFO Media Matters by Joe Capp
UFO Media Matters
Non-Commercial blog .




The comments below the entry make it even more interesting.

Here it is below:

Stephen Hawking has made a major blunder when it comes to addressing the alien possibility. Maybe he has been watching too many “Independents Day” reruns. Dr. Hawking warns the populace of the world not to make ourselves known out there in the Universe or we may be very sorry. Steven goes on to imagine a planet of marauders attacking other planets to replace their own depleted resources. Because, of course, it was Stephen Hawking who made the statement, the whole counter scientific argument of “it’s too far to get here from there” is forgotten by the media, at least for a time. So it was all over the media who of course sensationalized it.
But does this argument hold any validity?
Does a species far advanced of us have to attack a world to get what they need? If you were in need of minerals and other materials why would you have to go to a world with complex life and destroy it? Why not just mine the moons. There are eight or nine planets around our sun and many moons around those planets. Not only is there an abundance of minerals on those bodies, but also ,it seems, water. Attacking a planet with 8 billion souls may be harder than it appears. When America went into Baghdad we had all our guns blasting. Our air superiority was second to none of this planet. But once we planted boots on the ground to mop up, we had the same problems we had in any war like this, a long drawn out struggle.
There is no doubt any Extra Terrestrial who managed star travel could destroy us in many ways…but would they have to? Using Mr. Hawking concept wouldn’t it be better to secretly use our world as a launching pad to excavate the moons and planets of our solar system. This could easily be done without undue suspicion from the locals, especially if they still lived a constant species centric existence. Any arguments that ETs couldn’t get away with this are laid to rest by credible reports of UFO craft over a mile in diameter hovering silently over various parts of our planet, never to be challenged. They are not challenged because they give no reason to be challenged. What we know now, from government released classified documents, is that when UFOs were challenged it was always a no- win situation for our pilots. There seems to be a common sense policy in place for all the governments: The governments know they only have a finite number of times they can chase UFOs they cannot catch. That is where we seem to be right now. Unless a UFO makes a nuisance of itself it is left alone.

Could an alien presence go undetected by our top scientists? When the smartest minds on our planet say it’s close to impossible for UFOs to be spacecraft, it becomes a rule in science. Even a monstrous evil ET could spot this and could use it very effectively without the need for violence. When you start to think about any ETs destroying whole planets of intelligent species from star to star you find an unstoppable message that is delivered which precludes any species from doing just that.
Of course the planet that you destroy gets the message but so does other intelligent species in the neighborhood who have star travel. How stupid would these other ETS have to be to ignore the potential wolves at their virtual doorstep?

Stephen Hawking could be accused of other short sightedness when he makes these proclamations. He assumes the materials we consider most important will be what they consider most important ten thousand years from now. I am sorry but the ET reports indicate they may feel the important material to gather is not outside our bodies but inside it. In this case, if you were gathering biological gold destroying a civilization would be crazy. In fact eventual contact may be necessary as the world progresses to discover you.
Think about that. Even now corporations are copyrighting biological material. How important will this material be in a hundred years, a thousand years or even a million? The report from the abductees seems to indicate exactly what ETs are doing here; collecting the very essence of us.
Are there other worlds that will buy these biological products or is the product an absolute necessity for survival and has to be gathered? Life is rarer than minerals and water and if they are here I would bet it’s about life.

It seems Stephen hasn’t really thought this through. Humans are not the template to judge other species actions in the Universe; especially if you are considering an advanced ET. I think we can all admit being hoodwinked by someone much smarter than you is not a disgrace.

Total destruction of a planet is so over the top now as to be ridiculous, and if you think about it, the reported ETs do not, in any way, reflect this idea. What we find seems a much more intelligent and complex being. We find them gathering material from us. We find them at times conditioning us to a presence. We find they are quick to run away and not fight. We find very little evidence of the great weapons we envisioned in our star war science fiction. We find a humbler ET not going out of their way to control us. We find ETs which are not here to save the world either. What is so striking about all this is that when you get into the detail s of reported ET actions and abductions they are not like anything we had imagine., maybe that is because they are real

Stephen Hawking is the one of the best minds our world has ever produced, however there seems to be brighter and wiser minds out there… who prevailed.

Joseph Capp
UFO Media Matters
Non-Commercial Blog




Arvin Hill said...
One of the markers of a truly advanced species, culture or consortium is efficiency (i.e. economy).

Predation is not an efficient means of sustenance, as it introduces significant risk factors to the dominant entity... and another marker of advanced intelligence is effective risk management.

Hawking blew it, and I hope he takes a [metaphorical] beating for capitulating to his fear, and, worse, for endeavoring to reproduce his phobia on a mass scale.
April 28, 2010 4:27 AM
Joseph Capp said...
Dear Anonymous thanks,
I guess my wife is right I am a weirdo and a crank. The interesting part about this is when any UFO case is reported in the news you always have the debunker explaining to everyone how it is impossible to get here from another star system. But good old Steven he can get away with it. I think you are dead on when it comes to Hawking and UFOs. I would like Edgar Mitchell to drop him a note and let Mr. Hawking call him crank or a wierdo.
Thanks
Joe
UFOMM
April 28, 2010 8:46 AM
Joseph Capp said...
Dear Arvin,
Good point. I would hope that any advanced species would have solved many of the problem perplexing us, otherwise I don't think they would make it. Destroying worlds is a messy business. There may have been, in the past, some cases of Alien nastiness on earth but hardly on an worldwide scale.

Thanks
Joe
UFOMM
April 28, 2010 9:08 AM
John said...
Ahem..ahem...pardon me..but.....

UFOs, be they aliens or not, have been fucking around with humanity for decades, if not centuries or longer.

They operate in secrecy, conduct a cover-up, and deeply and often traumatically impact people's lives.

Now, I have no idea for sure if UFOs, any of them, represent 'extraterrestrials' however, all evidence gathered to date shows that we have every reason to be deeply suspicious of them.

Just what species do you belong to after all?

We may even be 'ants' relative to these UFO occupants but at least I intend to be on the 'ants' side of the equation.

John
April 28, 2010 12:11 PM
Joseph Capp said...
Thanks John,
We have a right to be suspicious but I think we have to be very respectful of the power of the intelligence we may be facing. What ever is happening with these beings it is more complex than just conquering our planet.

Thanks
John
April 28, 2010 1:19 PM
Joseph Capp said...
Thanks John,
We have a right to be suspicious but I think we have to be very respectful of the power of the intelligence we may be facing. What ever is happening with these beings it is more complex than just conquering our planet.

Thanks
John
April 28, 2010 1:19 PM
Trained Observer said...
Blogger: UFO Media Matters - Post a Comment

It's like the 1968 NSA document called UFO Hypothesis and Survival Questions" says, "Up until this time, the leisurely scientific approach has too often taken precedence in dealing with UFO questions. If you are walking along a forest path and someone yells 'rattler' your reaction would be immediate and defensive. You would not take time to speculate before you act. You would have to treat the alarm as if it were a real and immediate threat to your survival. Investigation would become an intensive emergency action to isolate the threat and to determine its precise nature. It would be geared to developing adequate defensive measures in a minimum amount of time. It would seem a little more of this survival attitude is called for in dealing with the UFO problem."

Hawkings is wise to suggest caution. To assume anything about what an alien civilization would do or is doing without real evidence is asking for trouble. You assume a threat until proven otherwise ...unless survival is a secondary goal. Just because a society employs high technology doesn't mean it is advanced socially in such a way that would mesh with human society. And as the document says elsewhere there are certain seeming inescapable sociological and physiological ramifications of contact with a significantly more advanced civilization that would not benefit us in the least.

I think the main thing is "who knows?" and when you don't know it pays to be careful. I think we need to seriously prepare as global community (the U.N.?)for meeting threats coming from off-planet. This includes asteroids, solar flares, and roving bands of alien marauders hell bent on stealing all of our shiny things and wimmings.
April 28, 2010 1:44 PM
Joseph Capp said...
Dear Trained Observer,
Could that be the reason SETI hasn't heard anything?
However Stevens' red flag is a false flag. Any sufficiently advanced civilization with star travel would have found easier ways to spot planets like ours. I still believe warlike ET entities would have been taken care of by other advanced species long ago. Of course they could be the top of the stellar food chain in this part of the neighborhood. If that's the case it's probably too late now anyway.
Thanks
Joe
ufomm
April 28, 2010 3:00 PM
Trained Observer said...
They don't have to be warlike at all, just sufficiently "different" or "advanced" to have unintentional adverse effects on human society. There things as bad or worse than "war-like". They might see us as the Christian missionaries saw the natives of the North American continent, savages who need conversion and their brand of "civilization."

We shouldn't assume anything one way or the other, we just need make sure we hope for the best but plan for the worst. Making contact with "ET" (whatever they are, where ever they come from) is going to have its consequences and we need to be prepared for them. Someone knocking on the door and asking for a cup of Dysprosium isn't out of the realm of possibility.
April 28, 2010 5:16 PM
Joseph Capp said...
Dear Train Observer,
I fully agree and I don't see us sending messages out to space anymore. I just think at this point in the age of the Universe what ever could have happened would have happened already.
Now, as the probability of life in the universe continues to go up, I think we can say with some certainty that a Alien Napoleon will not show up. Famous last words right?
Thanks again
joe
ufomm
April 28, 2010 5:41 PM
Arvin Hill said...
...Minute 5: "I am discounting reports of UFOs. Why would they appear only to cranks and weirdos?"

That's a devastating quote... and not for us cranks and weirdos.

Thanks for sharing it, Anon.

* * * * * * * *

"They operate in secrecy, conduct a cover-up, and deeply and often traumatically impact people's lives."

That sounds familiar. Patriot Act familiar. Death squad familiar. Pat Tillman familiar. All kinds of familiar.

UFO encounters can be quite profound. The extent to which they rise to the level of traumatic, I believe, very often corresponds to our individual and collective response to the phenomenon - and those responses, regardless of their nature, are cultivated in the darkness of societal ignorance: some of it willful; much of it, not (i.e. State cultivation of ignorance through propaganda).

The official and unofficial response: Declaring witnesses psychological aberrations, and/or other sanctions intended to make life extremely uncomfortable for people with the earth-shattering temerity to describe events which contradict the official line/lie.

Now *that* is a veritable fountain of trauma - manufactured, deliberate, systemic, punitive trauma - and it represents a greater immediate threat to me - by far - than any cosmic/transdimensional intelligence I've thus far encountered.

Now, I have no idea for sure if UFOs, any of them, represent 'extraterrestrials' however, all evidence gathered to date shows that we have every reason to be deeply suspicious of them.

Perhaps the evidence validators are cherry-pickers much like the scientists, politicians and bureaucrats they accuse, with ample reason, of intellectual dishonesty.

My life, which I was quite happy with before peeling this onion, has been vastly enriched by my experiences, and I know for a fact I'm not the only one. Far from it.

In fact, one of the things that surprises me is the degree to which people with positive contact experience are frequently perceived as Manchurian Candidates by the same people who keep the tissue box stocked for abductees with horror stories. If it bleeds, it leads.

"Just what species do you belong to after all?"

One that thinks extremely highly of itself, considering the rank exploitation of its poorest, most vulnerable members.

When governments and the governing class invoke concerns about threats, the top of the priority list is reserved for defending the global economic order - the system from which, according to the rule makers, all good things flow. To them.

Over and over, the people and institutions making the rules on the trigger-end of the gun demonstrate that their interests are not mine, and, in fact, are antithetical to interests of the vast majority of human beings and other life forms on this planet.

When adopting a defensive posture, it pays to be cognizant of what one is defending and why.
April 29, 2010 3:39 AM
Joseph Capp said...
Well said T.O.

thanks
joe
ufomm
April 29, 2010 11:16 AM
Erich Kuersten said...
far worse than Hawkings unwittingly rabble rousing conjecture is the way he refuses to even glance at the vast amount of evidence to suggest that we have always been visited and always will be. It's sad to see Hawking trying to elude the risk of peer discrediting by ignoring all the evidence and hard work of people just a little left of the 'fringe' line.

As for the way the sleepy media's ears perked up at the word 'threat' and have rolled with it like an avalanche no one needed or asked for, well who can blame them? Our media is fear-centric. But this is how people way in the mainstream begin to change beliefs from 'are they out there' to 'how much time do we have to dig a root cellar to hide the kids in before the lasers start falling?" And in a way, that's good, if full disclosure is what you're after.

But I fear full disclosure will be a little like lifting up your blanket after a long night's sleep to find a giant mantis gnawing on your leg, and to realize he's been there the whole time, long before our strain of humanity even began, and we're basically snack food... unless of course we can evolve into a state of energy light and expanded enough to get through their nets and back into the light of pure being. We will cease to have a history as we've ever understood it. The wool is over our eyes for a purpose, and if you wonder why, just watch the news' treatment of 'the alien threat!' Klaatu Barada Niktu, baby!
May 2, 2010 7:51 PM
Joseph Capp said...
Dear Erich,
Thank you, I think the other statement he made about UFOs just showing themselves to "cranks" and "weirdos" shows without doubt that I know more about UFOs and who sees them than he does.
Unless you want to put Astronaut Gorden Cooper the hundreds of pilots, scientist, radar operators, State Governors, police and even Presidents into a cranks and weirdos baskets.
The man should read more on subjects he pontificates about.
Joe
UFOMM
May 2, 2010 9:57 PM
MARLA said...
Most scientists think they have the right to insult other people on their beliefs & ufo sightings and get away with it just becuase they are scientists. They think they have the power because they have a title and I really hate their attitude toward everything else that don't fit their own belief system.

Theoretical physicists and cosmologists talk so much crap and change their mind whenever they want. I usually believe very little of everything they say.

I think Hawking has been watching a lot of "V" episodes lately.
May 3, 2010 3:15 PM
Joseph Capp said...
Steven Hawkins,
I could ask Stephen Hawking about the ten top Project Bluebook unknowns and he wouldn't have the faintest idea of what I was talking about. He is an expert at what he does and what he does has nothing to do with UFOs.
This is, and has been, the major problem with scientist. They sound so full of themselves there is no room left for pure science.
thank you
Joe
UFOMM
May 3, 2010 7:46 PM
Trained Observer said...
"...It's sad to see Hawking trying to elude the risk of peer discrediting by ignoring all the evidence and hard work of people just a little left of the 'fringe' line."

I don't know, it sounds like an intelligent thing to do to me. What "evidence" and "hard work" are you referring to specifically? In other words what evidence are you aware of that would fit the criteria for risking your credibility were you in Hawkings position?

"And in a way, that's good, if full disclosure is what you're after. "

When people talk about Disclosure I have to wonder just where this disclosure of information is supposed to come from. The government? We trust the government to tell us the truth do we? That is assuming they know the truth which seems highly unlikely in any scenario you care to run. You want to hear the government say "aliens are here" or something like that? How do we know they are "aliens from another world" ... because they told us? We should believe them?

Are we hoping for Disclosure from whatever is behind the phenomena? Well, since the phenomena has always been in control of the secrecy and disinformation surrounding it it seems logical to expect any "real" disclosure of information about it to originate there. However, given its track record, it would appear the whatever is behind the phenomena has no interest in "disclosing" anything truthful about itself to us. It hasn't for as long as it has been here (thousands of years?, if so are they really from another planet then?) so why should it change its mind now? If it follows the trend indicated by its history ...it won't.

"...unless of course we can evolve into a state of energy light and expanded enough to get through their nets and back into the light of pure being."

And I wonder what the chances of that happening are? No, really. I would put right up there with Disclosure ...somewhere between slim and none.

It seems to me that the most likely scenario for "Disclosure" is one that involves open war breaking out between Earth's military/security forces and the phenomena or whatever is behind it. This seems pretty remote as well though.
May 4, 2010 10:18 AM
Joseph Capp said...
Dear Trained Observer,
Disclosure was movement created by Dr. Steven Greer. Getting the witnesses together and trying to use them effectively could have been a smart move. Then Greer made it impossible to succeed it what they could have really done; release of all classified UFO documents. Instead Greer decided to tell the government publicly what secrets they were keeping. After that the serious journalist said what? Their first press conference was the first and last media attended press conference.
Disclosure hangs on as a word in the UFO community but it means many things to many different people insuring that what ever may be Disclosed in the future we will find some group within our midst saying their lying.
As for Sir Stephen, many of them don't believe in God but sometimes they pontificate just like one.
Thanks
Joe
UFOMM
May 4, 2010 11:40 AM

Source: Alien Ufo & The Paranormal Times
Original Source and Author: UFO Media Matters