Reaching Beyond The Valley Of The Dolls

"Today I happened upon a post written by Bryce Zabel on A.D. After Disclosure, "titled Calling Roger Ebert. I am not in the habit of reading A.D. -- not because I have a particular issue with the site or Richard ">"..."Ebert is saying that if you believe that it is possible to travel the galaxy and the universe that you believe in something that is preposterous. I say that very statement is preposterous."Ok, fine.

Wait, no! How did Ebert's claim that travel beyond the solar system is preposterous, at the same time denounce extra terrestrial travel to our own neighborhood? "Ok, ok." I suppose it could, on it's own. But not in the shadow of "A Quintessence of Dust, which Bryce first commends in his post. I think Bryce has greatly misunderstood Ebert's position. Either that, or Roger Ebert, who in his journal entry illustrates a more than basic knowledge of the universe, was just pulling words out of his ass. I somehow doubt the latter."

"After all, space travel beyond the solar system is preposterous."

He didn't say that travel "to" our solar system is preposterous. As well-read on the subject as he appears to be, he has to know that we currently do have the technology to travel outside our solar system (and will have officially done so in a few short years, thanks to unmanned spacecraft, like "Voyager 1" & "Voyager 2"), just not the resources or funding. So, in that respect, as far as" right now" is concerned, a 400 person crew on a ship the size of the "Enterprise" travelling outside our solar system "is" pretty preposterous. But we "will" do it. Some day. We have to if we hope to ensure the survival of our species. I believe Ebert does realize this.

So, in my opinion, Roger Ebert's statement was in regards to "us "efficiently traveling vast interstellar distances now, "with today's understood science. Not some unknown civilization light-years ahead of our own, visiting Earth. Otherwise, I'd be inclined to question whether Roger Ebert knows the difference between a solar system and the galaxy. Or a galaxy and the universe -- but "A Quintessence of Dust" states otherwise. Perhaps his use of the term 'solar system' was an error. It happens. He might have meant "galaxy", which would have been a more respectable limitation (for now).

But the fact that he referenced "Star Trek" in the first place leads me to consider he was speaking strictly of human exploration as it currently stands -- not hundreds of years from now (from the trailer, it looks as though the film "Source Code" takes place in the relatively near future). I sincerely doubt Ebert was speaking of the limitations of a proposed advanced civilization. Therefore, I do not believe his statement should be viewed as a put-down to UFO researchers and enthusiasts, intentional or otherwise. Nor do I feel it displays an ignorance of the UFO phenomenon, because it had nothing at all to do with the possibility of an alien presence in our solar system (or UFOs in general).

It may be that Ebert doesn't believe that extraterrestrials are visiting Earth, but I don't feel that his review of "Source Code" reflects that.

Posted in aliens,cropcircle,ufos aliens No comments