I wrote:
on Friday, July 25, 2025.
And now the news about this object
has slowed down to next to nothing.
In the past
I have just absolutely
silenced conversations
on social media,
but the entire internet?
Hubble has been able to look at this thing for a while now, it along with the JWST were supposed to be the best platforms to detect signatures of gas molecules, so where are they?
And where are the articles about possible perturbations of orbits? Either of Mars or of 3I/ATLAS. Or the scientific papers about why there wont be perturbations.
Time to get your heads out of the sand, Avi Loeb is 100% correct in that it is designed, but Aliens can not exist, so who designed it?
Anyway, two somewhat related articles, neither with any real "new news" about 3I/ATLAS.
Captures Phobos and Deimos Together
dailygalaxy.com 7/27/25
NASA’s Europa Clipper spacecraft captures
a rare infrared image of Mars and its moons,
Phobos and Deimos.
"The Role of Gravity Assists in Space Exploration
One of the interesting aspects of the Europa Clipper’s mission is its use of gravity assists to alter its trajectory. In March, the spacecraft used Mars’ gravity to adjust its path on its journey to the outer solar system. A gravity assist is a technique used by spacecraft to gain speed and change their course by passing close to a planet, using the planet’s gravitational pull. This technique not only helps the spacecraft save fuel but also provides an excellent opportunity for collecting data about the planet being flown by."
"This encounter with Mars also allowed the spacecraft to test its instruments before heading deeper into the solar system. By capturing the Mars-Phobos-Deimos trio, the spacecraft successfully verified the capabilities of its thermal imaging tools, which will be used in the future to study Europa in greater detail. Once the spacecraft arrives at Jupiter in 2030, it will conduct a series of flybys over Europa, taking measurements of its surface and interior to learn more about its potential to support life."
Avi Loeb's new piece 07/27/25
"In recent decades, academia distanced itself from the public. Scientific advances are routinely communicated in press conferences where scientists speak to reporters like teachers in a classroom, encouraging questions but resisting debates. Funding is allocated to research directions within echo chambers that are detached from public questioning."
(True science points to a creator and they know it or we wouldn't be having fairytales like the multiverse being considered "scientific".
They don't want the publics questions, they know the science points to a creator, a designer and they don't like it and that's just not science, true science goes wherever the evidence points whether they like it or not. They are supposed to be agnostic about the results, most are anything but these days.)
"The problem with this self-defeating approach is that science is fundamentally a work in progress, a learning experience where a sense of humility and raw-curiosity require collecting more data in the face of anomalies. Yes, mainstream scientists could be wrong irrespective of how confident they are about hypotheses. They can invest billions of dollars in searching for weakly-interacting massive particles as dark matter and not find what they are looking for, despite the confidence expressed in press conferences about the latest experiments and the compliments expressed in prize ceremonies that rewarded those who proposed these ideas without experimental evidence.
(They might as well be saying:
"We gotta keep rewarding the orthodoxy Jim")
"At the same time, when the possibility that interstellar objects might be technological in origin is proposed based on observed anomalies..."
(One more time:
3 billion character codes (DNA)
do not evolve,
they do not self create,
nor do they self assemble.
Codes require preplanning,
logic and sequence
and are thus
the result of an intellect
and the exact opposite
of randomness.
No randomness creating life here means
there is no randomness creating life anywhere else
as the laws of nature apply
to the entire universe and not just parts of it.
Information is always imputed
by an outside source.
Always.
Avi likes sticking to his own orthodoxy
no matter how heterodoxical it is
to the faith-based belief system of scientism. :-)
"— knowing that humanity launched interstellar probes over the past half century, comet “experts” are quick to ridicule it.
(As they are the idea of a creator as well.)
"Regarding 3I/ATLAS, the Oxford astronomer Chris Lintott was quoted last week as saying: “Any suggestion that it’s artificial is nonsense on stilts, and is an insult to the exciting work going on to understand this object.” Lintott is the editor of the scientific journal Research Notes of the American Astronomical Society, and in that capacity — he asked me to remove any reference to the possibility that 3I/ATLAS might be artificial before accepting my paper for publication (accessible here).
What is
"Nonsense on stilts"
to me is
not accepting:
"3 billion character codes (DNA)
do not evolve,
they do not self create,
nor do they self assemble.
Codes require preplanning,
logic and sequence
and are thus
the result of an intellect
and the exact opposite
of randomness.
No randomness creating life here means
there is no randomness creating life anywhere else
as the laws of nature apply
to the entire universe not just parts of it.
Information is always imputed by an outside source."
Ignoring those facts listed above
just isn't scientific.
Period.)
"Is it really an insult to consider a hypothesis in the context of figuring out anomalies regarding the nature of 3I/ATLAS? If the nature of dark matter happens to be a primordial black hole but for four decades mainstream astronomers argued that it is likely a weakly-interacting-massive-particle, should this suggestion be considered as “nonsense on stilts, and is an insult to the exciting work going on to understand this object”?
(Thats a great point :-)
I just laugh at em
Extraterrestrial life,
More subatomic particles
(to explain gravity, multiverse, extra dimensions etc)
they are just not gonna find any
as they just don't exist
and what a waste of taxpayer $ BTW.)
"By far the most likely outcome will be that 3I/ATLAS is a completely natural interstellar object, probably a comet, and the authors await the astronomical data to support this likely origin.”
(This community does as well Avi.
Where are the gas molecules?
Why the sudden silence about 3I/ATLAS?
Why no mention of the theory
about a close encounter with an asteroid
having resulted in Mars moons etc?
Where's the articles about potential perturbations?)
"One of the main reasons I co-authored this second paper is to encourage observers to collect as much data as possible in order to prove this hypothesis wrong."
(Avi gets his hypothesis half right.
3I/ATLAS is designed alright
just not by extraterrestrials :-)
"After all, the work of science
is to consider all possibilities
until the evidence rules out
all but one interpretation."
(Kinda disagree with that.
You dont have to
rule out all of the other options
you just have to have
an overwhelming amount of evidence
pointing in one particular direction,
you know,
like:
"three billion character codes don't evolve,
they don't self create
and they don't self assemble
they require logic,
preplanning
and sequence
they require an intellect behind them."
"Why is it far more reasonable to consider the search for anomalous radio signals as a techno-signature while treating the search for an alien artifact among the population of interstellar objects as “nonsense on stilts”? This choice is a matter of taste, not substantive reasoning."
(Agreed. It doesn't matter what the faith-based belief system is, the orthodoxy/status quo must be preserved at all cost, kinda like the Pharisees yup...)
"There is a huge invisible damage to innovation in science that results from the public ridicule towards “out-of-the-box” thinking. Of course, keeping the herd in a tight configuration might be the actual reason for the aggressive behavior of the herders towards individuals who deviate from the beaten path. This practice is common in religious cults, but science is supposed to be guided by evidence and not authority."
(Thanks Avi I couldn't have said it better myself.
The faith based belief system of
Scientism
=
Religious cult.
They just ignore the data they don't like
Three billion character coeds etc...)
"Committees of mainstream scientists who decide how to allocate federal funds often resist investments in the search for extraterrestrial intelligence by arguing that it is too risky and might result in wasting taxpayers’ money."
(Maybe they know it is?
And?
Sure seems like we have invested enough
and got 0 to lil return on it at this point.
If I could?
I would defund it all tomorrow.)
"Gatekeeping and ridicule are not the landscape I wished for
when I started my scientific career
45 years ago, around the time
when Chris Lintott was born."
(Ouch,
now he sounds like my friend
back in the day:
"B%#$@?
I got shirts older than you are."
:-).
"The ridicule of scientific hypotheses
before gathering conclusive evidence
is anti-scientific."
(Avi?
They just don't care.
You hit the nail on the head a minute ago
This isnt science anymore,
Its a cult
and it is one
that just ignores evidence
they don't like.)
"...This paper concludes with the following statement:
“Science begins with questions
and derives its answers
through evidence.”
That kinda rules out
the Multiverse fairy-tale now doesn't it?
And still no:
Evidence of gas molecules
coming from 3I/ATLAS
Mention of the theory of Mars moons
coming from a fragmenting asteroid
Or Perturbations of Orbits
I wonder why that is?
Spiritual gift
of Discernment:
Knowing what is being said
by what is not being said.
It just speaks for itself,
loud and clear,
it really does.
No comments:
Post a Comment