Moontanman

Sargassum can also be used as fertilizer and when dried it makes a good insulator.

One thing that contributes to the elderly losing their housing is that when your spouse dies your income is basically cut in half.

I know that homelessness has always been one of my own personal fears to the extent I have nightmares about it even today.

Has the number of homeless who are addicts been established? Are we assuming most are? Or is addiction relatively rare among the homeless? I think it would help if we had some idea of what portion of homeless are addicts or mentally ill, or just people who are down and out financially.

I am thinking of building a cathedral bee hive from plans on the net. Has anyone looked into this?

The cephalopods are world champions of camouflage some of them being able to instantly disappear in almost any environment.

If you get a free ride there, how do you get back to the place where you can get a job and get out of the camp? Or is this camp a permanent place? Life imprisonment? Do you only send homeless addicts to this place or all the homeless? I'm betting that the vast majority of the homeless are not drug addicts in the manner you are suggesting or are you counting alcoholics as drug addicts? In Ca., I've ben told by people who live there, the vast majority of the homeless are hard working people who cannot afford housing because the jobs they can get are so low paying. I was out there a couple years ago and the number of homeless was appalling, but a great many of them lived in high end tents, entire families, and even drove cars. My sons who do live there say the homeless are an artifact of the extreme restrictions of building new housing that keeps rent prices artificially high and once you become homeless recovering from it is almost impossible.

So you are sarcasm impaired? On the cheap legal drugs... we control alcohol by making it legally available, makes it harder for under age people to obtain it, drugs on the other hand that are illegal and have an actual war waged on them and anyone of nearly any age that has the money can get them.

All drugs should be legal and sold in designated drug stores along with alcohol and tobacco. Prices should be low enough that people can maintain their habit with the low paying jobs that are available to the general public. Housing should be cheap for those with very low incomes who have to work the low paying jobs. If this was implemented the ultra rich could get even richer and the homeless drug addicts wouldn't be a problem.

Damn, you guys just reminded me I have to make a partial water change on my tank. https://youtu.be/QBYuaEOliY4

We get large amounts of Sargassum weed here in the summer, a heavy onshore wind is the culprit for us.

Are we assuming that all the homeless are drug addicts or are we going separate out the drug addicted from the just homeless and put them in separate but equal concentration camps?

Hand fish are not particularly rare and fish that walk along the bottom aren't particularly rare either. If this one was seen in freshwater as the article suggests that would be rare IMHO.

Lack of data would be my guess. But then again... https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11776067/Air-Force-vets-testified-witnessing-UFOs-TURN-nuclear-warheads.html

And nothing about these things preclude alien spacecraft visiting the earth. Relativity in no way precludes aliens visiting the Earth. My belief on this subject is that there are occurrences that despite volumes of data remain unexplained and point to something extraordinary occurring. A bright object hovering over nuclear missile silos and the missiles going off line, 10 at once, doesn't prove aliens but it begs the question, what was it, and no answer has been forthcoming.

I did post a sighting, from the documentary The Phenomena" but no one seemed to be interested in watching a 2 minute clip. None of us are privy to the original data, we all have to depend on what others have reported. To a great extent this is true for everything posted on this forum... UFOs just get an extra kick in the teeth from the get go. I must be stupid, I do present actual data, if I had waved you should point it out specifically instead of handwaving everything I say as illegitimate. People are investigating, sometimes it doesn't adhere to scientific standards and when I doesn't it should be pointed out... specifically. Sadly we do not have access to the original data on most sightings and have to go with what is reported. Until quite recently, and I know you refuse to acknowledge this, scientists have been discouraged from looking into these things officially for fear of having their reputations sullied. This attitude dates from the 1950s when the air force controlled pretty much all the data not to mention the purse strings of many universities and actively discouraged any scientists from universities from looking into these things. There are some notable exceptions but they still encountered considerable friction from the scientific community. To expect aliens to leave behind "concrete" evidence of their existence just so we can know they exist seems to be a bit silly to me. Yeah they might, they might not, but there is no guarantee. Possibly we should drop the current nomenclature that implies aliens and just say that once all the data is in instead of saying UFO or UAP we should just admit they are Objects of Unknown Origin. Then we can concentrate on trying to figure out their origin instead of assuming we already know they are or are not of alien origin. Who knows, one of the craziest notions IMHO is that they represent an unknown civilization we share the earth with. You have yet to back up your assertion that distance and relativity preclude alien visitation.

Evidently proof is required before investigation can begin.

I surrender, I cannot provide concrete evidence that there are aliens currently flying around in our skies. I still think current data suggests something extraordinary is going on but suggests is evidently not enough to justify debate much less investigation.

Again... During the "heyday" of UFOs, probably beginning in the 40s to the late 70s, after which the phenomena was pretty much ignored as anything but "crazy" the main goal of the air force was not to study but to debunk. Their motives were their own and few were privy to them but some scientists like J. Allen Hynek quite working for the air force due to the total lack of rigor concerning the phenomena. Hynek said that the air force was in the business of debunking not studying the sightings and expected him to explain them away no matter how unlikely the "explanation" was. The air force would tout the sightings they could explain while actually hiding info on the ones they could not. They ended up withholding evidence from Hynek and keeping him from having access to witnesses considered to be highly competent like air force pilots and gun camera footage. So, all the King’s Horses and all the King’s Men and all the King’s cameras and electronic recording devices could not document anything paranormal occurring at the Skinwalker Ranch, in spite of scientists spending several years onsite trying to do so. NIDS never did document anything much happening anywhere, so Bigelow shut down NIDS in 2004. In 2016 he sold the ranch to Adamantium Real Estate, LLC, whose once-anonymous owner has just revealed himself to be Brandon Fugal, a wealthy real estate investor from Salt Lake City. Fugal had previously been involved in weird science projects, like “an attempt to create a gravitational reduction device that could produce clean energy”. (....) Not only was the yearslong monitoring of “Skinwalker” by NIDS unable to obtain proof of anything unusual happening, but the people who owned the property prior to the Shermans, a family whose members lived there 60 years, deny that any mysterious “phenomena” of any kind occurred there. The parsimonious explanation is that the supernatural claims about the ranch were made up by the Sherman family prior to selling it to the gullible Bigelow. Many of the really bizarre alleged incidents described in Hunt for the Skinwalker were witnessed only by Terry Sherman, who stayed on the ranch as a caretaker after it was sold to Bigelow. It is also disturbing that these people were deeply involved in the pentagons recent "investigation", I'm not sure how much influence they actually had but the skinwalker ranch program does not exactly bolster confidence.

Again... I am not asserting alien origin, I know i used to do that but thanks to you and other people I now know that cannot currently be supported but the unexplained sightings with loads of data still remain. Their origin remains unknown but that doesn't mean they are all conventional objects. All I ask is that people who do instigate these things are not ridiculed or dismissed out of hand. The phenomena is real and deserves to be investigated without ruining the reputations of those who do the investigations. This has improved in recent years to be sure, the subject has started to be taken seriously but the idea that "concrete" evidence has to be obvious before it can be taken seriously seems to be rampant on this forum as it was decades ago. Nothing can be discovered by people who assume there is nothing to be found. Debunking has, until quite recently, been the modes operandi of science and the government, I am glad to see this phenomena being taken seriously in recent years but even now it is being used by unscrupulous persons to make money. The skin walker ranch fiasco comes to mind. Charlatans are attracted like moths to a flame when money is involved. Is anyone else having problems with the spell check? Now that the video the phenomena is available on you tube we can pic it apart bit by bit. This one is interesting https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0Kr1TwKhQk 02:50 to 04:50 It's either a hoax or a real sighting of something extraordinary.

How about we change to a case that is somewhat more robust than the one we have been bashing in the above thread? Are you game? I have three, all of which involved the military and are well documented. No crashed spaceship or alien bodies so they cannot be "concrete" but are not easily debunked either.

https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/124844-aliens-from-space-split-from-time-to-talk-about-ufos-or-now-as-the-military-calls-them-uaps/?do=findComment&comment=1230506

Does scientific rigor mean concluding the data must be wrong because it's not conclusive ? I am quite aware of the unreliability of eyewitness testimony does that mean it should be ignored completely? I am not asking anyone to make a conclusion. all i am asking is that the data not be ignored because just it points to a possibility that is uncomfortable for many. Very true, that same cannot be said for rocks falling from the sky but even lighting was assumed to be from the gods and since at the time we couldn't study it in anyway that conclusion was accepted. When have I asserted that UFO sightings must be aliens? I am only asking that the data be followed to the logical conclusions. If that conclusion is "we don't know" then we have to continue to gather more data not simply dismiss it out of hand because it make us uncomfortable to consider things that lie outside our comfort zones. The real take away for me is that "if" the UFO phenomena represents something extraordinary and that something is best explained by saying it lies outside our current understanding not continuing the study seems somewhat less than scientific. It is true that most UFOs do not have much in the way of data but some do, in fact some have so much data it's downright embarrassing to have to say we don't know. I pointed out the Stockton Ca. sighting in 1896 not because I think it is proof of anything but because it is one of those sightings that is either absolute proof of aliens or an absolute hoax. Nothing in between will explain it, many sightings are like that and while either disturbing or laughable depending on your faith in humanity. It remains as something unusual on many levels not the least of which it supposedly happened at a time when the idea of aliens wasn't exactly part of the zeitgeist. It was at a time when it probably should have been seen in a religious/demonic context not technological or maybe the cusp of those two were meeting and in this case technology won out for whatever reason. One thing I think should be considered is that if we are dealing with an alien intelligence capable of technology far and away above our own then we are unlikely to get the "rigorous evidence" we require unless that intelligence gives it to us or they make a big mistake... everyone makes mistakes, we just need to make sure we are looking hard enough when it happens to know something extraordinary has happened. Ok, I'll give you this one, it's complete bullshit, does that have any bearing on other sightings that cannot be explained away?