Re: What is the best evidence for or against UFOs?

On 9/21/25 8:25 PM, Dawn Flood wrote:

> I would have to take issue even with unmanned space probes, all of which 
> require some energy to function, even if they are sitting in standby 
> mode.  Even the PCBs in the spacecraft will degrade over time, as it 
> would take tens of thousands of years for one to travel the distance to 
> the nearest star (other than our Sun), Proxima Centauri.  When (and if) 
> such a probe arrived, it would be completely dead.

I was always thinking along those same lines, then someone talked about
some freaki SciFi concept where you grow your tech...

It's not far fetched even right now. Though maybe not super hightech.

Biology lasts far longer than technology. Bacteria has survived dormant,
it is believed, long enough to reach other galaxies at velocities we
are capable of even today...

So the idea would be to maybe do a combination of growing and dormancy.
So your biotech can not only survive but be in operation. And you might
even do something funky, like the first generation produce a biproduct
that is going to sustain the second generation, sort of like how the
anaerobic bacteria farted oxygen which ended up poisoning them, but
was used by Gen II life forms... something like that.

I remember how, a billion years ago, someone on a documentary (I think)
said that if you asked Leonardo di Vinci to build a tv set he could
never do it, because he'd try to do it mechanically. THAT WAS HIS
WORLD! That's how he approached problems, tried to solve them. We are
currently in that phase with our hightech as opposed to biotech.




-- 
https://jtem.tumblr.com/tagged/The%20Book%20of%20JTEM/page/5