<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>kahnclusions</author><text>&amp;gt; Fermi’s paradox has two good answers — we don’t see aliens because they don’t exist, or we don’t see them because they are here already.&lt;p&gt;These are not &amp;quot;good&amp;quot; answers to the Fermi paradox, and definitely not the only answers. Much better answers (in my opinion) are things like: their signals haven&amp;#x27;t reached us yet; they haven&amp;#x27;t developed interstellar communications or travel yet; they haven&amp;#x27;t developed intelligent life yet.&lt;p&gt;I would think an alien spacecraft carrying the energy and resources needed for interstellar travel (including the return trip) would be pretty obvious and detectable even by amateur astronomers. Instead what we&amp;#x27;re doing here is chasing at shadows and grasping at straws. Credible reports deserve to be looked into, yes. But what is Grusch alleging here? Existence of a UFO crash retrieval program. Presence of non-human biologics. OK, experimental Soviet or Chinese military technology with dog or cat DNA counts. Of course the US military guards those in secrecy. When we ask, &amp;quot;did you find aliens?&amp;quot; they aren&amp;#x27;t going to reply with &amp;quot;sorry no aliens, and to prove it, here are the details of all the experimental Soviet&amp;#x2F;Chinese&amp;#x2F;US military tech we recovered.&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;PBS Space Time has a number of great episodes on the subject of aliens, including questions like how do we know whether humans are among the first spacefaring species: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.youtube.com&amp;#x2F;watch?v=uTrFAY3LUNw&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.youtube.com&amp;#x2F;watch?v=uTrFAY3LUNw&lt;/a&gt;</text><parent_chain><item><author>wildermuthn</author><text>I’m a huge skeptic, but I’ve been following this very closely over the past few months.
 Fermi’s paradox has two good answers — we don’t see aliens because they don’t exist, or we don’t see them because they are here already. They should be here already. The paradox is about why we don’t see them.
Being skeptical is different than doubt-by-default. A skeptic is curious and slow to judge. So with great curiosity, I’ve dug deep into the rabbit hole.
It appears that the vast majority of those in “ufology” are in it for the money. Many claims about extraterrestrials also veer off into the supernatural. Conspiracy theories have a funny attraction to one another, creating clumps of exuberant irrationality.
But the recent case of David Grusch and the rebranding of UFOs as UAPs and aliens as NHI (non human intelligence), are a sign that clear (but skeptical) thinking is growing on this topic.
Grusch isnt (yet) making money off this. He appears entirely trustworthy in a way that is off-color for this topic. Assuming he isn’t a world class con playing the long-game, his credibility suggests three possibilities:
1. He has bad data, by accident or incompetence 2. He has bad data, by purposeful deceit 3. He has good data.
The cool thing about Grusch is he doesn’t claim to have first-hand knowledge. He claims to have the names of people who do, and the locations associated with the “crash-retrieval” program.
What’s more likely, that there is no other intelligent life in the galaxy, or that an advanced civilization that has been around for eons isn’t all that interested in engaging with the local wildlife? The most credible UAP reports don’t involve the fantastic stories of abduction, crop-circles, ancient pyramids, etc. The credible reports have what appear to be reconnaissance craft with a strong interest in the military and nuclear weapons.
In short, it’s worth supporting Grusch and having his names and places checked out. The answer to Fermi’s paradox is an important one for humanity — as central as whether the sub revolves around the earth or the earth revolves around the sun.
At the very least, we should be curious skeptics.
As the head of the Pentagon’s All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO), Sean Kirkpatrick, said recently, “wouldn’t that be fun?” if we discovered evidence we were not alone.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Former intel officer says &apos;non-human biologics’ found at alleged UFO crash sites</title><url>https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-us-canada-66307705</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>throwbadubadu</author><text>&amp;gt; we don’t see aliens because they don’t exist, or we don’t see them because they are here already&lt;p&gt;imo most likely is they exist, but space is just so unimaginable huge,  and also Aliens can at most go close to lightspeed. They didn&amp;#x27;t beat physics nor invented portals &amp;#x2F; wormholes?&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; They should be here already.&lt;p&gt;Least likely for me out of the three options.. just our tinfoil hat love :)</text><parent_chain><item><author>wildermuthn</author><text>I’m a huge skeptic, but I’ve been following this very closely over the past few months.
 Fermi’s paradox has two good answers — we don’t see aliens because they don’t exist, or we don’t see them because they are here already. They should be here already. The paradox is about why we don’t see them.
Being skeptical is different than doubt-by-default. A skeptic is curious and slow to judge. So with great curiosity, I’ve dug deep into the rabbit hole.
It appears that the vast majority of those in “ufology” are in it for the money. Many claims about extraterrestrials also veer off into the supernatural. Conspiracy theories have a funny attraction to one another, creating clumps of exuberant irrationality.
But the recent case of David Grusch and the rebranding of UFOs as UAPs and aliens as NHI (non human intelligence), are a sign that clear (but skeptical) thinking is growing on this topic.
Grusch isnt (yet) making money off this. He appears entirely trustworthy in a way that is off-color for this topic. Assuming he isn’t a world class con playing the long-game, his credibility suggests three possibilities:
1. He has bad data, by accident or incompetence 2. He has bad data, by purposeful deceit 3. He has good data.
The cool thing about Grusch is he doesn’t claim to have first-hand knowledge. He claims to have the names of people who do, and the locations associated with the “crash-retrieval” program.
What’s more likely, that there is no other intelligent life in the galaxy, or that an advanced civilization that has been around for eons isn’t all that interested in engaging with the local wildlife? The most credible UAP reports don’t involve the fantastic stories of abduction, crop-circles, ancient pyramids, etc. The credible reports have what appear to be reconnaissance craft with a strong interest in the military and nuclear weapons.
In short, it’s worth supporting Grusch and having his names and places checked out. The answer to Fermi’s paradox is an important one for humanity — as central as whether the sub revolves around the earth or the earth revolves around the sun.
At the very least, we should be curious skeptics.
As the head of the Pentagon’s All-Domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO), Sean Kirkpatrick, said recently, “wouldn’t that be fun?” if we discovered evidence we were not alone.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Former intel officer says &apos;non-human biologics’ found at alleged UFO crash sites</title><url>https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-us-canada-66307705</url></story>