> It's not enough data to be able to build solid science yet
And thus you shouldn't believe it. The fact that you add the yet at the end of your sentence shows that you have already made up your mind and believe that there are ETs and you are looking for the evidence to prove it, instead of looking at the evidence coming to a conclusion from the available evidence.
Also you have to think in probabilities: what is more likely - that a radars fail and people misinterpret readings or that there is actually faster-than-light travel and ETs are almost stealthily looking at us, trying not to be seen but still failing? The available evidence strongly converges to the first hypothesis.
I find it odd that a crazy-advanced civilization would do such boring and mundane thing like hovering in the sky and sometimes land on earth. What would be the agenda?
And thus you shouldn't believe it. The fact that you add the yet at the end of your sentence shows that you have already made up your mind and believe that there are ETs and you are looking for the evidence to prove it, instead of looking at the evidence coming to a conclusion from the available evidence.
Also you have to think in probabilities: what is more likely - that a radars fail and people misinterpret readings or that there is actually faster-than-light travel and ETs are almost stealthily looking at us, trying not to be seen but still failing? The available evidence strongly converges to the first hypothesis.
I find it odd that a crazy-advanced civilization would do such boring and mundane thing like hovering in the sky and sometimes land on earth. What would be the agenda?