If EY loses his bet about UFOs not having a worldview-shattering origin, what are the reasons why? [INDEPENDENT MC]

Ṁ1027

2029

ALL

80%

Standards are revised: an explanation not worldview-shattering in 2023 now qualifies as such.

17%

Extraterrestrial life.

15%

New fundamental science discovery.

13%

Extremely advanced but non-exotic non-AGI human technology, very far beyond current public knowledge (not just a few generations ahead).

13%

Interference/interaction from other universes or dimensions.

11%

Yudkowsky privately knew a worldview-shattering explanation was true in advance (and still made this bet for some reason).

10%

Any explanation that appears to validate a religion with over 1 million followers.

Artificial intelligence.

Ancient terrestrial civilization.

Any religious/magical/paranormal explanation.

Entities from a traditional Abrahamic religion.

Any explanation that appears to validate the simulation hypothesis.

1.6%

Time travel.

Inspired by this market: https://manifold.markets/RobertCousineau/if-eliezer-yudkowsky-loses-his-bet

This market is independent to allow for overlapping answers, which will hopefully increase clarity and granularity and hopefully reduce controversy in resolution.

Any option that is a significant reason as to why Eliezer Yudkowsky lost the bet resolves YES. For example, "time-traveling AIs are responsible for UFO sightings" would resolve both "Time travel." and "Artificial intelligence." YES.

Resolves N/A if Yudkowsky wins the bet.

Resolution will be based on statements from Yudkowsky, RatsWrongAboutUAP, or clear consensus about the circumstances of the bet.

Get

1,000

and

1.00

Comments

Related questions

Related questions