Thereās no proof of intelligent life out there eitherā¦
When all people on earth will be dead, someone will say this about you. That there was no proof of intelligent life out here. 
Maybe you have something more to add, what was not mentioned, any idea? Maybe it was made of swiss cheese? 
Can be. It could also be a ellipse formed toroidal shape, or a regtangle, pointy triangle, and so on.
SPECULATION.
Speculation does not equal factual.
If you read the letter closely, they are consistently using terms like āassumingā and āgoing with this assumptionā.
Everything is speculation.
The right way to move forward is to archive the suggestions in this letter in the back of the head, assume nothing as you collect more data. When more data has been gathered, and analyzed, one can pick up on the suggestions in this letter, re-evaluating the plausibility in the speculations stated in the letter.
If you assume a specific explanation, it is more likely that one would collect data and analyse it in a way that confirms the beliefs of the researcher.
Take the EM drive. Perfect example. Going with the assumption that it works, many teams failed to account correctly for thermal effects on the measurements. When that was corrected, the results showed that the EM drive would be orders of magnitude less efficient compared to a photonthruster. Basically a light-bulb.
So. Fine. Believe that Oumuamua is alien.
All I ask, is that you stop claiming a letter that speculates on possible origins, to be factual or conclusive. I isnāt.
As I have repeatedly stated, that the discussion in the letter is extremely interesting, but the authors have stated themselves that it is more likely that it is a depleted comet core.
So please stop saying the letter is stating reality.
It is not.
One more thing, why everyone could think its a natural object made in some strange physical process, when its properties would have to fit a solar sail. Since when cosmos produces solar sails naturally? I did not had any information about such things. Everywhere you can see just stuff that never looks like that. And then you can think of a thing like that produced unnaturally, potential use in space industry, as a spaceship propulsion, even considered as a probe propulsion to a nearest system with planets in habitable zone. And it happens object that exhausts definition of a solar sail flies just where such planet in habitable zone is.
Its a pertinacious thought, that will make everyone scratch their heads for a long time I think. But I know what to think about it. 
That was nowhere to be found in that paper.
You have to read that again I think.
Cant find the primary source, but my very first reply, contains the secondary source.
Just stop referring to the letter as stating conclusive statements on the Oumuamua object.
it is speculation.
If you center your talk about your beliefs, discussing the discussion in the letter. But you are not doing that yet. You rant like the letter is conclusive, and use it in a way that implies it to be the only ātruthā.
Keep your arguments on your own playing field.
Before you argue that I should do the same, remember, I am only defending the non-conclusive nature of the letter. They even describe all the alien explanations as being exotic.
That is not a scientist way of saying I believe this to be the answer.
Look, while I agree that it is highly likely that there is other live in the universe, our actual knowledge about those things is a one dot statistic. We donāt even have another example of life than the one we know on earth which all shares a common origin. While this topic is absolutely fascinating, we simply have to admit that we are completely ignorant about it.
As for that asteroid. Seriously, every time something isnāt known people start to project god, angels and aliens as the cause. Everyone can just claim such a thing. But it is an absolutely extraordinary claim and extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence.
They have to include all those less plausible explanations in case some tetrically stiff pfofesor would say something like that.
Giordano Bruno was only one. Nobody wants to be āburned at stakeā now.
I wasnāt disputing their reasons for including the speculations. Iām disputing your claim that those speculations are conclusive to the description of the object.
Learn reading comprehension.
For anyone who didnāt read either the PDF or an article about it, the gist as I understand it is: The objectās pathway showed some acceleration that is not accounted for by momentum and gravitational forces. Which invites speculation on whether it may have some remnant self-propulsion.
This is correct.
But the author of this thread stated that is was conclusive to be alien spacecraft (or something like it).
There are some discrepancies in the projected trajectory and the actual trajectory that is still unaccounted for.
That still holds true.
is this some attempt at insulting my intelligence?
because it sure doesā¦
Do you know what beat people usually do?
they try to get the people who beat them down at their level
Luckily for me, Iām better than that. nice try tho 
I always make mistakes, but it was elbowing and not an attack, as I have posted before thank goodness for Google otherwise my lack of education would really show.
No, there is just nothing to insult. Look, I dont care how wise you attempt to look or how much overblown ego you have, you are still some kind of life form prone to extinction, and that extinction is speed up by your actions as human every day, its not only you, its our civilization as whole lacking intelligent lead, I think its also a flaw in other civilizations in which creatures considered themselves intelligent species. Your last chance is maybe be a fossil somewhere in museum of natural science, millions of years in future, but there is no imprint of intelligence in such thing. So that is why someone will say that there was no proof of intelligent life here. You understand now? Some alien researcher who will some day maybe receive our small bubble of radio waves emited from earth will be astonished how stupid our behavior was in our everyday life. Just like them.
Intelligence is overrated.
Not conclusive, I wrote conclusion. That is something different than conclusive last time I checked. I never wrote its conclusive. Or maybe in english its actually something different.
Oh look, its actually proposal in my language.
Wniosek - proposal, while conclusion is translated as wniosek.
āA conclusion is the point where you stopped thinking about the matterā 
I never stopped, it looks like its proposal derived from data, pointing strongly to an artificial origin. In that sense I used conclusion, but it looks like its meaning is different in both languages. Language barriers, is a bane of all creatures. No matter how intelligent.
Itās just a re-translated quote. Read it in a āMurphyās lawsā book in Spanish. But it emphasizes what is a conclusion, itās the end of the road, not a new road opening. This might not be easy to understand for non-Latin languages. 
Oh I understand now, when you mentioned Murphyās law.
We translate it as:
Wniosek, moment w ktĆ³rym nie masz siÅy już dalej mysleÄ.
Conclusion, a moment when you exhausted your will to think. 
Yes, thatās it, in Spanish itās āUna conclusiĆ³n es el punto donde dejaste de pensar en el asuntoā.
It haves some philosophiclaaimplications because, do we ever stop thnking about a matter? We surely will be hearing more from Oumuaumua, and my hunch is that maybe itās related to electromagnetic effects.
Saying that a solar sail coudl explain it since we donāt have any good images nor data on Oumuamua itās a bit of āstirring the potā. We could just have the trajectories wrong and be messing the mass of the object.
All we OBJECTIVELY know is its brightness and relative position compared to the background at several times. Brightness is very informational, but also depneds on guessing. A darker object will be farther and moving faster than a lighter object. We have a good estimate on the brightness of Oumuamua but itās an estimate nonetheless. Maybe the dust covering it haves a different composition thus its reflective spectrum is not what we think it was so turns trhat Oumuamua was darker than we supposedā¦ and there goes the velocity anomaly, if it just was a little farther than we thought.
Known Solar System objects, like asteroids and comets have mass-to-area ratios orders of magnitude larger than our estimate for āOumuamua. If radiation pressure is the accelerating force, then āOumuamua represents a new class of thin interstellar material, either produced naturally,through a yet unknown process in the ISM or in proto-planetary disks, or of an artificial origin.
It says it right there, that natural cause is one of the possibilities. So why are we jumping to conclusions that this must be artificial in nature?
If there are aliens they certainly arenāt going to be inclined to be discovered. It just make common sense to avoid as much discovery as possible since mankind would obviously be perceived as a threat. They also certainly wouldnāt send a spaceship through for you to have either.