People believe in all sorts of unbelievable things: conspiracy theories, ghosts, gods (no offense), etc...
So why is it that it seems many people refuse to believe in extra terrestrial life? They have no problem defending other things that probably don't exist, but they can't accept something extremely plausible? I bet if you took a poll in the United States, more people would be believe in ghosts than aliens -- or it would be pathetically close.
Earth is like 0.0000000000000000000000000000001% of the universe, and you can't even entertain the possibility for a second, that some sort of life exists somewhere else?
That doesn't mean it's intelligent, or has spaceships, or lasers -- it could simply be some bacteria or microbes.
No, I'll stop -- It's a ridiculous idea after all
(and no this has nothing to do with the stupidity that is UFOs)
On July 01 2009 08:25 Piy wrote: Why don't people believe in UFO's?
Kind of a strange contradictory thing to put at the end of your post imo...
Many UFO sightings and reported abductions sound absolutely ridiculous. I'm sure there's a couple controversial ones that are worth discussing, but most are BS.
i agree completely with the OP, the universe has something like 36.5 billion light year radius or something crazy like that? Which consists of millions of stars that each comprise their own potential system of planets, so i don't believe that Earth is supposed to be the only planet that can sustain life :x
It is almost directly a religious thing. If there are life forms on other planets it completely goes against everything conservative religions strive to teach.
Most people who realize just how vast the universe really is are smart enough to consider the fact that our planet isnt the only one a perfect distance from a heat source to contain life.
On July 01 2009 08:28 Grommit wrote: What makes you think that "so many people" refuse to believe in aliens? Are there even any legitimate studies about that kind of thing?
From my experiences I wouldn't be surprised if most people didn't. Is my generlazation accurate or credible? No. It's just a casual forum topic.
Poll: Do you believe in Aliens? (Vote): Yes - And they're watching us... (Vote): Yes - They're out there! (Vote): Don't Know (Vote): No - Incredibly unlikely (Vote): No - Impossible
Of course, this being a site dedicated to an intergalactic war between aliens, there may be some cause for bias.
The equation can really be looked at as a number of questions:
N* represents the number of stars in the Milky Way Galaxy
Question: How many stars are in the Milky Way Galaxy? Answer: Current estimates are 100 billion.
fp is the fraction of stars that have planets around them
Question: What percentage of stars have planetary systems? Answer: Current estimates range from 20% to 50%.
ne is the number of planets per star that are capable of sustaining life
Question: For each star that does have a planetary system, how many planets are capable of sustaining life? Answer: Current estimates range from 1 to 5.
fl is the fraction of planets in ne where life evolves
Question: On what percentage of the planets that are capable of sustaining life does life actually evolve? Answer: Current estimates range from 100% (where life can evolve it will) down to close to 0%.
fi is the fraction of fl where intelligent life evolves
Question: On the planets where life does evolve, what percentage evolves intelligent life? Answer: Estimates range from 100% (intelligence is such a survival advantage that it will certainly evolve) down to near 0%.
fc is the fraction of fi that communicate
Question: What percentage of intelligent races have the means and the desire to communicate? Answer: 10% to 20%
fL is fraction of the planet's life during which the communicating civilizations live
Question: For each civilization that does communicate, for what fraction of the planet's life does the civilization survive? Answer: This is the toughest of the questions. If we take Earth as an example, the expected lifetime of our Sun and the Earth is roughly 10 billion years. So far we've been communicating with radio waves for less than 100 years. How long will our civilization survive? Will we destroy ourselves in a few years like some predict or will we overcome our problems and survive for millennia? If we were destroyed tomorrow the answer to this question would be 1/100,000,000th. If we survive for 10,000 years the answer will be 1/1,000,000th.
When all of these variables are multiplied together when come up with:
N, the number of communicating civilizations in the galaxy.
What's your evidence that they don't? When asked the question "do you believe in aliens?", people are more likely to interpret that as "have UFO's come to earth and abducted people" than "might there be bacteria somewhere in the galaxy".
If by aliens you mean more evolved lifeforms than human beings that we have not yet encountered yet, then yes I do believe in them. If you are talking about the cloverfield monster or predator then no I don't
It's very probable that aliens do exists and they are just highly evolved versions of us. We like to think that we are the peak of evolution but that is just silly. There are organisms that we as humans study which are very primative, so there has to be organisms out there that are so highly evolved we can't even comprehend them. Physicists talk about time travel and multiple dimisions, and it is likely that these alien beings live in a different time/space. They can observe us because they are so more technologically advanced than us, but we cannot spot or communicate with them. UFOs are really just alien observers checking upon us, because to them, we are the past and they live in the future.
Godamn I know what I just typed sounds nutty but I've heard Michio Kaku talk about it and hes legit.
The article said they interviewed people 18 and older...I'd be willing to bet the older people are, the less likely they are to believe in extraterrestrial life. This generation is probably much more receptive to the idea of E.T than say the baby boomers or the greatest generation.
I'm pretty sure anybody who's taken an astronomy course would feel somewhat confidant that we're not the only intelligent life in the whole universe. I mean, like you said, it seems that there's a high probability of earth-like planets to be out there. We've even found at least one, I remember reading.
The difference between believing that and believing there are little secret green men running around in our .0000000000000000001% of the universe probing our anuses is very large. People who believe that space men have beamed them up and experimented on them are usually delusional.
Personally I think the Drake equation is not very useful. Chances of there being any life that will ever be close enough for us to meet: tiny. Chances of us communicating through radio signals: slightly less tiny. Chances that there is life out there SOMEWHERE: not bad.
We don't believe them because their liars. You lend them money, they disappear out of this galaxy and you never see your money again.
Seriously tho. I just rather believe in what provides me a practical solution to a problem. That sentence resumes 100% of everything I believe, it just makes more sense. So while I do admit that it's plausible that aliens might exist and we might never know for sure. Believing it's true simply doesn't brings me as much practical solutions in my life than believing it isn't. It's simple as that.
On July 01 2009 08:48 VIB wrote: We don't believe them because their liars. You lend them money, they disappear out of this galaxy and you never see your money again.
and they make you build derby race cars with only the parts from the kit
I do believe that other intelligent life exists somewhere in the universe but I don't believe we'll ever encounter them. I love Star Trek, but I really don't think we'll ever invent the warp drive. Chances are, we will have depleted the earth's supply of natural resources before we get anywhere near FTL travel.
On July 01 2009 09:07 B1nary wrote: I do believe that other intelligent life exists somewhere in the universe but I don't believe we'll ever encounter them. I love Star Trek, but I really don't think we'll ever invent the warp drive. Chances are, we will have depleted the earth's supply of natural resources before we get anywhere near FTL travel.
Eh humans use natural resources mostly for energy consumption.
Once we figure out fusion, and I have no doubt that we will within the next century, most of our natural resource problems will completely vanish because of just how much output fusion reactors have.
So much actually that all the oil companies would be put completely out of business within two to three years.
I believe that it appears very likely for extraterrestrial sentients to exist considering the breadth of the universe. I'll remain wary of any more specific assertions regarding aliens unless presented with evidence.
On July 01 2009 08:48 VIB wrote: We don't believe them because their liars. You lend them money, they disappear out of this galaxy and you never see your money again.
and they make you build derby race cars with only the parts from the kit
I assume there is life beyond Earth (in what capacity, I have no idea), but there is no evidence to prove alien life exists which is why people do not believe in aliens.
They believe in God because it makes them feel happy, and God is a perfectly good answer as to why we exist.
Conspiracy theories they believe because it is much more fun to believe Air France was a secret terrorist plot bringing the plane down than a crappy storm.
Ghosts because it can explain a lot of weird noises and sounds things make by random variables. Better believe in ghosts than think you are crazy.
Now aliens what do they mean to humanity? Just means that someone is better than we are. When people think of aliens they think of creepy, weird, intelligent and hostile beings. Rather not think they exist.
Some people don't believe in actual facts like global warming, what makes them believe of unheard of things?
On July 01 2009 08:47 micronesia wrote: Personally I think the Drake equation is not very useful. Chances of there being any life that will ever be close enough for us to meet: tiny. Chances of us communicating through radio signals: slightly less tiny. Chances that there is life out there SOMEWHERE: not bad.
Given millions of years, humanity could do a fair job of colonizing our entire galaxy even at sub-light speeds. The technology isn't there yet, of course, but it almost certainly will be very "soon" relative to the age of the universe. From there, we could branch out to other galaxies and explore a lot of space on a billion year time scale. In that scenario, even if someone does meet an alien species, 99.99999999% of humanity wouldn't ever know about it, but it'd still happen!
Of course people believe in aliens, the zerg swarm is heading this way!
On a more serious note, there have been confirmed "aliens" in mars I think. Well bacteria and micro organisms anyways.
In terms of intelligent lifeforms, it is just the chance of meeting them is so unlikely because well they most likely live very far away from us and if Einstein's theory of relativity is correct that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light, then the chance of us meeting an intelligent lifeform is very slim.
On July 01 2009 08:23 eMbrace wrote: People believe in all sorts of unbelievable things: conspiracy theories, ghosts, gods (no offense), etc...
So why is it that it seems many people refuse to believe in extra terrestrial life? They have no problem defending other things that probably don't exist, but they can't accept something extremely plausible? I bet if you took a poll in the United States, more people would be believe in ghosts than aliens -- or it would be pathetically close.
Earth is like 0.0000000000000000000000000000001% of the universe, and you can't even entertain the possibility for a second, that some sort of life exists somewhere else?
That doesn't mean it's intelligent, or has spaceships, or lasers -- it could simply be some bacteria or microbes.
No, I'll stop -- It's a ridiculous idea after all
(and no this has nothing to do with the stupidity that is UFOs)
Dude, most kids I know my age ALL believe in extra terrestrial life.. idk what your talking about.
I don't believe that we can ever hear/contact aliens. I believe the great filter is to pervasive and that intelligent life does exist, albeit only a handful do exist in the universe.
On July 01 2009 08:47 micronesia wrote: Personally I think the Drake equation is not very useful. Chances of there being any life that will ever be close enough for us to meet: tiny. Chances of us communicating through radio signals: slightly less tiny. Chances that there is life out there SOMEWHERE: not bad.
Given millions of years, humanity could do a fair job of colonizing our entire galaxy even at sub-light speeds. The technology isn't there yet, of course, but it almost certainly will be very "soon" relative to the age of the universe. From there, we could branch out to other galaxies and explore a lot of space on a billion year time scale. In that scenario, even if someone does meet an alien species, 99.99999999% of humanity wouldn't ever know about it, but it'd still happen!
Cosmic events can stop evolution in its tracks. If you think about that, you have to understand humanity's ability to expand itself to other solar systems and galaxies as finite. Maybe there won't be enough time for us to invent effective space travel. Maybe we'll kill each other before that happens. Maybe we'll just run out of resources.
@ OP: You're basically imagining a group of incredibly ignorant people that don't really exist. Just about everyone who knows how big the universe is believes there's life outside of Earth. It's not unthinkable that we're the first intelligent life, but that's highly unlikely considering the age of the universe.
extra terrestrial life is probed (martian rock from antarctica)... so you should believe in... but intelligent (according to what we call intelligence) life is difficult...
under the OP reasons we could believe in bigfoot, snowman, etc....
On July 01 2009 08:47 micronesia wrote: Personally I think the Drake equation is not very useful. Chances of there being any life that will ever be close enough for us to meet: tiny. Chances of us communicating through radio signals: slightly less tiny. Chances that there is life out there SOMEWHERE: not bad.
Given millions of years, humanity could do a fair job of colonizing our entire galaxy even at sub-light speeds. The technology isn't there yet, of course, but it almost certainly will be very "soon" relative to the age of the universe. From there, we could branch out to other galaxies and explore a lot of space on a billion year time scale. In that scenario, even if someone does meet an alien species, 99.99999999% of humanity wouldn't ever know about it, but it'd still happen!
It would take many years to get to another star. I fail to see any prospective technology that makes interstellar transport of live humans possible.
There's a difference between saying there's probably intelligent life elsewhere in the universe and believing there is as fact. There's no proof for the latter.
I think you are wrong, if I remember correctly there was once a poll in the U.S. which I saw on the news saying that over 65% of adults in the U.S. believed in UFOs and a majority of that 65% also believed these could be extra-terrestial.
On July 01 2009 08:49 GGQ wrote: you're a dumbass (no offence)
Irony...
In any case, I need positive evidence for anything. Prove to me that there are aliens or God or whatever else people believe in. The fact that I can't prove that they don't exist isn't an argument for their existence. It simply means that science hasn't progressed that far yet. Faith is stupid because it skips right over any kind of mental effort and only requires blind acquiescence. Of course, it's obvious that with the billions of stars out there, there are at least a couple that have the capability of sustaining life, but that does not make a strong argument that it's there.
I dont really get the point of making up an answer for this. Why do you have to choose sides on whether you believe it or not? Both answers are possible, and believing in either shouldnt change at all the way you think or behave, unlike believing in something religious or paranormal.
On July 01 2009 08:47 micronesia wrote: Personally I think the Drake equation is not very useful. Chances of there being any life that will ever be close enough for us to meet: tiny. Chances of us communicating through radio signals: slightly less tiny. Chances that there is life out there SOMEWHERE: not bad.
Given millions of years, humanity could do a fair job of colonizing our entire galaxy even at sub-light speeds. The technology isn't there yet, of course, but it almost certainly will be very "soon" relative to the age of the universe. From there, we could branch out to other galaxies and explore a lot of space on a billion year time scale. In that scenario, even if someone does meet an alien species, 99.99999999% of humanity wouldn't ever know about it, but it'd still happen!
It would take many years to get to another star. I fail to see any prospective technology that makes interstellar transport of live humans possible.
He said soon by the standards of the universe. What you need to realise is that humanity is only 50,000 or so years old. The fact that we don't have interstellar travel now is irrelevant. It wasn't so long ago that the first men started harnessing fire while now that same power is used to propel their descendants to the moon. Another 50,000 years would be the blink of an eye in the history of the universe while the advancement required is nothing compared to how far man has already come.
That said, I don't believe the question of whether there are aliens is relevant because of the lifespan of species and the size of the universe. There probably are, were, and will be. But for two sentient species to coexist within the same area in both time and space is vastly less likely.
What I find way more interesting is that it was just 20,000 years ago that homosapiens became the sole self conscious life on earth after wiping out the Neanderthal. It's not so long ago that another self aware species roamed the earth and that really messes with our egocentric view.
On July 01 2009 12:22 Irrelevant wrote: Simply, the major religions of the world doesn't have them listed.
A decent portion of Christians believe Aliens are fallen angels, as does my self; Books of Enoch confirm this for us Christians if they only open up their mind.
Aliens seem to be one of those things that the majority of people need to see with their own eyes to believe. You have former astronauts, government workers and obviously people everywhere in between saying they have seen something thy cant explain. Then we have various reports, videos, audio, obviously nothing conclusive enough to say, okay..they're here!
I'm just trying to say there are people in every day walks of lives reporting these things now a days, not just the inbred trailer park guy of the past. UFO's are a proven phenomena that has been going on for thousands of years, from Aztec drawings up until this very day, now what are they is the question you have to ask for your self.
On July 01 2009 12:22 Irrelevant wrote: Simply, the major religions of the world doesn't have them listed.
A decent portion of Christians believe Aliens are fallen angels, as does my self; Books of Enoch confirm this for us Christians if they only open up their mind.
Aliens seem to be one of those things that the majority of people need to see with their own eyes to believe. You have former astronauts, government workers and obviously people everywhere in between saying they have seen something thy cant explain. Then we have various reports, videos, audio, obviously nothing conclusive enough to say, okay..they're here!
I'm just trying to say there are people in every day walks of lives reporting these things now a days, not just the inbred trailer park guy of the past. UFO's are a proven phenomena that has been going on for thousands of years, from Aztec drawings up until this very day, now what are they is the question you have to ask for your self.
What do you mean "believe?" I am not sure whether aliens exist. Anyone who understands science knows that it is not known for certain whether or not aliens exist (maybe some know for certain, those who were senselessly raped and examined by alien overlords).
On July 01 2009 12:52 Zurles wrote: 99.9999% existence probability
Agreed with probably a few more 9's.
An interesting thing I read about UFO's in a book by some guy named Jim Marrs. It was called "The Fourth Reich" it was a nicely researched conspiracy theory novel which is very entertaining, in about the third chapter it says how the Nazi's technology was FAR more advanced then modern history leads us to believe. It in fact says that the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki used Plutonium created by the Germans, because the Manhattan project failed to yield the necessary amount of Uranium to produce the bombs.
It also mentions how the German's were able to create UFO's and goes into great detail. It sounds a bit crazy but its all cited, so take it as you will. Its a book worth reading if you like history and wouldn't mind seeing another take on it.
On July 01 2009 12:52 Zurles wrote: 99.9999% existence probability
Agreed with probably a few more 9's.
An interesting thing I read about UFO's in a book by some guy named Jim Marrs. It was called "The Fourth Reich" it was a nicely researched conspiracy theory novel which is very entertaining, in about the third chapter it says how the Nazi's technology was FAR more advanced then modern history leads us to believe. It in fact says that the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki used Plutonium created by the Germans, because the Manhattan project failed to yield the necessary amount of Uranium to produce the bombs.
It also mentions how the German's were able to create UFO's and goes into great detail. It sounds a bit crazy but its all cited, so take it as you will. Its a book worth reading if you like history and wouldn't mind seeing another take on it.
I think there's a big distinction between believing in alien life and believing in aliens having visited us. Most thinking people will probably agree that alien life is quite likely and aliens having come here is not.
On July 01 2009 08:47 micronesia wrote: Personally I think the Drake equation is not very useful. Chances of there being any life that will ever be close enough for us to meet: tiny. Chances of us communicating through radio signals: slightly less tiny. Chances that there is life out there SOMEWHERE: not bad.
Given millions of years, humanity could do a fair job of colonizing our entire galaxy even at sub-light speeds. The technology isn't there yet, of course, but it almost certainly will be very "soon" relative to the age of the universe. From there, we could branch out to other galaxies and explore a lot of space on a billion year time scale. In that scenario, even if someone does meet an alien species, 99.99999999% of humanity wouldn't ever know about it, but it'd still happen!
It would take many years to get to another star. I fail to see any prospective technology that makes interstellar transport of live humans possible.
He said soon by the standards of the universe. What you need to realise is that humanity is only 50,000 or so years old. The fact that we don't have interstellar travel now is irrelevant. It wasn't so long ago that the first men started harnessing fire while now that same power is used to propel their descendants to the moon. Another 50,000 years would be the blink of an eye in the history of the universe while the advancement required is nothing compared to how far man has already come.
For starters, I don't think I 'need to realize' that humanity is only ~50k years old. I very well understand your point.
However, I believe we are getting to a point where the scientist is better than the historian at answering questions about if certain technologies and advancements are attainable.
Regardless, he said "but it almost certainly will be very 'soon' relative to the age of the universe." Because humans have not been around for that long, you consider interstellar colonization a likelihood? Even if we were assured that humans would be around for a billion years, that doesn't mean that we will accomplish anything that we want to.
I believe there is a strong chance there is life somewhere else in the universe (aliens). But for me to believe there are little green men flying around putting anal probes in rednecks and killing cattle is pretty far fetched.
They definitely exist and its a race to find them and annex their shit before they kill us. The finder will come out on top cuz they obviously can travel through deep space and that shits imba.
On July 01 2009 08:25 Piy wrote: Why don't people believe in UFO's?
Kind of a strange contradictory thing to put at the end of your post imo...
Many UFO sightings and reported abductions sound absolutely ridiculous. I'm sure there's a couple controversial ones that are worth discussing, but most are BS.
hmm... i believe many alien sightings and reports are pretty ridiculous as well, so following ur logic i will stop believing in aliens...
This is a very controversial, yet highly-interesting subject.
I am in complete love w/ the idea of Aliens. I'm hoping that if there is aliens, they're more liek Protoss, rather than Zerg. That they have more useful technology (even meaning if they could eradicate us) but perhaps, likewise to the Protoss, follow a belief of Dae'Uhl or The stewardship - where they just 'oversee' and protect lesser species under their galactic patrol.
Theres possibilites of both kinds of aliens, the technologically advanced, but also the rather bug-like or totally hideous kind that's hell-bent on infesting and expanding.
I think it's prolly the very best idea of having hope of space-exploration. I mean c'mon. U know how much $$ america alone is spending on its space-missions and exploration? I'm talking about we're spending more trying to send shuttles into space and look for extra life than anything else! Like - if we quit doing that, we'd prolly not have such a high national debt (not that i'm against space-exploration, just that jeeez.. thats a lot of $$$)
Who's to say we're not alone here.. There have been the rumors of Area 51 and Roswell from way back, I think in the 50's.. but thats highly skeptical as we've still haven't gotten that much proof from it.
However, hearing details about our universe from a highly-informative series called "The universe" off the history channel - it's totally and mind-blowingly unbelieveable how lucky we are to have the Earth. I seriously wish at least everyone reading this post and using this website would take a step back and really deep-think and appreciate the Earth for what it is and how long we've had it. I wish the entire world could - but they can't all navigate to this site immediately.
Whats so impressive about the Earth: It's in the Perfect position away from the Sun to sustain life. I'm talking about pretty serious, pretty advanced life. I heard from that show that through space-exploration, we've discovered like up to 300 other worlds... THREE HUNDRED other worlds.. Worlds just like ours, that have land and an atmosphere - not just planets that are totally gaseous like Jupiter that no one could ever inhabit (not that some of those others are inhabitable, but we could at least land there and terra-form etc) But - of those so many worlds that have been discovered already and named, NONE of them are even close to sustaining life.. even bacteria related. Can you fathom that ppl? Think of how big this planet is. I mean, even a state of America is huge.. land-wse. Then u got the Americas. Europe. Asia. Antartica. Earth itself is huge. Thats just ONE planet. We've found SOO many others - yet none even close to having water.. or a tree, or parasites. Even those would at least hold the possibility of eventual evolvement (yes, I believe in evolving, totally more understandable than the belief of a "mighty one")
So ya, that alone makes me truly appreciate the Earth - The ONLY recorded planet to sustain such a diverse enviroment of life. Plants, Animals, Insects, Rivers, Mountains, Cars, Technology, Internet, everything.. We as humans should be totally more respectful of not only each other, but the ONE AND ONLY planet we have - our time is coming to an end.
p.s. That's why movies these days are making human-beings out to be the bad-guys in films, because of our disrepect of the earth. Movies like "The happening" or "The Day the earth stood still" (new version w/ Keanu Reeves) Also - for those living in the states and watch tv, you notice that they play "The day after tomarrow" like 3x's a week.. Ya yo.. Global warming is about to own our asses.. but that's getting onto another topic..
On July 01 2009 09:07 B1nary wrote: I do believe that other intelligent life exists somewhere in the universe but I don't believe we'll ever encounter them. I love Star Trek, but I really don't think we'll ever invent the warp drive. Chances are, we will have depleted the earth's supply of natural resources before we get anywhere near FTL travel.
Eh humans use natural resources mostly for energy consumption.
Once we figure out fusion, and I have no doubt that we will within the next century, most of our natural resource problems will completely vanish because of just how much output fusion reactors have.
So much actually that all the oil companies would be put completely out of business within two to three years.
Which is exactly why fusion will never be discovered.
Lets be real here. The universe is infinite. The probability that there is intelligent life may be small, but in the vast expanses of infinity, it is almost GUARENTEED to happen.
Great example posed by a friend ..
If you had an infine amount of monkeys pounding away at keyboards forever, one day, a whole work of shakespeare would appear. Crazy shit eh?
On July 01 2009 14:52 DreaM)XeRO wrote: Lets be real here. The universe is infinite. The probability that there is intelligent life may be small, but in the vast expanses of infinity, it is almost GUARENTEED to happen.
Great example posed by a friend ..
If you had an infine amount of monkeys pounding away at keyboards forever, one day, a whole work of shakespeare would appear. Crazy shit eh?
No it wouldn't. The way the keyboard is designed that doesn't make any sense. If i pounded my keyboard no matter what I would never get a real word, just gibberish. For example: if i hit the left side of my keyboard I'm bound to hit a QAWSZX. There isn't a word in the dictionary with those letters together.
i believe in aliens. the fact is there are basically infinite planets, at least 1 planet has to have at least single-celled organisms, and most likely some planet has something more intelligent then us. As far as UFOs, i wouldnt be surprised to find they are real. Lets face it, we are curious about life on other planets as well. Them sending flying saucers here to study us is about the same as us sending a rover to mars, except a much more advanced way. As for abductions and all that, again there could be a legitimate case or 2 of it(yes if we found life less intelligent then us we woluld study it to) but most of those people are just on something and/or crying forn attention
Earth was created by Aliens, they are watching our development and growth. We are nothing more than lab rats to them. And in time we will do the same thing.
anyway, with ufos, someone should post that video of how small this earth really is in comparison to things in our galaxy, let alone universe, and then whether we are the only ones alone comes into perspective.
On July 01 2009 08:28 Grommit wrote: What makes you think that "so many people" refuse to believe in aliens? Are there even any legitimate studies about that kind of thing?
On July 01 2009 14:52 DreaM)XeRO wrote: Lets be real here. The universe is infinite. The probability that there is intelligent life may be small, but in the vast expanses of infinity, it is almost GUARENTEED to happen.
Great example posed by a friend ..
If you had an infine amount of monkeys pounding away at keyboards forever, one day, a whole work of shakespeare would appear. Crazy shit eh?
No it wouldn't. The way the keyboard is designed that doesn't make any sense. If i pounded my keyboard no matter what I would never get a real word, just gibberish. For example: if i hit the left side of my keyboard I'm bound to hit a QAWSZX. There isn't a word in the dictionary with those letters together.
When they say that what they really mean is random selection of letters... in which case it is statistically true (although not practically since every monkey that ever lived wouldn't be nearly enough to produce Shakespeare)
On July 01 2009 14:52 DreaM)XeRO wrote: Lets be real here. The universe is infinite. The probability that there is intelligent life may be small, but in the vast expanses of infinity, it is almost GUARENTEED to happen.
Great example posed by a friend ..
If you had an infine amount of monkeys pounding away at keyboards forever, one day, a whole work of shakespeare would appear. Crazy shit eh?
No it wouldn't. The way the keyboard is designed that doesn't make any sense. If i pounded my keyboard no matter what I would never get a real word, just gibberish. For example: if i hit the left side of my keyboard I'm bound to hit a QAWSZX. There isn't a word in the dictionary with those letters together.
When they say that what they really mean is random selection of letters... in which case it is statistically true (although not practically since every monkey that ever lived wouldn't be nearly enough to produce Shakespeare)
It was the best of times, it was the blust of times...
On July 01 2009 13:14 micronesia wrote: However, I believe we are getting to a point where the scientist is better than the historian at answering questions about if certain technologies and advancements are attainable.
Regardless, he said "but it almost certainly will be very 'soon' relative to the age of the universe." Because humans have not been around for that long, you consider interstellar colonization a likelihood? Even if we were assured that humans would be around for a billion years, that doesn't mean that we will accomplish anything that we want to.
Well, it is a fact that we can travel through space already, the matter of colonizing other planets then boils down to how much time it will take to travel to them and how long it will take until we find a usable planet. Even if we have to crawl our way toward the next planet and leave space stations on the way for easy transportation of resources, it will happen. In any case this can't possibly take very long compared to the age of the universe, even with current technology, and I'm sure noone believes that we will stay at the current space travel capability, it will most probably improve a lot.
Also, humanity is in a kind of singularity in that the rate of advancement is accelerating, and regardless of whether this acceleration will continue for very long or not, it surely increases the hope that we have in colonizing another planet / asteroid / giant rock "very soon" (as in, say, the next 500 years).
I think the more interesting question is what this all means to us on a more personal level. Today we can imagine space travel and looking through the spaceship's glass toward the planets and stars. Tomorrow we will be living it. But do we need to wait that long, really? Computing is advancing so rapidly, that it is really easy to believe that in a few years we will be able to live that experience almost completely from our own homes.
And it might be even better than that, as reality doesn't really allow us to explore the possibilities that much, but imagine a very realistic virtual reality game where you can re-enact Star Wars or some shit like that. I mean, I don't like war and would never participate in one, especially after I found Call of Duty 4. That shit is really immersive, it grabs onto your brain and it's almost like you're there. Computing will soon be realistic enough for you to feel like you're there, and more.
On July 01 2009 13:14 micronesia wrote: However, I believe we are getting to a point where the scientist is better than the historian at answering questions about if certain technologies and advancements are attainable.
Regardless, he said "but it almost certainly will be very 'soon' relative to the age of the universe." Because humans have not been around for that long, you consider interstellar colonization a likelihood? Even if we were assured that humans would be around for a billion years, that doesn't mean that we will accomplish anything that we want to.
Well, it is a fact that we can travel through space already, the matter of colonizing other planets then boils down to how much time it will take to travel to them and how long it will take until we find a usable planet. Even if we have to crawl our way toward the next planet and leave space stations on the way for easy transportation of resources, it will happen. In any case this can't possibly take very long compared to the age of the universe, even with current technology, and I'm sure noone believes that we will stay at the current space travel capability, it will most probably improve a lot.
I don't agree with you that it will happen. I consider the odds unlikely.
Also, humanity is in a kind of singularity in that the rate of advancement is accelerating,
How do you measure the rate of advancement? How do you conclude that it is accelerating?
and regardless of whether this acceleration will continue for very long or not, it surely increases the hope that we have in colonizing another planet / asteroid / giant rock "very soon" (as in, say, the next 500 years).
I don't see any purpose in trying to colonize a place that can't sustain human life.
On July 01 2009 14:34 Sosha wrote: Theres possibilites of both kinds of aliens, the technologically advanced, but also the rather bug-like or totally hideous kind that's hell-bent on infesting and expanding.
What makes you think humanity does not fall into this category?
On July 01 2009 14:34 Sosha wrote: Theres possibilites of both kinds of aliens, the technologically advanced, but also the rather bug-like or totally hideous kind that's hell-bent on infesting and expanding.
What makes you think humanity does not fall into this category?
Our time existing on this world compared to the existence of the universe is infinitesimally small. We are nothing but a pin drop in a very very large room time wise.
Not too long ago we believed the earth was flat, then we said the Earth was the center of the universe, 100 years ago we started to communicate via radio waves and about same time we started to make planes...only 60 or so years since we had computers....who are we to say life out there does not exist?
While there are certain conditions, at least to our knowledge of how life can form via the circumstances that happened to Earth. With the universe being so infinitely large, there is almost a guarantee that there is some sort of other life out there. Now they may be older or younger then us, since we have not been around for long, and universe has formed a very long time ago.
Weather they are alive or not depends on if they overcame circumstances that are affecting us today to be able to survive and not to mention all the other stuff the universe can throw at you.
So in the end, it is quite possible there is other intelligent life out there, but with the universe being so freaking large, we may never meet them.
As for astronomical numbers and the probability of intelligent life out there and the Drake equation. The Drake equation needs only one really small number and it won't matter at all how many stars there are.
The probability of life originating from biochemistry may very well be almost zero, eventhough on earth it happened almost immediately from when it could happen. Same for multicellular life and intelligent life.
Drake equation proves we are the only one out there just as much as it does the opposite.
The Fermi paradox is not a paradox. Right now because of the Fermi 'Paradox' we think we know that the odds of intelligent life being out there in the Milky Way is very close to zero. There is no intelligent life in the Millky Way at the right moment at the right time so that they are able to communicate with us. Otherwise, they would have and we would have known.
So intelligent life in the Milky Way may occur or have occured but only millions of years before or after earth had intelligent life.
And besides the probable exteme rarity, intelligent life may very well always be self-destructive, as we see on this planet. And Darwinian evolution explains very well why.
If within 100 years we find microcellular life on Mars or Europa and we find many very extrasolar planets with lots of oxygen and water in the habitable zone and at correct temperatures then that can mean only two things: 1) We are about to go extinct 2) Intelligent life is incredibly rare and it really only happened once in the Milky Way
So if we find life on Mars and we find 'earths', like we expect to do we better either also find a Dyson sphere or we should prepare for doomsday.
So either we are very special, which is against the Copernical principle, and we passed through the Great Filter or we are about to hit the Great Filter ourselves. Which one is more likely? I fear the second.
oh man. i have a LOT to say on this matter and similar ones, but i visit other forums for that. i'll just leave this story and you guys can read and make your own decision.
yes i am a firm believer of alien life. I also believe the multiverse theory and that the universe is extremely small compared to what else is out there, which would increase the chance of alien life existing to 99.999999999%
On July 01 2009 14:34 Sosha wrote: Theres possibilites of both kinds of aliens, the technologically advanced, but also the rather bug-like or totally hideous kind that's hell-bent on infesting and expanding.
What makes you think humanity does not fall into this category?
There are actually a lot of factors in the argument against the belief of alien lifeforms as well. Yes, Earth is just one of a gazillion planetary bodies and it seems unlikely that not one of them will harbor alien life form but at the same time we need to realize, the lifespan of this world is just a blink in the scale of the life span of the universe. As a result, not only do we have to factor in mind that Earth offers a variety of flukes that allow the planet to support lifeforms but also the time frame of our existence is very minute making the chances of there being another alien life form existing at the same time a lot smaller than most people think. (Not sure if that last part makes any sense but I'm too lazy to really clarify it) Personally I do believe there are alien lifeforms but I don't believe homo sapiens will be encountering any.
On July 02 2009 06:15 KissBlade wrote:the lifespan of this world is just a blink in the scale of the life span of the universe. As a result, not only do we have to factor in mind that Earth offers a variety of flukes that allow the planet to support lifeforms but also the time frame of our existence is very minute making the chances of there being another alien life form existing at the same time a lot smaller than most people think.
I think that's a really weak argument. Just because the time span is relatively short, doesn't give any reason to believe that among the trillions and trillions and trillions of other planets there isn't one experiencing the same phenomenon as ours. When people are calculating the likelihood a planet can support life, calculating distance from the sun, atmosphere, size, etc... All those obviously include time. No one is talking about planets that were or will be capable of sustaining life, we're talking about right now at this moment. To me, saying it's unlikely a planet is experiencing the same conditions as the earth right now isn't any more foolish than saying it's unlikely out of 7 billion people that 2 of them will blink at the exact same time, every second of every day. Now imagine that with a number of people you can't even imagine and that's how likely it is another planet is doing the same things as ours, give or take a million years, like you might give or take a nanosecond of difference between two people blinking.
On July 02 2009 06:15 KissBlade wrote: There are actually a lot of factors in the argument against the belief of alien lifeforms as well. Yes, Earth is just one of a gazillion planetary bodies and it seems unlikely that not one of them will harbor alien life form but at the same time we need to realize, the lifespan of this world is just a blink in the scale of the life span of the universe. As a result, not only do we have to factor in mind that Earth offers a variety of flukes that allow the planet to support lifeforms but also the time frame of our existence is very minute making the chances of there being another alien life form existing at the same time a lot smaller than most people think. (Not sure if that last part makes any sense but I'm too lazy to really clarify it) Personally I do believe there are alien lifeforms but I don't believe homo sapiens will be encountering any.
the thing is we don't really know how long we've (human beings) have been on earth or in existence in general. there are findings every week that change scientists' view on all sorts of things related to how and when human beings got to be on earth, and what is needed to sustain life. not much is set in stone in science nowadays, there are breakthroughs that totally reverse the way of thinking on similar subjects such as the uni vs multiverse, 10, 11, and even 25 dimension theories, dark vs anti matter, etc.
OP fails so bad, Where the hell do you get your information? How do you know people believe in other supernatural things over aliens?
On a related note, there are an equal amount of lame shows on ALL THE TIME regarding pseudo science and beliefs. All with their own pathetic attempt of creepy music, retarded dramatizations & eye witnesses, and disinformation.
On July 02 2009 06:15 KissBlade wrote: There are actually a lot of factors in the argument against the belief of alien lifeforms as well. Yes, Earth is just one of a gazillion planetary bodies and it seems unlikely that not one of them will harbor alien life form but at the same time we need to realize, the lifespan of this world is just a blink in the scale of the life span of the universe. As a result, not only do we have to factor in mind that Earth offers a variety of flukes that allow the planet to support lifeforms but also the time frame of our existence is very minute making the chances of there being another alien life form existing at the same time a lot smaller than most people think. (Not sure if that last part makes any sense but I'm too lazy to really clarify it) Personally I do believe there are alien lifeforms but I don't believe homo sapiens will be encountering any.
the thing is we don't really know how long we've (human beings) have been on earth or in existence in general. there are findings every week that change scientists' view on all sorts of things related to how and when human beings got to be on earth, and what is needed to sustain life. not much is set in stone in science nowadays, there are breakthroughs that totally reverse the way of thinking on similar subjects such as the uni vs multiverse, 10, 11, and even 25 dimension theories, dark vs anti matter, etc.
this is the page i found that from. click anywhere on the moon to see pics of that area.
obvious? what? I don't see anything wtf.
Just because there is a blurr on an image doesn't mean there is alien life there. It could be a number of reasons. 1) error 2) gov't is building shit up there (that is uknown to the public) 3) military security (also related to 2 maybe) 4) stuff that just looks questionable and they don't wanna cause a stir before they actually get a chance to check it out themselves.
etc etc , there are literaly hundreds of things it could be, and outright assuming that it is alien is completely closed minded. You have to look at all the possibilities and evidence for all of them.
On July 02 2009 06:15 KissBlade wrote:the lifespan of this world is just a blink in the scale of the life span of the universe. As a result, not only do we have to factor in mind that Earth offers a variety of flukes that allow the planet to support lifeforms but also the time frame of our existence is very minute making the chances of there being another alien life form existing at the same time a lot smaller than most people think.
I think that's a really weak argument. Just because the time span is relatively short, doesn't give any reason to believe that among the trillions and trillions and trillions of other planets there isn't one experiencing the same phenomenon as ours. When people are calculating the likelihood a planet can support life, calculating distance from the sun, atmosphere, size, etc... All those obviously include time. No one is talking about planets that were or will be capable of sustaining life, we're talking about right now at this moment. To me, saying it's unlikely a planet is experiencing the same conditions as the earth right now isn't any more foolish than saying it's unlikely out of 7 billion people that 2 of them will blink at the exact same time, every second of every day. Now imagine that with a number of people you can't even imagine and that's how likely it is another planet is doing the same things as ours, give or take a million years, like you might give or take a nanosecond of difference between two people blinking.
Your metaphor doesn't work out though . Blinking is a frequent common occurrence. Having planetary conditions able to support life is not. And also note, I never claimed any thing about it being impossible, I simply said it's more unlikely than the argument originally appears.
There's a fundamental difference between thinking we are entirely alone in the universe and thinking that we are being visited.
If you think we are alone in the ENTIRE universe, talking trillions of Galaxies each with billions of stars, you are probably retarded. Don't think you can find any sane scientific person claiming we are alone.
Now, if you are educated, you understand the vastness of space.. and that the chances of us being visited are very slim.
Not believing in aliens = retarded. Whether or not you believe in visiting aliens I'll leave up for debate, but most educated would say hell no.
85% of Americans believe in a sky wizard who is omnipotent and created all things (yet he's a dude with a dick), is compassionate and loving (yet sends people to hell for eternity), and is intimately concerned about every doing of every person on earth. I mean, they believe in a god.
85% of Americans believe in a sky wizard who is omnipotent and created all things (yet he's a dude with a dick), is compassionate and loving (yet sends people to hell for eternity), and is intimately concerned about every doing of every person on earth. I mean, they believe in a god.
But ALIENS? What nonsense!
Yes but God doesn't try and anal probe me. Wait a second...... but priests do...... i wonder....
On July 03 2009 04:33 CharlieMurphy wrote: obvious? what? I don't see anything wtf.
Just because there is a blurr on an image doesn't mean there is alien life there. It could be a number of reasons. 1) error 2) gov't is building shit up there (that is uknown to the public) 3) military security (also related to 2 maybe) 4) stuff that just looks questionable and they don't wanna cause a stir before they actually get a chance to check it out themselves.
etc etc , there are literaly hundreds of things it could be, and outright assuming that it is alien is completely closed minded. You have to look at all the possibilities and evidence for all of them.
if you look at a photo of that same area from a more recent mission there's nothing there at all, it's been completely edited out. back when that one photo was released (1994) computer photo editing wasn't good like today. you can obviously see there's something behind the smudge in that pic, whether it's alien or not i didn't say, i just said there's something there.
I'm more interested in ghosts. That's what happens after death. Whether it's some kind of lingering psychic energy that exists in you or just your memories. Whether your memories themselves can count as being ghosts. Are the existence of ghosts real just for you?
On July 02 2009 06:15 KissBlade wrote:the lifespan of this world is just a blink in the scale of the life span of the universe. As a result, not only do we have to factor in mind that Earth offers a variety of flukes that allow the planet to support lifeforms but also the time frame of our existence is very minute making the chances of there being another alien life form existing at the same time a lot smaller than most people think.
I think that's a really weak argument. Just because the time span is relatively short, doesn't give any reason to believe that among the trillions and trillions and trillions of other planets there isn't one experiencing the same phenomenon as ours. When people are calculating the likelihood a planet can support life, calculating distance from the sun, atmosphere, size, etc... All those obviously include time. No one is talking about planets that were or will be capable of sustaining life, we're talking about right now at this moment. To me, saying it's unlikely a planet is experiencing the same conditions as the earth right now isn't any more foolish than saying it's unlikely out of 7 billion people that 2 of them will blink at the exact same time, every second of every day. Now imagine that with a number of people you can't even imagine and that's how likely it is another planet is doing the same things as ours, give or take a million years, like you might give or take a nanosecond of difference between two people blinking.
Your metaphor doesn't work out though . Blinking is a frequent common occurrence. Having planetary conditions able to support life is not. And also note, I never claimed any thing about it being impossible, I simply said it's more unlikely than the argument originally appears.
I wasn't trying to use it as a metaphor, I was trying to exemplify my line of reasoning to make it easier to understand. Yes, not every planet "blinks" so to speak, but I'll bet every galaxy does.
On July 03 2009 04:33 CharlieMurphy wrote: obvious? what? I don't see anything wtf.
Just because there is a blurr on an image doesn't mean there is alien life there. It could be a number of reasons. 1) error 2) gov't is building shit up there (that is uknown to the public) 3) military security (also related to 2 maybe) 4) stuff that just looks questionable and they don't wanna cause a stir before they actually get a chance to check it out themselves.
etc etc , there are literaly hundreds of things it could be, and outright assuming that it is alien is completely closed minded. You have to look at all the possibilities and evidence for all of them.
if you look at a photo of that same area from a more recent mission there's nothing there at all, it's been completely edited out. back when that one photo was released (1994) computer photo editing wasn't good like today. you can obviously see there's something behind the smudge in that pic, whether it's alien or not i didn't say, i just said there's something there.
So you imply that nasa released a foto possibly containing evidence of alien life forms but being government and all they ''edited'' to prevent its citizens from revolting in terror from martians instead of simply not publishing it at all? Makes perfect sense to me, I mean government is retarded, after all it is representive of people,
@ the guy saying "omg we should appreciate the earth it is so rare to find a planet that can sustain life omg history channel omg"
no freaking way dude? Imagine that, we evolved perfectly to a situation??? HOW RIDICULOUS IS THAT? Life beyond earth doesn't have to follow any of the rules that we do, we don't have to find planets identical to earth to find life. You can prove this on the earth its self, there are freaking bacteria that live in the underground volcanos in the ocean.
On July 03 2009 04:33 CharlieMurphy wrote: obvious? what? I don't see anything wtf.
Just because there is a blurr on an image doesn't mean there is alien life there. It could be a number of reasons. 1) error 2) gov't is building shit up there (that is uknown to the public) 3) military security (also related to 2 maybe) 4) stuff that just looks questionable and they don't wanna cause a stir before they actually get a chance to check it out themselves.
etc etc , there are literaly hundreds of things it could be, and outright assuming that it is alien is completely closed minded. You have to look at all the possibilities and evidence for all of them.
if you look at a photo of that same area from a more recent mission there's nothing there at all, it's been completely edited out. back when that one photo was released (1994) computer photo editing wasn't good like today. you can obviously see there's something behind the smudge in that pic, whether it's alien or not i didn't say, i just said there's something there.
So you imply that nasa released a foto possibly containing evidence of alien life forms but being government and all they ''edited'' to prevent its citizens from revolting in terror from martians instead of simply not publishing it at all? Makes perfect sense to me, I mean government is retarded, after all it is representive of people,
thanks for the reply. if you're calling me retarded, explain then how you feel as you seem to be the one falling victim to the scams the government is pulling off right in front of your eyes. a lot of people think the government is all for the people, but the people who really run the US are really just in it for themselves. whether or not you believe aliens exist or the fact nasa edited the photos to cover something up is up to you. also, if you even bothered to read my post, you'd see it pointed out that i never said anything was alien, i just said it was there. i left it up to you guys to decide what you think it is. i'm not gonna try to make anyone believe anything, and i'm certainly not going to insult anyone on whether or not they believe in something or not.
On July 01 2009 08:23 eMbrace wrote: People believe in all sorts of unbelievable things: conspiracy theories, ghosts, gods (no offense), etc...
So why is it that it seems many people refuse to believe in extra terrestrial life? They have no problem defending other things that probably don't exist, but they can't accept something extremely plausible? I bet if you took a poll in the United States, more people would be believe in ghosts than aliens -- or it would be pathetically close.
Earth is like 0.0000000000000000000000000000001% of the universe, and you can't even entertain the possibility for a second, that some sort of life exists somewhere else?
That doesn't mean it's intelligent, or has spaceships, or lasers -- it could simply be some bacteria or microbes.
No, I'll stop -- It's a ridiculous idea after all
(and no this has nothing to do with the stupidity that is UFOs)
Have you ever heard of the Fermi Paradox? It addresses all the possibilities.
One of the most common clauses, proposed and believed by Fermi was that if the universe has been here for ~15 billion years, and assuming we were not the first organisms to have evolved this far along, then there should have been some organism that was created and evolved into higher beings since the very beginning of the universe. Given that, those organisms should have had at least 10 billion years to explore the universe. So, where are they?
On July 01 2009 08:23 eMbrace wrote: People believe in all sorts of unbelievable things: conspiracy theories, ghosts, gods (no offense), etc...
So why is it that it seems many people refuse to believe in extra terrestrial life? They have no problem defending other things that probably don't exist, but they can't accept something extremely plausible? I bet if you took a poll in the United States, more people would be believe in ghosts than aliens -- or it would be pathetically close.
Earth is like 0.0000000000000000000000000000001% of the universe, and you can't even entertain the possibility for a second, that some sort of life exists somewhere else?
That doesn't mean it's intelligent, or has spaceships, or lasers -- it could simply be some bacteria or microbes.
No, I'll stop -- It's a ridiculous idea after all
(and no this has nothing to do with the stupidity that is UFOs)
Have you ever heard of the Fermi Paradox? It addresses all the possibilities.
One of the most common clauses, proposed and believed by Fermi was that if the universe has been here for ~15 billion years, and assuming we were not the first organisms to have evolved this far along, then there should have been some organism that was created and evolved into higher beings since the very beginning of the universe. Given that, those organisms should have had at least 10 billion years to explore the universe. So, where are they?
Maybe civilizations more advanced figured it was more effort than useful to expand across an entire galaxy, maybe faster than light speed is completely impossible, maybe they are literally on the other side of the universe and we're just that spec in a dead zone, maybe they are avoiding us like the plague because we spend most of our time killing other humans. Who knows really?
There are plenty of possibilities but I still find the assumption that no aliens exist in the universe to be one of supreme stupidity simply because of how vast everything is.
We don't know exactly what causes species to evolve into higher live forms as there is obviously a necessary kick to involve self awareness and critical thinking. Aliens will most likely not think anything like us so maybe they just want to stay on their planet.
I still think that given the scale of the universe there has to be something else out there... and it's unlikely we'll ever see it.
I don't understand how some people believe in Aliens and not God, or vice versa. They're essentially the same concept (if you believe in Aliens that are "more enlightened" than us).
I have no problem believing in both, personally. Based on others' negative experiences with religion, though, I don't hold it against anyone for having a different point of view.
tl;dr math analogy, vastness of space / ridiculous coincidence that we are even alive infty/0.. who the fuck knows.
(lol, "whoever doesn't believe in aliens = retarded on last page. good to know pretentious intolerance thrives on the real important matters too.)
Earth is such a small piece of the universe, but also think about the incredible coincidence that Earth really is. It's not fiery hot, and its not blisteringly cold. Its got an ecosystem that self preserves. We can live because plants create oxygen. They also use our CO2 to do so. There is really a circle of life. Why are we so lucky to be able to self-sustain?
On the other hand, evolution says this was inevitable. We were given our worldly hand, and we made what we could from it. Is it really though? Look at the other planets around us. We still haven't found life there, but shouldn't evolution dictate something ought to be thriving off whatever resources they've got going on?
Lets make this analogy, considering our relative size to the universe, it should be infinitely likely that there are others out there like us. Considering the cosmic coincidence that got us here, we can divide it by something as infinitely small. The outcome is undetermined.
I think this is a naive approach to analyze the existence of extra-terrestrial life. But I'm also among those that don't believe in it since there is no proof of it. So call it naive if you want but take it with consideration of the perceived seriousness of the topic.
On July 03 2009 07:02 0neder wrote: I don't understand how some people believe in Aliens and not God, or vice versa. They're essentially the same concept (if you believe in Aliens that are "more enlightened" than us).
I have no problem believing in both, personally. Based on others' negative experiences with religion, though, I don't hold it against anyone for having a different point of view.
I can see where you're coming from, but I don't agree. Yes, it's true that Aliens and God are both entities that we haven't been able to directly observe - hence, we must choose whether to "believe" in them or not. Furthermore, it's easy to adopt an agnostic view on both concepts.
The difference I see is that God is an entity that is presented by most religions as a "higher being", in that God is superior to humans at a fundamental level. Also, interaction between humans and God is typically taken as one-way: God can influence us but we have nothing to offer God. Aliens, on the other hand, are simply technologically superior beings who were, presumably, like humans at some point and if we're visited by aliens, we can interact.
In short, if we "discover" God, we can say to ourselves "oh cool, God exists" but if we discover Aliens, we (hopefully) interact and steal technology from them and whatnot. That's why we have radio telescopes searching for Alien signals but no technology searching for God.
Hmm I think most people believe that aliens exist, but that they have never visited earth. This is the most likely case and what I believe.
I mean statistically with the sheer number of planets in the universe it's almost impossible that aliens don't exist somewhere, but due to the immense size it's almost impossible that the necessary distances could feasibly be travelled.
why when you can believe in aliens with no proof is it hard to believe these distances can't be travelled? You're applying something from our world(our limitations) to something necessarily out of this world.
On July 03 2009 04:33 CharlieMurphy wrote: obvious? what? I don't see anything wtf.
Just because there is a blurr on an image doesn't mean there is alien life there. It could be a number of reasons. 1) error 2) gov't is building shit up there (that is uknown to the public) 3) military security (also related to 2 maybe) 4) stuff that just looks questionable and they don't wanna cause a stir before they actually get a chance to check it out themselves.
etc etc , there are literaly hundreds of things it could be, and outright assuming that it is alien is completely closed minded. You have to look at all the possibilities and evidence for all of them.
if you look at a photo of that same area from a more recent mission there's nothing there at all, it's been completely edited out. back when that one photo was released (1994) computer photo editing wasn't good like today. you can obviously see there's something behind the smudge in that pic, whether it's alien or not i didn't say, i just said there's something there.
So you imply that nasa released a foto possibly containing evidence of alien life forms but being government and all they ''edited'' to prevent its citizens from revolting in terror from martians instead of simply not publishing it at all? Makes perfect sense to me, I mean government is retarded, after all it is representive of people,
thanks for the reply. if you're calling me retarded, explain then how you feel as you seem to be the one falling victim to the scams the government is pulling off right in front of your eyes. a lot of people think the government is all for the people, but the people who really run the US are really just in it for themselves. whether or not you believe aliens exist or the fact nasa edited the photos to cover something up is up to you. also, if you even bothered to read my post, you'd see it pointed out that i never said anything was alien, i just said it was there. i left it up to you guys to decide what you think it is. i'm not gonna try to make anyone believe anything, and i'm certainly not going to insult anyone on whether or not they believe in something or not.
so just like he and I suggested, It could be many things and if NASA was part of the shadow gov't or some kind of conspiracy then why the fuck even release the edited photo in the first place? Hell, even the astronauts taking the pictures would have to be in on it so why would they give up the photos to anyone who is not supposed to see them. It just doesn't make sense.
btw, I don't think either of us think the 'gov't is all for the people' or 'falling victim to gov't scams' (except maybe the racquet they pull with parking tickets).
We don't have any proof of it and we can't say that there is DEFINITELY alien life out there but we can make an educated guess that it is highly probably there is. And I know of the ridiculously unlikely chain of events that lead to our existence, but when you consider the possible trillions of earth like planets out there, at least a few of them must have had something similar to what happened here occur on them. Hell they don't even have to be intelligent beings to be considered aliens, there's probably loads of planets out there that are roamed by large dinosaur-like creatures or other various types of animals. It's likely that there were many great civilizations on planets that no longer exist as our planet is a relative newcomer to the galaxy.
As for the travelling between planets business, you're talking thousands upon thousands of light years, it's theoretically impossible to even reach the speed of light, let alone exceed it. So unless they have ships where generations live for hundreds of thousands of years or they have somehow managed to achieve the physically impossible I think we can make a well educated guess that the chance of any alien life reaching us is remote, and if they had this kind of technology why the hell would they even bother visiting this relative piece of shit planet?
On July 03 2009 07:55 jello_biafra wrote: Hmm I think most people believe that aliens exist, but that they have never visited earth. This is the most likely case and what I believe.
I mean statistically with the sheer number of planets in the universe it's almost impossible that aliens don't exist somewhere, but due to the immense size it's almost impossible that the necessary distances could feasibly be travelled.
Our laws of physics forbid FTL travel, but currently, there's nothing supporting the belief that we can't cover such distances with conventional propulsion. Maybe not with manned vessels, but unmanned probes is very possible based on our current knowledge of science/engineering limitations.
Edit: I suggest everyone read that Wikipedia article on the Fermi paradox. It shows that people have put ALOT of thought into justifying various 'beliefs'.
Potentially hundreds of thousands of light years? Really? You know how damn long that's gonna take BELOW light speed?
Also I was just thinking, it was a crazy sequence of highly improbable events that lead to OUR existence, but it's highly possible that given, enough time and the right conditions, some other form of highly intelligent life form would have evolved regardless, and this could be the case on most planets that harbour life, that intelligent life is inevitable on habitable planets.
And with stuff like detecting alien radio signals, realistically with the distances involved and the noise from the CBR the only way we'd be able to pick up one of these signals would be if it was specifically sent towards our planet by the aliens.
The power of computer processing could one day solve the riddle of life's origin.
Scientists think life appeared about 4 billion years ago, and ancient rocks on Earth can give us some idea of what the environment was like. Life may have originated in an ocean rich in chemicals. This primordial soup may have been simmering, or it may have been zapped by lightning. Certainly energy of some sort must have helped drive a simple chemical system into a more complex state. But the clues are few, and the picture remains hazy.
Enter the Evogrid, a computer creation concept that would be a digital version of the primordial soup. The EvoGrid was dreamed up by a group of international advisors and Bruce Damer, the founder of a research company that creates 3-D spacecraft and mission simulations for NASA and the space community. Damer and his chief architect, Peter Newman, are developing the EvoGrid concept by adapting GROMACS, a powerful open source molecular dynamics simulator originally developed at The University of Groningen in the Netherlands. Story continues below ↓advertisement | your ad here
Each virtual particle within the Evogrid's simulated liquid soup will have particular physical properties, and will behave accordingly.
"We will be constructing a model of a 'toy universe,' which has approximate properties of the early oceans on Earth," says Damer.
Cooking creation With a laundry list of basic physical properties entered into the starting parameters, the simulation would allow artificial nature to take its course. Interactions and connections between particles should occur, and ever higher levels of complexity may arise from the most basic elements.
Much like SETI@home's screen saver, which enables computers at home to search for signals of extraterrestrial life within volumes of astrophysical data, the Evogrid is conceived to have volunteer computers become part of an interconnected grid for maximum processing capacity. Damer hopes to eventually get a million computers hooked into the grid.
These computers would receive data from the EvoGrid simulation engine. The simulation would essentially consist of a vast virtual ocean of interacting numbers that would model the time before complex life forms emerged. To know whether self-organization is occurring, the program would look for persistent patterns within the data.
"If a vesicle, or a ball of particles has formed, you would be able to detect that," says Damer. "If a string of particles began to replicate, that would be easy to track, or if particles began to combine in a long chain of reactions, that would be important but tougher to recognize."
INTERACTIVE Image: Ancient marijuana
Weirdest science of 2008 Far out, man! Check out the tales of ancient marijuana use, four-eared cats and other Weird Science Award winners. It is thought that some combination of a lipid container (vesicle), strings of molecules (genomes) and metabolic reactions led to the development of life. The Evogrid won't produce visual images of the combined effort of all the linked computers, because it would slow the processing down too much. However, home users would see a visualization of what is being observed in their own small patch of the EvoGrid.
Damer notes that present-day computer simulations run much more slowly than chemical reactions, but he anticipates that in the next 20 to 40 years, with the help of millions of microprocessors, an entire cell could be simulated in cyberspace.
"Nils Baricelli wrote an artificial life program for the first modern computer in 1953, and to some extent we haven't gone much further than his original experiment," says Damer. "We shall see how far the EvoGrid can go, using millions of the descendents of the original Von Neumann machine."
Tinkering with life Damer envisions two possible versions of Evogrid: a hands-off "Origins" version, and an experimental "Intelligent Designer" edition that would allow people to tinker with the simulation. Damer says the ID edition of Evogrid could include a "miracle module" that would allow users to play God in their attempts to create proto-life. The Origins edition would be the focus of the science, however, with strict controls to shield the experiment from any guiding human influence.
Damer muses that "in its ultimate incarnation, a much more powerful EvoGrid would allow us to pose the question: where in this universe or others might life exist and at what level of complexity?" Damer thinks an EvoGrid tuned for SETI and astrobiology could be used to simulate extraterrestrial environments and address the question of whether life could have emerged there.
Even if the EvoGrid managed to generate some virtual but convincing life forms, either through random or directed means, "the numbers will always be numbers," says Damer. "As Baricelli wrote over fifty years ago, they will never be living organisms."
But Damer dreams big, and he thinks someday the creatures generated by the Evogrid could be re-created chemically. A virtual scanner could be devised to break down the computer-based creature into its digital body parts, and then that information could be used to try to build the same creature out of real chemistry in the lab. Of course, this step of the experiment would rely on technology that does not currently exist. "Life is more than the sum of its parts, and you can't just throw the necessary chemicals together and expect a life form to emerge," Damer says.
Click for related content Cosmic Log: Nano-wizard takes the prize Newsweek: Are the chemicals in fireworks dangerous? Ancient mosaic comes out of hiding | Video
However, researchers are hard at work trying to recreate all the biochemical steps necessary to synthesize a kind of proto-life in the lab, so perhaps this possibility is not too far over the horizon.
Looking even farther into the future, Damer thinks that far more advanced EvoGrids, paired with "ChemoGrids," could be used to create a new genesis of cyber-physical life forms to colonize asteroids, or to terraform Mars into a more habitable planet for humans. Freeman Dyson, who is now an advisor for the EvoGrid project, popularized this concept, and Damer notes that "evolution within an adaptively-tuned living system is the only mechanism powerful enough to make a place outside of the Earth habitable for us."
He expects that other intelligent civilizations in the universe probably harness the power of evolution to solve difficult problems such as creating habitable zones to colonize. "This is a common theme in science fiction, but science fiction tells us what could be possible someday," he adds. "The way for us to get there is to start with simulation and ride the wave of ever greater computing power."
It will take millions of years, but we have to change our standards of time when it comes to space travel. It's not like I can launch a probe today and have it report back to me with alien life tomorrow. Currently, the most feasible model for space exploration is self-replicating probes.
This is, of course, going under the assumption that a millions years is a short time relative to the span of a very advanced alien civilization.
If we take the series of events that lead to our inception as probabilistic (is that even a word?) events, then sure, life is inevitable on habitable planets. Unfortunately, we have no way of measuring or calculating these probabilities so all we can do right now is guess.
Edit: after reading the last post, I guess we will be able to measure the probability o_O
On July 03 2009 07:55 jello_biafra wrote: Hmm I think most people believe that aliens exist, but that they have never visited earth. This is the most likely case and what I believe.
I mean statistically with the sheer number of planets in the universe it's almost impossible that aliens don't exist somewhere, but due to the immense size it's almost impossible that the necessary distances could feasibly be travelled.
Our laws of physics forbid FTL travel, but currently, there's nothing supporting the belief that we can't cover such distances with conventional propulsion. Maybe not with manned vessels, but unmanned probes is very possible based on our current knowledge of science/engineering limitations.
Edit: I suggest everyone read that Wikipedia article on the Fermi paradox. It shows that people have put ALOT of thought into justifying various 'beliefs'.
On July 03 2009 08:21 CharlieMurphy wrote: flourishes, and yea its a fluke We got like 5 royal flushes in a row.
Someplace somewhere this fluke has happened/is happening/will happen, earth is merely a precedent
one can not know that, we have absolutely no way of knowing that. We could might aswell be all alone, But I dont belive that, iam quite more for the option that life(including intelligent life exists in many(kind of funny word considering how big the fucking universe is) places in the universe
On July 03 2009 08:30 jello_biafra wrote: Potentially hundreds of thousands of light years? Really? You know how damn long that's gonna take BELOW light speed?
Also I was just thinking, it was a crazy sequence of highly improbable events that lead to OUR existence, but it's highly possible that given, enough time and the right conditions, some other form of highly intelligent life form would have evolved regardless, and this could be the case on most planets that harbour life, that intelligent life is inevitable on habitable planets.
And with stuff like detecting alien radio signals, realistically with the distances involved and the noise from the CBR the only way we'd be able to pick up one of these signals would be if it was specifically sent towards our planet by the aliens.
wow, thanks lots of theories upon theories countering other theories etc Especially this simple one is interesting http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Filter Perhaps something that hasn't yet happened to our supposed likely doomed civilization is keeping us (and many other planets) from step 8.
On July 03 2009 04:33 CharlieMurphy wrote: obvious? what? I don't see anything wtf.
Just because there is a blurr on an image doesn't mean there is alien life there. It could be a number of reasons. 1) error 2) gov't is building shit up there (that is uknown to the public) 3) military security (also related to 2 maybe) 4) stuff that just looks questionable and they don't wanna cause a stir before they actually get a chance to check it out themselves.
etc etc , there are literaly hundreds of things it could be, and outright assuming that it is alien is completely closed minded. You have to look at all the possibilities and evidence for all of them.
if you look at a photo of that same area from a more recent mission there's nothing there at all, it's been completely edited out. back when that one photo was released (1994) computer photo editing wasn't good like today. you can obviously see there's something behind the smudge in that pic, whether it's alien or not i didn't say, i just said there's something there.
So you imply that nasa released a foto possibly containing evidence of alien life forms but being government and all they ''edited'' to prevent its citizens from revolting in terror from martians instead of simply not publishing it at all? Makes perfect sense to me, I mean government is retarded, after all it is representive of people,
thanks for the reply. if you're calling me retarded, explain then how you feel as you seem to be the one falling victim to the scams the government is pulling off right in front of your eyes. a lot of people think the government is all for the people, but the people who really run the US are really just in it for themselves. whether or not you believe aliens exist or the fact nasa edited the photos to cover something up is up to you. also, if you even bothered to read my post, you'd see it pointed out that i never said anything was alien, i just said it was there. i left it up to you guys to decide what you think it is. i'm not gonna try to make anyone believe anything, and i'm certainly not going to insult anyone on whether or not they believe in something or not.
so just like he and I suggested, It could be many things and if NASA was part of the shadow gov't or some kind of conspiracy then why the fuck even release the edited photo in the first place? Hell, even the astronauts taking the pictures would have to be in on it so why would they give up the photos to anyone who is not supposed to see them. It just doesn't make sense.
btw, I don't think either of us think the 'gov't is all for the people' or 'falling victim to gov't scams' (except maybe the racquet they pull with parking tickets).
if they didn't release the photos, the public would wonder wtf they were doing with the millions of dollars put into the orbiter launch. astronauts don't take the pics, an orbiting satellite does. don't worry, most people share your opinion and are against the idea because that's what the people who run this country try to put in your head. you don't think they all work together?
i suggest you watch or listen to this if you have the time, and are willing to see a completely new perspective. i've followed the conspiracy scene for a long time so some of my opinions are pretty bold, but like i said before i respect your opinions, and i'm far from the right person to try to convince someone to think the way i do, so take it as you will.
There may have been intelligent civilizations in the galaxy before the emergence of intelligence on Earth, and there may be intelligent civilizations after its extinction, but it is possible that human beings are the only intelligent civilization in existence now. The term "now" is somewhat complicated by the finite speed of light and the nature of spacetime under relativity. Assuming that an extraterrestrial intelligence is not able to travel to our vicinity at faster-than-light speeds, in order to detect an intelligence 1,000 light-years distant, that intelligence will need to have been active 1,000 years ago. Strictly speaking, only the portions of the universe lying within the past light cone of Earth need be considered, since any civilizations outside it could not be detected.
also from wiki, our NOW is relative to the speed of light since what we see/hear (based on current laws of physics) passed a certain distance is from the past. So even if there is at this exact moment some other intelligent life doing the exact same thing, we can't ever talk or see them because by the time we do it would be millions or billions of years later.
On July 03 2009 04:33 CharlieMurphy wrote: obvious? what? I don't see anything wtf.
Just because there is a blurr on an image doesn't mean there is alien life there. It could be a number of reasons. 1) error 2) gov't is building shit up there (that is uknown to the public) 3) military security (also related to 2 maybe) 4) stuff that just looks questionable and they don't wanna cause a stir before they actually get a chance to check it out themselves.
etc etc , there are literaly hundreds of things it could be, and outright assuming that it is alien is completely closed minded. You have to look at all the possibilities and evidence for all of them.
if you look at a photo of that same area from a more recent mission there's nothing there at all, it's been completely edited out. back when that one photo was released (1994) computer photo editing wasn't good like today. you can obviously see there's something behind the smudge in that pic, whether it's alien or not i didn't say, i just said there's something there.
So you imply that nasa released a foto possibly containing evidence of alien life forms but being government and all they ''edited'' to prevent its citizens from revolting in terror from martians instead of simply not publishing it at all? Makes perfect sense to me, I mean government is retarded, after all it is representive of people,
thanks for the reply. if you're calling me retarded, explain then how you feel as you seem to be the one falling victim to the scams the government is pulling off right in front of your eyes. a lot of people think the government is all for the people, but the people who really run the US are really just in it for themselves. whether or not you believe aliens exist or the fact nasa edited the photos to cover something up is up to you. also, if you even bothered to read my post, you'd see it pointed out that i never said anything was alien, i just said it was there. i left it up to you guys to decide what you think it is. i'm not gonna try to make anyone believe anything, and i'm certainly not going to insult anyone on whether or not they believe in something or not.
so just like he and I suggested, It could be many things and if NASA was part of the shadow gov't or some kind of conspiracy then why the fuck even release the edited photo in the first place? Hell, even the astronauts taking the pictures would have to be in on it so why would they give up the photos to anyone who is not supposed to see them. It just doesn't make sense.
btw, I don't think either of us think the 'gov't is all for the people' or 'falling victim to gov't scams' (except maybe the racquet they pull with parking tickets).
if they didn't release the photos, the public would wonder wtf they were doing with the millions of dollars put into the orbiter launch. astronauts don't take the pics, an orbiting satellite does. don't worry, most people share your opinion and are against the idea because that's what the people who run this country try to put in your head. you don't think they all work together?
i suggest you watch or listen to this if you have the time, and are willing to see a completely new perspective. i've followed the conspiracy scene for a long time so some of my opinions are pretty bold, but like i said before i respect your opinions, and i'm far from the right person to try to convince someone to think the way i do, so take it as you will.
man you are fucking dense, saying that "THEY" 'put it in my head' wtf, fuck you man. No one is leading me to believe this shit. I am forming my own conclusions based on facts. And the fact is our gov't especially one which you suggest is trying to cover up things so cunningly would not be so stupid enough to slip up all this shit in the first place.
an no I won't watch "your" propaganda that they are trying to put in "your" head. IF you read that fermi paradox article there are so many theories in there that possible contact with life is HUGE HUGE HUGE Fucking odds. And just to note, these theories are not propagated by the gov't, they are created from science fiction and science fact.
Just look at the last thing I just posted about the Light Cone. Even with light speed travel its WAY too fucking big.
On July 03 2009 04:33 CharlieMurphy wrote: obvious? what? I don't see anything wtf.
Just because there is a blurr on an image doesn't mean there is alien life there. It could be a number of reasons. 1) error 2) gov't is building shit up there (that is uknown to the public) 3) military security (also related to 2 maybe) 4) stuff that just looks questionable and they don't wanna cause a stir before they actually get a chance to check it out themselves.
etc etc , there are literaly hundreds of things it could be, and outright assuming that it is alien is completely closed minded. You have to look at all the possibilities and evidence for all of them.
if you look at a photo of that same area from a more recent mission there's nothing there at all, it's been completely edited out. back when that one photo was released (1994) computer photo editing wasn't good like today. you can obviously see there's something behind the smudge in that pic, whether it's alien or not i didn't say, i just said there's something there.
So you imply that nasa released a foto possibly containing evidence of alien life forms but being government and all they ''edited'' to prevent its citizens from revolting in terror from martians instead of simply not publishing it at all? Makes perfect sense to me, I mean government is retarded, after all it is representive of people,
thanks for the reply. if you're calling me retarded, explain then how you feel as you seem to be the one falling victim to the scams the government is pulling off right in front of your eyes. a lot of people think the government is all for the people, but the people who really run the US are really just in it for themselves. whether or not you believe aliens exist or the fact nasa edited the photos to cover something up is up to you. also, if you even bothered to read my post, you'd see it pointed out that i never said anything was alien, i just said it was there. i left it up to you guys to decide what you think it is. i'm not gonna try to make anyone believe anything, and i'm certainly not going to insult anyone on whether or not they believe in something or not.
so just like he and I suggested, It could be many things and if NASA was part of the shadow gov't or some kind of conspiracy then why the fuck even release the edited photo in the first place? Hell, even the astronauts taking the pictures would have to be in on it so why would they give up the photos to anyone who is not supposed to see them. It just doesn't make sense.
btw, I don't think either of us think the 'gov't is all for the people' or 'falling victim to gov't scams' (except maybe the racquet they pull with parking tickets).
if they didn't release the photos, the public would wonder wtf they were doing with the millions of dollars put into the orbiter launch. astronauts don't take the pics, an orbiting satellite does. don't worry, most people share your opinion and are against the idea because that's what the people who run this country try to put in your head. you don't think they all work together?
i suggest you watch or listen to this if you have the time, and are willing to see a completely new perspective. i've followed the conspiracy scene for a long time so some of my opinions are pretty bold, but like i said before i respect your opinions, and i'm far from the right person to try to convince someone to think the way i do, so take it as you will.
man you are fucking dense, saying that "THEY" 'put it in my head' wtf, fuck you man. No one is leading me to believe this shit. I am forming my own conclusions based on facts. And the fact is our gov't especially one which you suggest is trying to cover up things so cunningly would not be so stupid enough to slip up all this shit in the first place.
an no I won't watch "your" propaganda that they are trying to put in "your" head. IF you read that fermi paradox article there are so many theories in there that possible contact with life is HUGE HUGE HUGE Fucking odds. And just to note, these theories are not propagated by the gov't, they are created from science fiction and science fact.
rofl nice way to handle yourself. your girlfriend must be happy.
On July 03 2009 04:33 CharlieMurphy wrote: obvious? what? I don't see anything wtf.
Just because there is a blurr on an image doesn't mean there is alien life there. It could be a number of reasons. 1) error 2) gov't is building shit up there (that is uknown to the public) 3) military security (also related to 2 maybe) 4) stuff that just looks questionable and they don't wanna cause a stir before they actually get a chance to check it out themselves.
etc etc , there are literaly hundreds of things it could be, and outright assuming that it is alien is completely closed minded. You have to look at all the possibilities and evidence for all of them.
if you look at a photo of that same area from a more recent mission there's nothing there at all, it's been completely edited out. back when that one photo was released (1994) computer photo editing wasn't good like today. you can obviously see there's something behind the smudge in that pic, whether it's alien or not i didn't say, i just said there's something there.
So you imply that nasa released a foto possibly containing evidence of alien life forms but being government and all they ''edited'' to prevent its citizens from revolting in terror from martians instead of simply not publishing it at all? Makes perfect sense to me, I mean government is retarded, after all it is representive of people,
thanks for the reply. if you're calling me retarded, explain then how you feel as you seem to be the one falling victim to the scams the government is pulling off right in front of your eyes. a lot of people think the government is all for the people, but the people who really run the US are really just in it for themselves. whether or not you believe aliens exist or the fact nasa edited the photos to cover something up is up to you. also, if you even bothered to read my post, you'd see it pointed out that i never said anything was alien, i just said it was there. i left it up to you guys to decide what you think it is. i'm not gonna try to make anyone believe anything, and i'm certainly not going to insult anyone on whether or not they believe in something or not.
so just like he and I suggested, It could be many things and if NASA was part of the shadow gov't or some kind of conspiracy then why the fuck even release the edited photo in the first place? Hell, even the astronauts taking the pictures would have to be in on it so why would they give up the photos to anyone who is not supposed to see them. It just doesn't make sense.
btw, I don't think either of us think the 'gov't is all for the people' or 'falling victim to gov't scams' (except maybe the racquet they pull with parking tickets).
if they didn't release the photos, the public would wonder wtf they were doing with the millions of dollars put into the orbiter launch. astronauts don't take the pics, an orbiting satellite does. don't worry, most people share your opinion and are against the idea because that's what the people who run this country try to put in your head. you don't think they all work together?
i suggest you watch or listen to this if you have the time, and are willing to see a completely new perspective. i've followed the conspiracy scene for a long time so some of my opinions are pretty bold, but like i said before i respect your opinions, and i'm far from the right person to try to convince someone to think the way i do, so take it as you will.
man you are fucking dense, saying that "THEY" 'put it in my head' wtf, fuck you man. No one is leading me to believe this shit. I am forming my own conclusions based on facts. And the fact is our gov't especially one which you suggest is trying to cover up things so cunningly would not be so stupid enough to slip up all this shit in the first place.
an no I won't watch "your" propaganda that they are trying to put in "your" head. IF you read that fermi paradox article there are so many theories in there that possible contact with life is HUGE HUGE HUGE Fucking odds. And just to note, these theories are not propagated by the gov't, they are created from science fiction and science fact.
rofl nice way to handle yourself. your girlfriend must be happy.
whatever that means. you know they can take a bunch of pretty pictures for the public and keep the real secret stuff to themselves right? You know they could just as easily say a fire burned up all the negatives. There are hunderds of things they can do besides doing a shoddy job of editing some photos. Its extremely ludicrous to just make a huge leap of faith that oh they purposefully did it to cover aliens. Be open minded, isn't that what true scientist /conspiracist should be in the first place? You are a hypocritical contradiction.
PS- Don't get me wrong, I am very willing to believe anything if I see some obvious empircal proof of evidence. But this is just some little tidbit that could literally be anything. Btw, Did you actually do the reasearch on the topics - talking to gov't officials and visiting gov't archives? Or did you just watch some biased video then read about it on the edited wiki article or some nutjob tinfoil hat wearing hero's website? Don't you think the gov't could have their hands in that too?
The only thing you can truly trust, and can truly believe in, is yourself.
On July 03 2009 07:55 jello_biafra wrote: Hmm I think most people believe that aliens exist, but that they have never visited earth. This is the most likely case and what I believe.
I mean statistically with the sheer number of planets in the universe it's almost impossible that aliens don't exist somewhere, but due to the immense size it's almost impossible that the necessary distances could feasibly be travelled.
Our laws of physics forbid FTL travel, but currently, there's nothing supporting the belief that we can't cover such distances with conventional propulsion. Maybe not with manned vessels, but unmanned probes is very possible based on our current knowledge of science/engineering limitations.
Edit: I suggest everyone read that Wikipedia article on the Fermi paradox. It shows that people have put ALOT of thought into justifying various 'beliefs'.
Cool. I didn't know that. Thanks for sharing. I'm wondering how physically sound this type of travel is since I haven't been keeping up with modern physics. Are dark matter/dark energy generally accepted concepts nowadays?
On a side note, it saddens me that I won't be alive long enough to see this happen. Call me a nerd, but if there's one thing I want to happen before I die (aside from reproducing), it's making contact with an alien species =D
On July 03 2009 04:33 CharlieMurphy wrote: obvious? what? I don't see anything wtf.
Just because there is a blurr on an image doesn't mean there is alien life there. It could be a number of reasons. 1) error 2) gov't is building shit up there (that is uknown to the public) 3) military security (also related to 2 maybe) 4) stuff that just looks questionable and they don't wanna cause a stir before they actually get a chance to check it out themselves.
etc etc , there are literaly hundreds of things it could be, and outright assuming that it is alien is completely closed minded. You have to look at all the possibilities and evidence for all of them.
if you look at a photo of that same area from a more recent mission there's nothing there at all, it's been completely edited out. back when that one photo was released (1994) computer photo editing wasn't good like today. you can obviously see there's something behind the smudge in that pic, whether it's alien or not i didn't say, i just said there's something there.
So you imply that nasa released a foto possibly containing evidence of alien life forms but being government and all they ''edited'' to prevent its citizens from revolting in terror from martians instead of simply not publishing it at all? Makes perfect sense to me, I mean government is retarded, after all it is representive of people,
thanks for the reply. if you're calling me retarded, explain then how you feel as you seem to be the one falling victim to the scams the government is pulling off right in front of your eyes. a lot of people think the government is all for the people, but the people who really run the US are really just in it for themselves. whether or not you believe aliens exist or the fact nasa edited the photos to cover something up is up to you. also, if you even bothered to read my post, you'd see it pointed out that i never said anything was alien, i just said it was there. i left it up to you guys to decide what you think it is. i'm not gonna try to make anyone believe anything, and i'm certainly not going to insult anyone on whether or not they believe in something or not.
so just like he and I suggested, It could be many things and if NASA was part of the shadow gov't or some kind of conspiracy then why the fuck even release the edited photo in the first place? Hell, even the astronauts taking the pictures would have to be in on it so why would they give up the photos to anyone who is not supposed to see them. It just doesn't make sense.
btw, I don't think either of us think the 'gov't is all for the people' or 'falling victim to gov't scams' (except maybe the racquet they pull with parking tickets).
if they didn't release the photos, the public would wonder wtf they were doing with the millions of dollars put into the orbiter launch. astronauts don't take the pics, an orbiting satellite does. don't worry, most people share your opinion and are against the idea because that's what the people who run this country try to put in your head. you don't think they all work together?
i suggest you watch or listen to this if you have the time, and are willing to see a completely new perspective. i've followed the conspiracy scene for a long time so some of my opinions are pretty bold, but like i said before i respect your opinions, and i'm far from the right person to try to convince someone to think the way i do, so take it as you will.
man you are fucking dense, saying that "THEY" 'put it in my head' wtf, fuck you man. No one is leading me to believe this shit. I am forming my own conclusions based on facts. And the fact is our gov't especially one which you suggest is trying to cover up things so cunningly would not be so stupid enough to slip up all this shit in the first place.
an no I won't watch "your" propaganda that they are trying to put in "your" head. IF you read that fermi paradox article there are so many theories in there that possible contact with life is HUGE HUGE HUGE Fucking odds. And just to note, these theories are not propagated by the gov't, they are created from science fiction and science fact.
rofl nice way to handle yourself. your girlfriend must be happy.
whatever that means. you know they can take a bunch of pretty pictures for the public and keep the real secret stuff to themselves right? You know they could just as easily say a fire burned up all the negatives. There are hunderds of things they can do besides doing a shoddy job of editing some photos. Its extremely ludicrous to just make a huge leap of faith that oh they purposefully did it to cover aliens. Be open minded, isn't that what true scientist /conspiracist should be in the first place? You are a hypocritical contradiction.
c'mon man.. you seriously can't say that i'm the one who is not open minded from our past conversation. all i did was give you the info and say have a look, and you're taking it way too far to heart getting upset about it. i even told you more than once i'm not trying to convince you, yet you make it out like i'm getting at you like a bad car salesman. all i did was give you the tools to see a new perspective on how this world works.
On July 01 2009 08:28 Grommit wrote: What makes you think that "so many people" refuse to believe in aliens? Are there even any legitimate studies about that kind of thing?
On July 03 2009 09:52 CharlieMurphy wrote: you called me a puppet basically, how can I not get upset? Especially when I think the coin is flipped and you are the ignorant puppet.
it's just that everyone is lied to. the people you hear on tv on the news are lied to. the people that tell those people their information are lied to. it all seems like it's the truth when it's coming from someone who also believes it's the truth. the general public trusts the media with the information they get, regardless of the topic. i'm not saying everything is bullshit, but there ARE things that are completely. anyway, it's not worth it to argue over it so my apologies if i worded something wrong and you misunderstood me.
The planet Mars conjures images of red rocks and arid, dusty plains, but as NASA's Phoenix Mars Lander showed last year, it snows on Mars.
The stationary robot observed ice crystals falling to the Martian surface near the end of its five-month mission in the arctic Vastitas Borealis plains last year. Scientists provided further details on this finding and others in a set of four papers in Friday's issue of the journal Science. The research could help shed light on the past and present action of water on the Martian surface and characterize the potential habitability of the Red Planet.
Phoenix landed on the Red Planet on May 25, 2008, with a mission to dig up and analyze samples of Martian dirt, confirm the existence of a subsurface layer of water ice and observe the weather at its far northern locale. Story continues below ↓advertisement | your ad here
Cirrus clouds... Spacecraft orbiting Mars had previously detected clouds high up in the Martian atmosphere and low-level ice fog, "but they've never seen precipitation," said James Whiteway of York University in Canada, the lead scientist for Phoenix's meteorological instruments.
From its vantage point on the Martian surface, Phoenix used its LIDAR (light detection and ranging) instrument, supplied by the Canadian Space Agency, to emit laser pulses upward into the atmosphere. The instrument detected clouds and precipitation above Phoenix's landing site.
The clouds were low-level, wispy clouds made up of ice crystals, similar to the cirrus clouds that form over Earth's polar regions in the winter. Whiteway also likened them to the thin clouds jet planes fly through high in the Earth's atmosphere.
"The thin, wispy clouds up there have a similar water content," he told Space.com.
The clouds didn't begin forming until around the mission's 80th or 90th Martian day (or sol), when air temperatures were cool enough for water vapor in the atmosphere to condense out, Whiteway explained.
As the mission wore on, the clouds became thicker, lower to the ground and persisted for longer.
...And snow The snow didn't come until close to the end of the mission. It too is similar to the snow that falls to the ground at Earth's poles, sometimes called "diamond dust." Whiteway describes it as "ice crystals sparkling in the air."
The snow wasn't enough to build a snowmartian with, however, amounting to only a couple micrometers (there are 1,000 micrometers in a millimeter) a day if it was melted on the surface, Whiteway said.
Click for related content Martian soil surprises explained Snow spotted falling from Martian sky See a solar eclipse from Mars
The observations show that "precipitation is a component of the hydrologic cycle" on Mars, which was not suspected before the Phoenix mission, Whiteway said.
How the finding might impact our understanding of the global Mars water cycle — both now and in the distant past, when the planet is suspected to have been warmer and wetter — is not yet known.
The new information can be used to modify Martian climate models, which currently don't feature these newly discovered clouds and precipitation, "and then we'll see what the implications are," Whiteway said.
On July 03 2009 11:28 illu wrote: I will keep an open mind that aliens MAY exist, but without solid evidence, to believe something like this would be merely superstitions.
dude their has to be some type of bacteria living somewhere..
On July 03 2009 11:28 illu wrote: I will keep an open mind that aliens MAY exist, but without solid evidence, to believe something like this would be merely superstitions.
dude their has to be some type of bacteria living somewhere..
I do believe in other lifeforms than humans, but for others that don't and demand evidence to support such a claim is logical and completly understandable. What would you say if I'd say that God exists, and God lives in a treecabin in the center of the sun. Of course you'd say that that statment is utterly ludicrous and ask me return for evidence for backing up my statment.
The bottom line is that forcing your believes on others is pretty bad and especially if you can't back you believes up with hard evidence.
On July 03 2009 04:33 CharlieMurphy wrote: obvious? what? I don't see anything wtf.
Just because there is a blurr on an image doesn't mean there is alien life there. It could be a number of reasons. 1) error 2) gov't is building shit up there (that is uknown to the public) 3) military security (also related to 2 maybe) 4) stuff that just looks questionable and they don't wanna cause a stir before they actually get a chance to check it out themselves.
etc etc , there are literaly hundreds of things it could be, and outright assuming that it is alien is completely closed minded. You have to look at all the possibilities and evidence for all of them.
if you look at a photo of that same area from a more recent mission there's nothing there at all, it's been completely edited out. back when that one photo was released (1994) computer photo editing wasn't good like today. you can obviously see there's something behind the smudge in that pic, whether it's alien or not i didn't say, i just said there's something there.
So you imply that nasa released a foto possibly containing evidence of alien life forms but being government and all they ''edited'' to prevent its citizens from revolting in terror from martians instead of simply not publishing it at all? Makes perfect sense to me, I mean government is retarded, after all it is representive of people,
thanks for the reply. if you're calling me retarded, explain then how you feel as you seem to be the one falling victim to the scams the government is pulling off right in front of your eyes. a lot of people think the government is all for the people, but the people who really run the US are really just in it for themselves. whether or not you believe aliens exist or the fact nasa edited the photos to cover something up is up to you. also, if you even bothered to read my post, you'd see it pointed out that i never said anything was alien, i just said it was there. i left it up to you guys to decide what you think it is. i'm not gonna try to make anyone believe anything, and i'm certainly not going to insult anyone on whether or not they believe in something or not.
I believe alien life forms exist. Not intelligent life forms, but definitely bacteria and very simple life forms (single cell/microscopic etc). Some religions (christian for example) would easily except the fact that their is indeed life in other parts of the universe. They do NOT however believe that their could exist intelligent alien life in the universe.
On July 03 2009 11:28 illu wrote: I will keep an open mind that aliens MAY exist, but without solid evidence, to believe something like this would be merely superstitions.
dude their has to be some type of bacteria living somewhere..
I do believe in other lifeforms than humans, but for others that don't and demand evidence to support such a claim is logical and completly understandable. What would you say if I'd say that God exists, and God lives in a treecabin in the center of the sun. Of course you'd say that that statment is utterly ludicrous and ask me return for evidence for backing up my statment.
The bottom line is that forcing your believes on others is pretty bad and especially if you can't back you believes up with hard evidence.
I would say that I don't believe it but I can't prove otherwise either.
Funniest shit I read in awhile was at the back of Sweden's largest newspaper (Aftonbladet). They ask a question to a couple of random people and post the answers. So, this one day the question was: "Do you believe in aliens?"
The best (meaning the worst) answer was provided by an old lady (about 60 years old):
On July 04 2009 02:38 ParasitJonte wrote: Funniest shit I read in awhile was at the back of Sweden's largest newspaper (Aftonbladet). They ask a question to a couple of random people and post the answers. So, this one day the question was: "Do you believe in aliens?"
The best (meaning the worst) answer was provided by an old lady (about 60 years old):
"No, I don't believe in supernatural things."
I laughed my ass off.
?
su⋅per⋅nat⋅u⋅ral /ˌsupərˈnætʃərəl, -ˈnætʃrəl/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [soo-per-nach-er-uhl, -nach-ruhl] Show IPA Use supernatural in a Sentence –adjective 1. of, pertaining to, or being above or beyond what is natural; unexplainable by natural law or phenomena; abnormal.
Of or relating to existence outside the natural world.
did you mean paranormal? that would make more sense, but you could still call aliens paranormal i guess too.
On July 03 2009 04:33 CharlieMurphy wrote: obvious? what? I don't see anything wtf.
Just because there is a blurr on an image doesn't mean there is alien life there. It could be a number of reasons. 1) error 2) gov't is building shit up there (that is uknown to the public) 3) military security (also related to 2 maybe) 4) stuff that just looks questionable and they don't wanna cause a stir before they actually get a chance to check it out themselves.
etc etc , there are literaly hundreds of things it could be, and outright assuming that it is alien is completely closed minded. You have to look at all the possibilities and evidence for all of them.
if you look at a photo of that same area from a more recent mission there's nothing there at all, it's been completely edited out. back when that one photo was released (1994) computer photo editing wasn't good like today. you can obviously see there's something behind the smudge in that pic, whether it's alien or not i didn't say, i just said there's something there.
So you imply that nasa released a foto possibly containing evidence of alien life forms but being government and all they ''edited'' to prevent its citizens from revolting in terror from martians instead of simply not publishing it at all? Makes perfect sense to me, I mean government is retarded, after all it is representive of people,
thanks for the reply. if you're calling me retarded, explain then how you feel as you seem to be the one falling victim to the scams the government is pulling off right in front of your eyes. a lot of people think the government is all for the people, but the people who really run the US are really just in it for themselves. whether or not you believe aliens exist or the fact nasa edited the photos to cover something up is up to you. also, if you even bothered to read my post, you'd see it pointed out that i never said anything was alien, i just said it was there. i left it up to you guys to decide what you think it is. i'm not gonna try to make anyone believe anything, and i'm certainly not going to insult anyone on whether or not they believe in something or not.
so just like he and I suggested, It could be many things and if NASA was part of the shadow gov't or some kind of conspiracy then why the fuck even release the edited photo in the first place? Hell, even the astronauts taking the pictures would have to be in on it so why would they give up the photos to anyone who is not supposed to see them. It just doesn't make sense.
btw, I don't think either of us think the 'gov't is all for the people' or 'falling victim to gov't scams' (except maybe the racquet they pull with parking tickets).
if they didn't release the photos, the public would wonder wtf they were doing with the millions of dollars put into the orbiter launch. astronauts don't take the pics, an orbiting satellite does. don't worry, most people share your opinion and are against the idea because that's what the people who run this country try to put in your head. you don't think they all work together?
i suggest you watch or listen to this if you have the time, and are willing to see a completely new perspective. i've followed the conspiracy scene for a long time so some of my opinions are pretty bold, but like i said before i respect your opinions, and i'm far from the right person to try to convince someone to think the way i do, so take it as you will.
man you are fucking dense, saying that "THEY" 'put it in my head' wtf, fuck you man. No one is leading me to believe this shit. I am forming my own conclusions based on facts. And the fact is our gov't especially one which you suggest is trying to cover up things so cunningly would not be so stupid enough to slip up all this shit in the first place.
an no I won't watch "your" propaganda that they are trying to put in "your" head. IF you read that fermi paradox article there are so many theories in there that possible contact with life is HUGE HUGE HUGE Fucking odds. And just to note, these theories are not propagated by the gov't, they are created from science fiction and science fact.
rofl nice way to handle yourself. your girlfriend must be happy.
whatever that means. you know they can take a bunch of pretty pictures for the public and keep the real secret stuff to themselves right? You know they could just as easily say a fire burned up all the negatives. There are hunderds of things they can do besides doing a shoddy job of editing some photos. Its extremely ludicrous to just make a huge leap of faith that oh they purposefully did it to cover aliens. Be open minded, isn't that what true scientist /conspiracist should be in the first place? You are a hypocritical contradiction.
PS- Don't get me wrong, I am very willing to believe anything if I see some obvious empircal proof of evidence. But this is just some little tidbit that could literally be anything. Btw, Did you actually do the reasearch on the topics - talking to gov't officials and visiting gov't archives? Or did you just watch some biased video then read about it on the edited wiki article or some nutjob tinfoil hat wearing hero's website? Don't you think the gov't could have their hands in that too?
The only thing you can truly trust, and can truly believe in, is yourself.
CharlieMurphey, take another look at that definition you cited. The term "natural world" refers to things inside of the natural realm, which includes sunlight and paper and magnets. Something outside of the natural realm would be, say, the Christian god. I trust that aliens would still be subject to physics, and are therefore not "supernatural."
As to the existence of aliens, the Drake Equation mentioned earlier is about as good of an approximation that we can get, except that it's filled with holes and assumptions that are questionable. Such as, life requires water. And is carbon based. I guess I'm saying that I don't know. I don't even know if it's probable. My intuitive guess is that it is, but I lack strong evidence to say that with confidence.
I must say, I think the lack of communication is the main problem, light just travels too slowly to see most of the universe.
So we've been here 50000 years, so that reduces the area aliens could find us (and we finding them) in to 50000 lightyears (by conventional knowledge) which someone already mentioned.
Which is a bit far fetched..
Wormholes and psionics, bending space and time, maybe that could be a valid method? *shrugs* I guess i've played too much starcraft, but it's quite an iconic vision of an alien species, familiar but different - much like most aliens in popular fiction. You don't see many formless horrors (Lovecraft aside )
If anything was visiting us i'd wager they were time travelling humans (only people that would know where we were)
As always; belief follows evidence, though many people have different definitions of the word evidence.
On July 04 2009 04:57 BottleAbuser wrote: CharlieMurphey, take another look at that definition you cited. The term "natural world" refers to things inside of the natural realm, which includes sunlight and paper and magnets. Something outside of the natural realm would be, say, the Christian god. I trust that aliens would still be subject to physics, and are therefore not "supernatural."
As to the existence of aliens, the Drake Equation mentioned earlier is about as good of an approximation that we can get, except that it's filled with holes and assumptions that are questionable. Such as, life requires water. And is carbon based. I guess I'm saying that I don't know. I don't even know if it's probable. My intuitive guess is that it is, but I lack strong evidence to say that with confidence.
I'm not saying the use of the word supernatural is best used to describe aliens, but if 'natural world' means planet earth. Then it makes sense to a degree.
Hmmmm I do believe that aliens exist somewhere far away in galaxy, I just don't believe they were on Earth (abductions, x-files conspiracy shiet, etc... ).
I think aliens do exist, If we are here then what's stopping there from being life in other galaxies?! I'm really interested in this topic, I hope scientists keep up the good work on space!
On July 04 2009 07:56 illu wrote: Just for the references, I also keep an open mind that god may exist - no different from aliens.
Great! Seeing as the gravitational constant and Earth's climate, revolution around the sun, and distance from it proves that there's such a low chance of Earth devloping such conditions suitable for life by itself, there's some sort of sentinent life outthere. + Show Spoiler +
The Overmind. ㅋ_ㅋ
Sure, it might not necessarily have to be God but something had to have boosted that chance through intelligent design or else the entire Earth forming as it was only had like... 0.000000000000000001 or something like that.
On July 04 2009 07:56 illu wrote: Just for the references, I also keep an open mind that god may exist - no different from aliens.
Great! Seeing as the gravitational constant and Earth's climate, revolution around the sun, and distance from it proves that there's such a low chance of Earth devloping such conditions suitable for life by itself, there's some sort of sentinent life outthere. + Show Spoiler +
The Overmind. ㅋ_ㅋ
Sure, it might not necessarily have to be God but something had to have boosted that chance through intelligent design or else the entire Earth forming as it was only had like... 0.000000000000000001 or something like that.
Let's say you're right and there is only a "0.000000000000000001" percent chance that a planet can have conditions suitable for life.
There are approximately 400 billion stars in the milky way galaxy. Let's say each one of these had just 5 planets...not 9 (screw you all, I still count pluto). Now let's remember that there are an estimated 125 billion galaxies in the known universe.
I don't want to do the math, but you can clearly see that even 0.000000000000000001% of that would leave an enormous amount of planets suitable for life. Some form of intelligent design did not have to guide the development of life on Earth
im pretty sure that there are forms of life out there, like some bacteria or microbes. if intelligent life exists im very sure that they live so far away from us that a contanct is impossible.
On July 04 2009 07:56 illu wrote: Just for the references, I also keep an open mind that god may exist - no different from aliens.
Great! Seeing as the gravitational constant and Earth's climate, revolution around the sun, and distance from it proves that there's such a low chance of Earth devloping such conditions suitable for life by itself, there's some sort of sentinent life outthere. + Show Spoiler +
The Overmind. ㅋ_ㅋ
Sure, it might not necessarily have to be God but something had to have boosted that chance through intelligent design or else the entire Earth forming as it was only had like... 0.000000000000000001 or something like that.
Let's say you're right and there is only a "0.000000000000000001" percent chance that a planet can have conditions suitable for life.
There are approximately 400 billion stars in the milky way galaxy. Let's say each one of these had just 5 planets...not 9 (screw you all, I still count pluto). Now let's remember that there are an estimated 125 billion galaxies in the known universe.
I don't want to do the math, but you can clearly see that even 0.000000000000000001% of that would leave an enormous amount of planets suitable for life. Some form of intelligent design did not have to guide the development of life on Earth
According to those numbers, the epected value of planets with life is 500 (if I typed it in correctly)
Yes, there are aliens. Somewhere on the galaxy some single cell organisms probably chill around. No, there are no Effort like looking aliens that fly around and abduct people for anal exams.
I haven't researched it much but there is a couple theories that support both the bible and extra terrestrials (aka humans from another planet, or hybrid humans, probably the result of laboratory experiments!!!! Which people claim to be human/reptilian hybrids). No one really knows how pyramids were made or there is some crazy things the Mayans did and all. Perhaps a group of people left earth during this time that were superior to the rest of the humans on earth technology wise, and left with that technology.
Also there is some crazy stuff on fallen angels, or angels who betrayed god and try to lead humans away from god, and they are far superior intelligently and aren't of the flesh. And being of the flesh is the most often where aliens and the bible contradict amirite? anyways, leading people away from this planet to worship the angel who betrayed god is definitely a good way for the angel to keep people away from the teachings of god. Obviously the angel would have the intelligence to travel away from earth. It also would explain pyramids and mayan temples and stuff, angels could easily craft that stuff
Like I said I didn't do much research on the stuff, I'm probably way off, but I have a fairly strong faith in god so I don't want to waste my time learning something like this when I'll soon know anyways. Interesting stuff none the less.
Pretty much, I don't believe in this stuff, but I thought some might find it interesting, it's a possibility none the less I guess.
Just sayin people, think outside the box, not all theories on aliens contradict the bible.
All i can possibly say on this entire subject is that in (what is believed to be) an infinite universe, everything which is possible will happen an infinite number of times. This means inhabitable planets, alien races, etc.
On July 08 2009 01:16 ghermination wrote: All i can possibly say on this entire subject is that in (what is believed to be) an infinite universe, everything which is possible will happen an infinite number of times. This means inhabitable planets, alien races, etc.
Then the question is, what is possible? That basically brings us back to square one >.>
On July 04 2009 04:57 BottleAbuser wrote: CharlieMurphey, take another look at that definition you cited. The term "natural world" refers to things inside of the natural realm, which includes sunlight and paper and magnets. Something outside of the natural realm would be, say, the Christian god. I trust that aliens would still be subject to physics, and are therefore not "supernatural."
As to the existence of aliens, the Drake Equation mentioned earlier is about as good of an approximation that we can get, except that it's filled with holes and assumptions that are questionable. Such as, life requires water. And is carbon based. I guess I'm saying that I don't know. I don't even know if it's probable. My intuitive guess is that it is, but I lack strong evidence to say that with confidence.
I'm not saying the use of the word supernatural is best used to describe aliens, but if 'natural world' means planet earth. Then it makes sense to a degree.
Clearly, we have a different understanding of what the term "natural world" means (in what universe, in what classrom, in what class, would it ever refer to planet earth?).
In swedish, supernatural and paranormal are both translated to simply "övernaturlig" (well, there is a word "paranormal" in swedish too but the meaning is the same as "övernaturlig").
To be clear: the reason I laughed was because she excluded aliens from being apart of the natural world and then concluded that she doesn't believe in such things. That's a poor, and backwards way of reasoning.
On July 08 2009 00:50 IdrA wrote: whats it like being insane?
That was totally called for.
On topic: the Fermi paradox is a good basis for not believing in aliens.
The Fermi Paradox The apparent size and age of the universe suggests that many technologically advanced extraterrestrial civilizations ought to exist. However, this hypothesis seems inconsistent with the lack of observational evidence to support it.
It obviously doesn't completely disprove the existence of aliens, but if there are (or were) any, why haven't we picked up any form of proof? Radio waves would be the first sign; our radio waves started back in the 1930s, so they've traveled almost 100 light years around us by now. Failing that, if there was an intelligent race nearby (nearby being relative to the size of the milky way galaxy [approximate diameter is 100,000 light years]) that's simply been keeping quiet, we know that no intelligent life exists in a 50 LY radius around our planet (the time it takes for a radio wave to reach an extrasolar planet, and then a response to be sent back).
I do think life is out there other than just on our planet, but I think the Drake Equation is astronomically high in its figures.
On July 01 2009 08:30 HuskyTheHusky wrote: It is almost directly a religious thing. If there are life forms on other planets it completely goes against everything conservative religions strive to teach.
Most people who realize just how vast the universe really is are smart enough to consider the fact that our planet isnt the only one a perfect distance from a heat source to contain life.
I would think that if you believe in Creation, you're even more likely to believe in aliens than your average atheist.
I mean, if God created life once, why not elsewhere as well? Assuming God created angels and who knows what other heavenly life forms, that implies that He's been creating since long before we came around.
With how vast space is and how insignificant we are in the scheme of it, yeah I think it is highly likely there are other lifeforms out there besides us. Once we realize other lifeforms exist, there becomes too many questions we can't answer. What is the dominant form? How advance is their technology? Most important, are they hot?
On July 08 2009 00:50 IdrA wrote: whats it like being insane?
My ability to research a topic certainly doesn't make me insane.
please show me your research on fallen angels
I read some stuff on the internet, that is how I researched it. It's not like I found remnants of fallen angels or something man. Anyways I do believe trolling is against forum rules and your first post was trolling. Maybe even this one but we can't prove that.
OK, there are two different questions at work here, the first one is I think what the OP meant, which is:
Why don't people believe it to be possible there is life elsewhere in the universe
but what some people are interpreting it to be is
Why don't people believe that UFO's and other supposed extra-terrestrial sightings are aliens and that these sightings (or at least some of them) are true?
I think for most the obvious answer to question 1 is yes, while the answer to question 2 is along the more conspiracy nutjob kind of question that makes people question your sanity.
On July 08 2009 00:50 IdrA wrote: whats it like being insane?
My ability to research a topic certainly doesn't make me insane.
please show me your research on fallen angels
I read some stuff on the internet, that is how I researched it. It's not like I found remnants of fallen angels or something man. Anyways I do believe trolling is against forum rules and your first post was trolling. Maybe even this one but we can't prove that.
do you not know what trolling means?
if you honestly believe that aliens built the pyramids and that there was a group of superhumans with space flight centuries ago and all that religious stuff then you either do not think about your beliefs at all or you are crazy.
It's all but guaranteed for alien lifeforms to exist. You would have to be naive to actually believe the Earth is home to the only lifeforms in the universe. The universe is of a magnitude no human can fathom, period.
Just think about this...there are more galaxies (There are billions of stars in a galaxy) than grains of sand on the earth, and this is only what we can see (We can't see from one end of the Universe to the other).
Have aliens visited Earth? Hell no. If they have they would have made themselves known and or blown us to kingdom come. No sentient lifeform capable of interstellar travel is going to fly in and out of our atmosphere abducting what amounts to such a miniscule amount of people for what purpose? Just because?
TL:DR Aliens exist, mathematically proven. Aliens have never visited Earth, nor even been in our solar system.
Of course I believe in aliens when I see one. Just like I believe in anything else only when I have seen myself. Of course it´s highly probable that there is aliens, the world is that big.
I actually took an entire course on extraterrestrial life.. and there's actually a decent chance that we will discover signs of life (probably microbes) within 20 years. People are discovering new planets around other stars at a rate of about 1/day.. you don't hear about them anymore because it happens so often. Right now its mostly the giant ones (size of Jupiter) but in 10 years or so our resolution will be good enough to find Earth-sized planets.. give it another 10 years and we will have found most of the planets in our area of the galaxy. and once they're spotted it's pretty easy to look for chemical signatures that indicate life.. so if there's any kind of life we'll know about it soon. Considering we are looking at thousands of planets like Earth the odds are not bad at all.
no doubt other life forms exist. but maybe billions years ago? or even billions of light years away.
but the chance of there BEING NO extra life forms somewhere in the existing universe sometime during its existance, is about the same as humans EVER in its own existance EVER encountering them. if that makes sense... so yes to some life form exist outside of earth, but no to the UFO sightings or... any kind of alien sighting on this planet.
Trez: honestly we don't have enough knowledge to quantify the odds of intelligent life happening one way or the other, or for humans to have happened specifically. It's very possible that you are right - if one of the evolutionary steps was far less likely to occur than we realize. Odds are that if it is indeed the case, it's one of the earlier stages, simply because the later developments were occurring more and more rapidly - though the same argument can be made for them, it's just less likely to be correct.
For instance, if we find out that the expected time it takes for DNA based life forms to emerge from whatever organic compounds preceded them on earth's environment as it was then, is about say 10 ** 25 years, then intelligent life as we are familiar with is a freak chance -- and may very well not exist anywhere else in the universe - even if there are trillions of other earth-like planets in it.
On July 27 2009 03:38 EmS.Radagast wrote: Trez: honestly we don't have enough knowledge to quantify the odds of intelligent life happening one way or the other, or for humans to have happened specifically. It's very possible that you are right - if one of the evolutionary steps was far less likely to occur than we realize. Odds are that if it is indeed the case, it's one of the earlier stages, simply because the later developments were occurring more and more rapidly - though the same argument can be made for them, it's just less likely to be correct.
For instance, if we find out that the expected time it takes for DNA based life forms to emerge from whatever organic compounds preceded them on earth's environment as it was then, is about say 10 ** 25 years, then intelligent life as we are familiar with is a freak chance -- and may very well not exist anywhere else in the universe - even if there are trillions of other earth-like planets in it.
I get the whole part where it is impossible to quantify the odds, and agree completely that if something were living, it would very likely not be human or even mamalian.
alien = anything foreign you do not recognize. people living 3 blocks down are technically aliens but extratrestrial (uh cant spell) life most likely exists since its a big universe right?
On July 27 2009 03:23 Trezeguet23 wrote: Even though the earth is only 0.0000000000000000000000000000001% of the universe, the odds of us happening was even less than that, soo.....
wow, way to make up random numbers... could you be any more dogmatic?
On July 27 2009 03:23 Trezeguet23 wrote: Even though the earth is only 0.0000000000000000000000000000001% of the universe, the odds of us happening was even less than that, soo.....
wow, way to make up random numbers... could you be any more dogmatic?
I took that number from the OP, can be any more illiterate?
On July 27 2009 03:23 Trezeguet23 wrote: Even though the earth is only 0.0000000000000000000000000000001% of the universe, the odds of us happening was even less than that, soo.....
wow, way to make up random numbers... could you be any more dogmatic?
I took that number from the OP, can be any more illiterate?
Lol the odds of US happening were low, but what if some other species gained intelligence before monkeys did? It didn't really NEED to be monkeys that became intelligent first, that is just what happened.
Imo there would have been another intelligent species in our place if we didn't evolve, it might have taken many more millions of years, but it would be surprising if another species didn't evolve such a useful feature as intelligence.
On July 27 2009 03:23 Trezeguet23 wrote: Even though the earth is only 0.0000000000000000000000000000001% of the universe, the odds of us happening was even less than that, soo.....
wow, way to make up random numbers... could you be any more dogmatic?
I took that number from the OP, can be any more illiterate?
What's about the second part of your statement?
the odds of us happening was even less than that, soo.....
Please enlighten me as to how you deduced the likelihood of our existence is less than "0.0000000000000000000000000000001%".
On July 27 2009 03:23 Trezeguet23 wrote: Even though the earth is only 0.0000000000000000000000000000001% of the universe, the odds of us happening was even less than that, soo.....
wow, way to make up random numbers... could you be any more dogmatic?
I took that number from the OP, can be any more illiterate?
Actually, I can see some validity in that Earth is less than (inferred) 0.0000000000000000000000000000001% of the universe, as the size of Earth is known, and we have a general understanding of the size of our universe.
the odds of us happening was even less than that, soo.....
Please enlighten me as to how you deduced the likelihood of our existence is less than "0.0000000000000000000000000000001%".
The OP asked why people in general don't believe in ETs so I was just showing why maybe some people don't believe in them, not attacking you or anyone's beliefs.
Also, sorry for saying you are illiterate, I thought you meant making up the %, not making up the fact that the likelihood of us.
On July 27 2009 03:23 Trezeguet23 wrote: Even though the earth is only 0.0000000000000000000000000000001% of the universe, the odds of us happening was even less than that, soo.....
wow, way to make up random numbers... could you be any more dogmatic?
I took that number from the OP, can be any more illiterate?
I think a common mistake of people making the assumption that aliens would have made themselves widely known is that you see their behavior as human.
Just because they could visit us doenst mean they have to have human like motivations, and that could very well lead them to do all sorts of shit that makes no sense for us whatsoever such as abducting people leaving probes etc...
Just because a flying saucer didnt land in the white house in front of a shitload of reporters or an army of them came and wiped us out, doenst mean they arent out there, watching us!
Also, the astronauts from Apollo 14 are all batshit crazy insane traitors that want to ashame your country ?
The OP is quite wrong. In the Star Wars generation, nearly everyone has entertained the possibility (at least for a second) of aliens. How many multiplicities of that second we devote to thinking about aliens depends on the kind of people we are, including how bored we are of our own reality. I know that there are people who believe that realization is a function of the will, but for the ordinary kind of man, one might pose the question: what about aliens requires more than a second's thought?
lol Ive asked that many times to myself to, i believe in aliens no matter what lol. And in ghosts too lol, i might be delusional but what the heck? >_<
i rather believe in velociraptors on skateboards. on a more serious note. whats the point if believing? i dont connect aliens with any kind of religion that requires belief but it is more of a scientific fact and unless there is some good proof you just discard the idea.
This is pretty interesting stuff. One thing that surprised me though is there is no mention of time. The universe has been around alot longer than earth. Human beings inception to extinction would equate to less than a second if you are talking about time relative to the universe.
I'd say the consensus is that our planet is a typical one. While life spawning here was unlikely to say the least, modern physics seems to agree that we are not particularly unusual when looking at the other, raw, properties of planets.
The odds of finding other intelligent life if you look at the universe in the present are slim to say the least, when you factor in the fact that life has only been around a few hundred million years the odds become even less favorable, considering that there is no reason why other civilizations entire existence (inception to extinction) could fit anywhere into the vast majority of the time line of the universe.
Silly debate.. a dutch comedian may enlighten you:
- Say there are no aliens, then it is a waste of resources trying to look for them - If there are aliens, then there are two possibilities: - The aliens are not as smart as us. In that case, I don't want to deal with them - The aliens are smarter than us. In this case, there is a very strong likelihood that they will find us before we will find them, no need to go looking for them then.
Doesn't this line of thinking prevent, rather than stimulate further discussion? The lack of evidence in this case means that there is no basis on which to infer the probability of extraterrestrial life. Why must there be anything more to it?
MW, I think it just shift the discussion elsewhere. Given our current understanding of the natural sciences, it is not a trivial fact that we do not see any evidence of other intelligent life. So it spawns several lines of argument why that may be the case. Some of them are interesting points in themselves (if you bother looking into it more a second). Frankly, I am not sure what are you stating exactly. Is it that the existence (or lack thereof) of alien life forms doesn't matter one way or the other? or that since we don't know, any discussion derived from it is meaningless?
On July 27 2009 18:05 Mystlord wrote: People don't believe because if intelligent life does exist, then God doesn't exist. It's called denial.
Not at all, Kardecist Spiritualism is as christian as it can be and they claim tha tthe universe is a vastly populated place the humans being the only ignorant belligerent and self destructive species, still clinging to ways to put things in a us vs them perspective since they have not yet evolved spiritually.
On July 27 2009 18:05 Mystlord wrote: People don't believe because if intelligent life does exist, then God doesn't exist. It's called denial.
Not at all, Kardecist Spiritualism is as christian as it can be and they claim tha tthe universe is a vastly populated place the humans being the only ignorant belligerent and self destructive species, still clinging to ways to put things in a us vs them perspective since they have not yet evolved spiritually.
Weird seeing "Christian as it can be" and "evolved" in the same sentence lol. I think it's just more convenient for some people to assume we're alone in the universe.
Oh, and UFOs do exist. If it's flying, and you can't identify it, technically it's a UFO. Doesn't necessarily mean it's an alien craft that's come to tractor beam you from your back yard, but it's still a UFO by definition.
The concept of a space that never ends and aliens is just too far from many peoples daily understanding and view of their "world".
Yeah, we should think more about space and shit, it's pretty damn awesome. I love watching documentaries/reading books on space, astrobiology and what not
I think there are extraterrestrial lifeforms out there somewhere within the vast reaches of the (infinite?) universe. However, whether we encounter them or not is difficult to say - the universe is a big place, and who knows if humans will survive long enough to find out if any exist?
On July 27 2009 18:05 Mystlord wrote: People don't believe because if intelligent life does exist, then God doesn't exist. It's called denial.
Not at all, Kardecist Spiritualism is as christian as it can be and they claim tha tthe universe is a vastly populated place the humans being the only ignorant belligerent and self destructive species, still clinging to ways to put things in a us vs them perspective since they have not yet evolved spiritually.
The irony in this post is so overwhelming, I'm actually choking on it.