Extraterrestrial life
Offline If there is a habitable planet sustaining another form of life, (which I think there is, considering the number of combinations of planets and stars there are in the universe) do these creatures experience human emotions? That is, if they are intelligent enough? (Not like microscopic organisms.) As I was reading this post, I started to consider it. They would have to, because for argument's sake, we cannot exist without emotions. They would probably have to experience pain, curiosity, and desire, right? What about love, anger, and sadness? And if there is intelligence that complex, there must be smaller, inferior organisms to sustain their ecosystem, maybe even plant life. Of course, evolution would have occurred differently for them because of the environment and other factors. Maybe there is more than one planet in a solar system that contains life. How crazy would it be if they could travel from planet to planet and survive the changes? I've also wondered if they would have some sort of religious connotation. Maybe that's just a human trait. What do you guys think about all of this?
Technorati Tags: The World of Science
there are trillions of galaxies in the universe (and probabbly more)
there are billions of solar systems in each galaxy
it only takes one planet like Earth to sustain life
mathematically, it's next to certain that there are planets with intelligent life (excluding Earth)
Life is abundant throughout the Universe. Hell, I wouldn't be surprised to see that there is more than a billion advanced civillizations in our galaxy alone. But yes, we are currently being visited by at least one, possibly several. I am really waiting for First Disclosure to take place. However, it seems as if Humans are far from grasping the existence of life from another star coming here. But I do believe that extraterrestrials have been watching mankind since the dawn of civillization and activity really skyrocketed after WW-II with the advent of nuclear weapons.
I advise you check www.disclosureproject.com and www.ufoevidence.org.
I heard that the UFO stories are just a scapegoat; and the government is simply hiding new technology from other countries.
it's not a hard thing to do. occasionally leak some "top secret" information, and pretend to try and cover it up.
I personally don't think aliens have visited us. I mean, why would they be interested in us?
that's assuming they even had the technology to get here of course.
not that I don't think intelligent life doesn't exist elsewhere. but I think that they'd be either not advanced enough for interplanetary travel (which is quite likely), or if they are, they don't think it's worth the effort to study us.
I'm sorry, a billion? I think there are about 100 million stars... and approximatelly 1.5 billion planets. But there's achance I'm off by a magnitude of a thousand... but yeah, I think there's life out there, but I doubt it's visited us.
O.K I am from, roswell, NM and god only knows how much i have heard about this.......first off dont visit roswell...waste of gas...there are a few musems that are crap.....and.....lots of places want to rip you off...well anyways as my personal belief i do believe that there is life other than ours.... but not in the sense that T.V. and movies produced.... if all "life" started at the same time (big bang) then they would be at the same timeline as us.....but what if the evolved slower...or quicker....what if they didnt have the dark ages? Who knows how much we lost then.....dam christians....anyways.....there really is no way to know until that day we meet up with...them...who knows what they will be like...there are twice as many theorys aboput this than there are religious gods...so quite a number!!! and no the only aliens i have ever seen are illegal aliens so dont ask!!!!
as for the religion.....maybe....if they had the same inherient fear of their enviroment then yes chances are they have a "god" but they might have evovled quicker and thus might have already disproved him! there are too many variables to make an accurate prediction!
Everything is random. What could be emotion for us could be intelligence to another lifeform millions of light years away. There is no definate way of knowing what is real to us and what is real to them. Hell, they could all be organisms that lived in a world of x-rays completely different from us. We are just an example of a species that had emotion then learned thought. There is no way of telling if evolution would produce the same effect, and it is very unlikely that it would.
If you're going to say something, make sure it's right, sorry. There is an estimated 200 billion+ stars in our galaxy. So far, there is no estimate on planets. However, recent discoveries is starting to show that there are many.
There are an estimated 50 billion trillion stars in the universe. With so many stars, it would be folly to doubt the existence of other life. However, I will focus on the Milky Way, as life from outside the Milky would have to travel over 350000 light years to arrive here...
Furthermore, stars further than a million years away could simply be nonexistent or in a different phase at this point.
Stars remain in the Stable form in between 1 million and 10 billion years, before progressing to giant or dwarf phases. The Earth is 4.6 billion years old, and our sun's core will compress(ironically, pushing the outer part outward) and making it a red giant in about 5 billion years.
Assuming the sun miraculously formed at the beginning of the first life(the sun fuels life), and life evolved instantly all the way to the point of light speed travel, that leaves 10 billion years. Therefore, not only not only can the nearest life(for us to have contact w/ them) not be outside of the galaxy, but it must also be less than 5 billion light years away from us, simply for any alien ship which finds us to be able to report back to the planet before their sun destroys us. Luckily, this affects the data not at all, as we had already constrained it to the Milky Way. However, it raises the question as to the value of such a relationship between the species. Even if there is life on the nearest planet to us outside of our solar system, it would be almost 11 years between messages. Surely any intelligent creatures(intelligent enough to have light speed travel) would realize the futility of such an interplanetary relationship, even at the most optimistic of measures(that the nearest planet contained life). Therefore, I find it unlikely that any such species would be looking for us. But assuming that they are...
I just checked on the numbers from a few research universities, and got numbers in between 50 billion and 200 billion, gotten by abstraction by both the luminosity and the mass of the universe, assuming 96% of the universe to be dark matter/energy(which is the accepted value) The geometric mean of the two is 100 billion, so I was indeed off by a factor of a thousand. That is unfortunate..
However, estimates of planets are also somewhat figured out.
At 15 planets per star, there are 1.5 trillion planets.
The hotter planets are simply incapable of creating life, because the gasses on such planets are so close to the ideal gas phase that they constantly react again and again, never fully forming lasting bonds.
On the other hand, planets which never have an 'ideal gas phase' never cool down to the point where life can form with any form of good probability due to high temperatures causing many reactions.
We can assume that our style galaxy is favorable to life(because life was formed here). Therefore, to assume every galaxy to be like ours would be a more than generous assumption.
Furthermore only in solar systems w/ stable suns can life form. Dwarf stars do not produce enough energy for life. Any life of the form which could survive in the limited energy environment of a Dwarf Star would have its bonds ripped apart by the energy of our sun. On the other hand, Red Giants engulf the closer planets, and burn up the medium distance ones, but provide optimum heat for the further ones. Those further ones would have longer day cycles, but nothing preventing them from interacting with us. However, Red Giants emit far more UV radiation, and it seems unlikely that both such aliens and ourselves could survive in the same conditions, either their underexposure to radiation, or our overexposure would not allow us to coexist.
Yellow Giants and Pulsating stars, on the other hand, fluctuate in the radius of their outer layers, and in their radiation output, making life seemingly impossible, as it would require a massively quick evolutionary process.
The closest star is Proximi Centauri, at 4.2 light years
The closest planet is 10.6 light years away.
The closest star of our type is Alpha Centauri A, and it is 5.3 light years away, in a star cluster of 3.
Even if life would form, it is not necessary that it has intelligence.
Given all these various circumstances, which deter life(and only very select circumstances supporting life compatibile with ours) while it is quite likely that there is life within say... 20 light years(any more is simply unreasonable for us to contact), there are no reasons to believe that that life is necessarily intelligent, or capable of interacting with us. Furthermore, it is very strongly improbable that there are a BILLION highly advanced societies within our galaxy
Careful, this could be a form of circular logic. We need another form of evidence other than our galaxy has life in it. I think the probablity of life forming in the universe is not an extremely improbable event. Probably a 1 in a billion chance, possibly less. If you think about it, all we need is to jump start the process of natural selection. And any self replicating system with the possiblity of replacative error can do this. Now to say if its had enough time to evolve complex intelligence is difficult. Frankly, I would be happy with either.
I was just saying i'm making a more generous assumption than possible, for the point of proving my point even if I make concessions.
I see, well I'll let it slide this time.
Furthermore, stars further than a million years away could simply be nonexistent or in a different phase at this point.
Stars remain in the Stable form in between 1 million and 10 billion years, before progressing to giant or dwarf phases. The Earth is 4.6 billion years old, and our sun's core will compress(ironically, pushing the outer part outward) and making it a red giant in about 5 billion years.
Assuming the sun miraculously formed at the beginning of the first life(the sun fuels life), and life evolved instantly all the way to the point of light speed travel, that leaves 10 billion years. Therefore, not only not only can the nearest life(for us to have contact w/ them) not be outside of the galaxy, but it must also be less than 5 billion light years away from us, simply for any alien ship which finds us to be able to report back to the planet before their sun destroys us. Luckily, this affects the data not at all, as we had already constrained it to the Milky Way. However, it raises the question as to the value of such a relationship between the species. Even if there is life on the nearest planet to us outside of our solar system, it would be almost 11 years between messages. Surely any intelligent creatures(intelligent enough to have light speed travel) would realize the futility of such an interplanetary relationship, even at the most optimistic of measures(that the nearest planet contained life). Therefore, I find it unlikely that any such species would be looking for us. But assuming that they are...
I just checked on the numbers from a few research universities, and got numbers in between 50 billion and 200 billion, gotten by abstraction by both the luminosity and the mass of the universe, assuming 96% of the universe to be dark matter/energy(which is the accepted value) The geometric mean of the two is 100 billion, so I was indeed off by a factor of a thousand. That is unfortunate..
However, estimates of planets are also somewhat figured out.
At 15 planets per star, there are 1.5 trillion planets.
The hotter planets are simply incapable of creating life, because the gasses on such planets are so close to the ideal gas phase that they constantly react again and again, never fully forming lasting bonds.
On the other hand, planets which never have an 'ideal gas phase' never cool down to the point where life can form with any form of good probability due to high temperatures causing many reactions.
We can assume that our style galaxy is favorable to life(because life was formed here). Therefore, to assume every galaxy to be like ours would be a more than generous assumption.
Furthermore only in solar systems w/ stable suns can life form. Dwarf stars do not produce enough energy for life. Any life of the form which could survive in the limited energy environment of a Dwarf Star would have its bonds ripped apart by the energy of our sun. On the other hand, Red Giants engulf the closer planets, and burn up the medium distance ones, but provide optimum heat for the further ones. Those further ones would have longer day cycles, but nothing preventing them from interacting with us. However, Red Giants emit far more UV radiation, and it seems unlikely that both such aliens and ourselves could survive in the same conditions, either their underexposure to radiation, or our overexposure would not allow us to coexist.
Yellow Giants and Pulsating stars, on the other hand, fluctuate in the radius of their outer layers, and in their radiation output, making life seemingly impossible, as it would require a massively quick evolutionary process.
The closest star is Proximi Centauri, at 4.2 light years
The closest planet is 10.6 light years away.
The closest star of our type is Alpha Centauri A, and it is 5.3 light years away, in a star cluster of 3.
Even if life would form, it is not necessary that it has intelligence.
Given all these various circumstances, which deter life(and only very select circumstances supporting life compatibile with ours) while it is quite likely that there is life within say... 20 light years(any more is simply unreasonable for us to contact), there are no reasons to believe that that life is necessarily intelligent, or capable of interacting with us. Furthermore, it is very strongly improbable that there are a BILLION highly advanced societies within our galaxy
Well, current estimates are that there is 200-400 billion stars in our galaxy. From what I'm aware, a small portion of these stars are similar to our sun. However, a star doesn't necessarily have to be similar to our sun to harbor life. But from whawt I am aware, 8% of the stars in our galaxy are in the same class as our sun. I am also going by the assumption that any planet that has an environment fit for life will eventually have an advanced civilization either by colonization or speciation on the planet.
Well, we're far from the situation of asking if life exists. It's when the public will have knowledge of contact. I don't know how long this situation of secrecy will stay, but I hope it stops soon.
Furthermore, stars further than a million years away could simply be nonexistent or in a different phase at this point.
Stars remain in the Stable form in between 1 million and 10 billion years, before progressing to giant or dwarf phases. The Earth is 4.6 billion years old, and our sun's core will compress(ironically, pushing the outer part outward) and making it a red giant in about 5 billion years.
Assuming the sun miraculously formed at the beginning of the first life(the sun fuels life), and life evolved instantly all the way to the point of light speed travel, that leaves 10 billion years. Therefore, not only not only can the nearest life(for us to have contact w/ them) not be outside of the galaxy, but it must also be less than 5 billion light years away from us, simply for any alien ship which finds us to be able to report back to the planet before their sun destroys us. Luckily, this affects the data not at all, as we had already constrained it to the Milky Way. However, it raises the question as to the value of such a relationship between the species. Even if there is life on the nearest planet to us outside of our solar system, it would be almost 11 years between messages. Surely any intelligent creatures(intelligent enough to have light speed travel) would realize the futility of such an interplanetary relationship, even at the most optimistic of measures(that the nearest planet contained life). Therefore, I find it unlikely that any such species would be looking for us. But assuming that they are...
I just checked on the numbers from a few research universities, and got numbers in between 50 billion and 200 billion, gotten by abstraction by both the luminosity and the mass of the universe, assuming 96% of the universe to be dark matter/energy(which is the accepted value) The geometric mean of the two is 100 billion, so I was indeed off by a factor of a thousand. That is unfortunate..
However, estimates of planets are also somewhat figured out.
At 15 planets per star, there are 1.5 trillion planets.
The hotter planets are simply incapable of creating life, because the gasses on such planets are so close to the ideal gas phase that they constantly react again and again, never fully forming lasting bonds.
On the other hand, planets which never have an 'ideal gas phase' never cool down to the point where life can form with any form of good probability due to high temperatures causing many reactions.
We can assume that our style galaxy is favorable to life(because life was formed here). Therefore, to assume every galaxy to be like ours would be a more than generous assumption.
Furthermore only in solar systems w/ stable suns can life form. Dwarf stars do not produce enough energy for life. Any life of the form which could survive in the limited energy environment of a Dwarf Star would have its bonds ripped apart by the energy of our sun. On the other hand, Red Giants engulf the closer planets, and burn up the medium distance ones, but provide optimum heat for the further ones. Those further ones would have longer day cycles, but nothing preventing them from interacting with us. However, Red Giants emit far more UV radiation, and it seems unlikely that both such aliens and ourselves could survive in the same conditions, either their underexposure to radiation, or our overexposure would not allow us to coexist.
Yellow Giants and Pulsating stars, on the other hand, fluctuate in the radius of their outer layers, and in their radiation output, making life seemingly impossible, as it would require a massively quick evolutionary process.
The closest star is Proximi Centauri, at 4.2 light years
The closest planet is 10.6 light years away.
The closest star of our type is Alpha Centauri A, and it is 5.3 light years away, in a star cluster of 3.
Even if life would form, it is not necessary that it has intelligence.
Given all these various circumstances, which deter life(and only very select circumstances supporting life compatibile with ours) while it is quite likely that there is life within say... 20 light years(any more is simply unreasonable for us to contact), there are no reasons to believe that that life is necessarily intelligent, or capable of interacting with us. Furthermore, it is very strongly improbable that there are a BILLION highly advanced societies within our galaxy
"The hotter planets are simply incapable of creating life, because the gasses on such planets are so close to the ideal gas phase that they constantly react again and again, never fully forming lasting bonds."
-I don't think that's a huge problem. At room temperature(25 C) the energy is 1/100th that of a typical covalent bond. It's more of a huge issue of the denaturing of proteins, this starts after 37 C. Non-covalent interactions such as Van Der Waals and H-bonding are important in life.
"Any life of the form which could survive in the limited energy environment of a Dwarf Star would have its bonds ripped apart by the energy of our sun."
-I don't agree with that. The bond energies would be the same.
"herefore, not only not only can the nearest life(for us to have contact w/ them) not be outside of the galaxy, but it must also be less than 5 billion light years away from us, simply for any alien ship which finds us to be able to report back to the planet before their sun destroys us."
-Well about traveling through wormholes? We've barely skimmed space travel so far.
Wait, wait, wait... worm holes? That seems waaaayyyyy too much science fiction and very little of... well... everything else. But ok, regardless of whether or not there actually is a recipe on how to make a worm hole and jump across millions of light years in a nick of time. There are a few things to consider-
One, is about aliens visiting us... Why would they care to? To bring their message of peace and love? We're still a tribalistic people who enjoys fighting among each other, much less figuring out ways of sitting around the camp fire and signing happy-go-lucky songs. Or they might care to enslave us all and take us to work on their space mines... but they probably got robots for that. At the very most, if an ultra high-tech space civilization exists it's very unlikely that they actually care about us or actually made visits to this planet for around... several billion years that life has existed and leaving no evidence and no radio signals from SETI. To them, I'd say, we are but an ant hill- fascinating to observe but not something you want to step in.
But regardless- two, is the probability of intelligent life. Well ok, there are 200-400 billion stars in our galaxy and what? 7x10^22 in the universe? A pretty big number. But, what is the probability of intelligent life? Reproductive life is not that improbable, or relatively so compared to the vast amounts of stars in the universe. But consider intelligent life, consider how intelligent life got here- life on this planet, or so the common belief goes, is 3.5 billion years old. That's little small bacteria things. Then, around 1.8 billion years those bacteria developed organelles (that is, it took 1.7 billion years to get to the next level of complexity). Then life grew on, cells fused and such until the Cambrian 600 (?) million years ago. Then they crawled out unto the land and continued evolving and such until about 6 million years ago when humanids split from the primates and 100,000 years ago when Homo sapiens started walking the earth. Now, that seems all dandy and progressive, but when you consider the amount of time it took... and never mind time! Consider the several mass extinctions that took place, the twists and turns of the species, the loops, the splits, species coming in and out of existance, evolution bumbling along popping random species everywhere that die off sooner or later and if it wasnt for a set of intellectual primates that happened to walk upright due to changing climactic conditions in Sub-Saharan Africa that allowed them more use of their hands and the development of their tools, this planet would have never developed intelligent life. Now, it's easy to look back in time and say "Oh yeah, once life develops it naturally progresses to intelligence." But... there's nothing to say that, it's an ignorant statement of mistakingly thinking that you were ment to be here when being this grand intellectual ape on this long trajectory of species... but it's not the case, the universe might not like smart guys. There is only one humanoid out of several (the Homo sapien) to have high intelligence, humanoid is one of many primates, primates are one of the many mammals, mammals are the only ones of many species of vertibrates, vertigrates is one of many chordates, and chordates is one of several kingdoms. And intelligence only appeared once.
One, is about aliens visiting us... Why would they care to? To bring their message of peace and love? We're still a tribalistic people who enjoys fighting among each other, much less figuring out ways of sitting around the camp fire and signing happy-go-lucky songs. Or they might care to enslave us all and take us to work on their space mines... but they probably got robots for that. At the very most, if an ultra high-tech space civilization exists it's very unlikely that they actually care about us or actually made visits to this planet for around... several billion years that life has existed and leaving no evidence and no radio signals from SETI. To them, I'd say, we are but an ant hill- fascinating to observe but not something you want to step in.
But regardless- two, is the probability of intelligent life. Well ok, there are 200-400 billion stars in our galaxy and what? 7x10^22 in the universe? A pretty big number. But, what is the probability of intelligent life? Reproductive life is not that improbable, or relatively so compared to the vast amounts of stars in the universe. But consider intelligent life, consider how intelligent life got here- life on this planet, or so the common belief goes, is 3.5 billion years old. That's little small bacteria things. Then, around 1.8 billion years those bacteria developed organelles (that is, it took 1.7 billion years to get to the next level of complexity). Then life grew on, cells fused and such until the Cambrian 600 (?) million years ago. Then they crawled out unto the land and continued evolving and such until about 6 million years ago when humanids split from the primates and 100,000 years ago when Homo sapiens started walking the earth. Now, that seems all dandy and progressive, but when you consider the amount of time it took... and never mind time! Consider the several mass extinctions that took place, the twists and turns of the species, the loops, the splits, species coming in and out of existance, evolution bumbling along popping random species everywhere that die off sooner or later and if it wasnt for a set of intellectual primates that happened to walk upright due to changing climactic conditions in Sub-Saharan Africa that allowed them more use of their hands and the development of their tools, this planet would have never developed intelligent life. Now, it's easy to look back in time and say "Oh yeah, once life develops it naturally progresses to intelligence." But... there's nothing to say that, it's an ignorant statement of mistakingly thinking that you were ment to be here when being this grand intellectual ape on this long trajectory of species... but it's not the case, the universe might not like smart guys. There is only one humanoid out of several (the Homo sapien) to have high intelligence, humanoid is one of many primates, primates are one of the many mammals, mammals are the only ones of many species of vertibrates, vertigrates is one of many chordates, and chordates is one of several kingdoms. And intelligence only appeared once.
You can't characterize wormholes as being 'science fiction'. I hate this human attitude that we are at the forefront of technology and science. Beyond that, the current visitations have to be addressed.
"Why would they care to? To bring their message of peace and love? "
It's like for instance: Why would we bother studying other cultures, people or even sending peace corps to Africa? Beyond that, it should be understood that these civilizations have reached a technological age of close to limitless resources and energy along with space travel.
"several billion years that life has existed and leaving no evidence and no radio signals from SETI. "
Again, they may be aware of our situation on this planet, and are waiting for the correct time to 'reveal' themselves. It also has to be an issue with how the governments would like this situation to be.
With regards to SETI, I believe the program is absolute crap. Extraterrestrials obviously wouldn't be communicating within the same radiofrequencies or spectrum as SETI is searching in. Beyond that, government oversight of the program and any claims of contact wouldn't be taken seriously.
"But, what is the probability of intelligent life?"
I don't know. But as seeing how our life has come about through many random events. If evolution leads to a dominant species that can intellectually developed, a civilization can be eventually formed(note how Homo Sapiens have formed over the last 100,000 years). It's not necessarily true that 'intelligence has only appeared once'. We're just the first species to have taken advantage of the niche of using 'higher intelligence'.
"You can't characterize wormholes as being 'science fiction'. I hate this human attitude that we are at the forefront of technology and science."
Ok, so how would you go about tearing a hole in space-time and ripping it in another place?
"Why would we bother studying other cultures, people or even sending peace corps to Africa? Beyond that, it should be understood that these civilizations have reached a technological age of close to limitless resources and energy along with space travel."
Mmmk, well the reason that would be is because people of other cultures are people on the equal playing field that can understand and communicate with us and through them we can understand humanity as a whole. If such a civilization with limitless reasorces exists I want to see... well for one, evidence of them, and for two an reasoning of why they would communicate with what (to them) is a backward tribalistic planet.
"Again, they may be aware of our situation on this planet, and are waiting for the correct time to 'reveal' themselves."
And Jesus is waiting for the "right" time to come
*sarcasm*
"Extraterrestrials obviously wouldn't be communicating within the same radiofrequencies or spectrum as SETI is searching in."
Hm, first of all, that's a bit of special pleading, dont you think? But lets consider the amount of time radio frequency travels. Ughhh, I dont know that number, but that's a great deal. So much so, that it could be hundreds, if not thousands of years until any extraterrestrials actually start space travel on a major scale and achieved the awareness of our existance much later. So, unless they evolved millions of years before hand to turn off (for some reason) their radios and TVs and all other forms of communication which they knew they would pick up, to simply hide out in the dark reaches of space and wait for the "right" moment so that those communications wont wonder the galaxy and reach us (and apparently they had to also predict that we would develop the type of technological level that would catch their signals in the first place).
"If evolution leads to a dominant species that can intellectually developed, a civilization can be eventually formed(note how Homo Sapiens have formed over the last 100,000 years)."
Hm, if you didnt notice by my explanation of how we got here, the chances are pretty small considering that Darwinian natural selection generally conserns itself with physical things, at least for the most part of the evolutionary cycle. True, predators do generally have larger brains than their prey, but that's no sure fire guarantee that they'll start using tools and farming. If you look back what pushed us into intelligence was very rare and very unlikely.
"It's not necessarily true that 'intelligence has only appeared once'. We're just the first species to have taken advantage of the niche of using 'higher intelligence'."
Evidence?
But even if that's true, that that does solve the problem. Let's say that on some distant alien planet we have a race of giant smart turtle-like creatures. Now, in that case they are in the same trouble as other giant smart turtle-like creatures that might have existed on this planet- in that they, a) May not be taking advantage of their higher intelligence or b) May not have the particular anatomical traits (like hands and thumbs and upright walking) to take advantage of those parts. The problem still remains then, in 3.5 billion years of evolution, only one creature, by extraordinary chance, possessed true intelligence and acted upon it.
Ok, so how would you go about tearing a hole in space-time and ripping it in another place?
-I don't know, sorry.
"Why would we bother studying other cultures, people or even sending peace corps to Africa? Beyond that, it should be understood that these civilizations have reached a technological age of close to limitless resources and energy along with space travel."
Mmmk, well the reason that would be is because people of other cultures are people on the equal playing field that can understand and communicate with us and through them we can understand humanity as a whole. If such a civilization with limitless reasorces exists I want to see... well for one, evidence of them, and for two an reasoning of why they would communicate with what (to them) is a backward tribalistic planet.
-Well, extraterrestrial activity has sky rocketed ever since the end of World War II and the development of nuclear weapons. I don't know why they're hear, but it may be for reasons of maintaining peace and possible political/diplomatic ties. Think of it, we're in the Post-Reich era, the good side lost World War II, we're in absolute chaos.
"Again, they may be aware of our situation on this planet, and are waiting for the correct time to 'reveal' themselves."
And Jesus is waiting for the "right" time to come
*sarcasm*
-This situation is completely different. Human civilization is far from recognizing how 'simple' it is for life to have formed on our planet. Most still believe in god. Beyond that, any disclosure soon may lead to chaos, not to mention world governments wouldn't be favorable of it.
"Extraterrestrials obviously wouldn't be communicating within the same radiofrequencies or spectrum as SETI is searching in."
Hm, first of all, that's a bit of special pleading, dont you think? But lets consider the amount of time radio frequency travels. Ughhh, I dont know that number, but that's a great deal. So much so, that it could be hundreds, if not thousands of years until any extraterrestrials actually start space travel on a major scale and achieved the awareness of our existance much later. So, unless they evolved millions of years before hand to turn off (for some reason) their radios and TVs and all other forms of communication which they knew they would pick up, to simply hide out in the dark reaches of space and wait for the "right" moment so that those communications wont wonder the galaxy and reach us (and apparently they had to also predict that we would develop the type of technological level that would catch their signals in the first place).
-Well, as noted in the Disclosure Project, their means of traveling and communication are outside of electromagnetic means.
"If evolution leads to a dominant species that can intellectually developed, a civilization can be eventually formed(note how Homo Sapiens have formed over the last 100,000 years)."
Hm, if you didnt notice by my explanation of how we got here, the chances are pretty small considering that Darwinian natural selection generally conserns itself with physical things, at least for the most part of the evolutionary cycle. True, predators do generally have larger brains than their prey, but that's no sure fire guarantee that they'll start using tools and farming. If you look back what pushed us into intelligence was very rare and very unlikely.
"It's not necessarily true that 'intelligence has only appeared once'. We're just the first species to have taken advantage of the niche of using 'higher intelligence'."
Evidence?
But even if that's true, that that does solve the problem. Let's say that on some distant alien planet we have a race of giant smart turtle-like creatures. Now, in that case they are in the same trouble as other giant smart turtle-like creatures that might have existed on this planet- in that they, a) May not be taking advantage of their higher intelligence or b) May not have the particular anatomical traits (like hands and thumbs and upright walking) to take advantage of those parts. The problem still remains then, in 3.5 billion years of evolution, only one creature, by extraordinary chance, possessed true intelligence and acted upon it.
-I was arguing mainly against the preassumption that intelligent life would be 'improbable' on animal kingdoms of planets.
I'm going to have to admit, the case for extraterrestrial visitation isn't very good. However, it shouldn't be thrown away just because we as humans have some predisposition that we are technologically superior and our civilization on this planet is something special on this Universe. Such beliefs are rooted partially in religion. We've had people ranging from former Defence Ministers of Canada/Britain, to severals Astronauts to even former US Presidents supporting the concept of extraterrestrials visiting this planet. I've had my 'experiences' with it. The best source I refer to is the Disclosure Project. You should check their website out.
"Well, extraterrestrial activity has sky rocketed ever since the end of World War II and the development of nuclear weapons. I don't know why they're hear, but it may be for reasons of maintaining peace and possible political/diplomatic ties."
Hmmm, right. Ok, for one thing, just about almost every single "alien" sighting has been a grainy little photo... or a fake. Some of them have been top secret US technology which it was convinient for people to believe in UFOs than to disclose them. And then there's this thing called "waking dreams" which happen when you're under a great deal of stress... oh yeah and hypnosis is the worst form of anything to recall any "lost momeries."
"Think of it, we're in the Post-Reich era, the good side lost World War II, we're in absolute chaos."
Sorry, I havent read so much science fiction since the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy... and at least that was funny.
"This situation is completely different."
Not really, you claim that aliens will soon come without any evidence except for hear-say and personal experiences and so do the Jesus buffs.
"Beyond that, any disclosure soon may lead to chaos, not to mention world governments wouldn't be favorable of it."
And according to the Jesus buffs, when Jesus comes world governments wouldnt be favorable of it either...
"Well, as noted in the Disclosure Project, their means of traveling and communication are outside of electromagnetic means."
You're still not arguing against the point that there would be radio frequencies left over from the space civilization's earlier days before for some strange and mysterious reason they had to turn it off.
"I was arguing mainly against the preassumption that intelligent life would be 'improbable' on animal kingdoms of planets."
I am arguing on the improbability of any intelligent lifeforms ever visiting this planet even IF (and that's a big if) they ever had intelligence to use and build space ships.
"However, it shouldn't be thrown away just because we as humans have some predisposition that we are technologically superior and our civilization on this planet is something special on this Universe."
No, it should be thrown away because there isnt any evidence for it and no there is no predisposition that we are technologically superior, there is a predisposition that the chances of intelligent life evolving is minutely slim and space travel across vast distances is doubly so.
"We've had people ranging from former Defence Ministers of Canada/Britain, to severals Astronauts to even former US Presidents supporting the concept of extraterrestrials visiting this planet."
Are any of them rocket scientists, biologists, geologists, brain surgeons, that have examined all of the natural explanation to such phenomena? If no, then that is an appeal to authority, not exactly most specialized or intelligent authority.
The best source I have is Skeptic Magazine. They have several articles on their website in the reading room section dealing with UFOs.
Hmmm, right. Ok, for one thing, just about almost every single "alien" sighting has been a grainy little photo... or a fake. Some of them have been top secret US technology which it was convinient for people to believe in UFOs than to disclose them. And then there's this thing called "waking dreams" which happen when you're under a great deal of stress... oh yeah and hypnosis is the worst form of anything to recall any "lost momeries."
"Think of it, we're in the Post-Reich era, the good side lost World War II, we're in absolute chaos."
Sorry, I havent read so much science fiction since the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy... and at least that was funny.
"This situation is completely different."
Not really, you claim that aliens will soon come without any evidence except for hear-say and personal experiences and so do the Jesus buffs.
"Beyond that, any disclosure soon may lead to chaos, not to mention world governments wouldn't be favorable of it."
And according to the Jesus buffs, when Jesus comes world governments wouldnt be favorable of it either...
"Well, as noted in the Disclosure Project, their means of traveling and communication are outside of electromagnetic means."
You're still not arguing against the point that there would be radio frequencies left over from the space civilization's earlier days before for some strange and mysterious reason they had to turn it off.
"I was arguing mainly against the preassumption that intelligent life would be 'improbable' on animal kingdoms of planets."
I am arguing on the improbability of any intelligent lifeforms ever visiting this planet even IF (and that's a big if) they ever had intelligence to use and build space ships.
"However, it shouldn't be thrown away just because we as humans have some predisposition that we are technologically superior and our civilization on this planet is something special on this Universe."
No, it should be thrown away because there isnt any evidence for it and no there is no predisposition that we are technologically superior, there is a predisposition that the chances of intelligent life evolving is minutely slim and space travel across vast distances is doubly so.
"We've had people ranging from former Defence Ministers of Canada/Britain, to severals Astronauts to even former US Presidents supporting the concept of extraterrestrials visiting this planet."
Are any of them rocket scientists, biologists, geologists, brain surgeons, that have examined all of the natural explanation to such phenomena? If no, then that is an appeal to authority, not exactly most specialized or intelligent authority.
The best source I have is Skeptic Magazine. They have several articles on their website in the reading room section dealing with UFOs.
"Are any of them rocket scientists, biologists, geologists, brain surgeons, that have examined all of the natural explanation to such phenomena? If no, then that is an appeal to authority, not exactly most specialized or intelligent authority."
Yes, people ranging from having been on the moon, to astrophysicists, nuclear physcists and head of intelligence agencies have been a part of the Disclosure Project.
"Hmmm, right. Ok, for one thing, just about almost every single "alien" sighting has been a grainy little photo... or a fake"
Absolutely not, I think the best evidence lies in the NASA videos which led to NASA taking off their 24/7 broadcasting from the ISS/shuttle.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5070476612863849446&q=NASA
"You're still not arguing against the point that there would be radio frequencies left over from the space civilization's earlier days before for some strange and mysterious reason they had to turn it off."
I don't know about that, sorry.
"
And according to the Jesus buffs, when Jesus comes world governments wouldnt be favorable of it either...
"
Except in this case, you aren't dealing with people who are average everyday people. The Disclosure Project has witnesses from very high levels, yet you choose to ignore them all.
"And then there's this thing called "waking dreams" which happen when you're under a great deal of stress... oh yeah and hypnosis is the worst form of anything to recall any "lost momeries.""
The only thorough study of extraterrestrial abductions that I've read has been by John Mack, a Harvard Medical professor. I suggest you see what his input is:
http://www.ufoevidence.org/topics/JohnMack.htm
Well, as being a Holocaust skeptic, I find that big myths can be propagated easily. The Holocaust is the 'myth of humanity', even bigger than Jesus. I'm naturally inclined to be skeptical towards issues of certain extents. I
"Yes, people ranging from having been on the moon, to astrophysicists, nuclear physcists and head of intelligence agencies have been a part of the Disclosure Project."
So you're saying that Neil Armstrong saw a flying saucer? Can I get some evidence for this? Can I get any evidence for this? Do you even have any evidence?
"I don't know about that, sorry."
Then probably, wouldnt it be rational to tally that into the consideration as proof against any intelligent extraterrestrial life existing in the universe?
"Absolutely not, I think the best evidence lies in the NASA videos which led to NASA taking off their 24/7 broadcasting from the ISS/shuttle."
I very much enjoyed the blind sensationalism of that movie, it was screaming "This is the truth!" I'm pretty sure I've seen something like that on the undeniable truth of miracles... from the History Channel no less. Hm and of course it carries the mark of traditional psedo-science by claiming that all of the evidence is hidden by a giant conspiracy (NASA and the government) and that they have to "search the evidence for themselves." It's the same old tune... Yep, grainy images... the first five minutes looked like asteroids, asteroids with big fiery tales and a grainy orb shape.
"Except in this case, you aren't dealing with people who are average everyday people. The Disclosure Project has witnesses from very high levels, yet you choose to ignore them all."
And almost five billion people on this planet and multiples through time believe in God. Yet for some reason I chooce to ignore them all as well. It's like this- evidence. And the UFO buffs are no more average than anyone else.
"The only thorough study of extraterrestrial abductions that I've read has been by John Mack, a Harvard Medical professor. I suggest you see what his input is:
http://www.ufoevidence.org/topics/JohnMack.htm"
UFO-evidence. That sends out shock waves right there that that is not a balanced or scientific research. And what's sad is that you base it all your ideas from that? Here, something for you to enjoy-
http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/04-07-24.html
http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/04-11-19.html#Tunguska
http://www.skeptic.com/the_magazine/featured_articles/v11n4_alien_faces.html
"Well, as being a Holocaust skeptic, I find that big myths can be propagated easily. The Holocaust is the 'myth of humanity', even bigger than Jesus. I'm naturally inclined to be skeptical towards issues of certain extents."
Ok, let's ignore 6 million dead Jewish people for a minute including of grandparents of some of my friends who survived it... Consider the inconsistency- "myth of humanity" well hm, you deny or question certain things, like Jesus, and yet you willingly and hole heartedly accept the UFO phenomena, no less a phenomena than religion, using generally the same arguements, having the same anecdotal evidence and pictures of grilled cheese that kinda-sorta look like it, awaiting the same magical moment that you expect will happen very soon, claiming ignorance and insider knowledge at the same time, and using ad-hoc arguements for any lack of credible evidence... Yes, skepticism.
So here's a question for you, if aliens really wanted to observe us without being seen why wouldnt they put an invisibility shield around their saucers?
You misunderstand the point. Primeval earth was approximately 4000K
Atoms reach the ideal phase at high temperatures(meaning they react and break apart so quickly that it is a constant succession of reactions(which makes it very easy to form proteins through sheer chance) As the temperature decreased, it would eventually reach the point at which there were the highest amount of reactions, and yet the reactions still survived. This would create optimal circumstances for proteins and amino acids to be created by chance.
On some planets, A) the temperatures are so high that the molecules would never stay formed or B) the pressures are so high that the molecules never re break apart. THese are both problems because they are not the ideal situations for the formation of complex molecules by chance.
Prove the existence and usability of worm holes to me and I will then take that point seriously.
As for the Dwarf star analogy, life forms on such a planet would probably be made of a differnt base atom, because such an atom would have naturally stronger or weaker forces(and Carbon happened to be at the equilibrium point for the temps for our planet, but another planet, another distance might be different). Thus our gravity, even the UV rating of our sun would be drasstically different from theirs.
So you're saying that Neil Armstrong saw a flying saucer? Can I get some evidence for this? Can I get any evidence for this? Do you even have any evidence?
"I don't know about that, sorry."
Then probably, wouldnt it be rational to tally that into the consideration as proof against any intelligent extraterrestrial life existing in the universe?
"Absolutely not, I think the best evidence lies in the NASA videos which led to NASA taking off their 24/7 broadcasting from the ISS/shuttle."
I very much enjoyed the blind sensationalism of that movie, it was screaming "This is the truth!" I'm pretty sure I've seen something like that on the undeniable truth of miracles... from the History Channel no less. Hm and of course it carries the mark of traditional psedo-science by claiming that all of the evidence is hidden by a giant conspiracy (NASA and the government) and that they have to "search the evidence for themselves." It's the same old tune... Yep, grainy images... the first five minutes looked like asteroids, asteroids with big fiery tales and a grainy orb shape.
"Except in this case, you aren't dealing with people who are average everyday people. The Disclosure Project has witnesses from very high levels, yet you choose to ignore them all."
And almost five billion people on this planet and multiples through time believe in God. Yet for some reason I chooce to ignore them all as well. It's like this- evidence. And the UFO buffs are no more average than anyone else.
"The only thorough study of extraterrestrial abductions that I've read has been by John Mack, a Harvard Medical professor. I suggest you see what his input is:
http://www.ufoevidence.org/topics/JohnMack.htm"
UFO-evidence. That sends out shock waves right there that that is not a balanced or scientific research. And what's sad is that you base it all your ideas from that? Here, something for you to enjoy-
http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/04-07-24.html
http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/04-11-19.html#Tunguska
http://www.skeptic.com/the_magazine/featured_articles/v11n4_alien_faces.html
"Well, as being a Holocaust skeptic, I find that big myths can be propagated easily. The Holocaust is the 'myth of humanity', even bigger than Jesus. I'm naturally inclined to be skeptical towards issues of certain extents."
Ok, let's ignore 6 million dead Jewish people for a minute including of grandparents of some of my friends who survived it... Consider the inconsistency- "myth of humanity" well hm, you deny or question certain things, like Jesus, and yet you willingly and hole heartedly accept the UFO phenomena, no less a phenomena than religion, using generally the same arguements, having the same anecdotal evidence and pictures of grilled cheese that kinda-sorta look like it, awaiting the same magical moment that you expect will happen very soon, claiming ignorance and insider knowledge at the same time, and using ad-hoc arguements for any lack of credible evidence... Yes, skepticism.
So here's a question for you, if aliens really wanted to observe us without being seen why wouldnt they put an invisibility shield around their saucers?
"
So you're saying that Neil Armstrong saw a flying saucer? Can I get some evidence for this? Can I get any evidence for this? Do you even have any evidence?"
No, Edgar Mitchell, Gordon Cooper and Buzz Aldrin. In fact, Gordon Cooper even testified in front of the United Nations about his belief in extraterrestrial visitation. Check the Disclosure Project witness list. Not only has the Disclosure Project compiled hundreds of hours of witness testimony, when the organization was formed, high-level witnesses agreed to testify under oath in front of Congress about this.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6552475158249898710&q=Disclosure+Project
"UFO-evidence. That sends out shock waves right there that that is not a balanced or scientific research. And what's sad is that you base it all your ideas from that? Here, something for you to enjoy-"
Oh wow, you seem to not care about the fact he's an HMS professor. You can't debunk a study based on what websites decide to show interest in the study of academics. In fact, your skeptics magazine hasn't addressed any of his studies. In fact, they absolutely ignore people like John Mack and the Disclosure Project.
"Yep, grainy images... the first five minutes looked like asteroids, asteroids with big fiery tales and a grainy orb shape."
Perhaps if you would have watched the 3 hours of it you would have understood, or from noticing the closed to 90 degrees turn.
"like Jesus, and yet you willingly and hole heartedly accept the UFO phenomena, no less a phenomena than religion, using generally the same arguements, having the same anecdotal evidence and pictures of grilled cheese that kinda-sorta look like it,"
Hell, at least I don't believe in mythical genocides of 12 million that took place 60 years ago. Beyond that, you haven't failed to understand the importance of the NASA pho