Extraterrestrial life
Offline [i]If[/i] 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 [url=http://www.freethinkingteens.com/forum/freethinking_teens_community/freethinkers_debate/2215]this post,[/url] 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?
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!!!!:P 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
[quote]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.[/quote]
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. ;)
[quote=AgnosticAtheist1]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[/quote]
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.
[quote=AgnosticAtheist1]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[/quote]
"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.
[quote=Whitecrow]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.[/quote]
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.
[quote=Whitecrow]"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?
-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.
[/quote]
"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.
[quote=Whitecrow]"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.[/quote]
"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.
[quote=Whitecrow]"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?[/quote]
"
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 photos.
One huge issue is that you don't seem to mind to the slightest extent of some of the credentials of people supporting. I'm sorry, but people who have been a head of Defence Minister, an astronaut or a pilot have much higher credibility than some rural person. In fact, you haven't looked into this to the slightest extent.
"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?"
I don't know, it may possibly be a part of some intention for having us 'slightly' notice them or having humanity sometimes 'slightly' consider the existence of intelligent life out there.
[quote=AgnosticAtheist1]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.[/quote]
A huge reason of why Carbon is the basis for life on our planet is due to its ability of bonding to four atoms. In fact, carbovn is the most electronegative atom that can bond to four other atoms. Beyond that, it has a fairly high electronegativity. With regards to proteins and amino acids. Proteins are most efficient at 37 C and start denaturing after that. Denatured proteins are for the most part, absolutely useless. The best temperature for protein formation(by 'random' collisions) is around 37 C. Any higher than that, then the protein is either denatured or operating in a completely different manner.
"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."
A) Yes, denaturing of proteins is due to the breaking of non-covalent bonds. However, covalent bonds still require energy about 100 times that of room temperature to break.
I actually heavily considered the pressure situation. What IF by chance the Earth formed with a completely different amount of oxygen, hydrogen, nitrogen etc. In that case, the pressure at equilibrium would be completely different. So, we're very lucky.
"Prove the existence and usability of worm holes to me and I will then take that point seriously."
I can't, sorry.
"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-"
By the way, John Macks work isn't connected with "UFO-evidence" to the slightest extent. You obviously haven't looked into his work and discovered his neutrality and skepticism at the start.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2004/09/29/pulitzer_winner_is_killed_in_accident/
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/aliens/johnmack.html
You just write off one great person's work just because it happens to be published by a particular website. I don't see how his material is in anyway changed if it is published by UFO-evidence. In fact, non of Skeptics magazines studies of alien abductions comes anywhere close to John Mack's study of them.
"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."
And many brilliant scientists and about 5 billion people, including neurologists, evolutionists, historians, and people who study the paranormal believe in God and angels. Doesnt mean that that is true because there are many other intelligent people who say that it is all bunk. People tend to be automatically biased toward their worldview.
"http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6552475158249898710&q=Disclosure+Project"
That video is so full of conspiracy theories, speculation, and sensationalism it's a wonder why anyone would consider that a legitimate source of any information. Honestly... dont these engineer consider other things... like flukes, military aircraft, weather balloons, weather patterns... Na, it's aliens from a distant galaxy!
"Oh wow, you seem to not care about the fact he's an HMS professor."
Nope. That's an appeal to authority, a logical fallasy.
"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."
No, but it can raise alarm bells. And actually, yeah studies like those have been addressed, for one, you should realize how the image of aliens changed over the years due to popular culture, consider neulogist studies of waking dreams, consider the tests done to people that feel a presence in the room when they're a high electric field (like one caused by powerlines), consider pattern seeking in humans, consider how hypnosis actually implants ideas into peoples heads not brings back memories, consider that missing time is always occuring because humans generally dont have a good way of measuring it in their heads, consider everything before going off on some hype about how it has to be aliens who are here to teach us about peace and love and study us and have all this magical technology... As an atheist you probably have heard the saying- "Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence"- where is it? All you have is more appeals to authority.
"Perhaps if you would have watched the 3 hours of it you would have understood, or from noticing the closed to 90 degrees turn."
Balloons... They fly up, and a quick change in the wind wind makes them turn at a ninety degree angle. Never thought of that have you? And in any case that an arguement from ignorance, just because we cant think of a natural phenomena that does it it's automatically a flying saucer from a distant planet millions of miles away here to teach us about peace and love and observe us.
By the way, I've heard all of these claims, mind you. You're talking to a former UFO believer.
"Hell, at least I don't believe in mythical genocides of 12 million that took place 60 years ago."
That makes you less credible, not more.
"One huge issue is that you don't seem to mind to the slightest extent of some of the credentials of people supporting. I'm sorry, but people who have been a head of Defence Minister, an astronaut or a pilot have much higher credibility than some rural person. In fact, you haven't looked into this to the slightest extent."
And there's a guy at the Vatican claiming that he hears the voice of God in his head. Does that mean that God exists? Considering that that Defence Minister, the astronaut, and the pilot are all religious (which it's safe to assume they are) does it goes to say that there is a god? No. That's baseless appeal to authority. If I was a zoologist and if I claimed that I saw a pink elephant on a Safari and some aboriginals had a legend of one and there was a photo of kinda-sorta pinkish puff. Would that mean that pink elephants exist?
"I don't know, it may possibly be a part of some intention for having us 'slightly' notice them or having humanity sometimes 'slightly' consider the existence of intelligent life out there."
Or it may be more baseless speculation...
"http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2004/09/29/pulitzer_winner_is_killed_in_accident/
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/aliens/johnmack.html"
First of all, the first one is just a news article talking about his unfortunate passing (did aliens kill him?). And it talks about "widespread ridicule because of his work." So, that has to tell you something.
Second article indicates absolutely nothing that he's taking a speculative approach to these alien phenomena, he dismisses scientific testing because witness were "not asleep" well... how do people know? Sometimes we might be sleeping but not know it. That happened, to me, on several occasions. And there is this one thing about him going off into alien hybrids... ok, aside from the total idiocy of that statement (very much un-science like) what are the chances if lifeforms did evolve millions of miles away on a totally different planet (complete with very unlikely possibility of any intelligent life evolving and turning of radios before SETI found them) could they have the same or semiliarly the same sexual organs or at least sexual sperm and eggs as humans? Do you imagine the infinite improbabily of two space races mating because the other ones also evolved eggs and sperm? Can you also imagine the improbability of artificial insemination and having a living hybrid fetus? That's like inseminating a dog either artificially or naturally, it just wont happen! And inner aliens... how does that work? And where is he getting this stuff? The idea is... stupid for a lack of a better word. The whole interview reaks with alarm bells. And yeah there are scientific ways to explain this stuff the guy just doesnt accept it or follow it and believes in his quakery.
By the way, if you dont realize this, news are [i]not[/i] unbiased news sources.
"And many brilliant scientists and about 5 billion people, including neurologists, evolutionists, historians, and people who study the paranormal believe in God and angels. Doesnt" mean that that is true because there are many other intelligent people who say that it is all bunk. People tend to be automatically biased toward their worldview."
Well, that's why things should be studied clearly. The best example is the Holocaust. In reality, it never happened, but this is getting into another area. I appeal to their credentials because I find it amazing to see how a group of people would come forward and talk about how there is indeed a coverup. Especially when you have several NASA and Russian astronauts along with high defense officials talking about the issue. Some of these statements, aren't involved in belief but appear to be actual events and issues they've come across in their work. If they are wrong, they are probably lying or absolutely delusional.
"That video is so full of conspiracy theories, speculation, and sensationalism it's a wonder why anyone would consider that a legitimate source of any information. Honestly... dont these engineer consider other things... like flukes, military aircraft, weather balloons, weather patterns... Na, it's aliens from a distant galaxy!"
Well, there is much more testimony, some coming from the former Defense Ministers of Canada/Britain, Gordon Cooper, Edgar Mitchell. Oh, I also sent the wrong video to you, woohps. Also, the Disclosure Project never reported these aliens are coming from a distant galaxy. In fact, currently it's widely believed they may be coming from Sirius, a distance much less than a 'distant galaxy'. The three hour video I was talking about that provided evidence of bizarre crafts are the following:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5070476612863849446&q=NASA+UFO
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8524267568796529301&q=NASA+UFO
"Balloons... They fly up, and a quick change in the wind wind makes them turn at a ninety degree angle. Never thought of that have you? And in any case that an arguement from ignorance, just because we cant think of a natural phenomena that does it it's automatically a flying saucer from a distant planet millions of miles away here to teach us about peace and love and observe us."
Oh, I was referring to the NASA video that was filmed in space. See the above videos about it. But, what's a huge issue, is that the object appears to come in at a 'high speed' and then suddenly is 'deflected' by nearly 90 degrees, bah, you'll see it.
"And there's a guy at the Vatican claiming that he hears the voice of God in his head. Does that mean that God exists? Considering that that Defence Minister, the astronaut, and the pilot are all religious (which it's safe to assume they are) does it goes to say that there is a god? No. That's baseless appeal to authority. If I was a zoologist and if I claimed that I saw a pink elephant on a Safari and some aboriginals had a legend of one and there was a photo of kinda-sorta pinkish puff. Would that mean that pink elephants exist?"
They aren't talking about their 'beliefs', they're talking about their personal experience. However, with regards to appeal to authority, I actually see a difference between some farmer in a rural town and a Defense Minister of Canada. Not to mention people like Gordon Cooper and Edgar Mitchell have had extensive flying experience and technical background. Especially with Mitchell having his Ph.D in astrophysics from MIT. These are in no way... 'average' people.
"First of all, the first one is just a news article talking about his unfortunate passing (did aliens kill him?). And it talks about "widespread ridicule because of his work." So, that has to tell you something.
Second article indicates absolutely nothing that he's taking a speculative approach to these alien phenomena, he dismisses scientific testing because witness were "not asleep" well... how do people know? Sometimes we might be sleeping but not know it. That happened, to me, on several occasions. And there is this one thing about him going off into alien hybrids... ok, aside from the total idiocy of that statement (very much un-science like) what are the chances if lifeforms did evolve millions of miles away on a totally different planet (complete with very unlikely possibility of any intelligent life evolving and turning of radios before SETI found them) could they have the same or semiliarly the same sexual organs or at least sexual sperm and eggs as humans? Do you imagine the infinite improbabily of two space races mating because the other ones also evolved eggs and sperm? Can you also imagine the improbability of artificial insemination and having a living hybrid fetus? That's like inseminating a dog either artificially or naturally, it just wont happen! And inner aliens... how does that work? And where is he getting this stuff? The idea is... stupid for a lack of a better word. The whole interview reaks with alarm bells. And yeah there are scientific ways to explain this stuff the guy just doesnt accept it or follow it and believes in his quakery."
I know, I've concerned it as being weird as to how extraterrestrials would in anyway be similar to us on this planet. I don't know. But as being a Harvard Medical graduate, Mack must have had extension experience in biochemistry, biology, genetics etc. I don't see how his credentials would lead to... 'quakery'. With regards to this, probably really is playing a huge role, I can't address on how there can be these similarities, if they really do exist. However, as being a Harvard-trained psychiatrist and professor, he wasn't able to find much evidence linking many of the cases he interviewed to being 'delusions' or lies. Also, many of the questions you have asked about the psychological problems 'abductees' may have had have been addressed in his reports.
http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc14.htm
"By the way, if you dont realize this, news are not unbiased news sources."
Of course, as being a Nazi-sympathizer and Holocaust skeptic, I feel that news is absolutely biased in the West with regards to certain issues. However, it is biased AGAINST the extraterrestrial hypothesis in my opinion. It's sad to see how little attention has been given to the Disclosure Project.
But honestly, I don't think I can convince you, or many skeptics. Unfortunately, a huge portion of the extraterrestrial hypothesis does have some loopholes in it. Mainly as being to how they get here and why there isn't much physical evidence of them. I really liked the 3 hour video studying the 'NASA UFO's', you should watch it. I think a lot of it is speculation, but the video evidence and analysis is great.
"Well, that's why things should be studied clearly."
That's right, something the UFOlogists dont do.
"I appeal to their credentials because I find it amazing to see how a group of people would come forward and talk about how there is indeed a coverup."
It doesnt matter what a person's credentials are. I would point out the Discovery Institute, some of the quaks there have two Ph.D.s doesnt make them right. I would also appeal to the size of their bank accounts to point out that yeah, they are lying.
"Especially when you have several NASA and Russian astronauts along with high defense officials talking about the issue. Some of these statements, aren't involved in belief but appear to be actual events and issues they've come across in their work. If they are wrong, they are probably lying or absolutely delusional."
Citations?
"Well, there is much more testimony, some coming from the former Defense Ministers of Canada/Britain, Gordon Cooper, Edgar Mitchell. Oh, I also sent the wrong video to you, woohps. Also, the Disclosure Project never reported these aliens are coming from a distant galaxy. In fact, currently it's widely believed they may be coming from Sirius, a distance much less than a 'distant galaxy'."
And they all deduced that from waking dreams and blurry pictures? Amazing!
"Oh, I was referring to the NASA video that was filmed in space. See the above videos about it. But, what's a huge issue, is that the object appears to come in at a 'high speed' and then suddenly is 'deflected' by nearly 90 degrees, bah, you'll see it."
And how could they calculate it just from seeing some blurry NASA footage? Here's something more for you- http://skepdic.com/saucers.html
"They aren't talking about their 'beliefs', they're talking about their personal experience."
People personally experience angels and God... doesnt mean they are real.
"However, with regards to appeal to authority, I actually see a difference between some farmer in a rural town and a Defense Minister of Canada."
Does the Defense Minister of Canada have a Ph.D. in something or other?
"Not to mention people like Gordon Cooper and Edgar Mitchell have had extensive flying experience and technical background."
Not skepticism... pity.
"Especially with Mitchell having his Ph.D in astrophysics from MIT. These are in no way... 'average' people."
And the scientific community with even more Ph.D.s that concur that 98% of UFO sightings are nothing more than garbage and that there's no more evidence to believe that the other 2% is anything other than that too.
"I know, I've concerned it as being weird as to how extraterrestrials would in anyway be similar to us on this planet. I don't know. But as being a Harvard Medical graduate, Mack must have had extension experience in biochemistry, biology, genetics etc."
Actually his claims are very disputed by the scientific community at large.
By the way, just for you, here's some common sense- http://skepdic.com/aliens.html
"[i]John Mack
Another alien enthusiast was the Harvard psychiatrist Dr. John Mack (1929-2004), who wrote books about patients who claim to have been abducted by aliens. Many of Mack’s patients had been referred to him by Hopkins. Dr. Mack claimed that his psychiatric patients were not mentally ill (then why was he treating them?) and that he could think of no better explanation for their stories than that they were true. However, until someone produces physical evidence that abductions have occurred, it seems more reasonable to believe that Dr. Mack and his patients were deluded or frauds. Of course, the good doctor could hide behind academic freedom and the doctor/patient privacy privilege. He could make all the claims he wanted and refuse to back any of them up on the grounds that to do so would be to violate his patients' rights. He could then publish his stories and dare anyone to take away his academic freedom. He was in the position any cheat would envy: he could lie without fear of being caught.
Dr. Mack also appeared on the Nova "Alien Abductions" program. He claimed that his patients were otherwise normal people, which is a debatable point if his patients are anything like Hopkins' patients who appeared on the program. Mack also claimed that his patients have nothing to gain by making up their incredible stories. For some reason it is often thought by intelligent people that only morons are deceived or deluded and that if a person's motives can be trusted then his or her testimony can be trusted, too. While it is true that we are justified in being skeptical of a person's testimony if she has something to gain by the testimony (such as fame or fortune), it is not true that we should trust any testimony given by a person who has nothing to gain by giving the testimony. An incompetent observer, a drunk or drugged observer, a mistaken observer, or a deluded observer should not be trusted, even if he is as pure as the mountain springs once were. The fact that a person is kind and decent and has nothing to gain by lying does not make him or her immune to error in the interpretation of perceptions.
One thing Dr. Mack did not note was that his patients gain a lot of attention by being abductees. Furthermore, no mention was made of what he and Hopkins have to gain in fame and book sales by encouraging their clients to come up with more details of their "abductions". Mack received a $200,000 advance for his first book on alien abductions. Mack also benefited by publicizing and soliciting funds for his Center for Psychology and Social Change and his Program for Extraordinary Experience Research. Dr. Mack, by the way, was very impressed by the fact that his patients’ stories were very similar. He also believes in auras and has indicated that he believes that some of his ex-wife’s gynecological problems may have been due to aliens. Harvard kept him on staff in the name of academic freedom.[/i]"
"I don't see how his credentials would lead to... 'quakery'."
Refer to my statement about the Discovery Institute.
"With regards to this, probably really is playing a huge role, I can't address on how there can be these similarities, if they really do exist. However, as being a Harvard-trained psychiatrist and professor, he wasn't able to find much evidence linking many of the cases he interviewed to being 'delusions' or lies."
Really? Well... others did!
"However, it is biased AGAINST the extraterrestrial hypothesis in my opinion. It's sad to see how little attention has been given to the Disclosure Project."
Is that so??? Is that why I havent found any good scientific skepticism on the UFO phenomena on the History Channel (which has several shows dedicated to UFOs), the Discovery Channel, and of course, the movies and popular entertainment?
"But honestly, I don't think I can convince you, or many skeptics. Unfortunately, a huge portion of the extraterrestrial hypothesis does have some loopholes in it."
You mean [i]many[/i] loopholes.
"Mainly as being to how they get here and why there isn't much physical evidence of them."
Mystical powers and government conspiracy, right?
"I really liked the 3 hour video studying the 'NASA UFO's', you should watch it. I think a lot of it is speculation, but the video evidence and analysis is great."
Count how many skeptics do they have on that show and you'll find out how good analysis is.
Something to enjoy- http://skepdic.com/tialien.html
"And how could they calculate it just from seeing some blurry NASA footage? Here's something more for you- http://skepdic.com/saucers.html"
Perhaps if you would have seen the video you would know. People who are smart can generally tell from common sense that approximate angle of a turn.
"Citations?"
http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc1923.htm
http://www.space.com/news/spaceagencies/gordon_ufos_000728.html
Both of them are members of the Disclsoure Project.
"And the scientific community with even more Ph.D.s that concur that 98% of UFO sightings are nothing more than garbage and that there's no more evidence to believe that the other 2% is anything other than that too."
Where'd you get this poll from?
"Refer to my statement about the Discovery Institute."
Do you really think an HMS graduate and professor can have his study which took several years be debunked in a few paragraphs with someone who lacks comparable credentials? By the way, I'm not aware of his published reports trying to refer to patient confidentiality, however, he does refer to cases he has covered in his reports.
"And they all deduced that from waking dreams and blurry pictures? Amazing!"
I don't recall any member of the Disclosure Project ever noting waking dreams of blurry pictures.
You should really see the NASA videos I posted in the thread earlier. At least the first half an hour.
"Perhaps if you would have seen the video you would know. People who are smart can generally tell from common sense that approximate angle of a turn."
I did, and you're still arguing from ignorance.
"http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc1923.htm
http://www.space.com/news/spaceagencies/gordon_ufos_000728.html
Both of them are members of the Disclsoure Project."
By this time, the words "Disclosure Project" subtract from their credibility not add. Now let's see now, firstly, that's not the tons of witnesses you've been talking about. Secondly, here's a nice quote-
"I have no firsthand experience, but I have had the opportunity to meet with people from three countries who in the course of their official duties claim to have had personal firsthand encounter experiences." -Edgar Mitchell from that link. Oh and-
"Mr. E. MITCHELL: From what I now understand and have experienced and seen the evidence for, I think the evidence is very strong, and large portions of it are classified.
MURPHY: Classified by whom?
Mr. E. MITCHELL: By governments.
MURPHY: You're saying it-it-it not only likely happened, but there's been a cover-up?
Mr. E. MITCHELL: Oh I--I think if it has happened the way it seems to be, there's definitely been a cover-up."
"Lots of evidence but it's classified." Wow! That's the classic conspiracy theory-cover-up ruse of course they have "special knowledge" about it. You're sitting in the biggest pile of bullshit but fail to smell it.
As for Gordon Cooper Touts I just have the same counterpoints- First, the cover-up... yeah. Then, just because he's an astronaut, doesnt mean he's actually qualified to discuss such things as neurology or popular culture or the workings of the human psyche. And of course there was money to be made from that book, also tell me, does "Leap of Faith" in the title hint at anything? Like... maybe that UFO phenomena is, like I've been refering to, in many ways like a religion. You have faith, you simply have faith, and no matter how much I show how weak your evidence is, you accept UFOs because of that faith.
"Where'd you get this poll from?"
Every single show on UFOs on the History Channel and the Discovery Channel. Oh and- http://skepdic.com/ufos_ets.html
"Do you really think an HMS graduate and professor can have his study which took several years be debunked in a few paragraphs with someone who lacks comparable credentials?"
Appeal to authority again. Havent you exhausted the list of logical fallacies yet? And yes, actually, yes because it doesnt matter how many years of study was put in or who has credentials, one only needs a few good points. Oh and, that's not actually just one guy's words, that's the words of the scientific community. If you scroll down, you'll find links to as many articles that you can get the stuff from.
"I don't recall any member of the Disclosure Project ever noting waking dreams of blurry pictures."
Well... maybe they should.
"You should really see the NASA videos I posted in the thread earlier. At least the first half an hour."
Been there, done that.
Exactly the point. We're very lucky, and thus it's equally unlikely to have happened in any other place as well. Thus the odds are against it having happened near us.
[quote=Whitecrow]"Perhaps if you would have seen the video you would know. People who are smart can generally tell from common sense that approximate angle of a turn."
I did, and you're still arguing from ignorance.
"http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc1923.htm
http://www.space.com/news/spaceagencies/gordon_ufos_000728.html
Both of them are members of the Disclsoure Project."
By this time, the words "Disclosure Project" subtract from their credibility not add. Now let's see now, firstly, that's not the tons of witnesses you've been talking about. Secondly, here's a nice quote-
"I have no firsthand experience, but I have had the opportunity to meet with people from three countries who in the course of their official duties claim to have had personal firsthand encounter experiences." -Edgar Mitchell from that link. Oh and-
"Mr. E. MITCHELL: From what I now understand and have experienced and seen the evidence for, I think the evidence is very strong, and large portions of it are classified.
MURPHY: Classified by whom?
Mr. E. MITCHELL: By governments.
MURPHY: You're saying it-it-it not only likely happened, but there's been a cover-up?
Mr. E. MITCHELL: Oh I--I think if it has happened the way it seems to be, there's definitely been a cover-up."
"Lots of evidence but it's classified." Wow! That's the classic conspiracy theory-cover-up ruse of course they have "special knowledge" about it. You're sitting in the biggest pile of bullshit but fail to smell it.
As for Gordon Cooper Touts I just have the same counterpoints- First, the cover-up... yeah. Then, just because he's an astronaut, doesnt mean he's actually qualified to discuss such things as neurology or popular culture or the workings of the human psyche. And of course there was money to be made from that book, also tell me, does "Leap of Faith" in the title hint at anything? Like... maybe that UFO phenomena is, like I've been refering to, in many ways like a religion. You have faith, you simply have faith, and no matter how much I show how weak your evidence is, you accept UFOs because of that faith.
"Where'd you get this poll from?"
Every single show on UFOs on the History Channel and the Discovery Channel. Oh and- http://skepdic.com/ufos_ets.html
"Do you really think an HMS graduate and professor can have his study which took several years be debunked in a few paragraphs with someone who lacks comparable credentials?"
Appeal to authority again. Havent you exhausted the list of logical fallacies yet? And yes, actually, yes because it doesnt matter how many years of study was put in or who has credentials, one only needs a few good points. Oh and, that's not actually just one guy's words, that's the words of the scientific community. If you scroll down, you'll find links to as many articles that you can get the stuff from.
"I don't recall any member of the Disclosure Project ever noting waking dreams of blurry pictures."
Well... maybe they should.
"You should really see the NASA videos I posted in the thread earlier. At least the first half an hour."
Been there, done that.[/quote]
Hey, since you have seen the 3 hour NASA video can you address some the particular videos shown?
"I did, and you're still arguing from ignorance."
I still don't get it, you haven't addressed the particular issues in the video, are you sure you've seen the two I've been talking about?
"By this time, the words "Disclosure Project" subtract from their credibility not add. Now let's see now, firstly, that's not the tons of witnesses you've been talking about. Secondly, here's a nice quote-"
Why would is subtract from their credibility? Also, with regards to the ton of witnesses, refer to the Disclosure Project list.
http://www.disclosureproject.org/aboutexecsumm.htm
Numerous people from that list have had good careers and have been in high positions, that's why I would appeal to their 'authority'. For one thing, if they had the slightest idea that what they may be promoting is a 'delusion' of some sort, then they wouldn't join the Disclosure Project and be known throughout history as 'hoaxsters' or lunatics. People such as Edgar Mitchell, Gordon Cooper, Paul Hellyer have an idea of how the government operates with regards to these issues and can infer from some of these. I just find it highly unlikely they would start such a project as a hoax to fool others.
What I don't like about your skepticism, is that you'll suddenly associate the Disclosure Project with UFO claims done by rural Alabama farmers. I'm sorry, but they're not associated. Yes, many extraterrestrial claims turn out to be hoaxes and false. However, people who have been known to do great things in history wouldn't ruin their character to start hoaxes.
Also, why does the skepdics not give the same credence to Holocaust witnesses(aka. assuming all of them are liars for no absolute reason)?
"I still don't get it, you haven't addressed the particular issues in the video, are you sure you've seen the two I've been talking about?"
Do you know what an argument from ignorance is? I'm sure you do. An argument from ignorance is saying that just because we dont know what something is, therefore it's object A. Be it God or UFO or ghosts or whatever. Saying that a ball of light, or a big donut looking thing, or whatever can turn at a 90 degree angle (and let's say that we cant definitively say that it isnt a hoax or a ballon or a government aircraft or a light in the sky caused by geological forces), it's automatically a UFO. You've got no evidence that that's a UFO, you've got no evidence (aside from science fiction novels) that aliens from outer space are actually visiting this planet.
"Numerous people from that list have had good careers and have been in high positions, that's why I would appeal to their 'authority'. For one thing, if they had the slightest idea that what they may be promoting is a 'delusion' of some sort, then they wouldn't join the Disclosure Project and be known throughout history as 'hoaxsters' or lunatics. People such as Edgar Mitchell, Gordon Cooper, Paul Hellyer have an idea of how the government operates with regards to these issues and can infer from some of these. I just find it highly unlikely they would start such a project as a hoax to fool others."
Or... they honestly accept UFOs as gospel truth without any serious reason to analyze the stuff they're believing or to accept the natural explanations for sightings/abductions. It's much like every other psedo-science be it creationism, alternative medicine, astrology, holocaust deniers, you name it, there is a small number who are in it for the money, others for the publicity, and there are some that are staunch and fanatical believers which no matter how much you argue you cant disprove because they simply believe (and continue using the same lame arguements). But you dont have evidence, just explainable phenomena. What's more is that you claim a government cover-up (while the government came up and showed that their investigations have found nothing!). And no matter what the government says or releases or what other people will say or release it will simply not disprove people because they will say that they are just hiding it, or covering more up. That's not just plainly insane, it's unscientific. When you've got a base thinking that an agent with infinite power is hiding something it violates the notion of Occam's razor. You could think of anything! And anything that's shown, revealed, exposed, they would claim that they are using it as more cover and that violates the concept of falsifiability. UFOlogy, UFO sightings, the Disclosure Project, is, at it's best a psedoscience and it's a pity that people are dragged in and spend money believing in that junk.
"What I don't like about your skepticism, is that you'll suddenly associate the Disclosure Project with UFO claims done by rural Alabama farmers. I'm sorry, but they're not associated. Yes, many extraterrestrial claims turn out to be hoaxes and false. However, people who have been known to do great things in history wouldn't ruin their character to start hoaxes."
What I dont like about your skepticism is that you dont have any. For some reason you accept claims by rural Alabama farmers with Ph.D.s and time in the military and yet fail to take into account the amounts of evidence (none) that you have neither do you take into account that people, regardless of experience, degrees, can be wrong. May I remind you the Descent From Darwinism by the Discovery Institute (I have more experience in getting down and dirty with Creationists if you havent realized) has a list of 400 (or maybe 500) university professors who claim to support Intelligent Design or Creationism or at least Theistic Evolution. Well... that seems like an impressive list until you realize that only a few people (Behe at least) have the experience with this stuff (and same in yoru case) while others are theologians, lawyers, philosphers, and just non-scientists. And that 99% of the scientific community affirms evolution as evolution. You've got the same deal here, you've got a few decent men (who none-the-less have been disproven by other scientists) and others are...... military people and astronaunts. Now, military people may know a great deal about flying or sailing or guarding intallations that have government tests, but they are completely ignorant when it comes to the facts of neurology, socializing, skepticism, and science really. And if you insist on basing your arguments by credentials, I could point to the scientific community at large that denies that UFOs are nothing more than a phenomena of modern popular imagination.
"Also, why does the skepdics not give the same credence to Holocaust witnesses(aka. assuming all of them are liars for no absolute reason)?"
Because Holocaust deniers follow the same psedoscience as the UFO buffs... I want to say worse but I dont want to drag my ethics and personal sentiment into a scientific discussion- http://skepdic.com/holocaustdenial.html
"For some reason you accept claims by rural Alabama farmers with Ph.D.s "
I don't think any members of the Disclosure Project were rural Alabama farmers. Also, I only take into account witness testimony from people of authority and reputation. People such as Paul Hellyer, Edgar Mitchell, Gordon Cooper had very good careers. Not to mention, the two latter, have extensive scientific, technical and flying backgrounds. It just seems illogical they would risk their reputation to consent
"Do you know what an argument from ignorance is? I'm sure you do. An argument from ignorance is saying that just because we dont know what something is, therefore it's object A. Be it God or UFO or ghosts or whatever. Saying that a ball of light, or a big donut looking thing, or whatever can turn at a 90 degree angle (and let's say that we cant definitively say that it isnt a hoax or a ballon or a government aircraft or a light in the sky caused by geological forces), it's automatically a UFO. You've got no evidence that that's a UFO, you've got no evidence (aside from science fiction novels) that aliens from outer space are actually visiting this planet."
Of course it isn't direct evidence for aliens from outer space. However, the fact that crafts can fly outside our known technology near our planet really has something to say for it.
"But you dont have evidence, just explainable phenomena. What's more is that you claim a government cover-up (while the government came up and showed that their investigations have found nothing!). And no matter what the government says or releases or what other people will say or release it will simply not disprove people because they will say that they are just hiding it, or covering more up."
Well, Disclosure Project members have testified to it. Not to mention, if they do achieve their goal of being able to testify in front of Congress, they would be committing perjury(if lying) and would have their reputations ruined.
"UFOlogy, UFO sightings, the Disclosure Project, is, at it's best a psedoscience and it's a pity that people are dragged in and spend money believing in that junk."
In fact, you still appear to have not watched the videos.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5070476612863849446&q=NASA+UFO
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8524267568796529301&q=NASA+UFO
I would like to see some of your skeptical input regarding them.
I'm going to have to say, the Disclosure Project isn't scientific at all, it's just a collection of witness testimony. Nor can any form of UFOlogy be, unless you want to study how it is technically impossibly for our crafts to travel as their crafts.
"I could point to the scientific community at large that denies that UFOs are nothing more than a phenomena of modern popular imagination."
Well, I wouldn't blame them, based on what we known. I have doubts most are aware of the Disclosure Project or have seen some of the NASA clips(I want to see your feedback with regards to this). In fact, I was once talking to a few physics and math professors about this at a Department open house, one thing they agreed on was that they felt UFOlogy was absolute crap because by human nature information would come out by people in the government who are aware of what is going on. They obviously didn't know about the Disclosure Project.
Me and my dad saw a UFO, my dad has doubts that what we saw was 'real'. That may partially be due to the fact that if what we saw was 'real', it would make my dad's work at JPL look like a joke. But ya, this is getting into another thing.
Well, I can point to how a majority of the Historical community thinks the Holocaust took place.
"What I dont like about your skepticism is that you dont have any."
Oh no, I believe heavily in skepticism. Lets take an event like the Holocaust. Once the wagon starts going down the hill, it's hard to stop. Look at what has happened: 1. People are being arrested for logically debating it, 2. Israel exists and gets extreme financial support, 3. Zion has taken over the West, 4. The Germans were the good side of WW II, but we see them as absolutely evil. etc.
It's for the good of mankind at this point, that we avoid having hoaxes that take part . However, you take things to a completely different extent. You assume the Disclosure Project HAS TO BE a lie. In fact you'll point at the lack of evidence for UFOlogy and the alleged government conspiracy to coverup evidence. What about Holocaust claims that the Germans blasted gas chambers at Auschwitz and destroyed documentation of how their gas chambers operated before they lost their bid for global liberation?
"May I remind you the Descent From Darwinism by the Discovery Institute (I have more experience in getting down and dirty with Creationists if you havent realized) has a list of 400 (or maybe 500) university professors who claim to support Intelligent Design or Creationism or at least Theistic Evolution."
I'm not surprised, a majority of the Doctors in the United States believe in God. However, trying to create a hoax about UFOlogy or Extraterrestrial visitation is to a completely different extent.
"Because Holocaust deniers follow the same psedoscience as the UFO buffs... "
Holocaust deniers don't follow any 'pseudoscience' nor is it related to 'UFO buffs'. In fact, the more appropriate word is Holocaust skeptics.
Yes, I've seen Michael Shermer's crap on 'Holocaust Denial'. In fact, he debated one of the top Holocaust skeptics a few years ago and refuses to sell that debate tape, partially cause he completely 'lost it'.
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v16/v16n1p22_Weber.html
http://www.noontidepress.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=154
Not to mention, his book absolutely ignores and misrepresents Holocaust skeptic views.
http://vho.org/GB/Books/dth/
Essentially, I would consider a lot of what comes from the SkepDic dictionary as being... Judeo-fied propaganda shit.
"I don't think any members of the Disclosure Project were rural Alabama farmers. Also, I only take into account witness testimony from people of authority and reputation. People such as Paul Hellyer, Edgar Mitchell, Gordon Cooper had very good careers. Not to mention, the two latter, have extensive scientific, technical and flying backgrounds. It just seems illogical they would risk their reputation to consent"
Did they lose their jobs over it?
"Of course it isn't direct evidence for aliens from outer space. However, the fact that crafts can fly outside our known technology near our planet really has something to say for it."
So can Winged Pegasi. But you're not arguing that Winged Pegasi exist.
"Well, Disclosure Project members have testified to it."
And the pope has testified that there is a god, so did all the archbisops, priests, theologians, imams, rabbis, brahmas, monks, nuns, saints, and five billion other people. Many of which are creadible. Yet you still dont believe in God. Why? Evidence. Same here, you're not being consistent... or... rational for that matter.
"Not to mention, if they do achieve their goal of being able to testify in front of Congress, they would be committing perjury(if lying) and would have their reputations ruined."
Or they might actually be believing something without evidence but whole heartedly still believing in it! Skeptics have long examined and debunked their claims, sorry.
"Well, I wouldn't blame them, based on what we known. I have doubts most are aware of the Disclosure Project or have seen some of the NASA clips(I want to see your feedback with regards to this). In fact, I was once talking to a few physics and math professors about this at a Department open house, one thing they agreed on was that they felt UFOlogy was absolute crap because by human nature information would come out by people in the government who are aware of what is going on. They obviously didn't know about the Disclosure Project."
I now know about the Disclosure Project and it's still crap. Honestly, if there were UFOs, it would be the scientists having a concensus not the government. By the way, what exactly would you like me to address on the NASA clips?
"Me and my dad saw a UFO, my dad has doubts that what we saw was 'real'. That may partially be due to the fact that if what we saw was 'real', it would make my dad's work at JPL look like a joke. But ya, this is getting into another thing."
Are you sure it wasnt a winged pegasus.
"However, you take things to a completely different extent. You assume the Disclosure Project HAS TO BE a lie. In fact you'll point at the lack of evidence for UFOlogy and the alleged government conspiracy to coverup evidence."
No, they just dont have any evidence. You dont have any evidence. You're still using the same fallacies I pointed out to you. That's why the Disclosure Project doesnt hold any water.
"I'm not surprised, a majority of the Doctors in the United States believe in God. However, trying to create a hoax about UFOlogy or Extraterrestrial visitation is to a completely different extent."
And there's a number of people who completely believe in UFOs regardless of the evidence. And as I said, it's not just a "hoax" it's partly a hoax, partly misintepretation, and a large core of staunch solid believers.
Now on the Holocaust- I dont want to get off topic here. This is about UFOs. If you wish to debate the Holocaust create a new thread.
"Are you sure it wasnt a winged pegasus."
I don't know what a winged pegasus is. But it was just a flying 'disc', it appeared to be very large and flying slowly. However, one huge issue was that it was flying in night and unlighted, it isn't distinguishable easily when looking at the night sky.
"Did they lose their jobs over it?"
No, it appears that practically all Disclosure Project members testify after they have retired.
"And there's a number of people who completely believe in UFOs regardless of the evidence. And as I said, it's not just a "hoax" it's partly a hoax, partly misintepretation, and a large cor'e of staunch solid believers."
I'm going to have to admit, most of 'UFOlogy' isn't very credible. With regards to witness testimony, I usually take into account only testimony from the Disclosure Project, I seriously don't care about the millions of other witneses that claim to have seen UFO's. Especially when Project Blue Book has reported that most such events are explainable.
"So can Winged Pegasi. But you're not arguing that Winged Pegasi exist."
lol
"No, they just dont have any evidence. You dont have any evidence. You're still using the same fallacies I pointed out to you. That's why the Disclosure Project doesnt hold any water."
Well, yes, it is partially like the Holocaust, no evidence. The only evidence I can sight would be the NASA videos, but that would only prove that there are anomalous objects flying.
"I now know about the Disclosure Project and it's still crap. Honestly, if there were UFOs, it would be the scientists having a concensus not the government. By the way, what exactly would you like me to address on the NASA clips?"
Oh, the NASA clips. There is that one video, with three objects:
1. High speed turn
2. Escapes gravity
3. Travels 1,000 miles and goes past horizon in about 4 seconds.
"Or they might actually be believing something without evidence but whole heartedly still believing in it! Skeptics have long examined and debunked their claims, sorry."
Well, a huge issue with the Disclosure Project, is that they really haven't been addressed. I am well aware of Skeptics debunking UFO incidents before, especially among the normal population. However, the Disclosure Project is mainly involved in having witnesses testify about the 'coverup'. Just because a majority of the UFO claims among the 'general population' have been debunkd, doesn't necessarily mean the same can be said about Disclosure Project witnesses.
"I don't know what a winged pegasus is. But it was just a flying 'disc', it appeared to be very large and flying slowly. However, one huge issue was that it was flying in night and unlighted, it isn't distinguishable easily when looking at the night sky."
A Pegasus is a flying horse in Greek Mythology. Maybe it had a halo around it... There. How do you not know that it was not a pegasus with a glowing halo around it and instead insist that it was a UFO?
"No, it appears that practically all Disclosure Project members testify after they have retired."
I dont mind spending my retirement getting famous by lying... Wait, no, I have ethics. But then again they might actually be true believers and just decided to come out of the closet (so to say) after retirement. Yet in any case there's no reputation threat!
"I'm going to have to admit, most of 'UFOlogy' isn't very credible."
Great! We're getting somewhere, now why do you believe it?
"With regards to witness testimony, I usually take into account only testimony from the Disclosure Project, I seriously don't care about the millions of other witneses that claim to have seen UFO's. Especially when Project Blue Book has reported that most such events are explainable."
The difference between Farmer Joe seeing a UFO and Pilot Bill seeing a UFO is really only that Pilot Bill knows how to fly a plane. You're still using arguments from authority and as I said there's no more reason for you to believe Pilot Bill as Farmer Joe, long flight hours do not give you skepticism or the knowledge of geological, astronomical, and meterological forces that scientists have.
"lol"
Maybe it was the Flying Spaghetti Monster... But honestly, here's what you're and the video is saying- there's a glowing orb thing in the sky, we cannot explain it, therefore it has to be a UFO. But why? That could be angels... or flying pegasi or... Thor... or any of those unexplainable things. Or explainable things. The point I'm trying to make is that with negative evidence is not evidence for UFOs.
"Well, yes, it is partially like the Holocaust, no evidence."
If, as you claim, there's no evidence for the Holocaust and therefore you dont believe it. (And I can venture you dont believe in God because of the lack of evidence). Then why do you believe in UFOs for that same lack of evidence? You're being inconsistent.
"1. High speed turn"
First of all, I'd like to know how that guy did the calculations of how far that object was away and how fast it was traveling while having only one perspective of it. It could of been as speck of dust really close by. Or better yet, since the image was so grainy and black and white, it could of been something wrong with the camera or it could of just been some natural light illusion. Furthermore that guy did not present any evidence that a high speed turn is a UFO, in fact he really presented only negative evidence why it's not a meteor or space shuddle. For all we know it could have been a pegasus. The burden of proof still lies unfulfilled.
"2. Escapes gravity"
See above and below.
"3. Travels 1,000 miles and goes past horizon in about 4 seconds."
Kinda like the first one except that that even more looked like a fuzzy image. Even the guy himself said the picture was grainy. But anyway what really sparked my notice was how the spark did not travel at a curve all the way through the map, it traveled straight first and started bending later until it disappeared at a hazy area of the picture that made it look like the horizon. Also his refutation of why it wasnt a camera fluke or a grain of dust just because it "disappears at the edge of the horizon" isnt that convincing. A blurry camera fluke could have done it just by chance.
"Well, a huge issue with the Disclosure Project, is that they really haven't been addressed."
Same funky lights in the sky. The Flying Pegasi must really be having a migration or something...
"However, the Disclosure Project is mainly involved in having witnesses testify about the 'coverup'."
There's always a 'coverup.'
"Just because a majority of the UFO claims among the 'general population' have been debunkd, doesn't necessarily mean the same can be said about Disclosure Project witnesses."
Oh... and why not?
Excellent Skeptism on WhiteCrow's Part. All I have to add is that it isn't the pegasi or whatever. I have absolute faith that it was either the flying spaghetti monster or the Invisible Pink Unicorn. And they are traveling to give us high quality toaster- ovens half- off. Oig. *Sarcasm*
(The OIG is a trend started at another forum, and it stands for Oh I'm God. Possibly offensive? Maybe. Best typo ever? Absolutely.)
Oh, and should we start the "Holocaust Skepticism" or whatever thread? Seems like a waste of time, but really, skepticism can lead to maintaining truth. Holocaust denial is sad. What is there to gain, aside from a minute historical detail? We should learn from mistakes. And I would like to see what you have to say concerning Hitler's nonviolence and Mein Kampf.
I think aliens do exist somewhere. If they do, they might be so advanced we can't imagine it. For example, suppose they pre-existed the Big Crunch and possibly deliberately caused the Big Bang. They could have survived through a multitude of universes developing their technology and sending probes some kind of gravity-distortion device to rupture a singularity and cause a Big Bang. Hell, the Bible might be halfway real and all the refrences to God were ignorant refrences to an advanced alien race that was messing around with early humans.
If that was the case, I'd die from laughing.
I just occured to me that once a baby is born on the moon, humans will be extraterrestrial. Think about it.
EDIT: Or in space.
[quote=Whitecrow]If that was the case, I'd die from laughing.[/quote]
http://kurtsaxon.com/atheist013.htm
Read it and laugh. He makes a pretty good case.
I think it's completely possible for there to be life on other planets, when you factor in the fact that we're just one solar system, in a universe with [i]a lot[/i] (to avoid arguement if I estimate incorrectly). Of course I don't believe that life on other planets is nessacerily green, slimy, with 2 dozen eyes and an antenna, (like movies and books make us think), but maybe even slightly like ourselves, as long as there is a similar atmosphere to ours, which is completely possible.
Think about it, organisms thrive in warm, humid temperatures. (I read in "Beginning Evolution" a theory that life started in a small pond when an organism was created by the warm humid temperature. If this is true, then if there was a planet with atmospheric conditions like our own, it is possible that life was created the same way, and it evolved through time (just like us), and there are similar beings out there somewhere.
I am 100% certain there has to be life on other planets. (Obviously opnion not fact for the record)
And I also do believe in the fact that they probably feel emotions too. I'm sure not to the extent that we do..but like animals on earth I'm sure they experience curiosity (obviously because that's part of the aging process), anger (I'm sure it's survival of the fittest so i'm sure organisms get pissed at other organisms), and so on.
Perhaps they would, but perhaps not. See, aggression is just a biological shortcut. You could figure out all the conclusions that emotions represent if you are smart enough. Any fool could know he has to go get food for himself, but things like teamwork and compassion can be arrived at logically also. They might just be smart enough to figure it all out.
I agree a lot with what you are saying. However, they type of consiousness that we posses is nothing (to our knowledge) matched by that of the worlds other inhabitants. It would obviously be insane to say that there is no life existant in another solar system, that I definetly agree upon. But, we breathe oxygen, as I hope that everyone is aware of, so who is to say that life on another planet does not breathe methane, and are more animal like, not humanoid. Our emotions may be the source of curousity to other life. Maybe the supposed sightings are because other life is so interested in the emtions and ways of human life. I believe there may have been actual UFO sightings that were not ficticious. But, on the other hand, how do we know if another form of life has the technology to travel through space to a different solar system. Maybe their intelligence is inferior to ours. Man, listen to me. I sound like an oxy-moron. Sorry for ranting. I guess that I am just as curious about the subject as you are
~John (the new guy)
I am neither here nor there when it comes to extraterrestrial life. There aren't really enough theological disruptions for me, but it is annoying that the History channel does a special every few weeks on "the God of the Exodus was really ET." Please, that is not history.
Realistically speaking, the universe is so large that superficially, it looks like life must result from sheer volume, but the number of required variables falling in place for the modern definition of life (even if it is not carbon based or terrestrial planet bound) along with the corresponding probability of each of those variables is so small that there is a rational limit to expectable extraterrestrial life.
Assuming the evolutionary model, I would "guesetimate" that the expectable upper limit for other life in the galaxy would be 2 or 3, certiantly not billions.
[quote=Darkfox]Everything is random.[/quote]Natural selection isn't random.
Evolution is not random, because natural selection is not random.
Even if it (natural selection) is not "random" in a literalist sense, it is certaintly not predictable in a human sense, which is how random is defined.
Besides, even if natural selection is not random, mutation, by definition, is. So at best natural selection acts as a natural seive of random information, so everything really is random, just a question of how far back you look.
PS information cannot be seived out with natural selection until the protein is functional (not optimal, just functional.) With the level of protein complexity involved, that means more or less a complete protein with a specific animo acid order. Natural selection combined with mutation is not a satisfactory source of new information.
[quote=Apokalipse]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)[/quote]
wrong
i do think that life, in some form, probably exists on other planets. Multi-cellular life, still fairly possible. Intelligent life? Very unlikely, but not impossible.
However, every story you have ever heard about UFOs, governments conspiracies, and secret technology is bullshit. All these ufos turn out to be fake. There isn't any evidence at all that there are aliens. As for the supposed abductees? Well, apparently, they claim that they hav e their mind wiped, but that a special kind of "therapist" (or bullshitter) canunlock those memories. Yeah, right.I have seen videos of these sessions, and the therapists plant the ideas in the peoples mind. They are subconsiously making shit up. They weren't abducted.
These UFO buffs are very similar to the religious right, as in they seem to have been born without common sense. Chances are, if there is intelligent life, it is too far away to travel to and from.