What is with this alien stuff?

[Duffy]

After watching a space doco on payTV, it occurred to me that I have always dismissed the alien stuff as a hoax. But this doco has made me think, why can't there be UFOs? Why should I assume that because our technology is limited that other life supporting planets would be the same. I'm still not convinced about alien contact because they are so 'cornfield ridiculous' but do others disagree? Do others think aliens have made contact and abducted people (thinking anal probes)? Because it just doesn't sound plausible...so far.

[SchizoDeluxe]

I believe that other life forms do exist outside of our solar system but I do not believe they have made contact with us. The UFO sightings being reported are for the most part either hoaxes, illusions or just a case of mistaken identity but the few that are legit are simply top secret military aircraft performing routine tests, area51 is not a UFO hub but a "not so secret" military base for new aircraft. Many people like to spin that story but claiming it's done with alien technology but it's not, it's just a military base for things like the stealth fighter which was created there. People ask why so secretive, the answer is pretty obvious really and it has nothing to do with aliens. The probability of aliens visiting us are pretty remote, even if they had far superior technology to us with abilities to travel at lightspeed, people don't realize just how big the universe is. We sit at the edge of the milky way galaxy, it would be like finding a needle in a haystack. But I do believe there is life out there, it just seems too unlikely that we are the only place in the entire universe with life. But if we are alone, WOW!

[GenericBox]

Of course because it doesn't matter at all how plausible it may "sound". The fact it is laughed at is because the evidence is not plausible, influenced by our own technology and cultural images (spinning discs, LED lights, TV screens onboard etc etc).

But unlike God, there is a possibility aliens exist, because there are so many different planets, with proven or accepted evidence showing that many of them can sustain life as we know it. The odds are just astounding against us being the only sentient beings in the universe.

But that is just wishful thinking. There is no evidence. There is no credible evidence. For either there existence or especially their presence in this atmosphere.

They call UFOlogism kinda like the next social evolution of religion. The new wave of religion. It all relies on stories, heresays, friends of friends, half truths and conspiracies, with of course NO credible evidence to support any of it.

Having said that I sincerely welcome the day Aliens come floating from the clouds to offer us all salvation, hmm, perhaps they should pick up Jesus / <insert type=diety>, on the way down.

[GenericBox]

These are some posts I posted on another forum years, and I mean years, ago about UFOs.


I would like to believe UFOs are real.

But honestly, beyond all the bullshit. What purpose would an alien race have by keeping secret? What purpose would they have abducting people?

I mean come on. If I only ever heard 1-20 abduction stories I would seriously consider believing aliens may b up there looking at us. But it is the shear amount of cases that to me proves they are fake. And to think people actually use this large number as evidence that aliens are abducting us. I've said this once before - Unlike science fiction, the real world runs on necessity, and although i can in no way pre-determine how an alien would behave, it would be safe to assume they would too.

An alien race - who has developed inter-planetry travel, would not need 50 years to study one species on a planet. And would in no way need tens of thousands of subjects. Like I said - 1 to 20 abduction stories fair enough, but beyond that is just crazy. We don't discover a new race of animal and take 50,000 of them to study them. We take what we need to get the information available.

Like I've said before things work on need. An alien would only need a very limited study to find out about us. Hell, in the last 20 years we have found enough about ourselves to develop bio weapons that could annihilate the entire population. So how could an alien race who travelled accross the galaxy to get to us need double that? What are they looking at? Not to mention like someone said it would be 4 yrs at lightspeed from the nearest star to us.

So assuming the slowest they travel at is lightspeed. They would have to stock themselves with 8 yrs of supplies at least to make the trip. Now if they traveled 4yrs here. They are not going to spend 50 years studying us. If we (humans) found another culture, and could secretly study them, I believe YES, we would take maybe 2-5 trips just to assess the situation. But we wouldnt want to waste too many resources and money and fuel waiting around longer to introduce ourselves.

Everything needs a purpose. So if an alien race travelled accross the galaxy to find us, it could only mean they wanted to:
A/ Find us to quell their desire for discovery, and answer their own questions on whether THEY are alone in the universe.

B/ To meet this civilization that has been trying to contact them for the last 50 years and set-up a treaty and share knowledge, culture and technology

C/ Finally to come to our planet with hostile intentions to use us in some way, farm the planet etc etc.

They would not travel here and continue to abduct people for the sake of 'Hey, we can do it, so what the hell lets keep wasting time and resources studying human beings of earth, just chuck the results beside the others'. Its un-economical.

Another factor is the shear chance that another alien race with that level of technology exists - There are Billions of stars, and there is a figure out there something on the lines of .0001% (I don't know exact), that can support human like life, now out of those planets, the beings on them would need intelligent life with the capacity to build a transportation device to reach us in an economical time period. Pretty small odds.

So lets consider all those numbers. You're telling me that an alien race, who has defied all those odds, comes accross a planet, that has a diverse civilization, multiple cultures, a technology level that is on the beginning of a bell curve, that is not only aware of space - But is LOOKING for these aliens, decides to chill, sit back, and study us for 50 years!

It is beyond reason. I would have no doubt that an alien race would study us. It is the most efficient method of determining the threat level of a population - we do it all the time. But they would not need that amount of time - nor that many samples.

We are still not dissecting horses to see what they are made of and how they work.

People are so quick to tell stories of UFOs and Alien Abductions when they never really ask 'Why?', 'Why was that UFO in that certain place?', 'Why would an alien abduct that person?'.

Things don't just do thing's becuase they can - they do it becuase they need to, and aliens no longer need to abduct/study humans - they have apparently doing it for 50 years.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I see ur points. We do dissect crap every day for school.

But take into account that these aliens have to actually take us, then have somewhere to dissect us, and if like u say for 'education', where is their population they are educating? Surely they wouldn't send a civilization accross the galaxy to orbit a planet, when they could just simply completely take and not return subjects.

And that's a great point <another poster>. Technology that level wouldn't allow itself to be seen unless it wanted to.

I mean yes we dissect stuff continuously for science, and schooling. But why would an alien race need to teach its population about us if its only going to stay hidden to those who claim they see them.

Your talking about dissecting insects - thats completely different. Not as in 'alien ethics' but our body systems/functions are completely different. Our bodies don't vary from human to human as much as insect species to animals do. Thats why we dissect them, to find similarities.

Give me an example of alien abductions of massive amounts of animals over the last 50 yrs? When checking out a planet you would want to check all the species that lived on it not just the most intelligent. They wouldn't know if some animals were more dangerous then us, and if they did, why not just do what they came to do?

<Another poster>, I wont even pretend to know an alien's purpose, but again like I said, they had to make their transportation out of something, their bodies would more then likely have to have some sort of 'food' to keep functioning. So what is the point to continue orbiting earth and taking people if its just wasting resources.

It would be like a scientist flying from the arctic to antartica to see what a southern penguin is made out of, taking one, flying back to the arctic, and the repeating the process over and over again.

If say they don't have a purpose. Why would they take the time to secretly take 1 at a time when just as easily take 50 or more at a time. Obviously they don't care too much about remaining hidden they 'apparently' expose themselves all the time.

As much as we would like to wish we weren't alone in the universe and we were being visited by aliens. We would either know completely about them, or nothing at all - not a bit. Becuase its a pretty slack method of covering themselves up if a small bit of mind trickery (hypnosis) can 'reawaken' memories of the ordeal. What sort of technology allows for abduction, hell, flying ships, and then returning, without anyone else noticing, but does not even completely remove the memory of the ordeal.

Again like I said, 1-20 abduction stories and none of the crap about government cover-ups and I might think, hey, maybe something is going on. Only 20 cases they might actually trying to keep this secret, no one has said anything from the government. But you have conspiracy theorists and paranoya about 'Area 51'.

I got that star/planet percentage off a discovery channel http://www.writingforums.com/images/smilies/icon_razz.gif presentation <another poster>. I also got this, it was on last night - it made me write my last rant http://www.writingforums.com/images/smilies/icon_razz.gif so im not forgetting it - The actual peices of 'alien ship' they found in Roswell? Was some tin foil and wooden shaped sticks! and some 'unknown' plastic. Oooo. This was the 1950s, back then they wouldn't have known about half the plastics we have nowadays. What purpose would tin follow and wood have on an inter-planet spacecraft - hell we don't even use tin foil on aircraft in our own atmosphere.

1950s was the beginning of the cold war, the government was trying to create more and more ways to spy on russia, and you know what was used on some models of balloon imaging devices? Tin foil. But no, the government is just trying to trick us, use it as a cover story.

I'm just saying its like a religion - UFOlogism. There is not much different from believing in UFO's to believing in a religion - 'proof' is 'personal stories of abduction and sightings'... hmmm ... sounds familiar to the proof of religion through 'personal experiences and sightings'.

<Another poster> from reading your posts in the religion debate I gather the sense your not a full believer in God? But you seem very intent to have the same amount of leap of faith to believe in aliens and UFOs.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The first real sign of alien life will be from SETI. Becuase the quicket, easiest, cheapest way to find if someone else is out there trying to look for you is by sending signals - and to our current knowledge/general acceptance is that light travels the fastest. Why would you spend the resources to travel when you can just as effectively try to communicate via signlas and transmission. Its a crazy long process. Hell we're more then likely aren't advanced enough to pick up their signals technologically, or even we may be recieving signals of some kind but dismiss them as radiation of some sort. But the point is before we meet aliens. we'll hear from them.


I was pretty angry when writing my second one :P

[Duffy]

top secret military aircraft performing routine tests, area51 is not a UFO hub but a "not so secret" military base for new aircraft.

I can remember a dinner party years ago where this guest explianed how after WW2 the Americans smuggled nazi scientists out the Germany and hid them... you guessed it, in Area 51. They were encouraged to finish experiments on cloning etc and even impregnated a woman with ape sperm to see what happened, hence the alien looking creatures that had been supposedly observed. I put it down to a fertile imagination and too much alcohol but I have never forgotten it. I wonder if anyone else heard that story about Area 51?:confused:

[Jonathon Byrd]

Extraterrestrial life may exist in other parts of the universe or it may not. A lesser chance is the existence of extraterrestrial life capable of manipulating its environment to the same or greater extent as do humans. If it does exist, the time frame of humanity will most likely not coincide with its own. The human technological stage will possibly be counted in the hundreds or maybe a thousand years. Looking beyond those figures requires some very optimistic thought. With 14.7 billion years, crossing time-paths cuts down coexistence to a luck event of some magnitude.

The number of life friendly planets other than some with microbial or those sustaining very basic forms, judging by our own solar system, tends to show there are not that many. There are none in our Solar System to this date. Even so, they may be in the millions, spread over the universe or even the Milky Way galaxy.

Of all the planets capable of sustaining life if it ever got going on other planets, there is no reason as to why it should produce what we class as intelligent life. On earth, who knows how many species there have been. Let’s say 10 million or 100 million. Only a couple look like they were contenders for ending up like us. Intelligence is not a peak position of evolution; it is only one of the possibilities. In our case it gave us an edge, the same as wings give an edge to birds, fins to fish, poison to snakes, speed for predators etc.

Using the best technology available to us right now, if we wished to go to our closest neighbour, I think Alpha Centuri or Proxima, I forget, it would be a journey of 100,000 years or so. This is as roughly as long as we have been humans. At the impossible speed of light, the trip is four years. This does not take into account the massive acceleration required, which would have us slime on the rear wall and then the front wall when we stop to get off at a planet we hope is there.

The rules of physics on how the universe operates and to which we can bend to our wills don’t give any indication that one day a discovery will overcome the distance problem. Of course, something could be discovered allowing for magical feats we cannot now even dream about. But I doubt it.

Alien visitation is very much like religion. There is not a skerrick of evidence for it and heaps of evidence against the concept.

But it is still a nice thought :)

Jonathon

[SchizoDeluxe]

I can remember a dinner party years ago where this guest explianed how after WW2 the Americans smuggled nazi scientists out the Germany and hid them... you guessed it, in Area 51. They were encouraged to finish experiments on cloning etc and even impregnated a woman with ape sperm to see what happened, hence the alien looking creatures that had been supposedly observed. I put it down to a fertile imagination and too much alcohol but I have never forgotten it. I wonder if anyone else heard that story about Area 51?:confused:

Not that one but I have heard other stories, very conspiracy type stuff which are pretty ou there.

[Duffy]

Not that one but I have heard other stories, very conspiracy type stuff which are pretty ou there.

Conpiracy theories, oh my:confused: I can't keep up. Who is the latest to have killed Princess Di.... Germaine Greer?:D

[SchizoDeluxe]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20090223/sc_space/naturalexplanationfoundforufos

[His Noodly Appendage]

TIMB has it.

"Vastly superior technology to anything we can imagine could possibly exist regardless" is unfalsifiable. It could be true, but so could the flying spaghetti monster.

The idea is not inherently ridiculous. We've certainly been proved wrong on comfortable assumptions enough times to be wary of going that far.

However, there's just no good reason to think it's true. Vastly more mundane possibilities cover all observations. With no really inexplicable phenomena, no evidence of aliens (technologically superior or not), and no evidence of FTL travel being even theoretically possible, the weight of the hypotheses is far to great for such a thin chain of reasoning.

Even if it is actually true, right here and now - without a good reason to believe, you'd be a fool to accept it.

This holds true on pretty much all topics.

[Vonnie]

Of course there's a very remote possibility of intelligent life on other planets.

However, there are very few planets even remotely similar to earth in the known universe, and none that are similar. There may be as yet undiscovered earth-like planets in universes millions of light years away, but it would take so very many things for intelligent life to evolve, that it's unlikely. The chances of intelligent life evolving on earth were so incredibly remote that it's unlikely to be replicated in a similar way anywhere else.

But, yeah, there's a tiny, tiny chance.

Vonnie

[GenericBox]

And even if it was possible for life, and indeed intelligent life to thrive on a planet like it did on ours, as someone said that would not be enough. It took billions of years to get to what we are now, so for a civilisation to even be in the millions of years range as our own development would be a fluke of monumental proportions. For a civilisation to be a 'few' thousand years either way of us would be remarkable, because that means that they developed at the near exact same speed as us. And that theoretically, would not happen on another planet. To many variations.

IF, IF, there are aliens out there there are more than likely still Dinosaur like creatures (or even more regressed), or literally Millions and millions of years more aged then we are. And if you consider the latter, it would be impossible to imagine the technology they would possess. It would be beyond even our most gifted artists ideas. Which again gives even more doubt to why they would have crappy, shiny, spinning discs for spacecraft. And why they would be so sloppy with their activities here.

[GUDLUSS]

Having perfected anti-gravity, they'd probably have perfected invisibility,too- WE made one that's about 10% effective (not even 10& come to think of it) and they're apparently millions of years ahead of us. So why in hell would we be seeing their spaceships?

[Godless Ray]

With no real data to support this, I tend to think that life probably does exist elsewhere. I would expect most of it to be bacterial and semi-vegative. I could imagine a small amount being classed "intelligent" as we see it, but as for using technology in a human like fashion might be unbearably rare.

It's enormously unlikely we have ever been visited. I beleive that the common folklore is common myth.

Godless Ray

[His Noodly Appendage]

Heh. I don't see that either intelligence or technology need be rare - that sounds like a terribly anthropocentric conceit.

I just find it unlikely beyond all bounds of sanity that there would be a technological, spacefaring race at just the right level of development to be able to come here and to want to, close enough to have detected signs of life here and reached us, all within this dazzlingly brief window of our civilisation.

[Godless Ray]

Noodly,

What made me start thinking along these lines was the information gleaned so far. We have scanned quite a lot of area and as yet nothing really indictative of technology at least at our level. I also take note of the planet searches they do now and that nothing we would think of as habital has really been found.

But, I see its possible still for some types of life but I base my opinions on what we seem to know right now.

Godless Ray

[His Noodly Appendage]

werl, as I said, the chances of recognisable radio communication reaching us during the time we're listening for it are horribly remote. Space is big, and time is vast. We're talking about the chances of two needles colliding in an impossibly huge, four-dimensional haystack - and that's assuming other civilisations, even if they existed at the same time (compensating for lightspeed lag) as us, would use radio in the first place.

As far as I understand, our ability to detect earth-sized extrasolar planets is extremely limited. We haven't found anything much smaller than a gas giant, afaik, and I'm not aware of any reason to suspect that small planets are rare. I think this is more about selection bias than cosmology...

[davo]

As far as I understand, our ability to detect earth-sized extrasolar planets is extremely limited. We haven't found anything much smaller than a gas giant, afaik, and I'm not aware of any reason to suspect that small planets are rare. I think this is more about selection bias than cosmology...

not sure where you get that info
http://exoplanets.org

I will have to search at some stage for the mathematics, but there is a huge chance of planets even habitable for ourselves within future 'reach'. with the aspect that at some stage we ourselves will reach a technoligical level of being able to send communications to these planets, and our very concept of thinking about that, also raises the question that any sufficiently technological society or race would do the same.

[davo]

ah yes, the Drake Equation currently at :

N = 7 × 0.5 × 2 × 0.33 × 0.01 × 0.01 × 10000 = 2.31 (technologically advanced civilizations in our galaxy that we may come in contact with, as per SETI)

However of course this is conjecture.

[Godless Ray]

It certainly is a subject I could change opinion on quickly. I guess we are very much in the shallow end with regards to having information.


Godless Ray

[Seamus]

@generic box:

Pedantic point;While it seems unlikely god(s) exist,it's not impossible.The argument is one of metaphysics,not science. As the cliche says " a lack of evidence is not evidence of absence"

[GenericBox]

Sorry what post of mine are you referring to?

I have been away a couple of days and have a memory worse than a gold fish.

[GenericBox]

Sorry. I read back and think I found what you are referring to:


But unlike God, there is a possibility aliens exist, because there are so many different planets, with proven or accepted evidence showing that many of them can sustain life as we know it. The odds are just astounding against us being the only sentient beings in the universe.


Sigh at the ol' can't disprove it therefore can't be ruled out. I'm not attacking, but I am really fed up with that regurgitated argument. Flying Spaghetti Monster was developed for one of these reasons.

It comes down to semantics, but honestly, if we had to say everything literally we would be very much like the treants in Lord of the Rings "It takes a very long time to say anything in entish, and we don't say anything unless it takes a very long time to say". Well, probably not the best example but I just watched LOTR the other night. Still, my point is that I can say that God does not exist, just as I can say that the sun WILL rise tomorrow.

It seems unlikely that the sun will not rise tomorrow morning, but it is not impossible. Yet we don't say, "when the highly likely event of the sun rising in the morning..."

You could counter my very poorly thought out example by saying that the sun NOT rising tomorrow morning would break many Physical, Astrological and Mathematic (to name a few) laws. But so does God.

If we cannot without conviction cut off the low percentage numbers as negligible, then we will indeed take a very long time to say anything worth while. Because I cannot say for certain that the sun will rise tomorrow, nor can I say for certain I will even wake up, or that an undetected meteor the size of a golf ball will crash through the roof of my house and deliver a fatal blow to my head, or that the Flying Spaghetti Monster will use one of its noodly appendages to stop that very meteor before it reaches me.

The only reason we don't dismiss an idea of god as one of our neglible percentiles is because it is so mainstream. You are not crazy to think that God is up there, but you are crazy to say the sun will not rise tomorrow.

I like to call myself a scientific man, and although I say now there is no chance (neglible or otherwise) of God, should any evidence provide enough reasonable doubt I may rephrase that. I am more than happy to whenever, if ever, say I am wrong, that I was wrong, or that I am sorry.

But I will not tiptoe around possibilities when right now I have created 3000 possibilities in my head of some idea that cannot be dismissed because they MAY be true.

There is no evidence that a magic society exists, that sends its young on a rickety, hundred year old train across the country side to a deserted, run down, ancient castle where they kill spiders, fly broomsticks and carry sticks around.
But a lack of evidence does not mean evidence of absence right?
If I am ever in London I am going to run full speed at the pillar between platforms 9 and 10. Who knows, its NOT IMPOSSIBLE it may work.


Sorry, Its 1:15am and I have had 9 hours (literally) sleep in the last 3 days (Friday > 4 hours sleep > Saturday > 5 hours sleep > Sunday > Now). So I am probably all over the shot and this may not make sense. I will reread it but I don't know how much that will help.

[GenericBox]

I do consider that "chance" that there is a god a negligible number. And my post you referred to tried to express that.

If you want me to be perfect,

But unlike God, there is a real possibility aliens exist...

PS. I will not respond to posts picking apart my use of 'real'. As I said at the end of my last post, it is late, I am buggered, and I cannot think of a word that expresses better what I wanted to express.

[davo]

Did you know, you have a higher chance of being adopted by Angelina Jolie, than being killed by a falling piano?

Statistically speaking that is.

[davo]

I think what Godless is trying to explain, is :

1/ There is no evidence whatsoever for a god

2/ There is evidence that life exists, there is evidence life can reach technological levels etc etc

3/ Therefore, there is a greater / realistic chance that there is life on other planets

[Seamus]

I can remember a dinner party years ago where this guest explianed how after WW2 the Americans smuggled nazi scientists out the Germany and hid them... you guessed it, in Area 51. They were encouraged to finish experiments on cloning etc and even impregnated a woman with ape sperm to see what happened, hence the alien looking creatures that had been supposedly observed. I put it down to a fertile imagination and too much alcohol but I have never forgotten it. I wonder if anyone else heard that story about Area 51?:confused:


That's a first for me. The ape/human hybrid suggests the story may not have been entirely credible. Pretty sure that's biologically impossible.
The US did have some German scientists during the war.I believe Einstein was German.I wasn't aware the began hiding Nazis until after the war.So did the British Government and probably the Russians..That's why I think the Nuremberg trials were an excercise in stunning humbug.

[Godless Ray]

Thanks Davo, yes that is what I meant.

The subject has interested me greatly over the years and I have read so many books about this. Recently, just finished Surendra Verma's Why arn't they here now ?

I just expect that with the Earths broad types of life added to the possibilites of other types that human life with its technological bent might be an exceedingly rare event.

Godless Ray

[Seamus]

Sorry what post of mine are you referring to?

I have been away a couple of days and have a memory worse than a gold fish.

This one:



But unlike God, there is a possibility aliens exist, because there are so many different planets,

The claim for the impossibility of god using that premise also a non sequitor.I think you may have conflated "possible" and "probable".

[GenericBox]

I still don't undertand your point... I went through my stance in a post previous.

I do mean possible not probable. Because although it works the same for my case against a god, it does not in reference to aliens. It is not probable aliens exist, because probable suggests 'likely' or even 'highly likely'. Which I think neither are the case for aliens.

Again refer to my last post about my use of possibility. There is a possibility that every idea ever conceived throughout history is true. Because we can always use the lack of evidence does not mean evidence of absence quote you used.

What makes things impossible is because we regard the possibility of that event occuring negligible. It is true that nothing is impossible, but things with extremely low chance of truth are labelled impossible to clear our minds and shorten our conversations.

The presence of any type of conceivable god, under any ever conceived religion, with the name or characteristics of any deity in the past, is one of those extremely small, negligible percentages.

The only reason we even consider it is because our history has grown up with it. It's what we know. The idea of a God out there is familiar and safe. But that doesn't make it any more right, or likely.

Whereas, as stated by other people, the functions and systems of life are existent on this planet, the beginning of this process are argued to be chemicals found throughout the universe. We know there are literally countless numbers of galaxies, let alone planets, therefore it is, unlike the idea of a God, a real (which I rephrased to on my other post) possibility that aliens exist.

[GenericBox]

Sorry but while my blood is boiling, the above posts are why I really get frustrated with Agnostics.

I cannot stand arguments that rely on a statement of 'you can't disprove it therefore it can't be dismissed'. Argh it just fires me up.

Agnostics either believe in the possibility of every ever conceived thought, or they are just deep down still afraid of burning in some sort of hell.

As I said in another thread, I am much more scared of the agnostic position than I am the fundementalist. Because the agnostic has the power to destroy the atheist from within the same labelling (non-believer). If the world becomes agnostic, then we fight almost every unproven thought, not just a few mainstream radical ones. Because in the end, there is no evidence that disproves most ideas.

For the agnostic reading that wants to correct me by saying that their position is one of 'there is neither sufficient evidence for or AGAINST* the existence of god' - it is really just a politically correct way to rephrase what I just wrote. There is neither sufficient evidence for or against the FSM. There is neither sufficient evidence for or against Star Wars actually representing the real tale of human like beings in a galaxy far far away...


Gah anyway. That was completely OT. But when the blood heats up the brain starts shutting off.

Or some such bullshit.

* Really, insufficient evidence? Read a little.

EDIT: I do realise an agnostic position is not exclusively related to religious debates, although, as we are on the Atheist Foundation of Australia's forums, I do hope noone feels the need to point that out and realise the context it is used in.

[GenericBox]

Just a note on how the public opinion, or perception, means little to nothing on the possibility of things. Davo summed it up well.


Did you know, you have a higher chance of being adopted by Angelina Jolie, than being killed by a falling piano?

Statistically speaking that is.


It is IMPOSSIBLE that I will be adopted by Angelina Jolie, but the mass would most likely (assuming) disagree with me if I said it was impossible for me to die from a falling piano.

Even though, as stated by davo, becoming Jolie's new son is the more likely of the two. (I can still wish though)

I'm just pointing out that regardless what people think is impossible or not, it has little effect on the actual probability it is true.

[davo]

statistically speaking ;)

[davo]

http://www.christiansymposium.com

weeeeee! everyone entering gets tin foil hats!!

9:00am Joe Jordan - "Unholy Communion : The Spiritual Nature of Abduction Reports"
10:45am Guy Malone - "ET's Message To Humanity - A False Gospel"
(followed by lunch break)
1:15pm Chris Ward - "Ministry to the UFO Community; One Pastor's Story"
2:30pm Nicole & Guy Malone - "Bible Physics & The Abilities of Fallen Angels"
3:45pm Gary Bates - "Alien Intrusion: UFOs and the Evolution Connection"

[Kid]

I remember reading somewhere once that belief in aliens was 'god' for atheists; that a lot of atheists profess a 'belief' in aliens. Whether this be true or not, I don't know... I personally don't accept that aliens have or are visiting our planet, but I do accept the possibility (if I can use that word) of there being 'alien' life out there in the vastness of the Universe, as after all, WE live in space, so why not some other lifeforms? whether they be merely microbes or sentient beings...it is possible somewhere, just not on this planet, as Eric Idle so rightly pointed out--to hope there's intelligent life out there somewhere cos there's fuck all down here on Earth...

[davo]

I remember reading somewhere once that belief in aliens was 'god' for atheists; that a lot of atheists profess a 'belief' in aliens. Whether this be true or not, I don't know... I personally don't accept that aliens have or are visiting our planet, but I do accept the possibility (if I can use that word) of there being 'alien' life out there in the vastness of the Universe, as after all, WE live in space, so why not some other lifeforms? whether they be merely microbes or sentient beings...it is possible somewhere, just not on this planet, as Eric Idle so rightly pointed out--to hope there's intelligent life out there somewhere cos there's fuck all down here on Earth...

Theists point out that because atheists generally are open to the fact there may be alien life out there, but ignore the actual basis for this reasoning, they consider it as being a 'belief', which it is not, it is an acceptance that there is the possibility that there are aliens as you rightly point out.

Any way they can try and inject 'belief' back at atheistic thought they will try, we see it time and time again.

[Godless Ray]

It is IMPOSSIBLE that I will be adopted by Angelina Jolie

It can't be generic box. I mean your such a fine figure of an evil Santa.

Angelina would fall in love with you in an instant.


Godless

[kencooke]

See about the Fermi Paradox at Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox)

The Fermi paradox is the apparent contradiction between high estimates of the probability of the existence of extraterrestrial civilizations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraterrestrial_life) and the lack of evidence for, or contact with, such civilizations.
The extreme age of the universe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_universe) and its vast number of stars suggest that if the Earth is typical, extraterrestrial life should be common.[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox#cite_note-sagan-0) In an informal discussion in 1950, the physicist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physicist) Enrico Fermi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enrico_Fermi) questioned why, if a multitude of advanced extraterrestrial civilizations exist in the Milky Way (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milky_Way) galaxy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galaxy), evidence such as spacecraft (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_spacecraft) or probes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Von_Neumann_probe) are not seen. A more detailed examination of the implications of the topic began with a paper by Michael H. Hart (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_H._Hart) in 1975, and it is sometimes referred to as the Fermi-Hart paradox.[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox#cite_note-1) Another closely related question is the Great Silence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Silence)[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox#cite_note-Brin-2)—even if travel is hard, if life is common, why don't we detect their radio transmissions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio)?


Also I recomend to you the SETI project (http://www.seti.org/Page.aspx?pid=1241).

[davo]

yes the Fermi Paradox is interesting, and actually led to something I referred to earlier the Drake Equation currently at N = 7 × 0.5 × 2 × 0.33 × 0.01 × 0.01 × 10000 = 2.31 technologically advanced civilizations in our galaxy that we may come in contact with, as per SETI, however there are a lot of disputes over this equation, and that really we are looking at less than one per galaxy on average .. but then have a look at how many galaxies there are out there, a lot of which we are seeing the light from when they were only a few hundred million years old.

[eclectic]

I think we're pretty agreed, that in the vastness of space and our limited knowledge of it, it is certainly possible that there are other life forms out there, (personally i think it would be strange if there were NOT other life forms out there, considering how 'mind-bogglingly huge' space is... but i don't know the science on that) but that the claims of them visiting us are almost certainly all bogus.

But to look at the issue from another angle, we may be harbouring alien life of a less sci-fi nature on earth already:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7893414.stm

[Kid]

"We don't have to go to other planets to find weird life.
"It could be right in front of our noses - or even in our noses," said the physicist.

Hilarious! I'm almost loathed to say this, but does that explain why bogies are green? sorry...(they don't call me Kid for nothing...)

[Ramen]

yes the Fermi Paradox is interesting, and actually led to something I referred to earlier the Drake Equation currently at N = 7 × 0.5 × 2 × 0.33 × 0.01 × 0.01 × 10000 = 2.31 technologically advanced civilizations in our galaxy that we may come in contact with, as per SETI, however there are a lot of disputes over this equation, and that really we are looking at less than one per galaxy on average .. but then have a look at how many galaxies there are out there, a lot of which we are seeing the light from when they were only a few hundred million years old.
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/the_drake_equation.png

[davo]

lol :) good one :)

However I don't think it bullshit, it was a progressive move in working toward a mathematical approach to the problem (you have to think this was 1961! we have discovered a lot since then!), the issues with time amongst them. SETI still uses it, but understands it is onnly looking at certain types of civilisations over certain periods.

So I think it's deceptive to say it's bullshit, but it is definitely not accurate as I said, but anything that is progressive in science is a step toward the truth, I'm glad he worked on it at the time.

edit: I should add that I find mathematical approaches to problems fascinating. After all, everything is numbers.

[Godless Ray]

Davo,

Do you imagine that technology based life forms similar in concept as ourselves are a regular occurrence in the average Galaxy?

Godless

[GenericBox]

I would think that any life form with any intelligence would recognise and utilise tools and create technology to aid them.

EDIT: DAMN! I wasted my 200th Post >.<

[Godless Ray]

But if look at the range of animal life here which seems reasonably broad not all that many life forms use tools. This had made me wonder that even if the ducks lined up and you got intelligence even as close as Neathandrals or possibally Aboriginals I mention them because the tool use was variant and didn't progress beyond certain points for great spans of years. Is it possible that even intelligent civilizations might not utilise as we had done?

Godless

[GenericBox]

Of course its possible when we're talking about alien civilizations ;) The shape and needs of their body would be evolved for their environment, and that environment might not need tools or technology, or even intelligence at all (as we would define it). Dinosaurs ruled here for millions of years without the 'level' of intelligence we possess. They didn't use tools or technology (compared to modern day Apes).

But if we are looking, or assuming that there is intelligent life out there, we are talking about the 'creative thinking' intelligence we possess. The problem solving intelligence. And I assume no matter how easy the environment has made living for these beings, they would create tools and technology to make it easier.

The problem is with 'alien civilizations', and its present in all religions here, is that we cannot imagine beyond our own limitations. That is, Gods look like us, Aliens look like our fears of our future (large brains, big eyes, extremely pale skin, small - unused body). Our brain cannot comprehend something not human-like.

In the end, we wouldn't know intelligent life if it bit us on the ass. We know what human-intelligent life would be.

It's one of the points why I am so skeptical about UFOlogy. The Aliens are always humanistic. Always something 'like us'. Perhaps they may be, but our shape is far from perfect, and developed for our world. Replicating those circumstances on another planet would be near impossible.

Does anyone know if SETI or anywhere really have a guideline or set of rules to define intelligence?

To me its the ability to:
- Problem Solve
- Communicate
- Adapt / Learn
- Empathise
- Create
- Memorise
- Imagine

[Godless Ray]

Generic,

What made me consider this more was after reading a couple of Jarad Diamonds books particulary his Guns Germs and steel. It pointed out to me that even creative animals like humans can exist with virtually almost no tool use. So looking at "what we know" our own worlds example, I could imagine the myriad cases where it might not evolve.

This had me thinking if life that was developed enough to even be able to start tool making be exceedingly rare as in maybe one per Galaxy or the like.

For me, there is nothing to suggest that life in its general sense might be a lot more common than previously thought.

Where I get very sceptical is in travelling beings such as suggested in the film contact. I am of the opinion there will serious limits to how far any technological invention will be able to usefully take you.

Godless Ray

[kencooke]

Does anyone know if SETI or anywhere really have a guideline or set of rules to define intelligence?



SETI is searching for extraterestrial life by listening for radio communications coming from "out there". If a life form has developed the technology for the transmission of radio signals then it is assumed that they are intelligent!

[GenericBox]

Yeah I know, but I mean like just because the transmission of radio signals expresses or suggests intelligence as we know it, do they define what intelligence is. I think that would have to be one of their fundemental questions. Do they look for patterns in a radio signal to suggest language, or mathematical ability as portrayed in 'Contact', or would a beep suffice.