# Alien thread



## violadude

This is a three question thread. Do you believe that there is life on other planets? Do you believe there is intelligent life on other planets? Do you think that intelligent life on other planets have made contact with us?

Go!


----------



## Sid James

*Do you believe that there is life on other planets?* 
Yes, or quite possibly at the least.

*Do you believe there is intelligent life on other planets?* 
Yes, I have known people who've seen UFOS, so I wouldn't doubt that those kinds of spacecrafts were made by intelligent beings.

*Do you think that intelligent life on other planets have made contact with us?*
Well, there's a guy who wrote a book about being taken by aliens and flying in their UFOs. I think he was an American & his book was a bestseller. It doesn't prove he was right or wrong & I'd like to read it myself, given the time/interest, etc. But someone who read it said it did sound quite "real" the way he described what he went through...


----------



## Meaghan

The universe is, well... very, very big. We can't possibly be the only planet in it that isn't a lifeless chunk of rock/blob of gas. That's all I'm sure about.


----------



## Ravellian

Yes, I do believe there is life on other planets, however we have a very narrow definition of what 'intelligent' life is, considering we only have humans to base our opinions on. Our galaxy is to the universe like what a speck of sand is to the entire Earth's mass. There probably is life in other systems, and we probably have no idea what it looks like. 

I did see a pretty convincing documentary on a UFO incident recently, where around twenty independent witnesses saw UFOs, including an air traffic controller who thought it was a UFO.. and there was a video of it. It was the Phoenix Lights incident.


----------



## kv466

“The universe is a pretty big place. If it's just us, seems like an awful waste of space.” 
― Carl Sagan, Contact


----------



## Amfibius

Intelligent life on other planets? Of course, but that depends on what you mean by "intelligent". Would you say that chimpanzees, pigs, dogs, dolphins, and octopuses (octopi?) are intelligent?


----------



## Sid James

Amfibius said:


> Intelligent life on other planets? Of course, but that depends on what you mean by "intelligent". Would you say that chimpanzees, pigs, dogs, dolphins, and octopuses (octopi?) are intelligent?


Intelligent in their own way. Put it this way, animals can't build pyramids but they can't cause as much harm as we humans have.

But to be more relevant, if scientists found a type of animal or even a living cluster of cells on Mars or on our moon or something, it would still be a big discovery, even if it wasn't a humanoid alien or something. What do you think they've been probing on these places for years for? It's to find LIFE of any kind there, not just dust and rocks...


----------



## clavichorder

violadude said:


> This is a three question thread.


Ready.


> Do you believe that there is life on other planets?


Yes!


> Do you believe there is intelligent life on other planets?


Why not?


> Do you think that intelligent life on other planets have made contact with us?


It would certainly be cool, but I'm skeptical. I guess there are abduction/siting stories that are impossible to account for with any sort of explanation, but perhaps there are a host of more likely things that could have happened instead of it involving aliens that we just didn't think of. Still, I have a fantasizing hope for benevolent alien observation. 2001 Space Odyssey(the book) is my favorite fictional account of alien intervention in human development. What cool aliens too, that in fact do not reside on other planets, and are not made up of matter, but energy.


----------



## Almaviva

1) Yes
2) Yes
3) No


----------



## Stasou

I won't even try.


----------



## Vaneyes

I don't know X 3


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto

Yes to all three. With regard to #3, "contact" could be as simple as hovering a craft over witnesses and radars, and effectively saying "hello" by presence that way. 

One for the religious folks amongst us: even the Vatican has released something not long ago (last year?) "allowing" the presence of aliens all as part of their God's creation.


----------



## Guest

Amfibius said:


> Would you say that chimpanzees, pigs, dogs, dolphins, and octopuses (octopi?) are intelligent?


Compared to Mozart lovers they are extremely intelligent :devil:


----------



## Sid James

Then there's that Roswell UFO incident thing, I saw a documentary about that ages ago, but I've forgotten it largely. I think a movie was made about this as well?...


----------



## Guest

*@Sid * I saw a doco on the same thing Sid, there are a lot of jokers making a good living in the area. True entrepreneurs


----------



## violadude

I don't wan't to belittle anyones religion here, I'm just suggesting something as a possibility. But one thing to think about is that if you go back in all the world religions and myths and fables, replace the words "God" and "angels" with extraterrestrial beings and assume that these beings have very advanced technology, then a lot of those religions and myths make a lot more sense scientifically.


----------



## Sid James

Yeah *Andante*, the Roswell thing is pretty controversial, as far as I remember, but the apparent fact that the government tried to cover it up - whatever it was - just spurned conspiracy theories like sprouting mushrooms...


----------



## Kopachris

Given the sheer size of the universe, the probability of intelligent life besides us _somewhere_ in the universe is pretty close to 1, so my answer to the first two questions is a 99% sure "yes." The last question I'm dubious about, so I choose to remain agnostic about it. Since there's so little we actually know about the universe, it's entirely possible that intelligent life has been visiting us, but I remain skeptical about UFO stories.


----------



## Guest

violadude said:


> I don't wan't to belittle anyones religion here, I'm just suggesting something as a possibility. But one thing to think about is that if you go back in all the world religions and myths and fables, replace the words "God" and "angels" with extraterrestrial beings and assume that these beings have very advanced technology, then a lot of those religions and myths make a lot more sense scientifically.


·	
That is exactly what Erich von Däniken suggested in his book 'Chariots of the Gods' over 40 years ago have you read it?


----------



## Klavierspieler

No, No, and No. I'll argue tomorrow morning.


----------



## clavichorder

Klavierspieler said:


> No, No, and No. I'll argue tomorrow morning.


Says the guy who doesn't believe in dinosaurs


----------



## violadude

Andante said:


> ·
> That is exactly what Erich von Däniken suggested in his book 'Chariots of the Gods' over 40 years ago have you read it?


No but I saw a documentary about it.


----------



## Couchie

Kopachris said:


> Given the sheer size of the universe, the probability of intelligent life besides us _somewhere_ in the universe is pretty close to 1, so my answer to the first two questions is a 99% sure "yes." The last question I'm dubious about, so I choose to remain agnostic about it. Since there's so little we actually know about the universe, it's entirely possible that intelligent life has been visiting us, but I remain skeptical about UFO stories.


Where did you get that 1 number? Seeing we have no idea how life began, how rare of an event that may be, and the odds that millions of years of evolution will tilt in favour of sentience...


----------



## Guest

If life exists then surly evolution would lead to intelligence otherwise it's pointless and with the distances involved I would doubt that contact will be made, so there.


----------



## Dodecaplex

There's absolutely _no way_ life, and for that matter, intelligent life, could _possibly_ exist anywhere else in this unfathomably large universe of ours (we're actually _that_ rare and significant!).

To answer the questions:
Yes, yes, no.


----------



## Guest

Dodecaplex said:


> There's absolutely _no way_ life, and for that matter, intelligent life, could _possibly_ exist in this unfathomably large universe of ours.


Why..................


----------



## Trout

Yes, yes, and yes. Couchie has made contact with us through means of this forum.


----------



## Dodecaplex

Andante said:


> Why..................


I was being sarcastic . . .


----------



## violadude

To the people saying no to the last question, how do you explain so many UFO sightings in our history?


----------



## Couchie

violadude said:


> To the people saying no to the last question, how do you explain so many UFO sightings in our history?


Misidentification, Hallucination, Hoaxes, Lying, Stupidity.


----------



## Meaghan

Dodecaplex said:


>


This thing is really cool, and also kind of terrifying. I got a little dizzy concentrating on it.


----------



## violadude

Couchie said:


> Misidentification, Hallucination, Hoaxes, Lying, Stupidity.


What about when there are numerous accounts of the same sighting?


----------



## Dodecaplex

violadude said:


> To the people saying no to the last question, how do you explain so many UFO sightings in our history?


According to good ol' Michio Kaku, 95% of all UFO sightings are hoaxes. The remaining 5% is still apparently unexplained. Here's an interview where he talks about this.


----------



## Couchie

violadude said:


> What about when there are numerous accounts of the same sighting?


Do I really need to humour you on this? I already had to listen to a neighbour today go on about the ghosts in her house rearranging her decor.


----------



## violadude

Couchie said:


> Do I really need to humour you on this? I already had to listen to a neighbour today go on about the ghosts in her house rearranging her decor.


No, I'm not trying to bait you at all! I'm actually kind of spooked to tell you the truth, and I would eagerly welcome anything disproving UFOs, that is why I'm asking.


----------



## Dodecaplex

Meaghan said:


> This thing is really cool, and also kind of terrifying.


Then you'll probably enjoy this.


----------



## Guest

Dodecaplex said:


> I was being sarcastic . . .


Yes! I know that, just teasing and your above link is just amazing Thanks


----------



## Couchie

Dodecaplex said:


> Then you'll probably enjoy this.


That's awesome. Reminds me of this sweet educational video:


----------



## Art Rock

1. yes
2. yes
3. maybe (probably not)


----------



## graaf

This might be the answer to all three questions.

@Dodecaplex - Awesome avatar!


----------



## Rasa

UFO does not equal alien. Just unidentified.


----------



## Polednice

Almaviva said:


> 1) Yes
> 2) Yes
> 3) No


+1. I have absolutely no faith in UFO accounts, just as with all other quackery.


----------



## Aramis

I don't belive that there is life representatives of which write better music than us. We, humans, are the best. This "och, how huge its the universe, and we are so small" thing doesn't impress me either. Without us it would be just one, huge, empty nothing.


----------



## Almaviva

violadude said:


> What about when there are numerous accounts of the same sighting?


 Well in those cases, there was probably the odd _unidentified_ flying object, which by no means indicates that such object was alien.


----------



## Elgarian

violadude said:


> This is a three question thread. Do you believe that there is life on other planets? Do you believe there is intelligent life on other planets? Do you think that intelligent life on other planets have made contact with us?


First things first. I'm still trying to figure out if there's any intelligent life on _this_ planet.


----------



## Elgarian

Dodecaplex said:


> 95% of all UFO sightings are hoaxes.


This is the problem with the whole business of UFO-spotting.

I've recently developed a different art: IFO-spotting (i.e. looking for Identified Flying Objects). So when one sees a passing aircraft, or Venus, or a shooting star, or a funny shaped cloud,* one can shout: 'Look! An IFO!!' It's amazing how the heads turn. Great for breaking the ice at parties.

*Of course, some of those may be hoaxes too. Some people are very sceptical about IFOs.


----------



## TxllxT

The interest in astronomy has its root in astrology. Not my cup of tea and my saucers do not fly.


----------



## schigolch

One very important scientific, Enrico Fermi, tried to find an answer to the puzzling question: "If there are extraterrestial civilizations, why they are not here?".

It's a a very pertinent question, and is known as the Fermi Paradox. Effectively, if there are many civilizations out there, and given the age of the Universe, and our own galaxy, why can't we just see those aliens walking among us?.

Of course, there are several possible answers, including:

1.- In thruth, there are no more civilizations outside Earth.

2.- Intelligent life, sooner or later, destroys itself, or destroys other intelligence species.

3.- Civilizations are destroyed by natural events like supernovae or meteorite impacts before they can make contact.

4.- They are there but we are not searching hard enough.

5.- They are there, but have no interest in being contacted

6.- Guy, didn't you pay attention to my abduction story?. They are here now.


There is an equation to evaluate the probability of extraterrestial intelligence existing in our galaxy. It's the Drake equation:

N = R * P * ne * fℓ * fi * fc * L

where:
N = the number of civilizations in our galaxy with which communication might be possible;
and
R = the average rate of star formation per year in our galaxy
P = the fraction of those stars that have planets
ne = the average number of planets that can potentially support life per star that has planets
fℓ = the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop life at some point
fi = the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop intelligent life
fc = the fraction of civilizations that develop a technology that releases detectable signs of their existence into space
L = the length of time for which such civilizations release detectable signals into space


The real problem is that some of those numbers are so unknown, even by several orders of magnitude, that is very difficult to get a solid prediction. At least, in our current stage of knowledge.

So, my answer to the thread questions is:

a) Most probably, yes
b) Probably, yes
c) Most probably, no


----------



## kv466

Aramis said:


> I don't belive that there is life representatives of which write better music than us. We, humans, are the best. This "och, how huge its the universe, and we are so small" thing doesn't impress me either. Without us it would be just one, huge, empty nothing.


I'm afraid, my friend, that our insignificance in the universe doesn't need your approval or for you to be impressed by it; it is a simple fact. As far as 'it' being a huge empty nothing? I hope the 'it' you are referring to is the ego because not only would the galaxies and universe not even notice our absence but the Earth would be far better off without us. As far as music,...it has nothing to do with life, only intelligence; the same 'intelligence' that has our planet in an utter state of disaster.


----------



## Aramis

kv466 said:


> not only would the galaxies and universe not even notice our absence


Who wouldn't notice? Those pieces of rocks and substances called planets? Surely they wouldn't notice our absence because they are incapable of noticing anything since they are dead mattery. The grandeur of universe is relative, it seems to be great and majestic to us from our perspective but what would make it great if there would be no little living beings like us to gaze at stars and become overwhelmed with their great numbers and indescribeable greatness of sky above us? Nothing.


----------



## Kopachris

Couchie said:


> Where did you get that 1 number? Seeing we have no idea how life began, how rare of an event that may be, and the odds that millions of years of evolution will tilt in favour of sentience...


See:


schigolch said:


> One very important scientific, Enrico Fermi, tried to find an answer to the puzzling question: "If there are extraterrestial civilizations, why they are not here?".
> 
> It's a a very pertinent question, and is known as the Fermi Paradox. Effectively, if there are many civilizations out there, and given the age of the Universe, and our own galaxy, why can't we just see those aliens walking among us?.
> 
> Of course, there are several possible answers, including:
> 
> 1.- In thruth, there are no more civilizations outside Earth.
> 
> 2.- Intelligent life, sooner or later, destroys itself, or destroys other intelligence species.
> 
> 3.- Civilizations are destroyed by natural events like supernovae or meteorite impacts before they can make contact.
> 
> 4.- They are there but we are not searching hard enough.
> 
> 5.- They are there, but have no interest in being contacted
> 
> 6.- Guy, didn't you pay attention to my abduction story?. They are here now.
> 
> There is an equation to evaluate the probability of extraterrestial intelligence existing in our galaxy. It's the Drake equation:
> 
> N = R * P * ne * fℓ * fi * fc * L
> 
> where:
> N = the number of civilizations in our galaxy with which communication might be possible;
> and
> R = the average rate of star formation per year in our galaxy
> P = the fraction of those stars that have planets
> ne = the average number of planets that can potentially support life per star that has planets
> fℓ = the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop life at some point
> fi = the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop intelligent life
> fc = the fraction of civilizations that develop a technology that releases detectable signs of their existence into space
> L = the length of time for which such civilizations release detectable signals into space
> 
> The real problem is that some of those numbers are so unknown, even by several orders of magnitude, that is very difficult to get a solid prediction. At least, in our current stage of knowledge.
> 
> So, my answer to the thread questions is:
> 
> a) Most probably, yes
> b) Probably, yes
> c) Most probably, no


Also, N doesn't even have to be <0 for the answers of the OP's first two questions to be "yes." The questions were not if communication with other life in the universe were possible, but if the life itself existed. Even if the probability of intelligent life developing around a given star is some absurdly small number, like 1 in a trillion, or 1 in 100 trillion, or even 1 in 100 quadrillion, there are an estimated 30 sextillion to 1 septillion stars in the observable universe. That puts the probability of at least one other intelligent civilization existing _somewhere_ out there very close to 1. You're right that we don't know how rare of an event intelligent life is, but I'd consider 1 in 100 quadrillion to be a conservative estimate. We do, for the most part, understand how life might have began on Earth and how it might begin on other worlds.


----------



## Elgarian

kv466 said:


> I'm afraid, my friend, that our insignificance in the universe doesn't need your approval or for you to be impressed by it; *it is a simple fact*.


But is it? On the contrary, it's a simple _choice_. That is, one can _choose_ to view the universe like that - so huge, so indifferent, as to make us seem insignificant. Alternatively, one can choose to contemplate the fact (and this really _is_ a fact) that the universe has spent the last 15 billion years or so bringing things to this point in space-time, where the privilege and responsibilities of causality are bestowed upon entities like you and me. Whether that process was accidental, or guided by divine plan, what happens next (in _this_ neck of the woods, at least), depends on you and me. That doesn't seem insignificant, to me.


----------



## kv466

Elgarian said:


> But is it? On the contrary, it's a simple _choice_. That is, one can _choose_ to view the universe like that - so huge, so indifferent, as to make us seem insignificant. Alternatively, one can choose to contemplate the fact (and this really _is_ a fact) that the universe has spent the last 15 billion years or so bringing things to this point in space-time, where the privilege and responsibilities of causality are bestowed upon entities like you and me. Like it or not, what happens next (in _this_ neck of the woods, at least), depends on you and me. That doesn't seem insignificant, to me.


Only because you are a denizen of this gorgeous planet in which we live and I don't blame you for wanting to believe it is 'special'. As far as it spending all this time to reach US?,...that is just not the case. 15 billion years is a blink of an eye for the Universe.

Sure,...there may not be anyone like us in this solar system; that is almost about a proven fact. Maybe not even in our immediately star system; heck, maybe not even in the Milky Way Galaxy...but there are billions upon billions of galaxies out there, moving through space with billions of stars within each of them. Our Sun is like the Goldilocks story. It is just right for there to be life. Out of billions of galaxies and billions of stars within each of them, to think that we are so special and that there can only be one star out there that can be perfect distant from a planet such as to create life,..well, that is a sad state of affairs and even worse,...ignorant.


----------



## Elgarian

kv466 said:


> Only because you are a denizen of this gorgeous planet in which we live and I don't blame you for wanting to believe it is 'special'. As far as it spending all this time to reach US?,...that is just not the case. 15 billion years is a blink of an eye for the Universe.
> 
> Sure,...there may not be anyone like us in this solar system; that is almost about a proven fact. Maybe not even in our immediately star system; heck, maybe not even in the Milky Way Galaxy...but there are billions upon billions of galaxies out there, moving through space with billions of stars within each of them. Our Sun is like the Goldilocks story. It is just right for there to be life. Out of billions of galaxies and billions of stars within each of them, to think that we are so special and that there can only be one star out there that can be perfect distant from a planet such as to create life,..well, that is a sad state of affairs and even worse,...ignorant.


I spent part of my life as an astronomer, working with models of the expanding universe. I've contemplated these things all my life. But you haven't understood my post, which was not about wanting to be 'special'. It was about choice. It's one of those 'bottle half full or half empty' situations, and 'significance' is a value judgment, not a fact.

I say again: what happens next in this part of the universe depends on me. And on you. How we respond to that situation (philosophically, morally, and practically), and what significance we bestow upon it, is a matter of choice, not a matter of fact.


----------



## Almaviva

schigolch said:


> One very important scientific, Enrico Fermi, tried to find an answer to the puzzling question: "If there are extraterrestial civilizations, why they are not here?".
> 
> It's a a very pertinent question, and is known as the Fermi Paradox. Effectively, if there are many civilizations out there, and given the age of the Universe, and our own galaxy, why can't we just see those aliens walking among us?.
> 
> Of course, there are several possible answers, including:
> 
> 1.- In thruth, there are no more civilizations outside Earth.
> 
> 2.- Intelligent life, sooner or later, destroys itself, or destroys other intelligence species.
> 
> 3.- Civilizations are destroyed by natural events like supernovae or meteorite impacts before they can make contact.
> 
> 4.- They are there but we are not searching hard enough.
> 
> 5.- They are there, but have no interest in being contacted
> 
> 6.- Guy, didn't you pay attention to my abduction story?. They are here now.
> 
> There is an equation to evaluate the probability of extraterrestial intelligence existing in our galaxy. It's the Drake equation:
> 
> N = R * P * ne * fℓ * fi * fc * L
> 
> where:
> N = the number of civilizations in our galaxy with which communication might be possible;
> and
> R = the average rate of star formation per year in our galaxy
> P = the fraction of those stars that have planets
> ne = the average number of planets that can potentially support life per star that has planets
> fℓ = the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop life at some point
> fi = the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop intelligent life
> fc = the fraction of civilizations that develop a technology that releases detectable signs of their existence into space
> L = the length of time for which such civilizations release detectable signals into space
> 
> The real problem is that some of those numbers are so unknown, even by several orders of magnitude, that is very difficult to get a solid prediction. At least, in our current stage of knowledge.
> 
> So, my answer to the thread questions is:
> 
> a) Most probably, yes
> b) Probably, yes
> c) Most probably, no


:tiphat:
These are exactly my reasons for having answered yes/yes/no


----------



## mmsbls

The standard way of answering questions 1 and 2 are using the Drake equation that schigolch posted. R is well known. P had large uncertainties until recently when we developed the capability of detecting planets around other stars. We have currently detected 687 extrasolar planets (link). Ne is assumed to be high, but until we actually detect earth-like planets, there will be some doubt. Astronomers expect to detect these fairly soon (assuming there are any). Ft is also expected to be very high (near 1) for a variety of reasons. The two most interesting factors are Fi and L. Fi is believed to be high by most people searching for extraterrestrial life and most physical scientists. Interestingly, biologists are less certain. Evolution creates a lot of things, but there is no clear progress toward many specific traits and no obvious reason intelligence would evolve. Finally L has a great uncertainty.

Personally I would answer:
1) yes
2) yes
3) no

I have read several detailed discussions of UFO investigations (project Blue Book and others). The bottom line is that I simply don't believe that true alien contact could be so incredibly easy to cover up such that scientists in general would not be relatively certain that it has occurred. Incidentally, the Roswell Incident has been considered well understood from shortly after the discovery of debris. Original descriptions of the debris match _very_ closely the description of a experimental high altitude surveillance balloon that had been lost in that area shortly before the incident.


----------



## Chris

a) no
b) no
c) no

Bible believers have no problem with this earth being special. Apart from its primacy in Creation (Genesis 1) it is the theatre of the great drama of Redemption, centred in the _unrepeatable_ self-sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ. At the end of history Christ will return to *earth* to redeem his people and judge his enemies. Simultaneously with this he will roll up the entire universe 'like a garment'. I find it difficult to reconcile all this with extraterrestial civilisations, even if I can't point to a verse in the Bible that says 'there is no life on other planets'.


----------



## jalex

Chris said:


> a) no
> b) no
> c) no
> 
> Bible believers have no problem with this earth being special. Apart from its primacy in Creation (Genesis 1) it is the theatre of the great drama of Redemption, centred in the _unrepeatable_ self-sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ. At the end of history Christ will return to *earth* to redeem his people and judge his enemies. Simultaneously with this he will roll up the entire universe 'like a garment'. I find it difficult to reconcile all this with extraterrestial civilisations, even if I can't point to a verse in the Bible that says 'there is no life on other planets'.


Why is it difficult to reconcile the idea of non-sentient life on other planets with an anthropocentric view of the universe? How does this brush up against Biblical authority any more than the existence of non-sentient animals here on Earth?


----------



## tdc

Without wanting to get into too much of a debate or anything on here, I think:

1)yes
2)yes
3)yes

I also don't think it is contradictory in anyway to believe in the Bible (or any form of spirituality) and aliens as well.


----------



## kv466

Chris said:


> a) no
> b) no
> c) no
> 
> Bible believers have no problem with this earth being special. Apart from its primacy in Creation (Genesis 1) it is the theatre of the great drama of Redemption, centred in the _unrepeatable_ self-sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ. At the end of history Christ will return to *earth* to redeem his people and judge his enemies. Simultaneously with this he will roll up the entire universe 'like a garment'. I find it difficult to reconcile all this with extraterrestial civilisations, even if I can't point to a verse in the Bible that says 'there is no life on other planets'.


Sad. Dude, I was raised in a long line of Catholics and have read the entire Bible cover to cover, thrice. What the **** does religion have anything to do with reality? Did God ONLY create Earth? You must have not read it yourself because you'd know that he created the entire universe; unless you really think it all happened in 'seven days'.


----------



## Chris

jalex said:


> Why is it difficult to reconcile the idea of non-sentient life on other planets with an anthropocentric view of the universe? How does this brush up against Biblical authority any more than the existence of non-sentient animals here on Earth?


I stopped short of saying extraterrestial life would 'brush up against biblical authority'. But I'm having difficulty seeing why God, having centred his purposes on man, on earth, and having created this vast universe to manifest his glory to man, would create (say) a pool of amoeba on some planet where they would never be seen. Non sentient life on earth is a different case because (to those who can see it) it demonstrates the creative powers of God and so glorifies him.


----------



## Chris

kv466 said:


> Sad. Dude, I was raised in a long line of Catholics and have read the entire Bible cover to cover, thrice. What the **** does religion have anything to do with reality? Did God ONLY create Earth? You must have not read it yourself because you'd know that he created the entire universe; unless you really think it all happened in 'seven days'.


I don't follow you. Anyone who has read the Bible will have learned that God created the entire universe, not just the earth. In six days, not seven.


----------



## Polednice

Chris said:


> a) no
> b) no
> c) no
> 
> Bible believers have no problem with this earth being special. Apart from its primacy in Creation (Genesis 1) it is the theatre of the great drama of Redemption, centred in the _unrepeatable_ self-sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ. At the end of history Christ will return to *earth* to redeem his people and judge his enemies. Simultaneously with this he will roll up the entire universe 'like a garment'. I find it difficult to reconcile all this with extraterrestial civilisations, even if I can't point to a verse in the Bible that says 'there is no life on other planets'.


This creates a problem for you, not extraterrestrial life. The life exists no matter how you square it with your faith. :tiphat:


----------



## kv466

Chris said:


> I don't follow you. Anyone who has read the Bible will have learned that God created the entire universe, not just the earth. In six days, not seven.


That's for the correction. 'He rested on the seventh day'. Still, did you pull from this that WE are the ONLY ones he created? Is that mentioned in the Bible? Anyway,...I was taught to not get into discussions about religion or politics and it is one of the best lessons I ever received. I've already been doing enough of that on 'The Colbert Report' thread; something I shall stop as well. I signed on here to talk about music.

Besides,...I know we are not alone.


----------



## TresPicos

violadude said:


> I don't wan't to belittle anyones religion here, I'm just suggesting something as a possibility. But one thing to think about is that if you go back in all the world religions and myths and fables, replace the words "God" and "angels" with extraterrestrial beings and assume that these beings have very advanced technology, then a lot of those religions and myths make a lot more sense scientifically.


Definitely. Like Ezekiel's chariot or The Watchers in the Book of Enoch. :angel:

Life on other planets? - Yes. 
Intelligent life on other planets? - Yes. 
Intelligent life on other planets having made contact with us? - Probably.

It seems really unlikely that - in a universe with 100 billion galaxies with 100 billion stars each - the most intelligent life would be the dolphins on planet Earth.


----------



## clavichorder

TresPicos said:


> It seems really unlikely that - in a universe with 100 billion galaxies with 100 billion stars each - the most intelligent life would be the dolphins on planet Earth.


And crows, those little buggars are clever.


----------



## myaskovsky2002

I am from another planet.

Martin


----------



## Vaneyes

Chris said:


> I don't follow you. Anyone who has read the Bible will have learned that God created the entire universe, not just the earth. In six days, not seven.


And on the seventh, I watched NFL.


----------



## Amfibius

kv466 said:


> I signed on here to talk about music.


Me too. I am starting to find all this talk about religion vs. atheism a real turn-off.

While we are talking about aliens, over the past few days I have been watching this guy plot the downfall of the planet Earth:


----------



## Guest

Amfibius said:


> Me too. I am starting to find all this talk about religion vs. atheism a real turn-off.
> 
> While we are talking about aliens, over the past few days I have been watching this guy plot the downfall of the planet Earth:


 so just unsubscribe from this thread and find one you like


----------



## jhar26

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> Yes to all three. With regard to #3, "contact" could be as simple as hovering a craft over witnesses and radars, and effectively saying "hello" by presence that way.
> 
> One for the religious folks amongst us:* even the Vatican has released something not long ago (last year?) "allowing" the presence of aliens all as part of their God's creation.*


Naturally. If He exists He's an alien himself.


----------



## Amfibius

Andante said:


> so just unsubscribe from this thread and find one you like


The point is - it could be a really fun thread if people did not bring up religion all the time. Just like some other threads about music getting derailed about the religious beliefs of the composer.


----------



## Guest

Amfibius said:


> The point is - it could be a really fun thread if people did not bring up religion all the time. Just like some other threads about music getting derailed about the religious beliefs of the composer.


Take all religious thing with a pinch of salt old chap


----------



## Igneous01

yes
yes

and yes, as seen here, thankfully we managed to repel them before they took the city.


----------



## myaskovsky2002

1) yes 2) yes 3) ?

Martin


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

Yes, yes and Yes - think I was posting with one on STI the other day...........


----------



## Totenfeier

1) Conceivably.

2) Vanishingly improbable.

3) No.

Now, as an astronomer, I'm a very good English teacher, but I've read up on cosmology a bit, and I think there are two things to think about that I haven't seen so far on the thread. The first is the truly incomprehensible "biggity" of the universe. Barring science fiction "hyperspace", there likely hasn't been enough time for any alien communications signals to reach us, let alone actual _craft_ - and we would likely have to be positioned in exactly the right place to be in the signal's path (and wouldn't an information-bearing signal degrade over time and space anyway?)

The second is this. I'm going to make a totally unwarranted and uneducated assumption here, and you cosmologists can freely correct me: intelligent life that we would be able to comprehend can't evolve in gas giant planets, but only on small, rocky planets in the star's habitable zone, such as Earth. But here's the thing about Earth: it is, as far as I know, an extremely anomalous rocky planet in that it has a satellite that is a significant fraction of the size of its primary, about 1/4, I believe. In other words, Earth doesn't just have available liquid water; it has _tides_, which produce tidal pools, which, as I understand it, are pretty much necessary "laboratories" for molecular evolution (cycles of wetting and drying, differing levels of oxygen availability, and so forth).

I believe the most current theory of the Moon's formation is the Impact Hypothesis, which holds that the Moon was formed when another body in the forming solar system either grazed or impacted the forming Earth in such a way that this huge mass was torn away, but remained caught in the Earth's gravitational field.

Put 'em all together, and what have you got? A one-in-a-trillion (heck, a one-in-a-hundred trillion, I don't know) random accidental collision between an early-solar-system body and the proto-Earth caused the ejection of sufficient matter to form an unprecedentedly large satellite that _stirred_ the Earth's water like soup on a stove, creating an unimaginably, vanishingly unlikely thing - life.

Or something like that.


----------



## TxllxT

Totenfeier said:


> 1) Conceivably.
> 
> 2) Vanishingly improbable.
> 
> 3) No.
> 
> Now, as an astronomer, I'm a very good English teacher, but I've read up on cosmology a bit, and I think there are two things to think about that I haven't seen so far on the thread. The first is the truly incomprehensible "biggity" of the universe. Barring science fiction "hyperspace", there likely hasn't been enough time for any alien communications signals to reach us, let alone actual _craft_ - and we would likely have to be positioned in exactly the right place to be in the signal's path (and wouldn't an information-bearing signal degrade over time and space anyway?)
> 
> The second is this. I'm going to make a totally unwarranted and uneducated assumption here, and you cosmologists can freely correct me: intelligent life that we would be able to comprehend can't evolve in gas giant planets, but only on small, rocky planets in the star's habitable zone, such as Earth. But here's the thing about Earth: it is, as far as I know, an extremely anomalous rocky planet in that it has a satellite that is a significant fraction of the size of its primary, about 1/4, I believe. In other words, Earth doesn't just have available liquid water; it has _tides_, which produce tidal pools, which, as I understand it, are pretty much necessary "laboratories" for molecular evolution (cycles of wetting and drying, differing levels of oxygen availability, and so forth).
> 
> I believe the most current theory of the Moon's formation is the Impact Hypothesis, which holds that the Moon was formed when another body in the forming solar system either grazed or impacted the forming Earth in such a way that this huge mass was torn away, but remained caught in the Earth's gravitational field.
> 
> Put 'em all together, and what have you got? A one-in-a-trillion (heck, a one-in-a-hundred trillion, I don't know) random accidental collision between an early-solar-system body and the proto-Earth caused the ejection of sufficient matter to form an unprecedentedly large satellite that _stirred_ the Earth's water like soup on a stove, creating an unimaginably, vanishingly unlikely thing - life.
> 
> Or something like that.


As a beach walk expert I confirm your tidal pool hypothesis as the origin of life: every time we are amazed at the number of baby crabs heading for the sea and how the beach is kept clean by the ebb - flood tides. Compare that with a beach on a sweet water lake...


----------



## Xaltotun

1. Maybe, but maybe not right now. Taking into account the whole time-frame of the universe.
2. Maybe not. Life can thrive with many other adaptations besides intelligence.
3. No.


----------



## Guest

Yes.
Maybe.
No.


----------



## Pugg

EddieRUKiddingVarese said:


> Yes, yes and Yes - think I was posting with one on STI the other day...........


Are they al aliens there?


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

Pugg said:


> Are they al aliens there?


I believe what they told me...................


----------



## Art Rock

Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us. – BILL WATTERSON


----------



## JeffD

Would the aliens' music be atonal. Would they "understand" atonal music any better than I do?


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

Undestand it, they invented it................


----------



## JeffD

EddieRUKiddingVarese said:


> Undestand it, they invented it................


I was thinking we invented it and it is the reason they are staying away.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

JeffD said:


> I was thinking we invented it and it is the reason they are staying away.


Sorry to disappoint you- they are wanting for us to catch up and understand it..............


----------



## JeffD

EddieRUKiddingVarese said:


> Sorry to disappoint you- they are wanting for us to catch up and understand it..............


It does feel that way sometimes.


----------



## EdwardBast

Totenfeier said:


> 1) Conceivably.
> 
> 2) Vanishingly improbable.
> 
> 3) No.
> 
> Now, as an astronomer, I'm a very good English teacher, but I've read up on cosmology a bit, and I think there are two things to think about that I haven't seen so far on the thread. The first is the truly incomprehensible "biggity" of the universe. Barring science fiction "hyperspace", there likely hasn't been enough time for any alien communications signals to reach us, let alone actual _craft_ - and we would likely have to be positioned in exactly the right place to be in the signal's path (and wouldn't an information-bearing signal degrade over time and space anyway?)
> 
> The second is this. I'm going to make a totally unwarranted and uneducated assumption here, and you cosmologists can freely correct me: intelligent life that we would be able to comprehend can't evolve in gas giant planets, but only on small, rocky planets in the star's habitable zone, such as Earth. But here's the thing about Earth: it is, as far as I know, an extremely anomalous rocky planet in that it has a satellite that is a significant fraction of the size of its primary, about 1/4, I believe. In other words, Earth doesn't just have available liquid water; it has _tides_, which produce tidal pools, which, as I understand it, are pretty much necessary "laboratories" for molecular evolution (cycles of wetting and drying, differing levels of oxygen availability, and so forth).
> 
> I believe the most current theory of the Moon's formation is the Impact Hypothesis, which holds that the Moon was formed when another body in the forming solar system either grazed or impacted the forming Earth in such a way that this huge mass was torn away, but remained caught in the Earth's gravitational field.
> 
> Put 'em all together, and what have you got? A one-in-a-trillion (heck, a one-in-a-hundred trillion, I don't know) random accidental collision between an early-solar-system body and the proto-Earth caused the ejection of sufficient matter to form an unprecedentedly large satellite that _stirred_ the Earth's water like soup on a stove, creating an unimaginably, vanishingly unlikely thing - life.
> 
> Or something like that.


There has been plenty of time for vessels or probes to reach us even assuming speeds of 1% of the speed of light.

Your information is dated. Some scientists now believe the most likely place for life to form is in fresh water around geysers/hot springs and in the adjacent fields where there is a continuous wet-dry cycle. These same people claim that salinity is in and of itself an impediment to the development of life because it makes the formation of membrane like capsules required for single-celled life unlikely. Some of this theory has been borne out in labs, where it has been demonstrated that amino acids form with relative ease in the environments described above. So, the tidal thing is irrelevant. No moons or collisions required and tide-locked planets are just as likely to hold life. Vulcanism and liquid water would be enough.

Rocky planets are apparently numerous. Seven earth-sized ones have recently been identified in the Trappist I system, only forty light years away. Three of them are in a zone where liquid water is possible.

Some have speculated that the most likely means for "colonization" of the galaxy would be using von Neuman probes. Such probes using robotics and AI would be self-replicating, using resources on whatever planet they find and producing replicas of themselves, which would be launched to further destinations. Over millions of years one could reach large swaths of the galaxy in this way. We are probably within a century or less of the required technological advancement to do this.

There are a trillion stars in the galaxy and current estimates based on stars we have surveyed are that, on average, stars will have 1.6 planets each. This means there are likely 1.6 trillion planets. If even a tiny percentage of these meet the necessary conditions, I would guess that simple life forms exist on millions (at least) of planets in our galaxy. As for intelligent life, who knows?


----------



## Meyerbeer Smith

The universe is vast, and they find Earth-like planets every other day. I'd be more astonished if we were alone than if the universe teemed with sentient life.


----------



## EdwardBast

Art Rock said:


> Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us. - BILL WATTERSON


This is the inverse of the Fermi Paradox, which asks: If intelligent life exists why haven't we found any sign of it yet, given the billions of years it has had to send signals? Scientists take the Fermi Paradox very seriously. Watterson's Inverse Fermi Paradox is seriously funny.


----------



## Totenfeier

EdwardBast said:


> There has been plenty of time for vessels or probes to reach us even assuming speeds of 1% of the speed of light.
> 
> Your information is dated. Some scientists now believe the most likely place for life to form is in fresh water around geysers/hot springs and in the adjacent fields where there is a continuous wet-dry cycle. These same people claim that salinity is in and of itself an impediment to the development of life because it makes the formation of membrane like capsules required for single-celled life unlikely. Some of this theory has been borne out in labs, where it has been demonstrated that amino acids form with relative ease in the environments described above. So, the tidal thing is irrelevant. No moons or collisions required and tide-locked planets are just as likely to hold life. Vulcanism and liquid water would be enough.
> 
> Rocky planets are apparently numerous. Seven earth-sized ones have recently been identified in the Trappist I system, only forty light years away. Three of them are in a zone where liquid water is possible.
> 
> Some have speculated that the most likely means for "colonization" of the galaxy would be using von Neuman probes. Such probes using robotics and AI would be self-replicating, using resources on whatever planet they find and producing replicas of themselves, which would be launched to further destinations. Over millions of years one could reach large swaths of the galaxy in this way. We are probably within a century or less of the required technological advancement to do this.
> 
> There are a trillion stars in the galaxy and current estimates based on stars we have surveyed are that, on average, stars will have 1.6 planets each. This means there are likely 1.6 trillion planets. If even a tiny percentage of these meet the necessary conditions, I would guess that simple life forms exist on millions (at least) of planets in our galaxy. As for intelligent life, who knows?


Well, I'm pretty dated myself, so I'm not surprised. Liquid water and vulcanism, hm? I'll educate myself.

On the other hand, I have heard of von Neumann machines and I also think that's the way to go. Vastly greater efficiency than the Starship Enterprise (DON'T send the stars - um, whole senior staff - on every away mission)!

Plus, the redshirts can relax.


----------



## Larkenfield

I'm sure the human race is not alone and there is life on other planets, but not likely within our own solar system. There are countless galaxies and solar systems in other parts of the universe, and the likelihood there's intelligent life there seems highly probable. It's hard to imagine that Life on planet earth represents the height of intelligence or evolution. But the instantaneous perfection of the crop circles found here - so complex and beautiful that it's hard to imagine - may already be suggesting intelligent life higher than our own.


----------



## DeepR

As for why aliens haven't visited us yet, I think there are a couple of things to consider (leaving aside the question if intelligent, advanced aliens are likely to exist, or exist at all).

- The ridiculous distances they'd have to cover to get here.
- We haven't been around for a long time on the cosmic timescale. A very short time actually.
- We've been sending out radio signals for a very short time. Those radio signals decay and after a certain distance they aren't distinguishable from the background noise of the universe. So it's pretty much a myth that aliens might pick up those signals.
- The further away in the universe they might live, the further "back in time" they (might) see our planet. They can't possibly tell what earth currently looks like. And so they can't see/detect us either.
- And last but not least, we are simply not worth visiting considering the time and resources it would take for aliens to reach us. 

Only extremely advanced (and extremely unlikely) aliens that can break the laws of physics as we know them, might drop by on the fly someday. Just to toy with us and have some fun. But we would be of no real interest to them.


----------



## JeffD

So what if there is intelligence out there, and they have music. In fact they like the Starland Vocal Band.

Beethoven not so much.

Could we still call it intelligence?


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese

DeepR said:


> As for why aliens haven't visited us yet, I think there are a couple of things to consider (leaving aside the question if intelligent, advanced aliens are likely to exist, or exist at all).
> 
> - The ridiculous distances they'd have to cover to get here.
> - We haven't been around for a long time on the cosmic timescale. A very short time actually.
> - We've been sending out radio signals for a very short time. Those radio signals decay and after a certain distance they aren't distinguishable from the background noise of the universe. So it's pretty much a myth that aliens might pick up those signals.
> - The further away in the universe they might live, the further "back in time" they (might) see our planet. They can't possibly tell what earth currently looks like. And so they can't see/detect us either.
> - And last but not least, we are simply not worth visiting considering the time and resources it would take for aliens to reach us.
> 
> Only extremely advanced (and extremely unlikely) aliens that can break the laws of physics as we know them, might drop by on the fly someday. Just to toy with us and have some fun. But we would be of no real interest to them.


Some might say they are already here - you know where did DJT come from.............


----------



## Pugg

EddieRUKiddingVarese said:


> Some might say they are already here - you know where did DJT come from.............


I know nothing :devil:


----------



## geralmar

Totenfeier said:


> Well, I'm pretty dated myself, so I'm not surprised.


No reason it can't be both.


----------



## Flamme

It prolly exists and I WANT TO BELIEVE they have reached us at least one time in our written or unwritten history!


----------



## DeepR

I want to believe as well. It's an endlessly fascinating question.

On one hand you have:
- The unfathomable enormity of the universe 
- The increasing rate of detection of extrasolar planets. I believe they've found a few thousand by now, most of them by looking at a small patch in the sky as big as your fist. A small but not insignificant amount of those planets lies within the habitable zone of their star, so there can be liquid water (not too close to or too far from the star).
- The signs of liquid water oceans under the surface of some moons in our own solar system, which shows that there can be water outside the habitable zone of a star. 
- The existence of "extremophiles" on earth, tiny organisms that can survive under the most extreme conditions, which shows the adaptability and resilience of life.

On the other hand, you have all the conditions and events that took place on our precious blue sphere called earth that made (advanced) life possible in the first place, the combination of which seems to be extremely unlikely to arise and also extremely delicate.
From the very formation of the solar system, our planet and our moon to the climate changes, asteroid impacts, mass extinctions and all the smaller things that affected the evolution of life. From earth's atmosphere, magnetic field, stable orbit and axis of rotation to the abundance of oxygen and liquid water.
The more you learn about the theories of how it all came to be, the more you realize that earth might just be a miracle, an anomaly, in a universe that is otherwise so inhospitable and anti-life.
So, *if* earth-like conditions are required for the evolution of advanced, intelligent lifeforms as we like to see ourselves, the chances of all those things happening in a similar way elsewhere in the universe might be so incredibly small that even the very size of the universe is not enough to compensate.
Even if it's happening somewhere far away, those lifeforms face the same challenges as we do in detecting alien life and space travel.

I am quite hopeful that (signs of) simple lifeforms may be found someday, but remain a bit skeptical when it comes to more advanced and intelligent life.


----------



## ST4




----------



## Totenfeier

EddieRUKiddingVarese said:


> Some might say they are already here - you know where did DJT come from.............


Well, that's easy. Crawled up out of the bowels of hell, of course. :tiphat:


----------

