• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

alien life possibility is pathetic

Lonewulf said:
I wonder why Makaya clings so ridiculously to his certainty. Reminds me of almost religious zeal; maybe if he repeats himself enough times, he might just convince one (maybe even himself).

It's sad, to see a man so much a fundamentalist, that he cannot admit even the possibility of his being wrong... or question his many presumptions.
Click to expand...


In all fairness, Lonewulf, I think makaya325 is (very, very slowly) making some progress. For, one he's gone from "no life at all", to "no complex life", to "no advanced life". I hope makaya325 sticks around these forums for a while, because there is a possibility he may learn some things.

makaya325, this board is full of very clever, very educated people and there is a good reason the word "Educational" appears in this foundation's name. Use the knowledge you find here.


makaya325 said:
When i asked my biology teacher if life existed out there, he said that it was silly for people to even CONSIDER advanced life possible
Click to expand...


Are you sure he didn't say it was silly for people to EXPECT advanced life? Keep in mind, makaya325, it isn't impossible for a biology teacher to be just plain wrong.
 
Last edited:
Robert Oz said:
In all fairness, Lonewulf, I think makaya325 is (very, very slowly) making some progress. For, one he's gone from "no life at all", to "no complex life", to "no advanced life". I hope makaya325 sticks around these forums for a while, because there is a possibility he may learn some things.
Click to expand...
I'm not convinced.

He goes from "no life at all" to "no complex life" to "no advanced life" to "most likely for life not to exist" to "no life at all" to "no complex life" to "no life at all" to...

He seesaws, he didn't improve. He repeats old rhetoric, and then phrases it another way, changing the goalposts all over the place.

He tries to go with the more reasonable A) Life is rare, and then uses that as an excuse to assert B) Life is non-existent.

He also ignores all the times he's been called out on specific claims, such as that alien life must necessarily be able to go faster than the speed of light (something that contemporary physics calls impossible to just VERY highly improbable and VERY energy-costly), and that the oceans have been 100% explored (changed to "we've discovered every large animal in the ocean").

It's tiring, and it's not progress; it's tactics.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by makaya325 View Post
When i asked my biology teacher if life existed out there, he said that it was silly for people to even CONSIDER advanced life possible
Click to expand...

Which, unfortunately, explains a lot when it comes the state of our education system.
 
So you're saying that you'll only admit that you're not 100% certain that there's no life when you've been proven wrong definitively.

Yeah, that's much better. :rolleyes:

I wonder how much of science works that way.

"Oh yes, there's no possibility at all of finding another planet. I'll admit I'm wrong only when we discover another one!" *Years go along until proper telescopes are found, so ergo, he was right!!111*

makaya325 said:
X, why? Because teachers dont blatantly state "Oh yes! Little green men are out there!"
Click to expand...

The "little green men" statement demonstrates your lack of imagination.



Also...

Didn't you state that you wanted SETI to be disbanded?

So, let me get this straight. Overall, you're saying:

"I'll only admit that I might actually be wrong and don't understand life and the possibility of life in every single way, and that (all, complex, insert whatever adjective here depending on Makaya's mood, apparently) life is not possible in all corners of the universe, only when the organization I think should be dismantled finds something. Until then, the organization should be dismantled."

Apparently, you can't keep all your arguments straight, or you don't care to.
 
Last edited:
Monster Machine said:
Reality check, just because the universe is big doesnt prove anything. It can be big, and empty of space. Our universe is big! Whoa, big deal, Its also big and DEADLY. Incredibly hostile, and the fact that not one shred of any kind of et life so far is damning.

So we should stop looking? Your statement is as ridiculous as the following:

"Honey, I can't find my car keys."
"Did you look under the couch?"
"Yes. It's the only place I checked!"
"Well, stop looking then... they're lost for good. I'll put the car up for sale on Craigslist"

As well, by your logic, we should now end finding cures for AIDS, MS, MD, etc. I mean, gosh - if they haven't found a cure yet then they never will, right?

Monster
Click to expand...
Quoting, as this fits Makaya's last piece of garbage quite nicely.
 
makaya325 said:
X, why? Because teachers dont blatantly state "Oh yes! Little green men are out there!"
Click to expand...

No, because he is a moron. It does help explain some the posts I've read here though. Moron teachers often produce moron students.
 
makaya325 said:
Lone, i would admit im wrong the day seti recieves a signal
Click to expand...

makaya325 said:
X, why? Because teachers dont blatantly state "Oh yes! Little green men are out there!"
Click to expand...


makaya325,

Instead of coming on here and posting one-liners that show a back-and-forth change of opinion from post to post, how about answering some questions. Please address the following:

1. Can you admit it is possible for microbial (or some other form of simple life) to exist on other planets?

2. If so, can you admit that it is possible for this life to evolve into more complex life-forms?

3. Since no one is arguing that aliens have visited Earth, why do you keep bringing up things like "little green men" and other obvious references to UFOs and science fiction?

4. Why do you think that life on other planets would have to be highly technologically advanced?

If you keep ignoring questions, I think it's time to give up on this thread.
 
makaya325 said:
1st off, life is very very PRECIOUS. It has to have very specific conditions for it to even exist for a certain amount of time. What are the chances a planet doesnt get affected by a supernova, gamma ray, asteroid, solar flare etc at all for 5 billion straight years? Incredibly small, if not non-existent.
Click to expand...

Jolly, gosh. Where the hell do you get those ideas, anyway ? How can YOU tell how small those odds are and nobody else can ?

When i asked my biology teacher if life existed out there, he said that it was silly for people to even CONSIDER advanced life possible
Click to expand...

Well, as we all know, if Person B is right, then there is no life elsewhere in the universe. QED.

... oh, wait...
 
makaya325 said:
Lone, i would admit im wrong the day seti recieves a signal
Click to expand...

Again, the results of SETI are extremely limited. SETI may never receive a signal, and yet ET intelligent life could exist in abundance.

Here's a question for the technically savvy people here:

Imagine someone out there with a SETI program pointing an Arecibo sized telescope exactly at us. What's the farthest they could be and still receive the signals we've sent out (that is Amos and Andy, I Love Lucy and so on, since we've never, to my knowledge, intentionally broadcast a strong signal to the cosmos)?

It's the same question as, what's the farthest away we could detect a civilization just like our own?

Makaya, I guarantee the answer is an area that is much smaller than 1/100th the volume of the galaxy. And I don't believe even within those limits we've focussed our radio telescopes on every single point yet.

And then, there's the time dimension. If they're 150 light years away and are right now pointing the telescope at us, I don't think they'd receive any signals yet. (And SETI is trying to cover as much of the sky as we can, so it doesn't just dwell on one point for years at a time to see if something changes.) If you were out there, you'd conclude that Earthlings don't exist (as complex life, or intelligent life or wherever your goalposts are at the moment).

Does this help you see that your claim that we are unique is a claim that goes way beyond the data?
 
Last edited:
Not to mention that advanced ET cultures within say, a sphere with 40ly radius, which do not produce high-intensity radio signals will be missed by SETI.

A negative SETI result is not necessarily a negative for ET civilizations.
 
Correa Neto said:
Not to mention that advanced ET cultures within say, a sphere with 40ly radius, which do not produce high-intensity radio signals will be missed by SETI.
Click to expand...
That's what I'm asking about. How far are the limits of detection of the radio signals we have "sent" (radio, TV, etc.)? How far away could someone detect us, given what we've actually done (not what we might be capable of doing)?
 
Think of possible technological trends for the next centuries- maybe our current broadcasts will be considered as a waste of energy and/or highly inneficient by then. We tend to think of more and more broadcasting power, but we actually just don`t know how it will be. Maybe our distant offspring`s data transfers will rely mostly on some sort of combination of cables, high-precision radio or laser beams and high-sensitivity antennas which would require less powerfull signals. Such a world would be much dimmer on radio frequencies than Earth nowadays is.

I tend to think this is one of SETI`s Achiles heel. A hipothetical world located 40ly from us who happened to make this transition between a bright and a dim radiosource world anytime before 41 years ago would not be located.
 
There are also the signals we've sent to and from our interplanetary probes. How far away could those be detected?

(I really have no idea. I sort of assume that stuff like my wireless microphone or the signal from my garage door opener are probably not detectable by an Arecibo sized dish even at distances of hundreds of miles--that is, distances well within our own solar system.)
 
yep

1. Can you admit it is possible for microbial (or some other form of simple life) to exist on other planets?
Click to expand...

Sure, why not? Earth can contaminate any planet it lands on!


2.
If so, can you admit that it is possible for this life to evolve into more complex life-forms?
Click to expand...

Improbable. We do know the evolution of life to complex life took a very long time, from 3.6 billion years to 500 millions years. And we had it easy. I look at it like this when it comes to alien planets. Lets say life is represented by blocks, and the tower we want to build with those blocks is complex life. Tell me this: What are the chances that the blocks will form a large tower without any dangers, like solar flares, asteroids, gamma rays, black holes, etc? So every time the microbial life trys to build its tower, a gamma ray would represent knocking down the tower, and then life has to begin again or die out

3.
Since no one is arguing that aliens have visited Earth, why do you keep bringing up things like "little green men" and other obvious references to UFOs and science fiction?
Click to expand...

The search for other civilizations is like looking for little green men. Looking for microbes is less controversial

4
. Why do you think that life on other planets would have to be highly technologically advanced?
Click to expand...

The evolution of complex life to intelligent life is very probable, so any complex life would emerge into intelligent life. Since we have scanned the whole sky and came up empty, its safe to assume that intelligent life nor complex life exist.


If you keep ignoring questions, I think it's time to give up on this thread.[/QUOTE]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom