• 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

Touche` Lonewulf. Although I tend to accept that not everyone will have the same interests as I (world would be rather boring that way). I think he was taunted as a young man while carrying a copy of LotR around, and has hated it ever since based on that emotionally scarring incident. That theory could also be totally loopy! :P
 
Yeah, other than those galaxies full of billions of stars, hydrogen, water, metals, and organic compouns, the universe is pretty empty.
 
godless dave said:
Yeah, other than those galaxies full of billions of stars, hydrogen, water, metals, and organic compouns, the universe is pretty empty.
Click to expand...
And planets, comets, dust lanes, debris, asteroids, fine porcelain, cats, ivy-covered brick buildings, and the contents of Chad Everett's trunk.*


*That last one a reference to a David Anthony Higgins comedy sketch I once saw. It was a spoof of the $20,000 pyramid, and the category they failed to get was "Everything in the universe". The Dick Clark character says, "Don't turn around yet. What if he'd said, "The contents of Chad Everett's trunk?" and the Higgins' character (the contestant) says, "I don't know. Everything in the universe?"
 
Makaya325, there's some ulterior motive in operation here and I suspect it's connected to your fundamentalist religious beliefs.
Why not just come clean and say, "the Bible told me so"? D
 
Dale said:
Makaya325, there's some ulterior motive in operation here and I suspect it's connected to your fundamentalist religious beliefs.
Why not just come clean and say, "the Bible told me so"? D
Click to expand...

I stated that i am an atheist, and feel all religions are poisons of the mind. Just because im an atheist, doesnt mean i believe in et life yet. Ward isnt religious.
 
Yet you stick with a conclusive, deductive (not inductive, as scientists are wont to stick to) conclusion with such fanatical zeal, and with no real support given for your arguments.
 
Lonewulf said:
Yet you stick with a conclusive, deductive (not inductive, as scientists are wont to stick to) conclusion with such fanatical zeal, and with no real support given for your arguments.
Click to expand...

No. I just gave you reasons to doubt the guarantee of et life's existence. Please show me references that rebute the rare earth theory. Non-biased sources please:D
 
Poisoning the Well; you already have your mind set up that any source I provide is "biased" if it happens to disagree with you (see your previous statements where you called all those that believed in the possibility of alien life "woo"), and it's rather obvious that you do. I'm not Sisyphus.
 
Makaya, I asked you before, but you didn't answer.

If we ARE alone in the universe? So what?

(Added) And if we are NOT alone in the universe? So what?
 
makaya325 said:
No. I just gave you reasons to doubt the guarantee of et life's existence. Please show me references that rebute the rare earth theory. Non-biased sources please
Click to expand...

Immitation is the sincerest form of flattery:

kitakaze said:
makaya325 said:
kitakaze said:
Makaya, among other things, I am waiting for...

(snip)

- You citing an example of a traditional tale of the Hupa about Bigfoot. Not a Bigfoot enthusiast's website reference.
Click to expand...
What should it be from? A cynics site?
Click to expand...
This is more evasion. All I'm asking you is to give us an example of a traditional Hupa tale of Bigfoot. I said don't give me any Bigfoot enthusiast sites. That means an un-biased source. If it that is some major challenge for you, then I 'll give you a pass and you can just say something from your long memory of Bigfoot and I'll research it my self.
Click to expand...
 
You know this discussion seems to be like this (possibly bad) analogy. It is like someone taking a glass and dipping it into the ocean, and then taking a picture of the glass of water; then you drawing the conclusion that no complex life can exist in the Atlantic ocean because we have scanned the entire ocean.

We don't actually see the entire universe, and honestly we really don't know a lot about the other systems in our own galaxy; much less other galaxies.

The problem is this, the possibility of alien life (even intelligent) elsewhere in the universe would be statistically high.

The other problem is, the possibility of alien life (even intelligent) ever coming in contact with us is statistically low.

And even if one day we got a signal, or an alien satellite wandered into our solar system, there would be a high chance that he originating culture would have died a long time ago. Not to mention that even the radio signals we have been generating for years will not likely make it far before they decay.
 
Last edited:
makaya325 said:
No. I just gave you reasons to doubt the guarantee of et life's existence.
Click to expand...
NO one is saying et life is "guaranteed" or certain to exist. This is known as the strawman fallacy. You've mischaracterized your opponent's position as an easily defeated position and have not argued against the actual position.

We're just saying that there's no evidence to support your assertion that et intelligence doesn't exist.

Please show me references that rebute [sic] the rare earth theory. Non-biased sources please:D
Click to expand...
I have given you valid arguments to show 1) that some of those so-called requirements for higher life forms on Earth are just speculation and I could as logically speculate the opposite, and 2) the rare Earth theory only argues that ET intelligence might be "rare" (a relative term, as I've pointed out repeatedly) and not that we are the only example of it in the cosmos.

It sounds like you're holding out the assertions made by the rare Earth theory as some sort of argument by authority. They're just assertions, not evidence.
 
JoeTheJuggler said:
And planets, comets, dust lanes, debris, asteroids, fine porcelain, cats, ....
Click to expand...

Hey Joe,

please keep my cats out of this mess. At least they are here, which for me is proof that not only humans are intelligent! Heck, they can associate "can opener noise" with "actual food". No matter how far they are away (they are all free to go out whenever they want, thanks to the cat-door). Now tell me that this isn't intelligent or at least complex :D

Oh ... makaya did say something? Heck, i'm sure that goalpost was right around the corner yesterday. Must be a magic, self-moving kind of goalpost.

Greetings,

Chris
 
makaya325 said:
No. I just gave you reasons to doubt the guarantee of et life's existence. Please show me references that rebute the rare earth theory. Non-biased sources please:D
Click to expand...

Do you realize that no one, ever, in this thread said something like "there guaranteed is life in the rest of the universe"?

Please answer the following question:

You already have admitted the undeniable truth that some light which we happen to capture in our telescopes is millions and billions of light years away. You also acknowledged that this lis, which we see, is actually from said millions or billion light years in the past.

Now, can you please point to any evidence that:
a) live can not appear on some planet in that period of time
b) we know for sure that what we capture on these images is actually what really was there
c) that the overall situation has not changed over all these millions and billions of years, that is, that there is no way that the circumstances there _now_ could support life
d) that all we see when we look in the universe is actually really all that is there
e) that all oceanic life is 100% explored and known
f) that only humans are considered to be intelligent life

Can you answer _any_one_ of these questions with 100% sincerity, and back up that answer with independent sources?

If you can for any one of these questions, and if only one, we might discuss the topic further. Until then, your assertions are solely a product of your obviously very limited ability to think.

So, care to answer one or more of these questions?

Oh, and this time, please, leave the goalposts where they are, OK? I am tired of searching them everyday again. Or with every post you make, that is.
 
M325, how can you continue to defend your position in the face of empirical evidence to the contrary? What about Mork or the cone heads; how do you explain them? D
 
makaya325 said:
No. I just gave you reasons to doubt the guarantee of et life's existence. Please show me references that rebute the rare earth theory. Non-biased sources please:D
Click to expand...
You started this thread on the basis of an absolute stone-cold guarantee that there is definitely no life in the Universe other than that which we find on this rock we cling to.

That argument was refuted by several posters, not a single one of whom said anything like "There is definitely life elsewhere in the Universe." Many have said that they think it extremely likely, some even go so far as to say that they find it highly unlikely that there isn't life in other parts of the Universe.

On top of this, the references that you use to support your argument don't.

The rare Earth theory only states that Earth-like planets, capable of sustaining life as we know it, may be far rarer than was previously thought. In fact, it uses a modified version of the Drake equation, which you call pseudoscience. The Drake equation isn't pseudoscience, but it also isn't particularly useful, mainly because far too many of the parameters in it can currently only be guessed at. The same problem applies to the modified version used in rare Earth theory. And that's one of the main reasons we are still looking for other planets and other solar systems, so we can gain better knowledge of those parameters, and make better calculations.

We may never get an answer to the question of whether or not we are alone in the Universe, but saying, "We haven't found any yet, so we should stop looking" is the very antithesis of science. If you seriously want to search for truth, and discover new and interesting things, then you must never stop looking, and never stop questioning.


So now you are backed into a corner, with three options;

1. Admit that you might possibly have been wrong, and overstated your case, or

2. Come out fighting.

3. Run away.

Option 2 is, sadly, not much of an option, as your above post shows. You're arguing with people who are far more knowledgeable on the subject than you, and have far more experience in debate. Option 3 rather speaks for itself.
 
makaya325 said:
Lone, the universe doesnt care if people say life has to exist elsewhere.
Click to expand...

It also doesn't care if they say it doesn't.

I might have been a little heated when starting the topic. The truth is: I do think that microbes are likely to exist, however, the transition from microbes to complex life is incredible to consider
Click to expand...

No it isn't, since it happened here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom