• 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

Please listen: The fact that life on earth was a freaking miracle proves that, despite many galaxies, alien life in no shape or form could ever exist.

1) I think you don't know what the difference between a 'fact' and an 'opinion' is.

2) This is a circular argument. 'Life on Earth is a miracle because we've never seen it elsewhere, which proves we'll never see it elsewhere...'

I would wager that 90% of members on jref would agree.

Casinos must love you, then. The fact that most people in this thread disagree seems to be a good indication that your wager's based on poor odds.

Athon
 
You need the right sun, the right planet size, the right galaxy, the right moon,

Who says?

Besides which, stars like the sun and galaxies like the Milky Way are extremely common, although I don't know why the kind of galaxy would matter.
 
Godless, our sun-like stars make up only 5% of the stars in our galaxy. Most of those stars are in deadly areas, and so on.

Most Mainstream scientists laugh at the idea of et life. Just ask peter ward and donald browlee
 
Godless, our sun-like stars make up only 5% of the stars in our galaxy. Most of those stars are in deadly areas, and so on.

Most Mainstream scientists laugh at the idea of et life. Just ask peter ward and donald browlee

From Peter Ward's wiki:

Ward is co-author, along with astronomer Donald Brownlee, of the best-selling Rare Earth: Why Complex Life Is Uncommon in the Universe, published in 2000. In that work, the authors suggest that the universe is fundamentally hostile to advanced life, and that, while simple life might be abundant, the likelihood of widespread lifeforms as advanced as those on Earth is marginal.


So "most scientists" consist of two who co-authored a book together who say it's unlikely but don't "laugh at it."

You're REALLY bad at this.
 
Godless, our sun-like stars make up only 5% of the stars in our galaxy. Most of those stars are in deadly areas, and so on.

Most Mainstream scientists laugh at the idea of et life. Just ask peter ward and donald browlee

5% times 200,000,000,000 = 10,000,000,000 stars like our sun in the galaxy. For the sake of an argument, let's assign most to be 75% in your "deadly areas". (though I doubt very much that any significant percentage of our galaxy is completely uninhabitible to life) 25% times 10,000,000,000 = 2,500,000,000 potentially habitible solar systems that have a star like ours. Add in the much more common smaller stars that could host earth like planets closer to themselves in a habitable zone and I'm failing to see the problem for life.


ETA: crap, I just used math of some sort in my 1,000th post. That seems wrong to me.
 
Last edited:
Godless, our sun-like stars make up only 5% of the stars in our galaxy. Most of those stars are in deadly areas, and so on.

Either you just asserted that there are only 20 stars in our galaxy or you confirmed 20 to 60 billion sun-like stars in the milky way.

Still, what is a "deadly area"?
 
deleted due to stupid.
 
Godless, our sun-like stars make up only 5% of the stars in our galaxy. Most of those stars are in deadly areas, and so on.
I don't think you have any clue how many stars there are in the universe.

Most Mainstream scientists laugh at the idea of et life. Just ask peter ward and donald browlee
"Most" mainstream scientists? Please name five, and provide citations and quotes that support your allegation. Also please tell us which area of science they currently are researching in. I wouldn't necessarily trust someone in the field of political science or engineering to have an authoratative opinion on cosmology.
 
The universe is big. Very big. Infact, it's so big that us human beings find it absolutely mind boggling, that is; it's far too big for our minds to grasp. The Milky Way (Our galaxy) is 1000 light years deep and 100,000 light years wide comprising an estimated minimum of 200 Billion stars.

That's just one galaxy. The biggest problem is that you can bandy around 10,000 or 100,000 and we understand the numbers easily, some of us can even visualise those numbers, but who can visualise those numbers when they relate to light years and the equivalent distance? The answer is very few, if anyone can.

There's a famous case of a jungle dwelling people who had no concept of distance and therefore perspective, that is; objects look smaller the further away they are from the viewer. People who have only ever lived in an environment where they can only see 20ft cannot understand why a human being is not the same size as they are if they see a human 500 yards away.

The same is true of human beings with regard to how vast the galaxy is. We just cannot comprehend how big and how many stars are contained in our galaxy and then comprehend the probabilities of other "Earths" existing let alone other planets that could contain life that we would have absolutely no conception of. We can estimate mathematically, but we cannot comprehend the numbers.

Secondly we assume that life is just like that which we see and experience. Why? Why can't life be very different? Why do we assume that we are the norm? Perhaps we are the exception and other life forms, based on other chemistries, are the norm. What is special about us? Why is it that human beings always think that we are special because we cannot grasp the incredibly huge numbers? Human beings are naturally poor at statistical analysis, we tend to be anthropomorphous in our outlook and thinking, just like the OP.

To the OP - what is so special about the Earth and human beings?

There are an estimated 200 billion (200,000,000,000) stars in our galaxy. Even if 1% had a planet containing life that would be 2,000,000,000 stars. Lets say that 1% of that had intelligent life then that would leave 20,000,000 (20 million solar systems).

When we use tools such as the Hubble Space Telescope we can see deep into space. Regions that appear black and empty suddenly show, under examination, hundreds of galaxies. There are an estimated 125 Billion galaxies in the observable universe.

Even if we think of life as being extremely rare, the simple scale and numbers are so against us that any individual given the idea that;

a) we are not unique in our intelligence, b) there are an unimaginable and intangible number of stars and therefore solar systems that have the conditions to contain life exist, c) intelligent life amongst those is very rare but possible.

Is most likely to be right.

Why are human beings so special? Why do people think that the circumstances that arose on Earth could not produce us unless through intervention yet we have lower estimations of 200 Billion stars in our own galaxy and 125 Billion galaxies in our observable universe. We are most likely not special so why do some of act like we are?
 
Sun, wrong, there are at most 50 billion stars in the galaxy, and then you have to go through a strict set of criteria:

planet must be right size, sun must be right type, right area in galaxy, right age, large jupiter to protect it from meteorites and asteroids, no black holes near, not near inner rim of galaxy, etc and so on. Why is it that you dont follow the logic that life is non existent elsewhere? Isnt it common sense that the universe is devoid of other life?
 
Art

Peter ward
donald browlee
michael hart
James randi

Drudgewire already pretty effectively destroyed your argument with regards to Peter Ward and Donald Browlee above. James Randi is not a practicing scientist, and I would be surprised to learn that he holds this view.

That leaves one that I'm unaware of. You're well short of the 5 Arthwollipot asked for.
 
Art

Peter ward
donald browlee
michael hart
James randi


Randi's a scientist? For that matter, do you have quotes to support the assertion he "laughs at" the notion of the possibility of life outside of earth?

I mean, the president of his educational foundation doesn't agree and has said so within the last two months. Don't you think that's something Randi would have addressed?
 
Please listen: The fact that life on earth was a freaking miracle proves that, despite many galaxies, alien life in no shape or form could ever exist. I would wager that 90% of members on jref would agree.
I'd wager that you'd lose that wager.

Godless, our sun-like stars make up only 5% of the stars in our galaxy. Most of those stars are in deadly areas, and so on.

Most Mainstream scientists laugh at the idea of et life. Just ask peter ward and donald browlee
If most mainstream scientists laugh at the idea then why are searches for Earth-like planets getting funded?

We know for an absolute fact that life can exists in this Universe, and we'd be extremely stupid and arrogant to think that we were in some way special. The number of stars that could support life is literally astronomical! We've located other solar systems, including one with an Earth-like planet.

If you're wondering why we haven't found more Earth-like planets, it's because they're hard to detect, and the observations take a long time. For instance, the techniques we use would have a very hard time detecting the Earth itself, because the gas giant planets would dominate the signals we look for in these systems. However, new techniques are being developed, and results are expected in the next few years.

I say all this as a mainstream scientist, an astrophysicist in fact, and know of nobody in my field who laughs at the idea.
 
Sun, wrong, there are at most 50 billion stars in the galaxy, and then you have to go through a strict set of criteria:
Current estimates are 200-400 billion starts. wiki Let's examine your criteria.

planet must be right size,
Planet could be a small moon with a water ocean (like Enceledus and Europa in our own system) up to several times the size of earth for life as we know it.
sun must be right type,
It doesn't have to be like our sun. A planet closer to a red dwarf or farther from a larger star could do just fine.
right area in galaxy,
With a few exceptions like the black hole very nearby or the very center, I'm having a hard time figuring out what these supposedly hostile areas of the galaxy are.
right age,
Disagree. Life was possible very soon after the planets formed in our solar system and will remain so for another billion years or so on Earth before the sun heats up too much. A planet earth sized closer to the orbit of Mars would have even longer
large jupiter to protect it from meteorites and asteroids,
Not necessary for life to develop, though Jupiter does certainly make extinctions more rare
no black holes near, not near inner rim of galaxy, etc and so on.
As far as it goes, but who knows how common black holes are? And it'd have to be very close indeed to have any effect at all unless it was actively feeding. As far as the inner rim(rim?) of the galaxy, if there were very complex gravitational forces going on I could see planets having a hard time maintaining a friendly to life orbit, but that's about it. Our supermassive black hole is not feeding, so it causes no danger unless you're really close.
Why is it that you dont follow the logic that life is non existent elsewhere? Isnt it common sense that the universe is devoid of other life?
Because there's lots of stars out there and planets look to be pretty common too. Your arguments here don't seem to be limiting the number of potential life bearers much. We've got 4 cantidates for life bearing bodies in this solar system alone (one proven). It is in no way common sense that there's no life in the rest of the universe.
 
Last edited:
Please listen: The fact that life on earth was a freaking miracle proves that, despite many galaxies, alien life in no shape or form could ever exist. I would wager that 90% of members on jref would agree.

There are no "miracles".
 

Back
Top Bottom