have they found anything?

[JoeTheJuggler]

All I'm saying is that intelligence is not a given.

I don't believe that's all you're saying.

If it were, you would acknowledge that just as it "may be" that we are unique in the galaxy, it also may be that there are hundreds or thousands of ET intelligent civilizations in the galaxy.

If you reject the latter possibility, you are in fact making a stronger claim that you're willing to defend.

If you're being honest, then I think you're arguing against a straw man. I don't think any reasonable person takes intelligence "as a given".

Questions that really, we at present still don't know. That's where we are in agreement.

If you believe that, then why won't you admit that there may also be hundreds or thousands of ET intelligent civilizations in the galaxy?

If you reject that possibility, you are claiming to know something that we don't know. If that's the case, you lack the integrity to defend the position you espouse.

 

[Radrook]

SURELY someone woud have noticed?

That assumes it wasn't an observed local phenomenon.

 

[paximperium]

That assumes it wasn't an observed local phenomenon.

Oh do tell. Tell us about your assumption and how it could've been possible?

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

That assumes it wasn't an observed local phenomenon.

Yes, I assume anything involving the Sun is not a local phenomenon.

ETA: In the cosmology of the people who wrote Joshua, the Sun was small and close and went around the Earth. They were wrong.

 

[amb]

Because their intelligence is not directed at tool making.


That is inherently false. There is no "pinacle" of anything in evolution. There is only the most efficient for survival in a given environment.


That is an unfounded assertion.


Sure.

Why has homo sapiens developed far more intelligence than he will ever need for survival? The animal kingdom live in the same eviroment as homo sapien yet for millions of years have shown to be static brain wise. Don't you think that the 'fluke' hypothesis regarding H/S may have a kernal of truth?
Why, only man has developed tool making abilities. And space travel.
Yes I'm aware that some animals and birds have very simple tool making abilities as well, but it's like comparing a dog's brain to a human one.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

Why has homo sapiens developed far more intelligence than he will ever need for survival?

How do you know we have? That's a really odd question.

Our intelligence, I think, is largely an advantage to living in very complex social groups.

ETA: Our mental faculties (language, pattern recognition, ability to infer agency and intent, etc.) give us a enormous selective advantage.

Why, only man has developed tool making abilities.

Man is not the only animal to develop tool making abilities. There's no point in asking why when it's not so.

Yes I'm aware that some animals and birds have very simple tool making abilities as well, but it's like comparing a dog's brain to a human one.

No, it's like comparing other tool making animals to the top (existing) tool making animal.

In fact, there were most likely other species of hominid that made tools in the past. Intelligence exists (and existed) on a continuum with no large breaks. The big advantage that humans have that made our technology really take off is extra-somatic memory (writing and such).

Sounds like you could do with a good class in evolutionary biology and anthropology. I remember the university I went to had a good one called "human origins".

 

[amb]

If you factor in that our universe has approximately 100 billion galaxies, each with their own suns, moons, and planets, you should guess that the odds are in the favor that their is. Just because we do not have the evidence that there is does NOT mean that we can conclude that there are no other life forms out there. Perhaps the other life forms aren't intelligent, just animals. If we have bacteria here on Earth that thrive in an enviornment of pure battery acid, life elsewhere can do the same. We have been sending out radio signals for about 60 years now. Those signals haven't even traveled 1/4 of the way across our own Milky Way galaxy. Scientists are discovering planets within our galaxy in the hundreds each year. How could we possibly say that there is no life elsewhere or any possibility of life elsewhere, when we can't even see or get close to the other planets distant from ours. We may even have other life forms within our own galaxy on one of Jupiter's moons. But it's either very primitive or microbial life. Remember, don't ever shut off your own imagination or beliefs just because there is some other person that knows nothing of Astrophysics to sway your opinion. My opinion on the subject--the odds are in the favor that there is microbial life elsewhere. Problem is, we will never be able to reach it because of the light-year distances that are between us; Moreover, everything is flying even further away from us at colossal speeds.

Source: Wiki answers.

 

[LarianLeQuella]

That assumes it wasn't an observed local phenomenon.

Exactly WTF does that even mean? Or are you part of the www.geocentricity.com crowd?

 

[LarianLeQuella]

We have been sending out radio signals for about 60 years now. Those signals haven't even traveled 1/4 of the way across our own Milky Way galaxy.

Try 0.05% (quite a long ways from 25%). As for the planet hunter folks, most (i.e. not all) have been inside 300 light years (0.25% of the glalaxy).

These are rough calculations, so I may be off by a bit, but even just what LITTLE we even really know about our own galaxy, not to mention about any types of different biology and intelligence... I just hate to see the sort of statements that people make asserting that there couldn't possibly be, or that at best it's not intelligent. We just don't have the data to draw that conclusion. And since we haven't found any more data, considering how little we've actually looked, and thus conclude it's a wasted effort is just assanine!

I sincerely would like for us to find something, but until we either DO, or can conclusively say there is none, we MUST contend with, "I don't know!"

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

So is some of this post from Wiki answers? If so, you should really quote it or something.

I'm sure all of it isn't, because Wiki probably wouldn't use "their" instead of "there".

At any rate, can you simply answer my question--do you accept that there may be hundreds or thousands of ET intelligent civilizations in our galaxy?

It sounds like you do, but you never really say that. If you don't, then you are arguing that you somehow know we are unique in the galaxy and not just that we might be.

If you factor in that our universe has approximately 100 billion galaxies, each with their own suns, moons, and planets, you should guess that the odds are in the favor that their is. Just because we do not have the evidence that there is does NOT mean that we can conclude that there are no other life forms out there. Perhaps the other life forms aren't intelligent, just animals. If we have bacteria here on Earth that thrive in an enviornment of pure battery acid, life elsewhere can do the same. We have been sending out radio signals for about 60 years now. Those signals haven't even traveled 1/4 of the way across our own Milky Way galaxy. Scientists are discovering planets within our galaxy in the hundreds each year. How could we possibly say that there is no life elsewhere or any possibility of life elsewhere, when we can't even see or get close to the other planets distant from ours. We may even have other life forms within our own galaxy on one of Jupiter's moons. But it's either very primitive or microbial life. Remember, don't ever shut off your own imagination or beliefs just because there is some other person that knows nothing of Astrophysics to sway your opinion. My opinion on the subject--the odds are in the favor that there is microbial life elsewhere. Problem is, we will never be able to reach it because of the light-year distances that are between us; Moreover, everything is flying even further away from us at colossal speeds. Source: Wiki answers.

Regarding the highlighted bit: I agree that even if there are hundreds or thousands of ET intelligent civilizations in the galaxy, we aren't likely to encounter them.

Everything within our galaxy is not flying further away from us at colossal speeds. Gravity holds things together locally. (Can you imagine if the distance between the Earth and the Sun were increasing? Or the distance between two points within your body?) Imagine expansion as the increase in space between galaxies.

 

[amb]

True. But the galaxies aren't. The distance between them is increasing by the second.
Physicist/author Paul Davies said as much when he stated: Seti is not a complete waste of money, but the odds of finding another civilization are million to one. Or words to that effect.

 

[paximperium]

True. But the galaxies aren't. The distance between them is increasing by the second.

This is only occurring between our galaxy and galaxies that are not bound together by gravity(ie, galaxies that are very far away), in fact the Milky Way will collide and merge with the Andromeda Galaxy in a few Billion years.

 

[Radrook]

Exactly WTF does that even mean? Or are you part of the www.geocentricity.com crowd?

It means exactly what it says in plain English. That you ignore possibilities in order to reach what you erroneously consider inevitable conclusions. Sure, they are inevitable. Only under the premise you narrow-mindedly set up. That's basic logic. Validity under a given premise doesn't constitute nor guarantee cogent reasoning.

BTW

The only crowd I'm part of is the anti-pop-goes-the weasel abiogenesis theory crowd.

 

[Lonewulf]

This is only occurring between our galaxy and galaxies that are not bound together by gravity(ie, galaxies that are very far away), in fact the Milky Way will collide and merge with the Andromeda Galaxy in a few Billion years.

Ah yeah, good point. There's been some other galaxies that have collided, and have provided us with a hell of a light show!

 

[paximperium]

It means exactly what it says in plain English. That you ignore possibilities in order to reach what you erroneously consider inevitable conclusions.

Which continues to be a BS argument. You are attempting to claim that religious belief is somehow "factual" and "scientific" and attacking science for not being to test the untestable.

No, science is limited to be able to test the natural world. Anything that interacts with the natural world can be tested, if not now then later. If something is untestable, it belongs in the realm of the abstract, fantasy or does not exist.

Sure, they are inevitable. Only under the premise you narrow-mindedly set up.

The irony and hypocrisy of this statement is pretty amazing.

That's basic logic. Validity under a given premise doesn't constitute nor guarantee cogent reasoning.

So? Science pretty much have stated that its primary assumption is Methodoloigical Naturalism. It works, it has continued to work and it is useful. Do you have any other method that works and produce any useful results at all?

The only crowd I'm part of is the anti-pop-goes-the weasel abiogenesis theory crowd.

Please expand on this version of non-scientific abiogenesis.

Who believes in it? Who is wasting money on this? The only version of abiogenesis that fits this definition is when "god" popped humans into existance from mud.

 

[LarianLeQuella]

It means exactly what it says in plain English.

Ah, so you mean the moon IS made of wenslydale then!

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

True. But the galaxies aren't. The distance between them is increasing by the second.

Yes. But isn't your claim that we are/may be unique in the galaxy? If so, expansion is irrelevant.

Physicist/author Paul Davies said as much when he stated: Seti is not a complete waste of money, but the odds of finding another civilization are million to one. Or words to that effect.

OK.

But do you accept that there may be hundreds or thousands of ET intelligent civilizations in our galaxy?

ETA: I think you meant one to a million, no? Or that the odds against finding another civilization are a million to one.

At any rate, when you say that, I wonder what the ratio 1: 1 million corresponds to. 1 in a million years? One in a million stars we look at?

That's why I say this business of saying ET intelligence is "rare" is a relative term. There are slim odds to winning a lottery--it's very nearly zero. But if you buy a billion tickets (or ten billion or 100 billion), you're nearly certain (if not absolutely certain) to win.

 

[amb]

This is only occurring between our galaxy and galaxies that are not bound together by gravity(ie, galaxies that are very far away), in fact the Milky Way will collide and merge with the Andromeda Galaxy in a few Billion years.

Of course you are right. Clusters of galaxies are held together by gravity and possibly by dark matter.

 

[amb]

Yes. But isn't your claim that we are/may be unique in the galaxy? If so, expansion is irrelevant.



OK.

But do you accept that there may be hundreds or thousands of ET intelligent civilizations in our galaxy?

ETA: I think you meant one to a million, no? Or that the odds against finding another civilization are a million to one.

At any rate, when you say that, I wonder what the ratio 1: 1 million corresponds to. 1 in a million years? One in a million stars we look at?

That's why I say this business of saying ET intelligence is "rare" is a relative term. There are slim odds to winning a lottery--it's very nearly zero. But if you buy a billion tickets (or ten billion or 100 billion), you're nearly certain (if not absolutely certain) to win.

You may well be right. There may be a billion lifeforms elsewhere in the galaxy. In fact I would be surprised if there weren't. [ I'm thinking very primitive lifeforms ]
But looking at the path it took here on Earth, intelligence is not a given. If it is, does that mean the universe is bound to produce intelligence if the right conditions arise on other Earthlike planets, or even non-Earth like planets?
In that theory, I sense design. The cosmos was created with mankind in mind in other words. In a multiverse situation it's no problem, out of possibly trillions of baby universes, one is bound to produce intelligent life. But if this is all there is and intelligence is widespread, how did it come about?
There have been billions of lifeforms right here on Earth, only one has developed enough to even ponder these questions. [ that sounds familiar]

 

[Radrook]

Ah, so you mean the moon IS made of wenslydale then!

No. It means that the moon is made of the living mush that happily and magically pops in the never-never land of certain minds whenever they see a little bit of water.