Are we alone in the universe? (poll)

[SilverKnight]

Do you believe in (intelligent, non-intelligent) life outside our planet ?
How will they affect our ways of thinking if we ever came to a world wide contact and did they really created us in their own image as ancient alien theorist believe ?

I believe we're not alone, I believe in ET's an in the presence of ET visitors to our planet then ever before. I have witnessed UFO's behind the mountains in my home town, in Miami Florida several times as well, and in one occasion here in PA.

I added a poll so you can voice our your opinion even more.

http://s2.postimage.org/7x2ckvjgp/20627712.jpg (http://postimage.org/)

[Pallantides]

I believe their might be intelligent life out there, but one can never be 100% sure until we get undeniable proof of it.

[SilverKnight]

I believe their might be intelligent life out there, but one can never be 100% sure until we get undeniable proof of it.

True, I once was a skeptic until I saw wonders. I think one day will be the "big" day when everyone will stop being a skeptic. It's more of when, then if ever.

[Sikeliot]

They exist but will never know who we are and we will never know who they are.

[Maddy]

I def think there is other life out there....but some so called "aliens" might really be just inter-dimensional beings....I believe that there are beings all around us, but that they are just on a different frequency level....so we can't see them, they can't see us....all on the third dimension....but I also think on higher planes, there are beings that can see us, but we can't see them (some may call them angels)....

One of my goals in life is to be captured by aliens....

[2Cool]

100% yes they exist. The odds that they don't are so small it would be statistically impossible. The only reason I can think of that someone wouldn't believe they exist is if they were religious.

Whether or not they visit us, I don't know. Personally I don't think so since I don't think we are that interesting.

[Pallantides]

One of my goals in life is to be captured by aliens....

Are we talking about aliens from outer space now or the illegal kind?






...sorry:D

[Incal]

I def think there is other life out there....but some so called "aliens" might really be just inter-dimensional beings....I believe that there are beings all around us, but that they are just on a different frequency level....so we can't see them, they can't see us....all on the third dimension....but I also think on higher planes, there are beings that can see us, but we can't see them (some may call them angels)....

One of my goals in life is to be captured by aliens....

I pretty much agree with what you think except for the last part :D

[Xenomorph]

I am an alien (you guys couldn't decipher it from the username)?

[SilverKnight]

I def think there is other life out there....but some so called "aliens" might really be just inter-dimensional beings....I believe that there are beings all around us, but that they are just on a different frequency level....so we can't see them, they can't see us....all on the third dimension....but I also think on higher planes, there are beings that can see us, but we can't see them (some may call them angels)....

One of my goals in life is to be captured by aliens....

Then I'll take aboard my inter-galactic shielded ship :cool:
http://s19.postimage.org/5ej02dbwj/Mothership_And_Phillipe.jpg (http://postimage.org/image/m2ai4v6nz/full/)



jokes aside ^^, I believe inter dimensional being as well, they are all around us and we're all around them. For example ghosts are the souls of the deceased ones, they are also in another dimension/ plain.



100% yes they exist. The odds that they don't are so small it would be statistically impossible. The only reason I can think of that someone wouldn't believe they exist is if they were religious.

Whether or not they visit us, I don't know. Personally I don't think so since I don't think we are that interesting.


Actually, the pope/ church itself admitted to the possibility of life out there :D funny eh.



I am an alien (you guys couldn't decipher it from the username)?

I notice that :p lol

[Contra Mundum]

I'm convinced life is common in the universe. Intelligent life is probably less common though. Only one species of life on earth is classified as intelligent life, and that came about by chance really. Some primates moved out of the jungle and onto the savannas where it was to their advantage to stand up to see. That led to an evolutionary change. Then they started to scavenge for meat, and that led to a more nutritious diet, which led to another evolutionary leap that increased brain size and intelligence. Since humans were bipedal and slower than other predators, they had to rely more on their wits, and that led to an even a greater increase in brain size, and the ability to develop weapons for better hunting.

Odds are, most planets that have life on them are probably primitive life, but considering the vastness of the universe, even if one out of 10,000 planets that have liquid water and an atmosphere were to have intelligent life, that would mean hundreds, if not thousands of planets have intelligent life just in our galaxy alone.

Considering there are around 400 billion stars in our galaxy, I am sure at least a billion of them have a planet orbiting that has liquid water.

[Supreme American]

I am an alien (you guys couldn't decipher it from the username)?

Oh? I thought it was just a wigger thing.

[StonyArabia]

Aliens have always existed and in fact they walk among us. They have been called by different names throughout history. These creatures are called Demons, Jinns, and various other names. Some can be good and others are evil. I believe many of the alien abducation are rather Demons taking humans and doing their dirty work. As alien on different planet's not really, because they are those creatures. I believe there three intelligent beings those are the Angels, the Jinns, and Humans. The aliens are nothing more than the Jinn or Demons.

[Stefan]

There's no credible evidence for any non-terrestrial life visiting Earth. As far as its existence, we can only speculate. Some speculations are more thought out than others, but still it falls within the limits of speculation. However, considering the vastness of the universe, it seems likely, although probably not very common, that sentient beings live on other planets. Whether or not we ever make contact with any, I'm unsure.

[Pallantides]

Oh? I thought it was just a wigger thing.

...sometimes I really hope you're just joking:D

[Contra Mundum]

Aliens have always existed and in fact they walk among us. They have been called by different names throughout history. These creatures are called Demons, Jinns, and various other names. Some can be good and others are evil. I believe many of the alien abducation are rather Demons taking humans and doing their dirty work. As alien on different planet's not really, because they are those creatures. I believe there three intelligent beings those are the Angels, the Jinns, and Humans. The aliens are nothing more than the Jinn or Demons.

http://allieiswired.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Rupert-Grint-Caught-Smoking-Weed.jpg

[SilverKnight]

Aliens have always existed and in fact they walk among us. They have been called by different names throughout history. These creatures are called Demons, Jinns, and various other names. Some can be good and others are evil. I believe many of the alien abducation are rather Demons taking humans and doing their dirty work. As alien on different planet's not really, because they are those creatures. I believe there three intelligent beings those are the Angels, the Jinns, and Humans. The aliens are nothing more than the Jinn or Demons.

CW, I can see that you have strong religious views on the subject of aliens. You might be wrong I think, but then you might be right as well. I believe in demons, ghosts and other beings of different planes. But I also believe that aliens (ETs) are physical beings just like us, not in other dimensions. The universe is just too vast for us to be the only one.

Just sit our in the grass at night when the stars are all out and clear to see, and then wonder about how vast it is and that you're staring at infinity itself, think for a minute how many countless civilizations are out there in that vastness and then you realize how small we are and that we are very pretentious specimens :)



There's no credible evidence for any non-terrestrial life visiting Earth. As far as its existence, we can only speculate. Some speculations are more thought out than others, but still it falls within the limits of speculation. However, considering the vastness of the universe, it seems likely, although probably not very common, that sentient beings live on other planets. Whether or not we ever make contact with any, I'm unsure.

As I can see many people here have very interesting versions and views on this subject, one isn't sure, while the other believes that they are visiting while the other doesn't etc.

As far as I seeing people haven't really taken time to look at evidence which doesn't necessary mean that ones provided by NASA, ESA or any other government agencies around the world. The evidence is found in ourselves, we have had so many accounts of alien abductions that it is hard to imagine they where all faked or played out. Not just only that, but the countless videos around the world of space ships, flying saucers, mother ships, and even earth size ships around the world.

The ancient also account for "sky gods" who even Alexander the Great saw while he was in battle heading to India. I think it is no coincidence. Here's an interesting video from an Italian women who had a very close encounter with aliens.

o1515ujK7AI

[Stefan]

As far as I seeing people haven't really taken time to look at evidence which doesn't necessary mean that ones provided by NASA, ESA or any other government agencies around the world. The evidence is found in ourselves, we have had so many accounts of alien abductions that it is hard to imagine they where all faked or played out. Not just only that, but the countless videos around the world of space ships, flying saucers, mother ships, and even earth size ships around the world.


Subjective anecdotes must be considered with caution, regardless of how numerous they are. Many people in history believed the same things about vampires, werewolves, etc just because enough people "thought" they had encounters. Do they exist as well? I just credit it to social phenomena, since as of now, there isn't any empirical evidence. If such influences are as massive as people say, I'd expect there to be substantial empirical evidence. Right now, it falls within speculation and mysticism. The videos you cite almost always are obscure, and I can't help but think of many possible explanations for the UFOs that don't pertain to alien life. This isn't to say it hasn't happened, just that there isn't any substantial, non-anecdotal, evidence for it.

[Riki]

They exist, created us and are currently visiting us.
They exist, never created us but are visiting us.
They exist, but havn't had contact with us yet.

After watching numerous Documentaries,I have to think that any of the three choices above are/seem possible.

[Virtuous]

They exist, created us and are currently visiting us.
They exist, never created us but are visiting us.
They exist, but havn't had contact with us yet.

Yeah I believe it might be these three ^


What if Earth was some kind of prison for Extra Terrestrial species one day hmm?Or else a trash for when experiments with species go bad? :D

[Aces High]

Imagine a race on Earth that landed millenia ago.....who's task it was to bring the humanoids up to standard.

Aliens...Aryans...Aliens...Aryans...keep saying it faster and faster until it blends into one.
Theres your answer.

[Virtuous]

Imagine a race on Earth that landed millenia ago.....who's task it was to bring the humanoids up to standard.

Aliens...Aryans...Aliens...Aryans...keep saying it faster and faster until it blends into one.
Theres your answer.

Ended up saying "Ariens"

[Osprey]

There is a theory that says, there are several different worlds operating at this very planet.
Just that, they are at different frequencies. If we can attune ourselves to it, then we can sense other worlds.
Or maybe, it might refer to time, ie the fourth dimension.

[Vixen]

There is a theory that says, there are several different worlds operating at this very planet.
Just that, they are at different frequencies. If we can attune ourselves to it, then we can sense other worlds.
Or maybe, it might refer to time, ie the fourth dimension.

JDZBgHBHQT8

[Riki]

There is a theory that says, there are several different worlds operating at this very planet.
Just that, they are at different frequencies. If we can attune ourselves to it, then we can sense other worlds.
Or maybe, it might refer to time, ie the fourth dimension.

Multiverse.And the theory is that possibly,using black holes one could jump from
Universe to Universe.(Worlds).
If you think about It, we are aliens in the Universe.

[Germanicus]

If there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe it means nothing to us, the distance to other worlds is light years away....unless you can travel faster than light it is meaningless.:coffee:

[Virtuous]

....

[Hurrem sultana]

They exist but they have not visited us

[Ushtari]

They exist but they have not visited us
http://webtrax.hu/myfacewhen/faces/lineart-memes/you-dont-say.jpg

[Hurrem sultana]

http://webtrax.hu/myfacewhen/faces/lineart-memes/you-dont-say.jpg

It is pretty much the only logical thing to believe,i mean the universe is HUGE ,it would be a miracle if we were the only ones

[Aces High]

It is pretty much the only logical thing to believe,i mean the universe is HUGE ,it would be a miracle if we were the only ones

Or maybe they have visited us,and know we are here.....as we know that Krill exists in the sea,but dont bother talking to it.
;)

[Drawing-slim]

Or maybe they have visited us,and know we are here.....as we know that Krill exists in the sea,but dont bother talking to it.
;)
This scenerio would make it freakishly interesting univerese to live in. Other intelligent life forms that have evolved millions of years or billions ahead of us.

[sydvice2]

i am sure we are alone

[Hurrem sultana]

Or maybe they have visited us,and know we are here.....as we know that Krill exists in the sea,but dont bother talking to it.
;)

they probably have not visited us

[Mortimer]

Not sure but they might exist, the universe is big and if we are created by evolution there might have happened similar in other parts of the universe

[Riki]

If there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe it means nothing to us, the distance to other worlds is light years away....unless you can travel faster than light it is meaningless.:coffee:



The impossibility of faster-than-light relative speed only applies locally. Wormholes allow superluminal (faster-than-light) travel by ensuring that the speed of light is not exceeded locally at any time. While traveling through a wormhole, subluminal (slower-than-light) speeds are used. If two points are connected by a wormhole, the time taken to traverse it would be less than the time it would take a light beam to make the journey if it took a path through the space outside the wormhole. However, a light beam traveling through the wormhole would always beat the traveler. As an analogy, running around to the opposite side of a mountain at maximum speed may take longer than walking through a tunnel crossing it.

[Insuperable]

Multiverse.And the theory is that possibly,using black holes one could jump from
Universe to Universe.(Worlds).
If you think about It, we are aliens in the Universe.


It is pretty much the only logical thing to believe,i mean the universe is HUGE ,it would be a miracle if we were the only ones


I'm convinced life is common in the universe. Intelligent life is probably less common though. Only one species of life on earth is classified as intelligent life, and that came about by chance really. Some primates moved out of the jungle and onto the savannas where it was to their advantage to stand up to see. That led to an evolutionary change. Then they started to scavenge for meat, and that led to a more nutritious diet, which led to another evolutionary leap that increased brain size and intelligence. Since humans were bipedal and slower than other predators, they had to rely more on their wits, and that led to an even a greater increase in brain size, and the ability to develop weapons for better hunting.

Odds are, most planets that have life on them are probably primitive life, but considering the vastness of the universe, even if one out of 10,000 planets that have liquid water and an atmosphere were to have intelligent life, that would mean hundreds, if not thousands of planets have intelligent life just in our galaxy alone.

Considering there are around 400 billion stars in our galaxy, I am sure at least a billion of them have a planet orbiting that has liquid water.


100% yes they exist. The odds that they don't are so small it would be statistically impossible. The only reason I can think of that someone wouldn't believe they exist is if they were religious.

Whether or not they visit us, I don't know. Personally I don't think so since I don't think we are that interesting.

What you wrote is a complete crap no matter from which side I see it.
2Cool, lets put the notion of awareness aside and lets put religion aside.

E.T., Indiana Jones, Start Trek, Star wars...
In this Star Trek "generation" scientifically illiterate people only believe that in the Universe life is popping just like that.
If the Universe is infinite chance of sentient lives on another planets would be 100% for sure but the Universe is not infinite, it is finite since it had beginning and time begun with it. Not only do we have overwhelming evidences ( aproaching proofs ) that the Universe had a beginning we can estimate the number of atoms in the Universe which is somewhere around 10^80. This number encompasses what you think of as an extremely large Universe with billions of stars, billions of galaxies, billions of planets. So, no matter how big that is, its size is insignificant because it has been calculated that the chance for creating one enzyme ( and what is enzyme made of if not of atoms ) out of all that "chaos" ( Big Bang, creation elements out of another elements under extraordinary temperatures, fusion, cooling, emergence of planets, comets bringing water to planets.... ) is extraordinarly low. One cell ( one cell is needed for evolution to start ) has around 2000 enzymes. Since the chance for enzyme to emerge in one single place in the Universe is very very low the chance for 2000 enzymes to start to exist and to form a cell is ofcourse exponentially lower and it has been calculated that that chance is around
1/10^40000 %. Base on that we can very strongly argue that the product of that chance are we. It is as simple as that.
So compare that numbers and you can see that no matter how big the Universe is, its actually too small ( 10^80 ) for life popping just like that because of chance which is just too small when compared with atoms in the Universe.
Ofcourse, after the Universe "settled" down and the chance of life OVER TIME became higher. For example some models predict that the chance for a single life to emerge somewhere on some single spot in the Universe ( starting from a cell ) besides on this planet in perhaps couple of billions of years is still low even when compared to that big time even after the Universe has "settled down" and when higher chances of life were more probable.

So,
Is there a life on another planets? Maybe
Is there a life on another planets more evolved than ours? Maybe, but very very unlikely in this case

Multiverse is a very pseudoscientific. A large number of Nobel prize winners and other scientists reject that.
Multiverse arises primarily from string theories which are rejected by mainstream science.
The reason why some think that String theories are mainstream science or are on that way is because of media and stupid newsreporters who write crap and people who are sheeps can not distinguish what is a right and what is wrong.
Yes, I am somewhat religious but I still can not understand why people want to believe in something pseudoscientific ( because according to scientists, even if there is a multiverse we will never be able to have a proof of another Universe except some biassly interpreted evidences ) which can not be proved nor disproved only so they can reject in their mind the notion of God which also can not be proved or disproved.
Perhaps in near future Jews will be blamed for your E.T. generation stupidity because they own media.:icon_lol:

Isnt it better to open a damn book rather than watching TV or reading from the Internet and talking nonsense which just comes from your head?

[Insuperable]

If there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe it means nothing to us, the distance to other worlds is light years away....unless you can travel faster than light it is meaningless.:coffee:

It is perfectly possible to travel the distance of for example five light years in less than five years without crossing the speed of light and without wormholes because of space dilation.
Space and time dilation were proven many times by monitoring particles which move at speeds close to the speed of light and bending of space under high speeds has been proven in the last few years more accurately using high tech astronomical observations. I think it was in a LISA experiment.
The more the speed of some object aproaches the speed of light it actually bends space and reaches two points in space faster.
Imagine a letter U which becomes more narrower the more you aproach the speed of light and imagine that you are crossing the space between to points of a letter U. In this way you can never go over the speed of light but you can cut the distance. When aproaching the speed of light an object gains mass and therefore the space bending. If something would reach the exact speed of light its mass would be infinite. So, nothing can go faster than light or we would in theory go back in time which is impossible because speed of light is an asymptotic value and the more something aproaches it ( with more decimals aproaching the speed of light ) exponentially more energy needs to be used to drive a ship or whatever.

[ricko0812]

to think we are alone in the billions of galaxies and solar systems would be lunatic like.:thumb001:

[Vasconcelos]

i am sure we are alone

i am sure we are not alone

[Lithium]

It's statistically impossible the earth creatures to be the only ones in the whole universe.

[Kalitas]

to think we are alone in the billions of galaxies and solar systems would be lunatic like.:thumb001:

Would not only be lunatic, but creepy and scaring

[Phoenix]

I am sure that aliens do exist, and I don't want to die without having seen one of them in the news or something xD

[ricko0812]

Would not only be lunatic, but creepy and scaring

thinking about all the other galaxies and stuff out there it really shows how insignificant we really are in my opinion. kind of depressing.

[Riki]

What you wrote is a complete crap no matter from which side I see it.
2Cool, lets put the notion of awareness aside and lets put religion aside.

E.T., Indiana Jones, Start Trek, Star wars...
In this Star Trek "generation" scientifically illiterate people only believe that in the Universe life is popping just like that.
If the Universe is infinite chance of sentient lives on another planets would be 100% for sure but the Universe is not infinite, it is finite since it had beginning and time begun with it. Not only do we have overwhelming evidences ( aproaching proofs ) that the Universe had a beginning we can estimate the number of atoms in the Universe which is somewhere around 10^80. This number encompasses what you think of as an extremely large Universe with billions of stars, billions of galaxies, billions of planets. So, no matter how big that is, its size is insignificant because it has been calculated that the chance for creating one enzyme ( and what is enzyme made of if not of atoms ) out of all that "chaos" ( Big Bang, creation elements out of another elements under extraordinary temperatures, fusion, cooling, emergence of planets, comets bringing water to planets.... ) is extraordinarly low. One cell ( one cell is needed for evolution to start ) has around 2000 enzymes. Since the chance for enzyme to emerge in one single place in the Universe is very very low the chance for 2000 enzymes to start to exist and to form a cell is ofcourse exponentially lower and it has been calculated that that chance is around
1/10^40000 %. Base on that we can very strongly argue that the product of that chance are we. It is as simple as that.
So compare that numbers and you can see that no matter how big the Universe is, its actually too small ( 10^80 ) for life popping just like that because of chance which is just too small when compared with atoms in the Universe.
Ofcourse, after the Universe "settled" down and the chance of life OVER TIME became higher. For example some models predict that the chance for a single life to emerge somewhere on some single spot in the Universe ( starting from a cell ) besides on this planet in perhaps couple of billions of years is still low even when compared to that big time even after the Universe has "settled down" and when higher chances of life were more probable.

So,
Is there a life on another planets? Maybe
Is there a life on another planets more evolved than ours? Maybe, but very very unlikely in this case

Multiverse is a very pseudoscientific. A large number of Nobel prize winners and other scientists reject that.
Multiverse arises primarily from string theories which are rejected by mainstream science.
The reason why some think that String theories are mainstream science or are on that way is because of media and stupid newsreporters who write crap and people who are sheeps can not distinguish what is a right and what is wrong.
Yes, I am somewhat religious but I still can not understand why people want to believe in something pseudoscientific ( because according to scientists, even if there is a multiverse we will never be able to have a proof of another Universe except some biassly interpreted evidences ) which can not be proved nor disproved only so they can reject in their mind the notion of God which also can not be proved or disproved.
Perhaps in near future Jews will be blamed for your E.T. generation stupidity because they own media.:icon_lol:

Isnt it better to open a damn book rather than watching TV or reading from the Internet and talking nonsense which just comes from your head?

Science is full of paradoxesThat's what drives Human kind to find the right answer's.Calling different theory's crap seems a bit far-fetched.

[Catrau]

Follow this link from NGS

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/known-universe-alien-contact/

[Stefan]

Watch these, especially the first one:
gQliI_WGaGk

GctnYAYcMhI

[PetiteParisienne]

I definitely believe in other life forms. The universe is far too expansive for us to be alone.

[Insuperable]

Follow this link from NGS

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/known-universe-alien-contact/

Lets watch documentaries... yeah.
Read the post on top of that Giovanni guy. Exactly my thinking.


Science is full of paradoxesThat's what drives Human kind to find the right answer's.Calling different theory's crap seems a bit far-fetched.

Do not tell that to me but mega physicists who deny that theories in regard of more realistic theories.


It's statistically impossible the earth creatures to be the only ones in the whole universe.


I am sure that aliens do exist, and I don't want to die without having seen one of them in the news or something xD

I have just described in a previous post why other life not to mention intelligent life as we is not probable ( that does not mean that there is none ) purely from a scientific view irregardless how big the Universe is ( Annd irregardless of a religious beliefs. I must say this because 2Cool thinks that religious people do not believe in aliens ).
People develop models and calculations and you simply say basing your ideas on nothing that there must be for SURE life on another people. You should watch movies a little less.

A large number of scientists DO NOT think that it is probable that there is a life on another. The reason why you do believe this is because of media.
In the last years there was an indications of water outside of the Earth on more than one place. And newsreporter asked a scientist who led the team "Have you found a life? Is there a life? .." and he replied " What do you think that we will find life out there just like that?". Something like that. I can not remember correctly.
For example in that video above listen to what Max Tegmark says from 24:35-24:45

[Germanicus]

i am sure we are not alone


You have made a guess, you cannot prove it!

Again as said in my previous post, even if there were intelligent life forms in our galaxy, the distances are astronomically impossible to contemplate visiting now....or in the future, without light speed, travel it is unthinkable.:coffee:

[2Cool]

For anybody who thinks we are alone: I don't think you quite understand the scale of the Universe.

http://i.imgur.com/WDhGP.jpg
This is an image that the Hubble telescope took from a small patch of the Universe that looked empty. What you see there are thousands of galaxies. Sure some of them might not exist anymore but you get the point. Explanation of the image: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcBV-cXVWFw

http://i.imgur.com/OKLdb.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/pM1Ba.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/dSoec.png

[Stefan]

@2cool Watch the second video I posted, at approximately 15 min in. Max Tegmark is a well-known cosmologist who works at MIT. He expresses his belief that it is unlikely there are intelligent living beings, capable of contact with us, with substantial scientifically logical claims. Now neither belief is right or wrong, both are speculation. Yet, it isn't concrete nor certain that intelligent beings must exist in our universe, besides ourselves.

[Insuperable]

For anybody who thinks we are alone: I don't think you quite understand the scale of the Universe.


Let me guess. You figured out that recently so you can not still adjust to to the idea how big the Universe is.

Have you even read what I wrote or watched videos which Stefan posted?

[SilverKnight]

Would not only be lunatic, but creepy and scaring

It definitely will, and the idea that we are alone is almost close to impossible.


Watch these, especially the first one:
gQliI_WGaGk

GctnYAYcMhI

I understand David Deutsch's point of view, but he is making Earth too unique/ special when we haven't traveled enough distances to prove what is special about Earth. From his speech to know there has being an abundant of Earth like exo-planets that have being found, and that's not the end.

So yeah, we are somehow special, and it's not so common to find a planet like ours, but that's because we're just in a premature state of discovery and exploration. The distances are vast, but in a universal perspective they quiet not so far. He's seeing this distances rather in a human perspective.

Yes it will take hundreds and thousands of years for us to reach the nearest possible planets with life, but that's because out technology isn't capable enough as theirs is. They (ETs) can reach us, but we can't reach them (yet).



You have made a guess, you cannot prove it!

Again as said in my previous post, even if there were intelligent life forms in our galaxy, the distances are astronomically impossible to contemplate visiting now....or in the future, without light speed, travel it is unthinkable.:coffee:

Germinicus, like I said to Stefan, our technology for isn't capable enough of reaching this extraterrestrial civilizations. Light speed will require off course a vast amount of economical and technological resources that we yet don't have.

[Stefan]

It definitely will, and the idea that we are alone is almost close to impossible.



I understand David Deutsch's point of view, but he is making Earth too unique/ special when we haven't traveled enough distances to prove what is special about Earth. From his speech to know there has being an abundant of Earth like exo-planets that have being found, and that's not the end.

So yeah, we are somehow special, and it's not so common to find a planet like ours, but that's because we're just in a premature state of discovery and exploration. The distances are vast, but in a universal perspective they quiet not so far. He's seeing this distances rather in a human perspective.

Yes it will take hundreds and thousands of years for us to reach the nearest possible planets with life, but that's because out technology isn't capable enough as theirs is. They (ETs) can reach us, but we can't reach them (yet).

The point of posting David Deutsch's video, was to emphasis the point that we're vulnerable. We can go extinct tomorrow. Much of the universe isn't hospitable, and that is what makes us unique. However, if we do survive to leave our planet, we can use our knowledge, as long as it is in the possibilities of physics, to occupy other regions of the universe. He makes it clear that both concepts are wrong: we're neither special nor are we something that must be taken for granted. He emphasizes this by presenting both extremes, and debunking both of them, while finding a compromise somewhere in the middle.

As for proof of what he says about interstellar space, and the inhospitable regions of our universe, we have a substantial amount of observational and empirical evidence to support these claims. Of course, there is much we don't know, but what we do know is scientifically concrete.





Germinicus, like I said to Stefan, our technology for isn't capable enough of reaching this extraterrestrial civilizations. Light speed will require off course a vast amount of economical and technological resources that we yet don't have.

Light speed, simply by acceleration is impossible for anything that has a rest mass greater than nothing. For anything that doesn't have a rest mass, such as a photon (light particle), the speed can't be less than that 3E8, when in a vacuum. The possible ways to move between two positions faster than light, without any effects of dilation, would be to manipulate space. No amount of knowledge will change the constant of C. If extraterrestrial civilizations are capable of travel, quicker than light, then we must ask the question of the Fermi paradox. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox) Some physicists believe that any civilization great enough to gain insight of the universe to circumvent the speed of light, must be so superior to us that they are not interested. Others, however, truly believe no life or very few life exists that are capable of such travel, based on the Fermi paradox. Again, all of this is speculation until we have credible, empirical evidence that such lifeforms exist.

[Contra Mundum]

For anybody who thinks we are alone: I don't think you quite understand the scale of the Universe.

http://i.imgur.com/WDhGP.jpg


God installed some pretty lights on the roof of the Earth for us to look at.

[SilverKnight]

The point of posting David Deutsch's video, was to emphasis the point that we're vulnerable. We can go extinct tomorrow. Much of the universe isn't hospitable, and that is what makes us unique. However, if we do survive to leave our planet, we can use our knowledge, as long as it is in the possibilities of physics, to occupy other regions of the universe. He makes it clear that both concepts are wrong: we're neither special nor are we something that must be taken for granted. He emphasizes this by presenting both extremes, and debunking both of them, while finding a compromise somewhere in the middle.

As for proof of what he says about interstellar space, and the inhospitable regions of our universe, we have a substantial amount of observational and empirical evidence to support these claims. Of course, there is much we don't know, but what we do know is scientifically concrete.


Well in that case that makes more sense, he is neutral about our position in the universe like you said. It just seemed as he was indirectly suggesting that our universe is a vast and empty vacuum and that we will never be able to reach the stars beyond our solar system or galaxy and meet other being.





Light speed, simply by acceleration is impossible for anything that has a rest mass greater than nothing. For anything that doesn't have a rest mass, such as a photon (light particle), the speed can't be less than that 3E8, when in a vacuum. The possible ways to move between two positions faster than light, without any effects of dilation, would be to manipulate space. No amount of knowledge will change the constant of C. If extraterrestrial civilizations are capable of travel, quicker than light, then we must ask the question of the Fermi paradox. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox) Some physicists believe that any civilization great enough to gain insight of the universe to circumvent the speed of light, must be so superior to us that they are not interested. Others, however, truly believe no life or very few life exists that are capable of such travel, based on the Fermi paradox. Again, all of this is speculation until we have credible, empirical evidence that such lifeforms exist.


I don't need main stream scientists to tell me what is out there or not. They are doing a darn good job covering us from reality and working with various powerful governments around the globe. It's clearly about the control of the masses.

The evidence is all around us, thousands of videos in youtube and TV posted by eye witnesses around the world should be enough to prove that something at least a government cover up is going on up there in space. I'm one of these people who have seeing UFO's with my own eyes disappear in clear evening skies in Florida. Spherical and boomerang shaped golden objects with binocular. I doubt that we have a technology in this planet with such great capabilities yet. Like I said again I don't need evidence when I have seen enough of it already.

[ricko0812]

For anybody who thinks we are alone: I don't think you quite understand the scale of the Universe.

http://i.imgur.com/WDhGP.jpg
This is an image that the Hubble telescope took from a small patch of the Universe that looked empty. What you see there are thousands of galaxies. Sure some of them might not exist anymore but you get the point. Explanation of the image: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcBV-cXVWFw

http://i.imgur.com/OKLdb.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/pM1Ba.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/dSoec.png

and how many solar systems are in one galaxy, billions. there is just no way we are alone.

[2Cool]

@2cool Watch the second video I posted, at approximately 15 min in. Max Tegmark is a well-known cosmologist who works at MIT. He expresses his belief that it is unlikely there are intelligent living beings, capable of contact with us, with substantial scientifically logical claims. Now neither belief is right or wrong, both are speculation. Yet, it isn't concrete nor certain that intelligent beings must exist in our universe, besides ourselves.


Let me guess. You figured out that recently so you can not still adjust to to the idea how big the Universe is.

Have you even read what I wrote or watched videos which Stefan posted?

I didn't even talk about intelligent beings. You are going to tell me that we are the only form of life in the entire Universe? Not even a microbe? It's 78 billion light years across.

I've also watched the second video (at the 15 mins point) and he's premise is flawed. Life in some other planet could be so different from our own that we might not even recognize it as life. Then his argument to show that they do no exist to in our galaxy is because they didn't come to Earth yet is kinda dumb imo. First this gives our planet too much importance to our planet and second but he also assumes that they never checked the planet out. We don't know that. We also only recently started to sent radio waves and objects out of the Earth. Before the 19th century, there is no trace of our existence anywhere. Currently our farthest object is at the edge of our Solar System and any type of radio signal that we send outwards is less than 200 light years away. That's nothing. Maybe there's just no incentive for intelligent interstellar life to come see us? At that point we are talking about a philosophical problem.

This guy explains it well :

"Tegmark here seems to make a bit of a deft mathematical feint to explain his opinion that there is no intelligence in the observable Universe beyond ourselves. The bottom line is we simply do not know the variables, and to be honest I'd tend to lean somewhat towards the principle of mediocrity - i.e. that there needn't be anything special about our place in the Universe. The implication from Tegmark is that we pretty much are in the single most special part of the Universe. Not compelling. "

[Stefan]

There are billions of solar systems in our galaxy, yes. However, the majority of these are in our galactic core. The frequency of super novae, which release gamma ray burst that destroy any life within a radius of light years, is just too common in these regions to support life. Every few million years, any life that develops will be cleansed to a mass extinction.

Meanwhile, the stars in the outer edges of our galaxy are formed in very old clusters, globular clusters. These stars lack the necessary elements for life, because the stars are almost as old as our galaxy. We get much of our elements from supernovae.

The region of our galaxy that is hospitable, is the region we live. There are relatively newer stars, that have all the necessary elements, but the distances between the stars is enough to limit the frequency of gamma ray bursts. Therefore, any life in our galaxy must be within the constraints of this region. In elliptical galaxies, on the other hand, not much life will exist because of the density of these galaxies, and hence the frequent gamma ray bursts. These elliptical galaxies tend to form from collisions of spirals.

So in the end, there may be only a few billion instead of hundreds of billions of stars in the region of the galaxy capable of supporting life. Remember, there must be earth-like planets around these stars, which means there can't be any binary systems. Binary systems make up the majority of solar-systems. So that even limits the chances more.

We can go on and on, but the chances aren't as vast as you make them seem.

[SilverKnight]

Evidence ??

Have you guys heard about the Dogon people from Mali ?

Well they have already had contact in ancient times with extraterrestrials. They even knew about the Sirius stars (C, B) where they are, how many moons (Jupiter has) , how far and how big they where from each other and so on way before they where discovered in mid 90's.




The Dogon tribe in Mali West Africa have been telling their story of an Extraterrestrial visitation in the past, by beings from the Star Sirius B sometime around 8,000 years ago.
Even though this star cannot have been seen by them visually because it can only be seen by looking through a fairly advanced telescope.
They also have in depth knowledge about a very small red dwarf star Sirius C which was only discovered by Astronomers in1995. They also knew that planet Jupiter has 4 Moons and described the visiting Craft and Extraterrestrials in great detail.


G9ruJ2t-xaE

[Insuperable]

I didn't even talk about intelligent beings. You are going to tell me that we are the only form of life in the entire Universe? Not even a microbe? It's 78 billion light years across.

I've also watched the second video (at the 15 mins point) and he's premise is flawed. Life in some other planet could be so different from our own that we might not even recognize it as life. Then his argument to show that they do no exist to in our galaxy is because they didn't come to Earth yet is kinda dumb imo. First this gives our planet too much importance to our planet and second but he also assumes that they never checked the planet out. We don't know that. We also only recently started to sent radio waves and objects out of the Earth. Before the 19th century, there is no trace of our existence anywhere. Currently our farthest object is at the edge of our Solar System and any type of radio signal that we send outwards is less than 200 light years away. That's nothing. Maybe there's just no incentive for intelligent interstellar life to come see us? At that point we are talking about a philosophical problem.

This guy explains it well :

"Tegmark here seems to make a bit of a deft mathematical feint to explain his opinion that there is no intelligence in the observable Universe beyond ourselves. The bottom line is we simply do not know the variables, and to be honest I'd tend to lean somewhat towards the principle of mediocrity - i.e. that there needn't be anything special about our place in the Universe. The implication from Tegmark is that we pretty much are in the single most special part of the Universe. Not compelling. "

I ask again. Have you even read what I wrote? Enzymes and cells are the most basic building blocks of every organism whether human or Star trek alien or an alien animal from an another planet if they exist.

What you people do not understand that no serious scientist will say that there is ( or that there is not ) life somewhere else. He will simply say that he does not believe ( or in some cases will believe ) that there is life out there. What I am critizing here is that vast majority of you KNOWS FOR SURE that there is life out there and some even say basing their judgement on nothing that it is statistically impropable that there is no life on another planets without knowing that its more closer to the opposite of that.
People study their whole life, develop models ( like they do not know how big is the Universe ) which show that the chance for another life out there is very small ( not to mention that life was or is popping just like that ) and you people not knowing anything more mathematically and physically advanced criticize their beliefs over yours which are based on your amazement how big the Universe really is. Pathetic.

[Insuperable]

Evidence ??

Have you guys heard about the Dogon people from Mali ?

Well they have already had contact in ancient times with extraterrestrials. They even knew about the Sirius stars (C, B) where they are, how many moons (Jupiter has) , how far and how big they where from each other and so on way before they where discovered in mid 90's.

http://img814.imageshack.us/img814/7489/facepalm53110262622.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/814/facepalm53110262622.jpg/)

[Stefan]

I didn't even talk about intelligent beings. You are going to tell me that we are the only form of life in the entire Universe? Not even a microbe? It's 78 billion light years across.

It is likely that, primitive life is common. However, we can't be certain of anything. As for intelligent life, that is far less certainty. I am telling you there is no way to know for sure until we find it, and neither speculation is vastly more likely than the other, with our current knowledge.




I've also watched the second video (at the 15 mins point) and he's premise is flawed. Life in some other planet could be so different from our own that we might not even recognize it as life.

If we don't recognize it as life, then certainly it isn't life, as we define it. There are qualities of matter that define it as life, and if it doesn't fit within at least some of these qualities, then it doesn't suit the idea. Whether or not sentience exists in a non-living form, that is a matter of some other debate.



Then his argument to show that they do no exist to in our galaxy is because they didn't come to Earth yet is kinda dumb imo. First this gives our planet too much importance to our planet

I don't follow how. He didn't say directly that intelligent life doesn't exist in our galaxy. He made it clear that it seems unlikely that any civilization capable of inter-stellar travel exists within our galaxy, due to the inhospitably of it all. There is a difference. We have no idea of the probabilities, and therefore the Fermi paradox maintains its value.



and second but he also assumes that they never checked the planet out. We don't know that. We also only recently started to sent radio waves and objects out of the Earth. Before the 19th century, there is no trace of our existence anywhere. Currently our farthest object is at the edge of our Solar System and any type of radio signal that we send outwards is less than 200 light years away. That's nothing. Maybe there's just no incentive for intelligent interstellar life to come see us? At that point we are talking about a philosophical problem.

Science isn't about, "what ifs", it is about what we observe. We have not observed, through empirical means, any intelligent life, and therefore it isn't science to assume the existence until we do. Many astronomers, cosmologists, and physicists take the viewpoint that such beings would consider us the equivalent of how we consider, 'ants', and that is one way to speculate as well. As of now, it's ALL speculation. Nothing is concrete, and it's deceptive to espouse as such.



This guy explains it well :

"Tegmark here seems to make a bit of a deft mathematical feint to explain his opinion that there is no intelligence in the observable Universe beyond ourselves. The bottom line is we simply do not know the variables, and to be honest I'd tend to lean somewhat towards the principle of mediocrity - i.e. that there needn't be anything special about our place in the Universe. The implication from Tegmark is that we pretty much are in the single most special part of the Universe. Not compelling. "

Tegmark stated the bolded himself. It is exactly the principle he bases the idea that the existence of such beings is not a certainty.


As for the latter, we are special. There are inhospitable regions of the galaxy, and our universe that do not allow for life to exist beyond certain stages. We might not be especially, special, but there is a degree of selection of many variables that have allowed us to progress as far as we have.

[dralos]

i hope so since i'm waiting for them to help me conquer all apricity

[askra]

considering billions of galaxies, it's very probable that could exist a solar system where is located a planet like the Earth with intelligent forms of life.

i don't believe in flying saucers, because aliens should be very stupid to travel across the Space, reach the Earth and not try to contact us!

[SilverKnight]

http://img814.imageshack.us/img814/7489/facepalm53110262622.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/814/facepalm53110262622.jpg/)

It might seem "absurd" but these people knew these stars before us, there was no way they could have known in detail about Jupiter's moons and Sirius system without any telescopes, some civilization with enough knowledge and technology to travel fast distances could only being the responsible ones.. I makes perfect sense.

[Tanja88]

They are among us.

[Riki]

Lets watch documentaries... yeah.
Read the post on top of that Giovanni guy. Exactly my thinking.



Do not tell that to me but mega physicists who deny that theories in regard of more realistic theories.





I have just described in a previous post why other life not to mention intelligent life as we is not probable ( that does not mean that there is none ) purely from a scientific view irregardless how big the Universe is ( Annd irregardless of a religious beliefs. I must say this because 2Cool thinks that religious people do not believe in aliens ).
People develop models and calculations and you simply say basing your ideas on nothing that there must be for SURE life on another people. You should watch movies a little less.

A large number of scientists DO NOT think that it is probable that there is a life on another. The reason why you do believe this is because of media.
In the last years there was an indications of water outside of the Earth on more than one place. And newsreporter asked a scientist who led the team "Have you found a life? Is there a life? .." and he replied " What do you think that we will find life out there just like that?". Something like that. I can not remember correctly.
For example in that video above listen to what Max Tegmark says from 24:35-24:45


"Do not tell that to me but mega physicists who deny that theories in regard of more realistic theories."

Do not tell that to me,but to mega physicists who agree with the theory's.
Do you get the paradox?

[Insuperable]

"Do not tell that to me but mega physicists who deny that theories in regard of more realistic theories."

Do not tell that to me,but to mega physicists who agree with the theory's.
Do you get the paradox?

None of them is a Nobel prize winner while those who do not agree are.
For example
Richard Feynman,
Gerard 't Hooft
Sheldon Glashow
David Gross
Burton Richter
Philip Anderson
Robert Laughlin

Feynman: String theorists don't make predictions, they make excuses.
Laughlin: String theory is like a 50 year old woman wearing too much lipstick.

Remeber,
Nobel prize winners are physicist who do an exact science and their achievements changed world. Nobel is given only to theoretical physicists whos theories were experimentaly confirmed. They have every right to criticize them.

[Lithium]

What do you guys think about the ancient astronauts theories? It's still not proven how the pyramids and monuments in Egypt are built and why they are on the same paralel as other ancient cities in South America?

[Riki]

None of them is a Nobel prize winner while those who do not agree are.
For example
Richard Feynman,
Gerard 't Hooft
Sheldon Glashow
David Gross
Burton Richter
Philip Anderson
Robert Laughlin

Feynman: String theorists don't make predictions, they make excuses.
Laughlin: String theory is like a 50 year old woman wearing too much lipstick.

Remeber,
Nobel prize winners are physicist who do an exact science and their achievements changed world. Nobel is given only to theoretical physicists whos theories were experimentaly confirmed. They have every right to criticize them.

There are stars with enough mass to collapse on themselves, forming what have been theorized as black holes. It is thought that within these black holes there is a point called "singularity" at which all physical laws may cease to exist. At this point the curvature of space-time becomes infinitely large, and modern science can no longer predict what will happen. Einstein's theory of relativity cannot determine what effect singularity will have on an object, forming an uncertainty in our universe. It is from this uncertain state that many theories have arisen surrounding singularity. It has been theorized that beyond singularity exist tunnels - shortcuts - to other ends of the universe. These "wormholes" could be a solution to interstellar travel, which currently is limited by relativity. However, many complications surround this possible theory. Most notable is the fact that the gravitational force of a black hole would crush any possible interstellar spacecraft, which is something that will have to be worked out. While this theory about singularity is questionable at best and will probably be left to science fiction, there is another theory about the center of a black hole that has been gaining more acceptance from respected physicists and astronomers, and describes a whole new view about our known universe.
t the point of singularity it is agreed that it is impossible to predict physical behavior. This could mean that beyond this point of singularity there may be an entirely new set of physical laws. It is quite possible that after singularity, there may be an absence of such basic forces as gravity, electromagnetism, and the strong and weak nuclear forces. If this were to happen, or if just one of these forces did not exist or was changed, then technically it would not be a part of this universe. Our universe is defined as the observable (if not explainable) aspects of the cosmos that involve the galaxies, stars, planets, and life that we know. Should a basic component of our physical laws be changed, none of what we know would exist. According to Before the Beginning, by Sir Martin Rees, "If nuclear forces were slightly weaker, no chemical elements other than hydrogen would be stable and there would be no nuclear energy to power stars. But, if the nuclear forces were slightly stronger than they actually are relative to electric forces, two protons could stick together so readily that ordinary hydrogen would not exist, and stars would evolve quite differently." (Rees 232) This demonstrates the small chance that it took for things to actually turn out like they did, and implies that it may be difficult for things to ever duplicate themselves should this idea of a "Multiverse" be more than just a theory.
The Multiverse theory for the universe has been a recently accepted theory that describes the continuous formation of universes through the collapse of giant stars and the formation of black holes. With each of these black holes there is a new point of singularity and a new possible universe. As Rees describes it, "Our universe may be just one element - one atom, as it were - in an infinite ensemble: a cosmic archipelago. Each universe starts with its own big bang, acquires a distinctive imprint (and its individual physical laws) as it cools, and traces out its own cosmic cycle. The big bang that triggered our entire universe is, in this grander perspective, an infinitesimal part of an elaborate structure that extends far beyond the range of any telescopes." (Rees 3) This puts our place in the Multiverse into a small spectrum. While the size of the earth in relation to the sun is minuscule, the size of the sun, the solar system, the galaxy, and even the universe, could pale in comparison to this proposed Multiverse. It would be a shift in thinking that may help explain our big bang theory and possibly give light to the idea of parallel universes.
While the idea of a parallel universe may sound farfetched, a recent book from an Oxford physicist named David Deutsch entitled, "The Fabric of Reality: The Science of Parallel Universes - And Its Implications" describes the possibilities of tapping in on parallel universes. He proposes that through a parallel universe one computer would be able to find an identical counterpart computer from the other universe, and collaborate with it to increase knowledge of the other universe. This involves the collaboration of many theories that have yet to have much proof. However, it is another arm of the Multiverse theory that has become more accepted in recent years that could possibly yield positive benefits for society.
The Multiverse theory itself, regardless of parallel universes, has many implications. Most notable is the unique, complex process from which our own universe was born, and how easily it could have been different. It may imply that, out of the possibly thousands, millions, or billions of universes, ours was special enough to develop life, which, in itself is special. Maybe life in another universe has a different meaning, but we know that our universe, at the very least is special in that it houses our kind of life. If just one physical law were slightly different, then there would be nobody to appreciate the beauty that we can see on an everyday basis. This brings up one ultimate question. If every universe began from another universe, where did it all begin? Recent physicists imply that there is no room for a creator under the current model of thinking. However, with such a complex system of laws, principles, and forces that allowed life to exist, one must give to the possibility of a creator behind it all.
Remember,""This new concept is, potentially, as drastic an enlargement of our cosmic perspective as the shift from pre-Copernican ideas to the realization that the Earth is orbiting a typical star on the edge of the Milky Way."
Sir Martin Rees, current Astronomer Royal of Britain

[SilverKnight]

They are among us.

Oh they sure are :)


What do you guys think about the ancient astronauts theories? It's still not proven how the pyramids and monuments in Egypt are built and why they are on the same paralel as other ancient cities in South America?

I believe that many of the ancient astronaut theories are accurate as you cna see on my posts. Everything from the Pyramids on Giza, the Brahmin wars in India, flying saucers seen on Alexander's army journey to India to the monuments in Central and South America where all in some way influenced by ancient aliens.

[2Cool]

I ask again. Have you even read what I wrote? Enzymes and cells are the most basic building blocks of every organism whether human or Star trek alien or an alien animal from an another planet if they exist.

What you people do not understand that no serious scientist will say that there is ( or that there is not ) life somewhere else. He will simply say that he does not believe ( or in some cases will believe ) that there is life out there. What I am critizing here is that vast majority of you KNOWS FOR SURE that there is life out there and some even say basing their judgement on nothing that it is statistically impropable that there is no life on another planets without knowing that its more closer to the opposite of that.
People study their whole life, develop models ( like they do not know how big is the Universe ) which show that the chance for another life out there is very small ( not to mention that life was or is popping just like that ) and you people not knowing anything more mathematically and physically advanced criticize their beliefs over yours which are based on your amazement how big the Universe really is. Pathetic.

Personally I believe you are pretty ignorant if you believe the Earth is the only planet in an Universe with trillion upon trillion of Stars and billions of galaxies that has life. There are plenty of planets that are located in the so called goldilock zone even in our galaxy. Earth is not really special in that regard and neither is the concept of life. Of course we cannot know for sure but the odds are greatly on the favor that alien life exists. Life isn't even that hard to achieve. We've already made some great progress at replicating it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habitable_zone


The location of planets and natural satellites (moons) within its parent star's habitable zone (and a near circular orbit) is but one of many criteria for planetary habitability and it is theoretically possible for habitable planets to exist outside the habitable zone. The term "Goldilocks planet" is used for any planet that is located within the circumstellar habitable zone (CHZ)[4][5] although when used in the context of planetary habitability the term implies terrestrial planets with conditions roughly comparable to those of Earth (i.e. an Earth analog). The name originates from the story of Goldilocks and the Three Bears, in which a little girl chooses from sets of three items, ignoring the ones that are too extreme (large or small, hot or cold, etc.), and settling on the one in the middle, which is "just right". Likewise, a planet following this Goldilocks Principle is one neither too close nor too far from a star to rule out liquid water on its surface. While only about a dozen planets have been confirmed in the habitable zone, the Kepler spacecraft has identified a further 54 candidates and current estimates indicate "at least 500 million" such planets in the Milky Way.[6]

There are billions of galaxies just like the Milky way. Which means there are trillions of planets just like ours.

Even if the odds of intelligent life is only 0.00001%. In our galaxy alone that would be equal to 50 planets. And that's just taking into account the Goldilocks zone. Then you take that number multiplied by around 500 billion (number of galaxies) and you get a very crude number of the possible amount of planets that have/had life.

[Stefan]

I've already explained that there are certain habitable regions of a galaxy, within those habitable regions there must be mono-stellar systems for a habitable earth-like planet. On those habitable earth-like planets, there must be magnetic fields to protect from radiation from the sun, and maintain an atmosphere. These planets must have liquid water, and of abundance. Within this liquid water, there must be the right elements to form amino acids. These amino acids must be able to replicate by RNA, then diversify through endosymbiosis to form eukaryotes. These eukaryotes must then, without any major influences, develop into multicellular creatures. These multicellular creatures, must be able to persist long enough to select for intelligence, which seemingly is rare considering how we only know of one sentient genus capable of higher cognition on our planet, after 4.6 billion years of Earth's existence. Remember, the stars can't have short lifetimes, as a star 10 stellar masses would have. Therefore, a good majority of the larger stars must be taken out of the picture. These intelligent beings must be able to persist long enough to develop interstellar travel, and then, only then do they have a chance of colonizing the rest of the galaxy.

Currently, there is no mathematical method to determine how common these events are. That is the premise of the argument.Let's say the number isn't .000001% but 1E-20% or 1E-40.


Edit: Hehe, a failure of reading comprehension on my part, or rather reading quotes. Anyway, my points still stand, disregarding accidentally thinking it was my posts that were quoted.

[Insuperable]

Personally I believe you are pretty ignorant if you believe the Earth is the only planet in an Universe with trillion upon trillion of Stars and billions of galaxies that has life. There are plenty of planets that are located in the so called goldilock zone even in our galaxy. Earth is not really special in that regard and neither is the concept of life. Of course we cannot know for sure but the odds are greatly on the favor that alien life exists. Life isn't even that hard to achieve. We've already made some great progress at replicating it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habitable_zone

There are billions of galaxies just like the Milky way. Which means there are trillions of planets just like ours.

Even if the odds of intelligent life is only 0.00001%. In our galaxy alone that would be equal to 50 planets. And that's just taking into account the Goldilocks zone. Then you take that number multiplied by around 500 billion (number of galaxies) and you get a very crude number of the possible amount of planets that have/had life.

I ask again have you even read what I wrote?
Can you realize a difference between 10^80 and between 10^-40000?
10^80 are these billions of galaxies and these trillions of planets.
As the Universe gets older the chance for life rises but if you take that in a consideration the chance is again just too small according to models. According to one model the chance is about 1/1000 percent that there is ANY KIND of life out there in AN ENTIRE UNIVERSE WITH ALL THIS GALAXIES in the last two billion years. DO I NEED TO WRITE THIS AGAIN? Nobody will say that there is no life on another planets, but simply that one does not believe there is. Everything is possible as long as there is a chance, but that chance is just too small.

You wrote this:
100% yes they exist. The odds that they don't are so small it would be statistically impossible. The only reason I can think of that someone wouldn't believe they exist is if they were religious.

Whether or not they visit us, I don't know. Personally I don't think so since I don't think we are that interesting.

I am simply arguing that a chance that there is a life capable of visiting us or that it is on our level is extremely close to zero.

[Yaroslav]

I am a Christian and Bible teaches nothing about extra terrestrial life.

[2Cool]

I am a Christian and Bible teaches nothing about extra terrestrial life.

It also doesn't talk about sub atomic life or electricity or black holes or most scientific concepts like relativity. I guess none of them exist.

[Stefan]

I think the only other way to get an idea is through computational models. We've already got computational models for our universe, at a grand scale. Possibly, we can simulate a collection of a thousand stars. See if any life develops on any of them. If not, increase it to a million, as we gain more powerful supercomputers. If not, then a billion. Then, a few billion. If no life develops in a few billion stars, then I think it's quite certain at the very least life is sparce within our galaxy. Of course, we'll have to gain advancements in both computing and our understanding of astrophysics to truly have a solid model.

[Insuperable]

here are stars with enough mass to collapse on themselves, forming what have been theorized as black holes. It is thought that within these black holes there is a point called "singularity" at which all physical laws may cease to exist. At this point the curvature of space-time becomes infinitely large, and modern science can no longer predict what will happen. Einstein's theory of relativity cannot determine what effect singularity will have on an object, forming an uncertainty in our universe. It is from this uncertain state that many theories have arisen surrounding singularity. It has been theorized that beyond singularity exist tunnels - shortcuts - to other ends of the universe. These "wormholes" could be a solution to interstellar travel, which currently is limited by relativity. However, many complications surround this possible theory. Most notable is the fact that the gravitational force of a black hole would crush any possible interstellar spacecraft, which is something that will have to be worked out. While this theory about singularity is questionable at best and will probably be left to science fiction, there is another theory about the center of a black hole that has been gaining more acceptance from respected physicists and astronomers, and describes a whole new view about our known universe.
t the point of singularity it is agreed that it is impossible to predict physical behavior. This could mean that beyond this point of singularity there may be an entirely new set of physical laws. It is quite possible that after singularity, there may be an absence of such basic forces as gravity, electromagnetism, and the strong and weak nuclear forces. If this were to happen, or if just one of these forces did not exist or was changed, then technically it would not be a part of this universe. Our universe is defined as the observable (if not explainable) aspects of the cosmos that involve the galaxies, stars, planets, and life that we know. Should a basic component of our physical laws be changed, none of what we know would exist. According to Before the Beginning, by Sir Martin Rees, "If nuclear forces were slightly weaker, no chemical elements other than hydrogen would be stable and there would be no nuclear energy to power stars. But, if the nuclear forces were slightly stronger than they actually are relative to electric forces, two protons could stick together so readily that ordinary hydrogen would not exist, and stars would evolve quite differently." (Rees 232) This demonstrates the small chance that it took for things to actually turn out like they did, and implies that it may be difficult for things to ever duplicate themselves should this idea of a "Multiverse" be more than just a theory.
The Multiverse theory for the universe has been a recently accepted theory that describes the continuous formation of universes through the collapse of giant stars and the formation of black holes. With each of these black holes there is a new point of singularity and a new possible universe. As Rees describes it, "Our universe may be just one element - one atom, as it were - in an infinite ensemble: a cosmic archipelago. Each universe starts with its own big bang, acquires a distinctive imprint (and its individual physical laws) as it cools, and traces out its own cosmic cycle. The big bang that triggered our entire universe is, in this grander perspective, an infinitesimal part of an elaborate structure that extends far beyond the range of any telescopes." (Rees 3) This puts our place in the Multiverse into a small spectrum. While the size of the earth in relation to the sun is minuscule, the size of the sun, the solar system, the galaxy, and even the universe, could pale in comparison to this proposed Multiverse. It would be a shift in thinking that may help explain our big bang theory and possibly give light to the idea of parallel universes.
While the idea of a parallel universe may sound farfetched, a recent book from an Oxford physicist named David Deutsch entitled, "The Fabric of Reality: The Science of Parallel Universes - And Its Implications" describes the possibilities of tapping in on parallel universes. He proposes that through a parallel universe one computer would be able to find an identical counterpart computer from the other universe, and collaborate with it to increase knowledge of the other universe. This involves the collaboration of many theories that have yet to have much proof. However, it is another arm of the Multiverse theory that has become more accepted in recent years that could possibly yield positive benefits for society.
The Multiverse theory itself, regardless of parallel universes, has many implications. Most notable is the unique, complex process from which our own universe was born, and how easily it could have been different. It may imply that, out of the possibly thousands, millions, or billions of universes, ours was special enough to develop life, which, in itself is special. Maybe life in another universe has a different meaning, but we know that our universe, at the very least is special in that it houses our kind of life. If just one physical law were slightly different, then there would be nobody to appreciate the beauty that we can see on an everyday basis. This brings up one ultimate question. If every universe began from another universe, where did it all begin? Recent physicists imply that there is no room for a creator under the current model of thinking. However, with such a complex system of laws, principles, and forces that allowed life to exist, one must give to the possibility of a creator behind it all.
Remember,""This new concept is, potentially, as drastic an enlargement of our cosmic perspective as the shift from pre-Copernican ideas to the realization that the Earth is orbiting a typical star on the edge of the Milky Way."
Sir Martin Rees, current Astronomer Royal of Britain

The subject of this thread is are we alone in the Universe
My guess is that we do not know, but the chances are too small. Perfectly valid guess.
You write about non-mainstream science ( oh yes it is non-mainstram science no matter what its said on the Internet ) which says that we would be unable to go into an another Universe. Than you show me again a new theory about this non-mainsteram science which says the opposite.
So its a theory about a theory rejected by a vast number of mainstream mega soon to be historical giants vs mainstream scientific data regarding our knowledge of the Universe.
Guess what Martin Rees is an advocate of a Multiverse theory and the word advocate tells you that it is not mainstream but on their way to there if there are any evidences and there is not except biassly interpreted hot spots in Microwave background radiation ( collision of Universes ) which can be explained with the current physics.

[2Cool]

I ask again have you even read what I wrote?
Can you realize a difference between 10^80 and between 10^-40000?
10^80 are these billions of galaxies and these trillions of planets.
As the Universe gets older the chance for life rises but if you take that in a consideration the chance is again just too small according to models. According to one model the chance is about 1/1000 percent that there is ANY KIND of life out there in AN ENTIRE UNIVERSE WITH ALL THIS GALAXIES in the last two billion years. DO I NEED TO WRITE THIS AGAIN? Nobody will say that there is no life on another planets, but simply that one does not believe there is. Everything is possible as long as there is a chance, but that chance is just too small.

You wrote this:
100% yes they exist. The odds that they don't are so small it would be statistically impossible. The only reason I can think of that someone wouldn't believe they exist is if they were religious.

Whether or not they visit us, I don't know. Personally I don't think so since I don't think we are that interesting.

I am simply arguing that a chance that there is a life capable of visiting us or that it is on our level is extremely close to zero.

Look, we can only assume and for all intend and purposes we don't know for sure. However, personally, I am confident in saying that there is alien life out there. I have no reason to believe otherwise given the vastness of the Universe (it's statistics really) and I just don't see Earth, life, or humans to be anything special or marvelous or unique. I also don't believe that we would be of any interest to any alien civilization that has the technology to travel far enough to reach us.

Let me put it this way: If I were gambling and I had to gamble on two options: Yes there is life in the Universe, No there isn't life in the Universe. I'd put all my money in the first option all the time because the odds are on my side.

[Piparskeggr]

I think there may be, and believe there is...

[2Cool]

Life is also not that complex to happen. We've been making huge progress on producing synthetic life already.

[Insuperable]

Life is also not that complex to happen. We've been making huge progress on producing synthetic life already.

That synthetic life is not "synthetic" like what you have in mind.
I have read about it two years ago.

Here you go - copied from wikipedia

In 2010, the team of Craig Venter replaced the genome of a natural cell with a different genome created by gene synthesis [1] creating a new bacterial strain dubbed Mycoplasma laboratorium[citation needed]. In press conferences, Craig Venter described this work as the creation of "Synthetic Life". This statement was widely criticized[who?] on the grounds that:

the chemically synthesized genome was an almost 1:1 copy of a naturally occurring genome and
the recipient cell was a naturally occurring bacterium

The Craig Venter Institute maintains the term "synthetic bacterial cell" but they also clarify "...we do not consider this to be “creating life from scratch” but rather we are creating new life out of already existing life using synthetic DNA" [4]

And facepalm on what you said how it is not complex.

[Insuperable]

Look, we can only assume and for all intend and purposes we don't know for sure. However, personally, I am confident in saying that there is alien life out there. I have no reason to believe otherwise given the vastness of the Universe (it's statistics really) and I just don't see Earth, life, or humans to be anything special or marvelous or unique. I also don't believe that we would be of any interest to any alien civilization that has the technology to travel far enough to reach us.

Let me put it this way: If I were gambling and I had to gamble on two options: Yes there is life in the Universe, No there isn't life in the Universe. I'd put all my money in the first option all the time because the odds are on my side.

Statistics based on physical and mathematical model based on experimental data

[SilverKnight]

I am a Christian and Bible teaches nothing about extra terrestrial life.

Genesis 2:21-25

22 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; 22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. 23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. 24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. 25And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.


Gen:6:2: That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair and they took them wives of all which they chose.

Gen:6:4: There were giants in the earth in those days and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

Jude 1:6

And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. 7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

[Riki]

The subject of this thread is are we alone in the Universe
My guess is that we do not know, but the chances are too small. Perfectly valid guess.
You write about non-mainstream science ( oh yes it is non-mainstram science no matter what its said on the Internet ) which says that we would be unable to go into an another Universe. Than you show me again a new theory about this non-mainsteram science which says the opposite.
So its a theory about a theory rejected by a vast number of mainstream mega soon to be historical giants vs mainstream scientific data regarding our knowledge of the Universe.
Guess what Martin Rees is an advocate of a Multiverse theory and the word advocate tells you that it is not mainstream but on their way to there if there are any evidences and there is not except biassly interpreted hot spots in Microwave background radiation ( collision of Universes ) which can be explained with the current physics.

I don't think you understand the current situation of Science.
All Scientist that promptly dispute any theory are charlatans.
All Scientists have to keep an open mind to the possibilities.There is no such thing as an exact Science when It comes to the study of the Universe.
If you could go back in time and say to the World back then, that exist's numerous planet's,etc;
What do you think their reaction would be?

[Stefan]

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2009/07/-stephen-hawking-why-is-the-milky-way-not-crawling-with-selfdesigning-mechanical-or-biological-life.html


In his famous lecture on Life in the Universe, Stephen Hawking asks: "What are the chances that we will encounter some alien form of life, as we explore the galaxy?"

If the argument about the time scale for the appearance of life on Earth is correct, Hawking says "there ought to be many other stars, whose planets have life on them. Some of these stellar systems could have formed 5 billion years before the Earth. So why is the galaxy not crawling with self-designing mechanical or biological life forms?"

Why hasn't the Earth been visited, and even colonized? Hawking asks. "I discount suggestions that UFO's contain beings from outer space. I think any visits by aliens, would be much more obvious, and probably also, much more unpleasant."

Hawking continues: "What is the explanation of why we have not been visited? One possibility is that the argument, about the appearance of life on Earth, is wrong. Maybe the probability of life spontaneously appearing is so low, that Earth is the only planet in the galaxy, or in the observable universe, in which it happened. Another possibility is that there was a reasonable probability of forming self reproducing systems, like cells, but that most of these forms of life did not evolve intelligence."

We are used to thinking of intelligent life, as an inevitable consequence of evolution, Hawking emphasized, but it is more likely that evolution is a random process, with intelligence as only one of a large number of possible outcomes.

Intelligence, Hawking believes contrary to our human-centric existece, may not have any long-term survival value. In comparison the microbial world, will live on, even if all other life on Earth is wiped out by our actions. Hawking's main insight is that intelligence was an unlikely development for life on Earth, from the chronology of evolution: "It took a very long time, two and a half billion years, to go from single cells to multi-cell beings, which are a necessary precursor to intelligence. This is a good fraction of the total time available, before the Sun blows up. So it would be consistent with the hypothesis, that the probability for life to develop intelligence, is low. In this case, we might expect to find many other life forms in the galaxy, but we are unlikely to find intelligent life."

Another possibility is that there is a reasonable probability for life to form, and to evolve to intelligent beings, but at some point in their technological development "the system becomes unstable, and the intelligent life destroys itself. This would be a very pessimistic conclusion. I very much hope it isn't true."

Hawkling prefers another possibility: that there are other forms of intelligent life out there, but that we have been overlooked. If we should pick up signals from alien civilizations, Hawking warns,"we should have be wary of answering back, until we have evolved" a bit further. Meeting a more advanced civilization, at our present stage,' Hawking says "might be a bit like the original inhabitants of America meeting Columbus. I don't think they were better off for it."

[SilverKnight]

Hawkling overlooks the UFO phenomenon and its strong evidence way too easy. Aliens don't necessarily have to show themselves in a massive scale to everyone in the world. He's very mainstream to me.

I suspect they have good reasons for not showing themselves yet officially. The government knows that they are visiting us pretty well, they are doing all in their efforts to prevent us from knowing the truth, maybe even doing treaties with alien races under close doors so they don't show up to everyone.

[Yaroslav]

It also doesn't talk about sub atomic life or electricity or black holes or most scientific concepts like relativity. I guess none of them exist.

It wouldn't make sense for Bible go in that much detail. However I think it should be obvious that black holes were made on the 4th day (the same day sun, moon, and the stars were made), don't you think?

And what do you mean by subatomic life? Like bacteria and stuff? If so then subatomic sea and sky creatures were created on the fifth day while subatomic land creatures were created on the sixth day. Subatomic creatures are ANIMALS, it's just that they are smaller...

[Insuperable]

It wouldn't make sense for Bible go in that much detail. However I think it should be obvious that black holes were made on the 4th day (the same day sun, moon, and the stars were made), don't you think?

And what do you mean by subatomic life? Like bacteria and stuff? If so then subatomic sea and sky creatures were created on the fifth day while subatomic land creatures were created on the sixth day. Subatomic creatures are ANIMALS, it's just that they are smaller...

Please Yaroslav do not post anything. You are a Creationist and you embarrass Christianity with your nonsense:D

[Insuperable]

I don't think you understand the current situation of Science.
All Scientist that promptly dispute any theory are charlatans.
All Scientists have to keep an open mind to the possibilities.There is no such thing as an exact Science when It comes to the study of the Universe.
If you could go back in time and say to the World back then, that exist's numerous planet's,etc;
What do you think their reaction would be?

Martin Rees is an outstanding physicist who has contributed to the Standard model of the Big Bang which is overwhelming with evidences.
The guy simply in his free time deals with Multiverse:D

You are calling what I like to call Mega physicist charlatans.
Let me tell you a difference between a charlatan and a mega physicist,

Mega physicists are for example physicists who enabled laser, holography, harddrives, supercomputers and which again learned from theoretical physicists who propose experiments and those who test them including Big Bang Standard model contributors because they all actually propose experiments which can be tested.

Charlatans are those who propose untestable theories or theories which could be tested ( if at all are true ) in 1000 years because than we could have technology to test them when instead they could do something to change everyday lives.

For example let me just show how charlatan they really are.

For example Guth proposed a theory of inflation to upgrade a Standard model of the Big Bang.
Do you know what charlatans do? They immediately take this new theory and propose eternal inflation theory with billions of Universes and billions of Big Bangs bla bla bla bla.So they were trying to connect inflation with Multiverse. So for 30 years the scientists simply come up with these theories bla bla bla I propose a theory about a new theory and this new theory is a new theory about a new theory which we will prove in about 1000 years or never. Very scientific I admit.:D
And voila here you go
http://holographicgalaxy.blogspot.com/2011/07/big-bang-string-theories-and.html
I could not find any other link.
Its a latest physics which discovered that a premise of these theories is incorrect and 30 years of "science" and 30000 papers written on that subjecte were shreded on a European scientific conference.
The problem is that majority of people is not aware of this and the Multiverse advocates are trying to rewrite a theory so it can fit observations. Yes, I call that charlatans.
Could not they do something else in 30 years which is something more productive rather than theorizing about unreachable.

[Stefan]

Here's a Drake Equation calculator, for those interested in playing with it.

http://www.classbrain.com/artmovies/publish/article_50.shtml

Let's say, 20% of the stars in our galaxy are viable. With an upper limit of 400 billion stars, that is 80 billion. The closest is 100 billion, so I chose that.

Now the percent of those stars with planets? Most stars are M spectral class(70%.) About 50% of those probably have planets. So let's say somewhere around 40%, considering the rest of the stars are mostly in binary systems, and out of the ones that aren't, only a fraction are in between M and the giants that die out after a few million years.

Number of planets that can sustain life like earth. I'd think either 1 or 2(at most.) So let's choose 1.5.

Percent of those planets where life actually develops. Let's say, 10%. Seems about likely.

Percent of those planets with intelligent life. This will be substantially lower, I'd guess .0001%(1/1 million) This is because in the history of life, there have been a few dozen billion species, only one genus(arguably a few more) have intelligent life.

Percent of those planets where technology develops. Let's choose 10%; that seems optimistic.

Lifetime of communicating civilizations. Let's choose 100,000 since we've been able to communicate for only 100, but we want to see something more advanced than us.


The answer? .006; and I thought I was optimistic.

[SilverKnight]

Interesting culculator.

I chose 100,000 stars like Stefan to make it close as well, to be more fair I chose 50% of then as having planets (as we're not 100% sure), out of those 50%. I chose 20% where life developed (close to half to be fair).

10% of planets with life as having intelligence, 5% as having technology like us, less or better. In communication "Lifetime" I did a very low amount, 10,000 years (lower then Stefan's 100,000 which is relatively small in a universal time scale).

Results: 150 communicative civilizations, out of them could have possibly visited us already which I strongly believe.

If it where 100,000, it will be even greater at ~1,500 communicate civilizations.

There are possibly 1 or 2 civilization with >100,000 to 1,000,000. Imagine a larger galaxy with more stars, now that's when the chances get even higher.

[Riki]

Martin Rees is an outstanding physicist who has contributed to the Standard model of the Big Bang which is overwhelming with evidences.
The guy simply in his free time deals with Multiverse:D

You are calling what I like to call Mega physicist charlatans.
Let me tell you a difference between a charlatan and a mega physicist,

Mega physicists are for example physicists who enabled laser, holography, harddrives, supercomputers and which again learned from theoretical physicists who propose experiments and those who test them including Big Bang Standard model contributors because they all actually propose experiments which can be tested.

Charlatans are those who propose untestable theories or theories which could be tested ( if at all are true ) in 1000 years because than we could have technology to test them when instead they could do something to change everyday lives.

For example let me just show how charlatan they really are.

For example Guth proposed a theory of inflation to upgrade a Standard model of the Big Bang.
Do you know what charlatans do? They immediately take this new theory and propose eternal inflation theory with billions of Universes and billions of Big Bangs bla bla bla bla.So they were trying to connect inflation with Multiverse. So for 30 years the scientists simply come up with these theories bla bla bla I propose a theory about a new theory and this new theory is a new theory about a new theory which we will prove in about 1000 years or never. Very scientific I admit.:D
And voila here you go
http://holographicgalaxy.blogspot.com/2011/07/big-bang-string-theories-and.html
I could not find any other link.
Its a latest physics which discovered that a premise of these theories is incorrect and 30 years of "science" and 30000 papers written on that subjecte were shreded on a European scientific conference.
The problem is that majority of people is not aware of this and the Multiverse advocates are trying to rewrite a theory so it can fit observations. Yes, I call that charlatans.
Could not they do something else in 30 years which is something more productive rather than theorizing about unreachable.

That's how It works.Until you reach the best one.
Listen I did not say that I believe or not.I say ,just like me and scientists an open mind has to be kept.Why?
Was It inflation?Was It big bang?Or something else.I'm sure no true Scientist will give you an exact answer.

Martin Rees
This is the only thing I posted from him;
"This new concept is, potentially, as drastic an enlargement of our cosmic perspective as the shift from pre-Copernican ideas to the realization that the Earth is orbiting a typical star on the edge of the Milky Way."
All the rest are my text's.And he is right.

[Stefan]

Edit: We actually went about this wrong. R* = average rate of star formation per year, not the number of stars in a habitable zone.

[Peyrol]

They exist and they're visiting us...



-...but Sigur Ros is actually one of the grey aliens which abducted Travis Walton in 1975 :lol:

[Insuperable]

That's how It works.Until you reach the best one.
Listen I did not say that I believe or not.I say ,just like me and scientists an open mind has to be kept.Why?
Was It inflation?Was It big bang?Or something else.I'm sure no true Scientist will give you an exact answer.

Martin Rees
This is the only thing I posted from him;
"This new concept is, potentially, as drastic an enlargement of our cosmic perspective as the shift from pre-Copernican ideas to the realization that the Earth is orbiting a typical star on the edge of the Milky Way."
All the rest are my text's.And he is right.

:lol00002:

You posted the whole post from the 8 page from him. I think that is an extract from his book written in 1990s.

And he is right about what? About Multiverse. Are you fucking serious? There has to be some discovery or evidence.
Do I post an invisible posts?
http://holographicgalaxy.blogspot.com/2011/07/big-bang-string-theories-and.html
Do you see what it says there? You posted everything from a book written back in 1990s

[Stefan]

http://news.discovery.com/space/how-many-aliens-drake-equation-110505.html


Finally comes "L," the length of time that the civilization releases detectable signals into space, which, using humans as an example, this technological advancement can be estimated at 10,000 years.

So this is the exciting bit, plug those numbers all in to the equation and you come up with... (drum roll please) ...50!

Is that really it?

The number of contactable civilizations in our Galaxy, right now, that we might communicate with, is just 50... fifty? It's estimated that there is around 400 billion stars in our Galaxy and, according to my numbers (which, by their nature are educated guesses), there are just 50 alien civilizations that we could communicate with.

[Yaroslav]

Belief in aliens is purely religious as there is zero evidence for them.

[Heart of Oak]

I believe they come an check us out a lot. So are proberly amoung us right now, I believe they've got far more advanced than us.
One day we'll see them or maybe they will talk ect with us soon as we are messing the planet up.
Sometimes I think they've already amongst us....
I feel things in different place's things I can't or won't talk about, I've felt them.
They are our true Gods, I hope to see one in my life time.
I could go on n on, you either believe or you don't.

[Riki]

:lol00002:

You posted the whole post from the 8 page from him. I think that is an extract from his book written in 1990s.

And he is right about what? About Multiverse. Are you fucking serious? There has to be some discovery or evidence.
Do I post an invisible posts?
http://holographicgalaxy.blogspot.com/2011/07/big-bang-string-theories-and.html
Do you see what it says there? You posted everything from a book written back in 1990s

When I said mine.I did not meant it was my ideas.
I meant it was not his text(Quotations) as i did not know who had writen that text.
Being the same person was a coincidence ,I dont even know his work.
That is why I posted the following.
Martin Rees
This is the only thing I posted from him;
"This new concept is, potentially, as drastic an enlargement of our cosmic perspective as the shift from pre-Copernican ideas to the realization that the Earth is orbiting a typical star on the edge of the Milky Way."
All the rest are my text's.And he is right.

He is right on the above quote.

[SilverKnight]

Sometimes I wonder what's the population of the universe (living intelligence) :icon_ask:

[2Cool]

Sometimes I wonder what's the population of the universe (living intelligence) :icon_ask:

At least ~7 billion.

[2Cool]

That synthetic life is not "synthetic" like what you have in mind.
I have read about it two years ago.

Here you go - copied from wikipedia

In 2010, the team of Craig Venter replaced the genome of a natural cell with a different genome created by gene synthesis [1] creating a new bacterial strain dubbed Mycoplasma laboratorium[citation needed]. In press conferences, Craig Venter described this work as the creation of "Synthetic Life". This statement was widely criticized[who?] on the grounds that:

the chemically synthesized genome was an almost 1:1 copy of a naturally occurring genome and
the recipient cell was a naturally occurring bacterium

The Craig Venter Institute maintains the term "synthetic bacterial cell" but they also clarify "...we do not consider this to be “creating life from scratch” but rather we are creating new life out of already existing life using synthetic DNA" [4]

And facepalm on what you said how it is not complex.

No not that. More like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dySwrhMQdX4

This just shows how life could have started.

[Germanicus]

A light-year, also light year or lightyear (symbol: ly) is a unit of length, equal to just under 10 trillion kilometres (or about 6 trillion miles). As defined by the International Astronomical Union (IAU), a light-year is the distance that light travels in a vacuum in one Julian year.


Proxima Centauri, V645 Cen. is the nearest star to Earth at a distance of 4.2 light years, what means the nearest star is 25 billion miles away.
It would take about 50,000 years for our very fastest spacecraft to get to Alpha Centauri.
http://www.astro.wisc.edu/~dolan/constellations/constellations/Centaurus.html
One would need about 10,000 shuttle main engines in sequence just to build up a decent speed (say, 1/100th light speed).

[Insuperable]

No not that. More like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dySwrhMQdX4

This just shows how life could have started.

ARRRRRRRRRREEEEEEEEEEEEE YOOOOOOOOOUUUUUUUUUUUUUU SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSTUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUPPPPPPPPPPPPPP PPPPPPIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD DD OOOOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT? I am done arguing with complete idiots.

An extract from his presentations:
In this TED talk, he reveals some of his research. It’s important to note that while these experiments look like he generated living organisms, all of his experiments capitalize on already-existing bio mechanical and biochemical properties of the molecules he is using. However, as his results show, these can give us much insight into the kinds of mechanisms that the very first living things may have used to become living.

He is creating this protocells in a lab which means that he creates them in a controlled environment .
What we are talking here is the Big Bang vs lab. Or you believe that life in the Universe originated in a controlled conditions;)

Anyway I was reputing your claim where you say that it is statistically impropable that there is no life out there as complex as ours ( because that is what you imply on the first page of this thread ) when in fact it is more the other way around. You who only watches videos and with bias therefore not knowing anything wants to contradict scientists who work in that area.

Saying that life is not complex ( stupidy level one ) and that ( they made in a controlled environment by a people ) talking about a fucking protocell made out of the existing material when the discussion is centered on a alien life form as complex as we is an indication of a destructive conversation because of idiots involved because I have already written what is the probability for a cell to emerge in one spot in the Universe 4 billion years ago in my first post. Even if chance rises through time it is still to low that in 2 billionm years there could be only one life or lives on one distant planet and you post me a video about a guy who MAKES cells from an existing material.

From what I could understand he does not care about lives on another planet or anything like that. He simply wants to find a line from which an intelligent life starts.

[arcticwolf]

:rolleyes:

[arcticwolf]

At least ~7 billion.

hahaha Do you mean humanoid? Intelligent? Oh please! :D

[SilverKnight]

At least ~7 billion.

Let's make a fun guestimation.

there is roughly about 100-200 billion galaxies in the universe, there could be up to 500 billion, but let's be fair and keep it at 150 billion galaxies.

Now let say each galaxy has ~1,000 civilizations (my results with Drake's Equation) , each one of them with 1 billion or plus in population on average.


1,000 x 1 billion = 1 trillion in one "average" Galaxy alone :eek:
Now 1 trillion lives x 150 billion galaxies = 1.5 × 10*power of 23 (AKA more then a sextillion lives ).

Imagine with more Galaxies let say 500 billion which is to be believed as the most and the universe keeps expanding and it's very populated out their even tough "it might not seem".

[SilverKnight]

Mj4IbXxIMc8

[Contra Mundum]

Probably the most legit UFO sighting I have ever heard of.
Gl4Z-axJSTI

[Peyrol]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travis_Walton

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pascagoula_Abduction

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communion_%28book%29

[purple]

Yeah, they exist. Like the ones in War of the Worlds..With all those iPods and then hiding into basements..And Tom Cruise saves us all:lightbul:

[SilverKnight]

Yeah, they exist. Like the ones in War of the Worlds..With all those iPods and then hiding into basements..And Tom Cruise saves us all:lightbul:

Agree, except for the last part :p

[Svipdag]

That depends on what you consider acceptable company. Life is probably not rare in the universe. If you don't mind hobnobbing with bacteria and amoebae, we are not alone. Maybe there are even Metazoans out there.

INTELLIGENT life with which we can communicate or which can communicate with us is another matter. On this planet, anyhow, intelligence has not proved to be of great survival value. It is the only salvation of frail-bodied slow-moving creatures like us.

Armour, fangs, claws, and speed are far more useful. The dinosaurs, which dominated the terrestrial fauna for about 160 million years, were dimwits. However, they were well equipped with the foregoing attributes. Ultimately, they became extinct and this has led some to claim that they were a failure .

What incredible arrogance ! We've existed for about 4.5 million years and THEY ruled the world for 160 million years . And we have the gall to call the stupid dinosaurs a failure. We are so vulnerable that we couldn't appear until the Pleistocene when not only the dinosaurs, but the giant mammals of the early Cenozoic were extinct. Intelligence alone would not have enabled us to compete with them.

Unusual circumstances were needed for intelligent but slow and frail-bodied animals to survive. Large animals on other worlds need not be intelligent, then, in fact, they are more likely not to be intelligent than intelligent inasmuch as intelligence is not of high survival value except to creatures which have nothing else to rely on and few or no larger, more aggressive animals to compete with.

Extraterrestrial LIFE, then may be common, but INTELLIGENT extraterrestrial life is likely to be rare.


"INTELLEGO VT CREDAM"

[Furnace]

Well, there is a great possibility that they do exist, and there is also a chance that they visited us in the past, there are a lot of interesting scriptures and tales about ancient astronauts.

But If they do exist they wouldn't bother with us or our mess in the current age, I know I wouldn't.

[SilverKnight]

More on the Dogon people of Mali and their traditional beliefs on ancient ET visitation.

k56JeOKb5FM

[Peyrol]

Good song about this topic :D

tAePc-xzOjQ

[Stefan]

1,000 x 1 billion = 1 trillion in one "average" Galaxy alone :eek:
Now 1 trillion lives x 150 billion galaxies = 1.5 × 10*power of 23 (AKA more then a sextillion lives ).

Imagine with more Galaxies let say 500 billion which is to be believed as the most and the universe keeps expanding and it's very populated out their even tough "it might not seem".

We should limit any prediction to within the constraints of our galaxy. Anything more would be too distant for us to communicate with. Even assuming there was a method to manipulate space, for one to not experience the effects of time dilation, but also move faster than the speed of light the distances are too immense for the overwhelming majority of galaxies. At the most we would only consider our local group, which is about 30 galaxies. Assuming around 10 planets in each galaxy develops intelligent life, according to Carl Sagan's interpretation of the Drake's Equation (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlikCebQSlY), that would mean 300 intelligent civilizations in a spacial extent with a diameter of around 10 million light years.

In the end it relies on how typical intelligent life is. If let's say, our case is atypical, and intelligent life is much more common than we've experienced here on Earth, then that quite obviously ruins our use of the Drake's Equation.

[Heart of Oak]

The mega verse is to unimaginably large for this planet to be the only one with intelligent life forms, there have been visitors to this planet for many hundreds if not thousands of years.
There is proof to this fact.....
Egyptian tribes dress as astronauts for example....

[Hurrem sultana]

More on the Dogon people of Mali and their traditional beliefs on ancient ET visitation.

k56JeOKb5FM

interesting :thumb001:

[SilverKnight]

interesting :thumb001:

We're close to uncovering the truth, the question is not if, but when. I laugh when some people try to make fun of this.

[Heart of Oak]

If not when, where?

[Insuperable]

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Dogon_people

[Balmung]

The question isn't whether they exist or not. I'm sure there is some sort of life out there in the universe. The real question is will they be as hot as Asari?

[SilverKnight]

If not when, where?

Who knows, maybe the whole planet Earth?


http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Dogon_people

bunch of pseudo "scientific" bs.

[Insuperable]

bunch of pseudo "scientific" bs.

And Dogon people communicating with aliens is very scientific:rolleyes:
Explanation 3 and 4 are explanations I was referring to

[SilverKnight]

And Dogon people communicating with aliens is very scientific:rolleyes:
Explanation 3 and 4 are explanations I was referring to

Have you taken time to see the videos I posted about the Dogons? , this are scientists and explorers, who have travel all the way to Mali to study them, that's scientific enough to me. That sites only contains a few sentences.

[Insuperable]

Have you taken time to see the videos I posted about the Dogons? , this are scientists and explorers, who have travel all the way to Mali to study them, that's scientific enough to me. That sites only contains a few sentences.

I am unable to watch the video right now but it you prefer scientists and explorer as I and if you prefer quantity over quality here you go


http://www.michaelsheiser.com/PaleoBabble/Grialle%20Sirius%20Dogon.pdf
http://vega.lpl.arizona.edu/sirius/A3.html

[SilverKnight]

I am unable to watch the video right now but it you prefer scientists and explorer as I and if you prefer quantity over quality here you go


http://www.michaelsheiser.com/PaleoBabble/Grialle%20Sirius%20Dogon.pdf
http://vega.lpl.arizona.edu/sirius/A3.html

The articles have a good point, that the Dogons might have extracted knowledge from modern explorers and therefore adapted it to their own culture/ beliefs. I doubt this, I can't see how a people so primitive might want to incorporate detailed astronomical knowledge on their believes, and there's a stronger possibility that they actually had contacted the space aliens way before.

Mainstream scientists are always trying to find a way around things.

[Hurrem sultana]

The articles have a good point, that the Dogons might have extracted knowledge from modern explorers and therefore adapted it to their own culture/ beliefs. I doubt this, I can't see how a people so primitive might want to incorporate detailed astronomical knowledge on their believes, and there's a stronger possibility that they actually had contacted the space aliens way before.

Mainstream scientists are always trying to find a way around things.

I really doubt they have been in touch with astronomic science,i mean come on..how far stretched:rolleyes:

too primitive for that:coffee:

[SilverKnight]

I really doubt they have been in touch with astronomic science,i mean come on..how far stretched:rolleyes:

too primitive for that:coffee:

They're like "babies", young kids they hear things and repeat it to you but they're not aware/ conscious of what they really are and their technology, so they perceive it as being "super natural" or a deity.

[SilverKnight]

Russian "telecommunication" satellite followed by multiple UFOs (May 17).

0Ywu-ABke6o

[Insuperable]

http://www.philipcoppens.com/dogonshame.html
emphasis on the last paragraph

[Heart of Oak]

If there are skeptics amongst us, go to one of the henges in old England, an feel the vibrations from the ages, lay lines ect.
There is something old an wise there you must allow yourself to tune in feel the energy, it's the old ones, that use these places for there own reasons, visitations ect.
Meditate, sit an ponder an allow yourself to tune in to there wisdom....

Everything in the universe has a sound, vibration let yourself feel it....

[Anarch]

We are not alone in the universe. I highly doubt alien races have made contact with humans, however.

[Hurrem sultana]

They're like "babies", young kids they hear things and repeat it to you but they're not aware/ conscious of what they really are and their technology, so they perceive it as being "super natural" or a deity.

Yep but i doubt they were in touch with modern science,especially not new modern science...and this has been part of their religion for a long time

[Insuperable]

Yep but i doubt they were in touch with modern science,especially not new modern science...and this has been part of their religion for a long time

Exactly except it was not a part of their religin for a long time because the traveler who spent 30 with them made things up as you can see in the article above

[D_Sheetz]

Extraterrestrial life certainly exists, history tells us this..as to whether they created us and visit us though is another question. They certainly visit us and an a super human-like race could have definitely created us, but the answers to these questions will always be hypothesis for now..

[Contra Mundum]

http://a3.ec-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/108/3f7f3e8d51119344f2873e69f010f5a6/l.jpg

You people are trippin'.

[Heart of Oak]

Venus......
Nothing more to say just now.....
Let's see what happens in the month of June about 04:35 GMT 22nd.....

It will be a henge in some part of the world......

An I haven't tripped since 1985.....

[SilverKnight]

Venus......
Nothing more to say just now.....
Let's see what happens in the month of June about 04:35 GMT 22nd.....

It will be a henge in some part of the world......

An I haven't tripped since 1985.....

I knew Venus will transit across the Sun that day
but what hat does that mean? What would happen ?

[SilverKnight]

Details on an ancient artifact found that depicts a possible connections with Earth, aliens, the Sun and a possibility of it being a type of "star-gate" used by them.




BLGKOV3LhZY

[PeacefulCaribbeanDutch]

its not whether they are going to visit us, they already have, it's when they are going to make themselves publicly known, when they feel we are ready to know...... I think we are a long way before that, we have to reach world peace first

[SilverKnight]

its not whether they are going to visit us, they already have, it's when they are going to make themselves publicly known, when they feel we are ready to know...... I think we are a long way before that, we have to reach world peace first

World peace will come to be too late, there's more chances for pigs to fly then world peace. Aliens will show up and stop of from destroying ourselves (guaranteed).

[Stefan]

The "triangle" implication of a stargate in our sun is ....( I'm trying to find a less arrogant and harsh phrase to put here) - very unscientific? a faulty conclusion? logically fallacious?

Basically, at this point, a summary of this thread ..... kinda.

3kWaCB_T4-0

[SilverKnight]

The "triangle" implication of a stargate in our sun is ....( I'm trying to find a less arrogant and harsh phrase to put here) - very unscientific? a faulty conclusion? logically fallacious?

Basically, at this point, a summary of this thread ..... kinda.



There's nothign wrong with curiosity, it's embedded in human nature. Some of the things mentioned in Ancient Alien series might be truth, others not so much. There are also historical elements mentioned on that show that can't be denied as well.

[Aces High]

Venus......
Nothing more to say just now.....


Forget Venus....just you wait till Uranus is in its last stages.

[Stefan]

There's nothign wrong with curiosity, it's embedded in human nature. Some of the things mentioned in Ancient Alien series might be truth, others not so much. There are also historical elements mentioned on that show that can't be denied as well.

The problem I have does not lie with the curiosity of the individuals. I have a problem with the lack of an experimental method, and existence of numerous logical fallacies involved in the arguments of these thinkers; it's almost entirely speculative in nature, with a disregard for an empirical basis. Historical components are nice, but they can only go so far, and usually historical theisms and cultural traits are not literal, as these historians try to exemplify.

In fact, many of the conclusions contradict Occam's razor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor) with assumption after assumption, most of which aren't even good assumptions, accumulating.

Why would somebody speculate of stargates forming triangles on the sun, when they can learn solar astronomy, something far more substantial and empirical, for a more likely explanation.

It seems as if they're looking for patterns of grandeur, what they think is an interesting story, where there are not any. Meanwhile, science is far more revealing, and in my opinion interesting, because it is a more accurate representation of reality.

For example

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25CmSCVLZG8


Yesterday I came across with a couple of absolutely astonishing images taken by NASA SDO spacecraft, where we see a monster hole in the Sun's corona, with almost perfect shape of an isosceles triangle, placed EXACTLY at latitude and longitude zero and it's still open. Despite the lame explanations that debunkers and shills are gonna say, that is NOT an usual coronal hole and if I have to give it a shot, IMO that's a STARGATE open by extraterrestrial technology.

How can one come to that conclusion? A. It's stated in this video that there isn't a thorough understanding of solar activity involved by the person posting it. B. An assumption is made that such an event is atypical, without any insight on whether or not this actually is the case. C. A random speculative story is made up as an explanation for the phenomenon, akin to how people make up theisms to explain the world. So we have an assumption that this is an atypical event, based on personal anecdotal examinations of pictures, without any knowledge of Astronomy. This is suppose to be taken seriously?

Such a methodology is very inferior to the scientific method, when gaining insight and predictive knowledge of our physical world. It just seems useless to me, a truly curious person looks for what is likely and correct; he doesn't make up stories.

[SilverKnight]

The problem I have does not lie with the curiosity of the individuals. I have a problem with the lack of an experimental method, and existence of numerous logical fallacies involved in the arguments of these thinkers; it's almost entirely speculative in nature, with a disregard for an empirical basis. Historical components are nice, but they can only go so far, and usually historical theisms and cultural traits are not literal, as these historians try to exemplify.

In fact, many of the conclusions contradict Occam's razor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor) with assumption after assumption, most of which aren't even good assumptions, accumulating.

Why would somebody speculate of stargates forming triangles on the sun, when they can learn solar astronomy, something far more substantial and empirical, for a more likely explanation.

It seems as if they're looking for patterns of grandeur, what they think is an interesting story, where there are not any. Meanwhile, science is far more revealing, and in my opinion interesting, because it is a more accurate representation of reality.

For example

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25CmSCVLZG8



How can one come to that conclusion? A. It's stated in this video that there isn't a thorough understanding of solar activity involved by the person posting it. B. An assumption is made that such an event is atypical, without any insight on whether or not this actually is the case. C. A random speculative story is made up as an explanation for the phenomenon, akin to how people make up theisms to explain the world. So we have an assumption that this is an atypical event, based on personal anecdotal examinations of pictures, without any knowledge of Astronomy. This is suppose to be taken seriously?

Such a methodology is very inferior to the scientific method, when gaining insight and predictive knowledge of our physical world. It just seems useless to me, a truly curious person looks for what is likely and correct; he doesn't make up stories.

I understand where you're coming from about these visual demonstrations just being mere speculative theories that some people draw out. All I'm doing is posting bits of information about the whole subject. The triangles can be of a surmountable amounts of possibilities (such as ex. anomalies with the solar camera, anomalies with the Sun, data corruption etc).

Scientific data is required when we need to prove things we don't see, such as for example; black-holes, how they form and how big they can be, how powerful and fat they are etc . Physicists and astronomers use scientific and mathematical methods that will prove or at least create hypothesis and theories to better understand the functionality of these extra solar events and objects. These things aren't easy to visually perceive and prove. For instance, gravity, even though we can't see it, we know its presence is there, we knew about its presence way before we discovered that it was mainly caused by the attraction of two or more objects due to their mass. But even with all of these recent discoveries, gravity is still partially theorized and we don't have a full spectrum of it.

Overall and eventually, all of these events unfolding over our heads, if filtered down will deliver the realities of extraterrestrial life outside of our home planet. Sometimes it doesn't take the full extent of science to prove or disapprove that something exists. Historical scripts and illustrations can be useful at times, such as the illustrations drawn by ancient Sumerians for example, which clearly depict men and women pointed at the stars and a carving of some sort of galaxy with in perfect motion, just as we would see it in a modern telescope.

But let's forget about illustrations, scripts and "not so scientific" evidence/theories". There are ways of breaking the laws of gravity (well not entirely but enough to cause flight/ propulsion without too much energy). These technologies could be most likely used by UFOs/ ET spacecrafts for intergalactic travel. By using high frequencies to manipulate the photons within the matter of the object it could be possible. This could be one of the many explanations for the strange lights and electron-magnetic field seen on UFO's by commonly using thermo or night vision/ ultra violet cameras.
SGEGkWy_EaU

[Stefan]

http://www.skepdic.com/hutchisonhoax.html

Very interesting, but I don't buy it. It's more science fiction than fact.


Hutchison came on the scene around 1979, but he has not been able to convince the scientific community that he is anything more than a crackpot. The same qualities that repulse the scientific community endear Hutchison to the mass media: the lone wolf genius with no degrees or academic background who shows the world you don't need no education to find a source of unlimited energy that costs nearly nuttin. Of course, it goes without saying that there will always be military persons attracted to claims like those made by Hutchison. What general wouldn't want an army of levitating soldiers with unlimited power packs that cost and weigh next to nothing? Imagine tanks and planes protected by shields like those that protect the Starship Enterprise?

And lastly, Richard Feynman a few years before on anti-gravity.

hyCc3ri_ZF4

[SilverKnight]

in Aussie

JKEiSKHAhbk

recent of him

hX1qgzynucM
3ckWAyF7WHo
nGrxXWFRJ8g

and no isn't fake -.- it has being proven to be 100% real

[SilverKnight]

First footage of Baltic sea UFO or ( USO)


C-fDimPKYCg

[Bobcat Fraser]

It's a vast universe, so there must be a multitude of life forms out there. I'm referring to entities that are more exciting than amoeba. I'm referring to EBEs that have visited or are visiting Earth. I don't think that they created us, though. The Creator made both of us IMO. Sadly, if they made their presence known, some people would claim that they were angels or demons. However, I don't think that most folks would go off the deep end. We're not all dogmatic, suspicious fundamentalists.

[aimar]

it's unlikely

[Insuperable]

Scientific evidence and calculations go in favor that we are most likely alone in the Universe ( in terms of intelligent life ) as I have already written
Everything else is a wishful thinking from a dreaming idiots

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=49337&page=4

http://wallacegsmith.wordpress.com/2011/07/26/we-might-be-alone-in-the-universe-go-figure/

http://www.space.com/12421-alien-life-rare-universe-extraterrestrials-seti.html

Their result doesn't mean we're alone — only that there's no reason to think otherwise

[Mesrine]

Carl Sagan on intelligent life in the universe.

RB_v99FSTYc

[Bobcat Fraser]

Scientific evidence and calculations go in favor that we are most likely alone in the Universe ( in terms of intelligent life ) as I have already written
Everything else is a wishful thinking from a dreaming idiots

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=49337&page=4

http://wallacegsmith.wordpress.com/2011/07/26/we-might-be-alone-in-the-universe-go-figure/

http://www.space.com/12421-alien-life-rare-universe-extraterrestrials-seti.html

So, Stanton Friedman is idiotic now? Maybe it's ridiculous to *assume* that we're the only intelligent life there is.

[Mraz]

I just know that if they exist, we'll attempt first to exterminate them, next we'll mix wih them.

[Frigga]

I do believe in intelligent life other than our own, and I believe that it is greater than ours. Now whether it is outside of our planet only, outside our planet and beneath our planets surface simultaneously, or only below the surface, and whether it is what created humanity is not something that I am educated enough to speak on. But it is indeed interesting that ancient cultures from all around the globe have obvious similarities to each other, namely pyramids, obelisks, and references to sky craft and beings with giant forms and/or large elongated heads. And these are referenced all over the world, i.e. India, Egypt, Sumeria, and the Aztecs and Incas. And on Easter Island there is cuneiform writing that is almost identical to that found in the Indus valley (I think that is where it is, I may be wrong) and these evidences are all many thousands of years old. So, I don't know enough, but I do believe that we are not alone.

Also, wouldn't it be incredibly arrogant to believe that we humans are the supreme examples of intelligence in the universe? I should hope that we're not, we're far too barbaric for that in how we treat others of our own race and species, let alone the rest of the world.

[Frigga]

If indeed we are not alone in the universe, and if we are being controlled against our knowledge and/or our will, wouldn't it be an interesting thought that maybe the fear of other races is a subliminal thought pattern put upon us to keep us to divided. "Divide and Conquer" is a very old and well known military tactic.

[Insuperable]

So, Stanton Friedman is idiotic now? Maybe it's ridiculous to *assume* that we're the only intelligent life there is.


So, Stanton Friedman is idiotic now? Maybe it's ridiculous to *assume* that we're the only intelligent life there is.

People called him far worse than that. The guy is a nuclear physicist. So what? He appears constantly on TV which is starting to become annoying for everyone and since he is a recognizable face does not mean he should be taken serious. There are many scientists way above his league who claim the opposite.

Our galaxy has a diameter of circa 100 000 light years. Since SETI program has not yet received any intelligent signal it is fair to assume that there is no life at least in our galaxy. Signal moves at light speed in vaccum and nobody sent any in the last thousands of year beause we would receive some signal so it is fair to assume that there is possibly no intelligent life in our galaxy.


Here is another model developed by dr. Watson ( not crackpot:D ) and even his model predicts that chances are just to low.
http://www.universetoday.com/13741/the-odds-of-intelligent-life-in-the-universe/

Watson’s model suggests an upper limit for the probability of each step occurring is 10 per cent or less, so the chances of intelligent life emerging is low — less than 0.01 per cent over four billion years
So in the entire Universe that life originated in the last four years is 0.01 percent and if we take in an assumption that we are that life the chance there is another life drops down exponentially


Lets for example take Drakes equation in consideration. This equation is highly critized since it can not draw firm conclusion and it is used mostly for fun

Criticism of the Drake equation follows mostly from the observation that several terms in the equation are largely or entirely based on conjecture. Thus the equation cannot be used to draw firm conclusions of any kind. As Michael Crichton, a science fiction author, stated in a 2003 lecture at Caltech:[35]

The problem, of course, is that none of the terms can be known, and most cannot even be estimated. The only way to work the equation is to fill in with guesses. [...] As a result, the Drake equation can have any value from "billions and billions" to zero. An expression that can mean anything means nothing. Speaking precisely, the Drake equation is literally meaningless...

Another objection is that the very form of the Drake equation assumes that civilizations arise and then die out within their original solar systems. If interstellar colonization is possible, then this assumption is invalid, and the equations of population dynamics would apply instead.[36]

One reply to such criticisms[37] is that even though the Drake equation currently involves speculation about unmeasured parameters, it was not meant to be science, but intended as a way to stimulate dialogue on these topics. Then the focus becomes how to proceed experimentally. Indeed, Drake originally formulated the equation merely as an agenda for discussion at the Green Bank conference.

But as time passes and scientists play with its factors, guess what, the number of civilizations according to the equation drops more and more

In 2002, Skeptic magazine publisher Michael Shermer argued that astronomers weren't being critical enough in their evaluation of L, the length of time a civilization remains detectable. Looking at 60 civilizations that have existed on Earth since the dawn of humanity, Shermer came up with a value for L that ranged from 304.5 years to 420.6 years. If you plug these numbers into the Drake Equation, you find that N equals 2.44 and 3.36, respectively. Tweak the numbers some more, and you can easily get N to fall to one or even lower. Suddenly, the odds of hearing from an extraterrestrial life form are considerably lower.

But lets go back to real science again
http://ontherightside.wordpress.com/articles/the-odds-against-life/

NASA hired Yale University’s Harold Morowitz, a theoretics expert. Dr. Morowitz deals with “the laws of large numbers and probabilities.”

Here is how the probabilities theory works: you take a set of circumstances, and you scientifically determine the odds of a certain outcome. For instance, if you flip a coin, you have “even odds” of heads or tails. The more you flip it, the greater the odds are against it coming up “heads”

every time. Once you get to 1/1015, the probability of an event ever happening is negligible. If you get to 1/1050, the event could not have happened even once in 15 billion-years. After studying the complexity of a protein molecule, Dr. Morowitz concluded that the probability of life occurring by chance is 1/10236. 1/10236 takes into account all the atoms in the universe, and the chance that the right ones came together just once to form a protein molecule.

He said “The universe would have to be trillions of years older, and trillions of times larger, for a protein molecule to have occurred by random chance.”


So I do not understand why people take life so blatantly and repeating stuff like "but the Universe has so many galaxies and so many stars and so many planets life must have occured bla bla bla" is becoming ignorant and cliche. Nobody is claiming that there is no life out there but simply that it is not irrational to believe that there is no life out there and not to mention an intelligent one.

[Bobcat Fraser]

Solin, I have a question about SETI. Why would EBEs use that specific medium to reach out to us? Radio waves probably would seem outdated and primitive to them. Surely, they could find a better way to communicate with us. We don't use drums and smoke signals. That's how they might see radio waves. Shostak has no monopoly on contact. That said, neither one of us can give a definitive answer to this question.

[Frigga]

And how would we know what SETI releases out to the public is even true, or all of the truth?

[SilverKnight]

It's a vast universe, so there must be a multitude of life forms out there. I'm referring to entities that are more exciting than amoeba. I'm referring to EBEs that have visited or are visiting Earth. I don't think that they created us, though. The Creator made both of us IMO. Sadly, if they made their presence known, some people would claim that they were angels or demons. However, I don't think that most folks would go off the deep end. We're not all dogmatic, suspicious fundamentalists.

Off course there is, it doesn't take 'rocket science' to figure that out by our own.


Scientific evidence and calculations go in favor that we are most likely alone in the Universe ( in terms of intelligent life ) as I have already written
Everything else is a wishful thinking from a dreaming idiots

http://www.theapricity.com/forum/showthread.php?t=49337&page=4

http://wallacegsmith.wordpress.com/2011/07/26/we-might-be-alone-in-the-universe-go-figure/

http://www.space.com/12421-alien-life-rare-universe-extraterrestrials-seti.html

To suggest that we're the only intelligent specie in the universe is like suggesting that everything is just an empty waist of space. And if it's true, then it would be sad that we are the only ones alone.


If indeed we are not alone in the universe, and if we are being controlled against our knowledge and/or our will, wouldn't it be an interesting thought that maybe the fear of other races is a subliminal thought pattern put upon us to keep us to divided. "Divide and Conquer" is a very old and well known military tactic.


And how would we know what SETI releases out to the public is even true, or all of the truth?

I would suggest anyone with an open minded to watch this video report on alien contact.

mfzQjGLVHHo

We don't have to look at SETI for answers (or as I personally call it SELF - Search for Extraterrestrial Life that as been Found)

[Hurrem sultana]

Most people think they exist to me that is also the most logical answer

[SilverKnight]

(NEW UPDATES)

By: danielofdoria


Alien armada over Spain.
Alien intervention in our world.


Enjoy...

L2X9Lp7CpUs

JJpnHwy0bkU

[arcticwolf]

I know for sure, but I won't tell you. :laugh:

[The Lawspeaker]

The idea that we are really the only intelligent lifeforms in this universe seems... illogical to me.

[SilverKnight]

The idea that we are really the only intelligent lifeforms in this universe seems... illogical to me.

More then that... like absurd .

The evidences are vasts, beyond just theoretically..

[SilverKnight]

Alien Abduction Documentary - Implant Removal - Award Winning Film

-2YRLG2tuBI

[Vojnik]

I don't think we are alone in this Universe which is so large that we as humans can not even begin to comprehend it's vastness. I believe that there are other life forms out there, nomadic ones that travel from planet to plant raping them of it's resources and exterminating it after their departure.

The possibility of there being other more intelligent lifeforms other then ours would be the possibility that they will not treat our planet and us humans nicely. They would treat us how we as humans have treated ourselves. For example, what happened to the native Americans upon the arrival of the European colonizers ;). Although, I hope that this theory is not true :).

[spaz]

I believe there are more intelligent life forms out there. I also believe that the UFOs are man made. It might be possible that they reverse engineered them from another species' spacecraft. Apparently they involve electromagnetism.

[Contra Mundum]

I doubt these UFO sitings are extraterrestrial visitors. If they have the technology to travel such great distances, then they would also have the technology to observe us from high orbit, or even farther out. What would be the purpose of flying through Earth's atmosphere with no intention of trying to communicate with us?

[Contra Mundum]

Our galaxy has a diameter of circa 100 000 light years. Since SETI program has not yet received any intelligent signal it is fair to assume that there is no life at least in our galaxy. Signal moves at light speed in vaccum and nobody sent any in the last thousands of year beause we would receive some signal so it is fair to assume that there is possibly no intelligent life in our galaxy.




That's a really good point. There are most likely other planets with life, but intelligent life would be extremely rare. Out of the thousands of species on Earth, only one is classified as intelligent life, and we really came about by chance. A few planets may at best have life forms as intelligent as dogs, orcas or even chimpanzees. Most likely, far below that even. Probably limited to single cell life forms, or perhaps some type of sea creatures on planets with liquid water.

I think there is other intelligent life in our universe, but probably not in our celestial neighborhood of around 10,000 light years. If there is life in our galaxy, it's much farther out, perhaps on the other side. I do believe the odds are decent that intelligent life exists in another galaxy, but who cares, we will never reach them, or they reach us. Human beings will be extinct as a species before they could ever develop such mind blowing technology as deep space or time travel.

[only1]

Yes of course we alone. There are other creatures on earth the can't be seen through human eyes, though. Demons for example (they can change shape). I heard from old people that demons used to kidnapp people (especially kids) or seduce them to come with them, including female demons that seduced good looking young men.

I heard from an old man, that he knew a man (died 30-40 years ago) known to be a sorcerer, who married a female demon and sometimes people who were around could hear them talking, although they couldn't see her.

[SilverKnight]

Aliens have communicated already with us, just not in a global type level (yet). There's evidently various types of alien races and all which most likely have their own unique agendas with our planet and civilization. They don't necessarily have to travel vasts distances to come here and communicate with us, they could just be here to simply observe and study as, just as we do with non-human animals, we observe them from a distance at times..

Demons, negative spirits, lost fallen souls all possibly real, no doubt as I myself have experiences the spiritual side of our world. But it doesn't mean these extraterrestrials who are supposedly abducting Humans are necessarily demons...I doubt it, they're rather physical, living flesh... There are both, man made and alien made UFOs/ spacecrafts.



Some must see documentaries (recommended).

KC1zcixPaQA

6SEv78UOZc8

[Pecheneg]

Film producers always imagine them like this (they have heads, arms, eyes, legs etc just like humans)
http://i48.tinypic.com/14mmud.jpg
http://i49.tinypic.com/29o6e8j.jpg




How i imagine them
(yea even a stone is more plausible to me than those human-like creatures above)
http://i49.tinypic.com/8xq6w3.jpg

or at least..
http://i47.tinypic.com/v8eqt3.jpg
http://i45.tinypic.com/wj74ns.jpg
http://i49.tinypic.com/8xlpow.jpg
http://i50.tinypic.com/2vtv5dy.jpg

[Sabinae]

The universe...is inside of oneself...

[beaver]

We are alone, yeah. What else would you like to know?
(fucking sheet)

[SilverKnight]

Like I said, the universe is too damn vast to have such little or no intelligent life and just a few fossilized life and small creatures isn't rational.

We can't just be the only intelligence..

[Insuperable]

Aliens have communicated already with us, just not in a global type level (yet). There's evidently various types of alien races and all which most likely have their own unique agendas with our planet and civilization. They don't necessarily have to travel vasts distances to come here and communicate with us, they could just be here to simply observe and study as, just as we do with non-human animals, we observe them from a distance at times..

Demons, negative spirits, lost fallen souls all possibly real, no doubt as I myself have experiences the spiritual side of our world. But it doesn't mean these extraterrestrials who are supposedly abducting Humans are necessarily demons...I doubt it, they're rather physical, living flesh... There are both, man made and alien made UFOs/ spacecrafts.



Some must see documentaries (recommended).

KC1zcixPaQA

6SEv78UOZc8

:picard1:

[SilverKnight]

The universe...is inside of oneself...


We are all one with the source and the source is one with us.

People who don't think outside the box have a very young soul which has plenty more to learn in their next lives..

[beaver]

Like I said, the universe is too damn vast to have such little or no intelligent life and just a few fossilized life and small creatures isn't rational.
You definately live not in Russia with such idiotic sentiments.

[Furnace]

It's kinda silly to think that we are unique. I guess it's hard to find species that exist at the very same time as us, and within a reasonable distance from our solar system, and at the same time have advanced technology that can make them come in contact with us more easily. And if they had discovered us I don't think they would want to contact or interact with us, and/or our mess.

[SilverKnight]

We are all one with the source and the source is one with us.

People who don't think outside the box have a very young soul which has plenty more to learn in their next lives..

Great example, like bellow (beaver)


You definately live not in Russia with such idiotic sentiments.




It's kinda silly to think that we are unique. I guess it's hard to find species that exist at the very same time as us, and within a reasonable distance from our solar system, and at the same time have advanced technology that can make them come in contact with us more easily. And if they had discovered us I don't think they would want to contact or interact with us, or our mess.

Good to see honest smart folks that can think and as expected from someone who comes from such an advance and civilize European nation.

[beaver]

It's kinda silly to think that we are unique.
It would be even much more than silly.

[only1]

Like I said, the universe is too damn vast to have such little or no intelligent life and just a few fossilized life and small creatures isn't rational.

We can't just be the only intelligence..


You see man, that's the way non believers think, but a man that is a true believer who knows there is one and only Almighty creator doesn't have to ask unncessary questions. Such a man knows that The Almighty, whose greatness we can't grasp, has chosen only us humans who live on earth to worship him and that all other creatures and endless galaxies play just as a background.

[Stefan]

The problem is, not that intelligent life might exist, which statistically seems likely in the entire observable Universe. It is that the statistics aren't high enough for them to contact us. The universe is actually too vast. So they might as well not exist.

[Partizan]

I can't believe that we are only ones in this HUGE universe whereas ridicilous consiparicy theorists like David Icke and Von Daniken makes me doubt...

[beaver]

The problem is, not that intelligent life might exist, which statistically seems likely in the entire observable Universe. It is that the statistics aren't high enough for them to contact us. The universe is actually too vast. So they might as well not exist.
Stefan, please explain me one little thing - 2-split interference and summing Feynmans's amplitudes there. If you can you will be Zeus and Appolone simultaneously

[Albion]

Has anyone ever had really bad Déjà vu or started daydreaming and then wondered if life was actually a dream?

[Stefan]

Has anyone ever had really bad Déjà vu

I have! I get it more frequently as I age it seems. I hate it. It is so non intuitive, yet after learning about some of the metaphysical philosophies on time by physicists, it makes a bit of sense. Maybe it is something more simple and neurological though. It could be just a problem with our brains messing up the time-scheme and organization of our memories, I think.

[Contra Mundum]

The problem is, not that intelligent life might exist, which statistically seems likely in the entire observable Universe. It is that the statistics aren't high enough for them to contact us. The universe is actually too vast. So they might as well not exist.

That's too sane and logical for this thread. It's more fun to believe in evil spirits, shape-shifters, demonic possessions and aliens abducting people and probing their anuses.

[Stefan]

Stefan, please explain me one little thing - 2-split interference and summing Feynmans's amplitudes there. If you can you will be Zeus and Appolone simultaneously

It has to do with how particles act.

According to the heisenberg uncertainty principle, the more accurate your momentum measurement the less accurate the position measurement, and vice versa. This means, you can only determine the probability of a particle's position when interacted upon. This collapse of a wave-fucntion, or the probability amplitude (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probability_amplitude) of a particle's position squared, is seen in decoherence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_decoherence). Some physicists believe that future events, such as the collapse of the wave-function, affect past events. This is to align with their determinist philosophy. Others believe this collapse of the wave-function is entirely random and probabilistic in nature.

I like this video on the topic.

DfPeprQ7oGc

and this series on Quantum Mechanics.

TfPhZpNcUUE

[SilverKnight]

You see man, that's the way non believers think, but a man that is a true believer who knows there is one and only Almighty creator doesn't have to ask unncessary questions. Such a man knows that The Almighty, whose greatness we can't grasp, has chosen only us humans who live on earth to worship him and that all other creatures and endless galaxies play just as a background.

I know where you're coming from I used to be believer once, my family are all Christians and I mean real conservative ones. I stopped believing in most of those stuff until I realized that there was more out there then was tough to me..

Anyways, yes there's a spiritual world. A god that cares if we fart, do this do that and then sent innocent people to hell, don't think so. sorry..


The problem is, not that intelligent life might exist, which statistically seems likely in the entire observable Universe. It is that the statistics aren't high enough for them to contact us. The universe is actually too vast. So they might as well not exist.

Yes I understand, but what I think is that there are alien races who have technologies so advance they have created ways of traveling vasts distances in the universe in a shorter time then what we believe.

I already seen spacecraft myself, spherical in shape, shiny silver in color. It seems this type of technology is made to bend space and time and somehow use some source of energy to lunch themselves into space and appear quick as possible in our atmosphere.



I have! I get it more frequently as I age it seems. I hate it. It is so non intuitive, yet after learning about some of the metaphysical philosophies on time by physicists, it makes a bit of sense. Maybe it is something more simple and neurological though. It could be just a problem with our brains messing up the time-scheme and organization of our memories, I think.

Same here, I have this happen like everyday now. It seems like our brains or soul are connected in a way that enables us to see forward in time, in other words our mind can jump in time and see what may happen. Or it's just basically something neurological, but then again, there are things I have dreamed about that have occurred a week or so in advance in great detail.

[Albion]

I have! I get it more frequently as I age it seems. I hate it. It is so non intuitive, yet after learning about some of the metaphysical philosophies on time by physicists, it makes a bit of sense. Maybe it is something more simple and neurological though. It could be just a problem with our brains messing up the time-scheme and organization of our memories, I think.

I got it when I was in school once. It's terrible, it's like you've been asleep and you're not really aware of what's going on or how you came to be there.
I just sat quietly for a bit until I 'woke up'. I hadn't fallen asleep, I think it's just when you let your mind daydream too much.

[beaver]

Stefan
you will never have here space until I'm out of here. And I will work with you if you are trying to be here ever!

[Stefan]

Yes I understand, but what I think is that there are alien races who have technologies so advance they have created ways of traveling vasts distances in the universe in a shorter time then what we believe.

I already seen spacecraft myself, spherical in shape, shiny silver in color. It seems this type of technology is made to bend space and time and somehow use some source of energy to lunch themselves into space and appear quick as possible in our atmosphere.

Well I think that just gets us back to the empirical vs. anecdotal argument. There are a lot of problems with FTL travel, besides the barrier. The problems are mostly based in relativity and time paradoxes, reference frames, etc. Who knows, there is still much we don't know about physics, but all options for FTL travel, which deal with "warping space-time" require astronomical energies, and non-verifiable material and physical phenomena, like negative mass or density, etc, etc. Even still, there are probably few if any intelligent species in our galaxy, according to Drake's Equation, and even FTL travel would be quite slow between galaxies.

[Sultan Suleiman]

The universe...is inside of oneself...

That sounded....

INCREDIBLY http://d24w6bsrhbeh9d.cloudfront.net/photo/2875486_700b.jpg

[beaver]

Well I think that just gets us back to the empirical vs. anecdotal argument. There are a lot of problems with FTL travel, besides the barrier. The problems are mostly based in relativity and time paradoxes, reference frames, etc. Who knows, there is still much we don't know about physics, but all options for FTL travel, which deal with "warping space-time" require astronomical energies, and non-verifiable material and physical phenomena, like negative mass or density, etc, etc. Even still, there are probably few if any intelligent species in our galaxy, according to Drake's Equation, and even FTL travel would be quite slow between galaxies.
Has no notion about metric, mass, time and so on.

[Insuperable]

Well I think that just gets us back to the empirical vs. anecdotal argument. There are a lot of problems with FTL travel, besides the barrier. The problems are mostly based in relativity and time paradoxes, reference frames, etc. Who knows, there is still much we don't know about physics, but all options for FTL travel, which deal with "warping space-time" require astronomical energies, and non-verifiable material and physical phenomena, like negative mass or density, etc, etc. Even still, there are probably few if any intelligent species in our galaxy, according to Drake's Equation, and even FTL travel would be quite slow between galaxies.

The more someone approaches the speed of light he/she "cut" the distance and no negative mass or density is needed to get faster between two points.

[Stefan]

The more someone approaches the speed of light he/she "cut" the distance and no negative mass or density is needed.

I was talking about things like this, which Sigur was alluding to:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wormhole

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive

Wormholes would require negative pressure to stabilize, and even then they're quite dangerous and very theoretical anyway.

An Alcubierre drive would require a lot of energy to "warp space-time."

[Sultan Suleiman]

I am pretty much sure that Serbs or/and Croats who seeded all life are some where out there...

[beaver]

Stefan
you are afraid to stand against professional physicist, its clear. you will never get in touch with me, you are coward finally

[Insuperable]

I was talking about things like this, which Sigur was alluding to:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wormhole

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive

Wormholes would require negative pressure to stabilize, and even then they're quite dangerous and very theoretical anyway.

An Alcubierre drive would require a lot of energy to "warp space-time."

You were talking about requiring large quantities of energy so I thought you were talking about spacecraft which you did since high speeds in vaccum are also some kind of spacetime warping.
However it is more likely to build a fusion powered ship which will accelerate us to speeds close to the speed of light in order to "cut" the distance rather than making a spacraft which requires the negative matter but who knows, perhaps if we discover graviton we could do some engineering

[Stefan]

Stefan
you are afraid to stand against professional physicist, its clear. you will never get in touch with me, you are coward finally

:confused: I mostly didn't reply to your post before your last post because I didn't understand it, sorry. I was waiting a bit to see if it was a reading comprehension problem on my part or just poor English grammar on your part (not that you're at fault for it; it's not your native language.)

Anyway, in reference to your last post, I don't see what's wrong in what I posted. Those are flaws with such FTL travel that wishes to side-step General Relativity through "back-doors." You can read the papers sourced in the wikipedia links I presented, if you don't believe me.

[Stefan]

You were talking about requiring large quantities of energy so I thought you were talking about spacecraft which you did.
However it is more likely to build a fusion powered ship which will accelerate us to speeds close to the speed of light in order to "cut" the distance rather than making a spacraft which requires the negative matter but who knows, perhaps if we discover graviton we could do some engineering

The only problems with that are they're subjected to time dialation then, the speeds are too slow for the vast distances aliens would have to travel in some cases, and the number of planets they'd have to travel to in order to find us is so large! I doubt it would be economically feasible for such a species, unless they go into hibernation or something and gather energy from stars somehow. They'd have to be quite wondrous then. At least a Type II civilization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardashev_scale#Type_II) on the Kardashev scale.

What exactly would the graviton do though? Is there a postulated drive utilizing it? It sounds interesting. :)

[Insuperable]

The only problems with that are they're subjected to time dialation then, the speeds are too slow for the vast distances aliens would have to travel in some cases, and the number of planets they'd have to travel to in order to find us is so large! I doubt it would be economically feasible for such a species, unless they go into hibernation or something and gather energy from stars somehow. They'd have to be quite wondrous then. At least a Type II civilization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kardashev_scale#Type_II) on the Kardashev scale.

What exactly would the graviton do though? Is there a postulated drive utilizing it? It sounds interesting. :)

It would not be slow ( as you say because of time dilation or distance contraction ) if one has advance power source and has the ability with it to get closer and closer to the speed of light. Even though such a power source is mind boggling it is more likely that than having negative matter with negative energy which gravity repels instead pulls.

[Insuperable]

What exactly would the graviton do though? Is there a postulated drive utilizing it? It sounds interesting. :)

It should not do anything except proving that they are the cause of gravity for example and for other fundamental results
I am simply saying that if there are gravity particles such as gravitons maybe one can do some kind of engineering to make matter which deflects gravity but graviton itself and not to mention such a kind of engineering can be found only in our dreams ( at least for now ).
Maybe there are even antiparticles of graviton like antigravitons but that is still out of reach of today's physics and maybe even today's imagination.

[Mechanolater]

you are coward finally

Oh, come on. No need for that.

geRR7JF-3FI

Anyway; no, I don't think we're alone. Don't think we've been visited, though.

[SilverKnight]

There are rumors that aliens like the Pleiadians use some form of technology similar to those we've] tried or testes, in Billy Meier's voyage he described the space ship he travel to, here are the description on how the propulsion and speed of light, and hyper space travel works for them



The Pleiadians spaceships use a anti-gravitation drive for planetary flight and anti-matter drive for cosmic space.


Of course the Earth human has taken the first step towards cosmic space flight, but this is only the first primitive tries. Even if he has reached the moon with his missiles, he has not reached the cosmic space. In this manner he will not reach it at all since necessary for that is the Impulsion, which is able to break the hyper-space and bring together the tremendous distances.

Space and time are not overcome by space and time, but by the space and timeless, what that means is that space and time collapse into one another and equal-directed enter into the null time. Then just a few seconds are sufficient to hurry through billions of light-years, practically without loss of time, because the null time neutralizes space and time.



People on Earth will never be capable of traveling into the true, deep outer space unless they invent another method of propulsion. I can only imagine what you mean with the term propulsion, e.g. that it must involve a form of beam drive - a hyperdrive, so to speak. In my opinion it would need to consist of a drive that alters matter in some way, probably while the speed of light is exceeded. In the process, the beamship is hurled into hyperspace, in which space and time are paralyzed, as you have already explained. I assume that space and time collapse in a manner whereby they are somehow completely nullified.

To travel through real outer space, one needs a drive that surpasses the speed of light many times over.

This propulsion can only become activated, however, when the speed of light has already been reached.

As a result, another drive is needed to regulate the normal speed up to that of light.

This means then that a beamship needs two propulsion systems: first, a normal drive which permits acceleration up to and below the speed of light and, second, a hyperdrive as you call it.

A drive, therefore, which generates a velocity a million and billion times that of light; the hyperspeed, which enables us to enter hyperspace.

A space in which every mass expands in proportion to the increase in speed.

Consequently, time and space collapse and they become null-time and null-space.

That is to say:

Space and time simply cease to exist.

And exactly by this manner is created the fact that distances of countless light-years can be traversed in a fraction of a second without causing a shift in time.

Many of our scientists are already on the right track and are theoretically working at and researching the necessary propulsion systems.

These propulsion systems are already known in outline form to our scientific community as light-emission and tachyon drives.

The light-emission drive serves as normal propulsion and has the function of propelling the beamship onto planets or within their vicinity, up to the 153 millionkilometer distance – the safe distance, that is.

Then the tachyon drive, among others, is activated when greater distances need to be traversed.

This is one of the hyperdrives which are capable of conquering hyperspace and space and time.

A disk-like ship would be the ideal shape because surely, in the atmosphere, it offers the least aerodynamic resistance, which might also be the case in water

The disk shape ensures the least resistance in an atmosphere, and besides, it offers the largest surface and best shape that allows the drives on them — or through them — to become fully effective.

More:
https://sites.google.com/site/thelifeofthepleiadiansproject/page-10

[Stefan]

It would not be slow ( as you say because of time dilation or distance contraction ) if one has advance power source and has the ability with it to get closer and closer to the speed of light. Even though such a power source is mind boggling it is more likely that than having negative matter with negative energy which gravity repels instead pulls.

What percentage of the speed-of-light would you say we can economically, as say, a Type I civilization using fusion energy, reach? I'm not sure if there is a calculation for such a thing, but I'd imagine it would be considerably higher than what we can do now, but not very much in the grand-scheme.

According to this (http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/rocket.html), if we were to accelerate to .9999999999.... * c it would take us about 28 years to reach Andromeda in our reference frame, but that's still approximately 2,000,000 years from Earth's reference frame. Say we knew that a planet there had life somehow, that would be a 4,000,000 time gap before we got there. Imagine what could happen in that time-span.

Considering the number of planets we'd have to search, it still fits the argument that these distances are too far for Alien-human contact. Although interstellar colonization is definitely possible, seemingly. :) We just can't contact our parent worlds.

[StonyArabia]

We were never alone, like I have said call them Spirits, Demons, Angels, that's what the aliens are.

[Stefan]

There are rumors that aliens like the Pleiadians use some form of technology similar to those we've] tried or testes, in Billy Meier's voyage he described the space ship he travel to, here are the description on how the propulsion and speed of light, and hyper space travel works for them

No offence toward your credibility, but that article has a few conceptual flaws and a lot of odd terms I don't think the scientific community is much familiar with outside of fiction.

We don't know if a hyperspace exists, for starters, and since we're limited to the context of our four dimensions, we wouldn't know how to get to such a hyperspace.

This for example doesn't make sense:


As a result, another drive is needed to regulate the normal speed up to that of light.

Does he mean to reach large percentages of the speed of light? It's asymptotic, so you can't ever reach the speed of light unless you have no rest-mass, which unless you're light or composed of sub-atomic particles analogous to light in that context, you will have rest mass. You need an infinite amount of energy to reach c as matter, and that doesn't make sense.


A drive, therefore, which generates a velocity a million and billion times that of light; the hyperspeed, which enables us to enter hyperspace.

Sounds like science fiction.


These propulsion systems are already known in outline form to our scientific community as light-emission and tachyon drives.

We don't know if tachyons exist, and many physicists, if not most, don't believe they exist.


The entire argument relies on the existence of plediadians and faith in the guy who wrote it. I don't like mixing up faith with astronomy (and science in general.) :P

[SilverKnight]

We were never alone, like I have said call them Spirits, Demons, Angels, that's what the aliens are.

I believe in them, but doubt most or all aliens are them...

Anyways here's a good explanation on possibly how these aliens might travel far distances in a small amount of time...



The trip from Erra, the Pleiadian home planet, takes seven hours to reach Earth; they feel this is a long time to travel in a small ship. The total distance from Erra to Earth is around 500 light years, which is a considerable distance.

Here on Earth we are used to measuring things in miles. For instance, it is approximately 400 miles from Los Angeles to San Francisco by car. If we drove that distance, it would take us about 7 hours, traveling at a speed of 55 miles per hour. This is the
same amount of time it takes a Beamship to travel 500 light years from the Pleiades. We can envision the distance from Los Angeles to San Francisco since it is familiar to most of us, but a light year, how far is that?


Light travels at the speed of 186,000 miles in one second, not an hour. That means that if we multiply the speed of light times 60, we get 11,160,000 miles in a minute. And then multiply by another 60, and we get 669,600,000 miles in an hour. A light year is the distance that light will travel in one year's time, which is 5,865,696,000,000 miles. (That’s 5 trillion, 865 billion, 696 million miles.) That's so fast that our minds have nothing to relate it to. Here's an example that may help. It is approximately 24,000 miles around the Earth. If we used a flashlight as a light source and shined it due east, the light would travel around the Earth 7.75 times in one second. The light from the sun takes 8.3 minutes to travel 93,000,000 miles to Earth before it hits our eyes. Even if we could travel at the speed of light in a Beamship, theoretically it would still take us 500 years to get to the Pleiades. How then, are they able to get here in only 7 hours?


The answer lies in the fact that Beamships do not fly at the speed of light, but have the technology to convert themselves into fine-matter particles that can travel faster than the speed of light. This is possible by traveling through what is called hyperspace, thereby making it possible to travel billions of miles in just part of a second.

In order to understand this, a brief explanation of time and space is necessary, which will make all of this clearer.
You and I live in a three-dimensional world of planets, suns, and galaxies. It is a material place that we can see and touch. The Pleiadians call it the coarse-matter world since it is material and
appears solid.

[Insuperable]

What percentage of the speed-of-light would you say we can economically, as say, a Type I civilization using fusion energy, reach? I'm not sure if there is a calculation for such a thing, but I'd imagine it would be considerably higher than what we can do now, but not very much in the grand-scheme.

According to this (http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/rocket.html), if we were to accelerate to .9999999999.... * c it would take us about 28 years to reach Andromeda in our reference frame, but that's still approximately 2,000,000 years from Earth's reference frame. Say we knew that a planet there had life somehow, that would be a 4,000,000 time gap before we got there. Imagine what could happen in that time-span.

Considering the number of planets we'd have to search, it still fits the argument that these distances are too far for Alien-human contact. Although interstellar colonization is definitely possible, seemingly. :) We just can't contact our parent worlds.

With fusion powered ship we could not go fast, not even close to the speed of light, not by far
I was not serious with the notion that with the fusion we could get close to the speed of light and you got me too seriously. I was just implying that with some mind boggling drive ( because it is hard to imagine what can be more powerful than fusion ) we could get so close.

[Stefan]

With fusion powered ship we could not go fast, not even close to the speed of light, not by far
I was not serious with the notion that with the fusion we could get close to the speed of light and you got me too seriously. I was just implying that with some mind boggling drive ( because it is hard to imagine what can be more powerful than fusion ) we could get so close.

Only thing I could think of that would give us so much energy on a regular basis for that would be if we Dyson Sphere'd our Sun, and I doubt .99999... c is feasible. Although something like 50% c doesn't seem too slow for the closer star-systems.

http://www.daviddarling.info/images/DysonSphere2.gif

That's faaaaaar off! We're stuck to our Solar System for now and many tens of thousands of years, me thinks.

[SilverKnight]

It's truly far Stefan, but extraterrestrials seem to have found a away to reach us from vasts distances. Maybe they just have bases/colonies in our solar system or nearby in another, another possible case..

One thing is for sure, we're not just stuck within our own star system for many more years, but also in the way we think about space travel, how we equate it with our limited knowledge, reason why we find it so mind boggling to think that we can manage to travel such distances without breaking our current laws of physics we know of and work with...

[Stefan]

One thing is for sure, we're not just stuck within our own star system for many more years, but also in the way we think about space travel, how we equate it with our limited knowledge, reason why we find it so mind boggling to think that we can manage to travel such distances without breaking our current laws of physics we know of and work with...

That's the only thing I hope for on the matter. Maybe there is a loophole we don't know about with our current knowledge, which enables fast travel without time dilation. I kinda want alien civilizations to exist because it would even more interesting, yet the more I read the less I think it's likely there are expansive galactic civilizations. Science fiction is fun, but I'm an objective person: if I don't see it I don't believe it. I also kinda hope they don't exist. I don't want our planet ending up as fodder in some Galactic war or we to become slaves to an imperial empire. If humans are unique, the universe could be just as interesting with interstellar colonization. Regardless, I'd be long dead by then most probably, so I should look for such a fix in science fiction media.

[SilverKnight]

That's the only thing I hope for on the matter. Maybe there is a loophole we don't know about with our current knowledge, which enables fast travel without time dilation. I kinda want alien civilizations to exist because it would even more interesting, yet the more I read the less I think it's likely there are expansive galactic civilizations. Science fiction is fun, but I'm an objective person: if I don't see it I don't believe it. I also kinda hope they don't exist. I don't want our planet ending up as fodder in some Galactic war or we to become slaves to an imperial empire. If humans are unique, the universe could be just as interesting with interstellar colonization. Regardless, I'd be long dead by then most probably, so I should look for such a fix in science fiction media.

Understand.. ;)

But then again we have the possibility that reincarnation is true, and that our bodies are just the vessels of our soul (our concussions energy), energy can't be destroyed by shifted/ moved into another vessel, meaning you could possibly get to see the future in another body, well you won't remeber that you reincarnated most likely, but the possibilities of such thing are pretty high and on the increase in our knowledge about it.

[Contra Mundum]

It is possible to travel close to the speed of light, even using rocket technology, but the amount of fuel needed and the size of the spacecraft would be enormous. It would be too expensive.

There are several propulsion systems that could be used to approach 80 to 95% of the speed of light. All would gradually increase the speed of the craft over several months till it reaches maximum speed, then would take several months to slow back down. The most efficient way of doing this would be using some type of nuclear or laser propulsion.

I never hear this discussed, but how could the spacecraft be protected at such high speeds from collisions with asteroids, comets and small objects like rocks or ice? Also, is it possible to create artificial gravity on spacecraft? That would be useful to prevent bone thinning on missions lasting several years.

[Stefan]

I never hear this discussed, but how could the spacecraft be protected at such high speeds from collisions with asteroids, comets and small objects like rocks or ice?

I've also wondered about this. Maybe they could use a type of electromagnetic field? They'd need something to protect themselves from gamma rays too. Without our sun's magnetosphere it's quite dangerous in space.


Also, is it possible to create artificial gravity on spacecraft? That would be useful to prevent bone thinning on missions lasting several years.

I've watched documentaries on ship designs that have a spinning centrifuge type of mechanism that would emulate gravity by producing acceleration.



Another option for space travel would be solar sails.

7Mb47w0vB04

If I recall correctly they could go quite fast as well. I think it would be great for short distances, to the nearby stellar systems.

[Contra Mundum]

I've also wondered about this. Maybe they could use a type of electromagnetic field? They'd need something to protect themselves from gamma rays too. Without our sun's magnetosphere it's quite dangerous in space.

Yes, like the "shields" on star trek. :cool:

Now that I think of it, they didn't use them while traveling through space, only when in combat. Maybe warping space helps prevents such collisions.
Okay, now I'm getting way too deep into scifi.




I've watched documentaries on ship designs that have a spinning centrifuge type of mechanism that would emulate gravity by producing acceleration.

I used to see that discussed years ago, but not on any recent documentaries on the Science Channel. And I never hear any discussion on that subject from NASA anymore. Maybe it's too expensive and not feasible.




Another option for space travel would be solar sails.

7Mb47w0vB04

If I recall correctly they could go quite fast as well. I think it would be great for short distances, to the nearby stellar systems.

I've heard of those. We can develop the technology to reach the nearest star systems. I doubt it will ever happen though. The Americans probably wont be leading the way. You need a country with wealth and a lot of national pride to accomplish such a feat. Nationalism died in the US long ago. The country is no longer united because it has grown too diverse. Yet another tragedy of multiculturalism.

The Chinese may be our only hope when it comes to deep space travel. They have the money and drive to get it done, but technologically are still pretty far behind. Hopefully the Russians and Chinese can work together. Imagine what Germany could have accomplished had they won WW2. They would have bases on Mars by now.

Wernher von Braun said we had the technology to put man on Mars in the 1970s, but after the Moon landings, NASA's budget was suddenly slashed. And the shuttle program was a joke. A total waste of money.

[Stefan]

I wonder why Japan isn't more interested in deep space programs. They have the national identity, and they are quite adept at engineering and physics. I think they're very enthusiastic about science and technology in general, and they aren't corrupted by multiculturalism and Jews just yet. I'd love to see what they could do.

[Contra Mundum]

I wonder why Japan isn't more interested in deep space programs. They have the national identity, and they are quite adept at engineering and physics. I think they're very enthusiastic about science and technology in general, and they aren't corrupted by multiculturalism and Jews just yet. I'd love to see what they could do.

I wish Japan and China could put aside their differences and work together. Maybe with the Russians as well.

[The Lawspeaker]

I wish Japan and China could put aside their differences and work together. Maybe with the Russians as well.

Hmm maybe a joint ESA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Space_Agency)- FKA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Space_Agency) would be a better idea.

[beaver]

I mostly didn't reply to your post before your last post because I didn't understand it, sorry. I was waiting a bit to see if it was a reading comprehension problem on my part or just poor English grammar on your part (not that you're at fault for it; it's not your native language.)

Anyway, in reference to your last post, I don't see what's wrong in what I posted. Those are flaws with such FTL travel that wishes to side-step General Relativity through "back-doors." You can read the papers sourced in the wikipedia links I presented, if you don't believe me.
Stefan, sorry if you are honest man and you don't speculate about physics matters. Things of such level can be discussed by strong profies only. Also, if they mention notions like "particle", it doesn't mean that they really think that "particles" exist. Its a tool to comunicate, no more.

[Stefan]

Also, if they mention notions like "particle", it doesn't mean that they really think that "particles" exist. Its a tool to comunicate, no more.

I understand that very well. I could've digressed into mathematical rigor, albeit I'm not at such a level of aptitude nor achievement, yet the semantic expressions suffice for the casualness of this conversation. I figured you were somebody who wished for a causal explanation, anyway. But, you know very well about such matters I presume, much more than I should, at the very least.


Stefan, sorry if you are honest man and you don't speculate about physics matters. Things of such level can be discussed by strong profies only
Well, unfortunately there are only a few such people here. If you, as one of the "strong profiles", wish to enlighten me of my fallacies, please do so. I do not wish to remain ignorant by intention, nor am I totally incompetent on such matters, as I have a good scope of knowledge of the subject, just nothing detailed just yet. It wasn't as if I was espousing my own thoughts or speculating anyway. All of the knowledge I spake came from credible sources.

[beaver]

But, you know very well about such matters I presume, much more than I should, at the very least.
I dont know. I'been working on this theme about 25 years and still cannot decode the central position of the Feynman's work (about last 50-thies)

[Stefan]

I dont know. I'been working on this theme about 25 years and still cannot decode the central position of the Feynman's work (about last 50-thies)

When does one typically first experience Feynman diagrams in their training or education?

Particularly is there a course dedicated to just the implementation of them?

Possibly you can get somebody to assist you on Physics forums (http://www.physicsforums.com/library.php?do=view_item&itemid=235), where they are far more experienced?

I have Feynman's lectures, but I'm still focusing on studying the first two volumes, and haven't proceeded to the third one on Quantum Mechanics yet. After scanning through the pages though, I don't see any of his diagrams in the third volume, but he does discuss interference in detail, as well as probability amplitudes. You've probably already tried, but maybe if you read what he said on such matters in the volume it may assist you in the more detailed work of his.

[MarkyMark]

I'm not sure but I'm content with a female companion, dog, and children. I don't care if that means we are alone.

[beaver]

When does one typically first experience Feynman diagrams in their training or education?

Stefan, something about 1950-1960

[SilverKnight]

Human technology is a laugh to them as they're superior in that sense. Hope to see (maybe not now) but in the future all of humanity forgetting about the stupid wars and hate and rather uniting for a better cost, our conquest of space and exploration of the universe.

[Stefan]

Hope to see (maybe not now) but in the future all of humanity forgetting about the stupid wars and hate and rather uniting for a better cost, our conquest of space and exploration of the universe.

I think it's more likely going to happen through conquest. People are too different on this planet. The only way for us to "unite" is if one group absorbs or kills off most others, which is effectively genocide.

I personally don't think wars are "stupid." These wars are people struggling for their existence and survival.

[SilverKnight]

I think it's more likely going to happen through conquest. People are too different on this planet. The only way for us to "unite" is if one group absorbs or kills off most others, which is effectively genocide.

I personally don't think wars are "stupid." These wars are people struggling for their existence and survival.

1st, I don't think it's good idea to start speaking about genocide and sick things like that, in order for that to happen a better positive attitude is needed...Globalization will keep humanity stronger, connect and educate us more about each other:)

2nd, Wars are stupid, they're done/ manipulated by elites who lack knowledge on their souls evolutionary path, in other words they're the dark side our our civilization as physical and spiritual; being we are. To think that wars are good is just beyond me.

[Mechanolater]

2nd, Wars are stupid, they're done/ manipulated by elites who lack knowledge on their souls evolutionary path, in other words they're the dark side our our civilization as physical and spiritual; being we are. To think that wars are good is just beyond me.

Wars procure resources and, if propagated correctly, strengthen the cohesion of a population.

And just to keep on topic; aliens! Somewhere, not here.

[Stefan]

1st, I don't think it's good idea to start speaking about genocide and sick things like that, in order for that to happen a better positive attitude is needed...Globalization will keep humanity stronger, connect and educate us more about each other:)

I didn't imply genocide is a good thing. It is the only way you'll get a single cohesive population though. Globalization is just a different, less violent, form of genocide, by the way.



2nd, Wars are stupid, they're done/ manipulated by elites who lack knowledge on their souls evolutionary path, in other words they're the dark side our our civilization as physical and spiritual; being we are. To think that wars are good is just beyond me.

No they're not. For example, would there be an America without the revolutionary war? Would you be in this country right now if Old-Stock Americans didn't fight that war for their freedom and the freedom of their children, and consequently immigrants? Wars happen for reasons.

[SilverKnight]

I didn't imply genocide is a good thing. It is the only way you'll get a single cohesive population though. Globalization is just a different, less violent, form of genocide, by the way.

You might get a single cohesive population but as seen before it has ruined more lives then what it has done or try to do for 'good'.

There's nothing about globalization that's genocide, me and my peers have yet died from it :rolleyes: maybe it's a genocide for some race supremacist, but for sane normal folks it's just everyday life.




No they're not. For example, would there be an America without the revolutionary war? Would you be in this country right now if Old-Stock Americans didn't fight that war for their freedom and the freedom of their children, and consequently immigrants? Wars happen for reasons.

Definitely not, I agree, but these wars where necessary for freedom, is like me defending myself from a violent criminal, if I have a weapon I have the rights to defend and free myself from him/ her.

What I was simply referring to, are those wars caused by malicious supremacist thinking, for example the wars caused by Hitler and his allies, we had to defend ourselves from his insanity.

Necessary wars, unnecessary wars..

[Stefan]

You might get a single cohesive population but as seen before it has ruined more lives then what it has done or try to do for 'good'.

There's nothing about globalization that's genocide, me and my peers have yet died from it :rolleyes: maybe it's a genocide for some race supremacist, but for sane normal folks it's just everyday life.

Please read the definition of genocide, you don't know it. Death is not a requirement. Extinction of a people is the requirement.



Definitely not, I agree, but these wars where necessary for freedom, is like me defending myself from a violent criminal, if I have a weapon I have the rights to defend and free myself from him/ her.

What I was simply referring to, are those wars caused by malicious supremacist thinking, for example the wars caused by Hitler and his allies, we had to defend ourselves from his insanity.

Necessary wars, unnecessary wars..

For the German people, WWII was necessary. The Jews, in their eyes, were leaching off their economy, just like the mainland British in the eyes of the Americans. Hitler took the country and made it magnificent. The exception was the invasion of Poland, but to them it was something right. It is all subjective.

[Ánleifr]

100% yes they exist. The odds that they don't are so small it would be statistically impossible. The only reason I can think of that someone wouldn't believe they exist is if they were religious.

Whether or not they visit us, I don't know. Personally I don't think so since I don't think we are that interesting.

why don't religions think that God could have created other life?

[Leliana]

Erm, just imagine how people all around the world would go completely batshit if SETI, NASA, ESA or any other space institution would receive a clear extraterrestrial signal with a Mass Effect 2-like message: :shy:


Humans, your 'Curiosity' Mars probe changes nothing. Your species has the attention of those infinitely your greater. (That which you know as 'Aliens' are your salvation through destruction.)

Mass panic all the way, maybe even Mass suicides. Remember the TV series 'V'? :cool:

Let's better stay alone until we have better and more advanced technology to meet 'aliens' on eye level. :D

[Contra Mundum]

Orson Welles reading of "Wars of the Worlds" on radio in 1938 caused mass panic in those who had mistaken it for an actual news broadcast of an alien invasion. People were flooding police stations with phones calls. I think some even committed suicide. Welles' performance was just a little too convincing.
Xs0K4ApWl4g

His apology
2awVqsoLAKI

[Stefan]

I2apGYUX7Q0

[Stefan]

6AnLznzIjSE

[SilverKnight]

In my opinion: In the case of finding extraterrestrial intelligence, we must consider the eyewitness experiences and vast evidences like video recordings, photos, sounds, etc. equally or over any BS and cover up scientific methods in present days.

Also there are tales/ mythologies, historical records of creatures/ gods from the sky, which is also another logical evidence to prove that they might really exist, had and possibly still have an influence on our planet and human history and possibly our development as well.

Going by the standards set by SETI and other scientific institutions isn't that smart and limited in thinking, as our understanding of the universe and alien technology/ civilization is very pathetic and limited...

[SilverKnight]

Here goes your Mars rover looking for ET life that has already been found right in our eyes long..

ex5TKLZ71HU

[SilverKnight]

For the skeptics (real NASA footage) got deleted from the main source in YouTube after it reached over 14 million viewers! (coincidence? no) ..

Please and don't tell me they are 'magical space birds' or "weather balloons "..



Bxmnpw8qGOM

[American_Hispanist]

I think dp93 is a reptile from outer space.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ncwCETyQlk