Originally posted by debbiejo
How do you know?....Maybe there are many types of them, and some are more evolved then us, and wouldn't want to be found out and others are lilke us...barbaric.
The distance of space will stop all but the supper advanced, and if they were here, they would do a better job of studying us. We would never know.
Originally posted by hotsauce6548yeah i do agree on that i think the exact same thing, i don't think we are alone in the universe.
However, they DO exist.Okay, think of it this way.
Look up to the sky on a clear night and look at all the countless numbers of stars that you can see.
Now, let's say, for argument's sake, half of thos stars that we can see had planets revolving around them.
Okay, so now say that *those* half of the stars had planets that had livable conditions. (Right temeperature, water, air to breath, plants...)
Well, now let's say half of that half had microorganisms. (Bacteria etc.)
Now let's say that those half had some sort of multi-celled organisms living on them. (Animals.)
Now, we say half of that half had intelligent or semi-intelligent organisms living on them.
Do you follow?
Well, if not, I assume you get the picture. Anyway, now that we've halved and halved and halved and halved, do you know how many stars and star systems we still have left?
...
A LOT!
And that, my friends, is why I believe in aliens.
(Oh, and if you were wondering, I read something like this in a magazine, and it does have a very good point!)
Originally posted by T.M
If Aliens did exist they would have to be much smarter than humans.. or we would have seen them by now.. and if they were smarter than humans then they would now not to come to earth because we have wrecked it.
not really... considering with physics that we only see distant galazies in their past because light is only so fast we might not have any idea about some aliens and vice versa. there is infact a limit to what we see. and then there are possible other dimensions and different branes of existance and it just gets more and more complicated when you consider what might be true
If aliens exist (and they likely do), then those with truly open minds and hearts will rejoice in the knowledge that we are not alone (well, assuming the aliens arent like those ack-ack-ack Mars-Attacks guys). Only those with (IMO) "little Gods" at the core of their faith will be shaken and seek refuge in fortified ignorance.
Einstein, for example, found organized religion deplorable. But the more he learned about the Universe the more profound his belief in "the Old Man."
Only religionism will suffer, but then, that is the way of ossified organisms when environments change.
I don't really know if I believe in Aliens or not.
To the best of my knowledge, I've never seen one.
But I know that Space is unending, and that there's a slight to good chance that maybe we aren't the only living organisms in Space.
To have Space all to our own like that I don't think we're that special a organism to have the privilege. I mean look at or race. We hate each other and then over the dumbest things, lol. Not quite the works of a highly advanced race, which we aren't. Sorry but we don't deserve anything. And if other aliens races are having inter or extra-planetary utopic parties and have the greatest times of their advanced lives on scales unimaginable to the human brain, and we're counted out, ..Good!
Originally posted by §P0oONY
There is a small chance that they don't exist.
Originally posted by FistOfThe NorthBut I know that Space is unending, and that there's a slight to good chance that maybe we aren't the only living organisms in Space.
Rubbish
N=N*fp ne fl fi fc fL
Where N is the number of stars in the Milky Way galaxy; fp is the fraction with planets; ne is the number of planets per star capable of supporting life; fl is the fraction of planets where life evolves; fi is the fraction where intelligent life evolves; and fc is the fraction that communicates; and fL is the fraction of the planet's life during which the communicating civilizations live.
This serious-looking equation gave SETI an serious footing as a legitimate intellectual inquiry. 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. And guesses-just so we're clear-are merely expressions of prejudice. Nor can there be "informed guesses." If you need to state how many planets with life choose to communicate, there is simply no way to make an informed guess. It's simply prejudice.
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, and has nothing to do with science. I take the hard view that science involves the creation of testable hypotheses. The Drake equation cannot be tested and therefore SETI is not science. SETI is unquestionably a religion. Faith is defined as the firm belief in something for which there is no proof. The belief that the Koran is the word of God is a matter of faith. The belief that God created the universe in seven days is a matter of faith. The belief that there are other life forms in the universe is a matter of faith. There is not a single shred of evidence for any other life forms, and in forty years of searching, none has been discovered. There is absolutely no evidentiary reason to maintain this belief. SETI is a religion.
One way to chart the cooling of enthusiasm is to review popular works on the subject. In 1964, at the height of SETI enthusiasm, Walter Sullivan of the NY Times wrote an exciting book about life in the universe entitled WE ARE NOT ALONE. By 1995, when Paul Davis wrote a book on the same subject, he titled it ARE WE ALONE? ( Since 1981, there have in fact been four books titled ARE WE ALONE.) More recently we have seen the rise of the so-called "Rare Earth" theory which suggests that we may, in fact, be all alone. Again, there is no evidence either way.
Taken from a common sense text.
So I restate the original question.
Originally posted by Sir Whirlysplat
RubbishN=N*fp ne fl fi fc fL
Where N is the number of stars in the Milky Way galaxy; fp is the fraction with planets; ne is the number of planets per star capable of supporting life; fl is the fraction of planets where life evolves; fi is the fraction where intelligent life evolves; and fc is the fraction that communicates; and fL is the fraction of the planet's life during which the communicating civilizations live.
This serious-looking equation gave SETI an serious footing as a legitimate intellectual inquiry. 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. And guesses-just so we're clear-are merely expressions of prejudice. Nor can there be "informed guesses." If you need to state how many planets with life choose to communicate, there is simply no way to make an informed guess. It's simply prejudice.
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, and has nothing to do with science. I take the hard view that science involves the creation of testable hypotheses. The Drake equation cannot be tested and therefore SETI is not science. SETI is unquestionably a religion. Faith is defined as the firm belief in something for which there is no proof. The belief that the Koran is the word of God is a matter of faith. The belief that God created the universe in seven days is a matter of faith. The belief that there are other life forms in the universe is a matter of faith. There is not a single shred of evidence for any other life forms, and in forty years of searching, none has been discovered. There is absolutely no evidentiary reason to maintain this belief. SETI is a religion.
One way to chart the cooling of enthusiasm is to review popular works on the subject. In 1964, at the height of SETI enthusiasm, Walter Sullivan of the NY Times wrote an exciting book about life in the universe entitled WE ARE NOT ALONE. By 1995, when Paul Davis wrote a book on the same subject, he titled it ARE WE ALONE? ( Since 1981, there have in fact been four books titled ARE WE ALONE.) More recently we have seen the rise of the so-called "Rare Earth" theory which suggests that we may, in fact, be all alone. Again, there is no evidence either way.
Taken from a common sense text.
So I restate the original question.
So, if there's no proof that aliens exist yet there's also no proof of our being all alone, where does that leave someone?