Off Topic · OFF the record and a little fun for a change. How many of you believe there are Aliens of another world walking on earth? (page 3)
jrodmc wrote:Does anyone on this site read? Cave drawings? Aliens? Yesterday's mythology are today's aliens? What will they be saying about today's alien stories 1000 years from now?The observable universe is approximately 14 billion light years across. Mathematics can make even the most idiotically huge distances seem manageable. 14 billion? Our national debt's in the trillions. Alpha Centauri is "only" 6 trillion miles away.
Some of the best, most published astrobiologists have already pointed out that the number of factors that are all necessary at once for a habitable planet like ours creates such tremendous odds that even with a universe the size of ours, habitability is almost nearly impossible. The factors are coservatively estimated at at least 20. We're talking odds in the trillionths of a trillionth here. You'd be better off thinking you could win five lotteries everyday with the same 6 numbers. There are billions of galaxies with billions of stars each, but nothing anyone's observed at this point provides even the slightest hint of all the things required for conscious observers. Every single planet we've been able to see around stars in our own galaxy are gas giants. Look into real estate on Jupiter or one of its moons. Living there should be fun.
Your best bet from the best of atheistic/agnostic minds right now is the multiverse theory. Other invisible, undetectable universes that are on the other side of black holes. These universes pop up like bubbles, just because. Sounds a bit more intelligent than cave drawings or thinking Ezekiel was tripping out on mushrooms while watching ET fly around the Middle East.
You do realize that scientists NOW find far more of these "habitable" world in a stars habitable zone. Far more than ever expected and some are even in the Milky Way Galaxy.
DurzoBlint wrote:blkexec wrote:Earth is protected by several radiation belts. If a human tried to leave earth.....or enter earth without without protection. .... they will die instantly. So if aliens are walking the planet they would need a transportation vehicle that protects them from radiation.. Or their skin will not be human like.so I guess you don't believe in the Lunar landing. What about the guys right now on the space station orbiting the planet.
I used to test build and fly satelites for a living.....
DurzoBlint wrote:jrodmc wrote:Does anyone on this site read? Cave drawings? Aliens? Yesterday's mythology are today's aliens? What will they be saying about today's alien stories 1000 years from now?The observable universe is approximately 14 billion light years across. Mathematics can make even the most idiotically huge distances seem manageable. 14 billion? Our national debt's in the trillions. Alpha Centauri is "only" 6 trillion miles away.
Some of the best, most published astrobiologists have already pointed out that the number of factors that are all necessary at once for a habitable planet like ours creates such tremendous odds that even with a universe the size of ours, habitability is almost nearly impossible. The factors are coservatively estimated at at least 20. We're talking odds in the trillionths of a trillionth here. You'd be better off thinking you could win five lotteries everyday with the same 6 numbers. There are billions of galaxies with billions of stars each, but nothing anyone's observed at this point provides even the slightest hint of all the things required for conscious observers. Every single planet we've been able to see around stars in our own galaxy are gas giants. Look into real estate on Jupiter or one of its moons. Living there should be fun.
Your best bet from the best of atheistic/agnostic minds right now is the multiverse theory. Other invisible, undetectable universes that are on the other side of black holes. These universes pop up like bubbles, just because. Sounds a bit more intelligent than cave drawings or thinking Ezekiel was tripping out on mushrooms while watching ET fly around the Middle East.
You do realize that scientists NOW find far more of these "habitable" world in a stars habitable zone. Far more than ever expected and some are even in the Milky Way Galaxy.
Yes, and I realize that all the Kepler and Gaia missions have managed to find is a near miss on two out of the 20 factors mentioned above for habitability for all the exoplanets they've found. Again, it's not just two factors you have to hit on (size and being within the Circumstellar Habitable Zone), it's all those other factors as well. The other star watching missions will give us even more data in the coming years. None of it so far has even come close yet.
jrodmc wrote:DurzoBlint wrote:jrodmc wrote:Does anyone on this site read? Cave drawings? Aliens? Yesterday's mythology are today's aliens? What will they be saying about today's alien stories 1000 years from now?The observable universe is approximately 14 billion light years across. Mathematics can make even the most idiotically huge distances seem manageable. 14 billion? Our national debt's in the trillions. Alpha Centauri is "only" 6 trillion miles away.
Some of the best, most published astrobiologists have already pointed out that the number of factors that are all necessary at once for a habitable planet like ours creates such tremendous odds that even with a universe the size of ours, habitability is almost nearly impossible. The factors are coservatively estimated at at least 20. We're talking odds in the trillionths of a trillionth here. You'd be better off thinking you could win five lotteries everyday with the same 6 numbers. There are billions of galaxies with billions of stars each, but nothing anyone's observed at this point provides even the slightest hint of all the things required for conscious observers. Every single planet we've been able to see around stars in our own galaxy are gas giants. Look into real estate on Jupiter or one of its moons. Living there should be fun.
Your best bet from the best of atheistic/agnostic minds right now is the multiverse theory. Other invisible, undetectable universes that are on the other side of black holes. These universes pop up like bubbles, just because. Sounds a bit more intelligent than cave drawings or thinking Ezekiel was tripping out on mushrooms while watching ET fly around the Middle East.
You do realize that scientists NOW find far more of these "habitable" world in a stars habitable zone. Far more than ever expected and some are even in the Milky Way Galaxy.
Yes, and I realize that all the Kepler and Gaia missions have managed to find is a near miss on two out of the 20 factors mentioned above for habitability for all the exoplanets they've found. Again, it's not just two factors you have to hit on (size and being within the Circumstellar Habitable Zone), it's all those other factors as well. The other star watching missions will give us even more data in the coming years. None of it so far has even come close yet.
yeah, I knew that but, didn't want to go into such detail. I have to admit, I have learned a great deal watching Ancient Aliens. I know a lot more of things that I previously never heard of. But I saw a report very recently that said Nasa ( I believe it was) has identified at least 3. They did not make it sound like this was a "probably" discovery but an actual one.
DurzoBlint wrote:jrodmc wrote:DurzoBlint wrote:jrodmc wrote:Does anyone on this site read? Cave drawings? Aliens? Yesterday's mythology are today's aliens? What will they be saying about today's alien stories 1000 years from now?The observable universe is approximately 14 billion light years across. Mathematics can make even the most idiotically huge distances seem manageable. 14 billion? Our national debt's in the trillions. Alpha Centauri is "only" 6 trillion miles away.
Some of the best, most published astrobiologists have already pointed out that the number of factors that are all necessary at once for a habitable planet like ours creates such tremendous odds that even with a universe the size of ours, habitability is almost nearly impossible. The factors are coservatively estimated at at least 20. We're talking odds in the trillionths of a trillionth here. You'd be better off thinking you could win five lotteries everyday with the same 6 numbers. There are billions of galaxies with billions of stars each, but nothing anyone's observed at this point provides even the slightest hint of all the things required for conscious observers. Every single planet we've been able to see around stars in our own galaxy are gas giants. Look into real estate on Jupiter or one of its moons. Living there should be fun.
Your best bet from the best of atheistic/agnostic minds right now is the multiverse theory. Other invisible, undetectable universes that are on the other side of black holes. These universes pop up like bubbles, just because. Sounds a bit more intelligent than cave drawings or thinking Ezekiel was tripping out on mushrooms while watching ET fly around the Middle East.
You do realize that scientists NOW find far more of these "habitable" world in a stars habitable zone. Far more than ever expected and some are even in the Milky Way Galaxy.
Yes, and I realize that all the Kepler and Gaia missions have managed to find is a near miss on two out of the 20 factors mentioned above for habitability for all the exoplanets they've found. Again, it's not just two factors you have to hit on (size and being within the Circumstellar Habitable Zone), it's all those other factors as well. The other star watching missions will give us even more data in the coming years. None of it so far has even come close yet.
yeah, I knew that but, didn't want to go into such detail. I have to admit, I have learned a great deal watching Ancient Aliens. I know a lot more of things that I previously never heard of. But I saw a report very recently that said Nasa ( I believe it was) has identified at least 3. They did not make it sound like this was a "probably" discovery but an actual one.
They've "actually" discovered about 1500 habitable planet candidates, but again, despite all the wide eyed optimism, there aren't any of them at this point, that can be shown to meet what's been proven by known science, chemistry, etc to provide conscious observers.
GustavBahler wrote:Markji wrote:GustavBahler wrote:blkexec wrote:Earth is protected by several radiation belts. If a human tried to leave earth.....or enter earth without without protection. .... they will die instantly. So if aliens are walking the planet they would need a transportation vehicle that protects them from radiation.. Or their skin will not be human like.
In the book Dune and in science fiction films such as Event Horizon, and Deja Vu, people or spaceships are able to travel to any point in the universe instantaneously by "folding space". In Deja Vu it was to go back in time.Science fiction writers have been very prescient about future innovations, so maybe some advanced intelligence out there already knows how.
@1:50
I love the idea of Time Travel. It brings up so many anomalies. I'll have to watch this movie.Re: Aliens - I've never personally seen but I'm open to the possibility. Waiting for real proof; not just the conspiracy theories. Virtually everything/anything is possible if one understands the underlying reality and how the subtle laws of nature function.
One of my favorite time travel films, worth checking out if you haven't already.
Watched the trailer. Looks like simple fun. I'll have to watch it. Along with Deja vu. Thanks.
One movie I can recommend which is similar to Time after Time is TimeCop with Jean-Claude Van Damme.
Silverfuel wrote:I will believe in aliens before I will believe in god.
For either, aliens or God, if one has the experience, then one knows definitively. Belief/faith doesn't enter into it.
Papabear wrote:Papabear SaysWith things a little quiet in the NBA and Baron Davis was abducted. How many of you believe that Aliens are walking the earth. And have you ever seen any before? Or have you ever been abducted and probed. Or do you know of anyone who have been probed by an Alien.
Papabear - quite a surprising response to your thread. 3 pages already. Didn't know we had such an eclectic group here.
One question, the title states "Off the record", how is it "off the record" when we post a public response?
Just teasing you.
Markji wrote:Silverfuel wrote:I will believe in aliens before I will believe in god.
For either, aliens or God, if one has the experience, then one knows definitively. Belief/faith doesn't enter into it.
Should one believe/have faith in your statement above definitively as well? 
jrodmc wrote:Markji wrote:Silverfuel wrote:I will believe in aliens before I will believe in god.
For either, aliens or God, if one has the experience, then one knows definitively. Belief/faith doesn't enter into it.Should one believe/have faith in your statement above definitively as well?
Yes!
Touche.
DurzoBlint wrote:I never thought I would post to a thread where jrod appeared to the most informed... good stuff.blkexec wrote:Earth is protected by several radiation belts. If a human tried to leave earth.....or enter earth without without protection. .... they will die instantly. So if aliens are walking the planet they would need a transportation vehicle that protects them from radiation.. Or their skin will not be human like.so I guess you don't believe in the Lunar landing. What about the guys right now on the space station orbiting the planet.
your both close. Durzo the astronauts in space have all been within the "safe zone." What blkexec says is 100%. There are radiation bands that threaten satelites and present potential dangers for extended space travel. They are called the Van Allen belts: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Allen_b... however these are nothing compared to the radiation belts some of the bigger planets put out. Jupiter namely. Do some reading. Quite interesting.
First, lets quantify life as we know it: An organic being composed of a cell(s) that multiply. All life on this planet from single cell to playa2 fits into this, so for poops and giggles we will stick with that.
FACT: All organic based life forms on this planet know to man call contain cell(s) and the roadmap that allows those cells to reproduce is DNA
What is DNA? Protein... incredibly complex strands of protein that contain the roadmap (and history) of that life form and individual.
Where did the first DNA come from?
Here is where the debate splits into what I see as 3 possibilities:
1) DNA formed here on Earth:
The "primordial soup" which is what was the Earth's first oceans is theorized as where life first took place. Is it possible for this to happen as a random act of nature? Yes. There was a book written in the 90s called the "The Millennial Project." Its interesting... the gist is a roadmap on how humans will colonize the galaxy. One of the reasons for this colonization is simple... we are the sole intelligent life in the universe.
How can this be? Well, if we are working under the DNA spark of life theory, that despite the incredibly friendly and rare conditions here on Earth there should be huge amounts of alien life all around the universe right? Wrong. JRod suggested the math and he's correct. The possibility of DNA forming in some soup as chemical reactions IS POSSIBLE. The math is brutal though. Odds? They are beyond astronomical. Let me give you some perspective. Lets call the building blocks for DNA (nucleotides) alpha numeric characters. Look down on at your keyboard. Each key is a possible piece of protein that together forms DNA. Now the primordial ooze (early oceans) contain all the characters needed to come together to create that spark of life and create DNA. Here's the problem: You can put random characters together and get lucky to form words, familiar numbers, etc. The greater number of characters the less your odds of getting something that means anything.
So what would early simple DNA look like in these characters? A novel.
So to sum up, the "chance" of DNA forming as it may have here would require enough random characters thrown together to equal the Bible, or Stephen King's "The Stand" or an 800 page Oracle manual. You get the idea. So the sooo many planets and sooo many suns theories and numbers fall way short. Is it possible? Yes. About as possible as winning mega millions 5 times in a row. Think the kind of math that = "this aint gonna happen... ever"
Conclusion: We are the sole life intelligent in the universe
2) DNA/RNA or some very complex but close formula was present when the galaxy formed and somehow was spread out and Earth got some:
Like Yoda said.. we are made of star stuff. At some point (if you believe in the big bang or something close) all the matter in the universe was really close together and eventually goes pop! and spreads out damn fast. The science doesnt add up that DNA would be around at that point, but there is certainly opportunity for matter to be dispersed. Others have suggested microbes could survive space travel and be present in ice (comets) that could also seed primordial worlds in some way.
Conclusion: Building blocks needed for spark of life were spread around the universe via some cosmic event, and those would account for life on other planets. It would be similar to life on ours as many patterns are shared because of the similar origins.
3) Prometheus:
Kind of like #2, except not random. Building blocks or seeds of life were spread or sent to potential world by design. Enter your aliens or deities responsible for intelligent design. Whether they created the DNA (genetic engineering we can do this), or used their own *someone* put it there. It wasnt cosmic magic (#2) or the incredible odds needed for #1
Im not factoring in a true divine presence, ie god created the world in 7 days, that kind of thing. Its not quantifiable and I want to stick with what science we have.
FACTS:
Life came from the ocean. The question is where did the building blocks come from.
Summary of possibilities:
1) roll the dice enough times and even the most improbable and unique can happen
2) they were spread all over during some cosmic event
3) someone put them here
I have no feelings on any three... any one of them seems as possible as the next. This is what I believe. Possible? Sure. Likely? Im a Knick fan... I dont delve in the likely. Only the ridiculous.
Cheers.
The more we learn, and the deeper we look into the universe, and the closer we're able to examine the cell, it only reflects clearly how hostile this huge cosmic dark actually is. The odds for conscious observers aren't fantastic, they're impossible. If you found anything near the amount of irreducible complexity on one of these exoplanets that exists on earth, you'd have to come up with some "invisible spacemen seeding the place" theory. It's okay. Keep rolling the dice. It's always easier and more enjoyable than kneeling. When it comes right down to it, like Nietzche said, why should some deity rule, and we serve?
All of physics and chemistry and biology balanced on a razor's edge. Just because. Takes a lot of faith.
If that is the case, then how was it possible for our planet earth to be able to form these DNA molecules and have life evolve? TShouldn't the odds have been totally against this??
Both ID and evolution are theories based on many of the facts we have at hand. Without descending into scientism, the process would ask that you follow this evidence to a logical conclusion. Both evolutionary theory and ID have valid conclusions, both have underlying metaphysical consequences. Theories get stronger and weaker as new evidence comes in. Alot of what's being discovered in microbiology defies some of the basic tenets of evolutionary theory; chance + time + random mutations + natural selection = what exists today. Alot of what's being described and defined in viral pathology supports a Darwinian outlook. Can there be truth in both? As a wise man on UK once said, you damn skippy!
I think it's best to look at it in two huge parts. Life on this planet. Life on any other planets.
What I like when reading and listening to some of the proponents of ID and the some of the folks who propose the design inferences that the habitability of this planet provides, is that they are open to other points a view. The other points of view aren't seen as opponents in a cage match to the death. They're just viewed as interesting alternatives.
Guillermo Gonzalez: "There maybe other planets capable of supporting life, and there may not be. Either alternative is interesting."
jrodmc wrote:Must everything be portrayed in violence? ID Versus Evolution! God versus Darwin! Dawkins versus Collins!thats where your wrong... evolution has countless examples of concrete data behind. Its not a theory anymore than dinosaurs is a theory. We have their bones, carbon dating, locations... ID is something someone came up with because they were a bit uncomfortable with the details and accuracy science was starting to provide.
Both ID and evolution are theories based on many of the facts we have at hand. Without descending into scientism, the process would ask that you follow this evidence to a logical conclusion. Both evolutionary theory and ID have valid conclusions, both have underlying metaphysical consequences. Theories get stronger and weaker as new evidence comes in. Alot of what's being discovered in microbiology defies some of the basic tenets of evolutionary theory; chance + time + random mutations + natural selection = what exists today. Alot of what's being described and defined in viral pathology supports a Darwinian outlook. Can there be truth in both? As a wise man on UK once said, you damn skippy!I think it's best to look at it in two huge parts. Life on this planet. Life on any other planets.
What I like when reading and listening to some of the proponents of ID and the some of the folks who propose the design inferences that the habitability of this planet provides, is that they are open to other points a view. The other points of view aren't seen as opponents in a cage match to the death. They're just viewed as interesting alternatives.
Guillermo Gonzalez: "There maybe other planets capable of supporting life, and there may not be. Either alternative is interesting."
Its a parental part of the the human psyche... everyone wants to believe mommy and daddy are still out there and looking after us.
Im not anti-ID by any means, but there is zero "discovered" scientific evidence to support it. Meaning nobody found some evidence of (as Darwin found evidence of natural selection mutations). All "data" or "evidence" for ID was generated to support the theory, not vice versa.
Theory should always come after evidence. Its like trying to build a case around someone you have already decided commited a crime. Its why being a suspect is so dangerous.
fishmike wrote:jrodmc wrote:Must everything be portrayed in violence? ID Versus Evolution! God versus Darwin! Dawkins versus Collins!thats where your wrong... evolution has countless examples of concrete data behind. Its not a theory anymore than dinosaurs is a theory. We have their bones, carbon dating, locations... ID is something someone came up with because they were a bit uncomfortable with the details and accuracy science was starting to provide.
Both ID and evolution are theories based on many of the facts we have at hand. Without descending into scientism, the process would ask that you follow this evidence to a logical conclusion. Both evolutionary theory and ID have valid conclusions, both have underlying metaphysical consequences. Theories get stronger and weaker as new evidence comes in. Alot of what's being discovered in microbiology defies some of the basic tenets of evolutionary theory; chance + time + random mutations + natural selection = what exists today. Alot of what's being described and defined in viral pathology supports a Darwinian outlook. Can there be truth in both? As a wise man on UK once said, you damn skippy!I think it's best to look at it in two huge parts. Life on this planet. Life on any other planets.
What I like when reading and listening to some of the proponents of ID and the some of the folks who propose the design inferences that the habitability of this planet provides, is that they are open to other points a view. The other points of view aren't seen as opponents in a cage match to the death. They're just viewed as interesting alternatives.
Guillermo Gonzalez: "There maybe other planets capable of supporting life, and there may not be. Either alternative is interesting."
Its a parental part of the the human psyche... everyone wants to believe mommy and daddy are still out there and looking after us.
Im not anti-ID by any means, but there is zero "discovered" scientific evidence to support it. Meaning nobody found some evidence of (as Darwin found evidence of natural selection mutations). All "data" or "evidence" for ID was generated to support the theory, not vice versa.
Theory should always come after evidence. Its like trying to build a case around someone you have already decided commited a crime. Its why being a suspect is so dangerous.
Evolution has countless examples of concrete data? Like all those billions of transitional forms that support the theory? Darwin found evidence of natural selection mutations? In finch beaks? And that proves the theory of evolution? Dinosaur bones prove evolution? You're spouting the party line my friend.
ID is something someone came up with because they were a bit uncomfortable with the details and accuracy science was starting to provide??? 150 years after the printing of Origins??? Really?
fish, have you heard of Darwin's Black Box? Do you even know anything about microbiology? How does your "fact" of evolution (and I hate to tell you this, but it's still a theory) explain DNA? Where did all that information come from? Stephen Meyer has a doctorate from Cambridge, ever heard of the place? Try answering all his frightened thumb sucking questions about the origins of DNA. The guy was a geophysicist for an oil company before he suddenly decided that he missed his cosmic mommy and daddy. He didn't emerge angry from a seminary or a monastery.
Your worldview gives your bias away. Try looking at the evidence of something simple like a bacterial flagellum. Get your fact of evolution to come up with building that through random, natural mutations. Have fun.
ID is based on evidence, not the wishful, slightly disturbed writings of a rich English gentried intellectual from the 19th century. Look a bit into Charlie's other writings and his life. Some of it's kind of self-explanatory. Wasn't comfortable with maggots that ate organisms from the inside, and lost a a daughter to illness. Those things don't invalidate all of his insights, but it certainly doesn't explain away all the flaws and holes in his theory, either.
Read some of David Berlinski, if you're so sure any anti-evolutionaries are all Godfather-needy geeks.