Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Our existence is the source for the reproduction of God's consciousness so no matter what percentage we represent, we are not remotely insignificant.
how significant is a skin cell that you lost 10 years ago? "insignificant" might not be the best way to put it, but that skin cell, and "me", are not the defining volume of experience either.
so our we universal skin cells? or the universes "brain"?
I disagree with that, we have no way of knowing if we are the only source.
It doesn't matter if we are NOT the only source. That is extremely unlikely anyway. But consciousness appears to be the penultimate expression of our Reality and we are part of it.
sorry, no emotion here. Based on what we know it is far more likely that there is life out there. Based on our understanding of stars and planets. Just because some people are afraid to make a reasonable prediction, based on what we do know, doesn't mean the rest have to believe its a more valid to claim to hide behind.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rstevens62
Given the number of planets and galaxies out there (that we are even aware of), how could you believe intelligent life is rare?!!
People seem fixated on the idea that the number of worlds out there - let's say, planets and moons - that there must be other intelligent life. This is a mathematical argument. However, it is a mathematical argument that rather ignores the fact that we don't know the variables in the equation.
Such folks tend to point out the number of worlds out there. Let's keep things in the Milky Way and assume that our galaxy has about 125,000,000,000 stars. Estimates range from 100 billion to 400 billion, but most fall on the lower end of that scale. Then let's say that each star averages eight planets, because that's the number of planets the Sun possesses. Then let's toss in an average of ten decent-sized moons per system. One can quibble over the figures but these are reasonably generous estimates.
That's ten trillion planets and moons. This large number impresses people, but they have missed that rest of the equation. What are the odds of intentional life developing on a given body and being present at this time? We can guess, but it's just a shot in the dark. Beyond knowing that it's greater than 0 and less than 1, we have no idea. Our single positive data point (Earth) is useless because one cannot extrapolate from a sample size of one. Our dozen negative data points (assuming the rest of the solar system is free of intelligent life, which seems a fair assumption) is just as useless becasue even the most optimistic estraterrestiral intelligence advocates still regard the frequency of life occuring as a one in hundreds if not one in thousands event (the highest estimate I've ever run across is 156 million intelligent civilizations in the Milky Way).
Maybe the odds are one in a billion. If that's the case, we've got 10,000 such civilizations in the Milky Way. But maybe it's one in ten billion. Or one in ten trillion. Or one in a quadrillion. Or maybe the odds are even longer. Which is closest? We have no idea. Because we simply don't have any data.
Uninformed guesses are not predictions. They are uninformed guesses. The obstinate refusal to admit as much is a common human instinct, but that doesn't make it any less wrongheaded.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arach Angle
You do bring up a good point. This anti-religion is a great example. People that truly don't know what is more reasonable, or not, really need to stay out of the conversion. flat out rejection of valid claims because someone doesn't know, really only means they need to stay out of it. when push comes to shove that is.
I did not bring the topic of 'anti-religion' into the conversation. You did. Religion is a social phenomenon. No one disputes the existence of that phenomenon. So I have no idea why you're bringing it up. If you want to talk about that, knock yourself out, but don't pretend that I brought it up just so you can do so.
People seem fixated on the idea that the number of worlds out there - let's say, planets and moons - that there must be other intelligent life. This is a mathematical argument. However, it is a mathematical argument that rather ignores the fact that we don't know the variables in the equation.
Such folks tend to point out the number of worlds out there. Let's keep things in the Milky Way and assume that our galaxy has about 125,000,000,000 stars. Estimates range from 100 billion to 400 billion, but most fall on the lower end of that scale. Then let's say that each star averages eight planets, because that's the number of planets the Sun possesses. Then let's toss in an average of ten decent-sized moons per system. One can quibble over the figures but these are reasonably generous estimates.
That's ten trillion planets and moons. This large number impresses people, but they have missed that rest of the equation. What are the odds of intentional life developing on a given body and being present at this time? We can guess, but it's just a shot in the dark. Beyond knowing that it's greater than 0 and less than 1, we have no idea. Our single positive data point (Earth) is useless because one cannot extrapolate from a sample size of one. Our dozen negative data points (assuming the rest of the solar system is free of intelligent life, which seems a fair assumption) is just as useless becasue even the most optimistic estraterrestiral intelligence advocates still regard the frequency of life occuring as a one in hundreds if not one in thousands event (the highest estimate I've ever run across is 156 million intelligent civilizations in the Milky Way).
Maybe the odds are one in a billion. If that's the case, we've got 10,000 such civilizations in the Milky Way. But maybe it's one in ten billion. Or one in ten trillion. Or one in a quadrillion. Or maybe the odds are even longer. Which is closest? We have no idea. Because we simply don't have any data.
Uninformed guesses are not predictions. They are uninformed guesses. The obstinate refusal to admit as much is a common human instinct, but that doesn't make it any less wrongheaded.
I did not bring the topic of 'anti-religion' into the conversation. You did. Religion is a social phenomenon. No one disputes the existence of that phenomenon. So I have no idea why you're bringing it up. If you want to talk about that, knock yourself out, but don't pretend that I brought it up just so you can do so.
yeah, the first generation stars probably seeded the universe from the word jump. So I stick with using "i don't know as a cop out" in this matter.
No, you didn't bring up anti-religious, I did. But I used your example to point to that sect of atheism's "nobody knows" as a cop out as surely as theist use blind faith as a cop out.
People seem fixated on the idea that the number of worlds out there - let's say, planets and moons - that there must be other intelligent life. This is a mathematical argument. However, it is a mathematical argument that rather ignores the fact that we don't know the variables in the equation.
Such folks tend to point out the number of worlds out there. Let's keep things in the Milky Way and assume that our galaxy has about 125,000,000,000 stars. Estimates range from 100 billion to 400 billion, but most fall on the lower end of that scale. Then let's say that each star averages eight planets, because that's the number of planets the Sun possesses. Then let's toss in an average of ten decent-sized moons per system. One can quibble over the figures but these are reasonably generous estimates.
That's ten trillion planets and moons. This large number impresses people, but they have missed that rest of the equation. What are the odds of intentional life developing on a given body and being present at this time? We can guess, but it's just a shot in the dark. Beyond knowing that it's greater than 0 and less than 1, we have no idea. Our single positive data point (Earth) is useless because one cannot extrapolate from a sample size of one. Our dozen negative data points (assuming the rest of the solar system is free of intelligent life, which seems a fair assumption) is just as useless becasue even the most optimistic estraterrestiral intelligence advocates still regard the frequency of life occuring as a one in hundreds if not one in thousands event (the highest estimate I've ever run across is 156 million intelligent civilizations in the Milky Way).
Maybe the odds are one in a billion. If that's the case, we've got 10,000 such civilizations in the Milky Way. But maybe it's one in ten billion. Or one in ten trillion. Or one in a quadrillion. Or maybe the odds are even longer. Which is closest? We have no idea. Because we simply don't have any data.
Uninformed guesses are not predictions. They are uninformed guesses. The obstinate refusal to admit as much is a common human instinct, but that doesn't make it any less wrongheaded.
I did not bring the topic of 'anti-religion' into the conversation. You did. Religion is a social phenomenon. No one disputes the existence of that phenomenon. So I have no idea why you're bringing it up. If you want to talk about that, knock yourself out, but don't pretend that I brought it up just so you can do so.
You are correct that we are just guessing g, based on the number of stars and planets out there, that we are not alone. But we are not claiming for certain that there is life out there or if it would be cabin based.
On the other hand the OP claims that someone stated that we are alone. Now that is a positive claim with no evidence. The difference between there is no life out there or there probably is life out there is very different with the probably one not making an actual claim but an educated opinion based on the what is life here on Earth.
If our hypothesis is there is no life then we will not look but if it is that there might be life out there then we can work out, based on our very limited knowledge, what we should look for for finding life. Without the there might be life hypothesis then what other than we don't know and we don't care thinking can be used?
"probably" or "nobody knows so I aint saying." pick that is more reasonable, based on what we know.
gamma ray bursters are an issue. there are alot of them. Maybe sterilizing the 'verse. for obvious reasons, maybe the feedback loops control the number of carbon based life forms at any one time, so that some make it past being reliant on food (lmao, best battery ma nature came up with to date) as an energy source. then the next group makes it past.
kinda like a growing seasons or flowering intervals.
I went back and read the NY Times article from Dec 2017 about the Pentagons secret $22 million UFO project that they claim ended around 2009. Two things stuck out to me...
One was that Bigelow Aerospace was given taxpayer money to modify buildings in Las Vegas to house metal alloys and other materials obtained from unidentified aerial Phenomena (UAPs) This means the govt HAS indeed been to UFO crash sites and recovered materials from them. (thats pretty significant)
The other was after this project ended, they had made such extraordinary progress in identifying some of these materials, the Pentagon briefing stated and warned that the military would not be able to defend against these technologies if they were ever used against us in anyway. (that also VERY significant)
If these two things are not proof that there are other intelligent civilizations out there, plus that they are visiting earth, Im not sure what else would be!
I am not even researching this, that's like having to research a dude died, woke up, and flew away.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
