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.
Yes. But the odds could be so low it shouldn't have happened at all. So to say that since it happened once it can happen an infinite number of times is false.
The problem is that the materialist reductionists (and I get the impression that's what you're espousing) insist on a level of proof for questions like these that they would apply to no other area of life.
As I said, there could certainly be life elsewhere in the universe. I NEVER claimed I know the answer. What annoys me is when people claim to know.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark S.
For example: I have absolutely no proof that you are a human being. I can't prove it. I have ZERO conclusive evidence. But given the evidence that I do have and my knowledge of the way the world works, I am reasonably certain that you are, in fact, a human being. I'd even go so far as to say 99.9999% probability.
Yes, but you can also prove that there are real people on the internet, and you can identify what is likely human behavior. You can never be 100% certain, but you can be pretty close to it.
What then is the probability that there is life elsewhere in the universe? Is it 99.9999%? Is it 90%? Is it 75%? Is it 66%? Is it 50%? Is it 33%? Is it 25%? Is it 10%? Is it 1%? Is it 0.0001%?
You don't know. Why? Because it is literally unknowable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark S.
Can I prove it? Nope. But neither can I prove you are a human being.
What irritates me about atheists, is that they're constantly mocking people for believing things without evidence, while they rant about aliens and ghosts and horoscopes and all other kinds of nonsense.
As I said, there could certainly be life elsewhere in the universe. I NEVER claimed I know the answer. What annoys me is when people claim to know.
Yes, but you can also prove that there are real people on the internet, and you can identify what is likely human behavior. You can never be 100% certain, but you can be pretty close to it.
What then is the probability that there is life elsewhere in the universe? Is it 99.9999%? Is it 90%? Is it 75%? Is it 66%? Is it 50%? Is it 33%? Is it 25%? Is it 10%? Is it 1%? Is it 0.0001%?
You don't know. Why? Because it is literally unknowable.
What irritates me about atheists, is that they're constantly mocking people for believing things without evidence, while they rant about aliens and ghosts and horoscopes and all other kinds of nonsense.
Let’s not get stuck in hyperboleland. There’s a whole lot of atheists who don’t believe in UFOs, crypto’s and ghosts. I can think of two right now — Penn and Teller.
Statistics. The larger the universe, the greater likelihood of planets that would support organic life.
Sam Harris was talking about the probability that Christianity was correct vs whether Mormonism was correct. He used the example of the return of Jesus. The Christians believe he will come back to Earth but don't specify where. While the Mormons believe Jesus will come back to Independence, Missouri.
This is basically a kind of fine-tuning argument, the more specific something is, the less likely it is. Thus Jesus returning anywhere is more likely than Jesus returning to a specific spot.
But what then is the likelihood of Jesus returning at all?
You are correct in that if you doubled the size of the universe, you double the probability. But what is the probability?
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009
There is no question that there is organic life "out there".
Sources: "Take my word for it".
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
Mathematically, it seems implausible that among the Billions of galaxies, containing hundreds of billions of stars, and trillions of planets, only this one planet we call earth has life? Sounds like a mathematical impossibility.
Funnily enough, my dad and I just had a conversation about this the other day--though he was talking about people claiming to be abducted by aliens. He was asking me if I believed in aliens. My answer was, "Do I believe there are aliens out there? Absolutely. Do I believe they have the ability to reach Earth? Questionable." He laughed and conceded the point.
OK, so what are these Tic-Tac things then? Surely you dont live in a box, so there are questions you have to ask yourself about what is going on in the world. No? If these things are military then they are more-than-likely back-engineered from something with better technology.
If they ARE military, then shame on them for not releasing the energy technology and flight technology to make our world a better place to live.
Yes. But the odds could be so low it shouldn't have happened at all. So to say that since it happened once it can happen an infinite number of times is false.
I think that if the odds were so low it shouldn't have happened at all........it wouldn't have happened at all.
That it is proven to have happened and can happen means that it is something that does occur in nature. The only real question is frequency. Even in the most pessimistic, hypothetical "rare Earth" scenario, such that it only happens once or twice per galaxy, per billion years, there would have been trillions of worlds with life in the history of the universe.
I think James Webbs ability to measure the chemical composition of alien atmospheres may settle the debate in this thread within a few years.
Sam Harris was talking about the probability that Christianity was correct vs whether Mormonism was correct. He used the example of the return of Jesus. The Christians believe he will come back to Earth but don't specify where. While the Mormons believe Jesus will come back to Independence, Missouri.
This is basically a kind of fine-tuning argument, the more specific something is, the less likely it is. Thus Jesus returning anywhere is more likely than Jesus returning to a specific spot.
But what then is the likelihood of Jesus returning at all?
You are correct in that if you doubled the size of the universe, you double the probability. But what is the probability?
Sources: "Take my word for it".
Show me the math.
Hahaha .... my calculator doesn’t display enough digits .... so here are the rough figures
In our Milky Way galaxy, there are an estimated 100 Billion Stars.
In our visible universe it is estimated to be 2 Trillion Galaxies, with an estimated number of stars of 200 Billion Trillion.
From data collected from the Kepler space telescope, there are estimated to be 300 Million habitable planets in just our galaxyalone.
So, as a comparative example, winning the Power Ball Jackpot is estimated to be 292 Million to 1 odds. So just using the 300 Million habitable planets in just our galaxy, knowing there is at least one planet actively sustaining intelligent life (ours), the odds of no other planet with said life existing is 300 Million to 1, or roughly the same odds as winning the Power Ball Jackpot.
But then we have 2 Trillion galaxies! So the odds of no life existing in the entire Universe would be 2.333 Trillion to 1, or roughly the odds of winning the Power Ball jackpot every day for the next 2,739 years in a row, or 34 generations of your offspring.
In plain non-mathematical language, Moderator cut: rude word IMPOSSIBLE.
Last edited by Tallysmom; 01-20-2022 at 10:34 PM..
Reason: Circumventing the rude word filter
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.
Solly says — Be nice!
