[fidget]

Do you believe that Aliens are real or fake?

[fred]

The problem of discerning the realness or fakeness of something no tangible evidence exists for is that lack of tangibility.
Let's, for a moment, substitute "God" for "Extra-terrestrials" (alien is too broad a term). Barring nonsensical arguments, where is the realness or fakeness of God? He doesn't seem to hang around much. I mean, He doesn't show up to put an end genocides or apologize for the various weather related disasters that pop up occasionally (both of which, incidentally, are his purview). And it's certainly been a while since He parted the clouds and inspired someone to do something. Is He the absentee dad that won't even send us a five on our birthdays, or is He some sort of transcendental, extra-planar poseur? The obvious answer would be to point at Creation, but that ignores the problem of where God came from if Creation isn't it (the Mother of God argument operates on similar precepts). Rene Descartes had a clever attempt at this by disproving he himself was God by way of self doubt, but this was based on the idea God was all that embodied good (see genocide/weather argument above), and that God was omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent (copious lack of evidence for these assertions). So, is God "real" or "fake?"
Now, let's go back to the extra-terrestrials here. So, we have a bunch of little dudes, sometimes Grey, sometimes Brown, floating around in a tin can in some sort of pan-galactic road trip and chance upon a small backwater planet two-thirds the way out on the random arm of some random galaxy. Or maybe they picked up the broadcast of Hitler opening the 1936 Olympics. Or maybe they want to pester toothless drunk hillbillies. Maybe they're sadists and just want to mutilate random cattle. Like the God problems above, if you think a little bit about the "real" and "fake" of extra-terrestrials, you run into issues of raison d'être. Space travel is expensive, from the Physical point of view in terms of power requirements, duration and lack of a set goal, so to do so wontonly is simply not feasible. Second, they're probably going to ignore random transmission of television and radio broadcasts because theoretically, no one that advanced would use a transmission setting as low as the one used to open the '36 Olympics. One the last two points about hillbillies and livestock, now we've made them out to be interplanetary hooligans guilty of everything from disturbing the peace to property destruction.
"Are they out there?" is the better question. As an answer, I'm going to say most probably (there's a marginally better chance of us discerning the existence/non-existence of extra-terrestrials right now then we do of God). Barring such problems as where they would be or go, there's enough space out in the Universe for them to be in. After all, to paraphrase Carl Sagan, if we're all that's here, the Universe is a big waste of space.

[Lost Soul]

My answer is going to be simple.

Yeah, I think somewhere out there could be Other-Life. Don't know what that consists of but the chances of only earth having life is really slim.

[Migitmd]

my answer is this:

If there is life out there, they're either too stupid or too smart to contact us.

[fidget]

Migitmd, on Mar 8, 2010 - 12:29 PM, said:

my answer is this:

If there is life out there, they're either too stupid or too smart to contact us.

Either they are dumber then Us, the stupid ass creatures that can't even protect the planet we are living on from the destructive ways of, our selves. Or they are either smarter then us, and look down on us refusing to meet us. Well not only did you avoid answering my question with posting something that is completely vague, but you have insulted both human kind, and aliens all right away.

Yes, Shawn I would agree with you on that. Chances of Earth being the only place in this universe is slim. On the same lines as you, I would also have to agree with the overly wordy, but point driven answer that Fred gave. I mean the stuff about God, had nothing to do with this, and is a completely different argument that only Ed would eventually write a complete book about. Which in time we would all read it, and because for his techniques of arguing, he leaves the other side with nothing to say. Because he loves to write soo damn much that he always has about 6 different arguments within his own writings. Leaving the other side only able to quote what he is saying. Thats pretty much the point in which I give up...

This post has been edited by fidget: Mar 8, 2010 - 7:08 PM

[Migitmd]

Quote

but you have insulted both human kind, and aliens all right away.

but you have to realize I am correct. If i were an alien who was capable of communicating with another planet, why the hell would i want to make contact with a species who kills itself and basically destroys the planet that it inhabits? I'd say "fuck'em" and move on.

[fred]

Quote

Either they are dumber then Us, the stupid ass creatures that can't even protect the planet we are living on from the destructive ways of, our selves. Or they are either smarter then us, and look down on us refusing to meet us. Well not only did you avoid answering my question with posting something that is completely vague, but you have insulted both human kind, and aliens all right away.

I pointed out that there wasn't really benefit to spending resources to send a couple of clowns to what is essentially the Appalachia of the galaxy. That and I think you're full of it on account of implying there are creatures dumber than humans.

This post has been edited by fred: Mar 9, 2010 - 12:56 AM

[Lost Soul]

Sure the human race does kill itself, a lot. But I can't really think that an Alien race would just avoid those types all together, how would they really know about our killing ways? I would assume they would try to make contact with us before writing us off as an avoidable planet.

[fred]

Even if we weren't boneheaded as a species, I can't see why they'd bother. Even if technology and the vastness of the universe weren't factors, the best we have to offer them is laurel and Britney Spears album. We have no resources they would want or need, and there's probably going to be very little of what they have we can make use of without a massive education program on the part of the Vulcans (warp drives not withstanding, lol). To actually use said Star Trek reference, Roddenbury came up with the Prime Directive to avoid the problems of contact in the first place.
The exploration of space is unavoidable, this I think we all agree on, and I think we can generally agree on the point hostility on the part of our visitors would be unlikely. But establishing contact seems to pose problems more or less on a cultural advancement scale, if I may be as so bold to use the term. Let's articulate this argument using three periods in history, shall we? Obviously, we'll include the present day, March the whatever of 2010 and say, two thousand years in either direction of the human timeline. At either two thousand mark, I imagine contact would be relatively painless. The imperial Roman era circa 4 BC was fairly stable as far as migrations and societies go, even China was nominally peaceful in most places (note that this qualifier is relative, the obvious ethnic crap is still happening, but there are no continental or pan-continental wars happening or empires at serious odds with each other). To establish contact would have beneficial in the face of a world populace that worships the sky essentially. Two thousand years into the future would be fairly helpful because by that point we would have established a definable presence in space either with Lagrangian situated colonies or colonies arranged in a Dyson sphere. On top of that, we'd have a greater grasp of physics and how the universe works better than we do now. It wouldn't be so much first contact as it would be first commiseration. It's as one gets closer to the present that we start running into unavoidable problems with establishing contact.
The problem with establishing contact now would be them explaining to us, and us explaining to them what's actually up. With our "modern" technology, nation states are beginning to settle old scores and we're quickly running out of energy sources (nuclear sources run out in the century after oil does, for instance), aggravating the problem further. Additionally, we're divided into nation-states to begin with, some more publicly accessible than others, making news of a first contact contingent on the whims of the regime they chance upon. On top of that, there's friction between the three major monotheistic religions, a Judaism driven by Zionism (the philosophy), an antagonistic and evangelical Christianity and an emerging Islam whose rise is sadly spearheaded by extremists. If they were smart, the extra-terrestrials would have been in observation mode for a while (it's not unreasonable to assume so if you're of the first contact school), and would avoid doing so for at least the foreseeable future.
I think if an extra-terrestrial species does anything, it is to avoid contact, in addition to the costs of extra-solar-galactic travel, mostly to conserve the rarest thing in the universe: active biomass. It's kind of how we preserves large tracts of land out west in the square states of the US. It's not just for aesthetic appeal, but also because Montana doesn't exist anywhere else on the planet either. If they wanted earth preserved, they'd section off the solar system and let us alone. Barring imminent solar catastrophe, I doubt the interested stellar parties would make themselves known.

[PhillAholic]

Extraterrestrial life, as in life that did not originate from Earth, has yet to be scientifically proven, though there actually is evidence of it's existence. Since we certainly can't jump to conclusions too soon, more evidence is needed. Bacteria originating from fallen meteors have been found containing fossils of bacteria which are now circulating the scientific community as possibly alien. Originally they were thought to be contaminated with fossils from Earth, but it is still widely disputed.

Whether this is true or not, we aren't talking about the science fiction aliens with large ships that abduct people or anything even remotely like it. We are talking about aliens millions of years behind us in the Evolutionary process. We are also speaking of life outside of our own solar system, as the Earth is the only planet with habitable life. Scientists are looking at other systems with similar stars to out Sun and adjacent planets to our Earth that would fit the model of habitable life. To date, no know planets exist with these "perfect" conditions, though our Universe is essentially borderless, and mathmatically it's more likely that another situation like ours exists somewhere else in the Universe. However given our limited knowledge of the Universe that isn't a prediction but more of the limit of the mathematically equation that we have. We only have estimates of at least 125 Billion different galaxies. If you take out all the stars that don't have a planet system attached, and only 1 in a billion have a planet in the habitable zone, we are talking about over 6 Billion possibilities of life on a different planet than our own.

I'm not so sure about the above theory of estimation of life being any sort of real measurement, as it requires that all life needs the exact same conditions as life on Earth. I don't think it's bogus, I just think that it's being very conservative. There are other theories that are linked to the existence of water which is said to support the argument of life. Water doesn't exist without life being present. There are several places in our own solar system that water is thought to exist outside of Earth like our Moon, Mars and Mercury and the Moons of Jupiter.

What I do know is that as we increasing get closer to figuring out the origin of our own species, finding missing pieces in our evolutionary chain, we continue to understand how life is created, and doing so will help us with those certain guidelines needed in order to potentially find extraterrestrial life elsewhere in our universe.

[Migitmd]

Quote

Extraterrestrial life, as in life that did not originate from Earth, has yet to be scientifically proven, though there actually is evidence of it's existence. Since we certainly can't jump to conclusions too soon, more evidence is needed. Bacteria originating from fallen meteors have been found containing fossils of bacteria which are now circulating the scientific community as possibly alien. Originally they were thought to be contaminated with fossils from Earth, but it is still widely disputed.

I heard about that one.

Quote

We are talking about aliens millions of years behind us in the Evolutionary process.

You never know Ed, we could be the ones a few million years behind in evolution. And because of the uncertainty of the evolutionary process, nothing is concrete.

Quote

To date, no know planets exist with these "perfect" conditions, though our Universe is essentially borderless, and mathmatically it's more likely that another situation like ours exists somewhere else in the Universe. However given our limited knowledge of the Universe that isn't a prediction but more of the limit of the mathematically equation that we have. We only have estimates of at least 125 Billion different galaxies. If you take out all the stars that don't have a planet system attached, and only 1 in a billion have a planet in the habitable zone, we are talking about over 6 Billion possibilities of life on a different planet than our own.

Again, the uncertainty. There may be another way life can be sustained, and here i'm using an AVATAR reference. In the movie, Pandora's atmosphere will kill a human, yet the Navi are able to live perfectly fine. What may be suitable for us may in fact kill another species and vice versa. We can't rule anything out.

[fidget]

Migitmd, on Mar 10, 2010 - 12:10 AM, said:

Quote

We are talking about aliens millions of years behind us in the Evolutionary process.

You never know Ed, we could be the ones a few million years behind in evolution. And because of the uncertainty of the evolutionary process, nothing is concrete.

I don't think he is saying that everywhere in the universe, life is less evovled then ours, I think he is saying that the only proof we currently have, are the fossils. Which they are actually less evolved. So you could be very correct when saying that there are more advanced life forms out there, but Ed is certainly correct when he said that we are talking about aliens (The Bacteria) that are millions of years behind us in the evolutionary process.

Hopefully that cleared it up for you deckman, and hopefully I have interrupted this correctly as well.

[PhillAholic]

fidget, on Mar 10, 2010 - 12:27 AM, said:

Hopefully that cleared it up for you deckman, and hopefully I have interrupted this correctly as well.

Correct.

Intelligent Extraterrestrial life is almost identical to the GOD argument except other Intelligent life would have to obey the laws of Physics, and have to inhabit a planet, unlike the GOD argument which doesn't have to follow any rules whatsoever. The important thing is that we realize that you still have to have proof to say something exists, and if you don't have proof you are being a theist about it.

[fidget]

PhillAholic, on Mar 10, 2010 - 12:33 AM, said:

fidget, on Mar 10, 2010 - 12:27 AM, said:

Hopefully that cleared it up for you deckman, and hopefully I have interrupted this correctly as well.

Correct.

Intelligent Extraterrestrial life is almost identical to the GOD argument except other Intelligent life would have to obey the laws of Physics, and have to inhabit a planet, unlike the GOD argument which doesn't have to follow any rules whatsoever. The important thing is that we realize that you still have to have proof to say something exists, and if you don't have proof you are being a theist about it.

Ohh Ohh I saw a study the other week, that suggests that the Laws of Physics do not apply when it comes to extreme high temperatures. Let see if I can go find it. No.. I can not find it currently... I'm not sure if it had anything to do with the large hadron collider or not.. but I do remember a study that came out a few weeks ago, I just can't find it.

[fred]

Quote

To date, no know planets exist with these "perfect" conditions, though our Universe is essentially borderless, and mathmatically it's more likely that another situation like ours exists somewhere else in the Universe. However given our limited knowledge of the Universe that isn't a prediction but more of the limit of the mathematically equation that we have. We only have estimates of at least 125 Billion different galaxies. If you take out all the stars that don't have a planet system attached, and only 1 in a billion have a planet in the habitable zone, we are talking about over 6 Billion possibilities of life on a different planet than our own.

I'm not so sure about the above theory of estimation of life being any sort of real measurement, as it requires that all life needs the exact same conditions as life on Earth. I don't think it's bogus, I just think that it's being very conservative. There are other theories that are linked to the existence of water which is said to support the argument of life. Water doesn't exist without life being present. There are several places in our own solar system that water is thought to exist outside of Earth like our Moon, Mars and Mercury and the Moons of Jupiter.

Don't reference the Drake Equation, he's pulling it from his ass and he knows it. We aren't going to find life in our own solar system, true, but to assume it won't be found in the Galaxy I think is a bit pessimistic, both intelligent life and just life in general.
(Assume the galaxy can be divvied up into the galactic core and galactic disc for this.) If you take the galactic disc, and divide into three rings, you'll find earth sits on the outer edge of the second ring from the galactic core. That ring is important because it's far enough away from the core's gravitational chaos (the majority of our galactic mass is centered there; the disc only holds a portion of it) that the solar system doesn't get ripped apart and far enough from the edge that we don't fly off into extra-galactic space (the ramifications of that being cosmically foreboding). This second ring is probably where we're gonna have the best chance of finding extra-terrestrials (the circumstances not withstanding).