I didn't make that up, but to answer your question, it's obviously more likely that life as it exists on Earth is more probable than plasma beings. I don't know why you'd even bother to ask me such a question.
---------------
Moon-walker claims alien contact cover-up
- Thread starter 137th Gebirg
- Start date
---------------
A more apt question is why you would use such a comparison, when it makes for a weak argument.
Your comment about "plasma beings" living in the sun was just a slightly more sophisticated way of saying, "yeah, and monkeys might fly out of my ass." It adds nothing useful to the discussion except only to underscore your contempt for the original proposition.
I ask such a question because you level both propositions as if they are equally likely. That's not reasoning on your part but pure emotional manipulation wherein you attempt to equate a more outlandish concept as having the same chances of being in order to discredit a more reasonable one.
I called you on it--THAT'S why I asked the question.
Last edited:
One big piece of evidence against aliens is that UFOs are seen by normal people but not by Hubble or the astronauts on the ISS.
Plasma beings are equally likely to me being able to conclusively prove that aliens have never visited Earth, which is what it was said in conjuction with.
There's no need for us to get upset because we disagree about the likelyhood that Earth is being visited by extraterrestrials. I haven't been exposed to any evidence that I've found convincing, and I happen to think that if there are extraterrestrial civilizations out there that they're sparse enough, and far enough from one another in space and/or time to be effectively isolated. I can't prove that, but since I've seen no convincing evidence to the contrary that's my position.
I've even had people I trust tell me that they've seen UFOs. I believe them, I just don't believe they've seen 'flying saucers'.
---------------
I'm not even remotely upset. I have also not been exposed to evidence that I've found convincing. In fact, the LACK of evidence is something that troubles me when I consider the possibility of aliens visiting Earth.
I am a rare skeptic. I am one who WANTS to find the truth rather than simpy see my agenda fulfilled (be it "yes, I believe" or "no, I don't"). I think serious inquiry into this, and related subjects, has been damaged from both sides of the spectrum; i.e. the wild-eyed claimants who offer up bizarre nonsense without and speck of evidence AS WELL as the "skeptics" who laugh and ridicule and try to render ridiculous any serious consideration of claims ranging from insane to imminently plausable. I guess I'm saying I just don't appreciate the attitude of those who have nothing to contribute to the discussion other than scorn for the topic and laughter.
There are truths, objective truths waiting to be discovered and I really don't see how laughing at and refusing to consider possibilities helps in the pursuit of the answers to these types of questions. It becomes a question of how you are going to particpate IF you choose to. Will you lead, follow, or get out of the way. Because mocking from the sidelines just makes you an unhelpful agent of distraction.
NoImpulseEngine
Lieutenant
I suppose there are many UFO-ologists who think NASA did put people on the Moon
There's being open minded, and then being so open minded that one's brain falls out of their skull.
I have no problem believing that somewhere out there are intelligent aliens that are exploring the universe. There are ways to do that without FTL, albeit ones that require a lot of effort on the part of a species. The universe is fucking huge and if we losers are dicking around on our planet, it stands to reason something similar is dicking around out there somewhere in the deep black. I don't know why I just typed that since there doesn't seem to be any disagreement on that point.
But one astronaut who seems to think kids with telepathic powers saying "yeah, they're here!" is not convincing, not in the least. The odds of aliens actually traveling here and remaining undetected are insanely high; while most people dismiss the idea out of sheer ignorance, there are those of us that remain open to the possibility while recognizing that it's probably never actually fucking happened and isn't likely to in the near future.
I have no problem believing that somewhere out there are intelligent aliens that are exploring the universe. There are ways to do that without FTL, albeit ones that require a lot of effort on the part of a species. The universe is fucking huge and if we losers are dicking around on our planet, it stands to reason something similar is dicking around out there somewhere in the deep black. I don't know why I just typed that since there doesn't seem to be any disagreement on that point.
But one astronaut who seems to think kids with telepathic powers saying "yeah, they're here!" is not convincing, not in the least. The odds of aliens actually traveling here and remaining undetected are insanely high; while most people dismiss the idea out of sheer ignorance, there are those of us that remain open to the possibility while recognizing that it's probably never actually fucking happened and isn't likely to in the near future.
There certainly is disagreement.
The existence of extraterrestrials isn't something I take for granted, it's merely something I can conceive as being possible. The vastness of the universe doesn't in and of itself imply the existence of extraterrestrial civilizations.
---------------
This is a moldy, old chestnut.
And this is simply incorrect; you clearly haven't read or heard anything about the case.
So the alternatives are what? The universe was created for our pleasure alone, or we're a fluke (life in general) that probably hasn't been reproduced elsewhere?
The former, I wouldn't even give serious consideration to; the latter would be kind of sad...
What makes you sure the universe was created for anything?
He says in the next sentence that he doesn't even think that the possibility the Universe was created for something isn't worth the thought it takes to fathom it. He's just raising it as one of the two reasons life wouldn't have developed anywhere else in the universe, ever.
What are the alternatives? I don't understand your question.
Either life is singular to Earth or it is not. Those are the alternatives. I don't know which of those is true, but I don't believe the vastness of the Universe implies one over the other.
---------------
Sorry I wasn't aware you were on the fence there; must have misread.
I was simply taking the assumption of a negative and applying two possible reasons for that, but you seem to be taking an agnostic view to the whole question.
^Which is fine.
scotthm, if we find direct evidence of past or present life on Mars or some place else in our solar system, would your opinion change? I would think that the vastness of the universe would imply a higher chance of life arising in another place than a small one, especially if we know it arose in two different places in our own solar system. The odds of it not happening in another place would be astronomical, if not impossible.
I understand that I can't be 100% certain that life exists elsewhere until I see it with my own eyes. However, if that was the standard of certainty we applied to everything there wouldn't be much to accept as "truth". And you might also say that life doesn't prove there is any more intelligent life out there, but wouldn't that be a pretty self centred, creationist POV? If life arose here and lead to intelligent life through natural processes, and we accept that the chance of life in the universe is very high, then the chance of intelligent life is probably also high.
I'm not sure what any of this would really mean to us, beyond the knowledge that somewhere out there there are other creatures walking around. They're probably not next door, we might run into them in 1000 years or a million or never because they are ten galaxies away or we kill ourselves. Unless we get a signal, it's not like we can point a starship and say "let's go look for intelligent life" with any reasonable certainty of finding it.
scotthm, if we find direct evidence of past or present life on Mars or some place else in our solar system, would your opinion change? I would think that the vastness of the universe would imply a higher chance of life arising in another place than a small one, especially if we know it arose in two different places in our own solar system. The odds of it not happening in another place would be astronomical, if not impossible.
I understand that I can't be 100% certain that life exists elsewhere until I see it with my own eyes. However, if that was the standard of certainty we applied to everything there wouldn't be much to accept as "truth". And you might also say that life doesn't prove there is any more intelligent life out there, but wouldn't that be a pretty self centred, creationist POV? If life arose here and lead to intelligent life through natural processes, and we accept that the chance of life in the universe is very high, then the chance of intelligent life is probably also high.
I'm not sure what any of this would really mean to us, beyond the knowledge that somewhere out there there are other creatures walking around. They're probably not next door, we might run into them in 1000 years or a million or never because they are ten galaxies away or we kill ourselves. Unless we get a signal, it's not like we can point a starship and say "let's go look for intelligent life" with any reasonable certainty of finding it.
Ask me again if we find it.
I honestly don't think intelligent life is common no matter how widespread microbial life may be. I'm sure there are many environments where microbes could exist that intelligent life could not, so the former being common wouldn't reflect on the latter, IMO.
---------------
It's true.
The guy thinks a kid in Canada cured him of cancer with his brain when there was never any evidence he *had* cancer. The guy has made crazy shit up before and he's more than likely doing it now.
Although this maybe off-topic but here in Japan, it was recently reported that NASA lost some 700 boxes full of the original audio, visual tapes and records of Apollo program and further more that the laser measuring system claimed to be the most prominent evidence that man went to the moon was not able to be confirmed by other research institutions around the globe except the ones in the US.
Japan tried a similar test in the 90's only to fail claiming the reflectors were not accurate enough.
Japan tried a similar test in the 90's only to fail claiming the reflectors were not accurate enough.
