1. Post #81
    Gold Member
    GamerKiwi's Avatar
    November 2006
    5,045 Posts
    Real, probably.
    Intelligent, maybe.
    Here, probably not.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 United States Show Events

  2. Post #82
    Gold Member
    Jookia's Avatar
    July 2007
    6,768 Posts
    I firmly believe that aliens don't exist. There's no proof supporting their existence.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Linux Australia Show Events

  3. Post #83
    BestBuyInBRICK's Avatar
    February 2011
    184 Posts
    I firmly believe that aliens don't exist. There's no proof supporting their existence.
    -snip-

    nevermind that was a shit argument.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows Vista United States Show Events

  4. Post #84
    I firmly believe that aliens don't exist. There's no proof supporting their existence.
    So you're basically saying that we must be the only species of significant* life in the entire Universe, just because there is no proof?

    *More evolved then single-celled organisms, mostly more like plants, bugs, etc. at the minimum
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 United States Show Events

  5. Post #85
    Gold Member
    Ekalektik_1's Avatar
    September 2008
    6,030 Posts
    There is no way we are the only intelligent lifeforms in the galaxy. However, if there is a civilization capable of coming to our planet, it seems like the only reason to come here is to conquer us. It'd cost too much in terms of resources, at least the way we know them. If anyone is capable and willing to come here, they are probably capable and willing to kill us all for our world. I'd rather not picture alien life as a super-advanced, Geth-like race that exterminates all that cross their path, but it's pretty much impossible that they'd be benevolent space monks.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 United States Show Events

  6. Post #86
    imasillypiggy's Avatar
    December 2009
    8,851 Posts
    I firmly believe that aliens don't exist. There's no proof supporting their existence.
    Thats like the first people finding a black whole saying its the only one in the universe and firmly believing it.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows Vista United States Show Events

  7. Post #87
    Gold Member
    Jookia's Avatar
    July 2007
    6,768 Posts
    So you're basically saying that we must be the only species of significant* life in the entire Universe, just because there is no proof?

    *More evolved then single-celled organisms, mostly more like plants, bugs, etc. at the minimum
    Thats like the first people finding a black whole saying its the only one in the universe and firmly believing it.
    If we discover evidence that there are other intelligent life forms out there, I'm all for it. But all the available evidence points to us being alone.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Linux Australia Show Events

  8. Post #88
    Well in that case we may never find proof, because the closest form of life I described could be millions of lightyears away, or just far away enough for us not to notice.

    Same goes to the other species. They would be in the same situation, so how would they know we're here? (The more intelligent ones)

    By the time an alien species would find us and try to make contact, humanity may already be gone, and they'd only find ruins.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 United States Show Events

  9. Post #89
    imasillypiggy's Avatar
    December 2009
    8,851 Posts
    If we discover evidence that there are other intelligent life forms out there, I'm all for it. But all the available evidence points to us being alone.
    What evidence is there that we are alone? So far statistics are on the side that we aren't.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows Vista United States Show Events

  10. Post #90
    Gold Member
    Jookia's Avatar
    July 2007
    6,768 Posts
    What evidence is there that we are alone? So far statistics are on the side that we aren't.
    From what we've explored, we've only found one intelligent species -- us. Also, statistics aren't evidence.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Linux Australia Show Events

  11. Post #91
    imasillypiggy's Avatar
    December 2009
    8,851 Posts
    From what we've explored, we've only found one intelligent species -- us. Also, statistics aren't evidence.
    Yes it is. Finding one planet with life means theres a statistical chance of life per star system meaning the chances of there being others with life are higher then there not being any with life.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows Vista United States Show Events

  12. Post #92
    Gold Member
    Jookia's Avatar
    July 2007
    6,768 Posts
    Yes it is. Finding one planet with life means theres a statistical chance of life per star system meaning the chances of there being others with life are higher then there not being any with life.
    Statistically if I toss a coin 2 times it'll be heads and tails. But reality doesn't work on statistics.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Linux Australia Show Events

  13. Post #93
    imasillypiggy's Avatar
    December 2009
    8,851 Posts
    Statistically if I toss a coin 2 times it'll be heads and tails. But reality doesn't work on statistics.
    yea it does. statistics are used all the time in science and now because of current science we know that statistics actually controls everything including the creation of are universe.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows Vista United States Show Events

  14. Post #94
    Gold Member
    Jookia's Avatar
    July 2007
    6,768 Posts
    yea it does. 50% of the time heads and the other time tails. Well ok there is the small chance that it will land on the edge but you know what I mean.
    Whoosh.

    I'm saying that what happens in practice isn't the same as what statistics predict. Just because statistics say that there's life out there, doesn't mean there actually is.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Linux Australia Show Events

  15. Post #95
    imasillypiggy's Avatar
    December 2009
    8,851 Posts
    Just because statistics say that there's life out there, doesn't mean there actually is.
    Look at my edited post but basically it kind of does until there something to switch up the statistics.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows Vista United States Show Events

  16. Post #96
    Gold Member
    Jookia's Avatar
    July 2007
    6,768 Posts
    yea it does. statistics are used all the time in science and now because of current science we know that statistics actually controls everything including the creation of are universe.
    I don't think you understand what I'm saying.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Linux Australia Show Events

  17. Post #97
    imasillypiggy's Avatar
    December 2009
    8,851 Posts
    I don't think you understand what I'm saying.
    Yea I do your saying that statistics don't really represent the real world but the fact that they are used by science to make the most logical prediction about the real world kind of shows that they do.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows Vista United States Show Events

  18. Post #98
    Gold Member
    Jookia's Avatar
    July 2007
    6,768 Posts
    Yea I do your saying that statistics don't really represent the real world but the fact that they are used by science to make the most logical prediction about the real world kind of shows that they do.
    If statistics said tomorrow was a rainy day, and it wasn't, what would that mean?
    If statistics said life exists, and there isn't, what would that mean?

    Just because life may exist, doesn't mean it actually does.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Linux Australia Show Events

  19. Post #99
    imasillypiggy's Avatar
    December 2009
    8,851 Posts
    If statistics said tomorrow was a rainy day, and it wasn't, what would that mean?
    Statistics don't say that. They could say it will probably be a rainy day to tomorrow and that means it probably will even though it might not.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows Vista United States Show Events

  20. Post #100
    Gold Member
    Jookia's Avatar
    July 2007
    6,768 Posts
    Statistics don't say that. They could say it will probably be a rainy day to tomorrow and that means it probably will even though it might not.
    Exactly. So if there's probably life, that doesn't mean there is life.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Linux Australia Show Events

  21. Post #101
    imasillypiggy's Avatar
    December 2009
    8,851 Posts
    Exactly. So if there's probably life, that doesn't mean there is life.
    Yea but that means you firmly believing there isn't life isn't really logical.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows Vista United States Show Events

  22. Post #102
    Gold Member
    Jookia's Avatar
    July 2007
    6,768 Posts
    Yea but that means you firmly believing there isn't life isn't really logical.
    I believe in things with hard evidence.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Linux Australia Show Events

  23. Post #103
    imasillypiggy's Avatar
    December 2009
    8,851 Posts
    I believe in things with hard evidence.
    But statistics is evidence. It may not be 100% proof but it is definitely logical evidence.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows Vista United States Show Events

  24. Post #104
    Gold Member
    Jookia's Avatar
    July 2007
    6,768 Posts
    But statistics is evidence. It may not be 100% proof but it is definitely logical evidence.
    I want hard evidence, not probabilities.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Linux Australia Show Events

  25. Post #105
    Rad McCool's Avatar
    August 2009
    3,883 Posts
    imasillypiggy, there are no statistics!
    Since we don't know what the chance of life developing on any planet is, we are left with at least one unknown value. We cannot calculate or estimate anything from that.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows Vista Sweden Show Events

  26. Post #106
    Gold Member
    Jookia's Avatar
    July 2007
    6,768 Posts
    imasillypiggy, there are no statistics!
    Since we don't know what the chance of life developing on any planet is, we are left with at least one unknown value. We cannot calculate or estimate anything from that.
    Ssh, he'll bring up Drake's Equation and all kind of guesses.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Linux Australia Show Events

  27. Post #107
    Rad McCool's Avatar
    August 2009
    3,883 Posts
    Also Jookia, science is all about statistics. We can never prove anything, any theorem or physical law absolutely. We can only test them and verify them by looking at them statistically.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows Vista Sweden Show Events

  28. Post #108
    Gold Member
    Jookia's Avatar
    July 2007
    6,768 Posts
    We can only test them and verify them by looking at them statistically.
    We have evidence, maths, logic, proof. You can use all this to form statistics to try and predict things, but that doesn't mean that it WILL happen, thus it can't be treated as proof.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Linux Australia Show Events

  29. Post #109
    imasillypiggy's Avatar
    December 2009
    8,851 Posts
    imasillypiggy, there are no statistics!
    Since we don't know what the chance of life developing on any planet is, we are left with at least one unknown value. We cannot calculate or estimate anything from that.
    Well there are some. Like planets with water but again the thing is. Even without knowing the statistics for like the fact that we have observed it on one planet means there are probably more with life on it. Its how the universe works. Anything gets replicated with this many chances unless there is something special with it and so far we haven't sound something that makes life replicable again when we found a black whole we knew there had to be more out there because the chances of us observing the only one in the universe are slim unless there are more.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows Vista United States Show Events

  30. Post #110
    Gold Member
    Jookia's Avatar
    July 2007
    6,768 Posts
    Even without knowing the statistics for like the fact that we have observed it on one planet means there are probably more with life on it.
    No it doesn't.

    Its how the universe works.
    So you know how the universe works?

    Anything gets replicated with this many chances unless there is something special with it and so far we haven't sound something that makes life replicable again
    What chances?

    when we found a black whole we knew there had to be more out there because the chances of us observing the only one in the universe are slim unless there are more.
    1. We didn't know that there had to be more. We thought that there were more.
    2. Just because it's slim doesn't mean that there are more.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Linux Australia Show Events

  31. Post #111
    Rad McCool's Avatar
    August 2009
    3,883 Posts
    What about intelligent species on Earth for example. Out of the many millions species here today, and the hundreds of millions of species that ever lived, only one intelligent creature has evolved. I say that makes us pretty special and unreplicable.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows Vista Sweden Show Events

  32. Post #112
    imasillypiggy's Avatar
    December 2009
    8,851 Posts
    No it doesn't.



    So you know how the universe works?
    We know its a big place that replicates what it creates. We knew before we found a planet with liquid water on it because even if unlikely for the average planet its almost certain that there is another one because the chances of us being being a normal event are higher then us being magically being special. The chances of the statistics adding up for there being exactly one planet with life are lower then there being more or less then one.

    What about intelligent species on Earth for example. Out of the many millions species here today, and the hundreds of millions of species that ever lived, only one intelligent creature has evolved.
    So then its logical to think intelligent species are rarer.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows Vista United States Show Events

  33. Post #113
    BenJammin''s Avatar
    December 2010
    6,437 Posts
    Here? No. Out there? 99% positive.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 United States Show Events

  34. Post #114
    Gold Member
    Jookia's Avatar
    July 2007
    6,768 Posts
    We know its a big place that replicates what it creates. We knew before we found a planet with liquid water on it because even if unlikely for the average planet its almost certain that there is another one because the chances of us being being a normal event are higher then us being magically being special. The chances of the statistics adding up for there being exactly one planet with life are lower then there being more or less then one.
    Just because something can exist, doesn't mean it does.

    So then its logical to think intelligent species are rarer.
    No, it's logical to think that there's only one intelligent species in the Universe. Because that's all the evidence there is.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Linux Australia Show Events

  35. Post #115
    imasillypiggy's Avatar
    December 2009
    8,851 Posts
    Just because something can exist, doesn't mean it does.



    No, it's logical to think that there's only one intelligent species in the Universe. Because that's all the evidence there is.
    Thats like saying its logical to think there is only one planet with water because we haven't found another one yet (ok we have but as example). With so many tries for life the chances of the statistic adding up to only one occurrence is less every other chance (planet) there is. I'm not saying I know how rare life is but the chances of it being only one is low.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows Vista United States Show Events

  36. Post #116
    Gold Member
    Jookia's Avatar
    July 2007
    6,768 Posts
    I'm not saying I know how rare life is but the chances of it being only one is low.
    Contradictions, yay.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Linux Australia Show Events

  37. Post #117
    imasillypiggy's Avatar
    December 2009
    8,851 Posts
    Contradictions, yay.
    If I said I knew the chances I would say a percent. I'm just explaining how statistics work with a lot of chances.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows Vista United States Show Events

  38. Post #118
    Gold Member
    Jookia's Avatar
    July 2007
    6,768 Posts
    If I said I knew the chances I would say a percent. I'm just explaining how statistics work with a lot of chances.
    How do you know that it's low if you don't know the probability?
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Linux Australia Show Events

  39. Post #119
    imasillypiggy's Avatar
    December 2009
    8,851 Posts
    How do you know that it's low if you don't know the probability?
    I explained this. When knowing the number of chances and observed occurrences you can estimate how likely it is that those observed occurrences are the only ones.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows Vista United States Show Events

  40. Post #120
    Gold Member
    katbug's Avatar
    January 2010
    6,580 Posts
    about 0.00001 that conditions would be right for life (According to our calculations, and we are most likely way off)

    and a ten thousanth of a chance times infinity or near infinity..... that's a pretty good/definite chance.
    Reply With Quote Edit / Delete Windows 7 United States Show Events