134 posts in this topic

Given the sheer size of the universe I find it highly unlikely that we're the only planet with life on it, in fact I personally believe there are almost certainly aliens out there somewhere but until we have any tangible evidence that they exist it's little more than an intriguing theory. Nor am I really sure if any of the "UFO" sightings on Earth were actual aliens or not.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

... I'm still not convinced about aliens or UFOs though.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please just prevent Religion from being involved in our First Contact..... :/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So this Nigerian prince who keeps emailing me could in actual fact be an alien?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you seen one? I mean really you seen one not your friends not the guys on TV.

Yes.

I have always found it weird that people don't believe in Aliens.

There's Billions, no mopre than Trillions and Trillions of stars out there, which are suns of other solar systems, and of course many many many would have life.

It's plain stupid to even doubt life on other planets.

Even in our own solar system there's more than likely life on the other planets. Just cuz we couldn't live on them, doesn't mean some other species couldn't.

Are people really that retarded? It doesn't even make sense to think that we're the only ones around.

There's way more proof that aliens exist than God, but it's alright to believe in God, but you're considered crazy if you believe in Aliens, go figure.

This is because the gods of Science have not pronounced other intelligent life as true.

And so few humans are able to think for themselves. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if we did contact any aliens it would take thousands of years for them to notice and/or visit or even answer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given the vastness of the universe it seems almost a statistical certainty that there is life on other planets and likely plenty of it. Given "life" can include anything from microbes to more complex species I question the sanity of anyone who flatly denies even the possibility of that occurring somewhere else besides the Earth. In the same breath, there are likely to be countless beings infinitely more advanced than us too.

Do we have "evidence" yet. Not in plain sight. If you believe in UFOs and Roswell and all that then fine but if it's true it's currently hidden.

I think the issue would be even if "evidence" was forthcoming, "luddites" wouldn't stand for it or would attempt to discredit it. If Mr Spock himself landed in the middle the Super Bowl and proceeded to cut himself open and bleed green blood you'd get people saying "fake".

How many times have we laughed at the guy who calls himself Jesus Christ who hath returned! Even if it was in front of our faces we'd likely be too dumb as a collective to see it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is because the gods of Science have not pronounced other intelligent life as true.

And so few humans are able to think for themselves. ;)

Because science deals with observable truths, not wild fantasies.

Just because I don't believe in aliens doesn't mean I'm a mindless drone, get off your high horse.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because science deals with observable truths, not wild fantasies.

Men of science are just as capable of having their own personal biases as anyone else. Every new theory is shot down to hades and back and science has a big row until it's proven beyond belief and they have to except it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Men of science are just as capable of having their own personal biases as anyone else. Everything new theory is shot down to hades and back and science has a big row until it's proven beyond belief and they have to except it.

In English please

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Second, if you have evidence, then by all means post it. I see you suggesting there is but don't bother to post a single shred of it. Third, evidence in the court of law is by far no where the same as scientific evidence for proving X. For example, in a court room a witness can testify to seeing something and have that counted as evidence. In science, first hand eye witness testimony is not considered viable evidence.

Wrong the burden of proof is on those that say there is proof to begin with. Again odds are there is life beyond Earth, I believe this highly but the simple FACT is, we currently do not have proof. As for atoms, electrons and so on, at one point, we had theories of such but we didn't have the proof. Over time proof was gathered, it may have always been there but it wasn't known and wasn't within our reach to gather it. So in a sense if there is proof of alien life, we just don't currently have it. So unless you can provide said evidence, then you're talking out of your ass by saying there is a wealth of it.

In all fairness there is as much proof of alien existence as there is for god, which is none. The odds say we are not alone, given the vast size of space and the amount of stars and planets. We know the materials for life exists elsewhere. We know life "can" exist off planet Earth. We DO NOT how ever have evidence of alien life itself. So while it is astronomically silly to think we are the only planet with life, as of yet, we are the only planet that we know for sure that has it.

No where do I deny the probability or likelihood of the existence of alien life, I deny that proof or evidence for it currently exists.

As for your tree example. You have evidence of a tree, you have evidence that it fell, what remains is the how. The bigger picture is that you still have evidence, even if it's partial. There is no evidence for alien life, period.

I see your challenge of evidence, but please, in return do me the favor of seeing this challenge...

You state that there is the probability, likelihood, odds, that you believe this highly, to the point of otherwise being silly, that alien life exists. Yet you state over and over that there is no evidence and/or proof. How is it not irrational to be so sure of something while at the same time claiming to have no evidence? How is it not unreasonable to advocate an opinion or position while also advocating a lack of evidence for that same position? How can you have an opinion without any information about it's subject? How can you speak to an issue with authority, declaring that there is no evidence, without being well informed on that issue?

Because of some of your other statements, I'd normally give you the benefit of the doubt. Maybe you just misspoke several times, maybe you got confused about what constitutes evidence and proof in a court of law or in the scientific method. However, because of some of your other comments I'd take you to task for an explanation of this.

Being intellectually honest, reasonable, and rational, you must admit that something you know has led you to a conclusion. It is irrational and unreasonable to draw a conclusion that is based upon no evidence. It is also unreasonable and irrational to claim that although you have somehow convinced yourself of a conclusion in a logical manner, that someone else who has come to the same conclusion cannot have evidence to support that conclusion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_(truth)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence

Ok first off, you attempt to use another example that already contains proof of it's existence, the sun and the Earth. The evidence of both is there readily available to all.

The point here was lost completely

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That all builds up for a nice theory, something Im not in dispute with. I don't disagree that all the ingredients for life is there. I don't disagree that all the proper places or environments for life to survive is there. What I do disagree with is that there is actual evidence of life itself.

If you have a pan filled with all the cake ingredients mixed together and you have the oven set to 350 and it's ready to be thrown in, just because the outcome will be a cake, doesn't make it a cake just yet. It's not a cake til it's done cooking.

What you have listed above is akin to having all the proper ingredients and (what we believe to be) the proper tools and materials needed to make life. One of the key problems is, science still doesn't know how life is made. Some think life started in the primordial ocean vents, others are now saying it started on land and not in the oceans. We don't really know how it starts so we are kind of missing the oven. You can have all your ingredients but you can't make your life cake if you don't have the proper oven.

So pointing out evidence of the stuff that makes up life, is still not evidence of life. There is a wealth of evidence for the "stuff", there is none for actual life.

FYI that last article " Odds of Alien Life on Newly Spotted Exoplanet Are "100 Percent" Says Its Discoverer" is a bit silly. From this line "my own personal feeling is that the chances of life on this planet are 100 percent", to this "Steven Vogt, a professor of astronomy and astrophysics at UC Santa Cruz, said he had "almost no doubt" (which seems slightly different than 100 percent sure) that life exists on Gliese 581g".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That all builds up for a nice theory, something Im not in dispute with. I don't disagree that all the ingredients for life is there. I don't disagree that all the proper places or environments for life to survive is there. What I do disagree with is that there is actual evidence of life itself.

If you have a pan filled with all the cake ingredients mixed together and you have the oven set to 350 and it's ready to be thrown in, just because the outcome will be a cake, doesn't make it a cake just yet. It's not a cake til it's done cooking.

What you have listed above is akin to having all the proper ingredients and (what we believe to be) the proper tools and materials needed to make life. One of the key problems is, science still doesn't know how life is made. Some think life started in the primordial ocean vents, others are now saying it started on land and not in the oceans. We don't really know how it starts so we are kind of missing the oven. You can have all your ingredients but you can't make your life cake if you don't have the proper oven.

So pointing out evidence of the stuff that makes up life, is still not evidence of life. There is a wealth of evidence for the "stuff", there is none for actual life.

FYI that last article " Odds of Alien Life on Newly Spotted Exoplanet Are "100 Percent" Says Its Discoverer" is a bit silly. From this line "my own personal feeling is that the chances of life on this planet are 100 percent", to this "Steven Vogt, a professor of astronomy and astrophysics at UC Santa Cruz, said he had "almost no doubt" (which seems slightly different than 100 percent sure) that life exists on Gliese 581g".

Still here, you claim there is no evidence. You criticize only the lowest hanging fruit of the evidence you claimed I didn't have. You were screaming for evidence, yet you offer nothing but uninformed opinions and criticisms while slipping by without any facts or evidence of your own.

It would be quite astonishing to see you research and post evidence contradicting something that you "believe highly", all the while claiming that you still are quite sure that aliens do exist.

I can't have a conversation with you if you cannot assume responsibility and explain your previous gross errors of logic and reason that I quoted in my post. If they are any indication of how you process and analyze information, which now seems likely, it is pointless.

Nothing is more aggravating than someone who talks as if they know what they are talking about, but actually knows as much about the subject as I know about karate, being the expert on the original Karate Kid that I am. Possibly the only thing more intellectually immature is to ignore your mistakes and/or not admit when you were wrong. That's what I define as "talking out of your ass", to use your own verbage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still here, you claim there is no evidence. You criticize only the lowest hanging fruit of the evidence you claimed I didn't have. You were screaming for evidence, yet you offer nothing but uninformed opinions and criticisms while slipping by without any facts or evidence of your own.

It would be quite astonishing to see you research and post evidence contradicting something that you "believe highly", all the while claiming that you still are quite sure that aliens do exist.

I can't have a conversation with you if you cannot assume responsibility and explain your previous gross errors of logic and reason that I quoted in my post. If they are any indication of how you process and analyze information, which now seems likely, it is pointless.

You're the one claiming evidence exists, not me. I don't need to offer counter evidence to your non existent evidence, you need to provide actual evidence of life given it's your claim. You want to use building blocks as evidence for the building itself. You ignore the fact that the building, in this case life, doesn't even have a proper blueprint for how exactly it's put together in the first place to actually start the life. For the record, not a single link you provided claimed to be evidence of life. Evidence of the building blocks but not of life itself.

If there is evidence of life, where are the articles and peer reviewed studies that back up that claim? Where are the scientist that are shouting "look at my work, it proves that we are not alone in the universe"? Where is the scientific data that is agreed upon as showing alien life exists? Oh that's right, that doesn't exist either.

No wonder you can't have a conversation, you are in denial. You want to believe so bad that you take a few puzzle pieces as if it were a completed puzzle.

Nothing is more aggravating than someone who talks as if they know what they are talking about, but actually knows as much about the subject as I know about karate, being the expert on the original Karate Kid that I am. Possibly the only thing more intellectually immature is to ignore your mistakes and/or not admit when you were wrong. That's what I define as "talking out of your ass", to use your own verbage.

Get mirror, look into mirror, repeat lines, wake up.

Again I don't doubt life exists, I doubt that we currently have evidence for said life. When you want to provide evidence and not some "I have some flour and sugar which equates to a cake" bit, then Ill be more then willing to agree. Til then you don't have proper evidence that constitutes as evidence for alien life, period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're the one claiming evidence exists, not me. I don't need to offer counter evidence to your non existent evidence, you need to provide actual evidence of life given it's your claim. You want to use building blocks as evidence for the building itself. You ignore the fact that the building, in this case life, doesn't even have a proper blueprint for how exactly it's put together in the first place to actually start the life.

If there is evidence of life, where are the articles and peer reviewed studies that back up that claim? Where are the scientist that are shouting "look at my work, it proves that we are not alone in the universe"? Where is the scientific data that is agreed upon as showing alien life exists? Oh that's right, that doesn't exist either.

No wonder you can't have a conversation, you are in denial. You want to believe so bad that you take a few puzzle pieces as if it were a completed puzzle.

Get mirror, look into mirror, repeat lines, wake up.

Again I don't doubt life exists, I doubt that we currently have evidence for said life. When you want to provide evidence and not some "I have some flour and sugar which equates to a cake" bit, then Ill be more then willing to agree. Til then you don't have proper evidence that constitutes as evidence for alien life, period.

I didn't think you'd attempt to explain the logic of advocating an opinion at the same time as denying that any evidence exists to support your opinion. Or, offer any evidence to support your own claim, as you demanded of another.

Pathetic...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it was going to happen, it would have happened by 21 Dec 2012 :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't think you'd attempt to explain the logic of advocating an opinion at the same time as denying that any evidence exists to support your opinion. Or, offer any evidence to support your own claim, as you demanded of another.

Pathetic...

You still can't dispute what I said. Im starting to wonder if you even understand the difference between what the building blocks of life are vs what life actually is. Not a single like you provide makes the claim of evidence of life. At the very most they make claims for evidence of the materials that in part make up life, i.e. building blocks. Again you took on the claim that evidence exists, it's not on me to prove it doesn't, it's on you to prove it does. If you can't understand that basic idea, then you are incapable of having a proper and adult debate on the matter. It's not my opinion that there is no evidence, believe me when I say Id love for there to be some, it's just a simple fact that there isn't.

So either provide said evidence or keep on ranting and raving, either way you still haven't proven yourself. What's honestly pathetic is how personal you are taking this.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You still can't dispute what I said. Im starting to wonder if you even understand the difference between what the building blocks of life are vs what life actually is. Not a single like you provide makes the claim of evidence of life. At the very most they make claims for evidence of the materials that in part make up life, i.e. building blocks. Again you took on the claim that evidence exists, it's not on me to prove it doesn't, it's on you to prove it does. If you can't understand that basic idea, then you are incapable of having a proper and adult debate on the matter.

So either provide said evidence or keep on ranting and raving, either way you still haven't proven yourself.

You aren't grasping the concept of circumstantial evidence, it's wide use, and it's significance. People have been put to death on nothing but circumstantial evidence. Most of science is circumstantial evidence.

You are clinging to the notion that since there isn't absolute, definitive, direct evidence, there is no evidence. It's a thin thread that is easily seen through. It's weak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, the funny thing about this thread is that I don't even believe in aliens.

That ****s kooky... Bbbwwwwaaaaaa

j/k I just thought that would be funny :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You aren't grasping the concept of circumstantial evidence, it's wide use, and it's significance. People have been put to death on nothing but circumstantial evidence. Most of science is circumstantial evidence.

You are clinging to the notion that since there isn't absolute, definitive, direct evidence, there is no evidence. It's a thin thread that is easily seen through. It's weak.

If this was a court of law you might be able to make a case but in the realm of science no one in the scientific community is saying here is evidence of life and we base this off what you have listed above. If it were truly that simple, you would be able to find a scientific article based on peer reviewed journals supporting said claim. You don't find that because a claim like this is to big to make on just circumstantial evidence alone. Science, while not exact does it's best to get damn close. Even still they mess up from time to time and some screw ups can be big. Do I need to remind you of NASA's arsenic based life announcement that turned out to be false. Finding actual evidence beyond our planet would be one of, if not the biggest events in human history. Right now all we have are bit's of pieces that, in part, that make up life, not even a whole piece itself that is part of a great set of pieces. So yet again, we do not have evidence of alien life.

I also dont have a notion that there isn't absolute, definitive evidence, what I believe is that we haven't found it yet. If anything is weak it's your reading comprehension.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this was a court of law you might be able to make a case but in the realm of science no one in the scientific community is saying here is evidence of life and we base this off what you have listed above. If it were truly that simple, you would be able to find a scientific article based on peer reviewed journals supporting said claim. You don't find that because a claim like this is to big to make on just circumstantial evidence alone. Science, while not exact does it's best to get damn close. Even still they mess up from time to time and some screw ups can be big. Do I need to remind you of NASA's arsenic based life announcement that turned out to be false. Finding actual evidence beyond our planet would be one of, if not the biggest events in human history. Right now all we have are bit's n pieces that, in part, make up life, not even the whole pieces itself. So yet again, we do not have evidence of alien life.

I also dont have a notion that there isn't absolute, definitive evidence, what I believe is that we haven't found it yet. If anything is weak it's your reading comprehension.

You didn't even read my whole post... pointless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You didn't even read my whole post... pointless.

You said "Im not grasping the concept of circumstantial evidence", to which I debated that point. Instead of countering that point, you resort to another silly dodgy post. You have no interest in actual debating, only stating your beliefs and running in circles ignoring counter posts. You come across a few articles talking about "building blocks of life" and assume it means life. Iv tried to counter every post you have made, you are the one that has yet to even try to counter my counters. Nothing you provided would remotely count as enough circumstantial evidence to qualify as evidence of life. Bits of pieces is not enough. Again you can't provide a single study to make this claim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We could today, if we knew what we were looking for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because science deals with observable truths, not wild fantasies.

---

Funny you should say that. A lot of important discoveries WERE nearer to "wild fantasies" than observable truths before they were generally accepted.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.