Extraterrestrials - Here/Real or not? - General

[QUOTE=King Tiger;36853811]You've got it backwards, actually. Religion started from people like you, who accept things without proof.[/QUOTE] Uh...To me it just seems like he's accepting that we don't know. But humor me, what is he accepting without proof?

[QUOTE=King Tiger;36853811]You've got it backwards, actually. Religion started from people like you, who accept things without proof.[/QUOTE] What exactly am I accepting with out proof? I am saying this. I'll sum my views on extraterrestrial life in one sentence: [B]I do not know if there is extraterrestrial life because I do not have any evidence to support the claim that there is any extraterrestrial life. I also do not know if there is no extraterrestrial life because we have not explored enough of the universe to establish if we are alone in the universe or not.[/B] There, please tell me what I am accepting without proof? Because from my point of view I am accepting NOTHING because we have NO PROOF. Do you sniff glue or are you just trying to ignore everything that's been said often in a lot of pages?

[QUOTE=King Tiger;36853811]You've got it backwards, actually. Religion started from people like you, who accept things without proof.[/QUOTE] And here I thought my mega-post on the concept of plausibility would have shut you up, but alas, it seems I was wrong.

[QUOTE=Xenomoose;36856255]And here I thought my mega-post on the concept of plausibility would have shut you up, but alas, it seems I was wrong.[/QUOTE] It's amazing isn't it?

I didn't think this was a question people even asked anymore. Of course there is. As I heard them say, we came from Mars and made Earth our home.

We don't know if there's an end in the space. There might be countless amounts of habitable planets out there, and even if the chance is too low there might be "people" living there. Other species, that is. I just believe that surely there are other planets with other kinds of species living on them. But extraterrestrials? On Earth? I'm not really sure.

It doesn't matter whether or not there's an end to space. Nothing could ever get to us from past the Hubble limit, no matter what. The universe is expanding faster than the speed of light, and this expansion is accelerating. So basically, there's no physical difference that we could possibly observe, between an infinite universe and one that ends at the Hubble limit. This whole point is irrelevant since all the evidence says that life can evolve anywhere with some organic molecules, a reasonable amount of energy, and enough time. Since the elements needed to make life are abundant, energy is everywhere, and most stars have lived/will live for for billions of years; we can confidently say that life exists within our own galaxy. However, the vast amount of space between stars, combined with the relatively special conditions and amount of time it takes to evolve life, means that none of us will probably come into contact with intelligent life for thousands of years. TL;DR: Aliens currently exist in the Milky Way, but they've never been to Earth. We don't need direct evidence of their existence to say that they are statistically probable.

[QUOTE=Smashmaster;36940269]This whole point is irrelevant since [B]all the evidence[/B] says that life can evolve anywhere with some organic molecules, a reasonable amount of energy, and enough time. [B]Since the elements needed to make life are abundant[/B], [B]energy is everywhere[/B], and most stars have lived/will live for for billions of years; [B]we can confidently say that life exists within our own galaxy[/B]. However, the vast amount of space between stars, combined with the relatively special conditions and amount of time it takes to evolve life, means that none of us will probably come into contact with intelligent life for thousands of years. [B]TL;DR: Aliens currently exist in the Milky Way, but they've never been to Earth. We don't need direct evidence of their existence to say that they are statistically probable.[/B][/QUOTE] Show me all of your evidence and sources for these amazing claims! For how long have you been researching this to be make this amazing breakthrough in science? You're the first scientist to be able to support this claim! Now all we need is to see your evidence.

[QUOTE=Smashmaster;36940269]It doesn't matter whether or not there's an end to space. Nothing could ever get to us from past the Hubble limit, no matter what. The universe is expanding faster than the speed of light, and this expansion is accelerating. So basically, there's no physical difference that we could possibly observe, between an infinite universe and one that ends at the Hubble limit. This whole point is irrelevant since all the evidence says that life can evolve anywhere with some organic molecules, a reasonable amount of energy, and enough time. Since the elements needed to make life are abundant, energy is everywhere, and most stars have lived/will live for for billions of years; we can confidently say that life exists within our own galaxy. However, the vast amount of space between stars, combined with the relatively special conditions and amount of time it takes to evolve life, means that none of us will probably come into contact with intelligent life for thousands of years. TL;DR: [b]Aliens currently exist[/b] in the Milky Way, but they've never been to Earth. We don't need direct evidence of [b]their existence to say that they are statistically probable.[/b][/QUOTE] First you say that aliens currently exist, then you say that their existence is statistically probable. Saying something is probable doesn't mean it is 100% true.

[QUOTE=Blazyd;36953198]First you say that aliens currently exist, then you say that their existence is statistically probable. Saying something is probable doesn't mean it is 100% true.[/QUOTE] If someone were to tell you they flipped a coin in another room a thousand times, would you automatically assume you could never guess at the number of times it landed heads? Good odds mean that if you bet any other way, you're making the wrong decision. This is why the lottery and the casino are scams, because your chance of winning is lower than your profit if you do. They rely on the fact that statistics are predictable: Figuring out the result of one game of blackjack is impossible. Figuring out the result of a thousand is not. Figuring out the result of a million is trivial. So, you tell me, in a galaxy of 300 billion stars, where [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_sequence_star]most stars are like ours[/url], and [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellar_population]many of those are metal rich[/url], why wouldn't life exist outside our planet? Let's just do our own little version of the Drake equation. 300 billion stars * 90% main sequence stars * 2% population I metal-rich stars. How many stars have abundant oxygen, carbon, and other elements needed to make life? We can confidently say there are 5.4 billion in our galaxy. 5.4 BILLION. So, beyond this, we can only guess as to what percentage of these have a planet in their habitable zone, etc. But the statistics are on my side here. How likely is it, that only 1 in 5.4 billion metal-rich, main sequence stars have life? That's 0.0000000185%. Are you gonna hedge your bet that it's not 2 in 5.4 billion? 3 in 5.4 billion? Or any number above that? Nope, it has to be exactly 1 in 5.4 billion. If any single ONE of these stars, if an extra 0.00000002% have life, you lose. I mean, shit, what happens if we find single-cellular organisms on Ganymede or Europa? What if we find self-assembling RNA on Titan? Well, shit, there goes your whole game! You went all in on a pair of twos!

I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm saying that we just do not know. I do believe that there's a huge chance there is at least some sort of life form outside of Earth, whether it be in an ocean under Europa's surface heated by hydro-thermal vents, or on a planet thousands of light years away. We just do not know. Also, how do you know they have never been to Earth?

[QUOTE=Blazyd;36955552]Also, how do you know they have never been to Earth?[/QUOTE] Because we've seen Earth (we see it quite often, actually) and we haven't found any evidence of aliens having visited.

[QUOTE=Smashmaster;36954840]why wouldn't life exist outside our planet?[/QUOTE] Sigh, why is this so hard to get? We are not saying life does not exist, we are saying [B]we do not know.[/B]

Life outside of Earth probably exists but we don't know. The Drake equation is not proof of life.

[QUOTE=Robbi;36962359]Sigh, why is this so hard to get? We are not saying life does not exist, we are saying [B]we do not know.[/B][/QUOTE] That's not an answer to my challenge. "We do not know" is a cheap cop-out. We don't need direct evidence to say, within any reasonable margin of doubt, that they exist. The statistics are on my side. The chances are stacked 5.4 billion times in my favor. The only reason you would pull one quote out of my post, out of context, is because you can't think of an argument against the rest of it. In debate, I would say you have conceded by omission. You haven't contested my argument, so you must think it cannot be contested. [editline]27th July 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Falubii;36962525]Life outside of Earth probably exists but we don't know. The Drake equation is not proof of life.[/QUOTE] Let's say I put 100 jelly beans in a jar. One of them is red, the rest are blue. The jar is shaken around until they're all mixed. I reach into the jar, blindfolded, and pull out one. What color is it? You'll win 10 dollars if you guess correctly. By your logic, the correct answer is "I don't know." You go home 10 dollars poorer than you could have been. You didn't even make a bet! That's worse than making the wrong bet! You didn't even have a CHANCE of winning! Even the people who say "there is no life except on Earth." are closer to the truth than you, because at least they tried. So here's the important question: would you bet real money that life doesn't exist within our galaxy? (This is for you, as well, Robbi.)

[QUOTE=Smashmaster;36966326]So here's the important question: would you bet real money that life doesn't exist within our galaxy? (This is for you, as well, Robbi.)[/QUOTE] I'll answer the rest of your stuff once I get home but this for now. No I wouldn't bet money on it, because I think there's high chances there's life on places such as [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europa_(moon)]Europa[/url] and [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titan_(moon)#Prebiotic_conditions_and_possible_life]Titan[/url]. However, we do not know for certain which is the reason why I go with "I don't know" but I will gladly say there's very very very high chances of life being outside of Earth but still do not know 100% so until we have 100% proof that there is life outside of Earth I will go with that we don't know.

That's all I'm trying to say. The chances are so high that I can say they exist, and there is virtually no chance that I'm wrong. I'm just playing the odds. But what's the point of saying 'We don't know'? What do we gain from this? All the knowledge we have is subject to error. We only know 9 significant figures of the speed of light, and 5 significant figures of the mass of Earth. We know nothing perfectly for certain, and yet, our knowledge has practical uses. It allows us to put communication satellites into orbit, invent life-saving medicine, and feed billions of people. Knowledge doesn't have to be exact to be useful. So, if we take your logic of "we don't know" and apply it to anything that actually matters, we find that it collapses under its own weight. How fast is my car going? I don't know. How close am I to that pedestrian? I don't know for certain. How long am I going to spend in prison for vehicular manslaughter? There's no way to know exactly.

[QUOTE=Smashmaster;36967508]But what's the point of saying 'We don't know'? What do we gain from this?[/QUOTE] Being scientifically correct. [QUOTE=Smashmaster;36967508]So, if we take your logic of "we don't know" and apply it to anything that actually matters, we find that it collapses under its own weight. How fast is my car going? I don't know. How close am I to that pedestrian? I don't know for certain. How long am I going to spend in prison for vehicular manslaughter? There's no way to know exactly.[/quote] That is just being extreme and nonsensical. But let's say my car is going 90.15813km/h I can just round up the number and say it's going 90km/h. However we have nothing to base extraterrestrial life on, so we can't really "round up" the odds and say that it exists.

[QUOTE=Robbi;36968060]Being scientifically correct. That is just being extreme and nonsensical. But let's say my car is going 90.15813km/h I can just round up the number and say it's going 90km/h. However we have nothing to base extraterrestrial life on, so we can't really "round up" the odds and say that it exists.[/QUOTE] Nothing to base extraterrestrial life on? What have you been smoking? How about any of this: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_formation[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extrasolar_planet[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metallicity[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abundance_of_the_chemical_elements[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biochemistry[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetary_habitability[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrobiology[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution[/url] The purpose of science is to gain knowledge. That's what the word 'science' means. Some knowledge must be inferred; when we cannot directly observe something, we can still learn about it. We are allowed to use our current knowledge to make inferences about the universe. In your short-sighted attempt to be "scientifically correct" you have missed the entire point of science, and failed to gain any useful knowledge. So, good job.

[QUOTE=Smashmaster;36968280]Nothing to base extraterrestrial life on? What have you been smoking? How about any of this: [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_formation[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extrasolar_planet[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metallicity[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abundance_of_the_chemical_elements[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biochemistry[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planetary_habitability[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrobiology[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution[/url] The purpose of science is to gain knowledge. That's what the word 'science' means. Some knowledge must be inferred; when we cannot directly observe something, we can still learn about it. We are allowed to use our current knowledge to make inferences about the universe. In your short-sighted attempt to be "scientifically correct" you have missed the entire point of science, and failed to gain any useful knowledge. So, good job.[/QUOTE] Eh, you misunderstood me. I mean we have nothing to round up the things like we can round up that you are 1 metre away from me and going at 50km/h. If we could see buildings at Mars, then I think we could safely "round up" that there's life there. All these links you've posted are just places where life is [I]possible[/I] but show no evidence that there is anything close to life out there. [editline]28th July 2012[/editline] Hence, we do not know.

Smashmaster, you are making scientific claims based on faith. That is not how science works. It is a hypothesis that there is life elsewhere in the universe (albeit a probable one), but it is not a fact. There is nothing to debate because you have no evidence. Come up with all the anecdotes you want, but you still have no basis for your claim until we find life elsewhere.

[QUOTE=Robbi;36969335]Eh, you misunderstood me. I mean we have nothing to round up the things like we can round up that you are 1 metre away from me and going at 50km/h. If we could see buildings at Mars, then I think we could safely "round up" that there's life there. All these links you've posted are just places where life is [I]possible[/I] but show no evidence that there is anything close to life out there. [editline]28th July 2012[/editline] Hence, we do not know.[/QUOTE] You're really stuck on this uncertainty thing. Uncertainty doesn't always have to do with measured values like speed and distance. I was referring to your [i]uncertainty[/i] that alien life exists in our galaxy. You admitted that the probability is very high. Unless you'd like to take this statement back: [QUOTE=Robbi;36967328]However, we do not know for certain which is the reason why I go with "I don't know" but I will gladly say there's very very very high chances of life being outside of Earth but still do not know 100% so until we have 100% proof that there is life outside of Earth I will go with that we don't know.[/QUOTE] My point was that we accept uncertainty in our day-to-day activities, and that science accepts uncertainty as well. You said it yourself: [QUOTE=Robbi;36968060]But let's say my car is going 90.15813km/h I can just round up the number and say it's going 90km/h.[/QUOTE] Besides this being rounding [i]down[/i] and not up, you have a good point. When there is uncertainty, we just go with the closest guess. Except that this somehow doesn't apply to probabilities in your mind. The fact that the odds are staggeringly in favor of alien life in our galaxy won't dissuade you from defending a complete non-position: "We don't know!" Anyway, I think I'm done until you can actually provide a challenge here. Normally in debate I have to think about my arguments, but I'm on complete autopilot here. Your first reply to me kinda explains it all: [QUOTE=Robbi;36952413]Show me all of your evidence and sources for these amazing claims! For how long have you been researching this to be make this amazing breakthrough in science? You're the first scientist to be able to support this claim! Now all we need is to see your evidence.[/QUOTE] I mean, the douche levels coming off of this post are extraordinary. It reeks of trying to scare me off with thinly veiled hostility and aggression, but all it told me is that you don't have an argument. Anyway, I'll check on this thread occasionally in case you actually manage to come up with one. [editline]27th July 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Falubii;36969931]Smashmaster, you are making scientific claims based on faith. That is not how science works. It is a hypothesis that there is life elsewhere in the universe (albeit a probable one), but it is not a fact. There is nothing to debate because you have no evidence. Come up with all the anecdotes you want, but you still have no basis for your claim until we find life elsewhere.[/QUOTE] That's fucking retarded and you know it. I never relied on faith and I never used anecdotal evidence. Do you even know what anecdotal evidence is? I mean, talk about a mishandled use of the straw man fallacy. The straw man has to at least resemble my argument. Anyway, I've already explained my position in extreme detail. I'll sum it up carefully: the odds are so staggeringly in favor of alien life existing in our galaxy, that it is virtually impossible that Earth has the only life here.

Where are your observations then? It's kind of central to science.

[QUOTE=Falubii;36970372]Where are your observations then? It's kind of central to science.[/QUOTE] Okay, try actually reading the thread before you post. Go to page 14 and read my posts there. They explain my position thoroughly.

I don't understand your problem with saying that alien life is probable. Just don't say, "I know there is alien life." First you said: [QUOTE=Smashmaster;36940269]Aliens currently exist in the Milky Way, but they've never been to Earth. [/QUOTE] Then you said: [QUOTE=Smashmaster;36940269]We don't need direct evidence of their existence to say that they are [b]statistically probable[/b].[/QUOTE] These statements are not compatible.

[QUOTE=Falubii;36970513]I don't understand your problem with saying that alien life is probable. Just don't say, "I know there is alien life." First you said: Then you said: These statements are not compatible.[/QUOTE] In practice, they're the same statement. You're arguing an academic point that simply has no bearing on reality.

It's seems like we're just arguing semantics. You say definite, I say probable. I think we both basically agree and are not really answering the question to the debate.,

[QUOTE=Smashmaster;36970291]Anyway, I think I'm done until you can actually provide a challenge here. Normally in debate I have to think about my arguments, but I'm on complete autopilot here. Your first reply to me kinda explains it all: I mean, the douche levels coming off of this post are extraordinary. It reeks of trying to scare me off with thinly veiled hostility and aggression, but all it told me is that you don't have an argument. Anyway, I'll check on this thread occasionally in case you actually manage to come up with one,[/QUOTE] Oh please don't leave. I'll answer you properly and give you a challenge when I return home with internet faster than 5kb/s and stays online for longer than 10 minutes. Also, sorry about being a douche but I'm just very tired of people coming in and saying "Oh it 100% exists outside of earth." when we have [I]no evidence at all[/I] to support that claim.

Smashmaster, please show us proof that life 100% currently exists outside of Earth.

[QUOTE=Blazyd;36981410]Smashmaster, please show us proof that life 100% currently exists outside of Earth.[/QUOTE] Don't be stupid. You already know where I've posted my evidence, and you already know what my argument is. I'm disinclined to reply to more posts like this. You have no argument, and you're wasting my time.