Skeptics: Do you want to be alone in the Universe?

amazing
The point is, that Self-proclaimed skeptics,

The point is it's the convinced who throw around that label in a derogatory [correct term in this case] fashion. The people to whom you are referring would be more correctly labeled as believer-proclaimed skeptics.

Harte

amazing
The Universe is what...13.8 billion years old....
They've discovered a galaxy that they think formed only 500 million years after the big bang...The oldest known star in our galaxy is 13.6 billion years old. There are billions of galaxies in the known universe all of differing ages.

That means that there are very likely ..millions if not billions of solar systems that formed billions of years earlier than our own solar system, meaning that there is a very good high probability that there are life forms in the universe that are billions of years more evolved than we are. That is a possibility that you need to consider based on statistics, probabilities, math and science.

While skeptics ponder this, perhaps you should ponder exactly what it is that makes you think that there actually is such a thing as "more evolved," given that evolution doesn't have a specific direction and doesn't necessarily lead to improvement in the way you're assuming here.

Harte

Fair question. My thinking goes that if there are 100 planets that had life start earlier than ours here on earth that there could be 100 different possibilities. Some of those planets would have had catastrophic events ending all life. Perhaps they are barren of life now. Some of those planets would have had events ending life and then beginning again later. millions of years later and they would be behind us now, perhaps meaning simple cell life forms. Some of these planets could be water worlds where large sharks are the highest life form. Some could be cockroaches or Dinosaurs like animals of sometype.

Some of those planets, could have evolved like us and be humanoid or close to resembling us and might be at our technological level. However, my belief is that a few of those hundred worlds would have evolved into intelligent beings like us, maybe not looking like us but being just as intelligent as we are, building machines and civilizations. Now some of those civilizations could be thousands or millions of years further along than ours. Imagine how we were on earth just two thousand years ago now imagine where we will be in two thousand more years. Now imagine or theorize what we might do in 1 million years if we keep advancing, progressing and evolving. That's where I believe some of those life forms out there are and why it's so possible that they could have the technology to find us and visit us.

draknoir2

amazing
The point is, that Self-proclaimed skeptics,

The point is it's the convinced who throw around that label in a derogatory [correct term in this case] fashion. The people to whom you are referring would be more correctly labeled as believer-proclaimed skeptics.

Point taken but labels are just labels. Many claiming to be skeptics on this board will destroy a theory because it doesn't match their world view. That's the underlying issue. A skeptic may believe that it is impossible for a civilization on another planet to travel to earth. Fair enough. That is just an opinion. However when he states that it is most likely "impossible" for that to happen, he's closing his mind to the possibilities and in effect trying to undermine a theory that doesn't match his own. That is not denying ignorance.

reply to post by amazing


Exactly and we have those exact statements in this thread with stars to oddly enough highlight the post as an example. Based off the stars in this thread or seems most people....ah I just remembered a skeptical phrase..."we need more convincing..."

They're a fun bunch aren't they...

There are a lot of people more interested in aliens than they are of their fellow humans on Earth. I suppose it's because we can imagine the aliens to be whatever we want them to be. Ironically, we tend to think of them as being like us, although if there are such things they are probably not like us in the slightest.

So as it stands, we're by no means "alone" in the universe anyway. There are around 7 billion people, and who knows how many billions of other living things. I'm alone in my own mind, I suppose, and always will be. But otherwise you can barely get away from other creatures.

reply to post by TrueMessiah

LOL! This is not my "own spin" as you call it. I find it comical that you accuse me of following the Ancient Alien theories despite the original sources I listed earlier as being the precursor to a majority of the information they provide. I'm like 10 steps ahead of them. However I do commend the show for somewhat lifting the veil so to speak and opening the eyes and minds of those who were previously unaware.

Ahhhhh... Ten steps ahead of the Ancient Alien "experts", quite impressive. Are you ten steps closer to turning their theories into reality? Or are you still on the same page having zero tangible evidence to back up any of their claims? It's useless to proudly proclaim "10 steps ahead" if you aren't any further along than they are.

We do have monuments like the Pyramid of Giza whose stature and structure would be nearly impossible to construct by only modern homo sapiens back in those times.

As far as aliens building Giza:
-First off, we have the earliest known pyramid built for King Zoser that's a step design. We then go to King Sneferu which is more in line with the typical pyramid, but is crooked and imperfect. Another pyramid for the same king is built which is better, but still not perfect. Then we go on to progressively better designs that are more aesthetically pleasing in which the Giza pyramids are involved. This shows the classic human trait of becoming more skilled as you practice creating. The proverb- Practice makes perfect.

-Next, we have physical evidence of ancient Egyptian limestone quarries 1000 feet from Giza:

-We have Egyptian hieroglyphics showing the use of sleds to transport large stones and sculptures:

-We have physical evidence of the construction and use of ramps during the initial stages of construction:

We have actual Egyptian sleds recovered:


Now, provide me with equally compelling physical evidence you have that show aliens building Giza or any other pyramid.

Also, do you believe the Egyptians just wanted to make things easier on the aliens by employing thousands to slave over hand cutting stones and transporting them the site?

As for the lack of physical evidence, there are a number of rational explanations not "excuses": Destruction of evidence through constant geological Earth changes such as pole shifts, the great deluge, etc. There's also the possibility it hasn't been found yet. If you are in accordance with the ancient alien visitation theory, then it's possible that our visitors returned back to their homeworld and before leaving, decided to destroy, remove, or conceal evidence of their presence for unknown or covert motives. Let me guess....those are all just excuses too right?

-Destruction through pole shifts.
-Just haven't been found yet, despite thousands of years.
-The aliens gathered all their evidence before leaving Earth.
-The aliens destroyed the evidence before leaving Earth.
-The aliens hid their evidence before leaving Earth.
Yeah, that pretty much sums up excuses rather than rational explanations. You see, first you have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that aliens have visited Earth. That's your first hurdle. Then you can give these excuses which in turn can become rational and plausible, but, only at that time. Otherwise, you're back creating fantasy excuses for fantasy beliefs.

No it hasn't happened every time but when tales of abduction or UFO observation come into play (literally thousands), it's is quickly dismissed. Even when this is presented, it's not accepted. We have whistle blowers pop up (William Cooper) who mysteriously die (murdered by law enforcement) under strange circumstances from time to time so what do you think of that? If you were to find a dead alien body, the TPTB who control the media outlets and also systems of law enforcement won't help blow the whistle for you. Remember the secret aspect that has to remain in place? This would have to be covered up and swept under the rug with threats made to preserve secrecy and the founder must be discredited. If you bothered to do any research (not watching Ancient Aliens), the whole dilemma would make plausible sense.

Yes, pulling out the old uneducated skeptic/debunker/non-believer to the field of the UFO/alien phenomenon. --'If we only knew of all the facts through diligent study, as you and other believers have done, we just couldn't deny aliens are here or have visited Earth.'-- Why is this horrible tactic used over and over? Does it somehow explain away for you why we don't believe? We of course all know the facts and lack thereof in regards to this phenomenon. That's the entire issue here. A whole lot of stories, no real tangible physical evidence.

You can choose to accept what you want but I can't change your perception of that underlined part. I see it as a refusal to investigate for yourself and open up your mind to even the distinct possibility of this whole scenario. As long as that restriction is in place, I'm not expecting you to get the gist of the entire paradigm alleged to be happening. According to you, all of the sources (many which you can find free of charge online) were written and composed just for kicks and no kind of connections can be made or drawn from any of it nor can it be incorporated into any of the mysteries of mankind prevalent from prehistoric times to the present. Well allrighty then.

Derision from someone that argues:
-Aliens are communicating with humans through crop circles.
-Human beings are being abducted by aliens.
-Aliens are communicating with people.
-People are channeling alien messages.
-And on and on with other spiritual mumbo-jumbo that also is based solely on beliefs.
Interesting.

“It pays to keep an open mind, but not so open your brains fall out.”

Blue Shift

draknoir2
Wrong forum, Elijah.

Ugh. Christian "cleverness" is just the worst kind of unimaginative puppetry. I pity the aliens that might eventually encounter these aggressively pious folk who hope to enlighten their newfound alien brothers as to the "truth."

ever think that the aliens would/could believe in God?

why not?

lol!! what if they had their own version of Jesus or mohammed?

or do you think they are all atheists?

personally, i would assume they have some sort of theological ideas.

would you believe in God if they said He is real?

Personally it's got nothing to do with what I "want" and everything to do with ruling out the countless mundane yet more likely explanations before I believe something extraordinary which is exactly as it should be.

What a person wants is irrelevant, the truth is all there is and it remains a fact that the more mundane explanation is time proven to be the most likely and should be ruled out first.

I think if you instantly go to some far fetched conclusion and stick to it rigidly then that's when the word "want" comes into it.

To the OP:

Do you believe that Aborigines sailed to Europe 50,000 years ago?


If not, why don't you believe in Aborigines?

Ok nobody cares about your fantastically stupid Pyramid Bible theories, let's just get that out of the way. I am so godbloody tired of that insipid moron trash.

Back to reality.

The "skeptic" idea that well the cosmos is vast so nobody will ever come here is just a notion. It depends upon two ideas: we cannot do near FTL, and if we could, we would never bother. It's obviously a moron's argument, perpetrated by profound morons, because we now have many drones and robots that can fly all over the Sol system, so it's not hard to see robots going out from other systems a million years ago...

OK so where are they (Fermi's Paradox). Legitimate, honest question. If we can send up drones and send software across the net you tell me they could not have nanotech drones and tiny monitors on the net.

So yes, they are here, tiny and invisible, nothing we can do about it but not blow each other up.

reply to post by Nicorette


Using your ideas of [parphrasing] "the vastness of the universe is full of civilizations that had millions of years to devise ways of visiting us without being seen"...
...I could also ask "with the vastness of a universe full of civilizations, and the millions of of years that have had, why isn't at least one of those civilizations here right now openly saying "here we are!'".

I still think that there are in fact other civilizations out there, but they may not know our technological civilization exists. Even if there are a couple of civilizations who knows we (our technological civilization) are here, it may not be that easy for them to get here/contact us. And I think with the vastness of space, "a couple of civilizations who knows we are here" may be a lot.

The main problem is that believers blend and confuse totally different speculations/facts.

The first question is whether there is life in the universe or not and the answer is there is life. Fact

Is there life outside of earth and I think most would put that at or close to 100% chance. Highly probable

Ok that is it as far as life goes....

But the problem is believers add in the speculation of visitation of earth by intelligent alien life in that same bucket, and that is the same thing as asking "Do you believe life is out there?" and if the person says yes then the questioner says well then that means that bigfoot lives in your backyard too.

My question is how do we go from life in general to a Star Trek utopia of a dozen races all flying around our planet?

Nicorette
The "skeptic" idea that well the cosmos is vast so nobody will ever come here is just a notion. It depends upon two ideas: we cannot do near FTL, and if we could, we would never bother. It's obviously a moron's argument, perpetrated by profound morons, because we now have many drones and robots that can fly all over the Sol system, so it's not hard to see robots going out from other systems a million years ago...

OK so where are they (Fermi's Paradox). Legitimate, honest question. If we can send up drones and send software across the net you tell me they could not have nanotech drones and tiny monitors on the net.

So yes, they are here, tiny and invisible, nothing we can do about it but not blow each other up.

You cannot say "so yes" until you have a Nano drone to prove it... that is pure speculation on your part, nothing more nothing less. One doesn't just dream up an idea and pronounce it is real, and I think that is the main rift between believers and skeptics.

The problem is we give away the answer as to whether it is true that aliens have been here or whether they been created by a social phenomenon with the limits of our own imaginations.

Life is crazy, it goes off in any direction it can, but it seems that intelligent aliens are only allowed to be humanoid in nature based on all the "evidence". This screams that we invented the whole alien phenomena as we mirrored them after ourselves. Hell, even the poor lizard aliens are humanoid. It is really not our fault for if we started this social phenomenon today we would have 100s of really weird aliens, but we started it back in the 40s and people were not as advance in imagination as we are today, so aliens started as humanoid with flying saucers and so we been stuck with that basic blueprint ever since.

Fermi's Paradox:

So the universe is 14 billion years old and was mostly hydrogen. At 9 billion years ago it evolved to the point that we started to see solar systems as the heaver elements were created to do this. It took earth (about as perfect for creating life as it can get) 4.5 billion years to get us in 1/2 of the usable time, so I do not think advance aliens are as common as everyone would like to think they are.

Speaking of solar systems, just think of what it takes to line everything up for advance life. Life in general is most likely everywhere, but advance life takes a very special environment.

Need a G series type star to actually have a long life span as a star and to be about 6000 degrees to produce the sun light we all enjoy. A colder sun would produce infra-red and microwaves and a hotter sun would produce ultraviolet and x-rays, so what kind of life would come from those environments? I don't think the kind of advance intelligent life that would come here.

Binary stars are more common than single stars, and I would think that a binary system would not be very good in life development with the more extreme orbits planets would have.

Water in liquid form is kind of critical for life, so the Goldie Locks scenario is a must. Not saying that life can't evolve in other ways, but once again I do not think some advance alien that evolved in liquid methane has come here or even if life can exists in many other non-water environments outside of extremely simple types, if any. Both Mars and Venus are great examples of what happens to life if not perfect like earth is.

Need a liquid core planet...look at Mars as to what happens if your core cools too fast.
Need big planets like Jupiter and Saturn to be the vacuum cleaners. If not, then life reset quickly over and over, and even now it is only about every 70 million years for us even with our vacuums.
Most likely need a moon, we would not be here without ours. The environment would be too extreme in the shifts....

All this just to get more advance life forms, now when we dictate.. advance, intelligent, spacefaring capable life forms we come down to only one on earth in the last 4.5 billion years... odds kind of suck I would say.

Lastly, life is hard to kill once it take form, and earth has tried a number of times and failed, but species come and go all the time. A species is extremely fragile, and even the slightest change, they go bye bye real quick to just be replaced with other species. I think this is the most important part to whether an advance life form can actually hang around long enough before they are replaced.

reply to post by Ectoplasm8


I have always found it rather funny in the thought of some super advance race that comes here and uses extremely advance technology to only build with raw stone building blocks....

I have said before, at some point we actually need something, dare I say it, alien in nature to suggest aliens have been here.

game over man
Do you want to be alone in the Universe?

The skeptical side of the alien debate represents "there is no evidence"

Is there really no evidence?

I ask the question because I find it astonishing so many people don't want to look. What caused you to give up the search?

Do you want to be alone? Do you limit your alien research to ufology? Do you limit it to pictures of Mars? Do you limit it to fraudulent claims or hoaxes? Do you limit your beliefs because of SETI?

Do you limit your belief because you are out of touch with modern science?

Do you feel comfortable with your skeptical belief because of the size of the Universe? It's too big to search?

Have you seen enough evidence to discount alien life in our solar system?

That is good that you do understand the mindlessness of the skeptic.

They live in their own little world of Narcissism of which there is no escape.

Trying to have some understanding of how they think is like trying to understand the criminally insane mind.

It may be best to walk around a brick wall then to try and push through and get hurt.

They are as dumb as a box of rocks and we are not the jackass whisperers.

Xtrozero
I have always found it rather funny in the thought of some super advance race that comes here and uses extremely advance technology to only build with raw stone building blocks....

Plus the few thousand years of prior trial-and-error construction history that shows exactly how the Egyptian progressed from simple stone buildings to the Great Pyramid. If they had alien help, what's with all of the history of building progression?

I've always wondered why people think the Ancient Egyptians did not have the intelligence to figure out how to move stones without modern equipment. Egyptians had the same brain, same intelligence, and the same problem-solving abilities that we have. They also had a few thousand years to use that brain power to perfect their stone building techniques.

Why are some people so skeptical about the ancient Egyptian's abilities to work with stone?

waltwillis

That is good that you do understand the mindlessness of the skeptic.

They live in their own little world of Narcissism of which there is no escape.

Trying to have some understanding of how they think is like trying to understand the criminally insane mind.

It may be best to walk around a brick wall then to try and push through and get hurt.

They are as dumb as a box of rocks and we are not the jackass whisperers.

Wow, such love for a person who needs a little more proof that something exists than just speculation..

The interesting part is your character assassination is the exact one I would put on the many who prey on the believers to make a buck in all this.

game over man
reply to post by amazing

 

Exactly and we have those exact statements in this thread with stars to oddly enough highlight the post as an example. Based off the stars in this thread or seems most people....ah I just remembered a skeptical phrase..."we need more convincing..."

They're a fun bunch aren't they...

If this is what you think, then you don't understand skepticism. Skeptics are NOT saying "I need more convincing before I believe in intelligent life elsewhere in the universe".

What skeptics (at least the vast majority) say about life elsewhere is:

"I may personally believe that intelligent life exists elsewhere, but (1) what I believe is not necessarily relevant, and (2) before I'm convinced that what I 'believe' is the 100% truth, I need solid evidence".


That's quite different than your assertion that skeptics say "I need more convincing before I believe". It's been my experience that most skeptics do in fact believe that intelligent ET life is most likely out there somewhere.

Personally, I can "believe" a lot of things, but I need harder evidence before I can say I "know" something to be true. I believe that intelligent life exists elsewhere; However, I don't necessarily KNOW that intelligent life exists elsewhere.

That step from belief to knowing is where the skeptic treads very carefully. For the most part, a good skeptic is one who doesn't let their beliefs dictate what they know.

Xtrozero

waltwillis

That is good that you do understand the mindlessness of the skeptic.

They live in their own little world of Narcissism of which there is no escape.

Trying to have some understanding of how they think is like trying to understand the criminally insane mind.

It may be best to walk around a brick wall then to try and push through and get hurt.

They are as dumb as a box of rocks and we are not the jackass whisperers.

Wow, such love for a person who needs a little more proof that something exists than just speculation..

The interesting part is your character assassination is the exact one I would put on the many who prey on the believers to make a buck in all this.

Are you gay or did I ask for your love?

Being a stupid person should not entitle you to receive a free pass in life,

nor should the thinking folks on this forum be required to overlook and adjust their way of thinking to make the fools feel good.

You depict yourself as a fighter, well so am I.

I do have compassion for the people in need and have spent my life defending them from bullies, but I will not defend a stupid person that will not listen.

I try not to engage in verbal combat with fools because it may confuse the observers as to which one is the fool.

Thank you for finding and bringing to my attention my shortcomings and deficiencies.

waltwillis
Are you gay or did I ask for your love?

You misunderstood completely what he meant by "Wow, such love for a person who needs a little more proof that something exists than just speculation.".

He wasn't talking about your love for HIM, but rather your love/support for the OPs hyberbolic claims and strawman argument about "skeptics"



But going by the rest of your post, where you wrote...:

Being a stupid person should not entitle you to receive a free pass in life,

nor should the thinking folks on this forum be required to overlook and adjust their way of thinking to make the fools feel good.

You depict yourself as a fighter, well so am I.

I do have compassion for the people in need and have spent my life defending them from bullies, but I will not defend a stupid person that will not listen.

I try not to engage in verbal combat with fools because it may confuse the observers as to which one is the fool.

Thank you for finding and bringing to my attention my shortcomings and deficiencies.

...it seems to me that 'Xtrozero" may have been right about your character assassination.