It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Neil DeGrasse Tyson: ET and DNA

page: 8
39
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 12:39 PM
link   
a reply to: tanka418

this is what i'm referring to




posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 01:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: undo
a reply to: tanka418

this is what i'm referring to


Yes, well that's kind of the point I'm trying to make. That this Universe is a probabilistic Universe, and thus all things are only objects with "probability waves". Further that there is no such thing as a probability of either 0 (zero) or 1 (one).

Also, in regards to the Extraterrestrial issue, by analogy; we don't need to know where the photon strikes the measurement plane to know that it does. Just as we don't need a physical Extraterrestrial to know that they exist.

The reality is that no matter how small the probability of life in the Universe; given it's size; it would be rather crowded with life at all levels. Whether it is accepted by those who don't research or not; science is currently on the verge of deciding that both planets, and life are virtually ubiquitous in the Universe...just like microprocessors on Earth.



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 01:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanka418
science is currently on the verge of deciding that both planets, and life are virtually ubiquitous in the Universe...just like microprocessors on Earth.
If we discover life on Mars which is unrelated to life on Earth, then yes such evidence would show that it's not only plausible but likely that life exists in many, many places. Right now it seems like we are at the plausbile stage, and I don't hear anybody saying it's implausible.

If you expand that idea to intelligent life, it's extremely rare on a time basis even on the one planet we know of that has life. For nearly the entire existence of the Earth it didn't have intelligent life and further there's no evidence that evolution necessarily leads to intelligence. Dinosaurs might still be ruling the Earth without it if they hadn't been wiped out, plus, there's also the Fermi paradox: If there's other intelligent life in the universe, where is everybody?



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 02:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
[...] there's also the Fermi paradox: If there's other intelligent life in the universe, where is everybody?

There's a corollary to this question, which is that if you believe that life (including intelligent life) is very common in the universe, then the chances of it being obvious are increased accordingly. At some point, we should be able to casually look up into the night sky and see evidence of these creatures' existence, billions of years technically ahead of us, as they advance to the point where they are creating galaxy-wide constructions and manipulating the properties of stars and planets. Stars flashing in code to signal us. We might even be able to detect the ripples in space as they warp it to travel through it. If these creatures are that common.

But so far... nothing. Are we looking in the wrong place? Nope. The irrefutable evidence should be everywhere and obvious, even to our limited abilities and understanding.



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 02:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Blue Shift

I love it when scientist says yes we are very common indeed and life is common in the universe but backpedal when UFO issue is brought to the table, Like saying Yes Life is common in the universe but heck nooo no Extraterrestrial comes to earth they dont have the tech or the means to come ohh but yes Life is sooo common because humans is the most advance being in the universe
so if we cant do it nobody cant LOL until science say so!

Hahaha More and more science has become like a religion! stuff that doesnt compute in their system is left out and forgotten and if people insist its wrong bad or "damm creazy ufo nuts".

Do you think life in the universe propregate like the expontanius theory, that suddenly life wanted to be and wala! its there!?



If you want to see extraterrestrial life you dont need to look out for it in the deep of stars or radio signals , just buy a mere 3 dls mirror and look yourself in it, go out and look to the trees animals and your own pets in home, thats alien life!



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 02:49 PM
link   
a reply to: AlexDJ

Just to clarify, member Blue Shift doesn't think they exist period.



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 06:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blue Shift
If these creatures are that common.

But so far... nothing. Are we looking in the wrong place? Nope. The irrefutable evidence should be everywhere and obvious, even to our limited abilities and understanding.


So who said Extraterrestrials were common/ (space faring Ones that is).

In all of my research I've been able to find a lace for 2 (TWO). Three if you count Zeta Reticuli...last I looked 2 - 3 is not very damn many. One could easily get lost in everything, especially since most Terrestrials don't pay attention very well.



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 06:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
If we discover life on Mars which is unrelated to life on Earth, then yes such evidence would show that it's not only plausible but likely that life exists in many, many places. Right now it seems like we are at the plausbile stage, and I don't hear anybody saying it's implausible.



It won't be easy to determine IF Martian life is "related" to Terrestrial life for some time...not enough data. Life from places other than Earth or Mars will be required. Life evolving independently from Earth may be very much the same with most differences being contained within well defined "markers".




Dinosaurs might still be ruling the Earth without it if they hadn't been wiped out, plus, there's also the Fermi paradox: If there's other intelligent life in the universe, where is everybody?


Many of the "top" predators among the Dinosaurs were highly intelligent, and they had 65 million years on Humans.

And, yes for the first 2 billion years there was no like as we know it on Earth, wasn't even possible. Earth's atmosphere was highly toxic. This by the way limited the chemistry to mostly reactions and combinations that don't result in intelligent life. I wasn't until after this early life virtually killed itself off producing Oxygen that Earth become a place where advanced life could evolve. The "Great Oxygenation Event" occurred about 2.5 billion years ago. The usable geologic and fossil record began about 500 million years ago...Humans (modern) began about 250,000 years ago.

In the 2.5 billion years that Earth could support the right kind of life there were countless near extinction events, each dramatically changing the biology of Earth.

With all of the deadly events that has happened to the Earth over the past 4.5 billion years...it would almost seem a serious miracle that there is any life here at all...yet here you are.

Looks like life is a spontaneous, tenacious thing. It'll spring up anywhere, and you can't get rid of it!



posted on Mar, 20 2015 @ 06:59 PM
link   
a reply to: TrueMessiah

Well thats his prerrogative, my question is, why all this super duper scientist dismiss everything like if they actually do any real investigation on the field???. They speak often but, have they ever try to investigate ufo or abduction cases in real deep taking seriously this matter?? No....if they were real scientist they would take this matter seriously, not all people are liars or have mental problems , there is people who.something extraordinary happen and the scientic community prefer to duck their heads instead of help and try to take this into a real investigation, they prefer to make some bold statement and look the otherside. That speaks real good about them i supouse.

Just mention me if one of his famous scientist did ever try to do that? Carl sagan no, tyse no and the list goes on .. So if the ufo phenomena is so nut and wacky that is not worth any scientific investigation at all???? If that so then i would recommend ats to shutt down this forum .
edit on 20-3-2015 by AlexDJ because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 12:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Scdfa


Good thing the people of Boston didn't "demand real evidence" from Paul Revere before taking his "anecdotal claims" seriously.

Trying to make a point by comparing Revere's warning to alien abductions shows how skewed your thinking is.
Reality = Human beings, British troops, invasion of those troops.
Fantasy = Extra terrestrials, ET visiting Earth, ET abducting humans.


If they can only face the issue by demands of proof achieved through the scientific method, let's see you put some pressure on whatever scientific organization you consider legitimate to do just that. Get on the phone, start a petition, write your congressmen and scientists.

But that would take more effort than demanding proof from an alien abductee in a chatroom, wouldn't it?


This is an old go-to argument and nothing new. The scientific community refuses to approach the phenomena scientifically and it's the "believers" that do so. If someone like Tyson comes out and makes a mockery of it, it's because he's purposely spreading misinformation or just an uninformed fool. Meanwhile, believers will wholly accept something like Travis Walton's story as fact based on the story itself and no evidence.


And you ask what do I believe? Nothing. I have known alien contact to be a fact since 1966, through direct, first-hand experience. No need for "belief" of alien contact, either you are aware it is fact, or you are not yet aware it is fact.

Your firsthand knowledge of alien contact doesn't automatically translate to other cases being true also. You need to apply skepticism to every case and not blindly accept them as fact. Especially when stories have no evidence.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

originally posted by: tanka418


In the 2.5 billion years that Earth could support the right kind of life there were countless near extinction events, each dramatically changing the biology of Earth.

With all of the deadly events that has happened to the Earth over the past 4.5 billion years...it would almost seem a serious miracle that there is any life here at all...yet here you are.

Looks like life is a spontaneous, tenacious thing. It'll spring up anywhere, and you can't get rid of it!

Explain if high intelligence is a common path, why hasn't it evolved many times on Earth in those millions of years and branches of life. Every single species that has existed and evolved, did so with the ultimate purpose and outcome of survival and procreation. That's where it ended and nothing more. Do you believe that's only a coincidence that happened millions of times over, or actually shows the common evolutionary path? You can see how extremely rare high intelligence is by it happening once. Humans are a fluke of nature.



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 02:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8
a reply to: Scdfa


Good thing the people of Boston didn't "demand real evidence" from Paul Revere before taking his "anecdotal claims" seriously.

Trying to make a point by comparing Revere's warning to alien abductions shows how skewed your thinking is.
Reality = Human beings, British troops, invasion of those troops.
Fantasy = Extra terrestrials, ET visiting Earth, ET abducting humans.



So, you insult my mental capacity. I find that rude, and uncalled for, but I'm the forgiving type.

My analogy is quite apt, if I do say so myself.

You actually list the existence of extraterrestrials as fantasy, which puts your thinking well outside of the mainstream, even among skeptics.


My analogy is quite appropriate, actually.

edit on 21-3-2015 by Scdfa because: (no reason given)


So, you insult my mental capacity. I find that rude, and uncalled for, but I'm the forgiving type.

My analogy is quite apt, if I do say so myself.

You actually list the existence of extraterrestrials as fantasy, which puts your thinking well outside of the mainstream, even among skeptics.

edit on 21-3-2015 by Scdfa because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 02:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Scdfa

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8
a reply to: Scdfa


Good thing the people of Boston didn't "demand real evidence" from Paul Revere before taking his "anecdotal claims" seriously.

Trying to make a point by comparing Revere's warning to alien abductions shows how skewed your thinking is.
Reality = Human beings, British troops, invasion of those troops.
Fantasy = Extra terrestrials, ET visiting Earth, ET abducting humans.



So, you insult my mental capacity. I find that rude, and uncalled for, but I'm the forgiving type.

My analogy is quite apt, if I do say so myself.

You actually list the existence of extraterrestrials as fantasy, which puts your thinking well outside of the mainstream, even among skeptics.


My analogy is quite appropriate, actually.


So, you insult my mental capacity. I find that rude, and uncalled for, but I'm the forgiving type.

My analogy is quite apt, if I do say so myself.

You actually list the existence of extraterrestrials as fantasy, which puts your thinking well outside of the mainstream, even among skeptics.


My analogy is quite appropriate, actually.

sorry, trouble posting

edit on 21-3-2015 by Scdfa because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 02:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Ectoplasm8





So, you insult my mental capacity. I find that rude, and uncalled for, but I'm the forgiving type.

My analogy is quite apt, if I do say so myself.

You actually list the existence of extraterrestrials as fantasy, which puts your thinking well outside of the mainstream, even among skeptics.



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 03:52 AM
link   
a reply to: Ectoplasm8




Meanwhile, believers will wholly accept something like Travis Walton's story as fact based on the story itself and no evidence.






Your firsthand knowledge of alien contact doesn't automatically translate to other cases being true also. You need to apply skepticism to every case and not blindly accept them as fact. Especially when stories have no evidence.


Stories? Travis Walton telling stories? The rest of his crew, who watched him get struck by a beam of light from an alien ship, were telling stories?

Your use of the euphemism "story" reveals bias; it's an attempt to dismiss the credibility of these accounts of events by demoting them to "stories", as if they were Mother Goose, or some other fictional tale told for entertainment purposes. Deniers do this a lot, and usually get away with it.

Sorry, but those men weren't telling stories. Those men were bearing witness. They were giving testimony. Testimony in a police investigation.

Now, I chose these quotes from Ectoplasm because they are a sterling example of an untruth that is so often repeated by those who chose to deny alien contact: Ectoplasm would have you believe that these witness statements, first-hand accounts and testimony (stories, he calls them) have no evidence.

Folks, testimony IS evidence.

Simple as that.

So there goes all that nonsense about there being no evidence. Don't take my word for it, here is The Merriam-Webster Dictionary:

Definition of EVIDENCE

1
a : an outward sign : indication
b : something that furnishes proof : testimony; specifically : something legally submitted to a tribunal to ascertain the truth of a matter
2
: one who bears witness; especially : one who voluntarily confesses a crime and testifies for the prosecution against his accomplices

So there goes any nonsense about there being no evidence. Testimony from Travis Walton and his crew clearly and unquestionably fit the definition of evidence:

Testimony. Witness statements. Legally submitted to ascertain the truth of a matter.

If we are going to establish the reality of alien contact, we must remain steadfast in our insistence on honest and accurate discussion. Thank you.



edit on 21-3-2015 by Scdfa because: (no reason given)

edit on 21-3-2015 by Scdfa because: (no reason given)

edit on 21-3-2015 by Scdfa because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 05:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Scdfa


Testimony. Witness statements. Legally submitted to ascertain the truth of a matter.

There was legal testimony to ascertain the truth that Travis Walton was abducted by aliens? Or was there a sensationalized story promoted by alien believers? I think Ufology has had enough twisting of the truth. Just about every story is surrounded by misleading, twisted, convoluted statements. It's no wonder Ufology is treated like joke and is part of a comedy routine and has become the laughing stock of science...or is that the goal? If that's the goal, I would say the campaign has been remarkably successful. keep up the good work.



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 08:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: Arbitrageur
a reply to: undo
Tyson blows holes in the common argument "How can you not believe in UFOs when there are billions and billions of stars and some must have life?"

Obviously Tyson and others in his field think life outside Earth is very likely, but the interpretation of UFO sightings is another matter entirely that he discusses in this other video, apparently from the same session as the OP video.

Neil Tyson talks about UFOs

That's a must watch video about UFOs for anybody who hasn't seen it.

Back to the OP video, I usually agree with Tyson, but I think his argument about aliens not being interested in communicating with us is a little over the top. I think we are very interested in trying to communicate with other life forms like chimps, dogs, cats, dolphins, whales, etc. Researchers study whale songs trying to figure out their meaning, and the TV show Sea Quest shows one sci-fi view of a computerized translator converting dolphin language to English, which tells me somebody thought conversing with dolphins would be an interesting thing to do.

So yes some aliens might be many times smarter than us but I wouldn't presume that means they aren't interested in communicating with us. It might be as interesting for them to figure out what we are saying as it is for them to try to figure out what their toddler is saying, using Tyson's alien toddler example.


Not a huge fan of this guy. But this video is spot on.

I LOVE how he confirmed a few other posts of mine that said Science is never done. Good science is questioning everything at all times. People need to remember that when someone questions a supposed scientific fact.

And I do believe in UFOs and Alien visitation. I have seen them myself, along with other witnesses. It's arrogant to think that we are the only life in this universe. It's mind boggingly huge.

And If you think about it, his other video about chimps and humans being 1% apart, and if we met a being 1% above us, the things they know would truly shatter some scientific facts that we think we know.



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 09:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ectoplasm8
Explain if high intelligence is a common path, why hasn't it evolved many times on Earth in those millions of years and branches of life. Every single species that has existed and evolved, did so with the ultimate purpose and outcome of survival and procreation. That's where it ended and nothing more. Do you believe that's only a coincidence that happened millions of times over, or actually shows the common evolutionary path? You can see how extremely rare high intelligence is by it happening once. Humans are a fluke of nature.


I don't remember saying that "high intelligence" was common...In fact I said in another place:


In all of my research I've been able to find a lace for 2 (TWO). Three if you count Zeta Reticuli.


So basically that would be perhaps 3 species capable of interstellar travel in the space surrounding the Earth for a distance of about 100 light years. 3 or so species in that space is hardly "common".

The reality is that this "high intelligence" of yours is something that evolves, probably on a regular basis, but, as we can see in the case of Earth; it took something on the order of 500 million years after complex life began.

We should also consider that Humans are not the only "highly intelligent" species to have evolved on Earth, just the successful one...



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 04:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: AlexDJ
a reply to: Blue Shift

I love it when scientist says yes we are very common indeed and life is common in the universe but backpedal when UFO issue is brought to the table, Like saying Yes Life is common in the universe but heck nooo no Extraterrestrial comes to earth they dont have the tech or the means to come ohh but yes Life is sooo common because humans is the most advance being in the universe
so if we cant do it nobody cant LOL until science say so!


Science doesn't say that life is common in the universe just that the conditions favorable for life to develop are common in the universe BASED ON OBSERVATIONS and DATA. It's not some wild speculative guess nor is it based on over extrapolation of probabilities.

Science can not and will not say life is common in the universe until we've have found conclusive evidence of life beyond Earth. We have yet to find one alien microbe but we've only just begun to seriously search. Additionally, it is thought by most scientists we will find such evidence of life beyond Earth sometime within the next 10-20 years. At that point and ONLY then can science say ANYTHING about how common life is in the universe.

Even if we did detect alien microbes on Mars, elsewhere in our Solar System or its effects on the atmosphere of planet circling a star light years away science could not say ANYTHING on the likelihood or prevalence of advanced, technological life in the galaxy nor it's proximity to us.

Even if we did detect some artificial product of technology (radio signals, laser signals, artificial "city" lights) on a planet around a nearby star science could not say ANYTHING on the likelihood of the Earth being visited because such a detection would have nothing to which would inform us as to the likelihood of such a species building starships.

The only thing which might allow science to say anything on the subject of alien visitation would be the study of an alien or alien technology on Earth or elsewhere in our solar system. So far, there's nothing that would be conclusive evidence of any such visitation.

So in other words, you have made several light year sized leaps of logic without any good evidence to support doing so.

You can imagine whatever you want but that doesn't make you smarter than these scientists you're trashing because the simple fact is that science an the scientific method rely on OBSERVATION and DATA which can be REPEATABLY examined before determining whether something is real or not.

Imagination requires none of that but while imagined aliens may be real, the act of imagining them does not make them real nor provide anything useful which could be studied further. Only observation and data can do that.

And so far all the scientific studies of the UFO phenomena provide no data which would link it to anything extraterrestrial in nature.

And perhaps even more damning for those who believe UFOs must mean "alien spacecraft" is the fact that none of the scientific studies of natural phenomena like the global networks of 24/7 wide-field cameras pointed at the sky for transient phenomena like meteors, sprites, asteroid detection, have recorded any such "alien craft" entering or leaving the Earth, flying around our solar system or doing anything else that many in the UFO community allege they do.

UFOs exist. But there is no evidence they are extraterrestrials.

Extraterrestrials may exist but there is no evidence they come here in UFOs or even would want to.
edit on 21-3-2015 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 10:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: Scdfa


Testimony. Witness statements. Legally submitted to ascertain the truth of a matter.

There was legal testimony to ascertain the truth that Travis Walton was abducted by aliens? Or was there a sensationalized story promoted by alien believers? I think Ufology has had enough twisting of the truth.



Yes, there certainly was legal testimony to ascertain the the truth in the Travis Walton abduction, from Walton and his crew, who witnessed him being struck by a beam of energy from an alien ship. Being ignorant of the facts won't change them.

Were you unaware that an official police investigation began within hours of his abduction?

Walton and his crew encountered the disc-shaped craft on November 5, 1975, at approximately 6:00 p.m.

By 7:30 p.m., the six witnesses had had called the police from Heber, Arizona, and agreed to give witness statements to Deputy Sheriff Chuck Ellison. Deputy Ellison would later say that although he was skeptical of the fantastic nature of their statements, he felt they were legitimately distressed, and that "if they were acting, they were awfully good at it."

Deputy Ellison contacted Sheriff Marlin Gillespie, who ordered that the six witnesses be kept until he could arrive to conduct the investigation. An hour or so later, the Sheriff arrived with Officer Ken Coplan and took the testimony of the six men. As did investigators with the Arizona State Police.

Eventually, all six witnesses even submitted to polygraph examination to determine if they were telling the truth. After the polygraph examination, Sheriff Gillespie announced that he accepted the UFO story, saying "There's no doubt they're telling the truth."

Let us define the word testimony, to remove any argument:

Testimony
noun
a formal written or spoken statement, especially one given in a court of law.
synonyms: evidence, sworn statement, attestation, affidavit.

So, folks, in response to Zeta Rediculian's question, the facts of the official investigation are a matter of public record. Yes, those men did absolutely and unquestionably give legal testimony to ascertain the truth about Travis Walton.

You know, folks, I have to wonder about those who try to deny the reality of alien contact. I wonder how weak their arguments really must be, if they feel it is necessary to distort the factual record of evidence that supports alien contact?

And I'm not singling out this poster, or any particular poster, it is rampant among those who would deny alien contact. Just the other day I had to address a poster who claimed that legal testimony is not evidence! I kid you not!

So I posted the definition of the word evidence, and that ended that.

If we are going to raise awareness about alien contact, we must strive for accuracy in the language we use, and we must insist upon the same from those who disagree with us.

I do agree with one thing that Zeta Rediculian says, though, " I think Ufology has had enough twisting of the truth."

So do I, but it seems to me that it is those who would deny alien contact that are doing the twisting. Please stop.

Thank you.


edit on 21-3-2015 by Scdfa because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2015 @ 11:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Scdfa
I disagree. The witnesses underwent an investigation to determine if there was fowl play involved with a disappearance.
This is why statements like this are misleading.

Eventually, all six witnesses even submitted to polygraph examination to determine if they were telling the truth. After the polygraph examination, Sheriff Gillespie announced that he accepted the UFO story, saying "There's no doubt they're telling the truth."


Why not produce the questions that were asked?


By November 7, law enforcement officials were concentrating on the possibility that Walton might have been the victim of foul play at the hands of his coworkers. Walton's other brother Donald also felt that the UFO story was a cover for something else. To this end, Rogers and his crew volunteered to take polygraph examinations the following Monday, November 10. During the exams, C.E. Gilson of the Arizona Department of Public Safety asked four "relevant" questions; three of which dealt with whether Walton had been seriously injured or killed by the one or more members of the crew. The fourth question, added at the last minute, was: "Did you tell the truth about actually seeing a UFO last Wednesday when Travis Walton disappeared?" Not surprisingly, the six crew members were unanimous in their responses: "No" to the first three questions and "Yes" to the last. Five were judged to be truthful, results on the sixth (Allen Dalis) were "inconclusive." In his formal written report, Gilson said, "The polygraph examinations prove that these five men did see some object that they believe to be a UFO and that Travis Walton was not injured or murdered by any of these men, on that Wednesday (5 November 1975). If an actual UFO did not exist and the UFO is a manmade hoax, five of these men had no prior knowledge of a hoax. No such determination can be made of the sixth man whose test results were inconclusive."
www.debunker.com...

here is some more testimony

Klass: What did you see?

Pierce: Uh, well, I thought it was something a deer hunter, you know, rigged up. You know, 'cause it was deer season, you know, so he could see. You know? And, uh, and, but I couldn't see the bottom or a top or sides, all's I could see was the front of it, you know. You couldn't tell if it had a bottom to it or, you know, or a back to it or anything...


Its a sensationalized story. So produce some untwisted facts. So far all you have done is repeated lore, not facts.



new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join