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.

 

Would We Know ET if we Saw It?

page: 3
11
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 26 2015 @ 06:40 PM
link   
a reply to: JadeStar

Yep, that's what I was thinking about. I was trying to use examples that are already found on Earth to show how little we pay attention to our surroundings.

I also thought about how we seem normal sized to each other, but we're actually giants to most lifeforms on the planet. That's when I realized how limited our search for ET really is. If technologically advanced ETs were microbe or insect sized, it would throw off all of our assumptions. Because we're looking for aliens with technology like ours & with vessels comparable in size to our technology. But what if they've had thousands of years of experience with nano-technologies? We wouldn't even have a clue what their results would be.

And what if they communicate with chemicals like ants? Or with sounds in an absurd 20million hertz range? (We can typically hear from 20 to 20,000 hertz) Or what if they've mastered communicating with some kind of nano particles we haven't even discovered yet? They could be showering us with their technology and "welcoming signals" and we wouldn't have the slightest clue.

I've even imagined that they could be blasting holographic images to us right now, but they're in some form of light that we can't detect (outside of the range for "visible light"). And only intoxicated people can see glimpses of their holograms, which causes them to freak out. Haha, ok I'll stop. I could go on for hours about this stuff. I'd be thrilled if we ever did find ETs, but also a bit horrified because I'd expect humans to try to eradicate them.




posted on May, 3 2015 @ 11:14 AM
link   
To quote Stephen Hawking “I think [contacting an alien civilization] would be a disaster. The extraterrestrials would probably be far in advance of us. The history of advanced races meeting more primitive people on this planet is not very happy, and they were the same species. I think we should keep our heads low.”



posted on May, 3 2015 @ 11:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: beyondtheskys
To quote Stephen Hawking “I think [contacting an alien civilization] would be a disaster. The extraterrestrials would probably be far in advance of us. The history of advanced races meeting more primitive people on this planet is not very happy, and they were the same species. I think we should keep our heads low.”


I think too many people use this quote of Stephen Hawking without understand that he knows about as much as anyone on ATS about astrobiology. He's no expert on what aliens might or might not do.

He's a brilliant physicist but I wouldn't ask him about heart surgery nor astrobiology and ET. He's speculation is no better than anyone on this forum.
edit on 3-5-2015 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2015 @ 01:40 AM
link   
a reply to: JadeStar

I agree, but I would also argue that no one, not even the astrobiologists could predict the behaviors of aliens with any accuracy.

That aside, do you agree with Hawking's quote?



posted on May, 4 2015 @ 11:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: thesearchfortruth
a reply to: JadeStar

I agree, but I would also argue that no one, not even the astrobiologists could predict the behaviors of aliens with any accuracy.

That aside, do you agree with Hawking's quote?


Not sure "why" you think extraterrestrial behavior would be difficult to discern...do they not have the same needs as you?

Hawking, like may other scientists, seem to forget their objectivity when it comes to ET...



posted on May, 4 2015 @ 11:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: thesearchfortruth
a reply to: JadeStar

I agree, but I would also argue that no one, not even the astrobiologists could predict the behaviors of aliens with any accuracy.

That aside, do you agree with Hawking's quote?


Not sure "why" you think extraterrestrial behavior would be difficult to discern...do they not have the same needs as you?



How could anyone possibly answer that?



posted on May, 4 2015 @ 01:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: draknoir2

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: thesearchfortruth
a reply to: JadeStar

I agree, but I would also argue that no one, not even the astrobiologists could predict the behaviors of aliens with any accuracy.

That aside, do you agree with Hawking's quote?


Not sure "why" you think extraterrestrial behavior would be difficult to discern...do they not have the same needs as you?



How could anyone possibly answer that?


Seriously??!?

Does ET not live in the same universe as you?
Does ET not have many of the same biological needs as you?

Do you think that ET's wants are different than yours?

Seriously, man; what makes you think that ET would be any different than you?

Some thing we should all be positive about;
ET is flesh and blood...
ET requires food of some sort.
ET requires water.
ET requires shelter.

If you are unwilling to recognize these basic requirements...common to all life. Then you are in the wrong place. And, have totally misunderstood everything in your life so far.

Remember; "As above, so below." -- Hermes



posted on May, 4 2015 @ 02:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanka418

Seriously??!?

Seriously

Does ET not live in the same universe as you?


I do not know. Nobody does.


Does ET not have many of the same biological needs as you?


I do not know. Nobody does.


Do you think that ET's wants are different than yours?


I don't know. Nobody does.


Seriously, man; what makes you think that ET would be any different than you?


I dunno... maybe the rich diversity of terrestrial life might have something to do with it.




Some thing we should all be positive about;
ET is flesh and blood...


Not necessarily.


ET requires food of some sort.


Not necessarily.


ET requires water.


Not necessarily.


ET requires shelter.


Not necessarily.


If you are unwilling to recognize these basic requirements...common to all life. Then you are in the wrong place. And, have totally misunderstood everything in your life so far.


Seriously man, I don't think your post could contain a greater percentage of incorrect assumptions.


Remember; "As above, so below." -- Hermes


"Same as it ever was... same as it ever was." -- David Byrne



posted on May, 4 2015 @ 02:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanka418
Seriously, man; what makes you think that ET would be any different than you?

Logic. Any life existing elsewhere in the universe would almost certainly have evolved under very different conditions from life on Earth.


Some thing we should all be positive about;
ET is flesh and blood...
ET requires food of some sort.
ET requires water.
ET requires shelter.

If 'ET' had evolved on Earth, then those would be fairly safe assumptions to make. However, Earth is not an analogue of the entire universe. Far from it. It's possible that the above may be true, but it is not probable, and is by no means "positive".



posted on May, 4 2015 @ 03:41 PM
link   
a reply to: AdmireTheDistance



Logic. Any life existing elsewhere in the universe would almost certainly have evolved under very different conditions from life on Earth.


Who really knows? Logic in this case is reliant on what we know about life on Earth and is unavoidably limited. I think we'd be better informed with a single case of life elsewhere and more than one example would lend itself to more probabilistic speculation.

Should we ever be visited by technological, biological ETs, there's a reasonable case that can be made to suggest an evolution similar to ours. For example, we look for life on other planets/moons that fall within the 'Goldilocks zone.'

There's the possibility that intelligent, technological life also arises from within a 'Goldilocks zone' of environmental and cultural drivers. They couldn't evolve to control fire without their home planet/moon hosting an atmosphere that allows for controllable combustion. Without fire, they wouldn't be able to manufacture the metals and alloys required to construct the vehicles to leave the gravity of wherever they originate from.

Gas giants or planets like Venus and Mercury couldn't give rise to a technological intelligence. Mars' atmosphere is likewise unsuitable for intelligent arson. The search for exoplanets has, so far, found planets that aren't so different from those in our own solar system. Sure, there are differences in scale and some seem particularly hostile to the stability required for life to thrive. Still, they conform broadly to our own system's template.

If the day ever comes when we have a visit from a technological, biological culture, it shouldn't be that surprising to find that they are bipedal and breathe/metabolise an atmosphere that's not so dissimilar to our own.



posted on May, 4 2015 @ 05:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by: tanka418
Seriously, man; what makes you think that ET would be any different than you?

Logic. Any life existing elsewhere in the universe would almost certainly have evolved under very different conditions from life on Earth.


Some thing we should all be positive about;
ET is flesh and blood...
ET requires food of some sort.
ET requires water.
ET requires shelter.

If 'ET' had evolved on Earth, then those would be fairly safe assumptions to make. However, Earth is not an analogue of the entire universe. Far from it. It's possible that the above may be true, but it is not probable, and is by no means "positive".


Have you ever applied even the simplest of statistical method to that question? Obviously not.

If we apply the typical "bell curve" to the available stars we find very quickly the majority of advanced complex life will be found on planets around "G" class stars...kind of like Earth. The mean is "G5", so Earth / Sol is on the high side. Advanced complex life starts to fall off rapidly at around "F5", and in the mid "K's".

So, this leaves only the more "Sol like" stars for the kind of ET we are talking about to evolve on. As it turns out, before 2.5 billion years ago, life as we know it wasn't possible. All that lived was a very simple organism that consumed the toxic (to us) atmosphere, and excreted oxygen...which proved fatal to it. That life form probably wasn't capable of much by way of evolution, since what remains of it, is still primitive as far as life goes.

What occurred 2.5 billion years ago was the "Great Oxygenation Event", it took another 2 billion years for life on Earth to become complex, and 500 million to become sentient, and spacefaring.

Today Astronomer's are beginning to believe that virtually all stars have multiple planets in their habitable zone, though, that by no means makes a planet habitable. In this galaxy of some 200 billion stars, 7.6% are "G" class, or 15.2 billion potential Earths.

So, anyway, Earth most certainly can be used as a sort of template, at least until we learn more. And, One certainly should have some sort of "foundation" upon which to "ground" research.

And, speaking of research...how much have you done on this given question?



posted on May, 4 2015 @ 06:08 PM
link   
a reply to: thesearchfortruth

depends what race-
Most- No



posted on May, 4 2015 @ 06:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: draknoir2

"Does ET not live in the same universe as you?"

I do not know. Nobody does.



lol...

You should check out etymology of the word "Universe"...or as "Highlander" used to say; "There can be only one!"


"Seriously, man; what makes you think that ET would be any different than you?"

I dunno... maybe the rich diversity of terrestrial life might have something to do with it.




Yet that rich diversity has all those things I mentioned in common...



"Same as it ever was... same as it ever was." -- David Byrne



Laughable...



posted on May, 4 2015 @ 06:24 PM
link   
a reply to: tanka418

Creepers gonna creep.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join