The Drake Equation Fallacy

a reply to: cooperton

I generally try to make my own hope. I don't depend on powers outside myself because that's a bad habit that teaches you how to give up on your own strength and innovation. Believing in yourself and persevering is often more miraculous than letting a cosmic force commmand your life story.

a reply to: cooperton

Apart from the God stuff, Christian ideals are an excellent model for social creatures to follow. In particular that "do unto others" one. Christians are not unique in this approach, however.

The notion that belief in Christ should be a requirement, not so much.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: cooperton

Apart from the God stuff, Christian ideals are an excellent model for social creatures to follow. In particular that "do unto others" one. Christians are not unique in this approach, however.

The notion that belief in Christ should be a requirement, not so much.

It was originally credited to an egyptian goddess around 2000 BC

a reply to: Phage

This is a great point, you don't have to take the bible literally, plenty of well intentioned metaphors in there to reflect upon.

originally posted by: cooperton
God never "had to come from". At all. God is the Intelligence from which all intelligible things come.

Then your statement that intelligence must come from intelligence is wrong. There is no other way to slice it. You are playing dishonest word games. You regurgitate yet another presupposition as an argument. It's laughable.

Since God never had to come to be, God does not apply to the question below regarding the coming to be of intelligible things:

Again, that's a presupposition based on nothing. If God does not apply to your statement, then your statement is false.

Do you think it is more likely that intelligible things come to be from something intelligent or unintelligent? Just answer the question.

Dishonest question. Intelligibility has zero to do with God. You repeatedly assume that because we can comprehend the universe that is was designed, but you have no actual evidence of this. YOU ASSUME.

originally posted by: cooperton
Where have I ever denied science?

Baaaahahahahahahahaaaa! The guy just blatantly lies AGAIN. You deny science on here all the time and it's not debatable. You are the poster boy for young earth creationism which requires the rejection of biology, genetics and geology.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: cooperton

Apart from the God stuff, Christian ideals are an excellent model for social creatures to follow. In particular that "do unto others" one. Christians are not unique in this approach, however.

The notion that belief in Christ should be a requirement, not so much.

Now if only Christians would actually follow their own ideals.

a reply to: Barcs


Do you even realise how obnoxious, confrontational and arrogant you seem?

It’s really tiresome, I could even agree with some of what you say if it wasn’t put forward with such a negative tone.

a reply to: Grenade

and that says it all

I could even agree with some of what you say if ............

hear is a hint :

agree or disagree on facts - not wether you are offended by " tone "

what is really tiresome is the endless waves of anti science cultists

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: cooperton

Apart from the God stuff, Christian ideals are an excellent model for social creatures to follow. In particular that "do unto others" one. Christians are not unique in this approach, however.

The notion that belief in Christ should be a requirement, not so much.

All supernatural / theology aside, the Christian ethics taught by Jesus are undeniably the formula for a utopia.

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
what is really tiresome is the endless waves of anti science cultists

originally posted by: Barcs
You deny science on here all the time and it's not debatable.

When did I deny empirical evidence (Science)? Point out specific examples where I deny observable fact. No population of an organism has ever been shown to evolve into another organism. Fruit flies remain fruit flies, mice remain mice, despite millions of generations in the lab trying to evolve them. You simply believe organisms can evolve into other organisms. You claim to be adherents to science, yet you jump the gun and attach to baseless theories as dogma. Even worse, you crassly ridicule anyone who thinks otherwise.

You guys leave like little children out of a room of adults any time I start discussing the details of biology. So if you want to continue the conversation you left I am all ears. Otherwise just leave.

a reply to: ignorant_ape

Me? Really?

I'd wager a large bet i have a deeper understanding of Physics than both you or Barcs.

Certainly on the evidence presented in this thread.

a reply to: Grenade

stop spewing such utter bollox

i shall quote your second post in this thread :

I mean i don't trust a word NASA say, i don't believe we went to the moon,

thats you - you are an anti science idiot

and thats the polite version

originally posted by: ignorant_ape

thats you - you are an anti science idiot

and thats the polite version

Your type of mentality is deteriorating the unity of humankind. Stop being a twat.

a reply to: ignorant_ape

Questioning NASA makes me anti-science?

I'm actually very interested in Physics and Astronomy.

What exactly have you offered this thread other than insults?

As a member of MENSA i find it hilarious that you refer to me as an idiot.

You must be super intelligent if someone with an IQ of over 140 appears like an idiot. Ironically, i suspect the opposite to be true.

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: Grenade

and that says it all

I could even agree with some of what you say if ............

hear is a hint :

agree or disagree on facts - not wether you are offended by " tone "

what is really tiresome is the endless waves of anti science cultists

The word you're looking for is here! The spelling you are looking for is whether.

If you're going to question someones intelligence you should at least proof read.

Cultists, only one person here exhibiting those traits!

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: Grenade

stop spewing such utter bollox

i shall quote your second post in this thread :

I mean i don't trust a word NASA say, i don't believe we went to the moon,

thats you - you are an anti science idiot

and thats the polite version

If NASA hadn't deleted all the telemetry data i could have used science to prove they went to the moon. Unfortunately in its absence i'm left with dubious and inconsistent video footage.

So please, provide an actual example of me denying science. Otherwise you're just blowing hot air without substance. Which appears to be your answer to everything.

Now go have a banana and get back in your cage. Your username is suitably germane.

a reply to: Grenade

lets cut to the chase - please explain EXACTLY what " telemetry tapes " are missing

be precise - this is a point where ultimate exactitude is required

then explain why you believe this " loss " falsifies the entire apollo program

your hubris is astounding - you claim that you " could " preform a forensic analysis of an apollo telemetry tape - yet cannot comprehend the drake equation

as for your anti science stance - again :

I mean i don't trust a word NASA say,

that is an absolutist statement - that naturally exposes you to ridicule

a reply to: ignorant_ape

Sure, start another thread and I’ll happily discuss the topic in detail with you. Not trusting a government organisation is hardly denial of science. Its not relevant to this thread, nor am I obliged to defend my god given right to an opinion.

Again, provide examples of my failure to understand the Drake equation and I’ll attempt to explain my thinking.

We could try without the personal insults and attempt to find common ground but I’ll leave that up to you.

At work just now so quick response which I will elaborate on later.

Currently using a time domain reflectometer to troubleshoot cabling. It’s all very scientific, must be in the wrong job.

a reply to: Grenade

Sure, start another thread and I’ll

no - you start the new thread - dont attempt to foist the burden on me

your contribute to this thread has been all over the spectrum - so why not discuss apollo telemetry too ??

and again its not just distrust in an organisation - its your absolute statement - not to trust ANYTHING

as for the drake equation :

Quite simply the if the Drake Equation was true then intelligent life would be everywhere and we would have detected it.

demonstrates that you do not understand it

a reply to: ignorant_ape

I think you missed the “if”.

Context is very important.

Also you shouldn’t take everything literally.

I’m tired of atheists coming into this thread and their first correspondence and contribution is to resort to personal insults.

You could have said hello, explained your position and why you disagree but no just straight to insulting me for daring to have an opinion.

As for the NASA telemetry data, if you can provide it for Apollo 11 I will be happy to analyse and re-consider my position. In my job as a data communications specialist this is exactly the type of thing I work on daily.

Unfortunately it is my understanding this data does not exist.