It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

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

Minimal chance of intelligent life on other planets

page: 1
0
share:

posted on Apr, 25 2008 @ 04:44 AM
Hey ATS people.

I read this story in the norwegian newspaper Dagbladet. I'll try my best to translate it!

"A new study shows that the probability of intelligent life other planets than earth, is very small!

The point of the study is that even if there is life on other planets, intelligent life isn't likely to evolve before life on that planet expires.

Professor Andrew Watson from the University of East Anglia in England has created a mathematical model, which is published in "Astrobiology Magazine".

He's calculated the probability of evolution on earth to only 0,001 percent!

Watson thinks that human beeings are a result of 4 evolutionary steps. The first step was the creation of singular celled organism half a billion years after earth originated! The second step was the development of multi-celled life, which happened about a billion years after the creation of the singular celled organisms.

The next step, a billion years later, developed functionelle lifeforms, while the forth step, another billion years later, developed intelligent lifeforms with the abillity to communicate.

It took about 4 billion years from the creation of earth till the first intelligent lifeforms had developed!!

- This development is a result of a series of improbable coincidences, explains professor Watson to the Astrobiology Magazine.

Watson estimates that the probability of an evolution is the product of each steps probalility. He estimates that the probability of the each step to happen is about 10 percent, which gives a probability of 0,001 percent of a total evolution.

To really destroy the hope that there is intelligent life on other planets, the study shows that the development of intelligent life on earth was a race against time.

According to the study the sun will shortly begin to radiate stronger then it does today, and the beams eventually destroys the earths biosphere. When this happens, all life will be destroyed.

While it's about 4 billion years since the singular celled oranism originated, all life might be exterminated in about a billion years. You might say that intelligent life were created pretty late in comparison to the time life has an opportunity to excist on the planet.

- The fact that intelligent life were created so late in the biospheres lifetime, shows that our evolution is very improbable. If intelligent lifeforms had been created earlier in the biospheres history, it would be easier to see that it might happen on other planets, says professor Watson.

Norways most famous astronomer, Knut Jørgen Røed Ødegaard is not convinced by the british study. He is very sure that intelligent life excists on other planets. And that it's more common than we think.

- I'm not totally convinced about anything in that study. I donnot share his opinion. There are infact many things that shows that it has to be intelligent lifeforms on other planets. On earth primitive life were created many times when the planet was young. It shows how life always try to break through. And even if it took a very long time before intelligent life was created on earth, it might be something that's typical for our planet.

Røed Ødegaard thinks that there is more than just hope for intelligent life out there. But, how intelligent it is can be discussed.

- In either way, I think that we would be pretty impressed if we came to a planet with mighty dinosaurs, he says.

He says that alternative worlds excists in great amounts. With this days techonology we are barely able to discover them.

- We have already found 273 or 274 planets outside our solarsystem. Out of these 2 of the planets are in a habitable zone. But the problem is that we can only discover planets too close to it's stars to be habitable. There are many, many more, he says."

P.S. Sorry for the bad translation. It wasn't easy!

posted on Apr, 25 2008 @ 04:47 AM

posted on Apr, 25 2008 @ 04:47 AM

posted on Apr, 25 2008 @ 04:47 AM
Whoa, and we all know science is always right, hahaha.

These things are all subjective until we really know, are they not.

posted on Apr, 25 2008 @ 04:52 AM
It's funny how there are always "studies" like this. A few weeks from now, someone else will come up with a study that says the universe may be filled with life. A few months after that, someone else will have ANOTHER study that says life only exists on Earth.

posted on Apr, 25 2008 @ 04:55 AM
I say there's minimal chance of a scientist getting this right.

posted on Apr, 25 2008 @ 04:58 AM

just a few posts down from this one

posted on Apr, 25 2008 @ 06:06 AM
Ok, i didn't see that thread. Sorry!

Anyway, my thread has two theories and opinions, and I think the words are more simplified that on the other thread. So, I don't think it's a loss to have another thread with the same topic. But, hey! Maybe that's just me.

Interesting topic, though. But like you say, one study can be pro and the next study might be against! That's how inteligent people on earth are!!
I guess we just have to wait and see, won't we!

posted on Apr, 25 2008 @ 06:20 AM
sodom
so, now what is 0.001 % of an unknown amount of planets, galaxys,...
i would say there is 0.000000001% chance of geting this study correct.

my 2¢
sodom

posted on Apr, 25 2008 @ 06:22 AM

He's calculated the probability of evolution on earth to only 0,001 percent!

Calculations change when they interpret new bits of data into the equations.
Science books written less than 20 years ago are defunct now because of this.
Even at 0.001%, it doesnt remove the idea of intelligent life evolving

posted on Apr, 26 2008 @ 03:39 AM
You know, Professor Watsons theory is based on other theories.
So, what if evolution happened in 1, 2 or 3 steps. What if our theories and believes are far from what really happened. What if God created man. Or let's say people are really made by aliens. Or that people are aliens who crashed on earth a million years ago. Or other theories that most of the public doesn't want to believe in.
Then Watsons theory would be absolutely not correct at all!

It's funny how the media chooses what to go public with!

posted on Apr, 26 2008 @ 04:48 AM

Originally posted by Stanley Mimix

It's funny how the media chooses what to go public with!

I wouldn't say it that way. The media is too large and competitive of an industry to be effectively controlled by an agency. For every story in the media supporting a "conspiracy" or "paranormal" event - there's one trying to debunk it somewhere else.

Now, as for what stand mainstream scientists and professors tend to take... that one's never in favor of the "crackpot" ideas. Nevermind the fact that Relativity was a "crackpot" theory in its early years... but, such is the nature of the beast. You can't win for losing.

That doesn't mean every "crackpot" idea is correct... but it does mean that it's hard to really determine what's going on if "It was your imagination" is the answer you keep getting for photographs of strange flying objects and videos of lights that seem to defy the known laws of physics.

posted on Apr, 26 2008 @ 05:24 AM
Why am I back here so soon? Eh... there's a big wide audience for me to talk to.

So why not?

That being said... I'd hate to ruin everyone's pride by saying that science is more concerned with maintaining the status quo than with advancing man's mental and physical evolution, but I would not be forthright.

I think maybe you should meditate on this subject for a while hehe.

I can't prove to you that they are wrong... but they are very wrong, and either very biased... or very well funded

new topics

top topics

0