Alien life on other worlds is probable. There are simply too many possibilities to ignore; we can't happen to be on the one planet currently supporting life in our galaxy. Given how many times our planet has been nailed by cosmic bodies, I don't think we're lucky enough to believe those odds.
Intelligent life on other worlds is less probable, but still likely. The odds presented in the primary post on this thread ignore the probability of another life-sustaining world not getting hit by an astroid three times; if another planet with life were to be so lucky, said life forms would have had millions of years of evolution which we have not.
Intelligent life on other worlds being interested in Earth is improbable. Such beings would have developed the technology to survive in space, hence they would have much greater technology than ours, hence our planet would have little to offer save in the study of evolutionary principle. Unless our planet contains a resource which is valuable, of which we are probably not aware, I can see few reasons why ETs would have any interest in Earth.
Alien life being carbon based is improbable. Carbon-based life is relatively easy to achieve, seeing how it theoretically happened by accident; carbon-based life is clearly quite fragile, and easy to destroy. Presuming that non-carbon based life is possible (which, theoretically, is true), it goes to follow that such life may not necessarily require the sort of environment we deem capable of sustaining life; such life forms may live in climates which, to us, are unthinkable. It could be as simple as a biologically-functioning fragment of nitrous crystal, sustained by non-chemical means; such a life form would have no naturally occuring electrical impulses, no requirement of body heat, and would not even begin to register to our definition of biology as life.
Intelligent alien life being non-carbon based is probable. Such creatures would have undergone a radically different evolutionary path, and would be capable of creating and utilizing technologies which, to our minds, are completely illogical. Such logic is easily reversed; to an intelligent, non-carbon based bioform, we would be an enigma, and possible unrecognizable as living. In such a way we would, in all probability, be overlooked, hence the improbability that alien life is present on Earth. If such alien forms were unaware, or only partially aware, of our existence, it would explain UFO sightings and certain paranormal phenomena; simple occurances, which are usually discredited due to their nature, such as cattle slaughtering could be related to a simple lack of understanding of how to handle carbon-based life. Furthermore, their presence (if they were present, that it) could be attributed to either their fascination of carbon-based life, or to their need of one or more resources which are useable to them, but not us.
I could go on and on about the possibilities, but as I've made my point, and by the nature of my theories cannot provide any actual evidence, I'll stop here.
It is mind-boggling when one broadens one's view of the possibilities.

Originally posted by majestictwo
Well "Tezzajw" your imagination is completely wrong - no scoffing here. Since when are you judge a jury of others.

Hehehe Calm down... Tezzajw is an old timer We have been trough the ropes a few times here trying to show the reality... He was being sarcastic... but speaking truth...

Very few come here to get answers... and fewer still follow the path once you show the way..

When the 6th man to walk on the Moon does a world tour to talk about how we have been lied to and STILL no one listens... well... what do you do then?



So some deal in probabilities, while those 'in the know' deal in realities. We live in different worlds

they're interdimensional, not extraterrestrial.

thread closed.

[edit on 12-12-2008 by liquidsmoke206]

All of this (original post article) is all well and good, but there are several factors not being considered:

1. The good Dr. (and he is a PhD, I checked), applies the idea that all intelligent life would develop as it did on Earth. We already know that life can exist in MANY environments we never expected (deep sea vents for example) and in forms we didn't realize. To say that any of these forms could not evolve sentience is a pretty bold statement.

2. In a galaxy, there are billions and billions of stars. Then, there are billions and billions of galaxies. (forgive the Saganesqueness here)... So, even if you were to be bold enough to state that maybe each galaxy had ONE intelligent race (and odds are highly in favor, i.e. see Drake (another PhD) equation, that there are FAR more)...you're still looking at BILLIONS of intelligent races out there....

3. Technology. We've gone from riding horses to landing on the moon in less than a century. To think that another advanced race couldn't develop interstellar travel given more developmental time, is to simply ignore even our own exponential increasing technological curve.

4. The abundance of water (and where there's water on Earth, you usually have life) even in our own solar system, from lunar caps, Martian poles, and a few moons, further shows how possible life in general can be, even in just one solar system. Now, apply the factor in number two (lots of stars, lots of galaxies), and ET intelligent life is a statistical certainty. Either that, or we humans are the biggest longshot in the Universe if we are truly alone.

Originally posted by majestictwo
Regarding your comments about "Tezzajw"

majestictwo, being human means that I get moody, like anyone else. I have good days and bad. Sometimes I type as nice as pie, while other times, I'm an arsehole. I don't apologise for it. I don't type here with the intention of making 'friends', yet despite that, I probably have made a few friends along the way. Go figure, huh? Humans, with similar interests, attract each other under the most unusual circumstances.

Zorgon is a class above me, very diplomatic and well researched. Like him, I don't have time to consider the 'ifs' and 'buts' with regards to the possibility of aliens being here. I'm trying to dig deeper than the standard 'are they here?' crap. Some of us have moved on beyond the obvious. Each to their own, though.

People can believe whatever they like, while I continue to wear my 'UFOs are Real' tshirt down the street.

[edit on 12-12-2008 by tezzajw]

Originally posted by majestictwo
There appears to be so many threads that are all too willing to promote that aliens are visiting us.

Again, we are talking about terminology.
There are so many definitions of "aliens".
It is easy to assume that "aliens" are physical extraterrestrial entities. But they may not be.
Again, there are so many definitions of "extraterrestrial".
Personally I do not believe that there are any physical "aliens" visiting us.
I also do not believe that any physical "alien" spacecraft (such as the alleged entities in the alleged Roswell incident) has ever crashed on earth.

Originally posted by Gazrok
All of this (original post article) is all well and good, but there are several factors not being considered:

1. The good Dr. (and he is a PhD, I checked), applies the idea that all intelligent life would develop as it did on Earth. We already know that life can exist in MANY environments we never expected (deep sea vents for example) and in forms we didn't realize. To say that any of these forms could not evolve sentience is a pretty bold statement.

It's a bold statement to say they couldn't - but not bold to say that none of them have. They haven't because they don't need it. Intelligence may be an evolutionary development that's unlikely and unnecessary, as the vast majority of animals - ie everything but us - seem to have evolved happily without it.

Originally posted by Gazrok
2. In a galaxy, there are billions and billions of stars. Then, there are billions and billions of galaxies. (forgive the Saganesqueness here)... So, even if you were to be bold enough to state that maybe each galaxy had ONE intelligent race (and odds are highly in favor, i.e. see Drake (another PhD) equation, that there are FAR more)...you're still looking at BILLIONS of intelligent races out there....

This is a fair point, and I don't think many people would argue against it. No point quibbling over the exact numbers, but it's highly likely that life exists elsewhere, and that at least some of it is intelligent.

However...

Originally posted by Gazrok
3. Technology. We've gone from riding horses to landing on the moon in less than a century. To think that another advanced race couldn't develop interstellar travel given more developmental time, is to simply ignore even our own exponential increasing technological curve.

This is where the argument becomes a matter of faith. Suggesting interstellar travel is impossible or unlikely isn't about ignoring our own development. Our technology has allowed us to speed things up: the better it's got, the faster we go, the further we can get.

But we haven't changed the fundamental nature of travel. Physical bodies still pass through points in space, one after the other, to get from A to B - they just do it faster now because of technology. The speed of light is not a technological barrier: accelerating up to it is not just a matter of having a good engine and lots of fuel.

Given the 'bigness' of space, it would be a massive enterprise to send ships across galaxies: huge timescales (with many generations born and dying onboard) and huge resources (the energy of whole solar systems, even galaxies, being swallowed up as fuel).

Never say never - it's possible there are ways around these issues. But there might not be. So it's a matter of fantasy and faith, and it isn't supported by the leap we've made from horses to space shuttles.

The other factor in this discussion is time. It would appear that everyone is considering the development of intelligent life from the same starting point in time.

The Earth is estimated to be 4.5 Billion years old. Who is to say that our planet is the oldest? I'm not. In fact, chances are that planets exist that are much older. Therefore, there is the potential that life developed earlier on other planets and that intelligent life could be more advanced than ours.

Out of the many, many planets out there we only need one other that has developed intelligent life with sufficient knowledge to reach our world. The possibility, while small, is still a number greater than zero.

Originally posted by JoeBarna
The other factor in this discussion is time. It would appear that everyone is considering the development of intelligent life from the same starting point in time.

The Earth is estimated to be 4.5 Billion years old. Who is to say that our planet is the oldest? I'm not. In fact, chances are that planets exist that are much older. Therefore, there is the potential that life developed earlier on other planets and that intelligent life could be more advanced than ours.

Out of the many, many planets out there we only need one other that has developed intelligent life with sufficient knowledge to reach our world. The possibility, while small, is still a number greater than zero.

I see what your saying its a good point one I thought about earlier. I think the estimated age of our galaxy is around 13.5 billion years. Do you think life could have started in the very early stages of our galaxy - probably not. Nevertheless it not hard to imagine a life form a million years ahead of us.

They would however have to survive countless issues and then find us then perhaps travel the 20,000 light years to earth unless they are much closer like relatively next door..

Maybe the galaxy is not as large to them as it is us - thoughts on that?

Originally posted by damagedoor

Originally posted by Graphix10
I think the real question here is - How many more years advanced might an alien race be? If they are significantly more advanced (and I keep using 'a million years', so I'll stick with it here too) , then we have to look at where we will be in a million years...because that's the only example we have. Have we been to the moon? Yes, more than 30 years ago. Do we want to go farther and continue to explore? Obviously a yes here. We're planning trips back to the moon as well as preliminary plans for (manned) trips to Mars. Why would we go to Mars? Life, plain and simple. We want answers to our existence. We will eventually Terraform Mars as part of out galactic expansion. Why? So we can use the damn thing. Are we building bigger and better telescopes? Of course we are. We want to see whats out there. We are doing these things NOW.

I'm not really disagreeing with you - just discussing - but there's a danger in thinking that in a million years our knowledge today will simply be redundant. Certain things will hold true - we're not going to suddenly discover that the Sun actually goes round the Earth.

And I see no reason to believe that faster than light travel is possible. There is no reason to think that in a million years it won't still be impossible, other than wishful thinking.

You can always say 'what if?'. Traversable wormholes and warp drives currently reside in the same basket as PIEs (I like the acronym by the way).

If we can only go a percentage of light speed, we're limited. Plain and simple. In a million years we could probably have gone to the opposite side of our own galaxy and back again. In a straight line. Starting now. But who is on these ships for that long, and how? Thinking outside the box is great, but you have to be realistic. It would take us maybe thirty years to get even to Alpha Centauri. Who is going to do that? Who will pay? Why?

Terraforming Mars makes a degree of sense. But it's a venture that would take hundreds, possibly thousands of years, and would be massively expensive. I'd love to see a politician argue for that one. We can't even persuade people to cut CO2 to save our own planet.

For me, as far as I can sensibly imagine, we're stuck where we are. And for a race of non-immortal aliens, I see it being pretty much the same.

And here Damagedoor, is your Achilles heal or 'crutch' with this topic - You do not seem to be able to get past the 'travel issue'. This is where you are stuck. You seem to agree that intelligent life is out there but you consistently discount their ability to get from there to here. I think being skeptical is fine, but there has to be a point where you realize they are so very far ahead of us, in terms of technology at least, that they have conquered travel.

I do agree with you about the speed of light, I don't believe we will ever travel faster than 186,000 miles a second. I do believe, however, that we are underestimating how an advanced species may use multi-dimensional means to get around.

Remember, even if they've only been here once...only ONCE, then they've mastered the problem of travel and we can throw all of this 'odds' stuff out the window.

Originally posted by Norio Hayakawa

Originally posted by majestictwo
There appears to be so many threads that are all too willing to promote that aliens are visiting us.

Again, we are talking about terminology.
There are so many definitions of "aliens".
It is easy to assume that "aliens" are physical extraterrestrial entities. But they may not be.
Again, there are so many definitions of "extraterrestrial".
Personally I do not believe that there are any physical "aliens" visiting us.
I also do not believe that any physical "alien" spacecraft (such as the alleged entities in the alleged Roswell incident) has ever crashed on earth.

I don't really get this post. Aren't we talking about physical alien beings, UFO's etc.? When did terminology become an issue? Nobody else seems confused about what type of aliens we are talking about.

In a scientists mind, all they know is science from a Human perspective.
Humans developed on Earth and then developed the Earth to suit their needs.
Who's to say that any Aliens developed along the same evolutionary path us Earthlings did?
In all the Mutliverse's maybe there are beings similar to us in both apearance and temprement but not worried about money?
There are so many variables that all a scientist can quote is 'Human standard'.
Maybe evolution developed different limbs / appendages for different beings due to their climate / their needs.

I've heard scientists say that the current 'Human' shape is perfect for the environment, yeah thats right , it is , for the one we live in. But if we ever head out into space and colonise another world then we would adapt enough over generations until we can change the world we live on.
But to say that the 'Human shape' is perfect screams of supreme arrogance. Different environs mean different needs.

I hope there are aliens visiting us, not for a light snack but to learn our ways , maybe if we learn to start adapting to the Earth , like our ancesters did, instead of adapting the Earth to OUR needs , then maybe we can leave wars/hate/ money behind and actually start to evolve into better people.

The multiverse has infinite possibilites to be empty, there will be Aliens we'd call angels, and Aliens we'd call demons, possibly Aliens made of mist, of energy, of stone, of plant, of water. some will be nothing more than a germ, others will be space faring, some will be destructive, some will be generous, some will be kind, some if not most will ignore, but all spacefaring Aliens will have learned enough to actually want to leave their Worlds and Learn about what they find out in the vastness of space.

Unlike us who squabble over money and shiney stones , we will never really get off this rock until we learn to evolve maybe not our bodies but our minds, but we should at least evolve our character enough to want to change, who knows where that will lead.
Possibly the stars?