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.

 

What's the probability of extraterrestrial life?

page: 2
6
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 03:33 AM
link   
i will have to continue the ideea -

all you need is a planet with the right ingredients in order to form life-form similar to Earths life. (I do not say other form could not evolve in different conditions ).

Look, i found this video that was intended to be a debate against creationists, even if I do believe in God , i do not find any issue in adminitng it is right when this talks about the origins of life. Here we go (please do not turn into teological debate , the thread is about extraterestrial life and probabilities
)




Something i do not get - if evolutionists strugle so much to prove how easy is for life to come from "dead" elements, why not go the next step and admit life is something very common and expecable ????



[edit on 28-11-2009 by Romanian]




posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 07:48 AM
link   
42%

Because 42 is the answer to life, the universe and everything.



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 08:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 


in my opinion there has to be aliens out there, there just has to be, i mean the evidence is overwhelming you know ? And i feel with our technological advances i'm convinced that we have had a alien presence.



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 08:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 


ok i dont mean to be a gooon here but here is some basic math!

First lesson is You need to be here = 1 yes?

2nd lesson of math Always add you into the equation, tho granted they never teach you that in school as a kid its more like what is 1+1 bullcrap..

so lets have a math lesson with MATH shall we?

The probibilty of ALIEN life forming on other planets is 1 over 0 that means ALIENS ARE REAL.

why are they real? well.. if you take the factor YOU are here that is amazing on its own merits regardles then you add the OLDNESS of the univers and the time it takes for beings with brains to travas the universe "im not talkng dimenions here" tho this can be factored in.. then the edvidence is BASIC

1b + a + i + 1r = 1

1b is you
a = age of the universe
i = being able to get from a to b
1r = you being created

so you sit and ASK why or if its POSSIBLE

that aliens are real in fact MAKEs it possible by a factor of 1

because without YOU there can NOT be ANY aliens

you see what i mean? now if one is to factor in "other types" say multi dimention type aliens, this would still be classed as 1

because if they was indeed to show up here they would be in our dimention that would automaticaly make them aliens



little tip// ask you math teatch why they never enclude you in any math math

1) he will say what do you mean
2) he will say that is not how math works

Then you say this

1) How can i apply math if im the one doing it?
2) Does not that affect the outcome of the equation if there is no observer

Then go speak to a sience teacher and ask him about observation

You will find out very fast how flawed math is with YOU


Hope that helps

[edit on 28-11-2009 by 13579]



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 08:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Ghost in the Machine
 


no its not

by the way 4 2

is a reflection of its self

37 is the answer to life

If 42 is correct as they are polar?


what makes odd numbers odd? -


[edit on 28-11-2009 by 13579]



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 08:53 AM
link   
The probability is impossible to know. There is the Drake Equation, but it is not a law of nature, it is a thought-experiment to quantify what we don't know. For all we know, we could be alone, it is a possibility, but even if we are able to search every star in the galaxy and found nothing, we still would not know for certain. There is always the possibility something is waiting to be found or find us.

I don't think we are alone but I don't think the galaxy is teeming with intelligent life either. Space is a dangerous place, many terrible things can happen to a world to retard or hijack the development of intelligent life. And on the converse, sometimes terrible things have to happen to a world before it develops intelligent life; we owe our existence to that.



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 10:35 AM
link   
reply to post by DoomsdayRex
 


The probability is impossible to know for you because you don't want to weigh the evidence. This is just another silly pseudoskeptic statement that you bring to every thread. It makes no sense.

We can weigh the probability within reason as to what's most likely and what's less likely based on the available evidence. We do it everday and in all walks of life.

Mathematically we can weigh the probability simply based on the billions of earth like planets, extremophiles, liquid water on Mars, amino acids in the dust clouds of comets and signs of microbial life on Mars.

You can do this by simply imputing new values into Drakes equation based on current knowledge.

We found liquid water on Mars and the Moon. NASA scientist said before we even found the water, where there's water there's life.

There's over a billion earth like planets in the Milky Way.

We are looking at signs of microbial life on Mars and the meteorite ALH84001.

They have found amino acids in the dust of comets.

Extremophiles have formed in places that scientist didn't think life could form.

Yes, you can know the probability based on math and reason based on the available evidence.

[edit on 28-11-2009 by Matrix Rising]



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 10:54 AM
link   
reply to post by skip_brilliantine
 


Good points.

I think as we make new discoveries we can go beyond guesses. For instance, we used to speculate wether there was water on Mars. Now there's no need for the speculation. We use to speculate about life surviving in extreme conditions, now we don't need to speculate with the finding of extremophiles like this:


Now, researchers have sequenced the genomes of two extremophiles that love life extremely cold. They live at the bottom of Ace Lake in Antarctica, where there is no oxygen and the average temperature is a brutal 33 degrees Fahrenheit.

Some of these hardy organisms also live in oxygen-starved environments, without sunlight or carbon, and scientists believe that studying these microbes could reveal the boundaries of extreme environments that support life here on Earth and on other planets.

After the Viking voyages to Mars in the 1970s turned up no trace of life, as we knew it, some scientists dismissed the idea of Martian life. Twenty years later, with the discovery of organisms that can survive without oxygen, carbon, or sunlight, researchers are rethinking the boundaries of what environments may support life.


www.genomenewsnetwork.org...

So as are knowledge increases, we can weigh these things within reason.



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Matrix Rising
reply to post by DoomsdayRex
 

We can weigh the probability within reason as to what's most likely and what's less likely based on the available evidence. We do it everday and in all walks of life.

Mathematically we can weigh the probability simply based on the billions of earth like planets, extremophiles, liquid water on Mars, amino acids in the dust clouds of comets and signs of microbial life on Mars.

You can do this by simply imputing new values into Drakes equation based on current knowledge.


There is nothing mathematical or scientific in what you are arguing. You are simply reiterating the evidence of possibility, which no one disagrees with. Drake's Equation is a hypothetical exercise in probability, and you don't (and can't) cite anything that could fill in its variables - nothing that isn't also hypothetical.

I take from your post that you've already (simply) inputted your new values into Drake's Equation based on "current knowledge" - how did it work out for you? What's the solution, in your opinion?



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 11:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 


it's a 100%...the odds of winning the lottery is 1 in a 137 million. there are on the conservative side 200 billion stars in the milky way galaxy alone.
you have a 1,400 times better chance of winning the lottery, then NOT finding life in this galaxy. also they have been able to recognize millions of galaxies that are out in space, and they are still discovering them 13 billion light years away through the hubble telescope with no end to them in site. there are so far as humans have been able to measure an infinite amount of galaxies. the massive scale of this defies any type of equation or statistical data that man has been able to come up with.

how anybody says that there is NO LIFE OUT THERE BESIDES OURS is beyond any logical human reasoning.

[edit on 28-11-2009 by jimmyx]



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by jimmyx
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 

it's a 100%...the odds of winning the lottery is 1 in a 137 million. there are on the conservative side 200 billion stars in the milky way galaxy alone.
you have a 1,400 better chance of winning the lottery, then NOT finding life in this galaxy.

Your point is taken, but you know that analogy still doesn't make any sense, right? The odds you cite truly have nothing to do with one another. As if the frequency of life in the galaxy has any relation to the frequency of winning numbers in a lottery.


how anybody says that there is NO LIFE OUT THERE BESIDES OURS is beyond any logical human reasoning.

Who is saying that?



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by skip_brilliantine

Originally posted by jimmyx
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 

it's a 100%...the odds of winning the lottery is 1 in a 137 million. there are on the conservative side 200 billion stars in the milky way galaxy alone.
you have a 1,400 better chance of winning the lottery, then NOT finding life in this galaxy.

Your point is taken, but you know that analogy still doesn't make any sense, right? The odds you cite truly have nothing to do with one another. As if the frequency of life in the galaxy has any relation to the frequency of winning numbers in a lottery.


how anybody says that there is NO LIFE OUT THERE BESIDES OURS is beyond any logical human reasoning.

Who is saying that?


i was simply trying to give some type of reference as to how rediculous it is to try and come up with a statistical probability on this subject. you can not measure something that is infinite...for instance...give me the exact, and i mean the EXACT measurement of Pi...no one can. it is not finite



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 11:52 AM
link   
reply to post by skip_brilliantine
 





What's the solution, in your opinion?


The drake equation lacks one key element like most of the math.

They leave out YOU

I mean did you not read my post? ok i guess not. Let me try again

WHAT is the probibilty of you to be ABLE to ask about aliens

Then ask your self another question, am i good at math

answer = ET is out there, i mean WE are correct? or shall we leave out the very fact WE was created?

Moot point if you ask me, unless you think we "life" are the only factor in a universe as big as your mind?

1) dumb
2) Silly
3) Blind
4) Arrogant
5) God syndrome
6) All of the above
7) I dont know so ill just say I THINK... ; )

Comman answers used in debates that lack substance but use fancy words to get the same results, when the facts are in your face.

Being human is NOT SPECIAL.. stop thinking you are because its going to be our downfall..



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 11:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Matrix Rising
You can do this by simply imputing new values into Drakes equation based on current knowledge.


You are misappropriating the Drake Equation. You are taking it as law, that it expresses the probability of life. It was never intended to. It is based on conjecture, something that even Drake acknowledged...


In fact, he thought of it as an organizational tool — a way to order the different issues to be discussed at the Green Bank conference, and bring them to bear on the central question of intelligent life in the universe.


The equation was never meant to tell us how many civilizations there are, but to help us learn what we don't know and promote discussion on what factors lead to the rise of intelligent, communicating civilizations.

There are other factors that may have importance but the Drake Equation does not consider. Such as the rate of cosmic disasters across the galaxy, how the develop of other planets within a solar system affect the evolution of life on a particular planet or the tendency towards self-destruction among species. No matter what number you generate with the Drake Equation, considering it in light of the Fermi Paradox leads one to very terrifying and sobering possibilities.



Originally posted by Matrix Rising
Mathematically we can weigh the probability simply based on the billions of earth like planets, extremophiles, liquid water on Mars, amino acids in the dust clouds of comets and signs of microbial life on Mars.

You can do this by simply imputing new values into Drakes equation based on current knowledge.


You have no idea what you are talking about. Those are signs of hope we will find intelligent life. However, the Drake Equation does not account for anything you listed above (albeit except for the planets in the galaxy. And even then we don't know. You are speaking in absolutes about things astronomers and astrobiologists are still discovering).

So, what is the math that gives us this absolute probability? Even with the Drake Equation which does not tell us the probability of life in the universe nor was it ever intended to there are factors we don't know. For instance, you are telling us you know, 1) fraction of stars that have planets, 2) average number of planets that can potentially support life per star that has planets, 3) fraction of the above that actually go on to develop life at some point, 4) the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop intelligent life, 5) the fraction of civilizations that develop a technology that releases detectable signs of their existence into space, 6) the length of time such civilizations release detectable signals into space? You don't know any of that. No one does. We can make great guesses, but no one can know for certain.

And even then, once again, the Drake Equation does not tell us the probability of life in the universe nor was it ever intended to. The fact you keep claiming it does proves you have no idea what you are talking about.



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by jimmyx
 


PI is wrong
its only pie because you are using math that reflects upon its self.

To measure infinity would require 2 things

1) Being alive
2) Asking a dumb question

Cheers

Oh btw +1 in pi and see what happens ; )




posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by skip_brilliantine
I take from your post that you've already (simply) inputted your new values into Drake's Equation based on "current knowledge" - how did it work out for you? What's the solution, in your opinion?


He has no solution. This is just going to turn into one of his tiresome attacks on skeptics. He will claim the Drake Equation, which does not tell us the probability of life in the galaxy nor was it ever intended to gives us X number, which proves skeptics are wrong about there be no life in the galaxy (which no skeptic is claiming) then go on to say it proves that anyone who disagrees with the extraterrestrial hypothesis of UFOs is a pseudoskeptic, delusional, silly, or a liar. Look at the attack he has already launched on me for disagreeing we can come up with a probability at this time yet still agreeing we are not alone. It is impossible for him to have a civil and honest discussion.

Review this thread. It is better not to engage him.



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 12:01 PM
link   
reply to post by DoomsdayRex
 





For instance, you are telling us you know, 1) fraction of stars that have planets, 2) average number of planets that can potentially support life per star that has planets, 3) fraction of the above that actually go on to develop life at some point, 4) the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop intelligent life, 5) the fraction of civilizations that develop a technology that releases detectable signs of their existence into space, 6) the length of time such civilizations release detectable signals into space? You don't know any of that. No one does. We can make great guesses, but no one can know for certain.


it is funny how you listed it ... ever looked into a mirror?

You seem to miss the jist my friend, read what you posted.

Now lets play a game !

No other planets have life None only earth.

Do the math

and when you are doing it add a word called infinity

Then when you can not figure out my post ill help you out with a line under this one.

Infinity is a Result of being alive..

without it you would not have a mind let alone be able to ask questions.

words are just like math its hard to work them out but they are indeed math matical in nature just like numbers. people have a hard time dealing with reality, and there for can not grasp or understand the simple side of life.

we live in a mind .. who's? well your guess is as good as mine.

here is a hint/tip

Try to measure ur mind and try to mesure the universe.

Both get bigger, wonder why? because your asking.. quatom physics 101

Oh and just to add Your Brain is finite Your mind is not..

scale kinda thing!

do the cells in your body ask whey they are cells?


[edit on 28-11-2009 by 13579]



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by DoomsdayRex
 


I did infact give one. If you had read my posts that Do not use the drake equation





posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by 13579
 


I drank way too much last night to even try to begin to understand what you are getting on about.



posted on Nov, 28 2009 @ 12:12 PM
link   
reply to post by DoomsdayRex
 


Nobody is speaking in absolutes, we are talking about the probability of extraterrestrial life based on the available evidence.

Can you read?

You can look at and evaluate the aailable evidence based on probability as to what's most likely and what's less likely.

I have listed evidence and knowledge that we have now that we didn't have years ago and yes you can use this to weigh the evidence within reason or mathematically.

Yes, you can input these numbers into Drake's equation and nobody has claimed that you will get an absolute number.

You try to bring your pseudoskeptic nonsense onto every thread.

People on this thread have been and are discussing the probability of extraterrestrial life. It has been a very good discussion.

If you don't think weighing probabilities s possible and you want to live in your pseudoskeptic fantasy land, that's fine. Don't try to hijack the thread with your pseudoskeptic nonsense.

If you don't think it's possible to know the probability of these things that's fine. That's your opinion but don't try to steer the thread into a silly debate. It's obvious that you can discuss the probability of these things based on the available evidence.

People have been doing this throughout the whole post.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join