"They're Definitely Aliens in Outer Space" Michio Kaku

Originally posted by Druscilla

Originally posted by raj10463

and if we are alone... that would mean we are special and would make god a little more relevent. ah how iron binds and irony unhinges.

Gagarin said it, perhaps not exactly that way, but, it was said.

edit on 20-3-2013 by Druscilla because: (no reason given)

no aliens up there either.

Originally posted by raj10463
and if we are alone... that would mean we are special and would make god a little more relevent. ah how iron binds and irony unhinges.

There is no way to prove we are alone.
But it is simple to prove we are not.
(it's not easy, it's simple. Two different beasts)

reply to post by raj10463


There's no confirming evidence for or against aliens.

Aliens exist in a superposition of existing and not existing. It's one of those Schrodinger things.
Until we find, or don't find aliens, they occupy both states.

For instance I can reach the conclusion that Miami Heat will win the NBA finals based on the available evidence. This isn't making a statement of truth that the Heat will win the finals. It's a conclusion based on the available evidence.

Again, we do this in all walks of life.

People tend to act like science is rigid and Scientist don't reach conclusions based on the available evidence.

This is just silly.

Originally posted by neoholographic
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

 

Kaku never said anything about truth. You're debating something he never said.

The only truth is he reached the conclusion based on the available evidence.

You guys are the ones presenting opinion.

Absolutely. He reached his conclusion based on the available evidence.

I reached my conclusion (i.e., my conclusion is that I -- just like Kaku -- firmly believe that ET life exists in the universe) based on the available evidence.

However, until that philosophical "Truth" is discovered (by actually contacting/meeting these ETs), then it is still possible that I and Kaku are wrong, no matter what the circumstantial evidence is telling me and him.

Originally posted by neoholographic
Where's the evidence that prevents extraterrestrial life from existing?

Again, when Scientist debate, they always debate for and against the proposition.

What in the laws of physics would prevent life from forming? Is there a special ingredient on earth that will prevent life from forming on other planets?

Again, we weigh the evidence and reach conclusions in all walks of life including science.

Why can't we weigh the evidence and reach the conclusion extraterrestrials exist?

Personally, I don't think there is ANY evidence that prevents ET life from existing (especially considering that it is not possible to prove a negative). Personally, I think life elsewhere in the universe does exist.

However, what I think (even if what I think is based on evidence) is not relevant when it comes to whether ET life exists or not. I mean, if we humans were never around to debate the idea of ET life, that would not affect the existence of ET life.

I'm not sure how what I believe or what Kaku believes --even when that belief is based on the evidence at hand -- makes a difference when it comes to the existence of something.

Originally posted by neoholographic
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People

 

What in the laws of physics would prevent life from forming? Is there a special ingredient on earth that will prevent life from forming on other planets?

yes it is called information replication, it has not been reproduced in science. life has not been created by taking its building blocks and mashing them in a lab. it takes something more to be alive, maybe life is so sacred that it only exists here on earth. maybe it took the entire universe to make the right circumstances to harbor life here. maybe thats how rare life is.

Originally posted by drakus

Originally posted by raj10463
and if we are alone... that would mean we are special and would make god a little more relevent. ah how iron binds and irony unhinges.

There is no way to prove we are alone.
But it is simple to prove we are not.
(it's not easy, it's simple. Two different beasts)

we are alone until proven otherwise, and if you think not then you may as well believe in god.

Well experiencers of this already know that and have been speaking up to that effect for some time. YES THEY'RE MANNED and the ones that aren't black op, for certainly some are, ARE ET.

reply to post by Soylent Green Is People


You said:

However, until that philosophical "Truth" is discovered (by actually contacting/meeting these ETs), then it is still possible that I and Kaku are wrong, no matter what the circumstantial evidence is telling me and him.

You're debating against a point nobody made. Kaku never said he couldn't be wrong. He just reached the conclusion that they exist based on the available evidence. Of course he could be wrong. We could all be living in quantum computers. We could all be holograms.

At the end of the day, people draw conclusions based on the available evidence but nobody is making the claim that their conclusions are absolute truth.

So again, you're debating against a point that was never made.

Originally posted by raj10463

we are alone until proven otherwise

I disagree.
We don't know which one is it.
But it is dead simple to prove they exist. As soon as we find either living people, or indications of civilization.
How would you prove there are no people besides us?

Right now, we-just-don't-know, there's nothing wrong with not having an answer yet.
And it is certainly no excuse to invent stories to hide that we don't know.

reply to post by neoholographic


I liked the analogy that an advanced civilization would probably encode a message on dna and that if the question had been posed 200 years ago we probably would have said the surest way to communicate with them would be smoke signals.

reply to post by ParovStelar


He was coming from a simple law of averages. He stated that there are 100 billion galaxies in just the visible universe and that each of those galaxies contained about 100 billion stars. Thats 100 b x 100 b. Given that any star might have 6 planets revolving around it that is 6 with 20 zeros following it planets. His comment was. "They're out there" He left no room for doubt or speculation. Just, "They're out there" He was referring to intelligent life not just microbes or animals.

oh, they are around, but I guess if they wanted everyone to know for sure then everone would know for sure

Originally posted by karen61560
reply to post by neoholographic

 

I liked the analogy that an advanced civilization would probably encode a message on dna and that if the question had been posed 200 years ago we probably would have said the surest way to communicate with them would be smoke signals.

That was a good point also. Paul Davies made some good points as well.

Originally posted by karen61560
reply to post by neoholographic

 

I liked the analogy that an advanced civilization would probably encode a message on dna and that if the question had been posed 200 years ago we probably would have said the surest way to communicate with them would be smoke signals.

That was a good point also. Paul Davies made some good points as well.

reply to post by neoholographic

I actually think some in religion are actually more accepting of these things than atheist and skeptics.

Why would you think this? I am an atheist and I see 7 billion pieces of evidence of alien life. We are real and living on a planet in this realm. With billions and billions of planets in the universe it would be impossible to imagine that NONE of them have life on them.

reply to post by Tennessee77


Life would have to be everywhere. Amino acids have been found in meteorites and they are the building blocks of life. Water is in great abundance throughout our solar system albeit not liquid water save our own blue marble. If it is true here it is true throughout the universe and if it happened once it happened twice and if it happened twice its happened billions of times. That being said, unless there is really a way to travel by wormhole we will never see any of these others because we are too far apart. We would have to learn how to bend space to get from point a to point b. Assuming that life would be like us is another matter. Look at the vast difference in life just on our own planet. We also cannot assume that life is necessarily carbon based outside our little sphere.

reply to post by InnerPeace2012

Kepler is finding dozens of new planets every day and there have been a few that are earth like rocky with liquid water in the Goldilocks zone.

All in all I liked the show. I actually got chills running up and down my spine with some statements.

reply to post by Druscilla


How many different lifeforms are on this planet alone? How many have come and gone? Apes can be considered intelligent though not as intelligent as us but still. Now couple intelligence with either opposable thumbs or tentacles or some other appendage that can grab and build and there you go. Logic says that it is impossible that we are the only ones. Ego says otherwise but since when has ego been anything but self serving?