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.
tanka418
ZetaRediculian
I counter that this number represents biased speculation and not a real number since there is no known aliens from which to calculate a number.
Alas, this really shows the depth of your understanding. I have asserted before, and I will again, Extraterrestrials are not needed to estimate their probability. The "base line" for the probability of ET is 1 chance in the sample size (Earth being necessarily a part of the sample, and Earth has the kind of life we are looking for.)...so we start off with a "prior probability" for ET life...its sort of "built in". Thus your notion of "not having data" is wholly inappropriate, and acts as a "Bar" to further research.
Further, there seems to be extraterrestrials upon which to begin to build: Fresh claim for fossil life in Mars rock
www.princeton.edu...
"This argument seems persuasive on its face, but Spiegel and Turner have shown it doesn't stand up to a rigorous statistical examination — with a sample of only one life-bearing planet, one cannot even get a ballpark estimate of the abundance of life in the universe.
ZetaRediculian
I counter that this number represents biased speculation and not a real number since there is no known aliens from which to calculate a number.
Further, there seems to be extraterrestrials upon which to begin to build
ZetaRediculian
Which quote besides your own can you provide that supports you?
"begin to build"? as in there was nothing to build from before? as in zero? I thought you had already built it. this "fresh claim" is from November 2009
Oh sorry man, I use logic, as opposed to the opinion of
Joshua Winn, an associate professor of physics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Joshua Winn, an associate professor of physics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Do you not comprehend simple English? And, yes, begin to build
be·gin
1. start; perform or undergo the first part of (an action or activity).
tanka418
ZetaRediculian
I counter that this number represents biased speculation and not a real number since there is no known aliens from which to calculate a number.
Alas, this really shows the depth of your understanding. I have asserted before, and I will again, Extraterrestrials are not needed to estimate their probability. The "base line" for the probability of ET is 1 chance in the sample size (Earth being necessarily a part of the sample, and Earth has the kind of life we are looking for.)...so we start off with a "prior probability" for ET life...its sort of "built in". Thus your notion of "not having data" is wholly inappropriate, and acts as a "Bar" to further research.
Further, there seems to be extraterrestrials upon which to begin to build: Fresh claim for fossil life in Mars rock
tanka418
Alas, this really shows the depth of your understanding. I have asserted before, and I will again,
He knows that and has pretty much conceded all the points. He pretty much stated we haven't even started to build our knowledge of life outside of earth. He knows there is no knowledge base to draw any conclusions from and the hocus pocus of his Bayesian math has all but melted away. His only focus is me right now. He fancies himself a medieval magician or something and the first rule of magic is to divert attention.
draknoir2
tanka418
Alas, this really shows the depth of your understanding. I have asserted before, and I will again,
This shows the depth of YOUR understanding... it's your ASSERTIONS that are in question.
Blue Shift
waltwillis
The Pseudo-Skeptic is not a true Skeptic!
Labeling and semantics is the last refuge of scoundrels.
do you have any more videos?
waltwillis
Blue Shift
waltwillis
The Pseudo-Skeptic is not a true Skeptic!
Labeling and semantics is the last refuge of scoundrels.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
waltwillis
Blue Shift
waltwillis
The Pseudo-Skeptic is not a true Skeptic!
Labeling and semantics is the last refuge of scoundrels.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
draknoir2
This shows the depth of YOUR understanding... it's your ASSERTIONS that are in question.
We had to find ourselves on a planet that has life on it, but we did not have to find ourselves (i) in a galaxy that has life on a planet besides Earth nor (ii) on a planet on which life arose multiple, independent times. Learning that either (i) or (ii) describes our world would constitute data that are not subject to the selection effect described above. In short, if we should find evidence of life that arose wholly independently of us either via astronomical searches that reveal life on another planet or via geological and biological studies that find evidence of life on Earth with a different origin from us we would have considerably stronger grounds to conclude that life is probably common in our galaxy.
dragonridr
reply to post by tanka418
Actually life may have started on mars and transferred to earth so there isnt two places it happened only one if this is correct. If true this means life on earth was a cosmic fluke and wasnt meant to be here.More to the point however due to the requirements of life it will be a very rare thing indeed.
www.bbc.co.uk...
tanka418
dragonridr
reply to post by tanka418
Actually life may have started on mars and transferred to earth so there isnt two places it happened only one if this is correct. If true this means life on earth was a cosmic fluke and wasnt meant to be here.More to the point however due to the requirements of life it will be a very rare thing indeed.
www.bbc.co.uk...
interesting hypothesis. However, I'm not so sure. I suppose Mars could have gotten a bit of a "head start" due to the formation of the Moon, but, according to the research (admittedly quick) did today; Mars lost it atmosphere at around 700 million years, coincidently, that is around when life supposedly arose on Earth.
The Mars rock that contained the fossil was supposed to have been ejected from Mars some 15 million years ago. I would think that the probability of ejecta from Mars transporting life to earth would be something less than independent abiogenesis.
ZetaRediculian
do you have any more videos?
waltwillis
Blue Shift
waltwillis
The Pseudo-Skeptic is not a true Skeptic!
Labeling and semantics is the last refuge of scoundrels.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
All this work ultimately does is provide a starting point; which while valuable, should not be taken as the "final result".
Bayesian inference is an "updatable" process, and this latest update would alter the conclusions dramatically.
dragonridr
Actually makes sense when i think about it realize the inner planets at that time where constantly being bombarded with meteors. So its very likely a martian rock landed on earth.
dragonridr
reply to post by ZetaRediculian
First you have to have a planet around a star in a habitable zone not to far not to close. This planet must contain water and needs to have a long lifetime. Even our solar system we came in very late in the game because earth will only be habitable for 5 billion years and we showed up at 4. Now alot of people dont realize this but our galaxy has a habitable zone as well. Which severely restricts the number of stars. For example the center of the milky way is packed with stars many many however theres a problem there are so many they are bombarded with huge amounts of radiation. So this means about 3/4 of the stars just in our galaxy would kill microbial life. Then if we pass those hurdles we then need to look at how long a species survives 99 percent of all the animals that ever existed on earth are now extinct. Then we move on to could they develop technology well that appears to be a 50 50 shot supposedly dolphins are close to us in intelligence yet they can't make anything. Than there is the fact when you get intelligence you also gain the knowledge to destroy the planet. We have had some very close calls on almost killing ourselves off already.
So if we get through all that than comes the final stage does the species actually want to explore the stars.And at that moment how many civilizations are still around remember countless would come and go the universe is really old. And apparently intelligent species never colonize a galaxy or we would see it. So they probably stay within a local area of maybe a couple of parsecs. Meaning intelligent life could be in your galaxy but youll never meet them. By the time its all said and done you probably have about a dozen species in a galaxy that could travel into space and maybe one close enough if you're lucky. Because even if we came up with warp drive the other side of the galaxy would still be unreachable just because of the shear time involved.