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.

 

Humans came long after aliens, scientist suggests.

page: 6
31
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 06:57 PM
link   

ThinkingCap
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


"Humans made long after aliens."

This is a pretty odd thing to state.

Because as far as I know we know next to damn nothing about life (and their "age") on other planets, in other galaxies.


Actually we do.

It's basic astronomy. Almost every star and extrasolar planet has an age if you look it up.

If you want to know more about how we know what we know I can provide some links.




posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 07:00 PM
link   

Czulkang
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


I hope they are not hostile, because if they are we are screwed. it would me like the Army I corps. attacking a roman legion. It would be a slaughter.


Actually it would be more like......The US Air Force vs an ant hill. Or....



That said, I think there are several very compelling and logical reasons to believe alien invasion is likely rare in the galaxy and universe beyond.
edit on 2-2-2014 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 07:08 PM
link   

JayinAR
I asked this in another thread but didn't really get an answer.

How sure are we that an Andromeda strain scenario would play out if we contacted an ET race?

I mean sure, their atmosphere is likely to give us fits, but would they actually make us sick, or vice versa? I'm not so sure we would get sick. Here on Earth, for instance, it is rare for two species to make one another sick. Different immune systems entirely.

If we could interact with them without unleashing a deadly plague, we would most likely try to teach and/or learn from them.
If we feared a plague, prime directive is the way to go.

We already practice prime directive to an extent here on Earth with aboriginal tribes in New Guinea and elsewhere.


A lot would depend on whether the alien life is based on DNA and even if it is, whether it is based on our type of "right handed DNA".

If alien DNA is left handed it would not interact with ours at all. This is called chirality of DNA.



It would only be a danger if we encounter aliens with similar, right handed DNA.



posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 07:21 PM
link   

JadeStar

JayinAR
I asked this in another thread but didn't really get an answer.

How sure are we that an Andromeda strain scenario would play out if we contacted an ET race?

I mean sure, their atmosphere is likely t give us fits, but would they actually make us sick, or vice versa? I'm not so sure we would get sick. Here on Earth, for instance, it is rare for two species to make one another sick. Different immune systems entirely.

If we could interact with them without unleashing a deadly plague, we would most likely try to teach and/or learn from them.
If we feared a plague, prime directive is the way to go.

We already practice prime directive to an extent here on Earth with aboriginal tribes in New Guinea and elsewhere.


A lot would depend on whether the alien life is based on DNA and even if it is, whether it is based on our type of "right handed DNA".

If alien DNA is left handed it would not interact with ours at all. This is called chirality of DNA.



It would only be a danger if we encounter aliens with similar, right handed DNA.


Thanks for the clarification on that.
Although I was thinking that even if they had similar DNA that we may not be in danger.

For instance, here on Earth with dogs...they do all manner of disgusting things. Eat feces, lick their own ass, etc, yet they can do all that and kiss you right on the mouth with no danger to speak of. The bacteria that they carry has no effect on us.



posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 03:59 AM
link   
Well it would go a long way to explaining the theory that we are genetically engineered slaves. Mainly for gold. And look at "us" all these years later. Working our butts off to earn money [paid slavery], in a system backed by gold. Not the smartest behaviour from an "evolving" species ?



posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 05:36 AM
link   

DarksideOz
Well it would go a long way to explaining the theory that we are genetically engineered slaves. Mainly for gold. And look at "us" all these years later. Working our butts off to earn money [paid slavery], in a system backed by gold. Not the smartest behaviour from an "evolving" species ?


Nonsense "theory".

If one can traverse the stars they don't need slaves. They can easily build whatever they want.

If one can traverse the stars they don't need people mining gold either.

Sounds like more "Ancient Astronauts" bunkdom.



posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 07:08 AM
link   
Recent scientific evidence studying how the genome changes over time, implies that DNA came into being before Earth was formed.
It is logical that Earth was seeded with complex life

link



posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 07:42 AM
link   

Dr X
Recent scientific evidence studying how the genome changes over time, implies that DNA came into being before Earth was formed.
It is logical that Earth was seeded with complex life

link


The work of Sharov and Gordon in applying Moore's Law to DNA is interesting, but it is just a hypothesis that has a long way to go (and needs a lot of evidence) to be proven. Sharov and Gordon are truly just in the "what if?" stage of their theory.

There is still much more evidence that DNA came along after RNA, and it is also possible that RNA and DNA do NOT obey Moore's law, and the amount of information stored in RNA and/or DNA grew exponentially during some time in the past

So let's not jump the gun here, and say that Sharov and Gordon's work necessarily means that it is logical that the Earth was seeded with life. It may turn out to be the case (or not), but it is still OK for us to simply say "I don't know yet", because we don't know yet.


edit on 2/3/2014 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 08:04 AM
link   


And me, as well. It is very interesting and "curious" (as Spock would say) the amount of technology we've developed over the past 50-100 years with as long as we've been on this planet. It would almost appear like we've had some indirect help.


Hmm...I kinda feel opposite of this. I'm not referring so much to the 'indirect help' part because that is possible, but it just seems to me like we should actually be much further along. I feel like there are actually some limiting factors afoot to our progression.



posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 10:31 AM
link   
reply to post by Soylent Green Is People
 


by seeded I mean by very primitive life. Simple bacteria that then evolved further.
It does not have to imply intelligent life visiting.



posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 11:01 AM
link   
Although I know the theory is there for folding space and there are probably other means of powering a space ship, I always seem to get little futher than the realisation that our planet is somewhat unique. Its OK to think of other planets as having life having an atmosphere etc etc but what makes Earth so unique is that we have a very peculiar moon. As I understand it, without our moon, we could not exist due to the tidal pull which stops the water on earth stagnating and poisoning all life. We rely on night and day and could not survive without (literally) our beauty sleep. We also rely on a set degree of tilt, again which were it to vary could be the end of us.

I also wonder why, if aliens had made us to do their mining for us, why did nthey not take us with them when they left? Unless we could not adapt to a new environment or withstand the journey.

We have seen so much sci fi - and I have been a huge fan since a kiddie - but what looks effortless on the big screen - even if we can match some of the technology, fades because of the distances and the dangers of space travel. One hole in the ship by a small stone in space and its big trouble because it not like the ocean, there is nowhere to head for once out in space for repairs.

Although I watch the threads on the moon and what is possibly there I still think amateur astromers would have blown the whistle were there really ships landing and leaving the moon or 'people' already living there.

I am not normally sceptical, but aliens and when we happened to appear, is great food for thought until one thinks of the problems involved, or, that some being on the lines of a real and actual God, created us and then, due to his lack of recent appearances, wandered off having lost interest in us or worse having no purpose for us.



posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 11:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Shiloh7




I am not normally sceptical, but aliens and when we happened to appear, is great food for thought until one thinks of the problems involved, or, that some being on the lines of a real and actual God, created us and then, due to his lack of recent appearances, wandered off having lost interest in us or worse having no purpose for us.

 


Careful. There's more to that subject than you know of. The bible does explain that. And the explanation is this. The first century Jews got their God so upset that he cut them off for 2000 years. And that 2000 years are not up yet.

My best guess is that the 2000 years end sometime in the 2020s. And it's going to be a bumpy ride to get there.

This says it all.

Zechariah 13
7 Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man that is my fellow, saith the LORD of hosts: smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered: and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones.
8 And it shall come to pass, that in all the land, saith the LORD, two parts therein shall be cut off and die; but the third shall be left therein.
9 And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried: they shall call on my name, and I will hear them: I will say, It is my people: and they shall say, The LORD is my God.



posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 12:06 PM
link   
reply to post by JadeStar
 

If I'm correct then they will have right handed DNA. Honestly I don't understand how reverse panspermia seems so far fetched to you guys. 65 million years ago there was an impact on Earth so big that it killed the dinosaurs. Such an impact would certainly create the potential to seed other planets. Even a planet thousands of light years away would still have had millions of years for Earth's microbes to evolve.
Of course both scenarios are possible, but I'd say reverse panspermia is much more likely and provable.

For the record, my holographic DNA flavor of reverse panspermia is definitely reaching for the stars, but as far as the scenario above goes, there's not much wiggle room to argue against it.


edit on 3-2-2014 by Bone75 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 12:55 PM
link   
reply to post by ntech
 


Thanks Ntech for you reply, however it doesn't make any sense because I then start to wonder what on earth God was up to when he first created the dinosaurs and the gorgonosics that existed before even them. He waited a hell of a long time before he decided to make us. None of it makes sense because if a God wanted gold here he would have killed off the animals to mine it anyhow. It also leaves the question open - what on earth did God want with gold? He could create life, according to some so surely he could have made gold, it should have been easier.

Recently there was a thread about life starting up from a mix of cells and heat with the scientist who noticed this saying that life looked as though it was inevitable given the right circumstances wherever and whenever.



posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 01:08 PM
link   

Shiloh7
Although I know the theory is there for folding space and there are probably other means of powering a space ship, I always seem to get little futher than the realisation that our planet is somewhat unique. Its OK to think of other planets as having life having an atmosphere etc etc but what makes Earth so unique is that we have a very peculiar moon.


Our moon is not peculiar. There are plenty of large moons in our solar system. There is no reason to believe that they are unique. In Astronomy if there is one of something there's likely a billion or more of it if you look hard enough. We're probably no exception.

And without the moon a habitable planet closer to its star (due to it circling a cooler star) would experience tides due to the star.

Also it may very well be possible to have habitable exomoons around Gas Giants (like Avatar). These moons would experience a lot MORE tides than the Earth does.





As I understand it, without our moon, we could not exist due to the tidal pull which stops the water on earth stagnating and poisoning all life.


You've got this wrong. The water wouldn't stagnate at all due to weather. You know. Large storms, hurricanes, etc.

The importance of tides has been overemphasized due to the role they may have played in mixing up the precursors to life in tidal pools.


We rely on night and day and could not survive without (literally) our beauty sleep. We also rely on a set degree of tilt, again which were it to vary could be the end of us.


That's one theory (among many others which indicate we don't need the moon) which has a long way to go and is the last vestige of the nearly dead "rare Earth hypothesis". Only a few people take it seriously any more as plenty of other research indicates that life would get along just fine even if we had no moon.

We get tides from the sun as well as the moon but solar tides are weaker and thus less popular.

You're also not looking at the factor weather plays. Wind is just as good as tides for mixing up complex biology.



posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 01:19 PM
link   
I'd advise everyone to listen to Terence McKenna's definition of E.T's and higher civilizations. It will literally blow your mind, if you have an open one. I know I mention Terence a lot, and a great deal of people may disagree with him (which he acknowledged and confronted) but if you really listen and pay attention you'll understand his words. Make sure to listen to the full 21 minutes.




posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Phage
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 




Hopefully, one day we'll get a chance to meet some of them. See how they live, what they drive, what kinds of animals evolved on their planets, what kinds of ships and planes they fly, what kinds of foods they eat.

It works both ways. If there is a way to escape our island and we find it, we may find species just emerging into intelligence.

Then what?


Then they might be tasty!

Seriously though, we eat pretty much all species we come across, and I'm sure we would eat alien bacon too.

With that in mind, imagine a species similar to us showing up on Earth. Would it really be that outrageous to believe that they would decide to farm us?

I have it on good authority that we taste like chicken..



posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Bone75
reply to post by JadeStar
 

If I'm correct then they will have right handed DNA. Honestly I don't understand how reverse panspermia seems so far fetched to you guys.




Because there are billions of other planets like the Earth and most of them are older... We know this from results from Kepler:



My rockin' Kepler mug courtesy of the Kepler Science Team at NASA Ames.

It's simple math.

22% of Sunlike (F, G, and K class stars) have an Earthlike habitable planet.



48% of smaller/cooler Red Dwarf (M class stars) have an Earthlike habitable planet. The nearest one is likely within 10 light years.



Put that together and you get numbers like this for habitable Earthlike planets in our Galaxy...





65 million years ago there was an impact on Earth so big that it killed the dinosaurs. Such an impact would certainly create the potential to seed other planets.


Most planetary systems are FAR older than 65 million years. Think billions of years older than our Sun and Earth. Our Earth is 4.5 billion years old. Our galaxy is 11.8 billion years old. The universe is around 15 billion years old.


Considering the ingredients for life are plentiful and have been observed in far flung locations its silly to think that life would only evolve HERE 4 billion years old then travel BACK IN TIME to seed other planets which came BEFORE THE EARTH EVEN EXISTED.

Not only that but the vast MAJORITY of them circle stars with LONGER LIFETIMES than our Sun will have.

You see. the more massive the star, the shorter it's life.

Basic stellar evolution.





G-class stars like our Sun only make up around 3.5% of the stars planets circle. Lower mass K and M stars make up the majority... A whopping 88%!!!!

Again it's a numbers game...



Our most likely aliens will circle a K or M star far older than our Sun.


Even a planet thousands of light years away would still have had millions of years for Earth's microbes to evolve.


Assuming such microbes could exist in the cold, waterless depths of space for billions of years (a HUGE assumption with no evidence or basis in reality so far), how do you get around the travel time issue and the fact that they'd have to travel BACK IN TIME to seed planets which came before our Earth created.

Not to mention the vast distances involved. A meteoric impact would eject material travelling SLOWER THAN THE VOYAGER SPACE PROBES.

There would be NO TIME for the microbes to get to a suitable world where they could "sprout and spawn". They wouldn't be travelling at the speed of light.

More like Earth escape velocity which is 11-12 kilometers per hour.

The speed of light is 186,000 kilometers PER SECOND.

Based on the numbers I gave you above our first detection of alien life anywhere beyond the solar system is likely to involve life which was present before our planet even existed.

So since travelling back in time is probably a feat your hardy microbes would find very hard to do, your idea is full of holes and almost certainly wrong.



Of course both scenarios are possible,


Nope, because one ignores a basic fact about the Galaxy, that our planet is young and theirs are old....oh and that microbes can't do time travel.

LOL.


Its fun to speculate but useful speculation is based upon solid information and physical laws to the universe. That's where you idea is lacking.



but I'd say reverse panspermia is much more likely and provable.


You need to learn a lot more about astronomy young padawan....

For the record, my holographic DNA flavor of reverse panspermia is definitely reaching for the stars, but as far as the scenario above goes, there's not much wiggle room to argue against it.


edit on 3-2-2014 by Bone75 because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-2-2014 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-2-2014 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 01:40 PM
link   
reply to post by JadeStar
 


Though i agree there is probably other life its far from a certainty. There could be something that prohibits life and we were a one in a trillion mishap because as of right now were the only game in town.



posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 01:43 PM
link   

dragonridr
reply to post by JadeStar
 


Though i agree there is probably other life its far from a certainty. There could be something that prohibits life and we were a one in a trillion mishap because as of right now were the only game in town.


While possible, that would fly in the face of everything we've been learning about life, the universe, and everything since Copernicus.

We're not special. There's little reason to believe we are.

Without good reason to believe that we are the smart money is on the fact that we probably live in a populated universe. It won't be long before we find life out there and confirm this. Stick around the next 15-30 years and I'd be willing to wager we will have found it.

You might like this...

www.space.com...
edit on 3-2-2014 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
31
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join