Do you believe in Aliens? (Page 7)

Lanra
Lanra: I'm not sure if this has been covered already.
The case against Travis Walton and his eyewitnesses is the closest thing to scientific proof from USA.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travis_Walton

9 years ago Report
0
LiptonCambell
LiptonCambell: Eyewitness accounts are scientific evidence now ?
9 years ago Report
1
lavendar_star
lavendar_star: I think its bit patronising for people do argue that ancient civilisation in Africa, India and the Americas were too primitive to create pyramids and other artefacts so it must of been ancient aliens instead despite the evidence to the contrary.

Also I had a moment in my teens where I thought I saw a UFO I was convinced until i realised later on that its was the lightening in Wembley stadium near by lol.

The same reasoning and explanation one can give to people who claim to see God, Angels or ghosts can be applied to UFOs and aliens, people see what they want to see and the human mind can make images people see into anything they want, the human mind is quite amazing.
9 years ago Report
1
One Bar
(Post deleted by One Bar 9 years ago)
hellbhoy
hellbhoy: Probable and possible may be contained in the same sentence highlighting a point in a differing argument for or against.

1, It is probable there is life out there on the possibility there is life on earth.
2, There is no possibility of alien life without probable evidence.

Anyone who demands evidence before believing in alien life first must take the first piece of evidence for it.
There IS life on earth ?,where there is one there must be another because just about every other planet in the universe contains all matter in varying amounts !.
I'm sure this should get a few replies with the "this does not constitute evidence of it" then we should just dismiss the fact there is life on earth completely on that basis.
9 years ago Report
0
Aura
Aura: Well, no all planets do not contain all matter, or at least if our current thinking of how matter is created is correct, the shouldn't contain all matter. The current theory is that heavier elements are made in dying stars by means of fusion when the supply of hydrogen is (almost) depleted. So a first generation solar system should have less to no heavy elements and systems that are a few generations more than ours might have elements we do not have here on earth. Of course our own life is based on carbon mass (12) so it might not be all that important that some planets might lack things like plutonium (232 or more) for basic life forms.
9 years ago Report
0
One Bar
(Post deleted by One Bar 9 years ago)
hellbhoy
hellbhoy: Zen I said just about ! and also how the hell do we know what elements are on other planets ?.We send a probe to a few nearby planets scratch around a little on the surface in a small area and then make assumptions and assumptions on distant planets based on spectral analysis.

A classic similar argument happening just now with the same idea as this thread ! The HIGGS ! at the moment there is NO HIGGS because there is NO EVIDENCE ! RIGHT !.But some people on here are talking about it on here on threads like it EXISTS ! RIGHT !.Scientists are closing in on where they think it is apparently on spectral data.At this moment THE HIGGS is still only a THEORY they say it is PROBABLE ! RIGHT ! A POSSIBILTY based on MATH !.This paragraph may not be about alien life but is still relevant.If we find a planet out there that the MATH says is ripe for the condition of life ! should we assume there is ?.
9 years ago Report
0
Aura
Aura: Lol okay you are right, we do not know what elements are on other planets. But how does that defend you position that just about all matters is found on all planets?
9 years ago Report
0
LiptonCambell
LiptonCambell: >>>I'm sure this should get a few replies with the "this does not constitute evidence of it"

That's good- that means you have some inkling of why your argument is flawed.

>>>and also how the hell do we know what elements are on other planets ?

Observation of the stars help. Certainly if we can determine if the star is a first generation or not, we can determine what possible elements they have.

>>>We send a probe to a few nearby planets scratch around a little on the surface in a small area and then make assumptions and assumptions on distant planets based on spectral analysis.

Isn't your own stance based on assumption upon assumption? I agree that the information we have is very sparse- wouldn't then the logical conclusion be for both of us to concede that the information is not yet sufficient to make a conclusion?

And yet, you still hold a stance, despite expressing the great flaws in our information. Why is that? Isn't that a contradiction?

>>>If we find a planet out there that the MATH says is ripe for the condition of life !

But the math doesn't say anything of the sort.
9 years ago Report
0
hellbhoy
hellbhoy: Lipton
Yes we know next to nothing about the stars as it's still all basic THEORY and HYPOTHESIS mate.

Some smart nerd with a big calculator coming to the conclusion that a star is how many generations old because he uses THE MATH ? can this nerdy scientist actually PROVE that the star is that old or umpteenth generation ? You type POSSIBLE elements created and I'm getting a hard time for using the word POSSIBLE and my reasons for ! has he been around for over BILLIONS of years and has the data to support because he has actually observed this star imploding and exploding a few times any elements produced ? NO coz he uses the MATH to come to that conclusion because the data SUGGESTS it ! I'll repeat that again for ya ! SUGGESTS ! and you don't question it because he has a PHD.

Yes I'll agree to being rubbed up the wrong way a little ! well a lot by some.

SITS says ;
I agree with Lipton, who rationally refuses to acknowledge that there is any proof, or even indication, of extra-terrestrial life.

What's rational about that SITS ? basically your giving a clear NO by refusal ? that's a pretty darn narrow view you have there by STATING without actually KNOWING there is NO extra terrestrial life out there because you REFUSE to acknowledge on the grounds of we have no evidence or poof.Is it POSSIBLE that you forgot to include PROBABLE or POSSIBLE between ANY and PROOF in your above statement.

Everything our civilization knows has been achieved by accumulating ALL the facts first ! FOR and AGAINST or IS and NOT or CAN and CAN'T or WILL or WON'T and through the process of elimination then we get a definitive outcome.So by eliminating and refusing something YOU CAN'T even prove yourself there because you haven't traveled the universe and visited every planet in it or someone who has is bordering close to being arrogant.

If your ruling out CHANCE,PROBABILITY,POSSIBILITY,MAYBE or COULD BE ascertaining your position will you STICK to your position on the subject because no evidence or poof off which still is an indecisive answer in itself like CHANCE,PROBABILITY,POSSIBILITY,MAYBE or COULD BE ?.
(Edited by hellbhoy)
9 years ago Report
0
One Bar
(Post deleted by One Bar 9 years ago)
hellbhoy
hellbhoy: Nice one ONE BAR I needed the humour he he.
9 years ago Report
0
LiptonCambell
LiptonCambell: >>>Some smart nerd with a big calculator coming to the conclusion that a star is how many generations old because he uses THE MATH ?

Not exactly. We measure, we gauge, we observe, and we find a constant. And though that, we continue to test and gauge and observe, in the attempt to find a flaw in our calculations- and if one is found, we change our calculations and possibly our conclusions

The Drakes Equation makes no measurements, conducts no tests, and in 600 years(ha! 6!), it will make no changes to their calculations.

>>> can this nerdy scientist actually PROVE that the star is that old or umpteenth generation ?

Sometimes, yes. There certainly are some hints that help us understand their age.

>>>You type POSSIBLE elements created and I'm getting a hard time for using the word POSSIBLE

Not from me, no.

>>>as he been around for over BILLIONS of years and has the data to support because he has actually observed this star imploding and exploding a few times any elements produced ?

So, just to make your stance clear- in order to make any stance on this subject, you must be a billion years old?

It seems you have unreasonable and frankly impossible requirements.

>>>basically your giving a clear NO by refusal ?

Refusal of what?

>>> that's a pretty darn narrow view you have there by STATING without actually KNOWING there is NO extra terrestrial life out there

And that's a pretty darn narrow view you have there by STATING without actually KNOWING there IS extra terrestrial life out there

>>> because you REFUSE to acknowledge on the grounds of we have no evidence or poof.

Is....is that a double negative?

>>>Everything our civilization knows has been achieved by accumulating ALL the facts first !

Not true! We don't know for certain why we have such a large moon- but that didn't stop people from concluding exactly how oil works and how to use it in an engine.

If what you said was remotely true, we'd all be living in caves, refusing to acknowledge wheat grows from seeds until we can fully explain the issues of quantum mechanics.

>>>So by eliminating and refusing something YOU CAN'T even prove yourself there because you haven't traveled the universe and visited every planet in it or someone who has is bordering close to being arrogant.

Are you suggesting that I should not or can not hold an opinion on whether or not aliens exist until I've reached a point of omniscience?

I'm sorry, but I'm not going to wait. If I am to form an opinion in my lifetime, I will use whatever knowledge is available- not what our best guess's or greatest hopes are.

>>>If your ruling out CHANCE,PROBABILITY,POSSIBILITY,MAYBE or COULD BE

Have you ever heard of Russell's teapot?
9 years ago Report
0
One Bar
(Post deleted by One Bar 9 years ago)
hellbhoy
hellbhoy: One Bar I have to laugh about this thread sometimes.

We have a program in the UK called "The sky at night" it deals with everything in the universe even extra terrestrial life.Patrick Moore a prominent,eminent and well respected figure on the planet on the universe has had many programs on extra terrestrial life whether it EXISTS or NOT does not rule out the possibility of it himself,he does not require evidence first but bases his OPINION on the FACTS in hand that we have.Even if there is a 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 exponential chance we MUST assume even if it's life in a different form completely ie does not contain DNA or a planet like earth but has an atmosphere capable of sustaining it regardless of type of sun proximity to it's sun and so forth there might be because THERE IS life on earth.

>>>You type POSSIBLE elements created and I'm getting a hard time for using the word POSSIBLE

Not from me, no. Agreed and I didn't say you and sorry if you thought otherwise.

Russell's teapot ! looked it up and a good philosophical self defeating argument it is and thanks for stirring it up a notch Lipton har har.As SITS pointed out to me APPLES and ORANGES yes they are different but they are both still a fruit are they not.

SITS & LIPTON requires the proof first.APPLE
HELLBHOY also requires proof first but HAS FAITH on the probability FOR also.ORANGE
9 years ago Report
0
LiptonCambell
LiptonCambell: What i don't get, hellbhoy, is you have an incredibly critical look at the science behind our facts, claiming the estimates are too inaccurate- and yet, you side with a stance that is ENTIRELY guesswork and estimates.

Not only that, but the estimates you support are formed using the facts you've already criticized and rejected.

Why do you reject the method for understanding the age of stars, distance between each other, ect ect, but do not reject the calculations that use their conclusions?
9 years ago Report
0
hellbhoy
hellbhoy: Simple Lipton after the Cern search for the HIGGS anything after a certain distance in light years will now have to be reviewed completely.Our understanding of things outwith our solar system will as you put it have to be recalculated using the new data,the position of distant objects,the speed the universe is expanding,how other stars function in a life cycle and do they create things that travel faster than light,how all matter is created and all manner of things.If a particle can now be accelerated beyond the speed of light under certain conditions how and what effect does this particle affect have on it's it's immediate surrounding.Like what they have found out ! they sent a proton into what you might call another dimension evading our understanding of time and physics combined ! it disappeared and reappeared before the conventional data appeared ! we now have a dilemma ! is there a whole other part of the universe we can't see at the moment right beside us or in us or passing through us ! If possible if we can create a proton hyper drive,can we just physically travel through the sun after the speed of light ?.Is the Hubble pictures just interstellar pollution creating these amazing pictures ?.Yes I know there other stars galaxies and that but that's just simple finite data IT'S THERE like seeing across a river looking at the other side.
9 years ago Report
0
LiptonCambell
LiptonCambell: I'm not entirely sure what your point was with the previous comment....how does this support your belief in aliens?
9 years ago Report
0
lavendar_star
lavendar_star: Who missed up this thread lol

9 years ago Report
0
hellbhoy
hellbhoy: LIPTON my point on the universe what we know and how we can be explained by one thing and is relevant to everything else.
I won't bother trolling around the web for other supporting data for other things in the universe because I can't be arsed to PROVE my point further.

"A BLACK HOLE".

Black holes exist don't they ? there is evidence for ! correct ?.

Well you'd be totally wrong actually if you thought there was evidence because it is all still theory and only co-incidental evidence for what they think is a black hole,check the links below from credible sources like NASA and such.

1, http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2001/ast12jan_1/

2, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole

3, http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/10/111011102010.htm

4, http://amazing-space.stsci.edu/resources/explorations/blackholes/teacher/sciencebackground.html

First thing I'll point out here is they all use "Einsteins theory of relativity" at the core of everything they produce,then they use terms like THEORIZED , THROUGH THEORY , BEST EVIDENCE FOR , FOR THE EXISTENCE OF , PREDICTS , DETERMINED , HYPOTHESIZED , BASED ON , BELIEVED TO BE , ACCORDING TO , CONVINCING or CONVINCED and so forth but never actually say THAT THIS IS A BLACK HOLE at any time.

So if they are using Einsteins relativity "THEORY" to get their results,data or other.Then CERNS results totally wreck Einsteins theory by what we have ACTUALLY as FACTUAL through actual REAL data acquired through experimentation and is backed up by multiple experiments clearly giving the same results.

What we actually KNOW FOR REAL about stars are ! their orbiting planets ! the emitted spectral analysis from the stars or planets to a point out there and that's about it.

So if you BELIEVE there are such things as a black hole then you may as well believe there is alien life forms out because a black hole is just a theory at the moment with no actual PROOF OF their existence but people believe there are black holes.
(Edited by hellbhoy)
9 years ago Report
0
lavendar_star
lavendar_star: OK, Im not good at science but here goes would a planet far far away that possibly had aliens ( which I personally believe in more than God, God is 1%
chance and Aliens 5% chance) I would increase that possibility of organism existing on another planet to lets say 15%.

So wouldn't a planet have to be similar to earth in which to sustain life and then wouldn't these aliens look like or be like humans or would it be a different type
of humanoid i.e Neanderthals rather than us the Homosapiens or would there been a change in variable where evolution has gone a different way.
If that is the case they would be like us and not have the technology to travel ( discrediting-not that i need to lol any form of ancient aliens,
who btw seem a bit racist as they never went to Europe what's that about lol but now they are being reverse racist and just going to Europe and also to North America weird)

Furthermore, why do we care so much about aliens if they did exists, what happens next, when humans dislike people within our own species based on skin colour, race and even hair colour yes ginger prejudice is real. Then again maybe humans would unite against these beings and racism would finally become thing of the past, also if they are more advance then us, as Hollywood has shown wouldn't there be a high chance they would enslave us or colonise us or as history of humankind has shown i doubt we would be too friendly with them.

the mind wonders.

Does anyone British remember Jeremy Beetle show on the episode where they did a prank and had a middle class woman believe that aliens had visit and all she did was ask if they wanted a cup of tea and the alien was so fake looking. lol

The aliens that people claim to see, seem to replicate what Hollywood has shown us or naked bald midget people lol and also why cant we concentrate on the living things on our own planet be it humans, animals and plants, we have species of animals being wiped out and we know the wonders of the oceans, there still tribes in Amazons who apparently ( for their survival not being found) who have been recently discovered or found. I find our obsession with God and Aliens a bizarre preoccupation of humankind we dont want to be all alone, like evolution and how the earth came to be can it not be that our planet earth is special within the realm of our own known universe but within the whole universe, I think parallel universes more probable and replicate us else where I give that 7%.
.







9 years ago Report
0
hellbhoy
hellbhoy: Your right Lavender this thread has been totally wrecked ha ha,it was Jeremy Beadle that did it on candid camera.

I think if we ever got contact from an intelligent extra terrestrial life form they would tells us to "FACK OFF YOU SELF DESTROYING POWER MONGERING HUMANOIDS WE DON'T WANT YA" har har.

And if you have followed this thread Lavender you be asked DO YOU HAVE PROOF of anything you posted FFS.
9 years ago Report
0
hellbhoy
hellbhoy: OH LAVENDER I meant to add there be no life on this planet soon if things here keep escalating the way are.Just another lifeless dead planet amongst the other lifeless ones in this universe.

I'll be sure to be asked to provide PROOF of that because we demand proof ya fecker before we believe anything ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHH.
9 years ago Report
0
lavendar_star
lavendar_star: lol, well I can U tube( I got the last name wrong Beadle clip), but its just my humble opinion and bit of common sense and my intellectual reasoning, like I said
science is not my speciality so its just my 2 pence of the debate.

For real we are a effed up species Im not being anti human lol but I just dont no why we so want to meet aliens if we cant even live with our own species and our fellow beings on our own planet.
9 years ago Report
0