Intergalactic Life

[Francis]

Do you believe in Aliens? Well, in my side I do. I do believe that there is life beyond earth. And as a matter of fact, I do believe that we are not alone. Before you think of me as an idiot or something, I have a basis for saying this. I did research. Now, before we begin this debate, I'd like to cite my resource-- cybernoypi (http://cybernoypi.wordpress.com/2008/03/16/ufo-area-51-the-alien-interview/). Its a WordPress blog where I found the alien documentation, and it will serve as my evidence or concrete source.

With these on the hotseat, I'd like to start the debate. Who's with me? Who's not?

[masterofhobbiton]

I do believe in extraterrestrial life, but not in the manner presented in the videos you have linked to. I find them laughably absurd, I am sorry. I could be completely long, a flying saucer could land and 'greys' could come out and I would be shocked and admit you were right all along. But right now I think the idea is absurd.

[Francis]

No, that video was just to show my plot. I did no intend it to be something you would think of as a real thing. I called it 'evidence and concrete sources' just to show my plot, and all the others who also believe in it.

[Lithium]

Yes, I agree with MoH, there is indeed life out there, but in what form? Micro Bacteria? translucent creatures invisible to the naked eye? The universe is so fucking huge, we're not even sure if it ends.

[ScottieIWU]

The presence of life within the universe other than ourselves is just short of a certainty. Probability states that, based on the amount of space, the amount of planets that are in any way similar to Earth (and thus, are more likely to give rise to life as we know it) etc all basically create a probability that is almost impossible to deny. Carl Sagan actually went on about this at some point in time, and did the math based off known stars, etc.

On the other hand, the probability of that life being intelligent, similar anatomically to ourselves, developing interstellar/intergalactic space flight and coming to our planet is almost zero. Most stars do not actually have a planet in any way similar to Earth, and those that do are no doubt extremely far away. For aliens to fly between stars (we assume at no more than the speed of light) and waste all of that time in the hopes of maybe finding humans is pointless. There is no guarantee on their part that they'd accomplish anything.

Those videos are so bogus as to not even be humorous.

[TheOutcast]

We can't be the only ones. If you think of all those stars out there, even the ones in our galaxy, there's got to be a life-supporting planet orbiting one. The other day I saw a documentary called "extra terrestrial", and it's about scientists who have discovered a planet that could support life, and they made some observations. They made hypothesis about what the lifeforms would be like. It's hard to explain everything.

The aliens are most likely wondering the same thing and asking the same questions about other lifeforms within the universe.

[Skullflower]

Out of the millions of galaxies out there there has to be one planet that supports life besides ours.

[FrankZ]

The presence of life within the universe other than ourselves is just short of a certainty. Probability states that, based on the amount of space, the amount of planets that are in any way similar to Earth (and thus, are more likely to give rise to life as we know it) etc all basically create a probability that is almost impossible to deny. Carl Sagan actually went on about this at some point in time, and did the math based off known stars, etc.

On the other hand, the probability of that life being intelligent, similar anatomically to ourselves, developing interstellar/intergalactic space flight and coming to our planet is almost zero. Most stars do not actually have a planet in any way similar to Earth, and those that do are no doubt extremely far away. For aliens to fly between stars (we assume at no more than the speed of light) and waste all of that time in the hopes of maybe finding humans is pointless. There is no guarantee on their part that they'd accomplish anything.

Those videos are so bogus as to not even be humorous.

If that's how you see it Scottie, then I suppose Mr. Columbus did not waste all of that time in the hopes of maybe finding new land being pointless.

And as for everybody heartily laughing and splitting their sides, in my opinion, someone's work, whether in your opinion, is far fetched, isn't something to laugh at.

[TheOutcast]

Yes, I agree with MoH, there is indeed life out there, but in what form? Micro Bacteria? translucent creatures invisible to the naked eye? The universe is so fucking huge, we're not even sure if it ends.
And if the universe does end, then something beyond scientific reality or explanation lies outside of it. Another dimension possibly? It would be something we could not possibly imagine or describe if so. Stuff like this is interesting to think about, especially what could be beyond that dimension. :o

Out of the millions of galaxies out there there has to be one planet that supports life besides ours.
I just said that.

[ScottieIWU]

If that's how you see it Scottie, then I suppose Mr. Columbus did not waste all of that time in the hopes of maybe finding new land being pointless.Your conception of those events is clearly mistaken. While explorers in that era DID go out in search of just random new lands, Columbus new something was there and intended to go in our direction to find a path to those lands. Him running into the Americas was purely coincidental.

Moreover, there are certain issues that you have with that analogy, namely that wind never ends, but power for a space ship very likely could. Space exploration also takes decades to centuries, or more, and exploring earth via sailing took a couple of years, tops. There is no logic behind aiming your ship at a star and starting a voyage there for hundreds of years in the hope of finding something.

Superior technology that is beyond the realm of human conception aside, there is no such thing as extraterrestrial visits to earth, despite that the existence of these creatures is a certainty.

[TheBB]

Intergalactic Life

I believe in E.T. also, but not intergalactic. At least that's a much bigger leap than simply interstellar. You should be more careful with your thread titles.

The real question is if there exists intelligent life in this galaxy. There is no reason to believe we will ever be able to contact anything in another galaxy. So even if the sheer number of galaxies may practically guarantee the existence of intelligent life, that doesn't guarantee the possibility of contact as such.

[FrankZ]

Then tell me, Scottie. What makes you so sure that there is no such thing as extraterrestrial visits?

Don't call me looney or anything, I just want to know what makes you so confident in what you say, and that if in case aliens do exist, what makes you sure that their psychology is not like those of the explorers of the golden era of exploration?

[Durandal]

.Frank, taking into consideration that we don't even really know of any planets similar to our own, and any that we do have suspicions about are tens, hundreds, maybe even thousands of light years away - a trip to anywhere that has a remote probability of life has at best a slim chance of success, and would be centuries in the making, resulting in possibly no gain at all (Except finding an empty, yet habitable, planet, one simply inhabited by non-sentient species, or in the worst case scenario, a dead world.). It would be completely un-economical, and the crew that made it to the world would likely never return home anyway, instead opting on settling the planet. That is, if the planet itself doesn't become inhospitable in the journey over like Mars is suspected to have done.

.They would be unable to maintain any efficient communication with their home-world as well, since it would take hundreds if not thousands of years for their transmissions to reach them (provided that they do at all, which is very unlikely. Recent research has yielded that our own radio signals actually fade into nothing but white noise only 1.2 light years away from earth.) and as far as the home-world would know, the mission resulted in a failure. Their home-world, in the time of their trip, might even invent a more efficient method of rapid transportation or long range analysis, making the trip obsolete and a complete waste of manpower and time. It'd be more practical for them to send out robotic probes.

.And maybe even the situation on their world is similar to our own, where we place more emphasis on global conflict rather than starside exploration.
.

[ScottieIWU]

Durandal covers a lot of the good points, but I'd also like to point out the reasons why this is stupefying that anybody believes in extra-terrestrial visits to earth.

1) As Durandal says, the nearest planets that we believe could conceive life in ANY fashion similar to what we know is hundreds-to-thousands of light years away. I point out that I say "life as we know it" but I do not mean deer, etc. I mean, rather, the conditions by which life arises based on observable places on Earth. There is nothing that says life couldn't exist in other fashions that we are unaware of, but clearly, directing the search for life to planets like Jupiter or Mercury would be pointless, because the chances of finding life there are even more slim.

2) Real life is not science fiction, and it is also highly unlikely that something could live for a hundred or thousand years while at the same time being a species that is also sentient and technologically advanced enough to conceive of interstellar travel. While 100 years is a stretch, and could happen, more than that begins to cause problems for the imagination.

3) Because interstellar travel is extremely expensive in terms of fuel, costs to build, etc, even the most technologically advanced race, one that could feasibly build interstellar modes of travel, would most likely not have the resources to equip a ship with enough supplies to last 100 years. There have been studies in our space programs to determine whether or not plants could grow, and perhaps there is some form of dehydrated food, but you won't find any Star Trek-style replicators. Packing enough food for one person, plus the ability to grow food in space would probably only support one person, and supporting more becomes even more complicated. See point 4.

4) One could not undertake this journey alone. NASA in some ways fears sending astronauts to Mars because that long in space, with just a few people, would no doubt cause severe psychological distress. So, at very least, you would need 2 people to keep your intrepid explorer from going utterly insane, and the more people you have, the more chance one could go nuts anyway and do something stupid. Even the most psychologically hardened person needs company to survive.

5) Back to the lifespan, because we know that you would need at least two explorers on the ship, probably more, then there stands the chance that these beings could copulate and raise a child in space (an argument that I feel might come up). However, the resources for that are absolutely impossible to come by. This child would have to be educated solely by his/her parents, would have to learn the controls and methods of running a spacecraft, etc. It is highly unlikely that any child fostered in this environment would not suffer extreme psychological distress because of the lack of peers.

6) Physical limitations. First off, unless these beings were to evolve in an extremely low-gravity, or no-gravity environment, their bodies will no doubt shrivel and die by time they get to Earth, for lack of any exercise. Even shuttle missions, where astronauts are required to work out daily to keep from muscle atrophy, find the astronauts weaker upon returning to earth. These missions last a few days to a week or two, not decades, hundreds, or thousands of years. By time any interstellar being hit Earth, he/she would be completely unable to walk, move muscles or anything outside of a zero-gravity environment.

7) Illness. Close quarters breeds illness, and if one person on this voyage somehow managed to get sick (bad food, contact with excrement, etc) then it is likely the rest of them would. Without at least one trained doctor and medical facilities to compensate, it is likely that this illness could debilitate or kill whoever is involved. Plus, when these beings got to Earth, think of War of the Worlds. What is to say that they wouldn't become infected by us, or us by them? Don't you think that if these aliens existed and had come to earth, there would be some trace in some kind of strange, incurable or new illness that we had never previously seen? Think of when the settlers came to North America and massive amounts of Native Americans died to illnesses that the settlers brought over. This WOULD happen with space travel, and contact between interstellar species would require very careful quarantine until the risks of illness could be discovered.

8) Ship maintainence. Micrometeorites, larger meteorites, dust, debris, anything could damage the ship these people travel on. Space travel is a fragile thing, simply because the smallest micrometeorite can tear apart your ship. Maintainence materials and tools would have to be carried along, which further minimizes the amount of space you have, and increases the load. Moreover, on top of having a trained doctor and pilot, you also need a trained repairman, and one who is trained in how to do EV repairs at (we assume, because otherwise the time frame is MUCH longer) nearly the speed of light. One fuck-up and that guy is gone so fast, and then your ship is DEFINITELY out of luck. Any number of things could go wrong, and any number of things could breach the hull at light speed and just instantly kill everyone.

In conclusion: you, sir, have been thoroughly debunked.

Edit: On that note, inter-galactic life, as previously stated, is so far away as to make contact nigh impossible. That would not require centuries, but millions of years for anything to reach us at the speed of light. Even our own galaxy is 100,000 light years across, and if life were on the other side of the galaxy, you're looking at 100,000 years or so to reach us, not to mention the 1,000 or so light years thick that Milky Way is. The nearest star to us, Proxima Centauri, is 4.22 light years away and does not likely contain any life within its solar system. At current travel speeds it would take humans 32,000 years to reach Proxima Centauri.

[Durandal]

Well, you are basing most of your points off of our own current technological limitations. You could probably eliminate some of those points by arguing that they've already figured out workarounds, like say artificial gravity, solar or hydrogen fueled ships (Hydrogen or any similar substance from which fuel can be derived of can be extracted in feasible quantity through almost all of the known galaxy, with regard to the empty space in between.), or even the discover of artificial gravity. There are already currently existing, if crude methods, that could theoretically replicate gravity, such as a spinning chasis.

Not to mention that they are probably capable of going into cryogenic cycles and operating at very low power. Considering that there is no resistance to movement in space, in reality, very little fuel would be required to propel them except for their initial acceleration or even their escape velocity.

The possibility of a large colony-type ship with a crew of roughly a hundred being preserved in cryogenic chambers with seeds and other kinds of foods in cold storage to be grown when they awake isn't that far-fetched of a concept, but in the end is just impractical. As you've mentioned, the possibility of the ship taking severe or critical damage is impossible to calculate and prepare for. Every second the ship is in motion is more possibility for it to be destroyed and its crew killed in cold sleep, rendering it all a total waste. And it's not exactly like you can place tracking auto-cannons on the ship to eliminate any incoming debris, since many meteoroids can be just a few millimeters in diameter. But since they've been traveling at such a high speed for possibly billions of years, they would continue to accelerate until the thin armored hull of the ship would be incapable of stopping them.
.

[ScottieIWU]

I find it funny that the issue of structural failure is the one that couldn't be worked around, while the rest of them could. Honestly, I just don't see how hypothetical technology proves anything about the capabilities of these aliens. You could create scenarios all day where workarounds are created without us having a single bit of understanding how they work. What do you call that, then? Star Trek. Think of how many things in Star Trek have no cause, no scientific basis, but we just accept it because "it could happen." The more you hypothesize about what aliens could theoretically do if they had X technological improvement leads one to science fiction.

Yes, I'm working off of current technological issues, but since when was FTL travel even a physical possibility? Okay, then the timeframes still stand.

As far as a fusion or solar powered energy, this reduces the necessary fuel onboard, but doesn't change that acceleration to near-light speeds require obscene amounts of energy. A simple fusion core would not be able to provide that much energy. I don't have the numbers off-hand, but the amount of energy required to move something to near-light speeds is something like enough energy to power Earth for years. It's obscene, and a simple fusion or solar reactor cannot provide that much energy to provide quick acceleration to light-speeds, thus, time is required, which means that the time of travel is increased.

Cryogenic technology is in its infancy, and is still one of those things that nobody knows if it's even possible. The idea that aliens could wholesale safely place an entire colony ship into cryogenic stasis is extremely far-fetched.

Artificial gravity is nigh impossible, unless you go with a rotating ship that spins at extremely high RPM, and even then, that's barely artificial gravity. Other than that, you would have to get an object with an obscene mass at the center of the ship in order to pull people toward it, with real gravity. This of course brings in a whole bunch of other safety issues, because then not only do you have to engineer your ship to withstand space, but also you have to bring in structural engineers to ensure that all of the supports built for space can withstand the gravity caused by the massive core.

And honestly, even through this speculation you're kind of further proving the point that things like Area 51's aliens are bogus. The ships weren't colony ships, they were things that left so little debris that they looked like a weather balloon. There were only a couple of found "pilots" and there is no supermassive object that can create gravity within the ship.

The fact is that no matter how you try to justify this by clawing out at the air screaming "but technologyyyyyyyyy might be more advannnceeedddd," the odds of that are so low that there is basically no chance these alien encounters have ever been real.

Please, once again, keep in mind that I am not disputing the existence of extraterrestrial life. I consider it a certainty that somewhere in this universe there is an organism that is not of this planet. I just have a hard time listening to people trying to justify Area 51 myths as real because of shoddy evidence and science fiction.

[Durandal]

I never once suggested that they would be capable of faster than light travel, or even anywhere near light speed, so I don't see your point on that. Cryostasis technology is in its infancy, but far from impossibility. Tissue samples and cells have been successfully frozen and stored for long periods of time, and still retained their original functions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cryostasis#Freezable_tissues) when awakened.

Structural failure in my opinion would be very difficult to work around because the un-likelihood of harboring an active and awake crew; their constant drain on organic supplies and their own physical and psychological condition would be near impossible to prepare for and result in a complete waste of resources. It's more likely that repairmen or engineers would have to be awakened from some sort of cold sleep or hybernation either by an autonomous computer system, or by active crew taking regular shifts between cold sleep and management, providing that the former isn't itself damaged by the projectile. Even worse is if the damage is incredibly serious, such as a massive hull breach or breaches on multiple sectors that can't be contained by simply closing off the problematic compartment. Due to the lack of oxygen, they would have a hard time welding on plates to cover the area, too, and that's not even considering the possibility of it damaging critical and irreplaceable navigational, computer, or propulsion systems.

If the alien civilization isn't more advanced then we are, then there is no possible way they would have undertaken such a bold and dangerous mission to begin with, which is why I'm suggesting that they're utilizing technology beyond or more refined then our own. Though yeah, it's very unlikely that anything has visited us, much less crash-landed into the deserts of Nevada.

But aside from all that, I think we've already answered Frank's question about four times over, now. :)
.

[ScottieIWU]

You guys really don't understand the meaning of alien life, do you? It means something foreign to humans, therefore, we cannot have any solid basis on how the aliens live/survive. We classify things living capable of reacting to stimuli, reproduction, growth and maintenance as a stable whole. What if we do meet aliens someday, but they don't reproduce, grow, and maintain a stable whole, but they react to stimuli, ie: intelligent rocks. (XD) I'm just thinking hypothetically here, you guys really have no solid basis on determining whether or not aliens exist, but based, based on mathematical calculations and pure common sense, there is absolutely no reason why there shouldn't be any alien life forms out there. There's an entire field of writing devoted to speculation about what things like that would be like, free of any form of scientific evidence. It's called science fiction. Think about it.

Honestly, science is the means by which we quantify, measure, and describe the world. What we know constitutes what is possible within our understanding. Nobody in this thread thus far (that I can tell) has said that life beyond what we know could not possibly exist. Hell, I'm not even saying that. What I'm saying is that there is no point in speculating about it because we have no basis for thinking that life could exist as a sentient rock. Or as a wisp. Or as a pure energy being. That is why such thought is usually relegated to science fiction, so we can think about these interdimensional energy beings in a way that doesn't waste the time of scientists who seek to explain things that we know exist.

Looking at it from a creationism point of view, here's the evidence I've gathered. First of all, I would like to oppose the big bang theory. Say that the beginning of time, the beginning of space and matter all begun with this spontaneous dot containing incalculable amounts of matter within it. If gravity had been stronger or weaker by a trillionth trillionth trillionth, then it would've either imploded on itself or it would've just remained like that forever and ever. So why is gravity the way it is right now? 9 m/s squared? (Gah, I don't know the exact calculations) Because god created us. DUN DUN DUUUUN. But does that provide proof that god only created us? What about other creatuers, out in the universe? I'm going to drop my fairly benevolent intellectual discourse mask for a second and say one thing:

You are fucking stupid for even bringing this up. Not because it isn't necessarily some kind of valid point, but because now you have invited discourse into a religion-related topic, and as such, will now turn this thread into an atheism vs. religion debate.

That said, the reason you are wrong is as such: just because something happened to make the universe "fine-tuned" to life as it is, does not mean it was influenced by an invisible divine entity. It means that we're here to observe it and can question why the probabilities played out in our favor. Had they not played out in our favor, we would not be here asking that question. We might even exist in some unknown form of life that is asking "well fuck, guys, why are we like this, what if X constant had been Y instead."

The point is simply this: you are mixing causality here. We exist as we do because the universe is the way it is. By your logic, you are saying that the universe is the way it is, because we exist. We are not the cause of the universe being the way it is, the universe being the way it is is the cause of us. Is that clear enough, or shall I devote time to explaining why that argument falls flat on its face and gets stomped on by the fat retarded kid down the road who has to wear a helmet when he leaves his house?

Something doesn't need to be seen to exist. This has been proven througout history, over and over again.I'm not sure where you're going with this, but thinking to yourself that X is possible does not make it exist out in some distant realm of space.

I will once again state the point of my recent posts, just to make it clear: I do not deny that technologies with various technologies well beyond our own could exist. Rather, I am stating that engaging in speculation about these things is a waste of time, and doing so because of some fraudulent Area 51 video footage is an even bigger waste of time. We are best concerned with investigating extra-solar life in terms that we can not only understand, but quantify. Otherwise, we don't know what to look for.

[FrankZ]

I'm afraid you guys have been caging your logical electoplasmic psychological vortex into a mere four-cornered wall. Sometimes when dealing with subjects like these, you have to think more about what's out there and not what's already here. I mean, if you limit yourselves via the basis of human technology, there isn't a chance of even discovery.

It's like this: Americans did not limit themselves into their own technological capacities. When going out into wars against countries with advanced technologies, they always speculate around the thoughts of what are the possibilities of technology far off their current limitations. In simpler terms, when they were fighting with the Russians with their soldiers holding pistols, they already formulated plans on how to counter their enemies in case the Russians already carry laser guns.

You get the point? In case you don't try, re-reading and make some logic in there work. When talking about subjects as highly far-fetched as aliens, never limit the basis of your speech to the extent of human capabilities.

I know this sounds crazy, or as you say bunkered, but your intellect is far more advanced than the kid who opened this thread. He was merely debating about something he was too believed in. So the psychology when debating with a kid is to think like him. Don't say rusty pistols if the opposition is talking about laser guns.

Also, do not counter this post nor debate with me, as this is my last post here in this thread as I have absolutely no interest in this subject whatsoever.

[WhatIsStarcraft]

This is a rather short post, but, whatever. ScottieIWU, humans did not use only a couple of years to explore the entire earth with only the use of sailing. That is a wrong statement!

[ScottieIWU]

This is a rather short post, but, whatever. ScottieIWU, humans did not use only a couple of years to explore the entire earth with only the use of sailing. That is a wrong statement!Perhaps the way my statement was phrased led to the assumption that I was saying it only took a couple of years to explore earth. That is not what I meant. Rather, I was pointing out that each individual voyage would not have taken decades to hundreds of years of TRANSIT alone, with no layovers. Crossing the Pacific often entailed stopping to get supplies in various places, and crossing the Atlantic seldom (to my knowledge) took more than a few years.

Moreover, one of the main reasons that discovering parts of the planet took so long, besides longer voyages, was basically because it took so long to fund and prepare an exploratory voyage. Ships weren't leaving port daily to find new places, it often took weeks or months between voyages.

The exploration and discovery of the major continents, islands, etc, obviously did not happen in a matter of years. The voyages themselves, I will reiterate, would seldom have taken, from leaving port to returning to home port, the amount of time that one leg of an interstellar journey would take.

All of this only supports the idea that it's not feasible to explore the galaxy aimlessly in any sense. If it took industrial complexes that long to prepare for a trans-oceanic voyage, imagine what preparing a massive colony ship with tens-to-hundreds of explorers would cost and the time it would take.

And in response to Frank: you're cute. That's such a cop-out. Don't enter the discussion if you don't intend to follow up. I'm glad you decided to put in your opinion, as you definitely bring up some valid points, but backing out now is the intellectual equivalent of a small child covering his ears and saying "if I don't hear you you can't be right" to the insults of other children.

That said, I intend to address your concerns anyway. I think your point of the military preparing in advance is very valid. It pays to prepare for technologies that other militaries could have, because if you assume they'll be working with knives and they come with guns, you're kind of boned. However, that's a MILITARY tactic. In the search for life, it would behoove humans to not allow the bounds of the search to be set by one's imagination. Sure, it's entirely possible that there exist aliens that can travel at the speed of light, have enough of an industrial and/or military complex to build colony ships and have indeed covered many of the issues that come with long-term space flight. However, if we assume that, then we have to also assume that trans-dimensional beings also exist, because in theory there is a way that could happen. It leads down a path of looking for life everywhere, and spreading our small amount of resource so thin that we could very well miss something that's out there.

On the opposite end, by confining a search to human knowledge, we can look for things we know how to look for. Moreover, think of how much sentient life, with our technological capability exists: oh right, just us. We are not necessarily unique, but we are less common than non-sentient life. Based on those odds, it makes more sense to take into account that concept when searching for such life, rather than assuming everything out there is sentient. Why do you think NASA so often looks for bacterial fossils on things, rather than giant space ships flying around?

I'm not by any means saying that none of these far-fetched things could ever exist. My argument is merely that the chances of it are so low, so far-fetched, that in the search for interstellar life we should consider what we know more than what we think might exist.

[FrankZ]

*Meh* I know I am cute, thank you.

Anyway, if you would reread my posts, it wouldn't be such a shame that an intelligent person like you would even think that I actually participated in this thread. Commenting on a thread is much different from participating in a thread or debating. The definition of 'commenting' isn't rocket science or atomic research. I learned that in kindergarten in a school a little better than a daycare. Sorry for butting in, but your point is plain irrational or just very pointless. It's rather nice reading your looping scenarios, but saying I was actually participating? I wasn't I was commenting about my own views, not actually debating with you.

Thank you.
S.U.

[Durandal]

Also, do not counter this post nor debate with me, as this is my last post here in this thread as I have absolutely no interest in this subject whatsoever.

Seriously, what are you talking about? And why are you making accusations against what a person is saying without addressing and debunking any of his points?

[FrankZ]

AS I SAID, I won't debunk because I am not interested in this topic, and even if you reread all my posts, there's no such thing as a floating point that I'm addressing to any of you.

[Francis]

Seriously, what are you talking about? And why are you making accusations against what a person is saying without addressing and debunking any of his points?

Seriously, Durandal. You have a point, but this guy isn't bunkering or addressing someone. I'd have to be honest (though I hate it :mad:), you shouldn't address this guy as if he was debating directly with you. He was just commenting, not necessarily bunkering with all o' ya.

And if we continue to talk about this bunkering thingies and not proceed to the real reason of this thread, I'm afraid I'll have to call it scratched.

[Fiendwurm]

Well to put the thread back on topic...

I am sure that there are aliens out there in space, but I do not believe that aliens are living, making contact, or are anywhere near Earth.

Also long term space travel is possibly, but very unlikely. You can create artificial gravity via centrifugal force, and once the ship exits the area influenced by the suns gravity (forgot what it's called) it would not need to use any fuel to propel its self. With the crew in cryo-stasis they would need very little to live. But you still need energy to keep the area where the crew are kept spinning (unless the whole ship spins, just thought of that) and it would need enough energy to keep a timer running to wake up every body when they arrive at the next star.

The only self sufficient form of energy I can fathom right now would be solar power, but once your in the vast emptiness of space traveling from star to star, the amount of energy you could receive from stars would be so small you probably couldn't power a LED, and the amount of time it would take to travel just 4 light years would make the project seem pointless.

If you could travel at the speed of light it would make interstellar travel much more probable, but the only way I can imagine that being possible would be to change all the particles of the ship into electromagnetic radiation (electrons can do it, maybe neutrons and protons could to), making the consequences of hit an objet even higher.

[FrankZ]

To spicen things up and get everything back on topic, I thought I might share this weird yet interesting video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qvkj_2EKlyc

[Borgorb]

I must say the Chile 2004 image looked very convincing

but the other images looked too muck like hoaxes, especial the Italy 1993

i myself have completely no doubt that alien life exists but when people keep prattling on about how to get to places over many light years away it is obvious these creatures either:
1 live a lot longer that us
2 hve foud a way to bypass the space time continuum to travel faster tahn the speed of lighht
3 can put themselves in statis until their destination is reached
or 4 just live really close by

all this "cant go faster than the speed of light" is just sayin because we dont know how it must be impossible

[IrishDutchman]

4 just live really close by


'Really close by' in space would still mean they couldn't reach us without 2 or 3. We can say with some certainty that there is no alien life in our solar system, right? Everything outside of it is, well, really far away.

[MannBearPig]

Life exists on other planets. Thinking that they don’t is almost a little naive. There are an infinite number of planets in the galaxy, billions and billions. To think that there is not some form of life on any of those planets is a little, as I said, naive. I’m not saying its wrong to not believe and I’m not saying in right, but out of all the planets there is most likely life in some form or another, maybe no more advanced the we are, maybe less. However, we may not ever find any of this life. Earth somehow managed to create life, so isn’t it conceivable that some other planet somewhere has as well?

[Skullflower]

I just said that.
Thats cool, I guess.

[SolidSamurai]

I'm thinking the best source of energy for any spaceship in the 21st century (yes, the entire century) would be hydrogen or fusion (once fusion becomes containable; it's already viable). They already use hydrogen, so they merely need to find better ways to utilize it and make progress from there.

Beyond 21st century? Gravitons, maybe. Anti-matter might never be used in this millenium. StarTrek is BS, simply because anti-matter is so dangerous it might either create fear or because it's difficult to manufacture, or because it'll prove even more difficult to contain than fusion (which by that time, they might have 'cold fusion').

Alien life? I'm impartial in my belief on contact with 'grays' or any other so called 'species' of life that grew itself off-earth. But in any case, I'm still in the belief that alien life could exist in possibly some other galaxy. Our galaxy is quite small (if you take warp drives into consideration :P), so if aliens managed to thrive in an interstellar economy and society, it surely could not occur in our galaxy.

[FrankZ]

My naive fellas, MannBearPig just pawned you all.
So this is the second line.
And the third one.

So the point he just said: he thinks people who don't believe life on other planet exists are stupid.

[femoimal]

well, that thread is full of ideas and energy: if we transform this energy into impulse, i am sure we can propel a spaceship to the moon :D

Its quite possible, and even likely, that life exists somewhere. Life is auto-replication and possibility to mutate. That was achieved 1.5 billions of years (perhaps earlier) after the formation of the earth. It even perhaps happened on Mars or early Venus, it will be hard to tell. I am a bit dubious about the under-ice ocean of Ganymede or the surface of Titan, but you never know 'til you find out, right ?

Thing is, bacteria cannot hop on spaceships to visit us. There is a very tiny window of opportunity for an intelligence race, where it has both the technological means and the interest in exploring the galaxy. Say a race of amphibians evolve and build their first inter-stellar spaceships. There are 2 things here: either Einstein is right and they can only move at the speed of light, either they can fold space and make origamis out of it. If they travel slowly, it will take them eons to explore space. Not very motivating. If their technology is so advanced so as to allow them to tinker with the very fabric of space and time, they will perhaps be tempted to apply it elsewhere. Their machines, though, could do the annoying work.

I mean, how long do you want to toy with spaceships when you can become gods? So, my view is that there is only roughly a couple of centuries when a race can and will explore space. After they will be too busy transcending themselves or nuking back their asses to Amoeba. This window is a bit too small to narrow the geographical gaps between the life-holding nests.

So, i think its pretty likely that earth has been, or will be visited by something or someone from the outside, during its 10 billion years lifespan. I just doubt this happened between 1950 and today.

Indeed, perhaps some dinosaurs saw a flying teapot hovering above the swamps. Or perhaps some cambrian trilobite got snatched by a luminous cigar (hand-rolled). But i haven't been abducted and raped yet.

Still hoping though.


PS: read the SF novelette "the ruum", its great.

For those of you who don't remember, the story begins with an alien ship accidentally dropping a scout unit on primeval Earth, and planning to return later to collect it. The ship is then wiped out in an obscure interstellar battle.

The story then spirals forward to the present day, centring around a man who decides to head off into a remote North American pine forest to recuperate and regain his fitness after the excesses of the city. While out hunting one day, he enters a strange clearing filled with man-sized creatures from every epoch of history, including several supposedly extinct species - all of them appear to be dead yet preserved, yet on closer inspection he notices a flickering in the eyes of one of the prehistoric sauroids.

At this stage he hears a sound behind him and a massive, liquid-metallic sack rolls into the clearing, pauses, produces an ungainly telescope from one aperture in its frame, then a syringe from another, and begins rolling towards him. The rest of the story is of a relentless pursuit and flight, with this huge metal thing - the Ruum of the first few paragraphs - negotiating blithely through every conceivable trap (explosive, missile et al) the increasingly haggard protagonist can create.

The conclusion is superb: after several days of flight, the Ruum catches him, lifts him towards the syringe, then halts and lets him go - for no apparent reason. Then we realize that the alien pilots of the first two paragraphs made a reference to a net weight average which the scout unit was supposed to preserve - and it becomes clear that the protagonist's depredations over the three days have made him so haggard that he has fallen below the gradient.

[FrankZ]

And for those interested in reading interesting books, read:
The Doomsday Conspiracy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Doomsday_Conspiracy)
by Sidney Sheldon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sidney_Sheldon)

For those who find the idea of the novel absurd, you will drop dead to see that Mr. Sheldon has provided accurate resources and mail messages from government officials.

Also some articles that might interest you about the Roswell UFO research project on Area 51:
* http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/b/b5/Majic6.jpg/524px-Majic6.jpg
* Signed by US President Harry Truman
* The Government-Appointed Roswell Group Majestic-12 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MJ12) (aka MJ12, Majic12)
* Military Installation Area 51 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Area_51) on Roswell, Nevada
* more to come soon, still working on it. . .

To ScottieIWU, I owe you an apology. Yes, it is true, I shall and I will debunk you ASAP. Yes, interest on this topic has clinged to me. Touche.

~F59

[Nephi]

i thought roswell was a town in new mexico not Area 51.....

[Skullflower]

Area 51 is in Groom Lake. And no one has ever proven that those MJ12 documents are real. There was Project Blue Book though.

[FrankZ]

*ahem*

Clarifications:
* I never said that Area 51 is Roswell. Area 51 is a military installation in Roswell, that is also called Groom Lake or Dreamland.
* I can't seem to recall where I said that MJ12 exists. I just pointed out that there is an article about it.

[Skullflower]

Well, either way Roswell is in New Mexico.

[FrankZ]

Yeah, but Nephi said I said that Roswell is A51.

[whiteboy223]

Anyway, to pull some discusion on the first couple posts-

There is much that isnt known about the galaxy. Yes, there is a large chance that there is other life then here, and yes, we dont know where or even if the galaxy really ends, but think about how it was made. How was the galexy even remotly made? Was there a beggeining where nothing was ever anywhere? Was it a higher being? WE DONT KNOW. And thats the point that I'm trying to get to you. If there is life somewhere else, it would have had to been made just like we were made. And if you ask me, thats one hell of a miricle that has to happen more than once. Yes the galexy is huge, but who ever said that we were easily created? I mean, a mixure of chemicles and a flash of lightning (only one theory), thats not quite a straight shot to an explanation. Is there life somewhere else? I think we should be askin'- How would life get on any other planet?

[femoimal]

there is a good, solid solution to your interrogations, WhiteBoy.

It is "Less Church, More Reading". But Also "Less Miracles, More Chemistry and Thermodynamics".

Once you've got your ABC in biochemistry, chemical bonding mechanisms, polymer building, tertiary molecule configuration, you'll stop seeing miracles in the emergence of life, but the real thing behind it. Chemistry, that is, Physics.

Its the physical rules of the universe, and their impact on matter, that make life what it is. One thing is that physics, hopefully, and even chemistry, occur regularly in the universe. It occurs in the core of the suns, in the core of the planets, and on the very surface of the planets. All life needs is chemistry, energy, and time.

If you where to choose one superior being, a god-like entity, I'd suggest you pick either Energy, or Time. Call them Holly Joule, or Lord Chronos. THEY are your gods, you can bow to them, not a puppet anthropomorphic caricature you try to promote through your patently dishonest pseudo-neutral wondering.

We don't know about a higher being, but I am sure that I speak in the name of a few here when i say that we don't care about it. And its systematic intrusion in every philosophical or intellectual (even scientific!) debate is as annoying as hemorrhoids.

To conclude, life would not "get on another planet", but much more likely emerge on it. (I don't believe in that panspermia theory). But your knowledge can only follow where your mind leads. In order for your mind to get on another planetary surface and imagine life blooming, you have to make your mind leave the Church. In that church, the only flash of lightning you will see will be the one punishing you.

Get out in the vast openness of the galaxy, join the dark...eh, wait, no, that is not my line :)

[Starcraft78cwal]

Of course there is alien life out there. It's a vast, never ending universe; why would we be the only ones here? Also, I think scientists who disregard planets which have no water, which SO OBVIOUSLY MEANS THAT THERE IS NO LIFE THERE [/sarcastic] are jumping to conclusions. Who's to say aliens need water to live? Who's to say they need oxygen, or anything? They could live off 10000 degree dirt for all we know. Just because we need certain things to live doesn't mean aliens do.

[whiteboy223]

I see where you going there Femoimal. I was not sticking to chruch regulations. I was only referring to the number of things that are very much unkown to us. You said that there is pyshics happening everywhere. Who's to say that that same thing will happen elsewhere. Who is to say it even happend here? Scientists? Dont get me wrong. I highly respect scientists. But they dont really know if thats how we were created. I dont know how were created. And chaces are that you dont either. Im not trying to put anyone down or reject you logic. It is well thought out and has many resources to it. I am saying that I (myself) do not believe in aliens becuase of my uncertainty of my existance.