The link I followed from his post was: http://www.lifeslittlemysteries.com/...ronomers-1812/ which contradicts the title of the thread.
The link I followed from his post was: http://www.lifeslittlemysteries.com/...ronomers-1812/ which contradicts the title of the thread.
What's "new" about that?
Did ANY previous analysis say, "Yes, we are definitely alone"?
Or did any say, "No, we definitely have living neighbors out there"?
I'd guess that EVERY "analysis" concluded MAYBE.
Every single one.
So why is this one being touted as something noteworthy?
"The social contract exists so that everyone doesn’t have to squat in the dust holding a spear to protect his woman and his meat all day every day. It does not exist so that the government can take your spear, your meat, and your woman because it knows better what to do with them." - Instapundit.com
I'd say there is probably a lot of government funding (aka our tax dollars) at work behind this and whoever is being funded has to justify their expenditures. What better way than repainting the Studebaker and calling it "new"?
Or maybe the media didn't have much else to try and dazzle us with on that particular day. Even Obama has to take some time off from screwing up everything.
“When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.” Edumnd Burke
There are no delicious vanilla non-fat lattes. >:-O
Maybe life is out there, and we simply missed it.
Consider two factors: size and time.
SIZE
Is there a chance that the "life out there" is so small (compared to our own) among the vastness of the universe, that we are unlikely to see it even if we are looking right at it?
Brings to mind a cartoon (always a good reference ) on the subject that I once saw. Some guy is sitting at a table. On the floor beside him is a tiny space capsule the size of a pea, with a tiny door open on it. He's looking through a microscope, and a bunch of cells in the viewfinder are lining up to spell out the words, "Take us to your leader".
TIME
Some people say the Earth is maybe 4.5 billion years old, and the rest of the universe is much older. How long has Man existed on the planet? For that matter, how long has ANY "life as we know it" existed here, from single cells thru trilobites thru T-rexes thru man? Just a tiny fraction of the life of the planet. And if we start tossing nukes around or some other thing, that could all be gone in a thousand years or less.
"Life as we know it" has only existed HERE for a blink of an eye, in the history of the universe. Who's to say some other life form didn't develop or get created (insert your own favorite theory of origin here), half a universe-lifespan ago, grow, invent machines, spread through a galaxy or two, then goof and wipe themselves out like we might, all in their own relative blink of an eye, say ten billion years ago? Would there be ANY evidence of that left now? Even if there were, what are the chances of our finding it? We've been listening (and broadcasting) for less than a hundred years. And we've sent out what, a grand total of three spacecraft to exit our own SOLAR SYSTEM, and only in the last 20-30 years?
We have ZERO evidence that we are the only ones who are here, or have ever been. Course, there's zero evidence that we aren't, too. There's a very good chance that, if there was ever "life" in the universe, we (inevitably) missed it, and it's long gone now. If it ever existed.
What chances are there that, many billions of years in the future, other beings someplace will be saying the same thing... never knowing they are referring to US?
Last edited by darin; 09-04-2011 at 01:29 PM.
"The social contract exists so that everyone doesn’t have to squat in the dust holding a spear to protect his woman and his meat all day every day. It does not exist so that the government can take your spear, your meat, and your woman because it knows better what to do with them." - Instapundit.com
“When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.” Edumnd Burke
Well considering the last post was two days ago and this thread appears on the edge of death, I'lll have a go at it.
....Your option gives us a starting point, or at the least, a transition point. That creates limitations, whereas we who bow down to a greater power have no such limitations.
,,,,,You are inside a box, you need a method for non living, non organic material to somehow turn itself into self replicating autonamous organic, carebon based living material.BS
....And that living material has to one day advance to the point that it questions its own existence & can formulate either a BS idea of a "God" or a way for something to be created out of nothing, or at the least, transform into living organic organism(s).
.....If there is a God, YOU LOSE.
If there isnt a God, YOU LOSE cuz by your own idea, the organism has to "EVOVE" too a point that it questiosns it very creation. Since its impossible to prove that evolution DID IN FACT OCCUR, not just that it COULD'VE happened, & it's impossable for it to prove there is no God.Hence, your "being" will spend its eternity wondering "if there is a God. There will be no answer, therefor, you die and go into oblivion, nothingness. As we would also. But no harm no foul for both of us.
......On the other hand, if it turns out you are wrong, uh oh, better watch out....better not shout, guess who's cumming to dinner, tonight.
I DONT CLAIM TO KN0OW ANYTHING ABOUT HUMAN NATURE
NOIR DO I KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT CRITICAL THINKING
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree which is more amazing. An all powerful, but completely abstract being for which all we have are fantasies and bed time children stories for, or science which is making progress every year.
If god wants a brain dead slave that has to turn to a fear based logic of Pascal's Wager then I guess I do lose. I would hope god respects critical thinking. I would rather be in Pergatory with the Philosophers than a Heaven full of zombies.