Poll: Is there other intelligent life out there?

    Poll

Ad

  • Fri, May 3, 2019 10:30 AM

    Spinoff thread.  "Is there intelligent life on the OC?"

    Fri, May 3, 2019 10:46 AM

    I voted yes. I think outer space is too large for us to be the only shit going on. And if we're it, then that's pretty depressing. 

    Fri, May 3, 2019 10:51 AM
    posted by ernest_t_bass

    Spinoff thread.  "Is there intelligent life on the OC?"

    Excepting the occasional jim teacher, about average for this planet.

    Fri, May 3, 2019 11:28 AM
    posted by Zunardo

    No.

    The concept of intelligent life on other planets is just  StarTrek/StarWars/DayTheEarthStoodStill wishful thinking.

    That reminds me - the original version of The Day The Earth Stood Still has been on TMC several times in the last month.  I love that movie.  The Keanu Reeves version was on the other day, but I've never been able to watch it all the way through.

    I don't really understand this. It has happened once for sure, considering we are here to talk about it. How is the possibility of it happening somewhere else science fiction?  

    Fri, May 3, 2019 11:54 AM
    posted by Rotinaj

    I don't really understand this. It has happened once for sure, considering we are here to talk about it. How is the possibility of it happening somewhere else science fiction?  

    And here I thought folks would be happy I didn't crank out another tl;dr post, lol.

     The best short answer I can give you is because it hasn't been demonstrated elsewhere as of yet.  And I don't think it will be, at least during my natural lifetime.

    Fri, May 3, 2019 11:55 AM
    posted by Rotinaj

    I don't really understand this. It has happened once for sure, considering we are here to talk about it. How is the possibility of it happening somewhere else science fiction?  

    Based on an estimate of the number of planets in the observable universe, the odds would be staggering that there is not life elsewhere.

    Sun, May 5, 2019 2:30 AM

    Burden of proof rests where?

    There's your answer.

    Sun, May 5, 2019 7:10 AM
    posted by Zunardo

     The best short answer I can give you is because it hasn't been demonstrated elsewhere as of yet.  And I don't think it will be, at least during my natural lifetime.

    Absence of proof is not proof of absence.

    Sun, May 5, 2019 8:31 AM

    we are not alone but whatever is out there is likely plant life or simple organisms

    Sun, May 5, 2019 8:54 AM
    posted by queencitybuckeye

    Absence of proof is not proof of absence.

    Especially when the proof of absence has basically been the equivalent of walking next door, seeing nobody, and saying you’re the only person on earth.

     

    Sun, May 5, 2019 10:05 AM
    posted by queencitybuckeye

    Based on an estimate of the number of planets in the observable universe, the odds would be staggering that there is not life elsewhere.

    The Drake Equation for determining “probability of advanced life” can still show the probability to be very small. Even science has found that the chance of life evolving to the point we are on Earth is infinitesimally small. 

    Sun, May 5, 2019 3:32 PM
    posted by Laley23

    Especially when the proof of absence has basically been the equivalent of walking next door, seeing nobody, and saying you’re the only person on earth.

     

    I'm not a scientist, and I'm certainly not trying to be argumentative, I just gave an honest answer to the OP and poll.

     The analogy above is well-taken.  Should a similar analogy apply for proof of existence?

    Sun, May 5, 2019 4:05 PM
    posted by jmog

    The Drake Equation for determining “probability of advanced life” can still show the probability to be very small. Even science has found that the chance of life evolving to the point we are on Earth is infinitesimally small. 

    I've made that point a few times.  Dinosaurs dominated for like 170 million years, and pretty clearly never evolved to anything remotely involving "intelligent".  Yet man would probably never been able to evolve like it did if not for the one in a billion chance of an asteroid wiping out the dinosaurs.

    Then you look at how remarkably fast man evolved, while many other species around much longer never really evolved to be more intelligence.  Man is truly a fluke of nature, and it's almost a case AGAINST a planet with life and hundreds of millions of years to evolve ever evolving into intelligent life.

    Sun, May 5, 2019 7:50 PM
    posted by gut

    while many other species around much longer never really evolved to be more intelligence.  


    Sun, May 5, 2019 7:59 PM
    posted by ernest_t_bass


    I don't normally write that poorly even when I'm drunk.

    Mon, May 6, 2019 1:12 AM
    posted by queencitybuckeye

    Absence of proof is not proof of absence.

    No, but an absence of proof IS reason to assume something isn't true.

    The burden of proof falls on the affirmative claim.

    Fri, May 10, 2019 10:06 PM

    I would submit that not only are we not alone, we may be the lowest form of intelligent life in a multidimensional multiverse.

    There are very few of us that are capable of seeing things beyond anthropomorphic terms, and even those geniuses are limited by what they can verify by their senses. Imagine a blind man who has never seen color detecting/ understanding “redness”. 

    That’s where we are in the scheme of things.... maybe even less significant than that.

    Sun, May 12, 2019 7:29 PM
    posted by HitsRus

    I would submit that not only are we not alone, we may be the lowest form of intelligent life in a multidimensional multiverse.

    There are very few of us that are capable of seeing things beyond anthropomorphic terms, and even those geniuses are limited by what they can verify by their senses. Imagine a blind man who has never seen color detecting/ understanding “redness”. 

    That’s where we are in the scheme of things.... maybe even less significant than that.


    Ad