why not actually contribute here? did I step on your intellectual toe with the title and my personal view?

I'm going to repeat myself, not trying to convince anyone but you're still missing the point.

SETI.Telescopes, radio and optical emissions is the full extend of our technology. In Layman's terms we can't see shit.

Oh, I got your point. But statistically speaking, your point only potentially lowers the odds, it doesn't negate them.

There is in fact a statistical chance that there is 1 of something in the entire universe, for example, the universe. there's only one of those. :)

SETI has very little credibility; they need your interpretation of the Fermi paradox to be untrue.

Why in the actual fuck would there be only one universe? That's almost laughably ridiculous based on the latest findings of quantum mechanics and theoretical quantum physics. The "uniqueness" of this universe is silly to even consider.

a chitty chat about multiple universeses is for another thread and completely not pertinent to this one, forget I mentioned it because it doesn't matter here if there are multiple universes or not, that does not prove that there is in fact a statistical odd that we can be the only advanced life/intelligent life/tech capable life in this universe, which was my point. :)

:thumbsup ...many including Stephen Hawkings support that theory.

here's something else I've also NOT said- intelligent life won't spring up elsewhere.

So while I tend to believe there has not ever been intelligent life elsewhere and there is not any right now, it very well may happen at some point in the relative near future/future, in terms of universe time.

certainly not, even the closest galaxy to ours will never be visited by humans. whi lives there or in any of the other nearby galaxies (let alone anything further) will remain a mystery.

various SETI efforts have used the latest and greatest science and tech to look way out there.

If there is intelligent life in the universe.... It aint humans from earth!!!!!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...Wow_signal.jpg

http://www.latest-ufos.com/wp-conten...ignal-1977.jpg

I still maintain a small ray of hope that maybe we'll get some conclusive proof either way in my lifetime.

Until then...I keep an open mind.

If you truly believe we are the only intelligent species out there, you are truly an ignorant close minded cunt.

Btw,

SETI is absolute bullshit if ya didn't know that already.

A ridiculous waste of time and resources, in collusion with big bro no doubt.

Oh, go join a church

Whats fucking crazy is that it was sent on the frequency that was stated on the gold disk that was attached to voyager.

This +5 :thumbsup


.

Capt. Kirk signaling for take-out pizza again.

Dude, quote all the earth-bound conspiracy crapola all you want, but don't post this. Science is important and posting / sharing this kind of nonsense just slows the world down.

Assuming that an alien is 1:1 scale but we can't see the microbacteria which could suggest the aliens have been and gone.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh and you're calling me closed minded? you know that makes absolutely zero sense here right? How can I be closed minded if I an open to the fact Fermi
s paradox hasn't been answered in 50 years? Oh I know why, because you have absolutely no fucking clue. dumbfuck.

**********, you continually prove how you fail at grasping science.

Feel free to answer Fermi's paradox then since you're all scientific.

go on, razzle dazzle us with all that science you know. go on.

what's funny about that quote you +5 is I never used the words special or unique.

but hey, hi5!

PHD astronomist Keith Wiley seems to think enough of Fermi's Paradox to write a thesis attempting to solve it recently. He couldn't.
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/...111.6131v1.pdf

He's one of many PHD scientists who disagree with your view that this is nonsense.

so you know better huh **********. the science is settled huh.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

this guy is obviously dumber than gfyers too eh, you know, since he takes the paradox seriously. pfft.


what a tard huh!


Dr. John Lambshead is senior research scientist at the Natural History Museum, London. He is also the Visiting Chair at Southampton University, Oceanography, and Regent's Lecturer, University of California. He has authored almost a hundred academic/scientific publications. In their special 2000 millennium edition, London's Evening Standard newspaper nominated him as one of London's top 100 "unknown thinkers" for his scientific research.

The Evolutionary Explanation For The Fermi Paradox

by John Lambshead

Physicists have dominated discussion on the Fermi Paradox, Fermi was a physicist, because it appears to be an issue of astronomy. But actually it is an issue of biology since it is about evolution.

In this paper I am going to address two points: How common is life in the universe, and how common is intelligent life.
It's Lonely Out There ? The Evolutionary Explanation For The Fermi Paradox by John Lambshead - Baen Books

checkout this dumb egotistical cunt who takes Fermi's Paradox seriously, what a tard huh! This PHD astronomer/astrobiologist must think he's special and unique.

Donald Eugene Brownlee (born December 21, 1943) is a professor of astronomy at the University of Washington (Seattle) and the principal investigator for NASA's Stardust mission.

This argument, which was first articulated by geologist Peter Ward and astrobiologist Donald E. Brownlee, turns the whole Copernican Principle on its head. Instead of saying that we're nothing special or unique, the REH implies the exact opposite — that we are freakishly special and unique. What we see here on Earth in this solar system and in this part of the Galaxy may be a remarkable convergence of highly unlikely factors — factors that have resulted in a perfect storm of conditions suitable for the emergence of complex life.

The Great Filter theory suggests humans have already conquered the threat of extinction

Yes he is a tard. He is basing his ramblings on "The first evidence we have for the evolution of a mind capable of creating a civilization is not the manufacture of tools — many species use tools — but the creation of art."

Then goes on to conclude that humans are the only intelligent species because of the way we pick our mates "Men tend to be attracted to women who are fit, healthy, young and not yet pregnant (slim waist)."

Apparently he thinks this to be an impossibility throughout the Universe.

Instead of providing links to psycho babble museum workers why not try to form a thought of your own?

biology is psychobabble according to suckonthis. i see. :1orglaugh

that's funny although the funnier part of your bullshit is you can't form a thought of your own yet try and attack me for not having one when I've clearly picked a side here (thought of my own for those who can't figure that out) and supported it with viewpoints of scientists that you are quick to discount because hey, suckonthis has concluded biology is psychobabble.



wow, what a logical argument. :1orglaugh

you not aware of this as a distinction of civilization yet you are in here trying to argue a phd scientist is dumber than you re: the subject he studies professionally?

and that makes sense to you. :1orglaugh

I have provided plenty of my thoughts, whereas you find some paradox that was thought of back in the 1950's and then post links to museum workers to defend it. Keep trolling brotha.

The Dynamo Paradox: There is no proof Twinkies are bad therefore they are not...FACT!

more dumb egotistical closed mindedness by PHD scientists who disagree with the gfy science club who have all knocked-knocked on the science being settled.


The new research field of astrobiology is drastically reshaping our understanding of potential extraterrestrial life, especially complex, intelligent life. This interdisciplinary field includes the questions we're considering here, namely the search for habitable environments in space, and the origins of life on Earth. Astrobiology is starting to point to the idea that advanced life may be uncommon in the universe. If, then, the origin of life is extremely rare, it may have been totally by chance that life arose on Earth so early and so quickly. There is even the possibility that non-natural agencies are responsible, since life has the hallmarks of top-down design, if we think outside the limitations of naturalism.9 A recent article in PNAS (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences) shows that without evidence of life arising independently from Earth, we can't assume that life is common in the universe because of its early appearance here.



hahahahahahah

you're over your head here, otherwise you'd be able to contribute something/carry on an adult convo instead of trying to hurl insults.

which, btw, reveals much more about you and the others than me. I'm open to science, you, certainly are not, nor are you truly interested in the subject matter.

no, you are more interested in trying to insult, which is fine, go for it, keep showing just how incapable you are.

check out this retarded, egotistical cunt astrobiologist's study, what a retard!

Another researcher who breaks the bias barrier is the author of Lucky Planet: Why Earth is Exceptional-and What That Means for Life in the Universe, astrobiologist David Waltham, who states, "Because, by definition, we conduct our research from a habitable planet, we cannot generalize our experience assuming that it is universal."

Waltham blames his colleagues' disagreement with him on this point on observational bias. "Our view of what is really there has been misled by the accident of what we're able to see." He uses the example of the night sky to illustrate this point. The vast majority of stars in the galaxy are invisible to our naked eye. Only the very close or giant stars are bright enough to see. But our view of the night sky is misleading, since we don't see the real population of stars, only the visible bright ones. The Earth is our only example of a habitable planet, and due to the principle of mediocrity, we assume it is an average case.

Waltham only hints at the quantifiable rarity of the Earth when he posits that Earth might be one in a trillion, and says he doesn't think there is any evidence to suggest it should be higher odds than that.

This makes Earth, according to him, unique in at least the Milky Way, considering that there are only up to 200 billion planets in the galaxy. This probably means we are effectively alone, as intergalactic travel, and even communication, seems unlikely.

Thats hilarious considering you create these threads with the sole purpose to get people to argue with you. Not once have you provided your own thoughts other than 'fact: There is no other intelligent life in the entire universe.' which is of course is not a fact, just another troll attempt.

it's kinda sad to me that you think trying to discuss higher level subjects that have yet to be concluded is trolling. What's worse, is you can easily read this thread and see that I'm the one that's been trying to have an adult convo while people like you come in and hurl insults then tell me I'm trolling.

I've provided scientific view, articles, papers, graphics etc to corroborate my view and not once have you been able to dispute it and I'm the troll. :1orglaugh:1orglaugh

logic, look into it.

in the meantime, check out this closed-minded egotistical cunt scientist who is certainly trolling and not as smart as suckonthis et al who have concluded the science is settled on the universe.
:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Another recent book presents the case that Earth is very rare. Alone In the Universe: Why Our Planet Is Unique, by astrophysicist and science writer John Gribbin, gives much support to the idea that Earthlike planets, at least those with technological intelligent aliens on them, are exceedingly rare. His reasons go beyond just the habitability factors a planet must meet. He also shows that there are many contingent events in the Earth's history, the history of life, and in the development of technological civilization, that had to happen to bring us to this point in our existence. These rare chance events, such as the lunar formation event, the Cambrian explosion of animal life forms, and the development of science, all contribute to where we are today. It is far from probable that we and our technological civilization should be here. To expect Earth to be typical in the universe is overly optimistic. As Gribbin writes in the preface, we are the result of "a chain of coincidences that led to the emergence of intelligent life on Earth. And that chain has so many weak links that it may mean that, for all the proliferation of stars and planets in the Universe, as an intelligent species we may be unique."

It's obvious most of y'all are closed off to any and all scientific research or viewpoints that are too complex for you to comprehend and challenge your level of understanding, nevertheless, here's another:

Recent astrobiological research now points to the realization that environments, intergalactic, galactic, planetary system, stellar, and planetary, which are stable enough to allow life to arise and develop over several billion years as it has on Earth, are so rare that few if any civilizations will actually make it to the point where they can communicate beyond their planet. New discoveries about our sun and solar system's unique history have significant bearing on the issue of habitability. In addition, the Moon, the event that formed it, and its present existence also have important consequences for the issue of Earth's habitability.

dang, another troll retard ego cunt scientist! the nerve of this guy!

A recent article in PNAS (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences) shows that without evidence of life arising independently from Earth, we can't assume that life is common in the universe because of its early appearance here.

Bayesian analysis of the astrobiological implications of life?s early emergence on Earth

fact: There is no other intelligent life in the entire universe.


:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

A summary of the gfy braintrust's brilliant refutation of my claim that we are alone in the universe:

1. nuh uh.

2. you're stupid.

3. you're trolling.

4. you're a cunt.

5. your ego is as big as the universe.

6. PHDs, scientists, experts, professionals, astrobiologists, SETI, anyone open to the simple statistical fact are all stupid.

7. you're closed minded

well argued. :1orglaugh:1orglaugh

yup, my attempt at tongue-in-cheek humor to try and set the tone for this thread fell upon deaf ears. Kinda like the fact that there is a statistical chance that we are in fact alone in the entire universe. But heresy to even mumble such a notion. gfy think tank has it settled- we are not alone. that's a fact. :1orglaugh:1orglaugh

I agree with dyna mo on this one, as far as intelligent life as we understand it goes. Which also means I don't discount some other form of intelligence, and intelligent life (than can create it's own definition of art to be appreciated by others) elsewhere in the universe.

I don't think it's egotistical to side with those who have worked out that another earth-like planet as well as the formation of life as we know it to be extremely astronomical, and therefore unlikely, but I do think it maybe a bit 'small-minded' for want of a better phrase, to believe our intelligence as the only type of intelligence there is.

pick the bones out of that one lol.

the great news is being alone = zero competition for resources and colonization. cha-ching!

the entire visible universe is ours for the taking. :1orglaugh

yeah but if we do that, we'll destroy the universe in years to come. though I guess it'd fall under 'unique idea' so that's a pro right there

oh hey, btw, the reason I included the word *fact* in the title is to point out that the other side has assumed us to not be alone as fact. You know that right? You've assumed as fact that we are not alone. That's why peeps got upset in here with my posts.


the simple fact is the answer to "are we alone?" can be either yes or no.

Including the unknown bacteria that could potentially wipe us all out.

I thought of this, if there was life based on the numbers they would be flying around all over. Then I realized people get dumber has society evolves, so as they had a chance to get to the point of interstaller would of been the furthest they made before blowing themselves up.

I'm sure we will do the same.

They won't stick around if ever they find us.

"they're made out of meat and they're ruled by jews"

Or the one that could save us all. Either way, the good news is a lack of having to compete. Life expands though, naturally, regardless of the potential risks.

are we alone?

Maybe yes... maybe no... maybe Terrence McKenna has it right...

When civilizations have the technology to harness enough energy to travel to another galaxy, there would be no need to do so.

In their world, kids create galaxies before breakfast.