In search for intelligent life

[Feball3001]

People have been looking for life beyond our own solar system for a long time now. Is it possible that there are other planets that sustain life similar to our own? If there is life out there are they like us or are the developed totally different from us. What is the likeliness of them wanting to come to Earth? Are they evil and want to take over our planet to conquer the universe or do they want to make friends.

What is everyones thoughts about the unvierse and extera terrestrials?

[GcarOatmealRaisinCookies]

There is intelligent life, just not on Earth. Humans are dumb, petty creatures.

[Feball3001]

I was just watching Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galaxy and according to the the most intellegent life on Earth is mice and dolfins.

[Chidori]

That's easily believable when you spell it 'dolfins'

[WillPhanto1]

Well, with how big the universe is there has be some other intelligent life some where. Especially if you believe only in science, which means that we where not created special and the odds for other planets having intelligent life are even with ours. Heck, it says somewhere in the Bible that God went on to create a thousand other worlds, so even if you’re religious person, the idea of there being life on other worlds is not impossible. The thing about them coming to us is, if they developed enough to figure out to do Intergalactic travel quickly, and without Time dilation.

[CELTIC]

I wish aliens were real that would be cool not like the aliens from independence day aliens but more like star wars aliens

[Feball3001]

I was falling asleep when I typed that

@ WillPhanto1: I am a christian and when I was 15 I had an argument with our youth pastor saying that it was possible for got to have created life beyond our own planet. She did not seem happy with me.

[WillPhanto1]

@ WillPhanto1: I am a Christian and when I was 15 I had an argument with our youth pastor saying that it was possible for got to have created life beyond our own planet. She did not seem happy with me.
Some Christians are like that, they seem to think that we are the only ones in the universe and that we must take the Bible completely literately. I'm Lutheran by the way. I don't think God wouldn't make other worlds. When you play the Sims, do you just stay in the first Neighborhood?

(P.S. The German word for God; "Gott", is spelled with two t's, not one.

[AlissaX70]

When you play the Sims, do you just stay in the first Neighborhood?
Indeed :-)

[itachi4492]

Someone else who agrees with me! <img src='/images/emoticons/smiley2.png'>

[Feball3001]

It takes to long to load any other Neighborhood which is why I alsways play the same one which is Strangeville. My sister always plays the first neighborhood and I found that I would go back on and she would have my person having and affir with her one or moved out of the house.

Anyway I have no real idea if there are aliens or life beyond our own planet. I just think that it is a possibiliy that when God created life that it is possible for it to be beyond our own planet aswell. That is one thing that we may never know forsure in our life time either.

I think that the argument that my mum had was if there was life beyond our own planet then Jesus would of had to die for the sins on Each planet there was life. My argument back was the life out there may only be like animals, micro organisiums or that Jesus only had to go to one planet to due for our sins for the whole universe.

[lukeh]

If you are christian, God made the earth to only have life. He made the other solar systems to be stars to light up the earths sky because he saw that was good. He did not make any other species on other planets.or that Jesus only had to go to one planet to due for our sins for the whole universe.

Lolz. No offense.

[spencer43]

If you believe in evolution then we CAN NOT be the only race of intelligence in the universe.

Plus dolphins are far more intelligent, but hell we both have sex for enjoyment.

[lukeh]

but hell we both have sex for enjoyment.
LOL

How can evolution exist if we something never already existed that created the big bang? I don't beleive in evolution, but I beleive in adaptation and the theory of Natural Selection.

Lol im a nerd.

[killshot]

How can evolution exist if we something never already existed that created the big bang?
This statement makes no sense. If you are trying to use the "nothing exploded and created everything" argument, please do some research and find out what the big bang actually is.I don't beleive in evolution, but I beleive in adaptation and the theory of Natural Selection.

Natural selection gives rise to evolution. The difference between evolution and natural selection is a few thousand years.

It is highly unlikely that earth is the only planet that can sustain life. There may not be any intelligent life, but I imagine that organisms similar to bacteria exist on other planets. I wouldn't be surprised if a planet that has evolved to at least the level of earth existed, but there is little to no chance that we will ever come into contact with other intelligent life forms.

[Skarphedin]

I'd say it's fairly likely that we have intelligent life in the universe. Out of all of the star systems that exist in the universe, one out of two have planets, and of the systems that have planets, there is a high probability that one or two planets in the solar system can support life. Given those conditions, it's hard to think that life couldn't have developed somewhere. Given the number of stars in the universe, and the probability of supporting life, I could certainly believe that intelligent life could have evolved somewhere.

[spencer43]

But then if you strongly believe in God and his whole creation thing then the bible doesnt mention anything about other planets or life forms.

If there is then image what heaven would be like, kinda crowded up there aye. But then if there is other life forms then does God really exist, surely other life forms wouldnt believe in a humanistic God. So do they goto hell? Or do we goto Hell for not believing in the real God?

Kinda interesting when you think about it. But that poses the question where did God come from? how did everything begin?

If so why would God create such a vast universe with no end with millions of planets and stars but no other life?. If you believe in evolution then there must bo other planets out there with the same stability as earth. That can hold our form of life. Why would there be so many places with no other life when evolution says that animals evolve to deal with the enviroment.

That all life starts as something small.

Have you ever heard the term "why in Gods earth?". That poses the question does this earth belong to God and that other planets with other life belong to a different God?.

This topic holds so much potential for an interesting discussion.

[Elastas]

i think as a religous person that not only did god create the other planets as a marvlous thing of beauty to appreciate, but i think that when the time comes that god has these other planets in mind for us to populate one day when earth is cramped. some how someway,someday. as the bible says"allthings are possible with god"

[spencer43]

Yes they are possible with God, but where did he come from, how did everything start.

[Elastas]

if you read the bible, the youd know he always has been. no questions asked.
im done

[spencer43]

Yes but that does not satisfy my curiosity . How did it all begin it cant just be there he cant just appear.

[Elastas]

okay the last thing i will say on this topic is that HE HAS ALWAYS BEEN THERE. AND HE STILL IS AND WILL BE
there.

[Elastas]

sorry, lost my temper.

[spencer43]

lol its ok, this topic can sometimes get people a little touchy. Dont get me wrong I believe in God, we all need a faith but where and why. With the vast space of the universe is the humanized God the real deal?. Even on earth we amongst many cultures believe in different God's. Which is what starts wars, what makes us think that other forms of life on other worlds believe in different God's again.

It poses many questions, there are millions of questions that will remain unanswered until we die. But imput any imagination is always interesting.

[darkarcher]

4 points for now (from a Christian perspective):
1. My problems with the Big Bang is not in it happening, but in the physical impossibilities required to form a stable universe following the event.
2. God created the entire universe for His glory. Basically, just because he could.
3. God has always existed. He didn't "come from" anywhere.
4. It is entirely possible that intelligent life exists elsewhere. The Bible neither supports or refutes this. Just the existence of intelligent life does not mean that humans are any less significant or special in the universe.

[spencer43]

Thats a great perspective but what if the bible was made up? what if God is made up?

Then what, my problem with the big bang is where did the matter that caused the big bang come form. That supports my religious perspective on that. But then what made God. Every answer causes another question.

[Zairak]

This topic seems to be leaning more and more towards a biblical discussion...

[spencer43]

We seemed to have cover the basis on believing in other lifeforms, but in reality the topic is about religion. Because religion states that life is started by God. So if life is started by God then life on other planets was also started by God.

[darkarcher]

What made God?
By very nature, any true god cannot be made, but must exist eternally.

@ Zairak: I agree. Anyway, as far as life on other planets, I'm more inclined to believe that any alien life would merely be some bacterial scum as opposed to any sort of organized, much less intelligent, life.

[spencer43]

But why is that? We here exist on earth. By your logic then we are also a bacterial life form. To another life in the universe. If our planet is the perfect length from the sun then every other Solar system must have the same planet with the perfect length from the sun.

When you look into the stary sky you see plenty of stars. Each of which have their own solar systems and each with a planet close enough to our own in status. Why can they not sustain life such as our own.

[Zairak]

I have to say I disagree with your assessment, spencer. Simply because you can tie something to the Bible does not mean that the Bible or any other religion forms the core of the discussion. As darkarcher says and as my own research has indicated, the Bible says nothing about other life forms. Personally, I think it is highly probable that there is at least animal life on a few planets. After all, there are trillions, nay, quadrillions of planets out there and I doubt we have documented them all. Sentient, intelligent life, on the other hand...Who is to say?

[darkarcher]

You misinterpret what I was saying. Assuming that evolution is true as defined by popular, alien life is much more likely to remain in a bacterial state, especially if it developed at a later point than earth.

I was not saying that all life is bacterial, but I was saying that chances are that we are the only "intelligent" life.

[spencer43]

But research has stated that earth is a very young planet. There are many other planets that are much older then their own. But why would alien life be more likely to stay as a bacterial life form?

Evolution states that we were once chimps, but they became carnivorous and started to eat meat. Along with us standing on 2 legs which saved us energy allowing that energy to be transfered to improving our brains allowing us to become who we are today.

Now why can that not happen on other planets?

[Zairak]

...Ok, I will admit to not knowing everything about evolution, but I don't remember that being anywhere in the theory. Also, the conditions for life to be suppourted would be quite strict. Planets where the environs are in constant turmoil wouldn't be suited to life, for example.

[darkarcher]

I am merely stating the chances, not my actual beliefs. The chances of evolution happening on earth is phenomenal. The chances of the same thing happening on another planet is not double that, but squared. Every planet you add multiplies the chances. You eventually reach the point of basic impossibility. If, instead, God created it, then that life could be either intelligent or not depending on what he wanted.

My personal view is that evolution is false and that earth is the only planet with life. However, I'm flexible enough that I don't simply discount the possibilities.

[spencer43]

Well I just summed up the basic theory of evolution, I dont want to type 400 pages of theory on evolution. Evolution can happen on any planet at any time. All earth needed for evolution was bacteria.

[darkarcher]

All earth needed for bacteria is spontaneous generation...in essence, I find evolution to be inherently flawed. It could be true, but the odds are worse than being struck by lightning twice after winning every lottery in Vegas within 5 seconds of each other.

[Zairak]

...I feel like calculating the odds of that now.

Anyway, darkarcher is correct in that the odds are astronomical. However, when you consider the age of the universe as a whole and the sheer number of planets, I don't think the odds against it are quite that long. Still improbable, but at least remotely possible.

[spencer43]

we are here rite now? correct?

[Zairak]

Against the odds, yes. Unfortunately, this is where I leave off for tonight. I think darkarcher may have left too.

[spencer43]

But we are here. So why can that same anomaly not occur again? Odds aside but if something happens once, can it not happen again?

Where do these odds come from that we are against the odds. Since we have been on earth the most common form of evolution is the difference between black and white people.

You may think its just skin color but, darker skin people are less prone to heat and sun burn. Which is why they are originally from hotter countries and islands.

Where white people are from cooler countries. People evolved to cope with the environment.

[Zairak]

Just for us to have the chance to have existed, the conditions had to be perfect. The Earth had to be just the right distance from the sun and we had to not be wiped out by any of countless global and interstellar events. As I said, I am hardly an expert on evolution, but merely thinking about the idea of how we formed with any knowledge about evolution would show you just how many chances we had to fail along the way to this point. For this to happen twice, let alone multiple times, the odds would increase nigh exponentially. You see, just because an event happened once does not make the event any likelier to happen.

It is just skin color. Melanoma is what determines that and yes, it can prevent sunburns. I would hardly quantify it as the most common form of evolution though.

[spencer43]

Really and why is that? Would you argue that with the scientific minds?

Black and white skin is different to cope in different areas of earth. So thus the original humans were white. Then as they spread all over the world those skin colors changed. That us evolution, Evolution means to change in order to adapt to ones environment.

But in the widespread of the entire universe, billions of planets, billions of solar systems. You actually think that no where in the universe could the miracle of life happen anywhere else.

The odds don't decrease with every planet that it happens on. The ods remain the same becuase the only control factor that evolution requires is "the planet"

[V2NT1]

Just a small correction, if I may. If I recall, research shows that the very first human beings actually originated from the African region and had dark skin, not light skin.

As far as Evolution is concerned, if it does have one weakness, it is chance. Now mind, that does not make it impossible, but many are not content with an explanation like, "Well, it just happened to fall this particular way." It is much easier to explain the existence of life through theology, since there are many things we still do not yet understand. However, to do so, one would need very strong faith, and the ability to suspend doubts about theological arguments.

Evolution and Creationism CAN live in harmony at certain points, though. There are those who believe that God created the universe, as well as the original forms of life, and that humanity eventually developed from that original life. But that is just one of many possibilities.

Both arguments hold water, and both have weaknesses, but I believe some sort of middle ground can be reached. I believe it is the more extreme elements of both sides who would reject even attempts at finding some such mutual understanding.

[spencer43]

You are correct on that they originated in Africa, but because of the think hair the "chimps" we originated from had white skin. Same as any animal.

Althoe there is no definite answer to where and how we came about. As you say there are flaws and strong points to any and all arguments we can never know. All the research in the world will never give us a definite answer. The only way we can possibly find this all out is when we die.

Even then we may not for if there is no supreme being when we pass on, we just completely vanish then thats it. All the faith in the world can not change the fact that if there is no God then there isnt.

[V2NT1]

Well, faith itself does not change what the truth is. However, it usually requires some amount of faith to accept Creationism or a related theological theory. You do have a point that we really will not know at least until we pass on, and that no amount of scientific inquiry can give us the true, definitive answer.

I believe the fact that people talk about it at all is the point- stimulation of conversation and a meshing together and testing of thoughts and ideas tends to strengthen good arguments, break weak ones, and contribute to the general good of collective human intellect. I honestly believe that that is the true reason such debates (on existence, or development, or perhaps just about anything) are so crucial to our society.

[Zairak]

Your sentence seems to imply I am arguing from a religious viewpoint...

I was not implying that there is no other forms of life, I was merely stating that, even if there is, the odds that said life is sentient are far larger than life simply existing.

Also, it is my understanding that the odds do indeed get far larger. Take flipping a coin to get heads or tails. When you first flip the coin, there is a 50% chance it will get heads. The second flip, there is a 25% chance. I believe you need to study statistics a bit further than you have.

[spencer43]

But we are not talking about flipping a coin.

When speaking of the coin the control for the experiment is the coin its self. In that scenario what you mean is to get the same heads twice in a row its 25%, other then that to get heads a second time is the same, 50% the coin still has 2 sides.

But the control is not a flip of the coin, the chance here is to get a planet the same as earth, as in equality of the sun. Then bacteria form. Then that is the beginnings to evolution.

You already have heads just by the planet being in the same spot. Its not like the odds are trying to get the earth in the same spot, and as its gravity that predicts that then there are starts in the universe that are the same size as our sun, althoe ours is smaller then most, so its not the same length its the same percentage away from the sun, With all different shapes and sizes there has to be at least a few in our wide spread universe.

[darkarcher]

I'm sorry, but you really don't understand odds, do you?

Even with prime conditions, the chance of evolution is incredibly high...let's say 1 in 1 billion, just for our purposes. It is altually much higher.

Now, 1 billion has 9 zeroes after it. For evolution to happen on two planets, the odds would jump to 1 in 1 quintillion (1 followed by 18 zeroes). Another planet would be 1 in 1 octillion (1 followed by 21 zeroes).

Remember that 1 in a 1 billion is much lower than the actual chances of evolution.

[Zairak]

...And I am done here. This is honestly one of the more skewed discussions I have partaken in. First off, you seem to have assumed in every one of my posts that I claimed there is no life, intelligent or not, anywhere else. My second post in this thread near the top of the second page states the exact opposite, though I don't hold out hope for us ever meeting intelligent life. Other life forms, bacterial or on the level of flora and fauna are more probable than intelligent life, however. Have fun.

[spencer43]

No the odds would get higher if you were talking about the exact same evolution as what happened here on earth.

If they were high chances then wouldn't it be less then one million, what you are trying to say is they would be low. Its ok i understand what you are trying to say.

Understand this evolution does not require everything to be perfect. Because evolution needs only bacteria. Evolution is changing ones self in order to adapt to the environment, There is nothing to say that the evolution must follow human evolution they could be completely different beings heck they don't have to speak English. You think think way to high of the requirements to evolution.

[killshot]

Arguments over statistics seem rather pointless. We have no way of knowing what the odds are that evolution will occur. To determine the likelihood of life on other planets, we must first gain a better understanding of where life originates from. Since it has yet to be discovered how the most primitive lifeforms came to be, there is no way to know the probability of life on other planets.

[spencer43]

Well I just read a very interesting article, a speech from Steven hawking. Since he is one of the top minds in this field I think you should have a read, it proves most of what we all said wrong about other life. But it also throws out the window of creatism.

http://www.hawking.org.uk/lectures/life.html

[killshot]

Thanks for the article. Compelling stuff. I had never even considered the probability of asteriod collisions contributing to the development of life.

However, I don't believe that Hawking was mentioning creationism because he thought it was a serious possibility. He only brings up the intelligent designer theory once and then he immediately discredits the statement he made by bringing up the anthropic principle. Since the article was just a text form of a lecture he gave, you can't be certain that he wasn't mentioning creationism out of jest.

[spencer43]

Think about it, Steven Hawking is a man of science, I believe that he thinks more of the scientific possibility's over that of religious. But I would love to see more about what he thinks in more lectures or even some articles. I am looking into more of what he has to say and will post it here to keep you updated, you seem to know the most out of the theories and can appreciate the knowledge and information that i can bring up.

[Henriksson]

There is no evidence, or even anything that points to God existing.

There is no need for God.

Still, people claim God exists.

Doesn't make any sense.

[darkarcher]

The problem with God is not evidence. If God exists, then the entire universe is evidence for that fact. If God does not exist, then what is the harm in believing that one does?

How can you say there is no need for God unless you can prove God does not exist (which you can't, by the way)? Once again, there is need for God if God exists, but what is the harm if God does not exist?

In the end, God is beyond being proven by man. You cannot scientifically say there is a God, nor can you scientifically say that there is not one.

[spencer43]

No Dark Hen is rite. The entire belief of the the world over thousands of years was just proven wrong by him with NO evidence whats so ever.

The bible, there is evidence. "thats not evidence" well yes that may be true, but theres more evidence in the bible then you have to prove he isnt. So since you have no hard evidence that he does not exist, then by your logic of having no evidence then there must be a God.

This entire discussion is backed by facts and reason. Do not come in here say "this and that" with no backup or reasonable arguement. You just make your self look like an idiot.

[darkarcher]

Anyway, I feel like we're getting off-topic.

Intelligent life...hmm...do you think there's any validity behind supposed extra-terrestrial encounters?

[spencer43]

Its not going off topic. This topic has many different sub topics. If you read the entire conversation we have talked about all of this and read a lecture from Steven Hawking explaining about all of this, and since that we have almost completely exhausted evolution and all of those theories then obviously the next step is creatism, in order to talk about that then we must discuss the possibility's of God and whether he exists or not.

Its not going off topic just because we are not talking about the intelligent life else where there are only so many ways you can say yes or no. The discussion will continue on its own path.

[darkarcher]

I know that, but I merely feel like discussions that are mostly theological (i.e. the existence of God) are better left to their own topics.

[spencer43]

Like I said, we have exhausted everything else, then this topic should die. But I want to keep it open and explore all the possible means to the beginning of life and the possibility's of life else where and the only way to keep that is by touching the touchy topic that has started wars.

But since that this is a forum, I do not believe that we need worry about the affects of nuclear war and ending all life as we know it. Then placing this discussion utterly pointless. No, we must then touch on "Is there really a God?".

If you do not feel comfortable talking about this then you are free to leave this discussion at any time. Another joy and wonder of the internet forums.

[darkarcher]

It's not that I feel uncomfortable about it at all. In fact, it's just the opposite. The reason I'm trying to stay more strictly on topic is that topics that turn "religious" are often locked, and I would hate to lose such a (mostly) intelligent conversation.

I actually like to talk about religion quite a bit. I just didn't want the topic to be locked for us getting too far out from the actual "intelligent life" discussion. I will continue to post here regardless.

[spencer43]

There are no rules that deem religious topics "wrong or against the rules". But if it leads to a flame war then thats why they get locked.

It seems as tho most of us that post in this topic have at least 2 brain cells, and do not take any offense from another users opinions but take it on board in order to broaden their own opinions.

If it gets locked then I will protest against it as this is one of the only topics in the entire forums where it seems as tho there are some intelligent people here. The cloning topic sure sparked my interest but this one has more potential, along with a more interesting subject that has a much broader opinon factor. Making a more interesting topic.

[Henriksson]

Uh oh, someone has resorted to "you make yourself look like an idiot" argument.The bible, there is evidence. "thats not evidence" well yes that may be true, but theres more evidence in the bible then you have to prove he isnt. So since you have no hard evidence that he does not exist, then by your logic of having no evidence then there must be a God.

I guess it's time to bring up my personal favourite... the dragon. (http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/Dragon.htm)

[spencer43]

That proves what?. You still have no evidence to say that God Does Not exist. You just showed me something about a kid and his pet Dragon.

That has no point to this topic what so ever, like I said if you do intend to join this conversation, please use facts based on the discussion. Otherwise do not post here. How hard is that to understand.

Your logic is "If there is no evidence then it is wrong"

My Evidence is the bible.
Your evidence is a story about a kid and his invisible dragon.

My evidence proves that God Exists
Your evidence proves that the kid may or may not really have a real dragon.

By your logic there is a God.

[V2NT1]

I have heard of this analogy before, but when referencing religion, it's a bit fallacious. It doesn't do anything toward disproving the very existence of God; it just strongly suggests that you should not entirely trust claims that invisible creatures are living among humans. Since God doesn't live among humans, anyway, this wouldn't work so well.

All your argument seems to say is, if I cannot experience it with my senses, or with modern tools to heighten senses, it does not exist. Following that logic, it would have been perfectly fine for people who have never used microscopes to deny the existence of microscopic particles, simply because they could not experience it for themselves.

One way or another, human beings still do not know everything there is to know about our universe. God is not something humans can fully understand, in my belief. The Bible is one compilation of testimony that something above and beyond us exists; it is one of many such compilations created throughout history. So to use such a fallacious argument, refusing to even hear the testimony, is very one-sided and parochial. That is just my opinion.

[spencer43]

My Problem with the Big bang is where did the particles that caused the big bang come from?

So the only logical answer I can come up with is "a higher power i.e. God.

That asks a new question where did God come from.

Common answer "Hes always there"

Yeah ok that makes perfect sense. So by that definition there is no beginning. God just one day opened his eyes, and there it was just like a brand new house. A universe with nothing in it, "hmm" he thought to him self. "Lets make atoms and Molecules and see what happens.

*Bang* The Universe just appeared. You see I can never think how it all started because to me both Creatism and The Big Bang theory (Not the popular Tv show) work together. But then how did it all start? why did it all start?

Since we have covered the topic on The big bang and evolution, lets now look into the topic about Creatism and what it really means.

Lets face it The Big Bang and Evolution go together, so Creatism and we just being humans go together. Unless we can find out how Evolution and Creatism come together.

Since we can not really have originated from two people (Adam and Eve), or can we? Two people have massive families that spread to this day over billions of people?

Or does Adam and Eve just stand for Man and Woman, how many did he make? Then where are the Dinosaurs? how do they fit it, I Have never read about them in the bible yet we have their fossiles and bones.

Did they not mention them in the bible because they had not discovered them at the time and the people that wrote the bible had not imagined such large beasts?. So therefore was the bible just made up by a group of people that god bored and drunk one night? since then it has become the most popular book in history.

Please answer and elaborate on my questions. Towards the end of this topic we shall compare Creatism and The Big bang theory properly at the end so we may make a more concice conclusion.

[Henriksson]

ARGUMENT FROM INTELLIGENCE
(1) Look, there's really no point in me trying to explain the whole thing to you stupid Atheists — it's too complicated for you to understand. God exists whether you like it or not.
(2) Therefore, God exists.

[spencer43]

Please do not come back to this topic if you are going to insult us like this.

This is a serious discussion, and if you can not talk in a proper manner then you are not welcome here.

[Henriksson]

Sorry? I did not intend to insult you.

[spencer43]

Look, there's really no point in me trying to explain the whole thing to you stupid Atheists

[Henriksson]

It's called a non-sequiteur, man.

[spencer43]

There is no evidence, or even anything that points to God existing.

There is no need for God.

Still, people claim God exists.

Doesn't make any sense.

ARGUMENT FROM INTELLIGENCE
(1) Look, there's really no point in me trying to explain the whole thing to you stupid Atheists — it's too complicated for you to understand. God exists whether you like it or not.
(2) Therefore, God exists.


So you are a hypocrite then try to insult us then call it a non-sequiteur?

It seems you have nothing realistic to add to this discussion any way so why do you bother?

Like I said please do not post here, I do not want this topic locked because of a flame war you are trying to start.

[WillPhanto1]

You know, when I mentioned God, I was simply trying to point out that whether you listen only to science or religion, that both sides give the possibility.
*Science, with no matter how high the odds, the odds are equal through out the universe, and that we were not special, and that there must be other planets with Intelligent life much like are own.
*Religion, as far as Judaism and Christianity are concerned, I have not heard of any writing denying life outside of earth. I've heard about a verse that something like ". . . The Lord went on to create a thousand other worlds" which could mean he create life elsewhere in the universe. I think that verse is somewhere in the writings of the prophets.

And look Henriksson, your argument that there's no God doesn't tie into the conversation at all. Unless you're going to give a scientific reason whether there is, or isn't Intelligent life, please do not bother us.

Anyway, more the subject. A question of there being Intelligent life is how far along are they. Do you think there's any race out there that has the ability of Intergalactic travel without Time dilation? Or you do think they may still be in the "1950's" of sorts.

[spencer43]

Thats even if they are similar to humans, did you read the link I posted to Steven hawking's lecture?

[WillPhanto1]

No, I didn't read Steven hawking's lecture yet, but I bookmarked it for later.
And I've could have easily said Stone Age, Bronze Age, or Medieval Period. I don't know, I think it would be funny for us to one day accomplish Intergalactic travel, go to a planet with Intelligent life, and find that they're decades or even centuries behind us. Since most people think of super-advanced beings when they think of life elsewhere in the universe.

[killshot]

Wow, this sure has taken off without me. Forgive my back-tracking, but I want to address a few points that have been brought up earlier.My Problem with the Big bang is where did the particles that caused the big bang come from?

This is an interesting question, This does not, however, provide any sort of foot hold for creationism to stand on. You already believe that God created the universe and he himself has always existed, correct? Is it that much of a stretch to believe that the particles that were used in the big bang had always existed? It seems much more probable to me that the universe began with condensed matter rather than with an infinitely complex being such as a god. It could even be that our universe was created from the collapsed remains of a previous one, This is all just speculation, but I consider it to be more credible than a divine creator. I've heard about a verse that something like ". . . The Lord went on to create a thousand other worlds" which could mean he create life elsewhere in the universe.
I would be very interested in learning which verse this is. I have read the bible completely and I do not recall anything of this nature. I may have simply missed it because the bible isn't exactly the most entertaining book to read, so if you know any more about it please bring it up.

As for the advancement of hypothetical life forms, I think it would be much more plausible if they had evolved into something completely different than humans. They may even have evolved beyond the need for technology. For their civilization to progress the same way humans have, a myraid of factors would have to remain constant, such as their capacity for greed and violence. The history of mankind is filled with wars and oppression. It would be very interesting to study a civilization that was not so aggressive.

[lukeh]

This topic seems to be leaning more and more towards a biblical discussion...
Yeah sorry for starting that...

But natural selection i actually dont beleive in any more i heard evidence elsewhere that proved me wrong. I stand by my adaptation claim because how could you explain all the different races of humans?

I also beleive maybe that all the other worlds were when god was like," no this one sucks...no...no...ahh lets have this one next to those ones..." and so on. We need darkarcher in here. He is the most religious person on here most likely.

[spencer43]

WOW Iam back, so we can continue this haha.

God made all the worlds so if he thought one place sucked, he couldnt just fix it?

[lukeh]

Ok sorry for this I don't like going all religious in threads...

God wanted us to have free will. He didn't want to force us to do things he wants. He wants us to make our own things. God won't interfere with the things that are big like war. He knows the outcome anyways. He helps us through other people and others don't even notice it. We can make things better ourselves but god isn't going to snap his fingers and make it all better.

[killshot]

I think one of the best arguments against the existance of God is the amount of "wasted space" in the universe. If we are God's chosen people, why do we live in a small corner of a near infinite universe? On top of that, why do we live on a planet that is 90% uninhabitable by humans? Why would God create so much extra stuff in the universe if earth was the most important planet?

Alien life dosen't make sense from a religious standpoint. I think we should focus more on the scientific aspect of this topic.

[darkarcher]

Why would God create so much extra stuff in the universe if earth was the most important planet?
Because the entire point of the universe, from a religious perspective, is God's glory. He created the entire universe, in all it's expansiveness, basically because He could.

Anyway, back to the scientific perspective. I still find the odds of any second form of intelligent life existing in the universe to be practically impossible.

[lukeh]

I agree with darkarcher everything he said. But scientifically I think it is highly unlikely that a planet exists so perfectly placed and made as ours. Our planet is a perfect distance from the sun just enough so we can exist.

[spencer43]

explain venus

[Sophie]

I think we need to finish searching for life on our OWN planet first. The large majority of the rain forest, antarctic and the ocean are completely unexplored. Before we can begin to comprehend life on other planets, we need to fully comprehend life on our own.

[lukeh]

Sophie speaks... but what do you mean explain venus? Venus sucks. It has too many storms and other things...

[Underling]

desu

[lukeh]

Well, I don't really see the point of arguing any longer if nobody else beleives in a biblical point of veiw except for DarkArcher. The scientific aproach and the biblical approach are two entirely different things. There is no place in between.

[Sophie]

here was a large exhibition not long ago in which scientists had simulated life that might develop on planets much different from our own - including one with extremely dense air where these huge air-whale things had evolved, and another one on which the sun only ever shone on one side
Wow that sounds really interesting. Is there any online versions/information/ANYTHING of that exhibit by chance?

[Elastas]

wow.
big words.
so many.
head hurts.
this debate wont be solved......

[lukeh]

You are probobly right. If just there was a perfect line in between science and religion where it all makes sense and they balance the two.

[Elastas]

yup, i think this topiuc just for the sake of space should be locked.
not that im going to request it. just seems uncomfortable if you know what i mean.

[khane]

Yeah, the very basis of life as we know it has been found on numerous meteoroids, meteors, etc. that have hit the earth in the past. It's not unlikely at all that there is life at least starting to form on many other planets, it's just not very likely that we're even slightly close to them, and if as scientists suppose there is a "universal speed limit" of the speed of light, and we don't have the capability of using wormholes to go faster, it's highly unlikely that in the human species's existance that we will ever meet another "intelligent" species, especially if animals as we know it don't fit in that category. I mean, it's been 2-3 billion years since our Solar System and Earth were formed, and up until 10,000 years ago, humans weren't even mentionably intelligent. And according to the estimated life of the universe being 14-15 billion years old, add in a minimum of 1 billion years to develop an "intelligent being", plus the distance between Earth and the feasible other planets, with the "universal speed limit" and boom, it's extremely unlikely that we'll ever see any as a species... That is, unless we persist past this nuclear-terrorist age into an age of peace, in which we can all work together without the worry that we could destroy ourselves at any minute. That, and IMO once we start colonizing the moon/Mars, as long as they are independant colonies from Earth(no need for supplies), the possibility of the survival of our species will drastically increase..
Anywho, back on topic, if we as a species kill ourselves within the 10,000 year period of us being "intelligent" beings, and/or that is the average lifespan of an intelligent species, it'd be particularly hard to imagine finding another species that was intelligent in the universe.
So, do I believe in intelligent life? Sure, it's out there somewhere in the universe at the moment, it's just extremely unlikely that we're within even 10,000 light years of it.
Also, on a side note, if we do ever meet up with other intelligent life, I can see religions having a certain... trouble... accepting that there is other life that's either nearly as intelligent or more intelligent than us.

[khane]

Oh, added on note, this is a topic about intelligent life.
I'd be more than happy to debate religion, but make a different topic for that, and don't make it an argument. Make it a debate. The difference is that in a debate you're both willing to accept that maybe the other person is right, sometimes in a few cases, sometimes overall, while in an argument you just end up yelling at each other. That, and it's near-impossible to win a religion debate, people are far to arrogant on either side of the argument. That's because a lot of people who argue it tend to have very strong feelings toward one side or the other(ex. some evangelical christians vs some strong athiests) and nothing ever gets solved. People are too ignorant one way or the other on the issue. Their opinions are rarely open to the other person(s)'s. Keep that in mind before you get into a discussion about religion.

[lukeh]

You could have edited.

[khane]

I realize that, but my note was on a different topic within this topic, so I just added it on. That, and I'm lazy today.

[Feball3001]

The religioin debate is happening in this topic at the moment if you have not already seen it http://www.yugiohtheabridgedseries.com/forum/f24/t2966/

And as far as intellegent life goes, I think that it is facinating to think that it is possible that there could be something out there. I think that is what makes science fiction so entertaining because it covers the What Ifs that I like to think about.

[inamerica55585]

the universe is infinite. statistically speaking, there must be intelligent life elsewhere in the universe. once again, 'nuff said. <img src='/images/emoticons/smiley1.png'>

[Underling]

desu

[inamerica55585]

I'm sorry, forgive my somewhat lack of knowledge of cosmology.
Still, even if the universe is finite, it's still huge. as I said, its statistically probable for intelligent life to exist in another possibly distant galaxy.
And this might be a little off topic, but is the universe round like the earth? does it go back onto itself? <img src='/images/emoticons/smiley5.png'>

[darkarcher]

It depends. If you believe in the Big Bang, then the universe could be considered an ever-expanding bubble. Otherwise, we don't actually know.

[Zalera]

Take a look at this image taken by Hubble.
http://www.spacetelescope.org/images/screen/opo0428b.jpg

It is real and every little speck is a galaxy. There are over 10,000 galaxies on it. Each galaxy contains billions of stars. Each star has a chance of hosting a planet such as ours.

Personally, I had some doubts because the conditions for life seemed to be picky but then I saw this image and was forever changed.

[wokwoktheskydragon]

Are you sure all the specs could be galaxies? It is more than likely that they could be stars that are within our own galaxy.
But yes, the universe DOES contain an uncountable number of galaxies. Billions of them. I think it's extremely unlikely that we're the only life in this vast expanse.
Life, I think, may even be common in the universe. Take a look at Mars. They've found evidence that water once existed on the surface, and they even found a Martain rock back from about the same date as the water. The rock is special in that it contains, what scientists believe to be fossilized bacteria.

So for me, the question of whether intelligent life is out there is solved already. The only problem is making contact with it.
For decades, we've been transmitting a signal of radio waves into deep space. The first of these radio waves have already gone beyond our galaxy, so if any life were to exist in the Milky Way, they would have heard us by now. Even the Small and Large Magallenic Clouds, which are two smaller irregular galaxies that orbit our Milky Way, may have heard our broadcasts. Perhaps it may have even reached the closest of galaxies by now, galaxies that are part of the cluster we're in, known as the Local Group. If any intelligent life within these galaxies existed, they would have heard us by now.
So if we wait another few decades for them to return a signal, we'll get it for sure, right?

Many scientists believe we'll manage to make extraterrestrial contact sometime within the next hundred years, in fact. There are radio dishes scattered all across the globe, searching for any regular signals that are clearly made by intelligent life. Of course, they recieve signals all the time, but it's always from things like Pulsars (rapidly spinning, dead, "neutron" stars with a small radius [about 10km] and a strong magnetic field which emits radio waves from the magnetic poles), Quazars (Large, active galaxies billions of parcecs away [one parsec is roughly equal to 3.5 light years] that are a result of major galactic galaxy mergers and emit large clouds of radio waves parallel to the galactic plane), or Hydrogen's 21cm radiation (caused as a result of Hydrogen's electron changing direction in the way it spins).

We have yet to find evidence of an intelligent signal, but we're confident that one will reach us some day.

[cionicgreycloak]

dont u get really disapointed when they say weve got amazing pictures of another planet it gets you all worked up.......and all it is is a lot of red dust

[cionicgreycloak]

it would be the coolest thing ever if there was other life out there. but if there is why would it be interested in us? and why hasnt anyone considered that there is other life and its just more humans

[Grantsnake]

all to easy yes there is other life out there for definate (im tlaking bactiria level). that is for definate
the proburbility is that with all the galxies, with all there solar systems, with all there planets. there is proburly inteligant life out there
the likely hood of ever establlising conntact near to impossable things are hundereds light years away which mean even if we travel at light speed (which is impossable execpt for electro magnetic waves) it would still take hudreds of years to reach them and hundereds of year to get a message back.

the thing oyur all forgeting is that other form of life might not need water to suvive they may absorb liquid gold for substince there for the live at rediculous tempratures heck them lifform might not even be based on DNA

[RedRook]

"Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe." - Frank Zappa

[Bruno]

Yes of course, this make sense, however why they didn't visited us yet ? Maybe bcs they're not enough advanced, maybe we're too technically backward, not interesting...

[Grantsnake]

or it's just to hard too, the only realistic way of traveling large distances in space is to create a worm hole which (if my physics is correct) needs somthing with a large enough gravatational force to bend space with out creating a black hole.

[JesusRocks]

In the words of Eric Idle:Pray that there's intelligent life somewhere up in space
Coz there's bugger all down here on earth
- Galaxy Song: Monty Python's The Meaning of Life

[Animegirlzzzzzzz]

As much sense as this does make, does this mean the primordial soups of various life supporting planets judges the overall intelligentence, passion, curiousity and emotion of the various species spread accross it?

[spencer43]

Look this conversation is interesting as you all know, but the fact of the matter is we will never meet other life!. You know how I know that Eris that planet further est from the sun is approx 14 211 797 715.645 Km from the sun thats not even the edge of the solar system, now lets say that we are traveling at approx 40 000 k mph that would take around 40 years to travel. Who would do that? but then that would be getting to the edge of our own solar system.

You have to take into the account of many other factors such as getting to the next solar system then getting to a planet so your looking at 80 - 100 years. Organic life can only last so long.

Now why did I say 40 000 k mph well thats the fastest speed recorded by a space shuttle and was done in 1969 by the Apollo 10 but that was in a ship that didnt have many supplies or equipment like that, making it a lighter ship. Now if you were to travel for 80-100 years I think you would need to take a few supplies with ya.

So mathematically I just proved to you all that there is no way we will meet "alien" life forms. But it doesnt mean they may not exist out there.

[Zairak]

No. No you did not prove that. All you proved is that we lack the capabilities to travel very far in space right now. It was not very long ago that people thought we could never get so far as the moon. Besides which, even if we never develop interstellar travel, who is to say an alien species wouldn't?

[spencer43]

I dont know if its in this thread but I posted some where here a lecture from Steven Hawking talking about travel between solar systems, he puts it all out there and there's no way it exists everything you see in sci fi is only pretty ideas thought up by crazy people who become millionaires.

Before you say pfft its steven hawking .. well hes the world authority on all that space stuff, until you prove him wrong or he proves him self wrong .. hes rite.

[Zairak]

I just now read that article, actually. It was in this thread. Certainly, he did say that he believed the technological cliches of science fiction, i.e. faster than light travel, teleporting, etc were almost certainly not going to be invented. But so what? Who is to say there is not another way, some other form of travelling through space? That's why they are called inventions, we haven't thought of them yet.

[killshot]

No one said space travel of the Hollywood variety was possible. One thing you have overlooked is the possibility of just waiting. Humans might not be able to live long enough to reach distant solar systems, but an unmanned probe might. Who's to say an alien craft isn't probing other systems as well? Also, you only said that the shuttle sent in 1969 couldn't make the journey. Don't you think our technology can surpass something built in the sixties?

[spencer43]

No I was saying thats the fastest rocket recorded in history ... including todays rockets ...

Its all well and good meeting probes, but thats not meeting alien life forms. And I am not saying that tI just believe that with technology being capped to only a limit of speed then there is only so much of even our solar system we dont even know. I mean 2 years ago we discovered another planet one further past pluto but comes in close then neptune on orbit thats bigger then pluto.

We have so much to discover in our own back yard how on earth can we travel outside the solar system when we dont have the ability to man a shuttle to even Mars.. ?? sure probes can do all that cause there is not much equipment involved .. but when were sending men in space there are alot of needs. It would be one of those good bye things as well, you send some one outside the solar system they are not coming back haah. You all seem to have the idea that any other alien race that there wuld be out there is more intelligent then us, how bout thinking they are less intelligent?

So many ideas and contradictions are involved in a discussion such as this.

[Zairak]

We have so much to discover in our own back yard how on earth can we travel outside the solar system when we dont have the ability to man a shuttle to even Mars.. ?? sure probes can do all that cause there is not much equipment involved .. but when were sending men in space there are alot of needs. It would be one of those good bye things as well, you send some one outside the solar system they are not coming back haah. You all seem to have the idea that any other alien race that there wuld be out there is more intelligent then us, how bout thinking they are less intelligent?
I don't recall anybody saying all aliens are more intelligent than us. I simply brought up the point that we weren't the only ones who could even be capable of space travel. They could well be less intelligent than us. A lot would be, if there were other planets like Earth out there, with one dominant intelligent species on it and numerous lesser species.

Also, you seem to be skimming the responses to your posts. To make it perfectly clear: We. Can't. Travel. Through. Space. Yet. The technology does not exist yet. You are essentially claiming that we will never become more technologically advanced then we are right now. Furthermore, meeting an alien probe would be almost exactly like meeting an alien species. I doubt they would send them out without the capability to send messages back. Finally, it could be possible to send men into outer space instead of probes. If you had read the entire article from Steven Hawking, you would have read the bit about Genetic Engineering. Think of the possibilities! Given enough time and research, we could very well adapt ourselves to different environments and explore the universe like that, one planet at a time. So many ideas and contradictions are involved in a discussion such as this.
I may be missing something, but...What contradictions?

[Grantsnake]

it's really easy to travel great distaces in space just travel through a worm hole

what hard itcreating a worm hole from one place to another

[Zairak]

...Not really sure how to respond to this. This is probably because I am not sure if you are joking or not...

[Grantsnake]

not joking it is possable you just need a strong enough gravtational forcve to bend the space (this is working under the theroy that space is a saddle shape)

[OverMind]

My thoughts on extraterrestrial life are basically summed up in this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJUoiCdip7k

The ending had me in stitches.

[Zairak]

Well...Even if it were possible, would it be worth it? It would seem to me that the sheer costs involved in bending reality would be nigh unimaginable. Especially in comparison to simply spreading out across the universe planet by planet, or by using some as yet unthought of method.

[Grantsnake]

yh i would we dont have to create it we might find if where lucky but i doesnt look like where near one so physist (soz for spelling) are trying to figure out how to do it
i would mean that from a thied party you would be traveling beond the speed of light and it would make find another suitable lanet to live on wonce this one i coming to its end would a hell of allot easier

[darkarcher]

I was just going to point out that if you type up your post into Microsoft Word first, it will help you a lot with spelling and grammar, and make your points seem a bit more valid.

As for the theory of travelling beyond the speed of light, anything that has been come up with is theory, and the scientific basis of that theory is even more theory. For example, one theory is that we could artificially bend space at two separate points to where they touch and form a wormhold of sorts. However, this is based on the theory that the fabric of space can be artifically controlled. In addition, the amounts of energy required would be too much for us to even comprehend such an undertakng.

In short, I'm not saying it's impossible to travel beyond light-speed, but it's highly improbable and we aren't even close to accomplishing it.

[Grantsnake]

yh artifcaily it would take to much energy but using the gravatational energy that is already there we could do seeing as gravity is the only unlimited energy there is

[darkarcher]

Yet the question that remains is "how." How would you utilize gravitational energy in that sense? Even though it is unlimited, it is does not have the magnitude to accomplish such a feat.

[Grantsnake]

precily why we arnt doing right now

[darkarcher]

I'm going to backtrack to the subject of probes encountering each other. IF there were alien life and IF it were advanced enough to send out probes, it would still be the equivalent of two blindfolded men shooting guns in random directions with two of those bullets hitting each other in the air.

As for discovering an alien probe sent to earth, it would be the same, except the blindfolded man is shooting at a quarter 30 yards away.

[killshot]

Two probes encountering one another may not be probable, but it is possible and we do have the technology to accomplish this. And if enough bullets were fired, wouldn't two eventually collide? The problem is that we don't know if there is another blindfolded man shooting back and the bullets cost several hundred million a piece.

[Grantsnake]

and it doesnt have t hit are radars and telecopes could pick it up and we could retrive it

[magick]

No man is so foolish but he may sometimes give another good counsel, and no man so wise that he may not easily err if he takes no other counsel than his own. He that is taught only by himself has a fool for a master.

[GcarOatmealRaisinCookies]

Looking for Intelligent life on a forum? yeah none here.
But in Space...
nobody can hear you scream.
could be.

[OverMind]

Is that because no medium exists in space to transmit sound?

[killshot]

You silly girl, screams are louder in space because there is no air to get in the way.

[darkarcher]

While I would love to continue the satire in here, please remain on topic.

[OverMind]

We apologize.

Alright everyone, continue discussing crackpot theories about how it is possible to travel faster than the speed of light without any scientific evidence to back your claims.

[Grantsnake]

ah thank for that
i ddint say that from your prepective you would be traveling faster than light i merly ment from a third party you would apear to be

[killshot]

There is nothing that grounds the worm hole theory to reality. Its a hypothetical notion that does not, and probably never will have a working model let alone a practical use.

Also, it would be nice if you at least tried not to butcher the English language.

[Grantsnake]

fuck off i have dyslexia

[Grantsnake]

fuck off i have dyslexia

[Zairak]

Ok, first off, I have nothing against people with dyslexia. Nothing at all.

That being said, I don't understand you, Grantsnake. You aren't writing, you are typing. The keys on the keyboard don't move. You just memorize which key is where and press it. It's not like writing, which involves much more mental concentration.

Maybe I am wrong, but I would still like to bring this up. Correct me if you will.

[killshot]

Yes, dyslexia is what is preventing you from punctuating your sentences. Since when does dyslexia cause the period on the keyboard to disappear? How about the shift key? There are two of them in case you get confused which side they are on. Does your dyslexia also prevent you from using a spell checker? Firefox 3 has a built in spell check so you don't even have to copy and paste your gibberish into Microsoft Word. Having dyslexia doesn't excuse you from laziness.

[Animegirlzzzzzzz]

His joke just got pwned.
And the world shall not end!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Can we get back on topic?

[Zairak]

And the world shall not end!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
...Are you in the right topic?

Anyway, fair enough. We should get back on topic. Perhaps we should discuss what intelligent life actually means? I mean, what criteria are we working with here?

[Animegirlzzzzzzz]

Those anyone that's not Grantsnake have a sense of humor?

[darkarcher]

Kill the flaming or I kill this topic. Get back on track.

[Animegirlzzzzzzz]

Yes, sir!

[Feball3001]

I think it might be a good time for this topic to die since most of what needs to be said has already been said.

[killshot]

Perhaps we should discuss what intelligent life actually means?
I agree. Lets get back on track. I would operate under the assumption that intelligent life should be any life that has evolved beyond the microbial level. Basically anything with a lower brain function, or the equivalent of a brain. I doubt we will ever encounter any alien species that fits this criteria, but it is possible it exists.

[Zairak]

I may be mistaken, but wouldn't most animals fit that description of intelligent life? When I brought up that question, I was thinking more along the line of exactly what seperates humans from the other species of Earth.

[killshot]

Yes, most animals would fit that description. Where do you think we should draw the line between intelligent and unintelligent? I would say that being able to learn, even on a small scale, constitutes enough intelligence to be recognized as "intelligent life."

[Zairak]

Hmm... Well, that really depends on what you mean by 'learn'. If you simply mean memorize, then I disagree. Like, for instance, dogs learn that bones are tasty, etc. Of course, that might be more instinctual, I don't know.

Anyway, I would place more emphasis on the ability to reason and the capability of abstract cost. To memorize facts is one thing, but to be able to put facts together and comprehend what they actually mean...That's another thing altogether.

So, my definition of intelligent life as of right now is anything with the ability to reason and even imagine things.

[Tatterdemalion]

I would define intelligent life as anything with sapience, reasoning ability, judgement, and problem solving ability. That is, an inteligent animal would be an animal that is able to use reasoning and rational thought to function, is able to plan, and is able to use reasoning to learn.

Simply being able to learn does not necessarily denote intelligence, because learning does not necessarily require reasoning abilities, or judgement. That is to say, learning can be accomplished without any sort of sapience. For example, behavior can be learned through conditioning, and that sort of thing, without the need for actual reasoning, deduction, or similar thought processes. Also, a lot of learning is related to observation and imitation. That is, an animal learns to do things by watching other animals do it, rather than figuring out how to do it on their own. All of this could be considered learning, but at the same time I wouldn't categorize it as "intelligence," because it isn't cognitive.

Then there's the matter of things such as abstract thought, and assigning meaning to things, such as Zairak brought up, but I think that relates more to specifically human faculties, such as values, creativity, ideas, all of which are characteristic of humans, but which generally aren't categorized as requirements for intelligence.

I think the best comparison would be to look at artificial intelligence. There are computers that could be considered intelligent, definitely, even though they lack any sort of consciousness. Computers can't understand the meaning of anything, but they are still able to make intelligent decisions. That is, they not only memorize facts, but put facts together, which makes them intelligent. Being able to understand what facts mean would make them more than intelligent, it would make them human, which is something that machines can't do. (Which is why the whole "robots have right" or "androids are people too" motifs that you see in some science fiction make no sense whatsoever)

[Animegirlzzzzzzz]

WIN!
Humans are intelligent, just not as intelligent as life on other planets.
If humans apply themselves, they can do whatever they wish.

[Tatterdemalion]

What life would this be? Do you know something we don't?

[inamerica55585]

I think INTELLIGENT life is the wrong word
I think we should look simply for planets with life that is at least multicellular. If we, say, find zooplankton on Europa, would we count that as intelligent life?

[Animegirlzzzzzzz]

I believe we're looking for life that is more intelligent then humans, but yes, the discovery of zooplankton is somewhat signifigant.

[inamerica55585]

one other thing: if we were to discover, hypothetically, microbian life on a planet with an oxygen based atmosphere and H2O, if we were to bring colonies of this life to earth, would the evolution of these microbes be different from the life on their native homeworld?

[Grantsnake]

well der it still a different enviroment

[Arbaal]

TLDR oh and cool story bro

[killshot]

Arbaal, could you at least maintain a modicum of secrecy about which site you visit in your free time? There are rules against this kind of crap you know. If we, say, find zooplankton on Europa, would we count that as intelligent life?
I think the point of this thread is to discuss the probability of finding life with intelligence similar to our own. To me, I would consider anything with the ability to learn, even through observation and memorization, to be intelligent. However, it seems most others here would prefer a more complicated thought process to be considered intelligent.

[Animegirlzzzzzzz]

Agreed, but I already metioned the invalid value of that quote.

[Arbaal]

We shouldn't search for intelligent life because if we find it they'll turn their lazorz on us. What we should do is find dumb life and enslave them.

[Zairak]

...Damnit, Arbaal, this is not Off-topic, don't just spam jokes.

@killshot: Well, as I said before, under your definition of intelligent life, a large percentage of the Earth's species would be considered intelligent. If we accept this as the valid point of view, what then? Are we truly no better than the other species in terms of intelligence? Because if that is the case, I suppouse the search has long been over.

[killshot]

Are we truly no better than the other species in terms of intelligence? Because if that is the case, I suppouse the search has long been over.
By labeling another species as "intelligent," are we somehow invalidating our own intelligence? I fail to see how setting a broad definition for intelligence makes humans any less unique. I think the trouble is that you are trying to classify other life with humans being the standard. If an alien species were to be discovered, who's to say that their way of thinking will be synonymous to our own? Isn't it possible to be intelligent without possessing any human characteristics?

You mentioned earlier that reasoning ability should classify an organism as intelligent. I agree that anything with the ability to logically solve problems should be classified as "intelligent life," however I do think this is setting the bar a little too high. You surely must believe there is some middle ground between "intelligent" and "unintelligent," no? All I am saying is that I think you are being a little too selective in what you are considering to be intelligent.

We aren't really contributing much to the thread. This has sort of become an argument over semantics.

[Animegirlzzzzzzz]

Agreed.
Why must we undermine ourselves?
Whether they discover us, we discover them or they choose not to visit us, will it truly affect us in a signifigant manner?

[Grantsnake]

why bother doing anything we do? simple. Humans (unlike most other animals (as far as we know) are the only species who want to know as much as poaable. through this we have become the domenent species on the planet. why bother looking for intelgent life?... because we can! it's that briliant!

[darkarcher]

I'm sorry, but your post is practically illegible. Correct me if I'm wrong, but is this what you were trying to say?Why bother doing anything we do? Simple. Humans (as far as we know) are the only species that devotes itself to learning as much as possible. This is how we have become the dominant species on the planet.
The rest is not as confusing. For future reference, no one is going to take you seriously if they can't even tell what you're saying.

[OverMind]

darkarcher: Forum Moderator by day, Engrish-to-English Translator by night!

My contribution to the conversation:

It seems that we're all now poking holes into the question raised by the topic, and trying to determine what "intelligence" is. As killshot mentioned, we're now running in circles (e.g. should the bar be set low or high?).

Personally, I don't think we can even begin to make any progress in such a question until you find "unintelligent" life (whatever that may be ... Perhaps single-celled organisms? They're pretty dumb right?).

[RationalInquirer]

Anybody read the books written by Carl Sagan? He spearheaded the SETI project (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence). and was a worldwide known astronomer before his death.
I personally believe that the existence of aliens are highly probable. Seeing as we are an insignificant smote of dust orbiting a giant nuclear reactor core positioned in an equally insignificant galaxy (I am paraphrasing of course). According to my math textbook there are an absolute minimum of 50 billion galaxies in the universe. A typical galaxy holds 100 billion stars. Each star holds the possibility of planets orbiting around it. Each planet with a possibility of a life (civilization or otherwise). Of course it's not just the magnitude of numbers, you must also include the possible occurence of life under certain conditions, location in orbit, size and composition of planets, and the Anthropic Principle if you want to go into the specifics and so on...

Take a look at this link and you'll see what I mean http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble_Ultra_Deep_Field and this one http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f351/dabears1020/1202609635165.gif and this one if you are a science whiz http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle

[Grantsnake]

thank you, I suffer from dyslexia i somtimes (most times) have difficulty putting what i want to say into word so i don't mind if people pull me up on it if there nice about it

[Animegirlzzzzzzz]

Is okay.
DARK! Apologize to eels. NAO!!!

[darkarcher]

...why? I was helping him out...what do I need to apologize for?

[Animegirlzzzzzzz]

So we can talk about the reletivity of intelligence in peace!
And mabye throw in an extratresstral here and there?

[darkarcher]

Yes, but you still have not stated why I should apologize in the first place.

[Animegirlzzzzzzz]

Sorry man.
What you where destened to say was "I'm sorry, Grant. I didn't know."
Dislexic, dislexic, DISLEXIC!!!

[darkarcher]

Except there's no point in it because he didn't take offense to it. He thanked me for helping him out.

Also, I didn't do it in a mean-spirited way. It was just to help him out so that others could respond to him and continue the conversation.

[Animegirlzzzzzzz]

ASCII!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111!!!!!!!!!!!
OKAY, ur right.
This is getting somewhat ridiculus.
I'll treat a drink at the BAR. That place could use some livening up!
I've been away from it for a while. Please don't censor us. I only wanted to have a spot of fun.

[Animegirlzzzzzzz]

ASCII!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111!!!!!!!!!
OK, ur rite.
This was getting a tad rediculous, especually as an outlook on the human race.
I'll treat you to a drink at the BAR, that place needs some livening up.
I was only yanking your coller a bit in regards to the apology business. Nothing to dwell on, eh?

[Grantsnake]

wow a fight over me this is brill
(sorry for going off topic)

[Animegirlzzzzzzz]

Alright, that we shall.

[KuroStarr]

With how big space is...I don't have a hard time believing there is life beyond our solar system. It's inevitable.
We just haven't found them yet, or they just haven't found us yet.
Or maybe they have found us; but won't admit it. :]

[potatoman4]

i think they are already here

[Animegirlzzzzzzz]

Prehaps they are.
Prehaps they live among us.

[Animegirlzzzzzzz]

Prehaps they are.
Prehaps they live among us.

[TheFreedomIllusion]

If you take the time to think about the true scale of space, the billions of stars it contains, then the question if there is any intelligent life elsewhere in the universe changes to where is the intelligent life?

[Tatterdemalion]

No, it's still is. I mean, you just answered your own question, didn't you. Clearly if it is out there, it's somewhere around the billions of stars you just mentioned. That part's simple. The real question is whether or not it exists in the first place.

[RationalInquirer]

I am quite sure that we Homosapiens are not the only living beings in the universe. If we are alone out here, then I will feel very isolated and insecure (not emo-on a UNIVERSAL scale). I have read science articles that say the chances of life occuring on a planet are extrmemely slim, 1 to 10 billion or something along those values. If there is indeed sentient life out there in the vast cosmos, and assuming they have several thousand or million years headstart over us humans, then they are probably more advanced than anything we ever dreamed of. Isaac Asimov, Arthur C Clarke. Carl Sagan are personal heroes of mine who not only write fantastic novels, but also stretch our imagination of things unknown. We must be humbling on such matters.
Let's hope they're nothing like the Covenant from Halo who will not hesitate to exterminate us for our inferiority <img src='/images/emoticons/smiley5.png'>

[Tatterdemalion]

I think there's something strangely comforting about the thought that there is no other intelligent life in the universe. I mean, I don't believe it myself, and I think that it's certainly very possible that there is other life, but I don't see why there should be any reason to feel isolated and insecure because you're the only sentient species in the universe.

I mean, think about it. What on Earth is discomforting about the fact that against astronomical odds, you are the final product of the highly unlikely development of a form of existence that, in a mind-bogglingly big universe, is unique to you and you alone?

I mean, people go on with this whole "the Universe is so big, look at how insignificant and meaningless we are" attitude, but that doesn't really make any sense, does it? I mean, how does being the most developed being of a unique brand of existence

When you think about it, what is the Universe? It's nothing but a bunch of gas, dust and icy grain, chunks of rock, heaps of chemicals moving around...essentially, it's dirt. By human standards, it's garbage. There is nothing that, if it were to exist on Earth, wouldn't readily be tossed in a landfill. As vast and enormous as the Universe may be, as far as we know, there's still virtually nothing out there.

I mean, really, what exists in the known Universe outside of Earth that's so much greater than us? Is there art? Is there music? Is there poetry? Is there food? Is there language? Is there companionship? Is there philosophy? Is there sex? Is there storytelling? Is there love? No. There's dirt. Some of it's very big, some of it's very small, some of it's on fire, some of it's covered in ice, and all of it's very far apart, but still, it's dirt.

Now, I don't want to come off as sounding geocentric, and I appreciate human curiosity, but at the same time it's just that, curiosity. As interested as we may be in the Universe beyond Earth, it's not as though that I've always asked, if it was possible to travel safely at the speed of light, where would you possibly go? Sure you could travel to places now unimaginable, but at the same time, what would you do when you get there? We want to explore because it's in our nature, but at the same time we have to accept that the revelance and meaning it has to us and our lives is still very little. It's like Ernie's song I Don't Want to Live on the Moon, from Sesame Street.

We are humans. This is our planet. Our existence is literally meant for Earth. We have everything we could need as a species here naturally, and whatever we may still desire, we create, and we continue to create as we go on. No, it's not perfect, but everything in our lives that we could need, want or use isn't going to come from the sky, it's going to come from right here.

So I don't see where the notion of insignificance comes in. To be human in a Universe with no other sentient life is to be able to look at the night sky and know that you are the most interesting thing in a near infinite world. It kind of makes you feel proud, doesn't it?

And as far as isolation, human kinship is more than enough to get you through the long winter nights.


Also, this notion that somehow these sorts of novels are a bold and humbling insight into the possibilities of what may lie beyond to be baffling.

Relying on the belief that there are bigger, more important men out there somewhere in the Universe who are stronger and better than you in order to feel secure with your own Earthly existence is just as silly as needing to believe in a god to feel the same thing. They're actually pretty much the same thing. These are both different modes of storytelling through which humans express their own tendencies, and needs and desires by personifying them through the use of distant, alien figures who are supposedly distinct and different from humanity, so that we can then look at them and judge them from an outside perspective, as though to judge ourselves. I know I've said it before, but I'll say it again, religion isn't really about gods, and science fiction isn't really about what lies beyond. Whatever storytelling devices may be used, both of them are about humans, and humans alone.

Whatever you want to do in your little modern day legends, and 20th century biblical parables is all well and good, but when you want to talk about the real world don't make the mistake of creating life in your own image. Yes, they're good for the imagination, but in terms of what really is, they're irrelevant. Perhaps we can learn a bit about ourselves from them, but again, in matters material, irrelevant.

If you're an Atheist, don't make the Unknown your god.




Anyway, on to the meat and potatoes of the issue, and that is sentient life in the Universe. Yes, there is a very good possibility that there is some sort of life elsewhere in the universe. Still, it would be very foolish to suppose that such life is "intelligent" or somehow "more advanced" than humans, because doing so is to fall into the trap of thinking that humankind is somehow representative of a universal standard for developed life.

Starting off with the "more advanced" bit. It's possible to call humans more advanced than other species on Earth because we all share a common ancestor, and we all represent different stages in a long line of evolution, therefore making those of us farther down the line more advanced. But at the same time, extra-terrestrial life would not share the same evolutionary lineage, far from it. So in trying to imagine extra terrestrial life you have to ignore absolutely everything that we, as humans, take for granted. Even at the most basic level, why should we assume a resemblance to terrestrial life? Why should single-celled organisms on other planets even remotely resemble those on Earth? It would be an entirely different environment, after all.

But taking that into consideration, even if there was sme sort of resemblance, why should we assume these species would be animals? Then again, why should we even assume they would be eukaryotes? I mean, even if they were eukaryotes, which there still isn't much reasoning for, there are four taxonomical kingdoms we classify eukaryotes under, animalia, plantae, fungi and protista. So, why should there not, on an entirely different planet, be a fifth kingdom? Or a sixth kingdom? Or a myriad of kingdoms unlike anything ever seen on earth?

Even on the most basic, fundamental levels, there is no reason to assume any resemblance to terrestrial life, yet somehow we're to ignore that, and assume that life on other planets would not only take an unreasonably similar form to that on Earth, but that it would go on to produce a human-like species, which can then be surpassed in order to produce a "more advanced" species. The chances of life itself existing may be possible albeit highly improbable, but the odds of that sort of scenario ever occuring are downright laughable.

And then there's the matter of "inteligence." I mean, what is inteligence? On Earth it is a uniquely human characteristic, that exists in such a way that humans can take on a very specialized role. Now, this is where not taking things for granted comes in. Think of all of the possible senses that exist other than inteligence that are only posessed by a very small number of species. Sight, for example. The fast majority of organisms on Earth cannot see. Protists can't see, bacteria can't see, fungi can't see, plants can't see, and a considerable number of animals can't see. This isn't a disadvantage or anything, because at the same time, they don't need to. Now, you could say this is because animals that have sight are "more advanced," but then again, look at plenty of other specialized senses, like echolocation. Humans can't echolocate. Until very recently, we couldn't even understand what echolocation is. Now, humans are far more advanced than bats, but at the same time we don't use echolocation for it, because we have no use for it. It is indeed just a sense that, although useful for a small few species, fell off the evolutionary tree later on in the game.

That being said, why should we assume that something even remotely resembling intelligence should occur in organisms that have an entirely different ancestry, going back to the most fundamental level, and therefore have an entirely different evolutionary path from anything on Earth? The chances, once again, are laughable. At the same time, who's to say that there aren't a myriad other senses that these organisms may have that are entirely alien to humans? Just as a paramecium is completely incapable of experiencing sight, and a plant is incapable of experiencing fear, doesn't it stand to reason that there are just as easily a thousand other sensations that humans are entirely incapable of fathoming, due to our terribly limited abilities of perception?

And what about this, what if there is something in the Universe greater than life? I mean, life is just a state of being that certain physical compounds take on. Now, for this to occur is very uncommon, but still, it's happened. So why should we assume that there isn't some other state of being, completely different from life, that is just as uncommon as life, and which as a result we have never encountered, yet still exists? I mean, just as life is alien to a rock, and beyond a rock's comprehension, why shouldn't there be some other mode of existence that is as unfathomable to us as life is to a rock?

The mistake we can't make is that of thinking that we are aware of everything. That is to say, it's foolish to assume that humans are somehow aware, or capable of being aware of all of the factors and elements and sensations that contribute to existence. Why should we assume that there is nothing beyond our abilities of experience, simply because we have not experienced them?

Imagine, if you will, trying to get an amoeba to appreciate Mozart. it's not just difficult, it's literally impossible. Why? Because while Mozart's music certainly exists, a fact that is undeniable to us, the amoeba does not have the organs with which to sense it, the senses with which to perceive it, the faculties with which to process it, the reasoning with which to understand it, or the sentiments with which to appreciate it. The amoeba doesn't know this, of course, but there is indeed an entire world beyond its existence that it will not and can not ever be aware of. Why, then, should we humans assume ourselves to be any different? Who are we to say that we aren't just amoeba, floating blindly in the petri dish that is the Universe? And what logic or reasoning could say otherwise?

[RationalInquirer]

I didn't expect quite a lengthy response but there is much truth in what you posted. I understand what your saying, but I still feel that if we are the only sentient species in Universe, the very notion demands that we try our best to survive for generations to come. Without blowing each other up to smithereens in the process. I don't believe that one can survive death in a non-physical form, therefore I don't believe in an afterlife. As such, I feel that the future of our species lies with the understanding that if we are to die from natural or manmade causes, we run the risk of leaving behind an empty Universe devoid of life for maybe millions of years. I can't fathom what that could be like, but there is always the possibility. It is this reason that I prefer to (and there is a much larger probability) think that there are in fact other life in space.

[Tatterdemalion]

Keep in mind, the Universe was devoid of life for billions of years before we came along, and devoid of "intelligent" life for all but up until several thousand years ago. In terms of the grand calendar of the history of the Universe, the period of our existence is so small it's practically immeasurable. So if I was you I wouldn't worry about leaving a Universe devoid of intelligent life. I'm sure the Universe is used to it.

And also, even if we're gone, that's not it for life in general. That is, there would still be other forms of life on Earth, so it's not as though the Universe would be entirely on its own.

And it's actually very easy to fathom what it would be like if there were no life in the Universe. It would be very, very boring. Then again, we wouldn't be around for it, so why should we care? I mean, with no one around to be bored, why should it matter how boring something is?

Hey, that's kind of like the "tree falls in the forest" kind of thing, isn't it?

But yeah, don't feel so responsible. Take care of yourself, your friends, your family, your pets, if you have any. That's what matters. The Universe can take care of itself without you fretting over it.

[Animegirlzzzzzzz]

I agree for the most part.
Our society may benifit from the lack of unmanageable threat from other speices riveling or exceeding our intelligence. But if our planet was to be wiped out by a natural or artificial disease from other planetary species, they would serve as the only proof that there was ever life here. Unless they choose not to pass the story on. That's the Cliff Notes version, at least.

[EdBat]

Start by looking for intelligent life on Earth, first.

[Noslo]

Consider the possibilities of Level 1 Parallel Universe, a Universe within the same space as ours, but out of our cosmic view. Since the Universe is infinitely large and the laws of Quantum Mechanics give every event possible a one to infinite chance of occurring, every possible event has already happened. So in theory there are an infinite number of worlds like our own containing intelligent life.

However this is just a theory, and none of it can be proven. Just give it some careful consideration before discrediting these potential prospects.

[Tatterdemalion]

I thought the Universe was 15 billion lightyears in diameter?

[Noslo]

It is a just a theory though. Honestly, theoretical physics is beyond me.

[Tatterdemalion]

But we've got a picture.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/28/WMAP_2008.png

See? That's the Universe.

[Noslo]

That's what we can see. The Universe is expanding at an ever increasing rate, so we can't see everything because the light hasn't reached us yet, and never will because of the rate of expansion.

[Tatterdemalion]

That's what we can see. The Universe is expanding at an ever increasing rate, so we can't see everything because the light hasn't reached us yet, and never will because of the rate of expansion.

So what you're saying is that we can't see it, we can't measure it, and there's no way of proving it exists, and conveniently for you, the carefully constructed definition of "proof" means that we technically can't disprove it. Yet somehow, even though any rational person wouldn't believe it, considering that just like unicorns it's just something some people made up one day, you expect me to give money to people to investigate and research something that no one even has any reason to believe exists?

That sounds like RationalInquirer's definition of religion.

But back on the subject, if the Universe is 15 billion years old, around, and light travels at one light-year every year, and nothing travels faster than light, then how can there be anything beyond that 15 billion light-year mark?

Seriously though, look at the picture. I can see my house!

[Noslo]

Even though nothing travels faster than light, things can travel the same speed as light. So if the Universe is expanding at the same speed as light, we will never be able to see farther than 15 billions years. Rather than being an age this should be the point the rate of expansion reached the speed of light.

[Tatterdemalion]

Even though nothing travels faster than light, things can travel the same speed as light. So if the Universe is expanding at the same speed as light, we will never be able to see farther than 15 billions years. Rather than being an age this should be the point the rate of expansion reached the speed of light.

Yeah, but let's say the Universe is expanding at a rate close to the speed of light. In the estimated 13 to 15 billion years that the Universe has existed, how far could the Universe have expanded?

[Noslo]

That's a good question, if I were a mathematician I would answer you with an exact number. However, in this case if the Universe were close at a rate to the speed of light it would have traveled an innumerable number of light years, in theory. So there may be billions more of light years we'll never be able to see without wormholes or hyperspace.

[Tatterdemalion]

That's a good question, if I were a mathematician I would answer you with an exact number. However, in this case if the Universe were close at a rate to the speed of light it would have traveled an innumerable number of light years, in theory. So there may be billions more of light years we'll never be able to see without wormholes or hyperspace.

But this is what I'm saying...in one year, light can't travel farther than a light-year, right? That's why it's called a light-year, I think. So then how could the number of light years that the Universe, traveling near the speed of light, expands be greater than the number of years the Universe has existed. And that's assuming a maximum speed on the part of the Universe too...

[Noslo]

Well maybe the Universe hasn't reached speed of light yet so there may be more to the Universe for us to see. However, it's to soon to be sure, it's impossible to know unless, we wait several million year to see if we can see any farther than before. Eventually there has to be a point at which the universe and light are at the same speed, freezing our image of the Universe forever. Light is a constant so we just have to wait for the Universe to catch up.

[Fat1Fared]

Tatterdemalion, basically you get a real sense of well being from being top dog lol, though can see what your saying

Noslo, the problem is that earth is "very close" (this is in relative terms) to the out edge of galaxy and because of the TIME-SPACE-CONTINUUMM it is very hard to know real limits of space and if what we are seeing is even still there,

There are theories if were to travels through space you could get younger, because of just how warped it is, is unknown

So this comes down to chance and probability really, (I mean we were only made by chance and probability) As there is argument space is so big, there cannot not be other life (sentient/ animal, already found baritira and plants)

However you have counter balance this against just how amazing it is we came to be, our planet being just right distance away from sun, with right gases/levels of gas, eco layers, gravity/up put layers...etc all being just right, if there is one argument for god, it is this one
and the fact earth has not been destroyed (as is one other planet in our galaxy cannot remember which, that could have supported life, had it not become a gas bowl for unknown reason)

So this there another planet which did same, who knows, like say got to weight them to points up and come to own conclusion

PSNo matter how cool Star Wars is, 90% of planets on it, like Hoth could never have life

[Tatterdemalion]

Tatterdemalion, basically you get a real sense of well being from being top dog lol, though can see what your saying

Since when am I top dog? That's the logical fallacy right there.

However you have counter balance this against just how amazing it is we came to be, our planet being just right distance away from sun, with right gases/levels of gas, eco layers, gravity/up put layers...etc all being just right, if there is one argument for god, it is this one

No it's not. Keep in mind that considering how big the Universe it, the fact that one planet has conditions which could possibly sustain life (and not even ideally, if you look at all the terrible weather phenomena that exist that are detrimental to life on earth) isn't too hard to fathom.

[Fat1Fared]

Tatter, I was only joking as basically you said it feels nice to think humans are somehow to supreme, lol

Yes you are right and I never said anything against the argument that Universe is big, so got to have life, just saying must counter against this against how hard it is for life to grow