Do you believe there are aliens?

[azzaman333]

All we know is that intelligent life is possible, since we exist. We do not know the probability of intelligent life occurring, so it's impossible to say with any certainty whether aliens are out there.

 

[emzie]

That's my point.
So, you agree, but you disagree ? THAT is some awful logic here

Let me quote myself :

"his answer is just showcasing a certain kind of ignorance, the unability to distinguish between "faith" (which is based on wishful thinking) and "probability" (which is based on reasoning). "

Faith and probabilities are completely different concepts - in fact, most of the time they are at odds, probabilities being the best proof against the existence of religious beliefs. They can only be equated by someone who lacks the understanding of mathematical mechanisms.

/sigh

I don't know how else to put it. As I've said numerous times, there's not enough data to know if our existence is probable or improbable. No one has refuted this with sufficient data to back up their claim life obviously exists elsewhere or probably exists elsewhere. None of us know, and to pretend that we do, that is either a faith-based conjecture, or an ill disciplined mind when it comes what is or is not rational.

To have a position of anything other than hopeful, but agnostic, on extra extraterrestrial life, is not something that can be supported. Even SETI scientists and astrobiolgoists at NASA will agree with the hopeful-but-data-lacking position. To go beyond that and make assumptions and then say your assumptions are based on reason is an insult to rationality.

Look, I want extraterrestrial life to exist. It would be the single most exciting discovery of my life. I think, given the points you have brought up, a very real possibility. I am in deep support of funding projects that may detect it. But until we have more data, it would go against every rational fibre of my being, everything I've ever been taught from very smart men and women about how science works, to say yeah, life probably exists elsewhere -- even if that's my gut reaction.

 

[Akka]

/sigh

I don't know how else to put it. As I've said numerous times, there's not enough data to know if our existence is probable or improbable. No one has refuted this with sufficient data to back up their claim life obviously exists elsewhere or probably exists elsewhere. None of us know, and to pretend that we do, that is either a faith-based conjecture, or an ill disciplined mind when it comes what is or is not rational.

Let me, again, quote myself :

"No, that's pretty solid logic built onto something that is a non-absolute but somehow informed guess. The only unknown point is the probability of a "life-giving candidate" planet to give birth to actual life. My take is that it's "rare but not ridiculously microcosmically low" (considering all the elements you've listed). "

If you can't make a difference between an informed guess and faith, then in this case yes I've nothing more to offer. They are still completely different, though - the latter being about, as you tend to demonstrate it, something one WANTS, while the former is something that someone ESTIMATES.

 

[emzie]

And what is "your take" based upon?

 

[PlutonianEmpire]

I do believe in space aliens, obviously, but unfortunately, I don't think they're blue humanoids.

Horny, liberal, space age blue humanoids is just a pipe dream.

 

[Theov]

Of everyone in this thread, the Young Earth Creationist said it best. Every reason given that life exists elsewhere is faith-based, but everyone is ignoring the faith part of their conclusions.

No.
It's research based. We've built telescopes to see into space. We see that there are billions and billions of stars.
Then we also see that a lot of them have planets.
Then we also see that some of them are in the position to 'be like earth'.
It's just observable.
No one here is saying that there IS life on another planet, we're just stating that it's highly likely, just because there are so many stars with planets. (Let me speak for myself and rephrase that to 'me'.)

 

[emzie]

No.
It's research based. We've built telescopes to see into space. We see that there are billions and billions of stars.
Then we also see that a lot of them have planets.
Then we also see that some of them are in the position to 'be like earth'.
It's just observable.
No one here is saying that there IS life on another planet, we're just stating that it's highly likely, just because there are so many stars with planets. (Let me speak for myself and rephrase that to 'me'.)

It's not research based. The "highly likely part" is the issue. We don't know enough about how life came about to know how likely the same conditions would be found elsewhere. To assume likelihood, you're leaving the research behind and making faith-based conjecture.

 

[TheLastOne36]

Does extraterrestrial life exist? Yes. Is it necessarily like anything like the movies? Probably not.

It seems like a mathmatical certainy that we are not alone in this universe. Each galaxy has billions of billions of stars, each with their own planets. In turn, there is at least 170 billion galaxies. With all of these planets, which is much larger than Graham's Number, there is no way that Earth is the only planet special enough to hold life.

I agree with you, but do you realize how large Graham's number is?

 

[Power_of_Beer]

It's not research based. The "highly likely part" is the issue. We don't know enough about how life came about to know how likely the same conditions would be found elsewhere. To assume likelihood, you're leaving the research behind and making faith-based conjecture.

It probably doesn't take more than liquid water a bunch of small molecules (Methane, Ammonia, molecular Hydrogen). Just radiate the soup with UV light for a few 100 million years and you get all kind of organic molecules, including sugars, bases of nucleic acids, polypeptides, ATP etc. These molecules have been formed in multiple simulated primitive, various conditions. Given enough time, the self-replicating DNA will form.

Edit: There should obviously be some Phosphorus-containing copunds, too.

 

[emzie]

It probably doesn't take more than liquid water a bunch of small molecules (Methane, Ammonia, molecular Hydrogen). Just radiate the soup with UV light for a few 100 million years and you get all kind of organic molecules, including sugars, bases of nucleic acids, polypeptides, ATP etc. These molecules have been formed in multiple simulated primitive, various conditions. Given enough time, the self-replicating DNA will form.

Probably doesn't?

 

[Theov]

It's not research based. The "highly likely part" is the issue. We don't know enough about how life came about to know how likely the same conditions would be found elsewhere. To assume likelihood, you're leaving the research behind and making faith-based conjecture.

So we know life is possible to happen once (earth) but what is your take on it happening twice?

 

[Power_of_Beer]

Probably doesn't?

Following the results of the experiments , it doesn't.

 

[Eat_Up_Martha]

I'm with Contre on this one. The only thing we can infer from the existence of life on Earth is that there's a nonzero chance of its occurrence. This is not sufficient evidence to establish a solid 'yes' answer.

 

[emzie]

So we know life is possible to happen once (earth) but what is your take on it happening twice?

As I said earlier, given how little time elapsed between the end of the late heavy bombardment and the first signs of life, there's very good reasoning to suspect life may be found elsewhere, and that we should go look for it. However, we are one data point. Perhaps there's something really unusual about earth that sped up the formation of life, or made it possible in the first place. Until we have a better understanding of the origin of life on earth, I'm deeply uncomfortable extrapolating anything based on our existence.

Following the results of the experiments , it doesn't.

It doesn't follow from Miller-Urey that life will happen.

 

[Bei1052]

Considering the sheer size of the universe, the existence of another life somewhere is not just a possibility, but a certainty.

I'm sure there's a fallacy somewhere here.

 

[Theov]

I'm sure there's a fallacy somewhere here.

Well, his point is valid.
How improbable life somewhere else might seem, looking at how big the universe is, you can roll the dice enough times to make it land on 'life'.

 

[exhile]

just lookup "bob lazar" people and you'll all be convinced about the existince of alien life.

 

[Perfection]

What's the probability that the probability of life arising is so small that it only happened once? Who knows, right?
But it's exactly the same as the probability that life arose twice.

Why would anyone think that they're the same?

Seems like total rubbish to me.

 

[TheLastOne36]

The way I see it, it is speculation to say we are alone in the universe considering our own very existence.

 

[ZeletDude]

Of course there are aliens