Agnostic.com

20 8

New study casts doubt on the existence of alien life in our galaxy. So... let's not ruin the planet we have because there's not a lot of others to fall back on when this one is trashed. [nbcnews.com]

mtnhome 7 July 16
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

20 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

1

What sort of life forms?
Bacteria-like? Possible.
Anything more complex? Possible.
Anything comparable with humans? Possible, but improbable.
A larger than usual brain requires huge amounts of energy – and doesn't automatically confer intelligence or wisdom. Apart from being an energy hog, a large brain results in confusion – only humans are so often so confused about fundamental things – child rearing and conflict resolution being prime examples.
No other species traumatises its offspring; chimpanzees make war and are terribly cruel; ants go to war if they need to: but humans lose all sense of proportion, and destroy everything, and surpass chimpanzees in our cruelty.
No other species would elect a Donald Trump as their leader (an assumption, I admit) or leave him there, once they woke up.
We are pretty dumb.
If the earliest humans were as dumb as us, why did they survive?
Maybe our stupidity was a recent acquisition, resulting from our terrible parenting practices, which stunt children's development.
But it's our huge brain that makes this possible.
Obviously our ancestors survived, but was it because of their bigger brains, or in spite of them?
Were they just lucky?
Whichever is the case, I doubt there is a fundamental need for, or drive to acquire, quite such a large brain as we have.
There may be parallels elsewhere in the universe, but I doubt it.
I hope there are. Imagine all the music and such our there if others exist!
Otoh, imagine all the cruelty and misery – and stupidity…

1

Just in our galaxy or in the entire universe? Neither of those are provable. Not unless we can actually visit the planets in question and thoroughly search, or unless they make themselves known.

Fermi assumes that alien civilizations are like we are and want to or need to colonize everything or let others know they exist.

The Drake Equation is similarly inaccurate as we probably wouldn't know the exact nature of aliens anyway. Maybe they are so technologically advanced that their equipment doesn't let off any type of signal.

What if aliens are so primitive that they don't have equipment at all? What if they aren't capable of building anything? What if they don't need the same variables that we do to remain alive?

There is a 50/50 probability as far as I'm concerned regarding whether there are aliens.

1

Evidently they haven't been to Miami Beach.

2

I think it is very likely that there is life beyond our solar system. However, the distances are so vast that we will probably never encounter extra-solar life.

@TiberiusGracchus
We know that life spontaneously evolved on this planet. And we have recently learned that the galaxy is replete with planets, a small but significant percentage of which have life-sustaining conditions. To maintain that we are absolutely unique seems rather egocentric.

2

Whatever doubts there may be about intelligent life on any other planets (I don’t hold those doubts personally), the existence of other planets on which life similar to ours COULD exist is highly likely.

It is not a foregone conclusion that the conditions suitable for life will have given rise to life, especially intelligent life - there are far too many other variables. On that basis, there quite probably is plenty of real estate out there that is unoccupied, and suitable for us.

The only real obstacle we face is getting to any of those other places. The journeys are far too long for even one human lifespan, often more than that. So we’d be looking at suspended animation and AI controlled vehicles. Or generation ships, but human nature would most likely see those crash and burn due to social pressures and mass disillusionment and anger before the second generation died off.

We need the theoretically possible warp drive before we can go anywhere outside our own system.

1

Because there is nowhere else to go, so we should "save our planet", is not a logical reach. It is already too late to save this humans life on this planet. According to Stephen Hawkins (before he died), the human-caused global warming has become self-sustaining and will accelerate even if all other human factors are eliminated. He said that Earth will be similar to Venus and it is all over for mankind within 100 years. It is bend-over-and-kiss-our-butts-goodby time folks.

1

We can trash this one because when we die we will all be going to a worlderful after life. Says so right here in this book. Written by bronze age goat herders so it must be literal truth.

KC1959 Level 5 July 16, 2018

I claim the cloud over there! ---> The one with a bass guitar sitting on it.

0

Fermi’s Paradox and the Drake Equation...

PDF Level 5 July 16, 2018
1

They're just using new made-up variables. The truth of it is that nobody really knows what the odds are that life will begin on a new planet or what the odds are that the life will develop into intelligent beings. We have only blackboards and guessing so far and we probably won't know until we begin real exploration.

How far do you think we can explore with only sub-light speed? You do know of course, that scientists have stated that matter ceases to exist as we know it at the speed of light. In as much as the closest system is 10 light years away from us and with our fastest rockets, it would take 88,000 years to get there, how much "exploring" are we likely to do?

@dahermit That point was literally in the article using Antartica as an example. Are you using our current technological limitations regarding space travel as our impenetrable ceiling? Are you using the unknown state of matter at light speed as another gate we cannot possibly break past? Good thing past explorers saw the watery horizon and with only the wind in their sails immediately turned around and went home.

@dahermit It could be done much quicker, with present know how, but not with current rockets.
Forty to eighty years – or quicker, if drives beyond present capabilities are made.
One possibility is nuclear pulse propulsion – which would put nuclear weapons to actual, beneficial use, rather than waiting around to be used to destroy everything on earth.
I hope we build some, and get the damned weapons off the planet – and stop making more of the useless things!
Then we could build better designed ships that use fusion drives, after all the bombs have been used up in the first generation of interstellar ships.
Humans acting rationally – is that possible?

@mattersauce No, I am not "...using our current technological limitations regarding space travel as our impenetrable ceiling..." I am suggesting that the speed of light may be an impenetrable ceiling. In any event, we will have died out way before faster than light speed (if posssible) can be achieved...we are too close to the end as it is.

@dahermit So you've made solid predictions based on theory that has never been close to tested? I'm assuming you're schooled or hold this as a profession for these kinds of assertions. I'm really hoping that it didn't just come up on your magic 8 ball or maybe you know a guy?

As Nick Fury said "Until such time as the world ends we will act as though it intends to spin on." Take your sandwich board to the next corner.

@mattersauce No dip shit, I am repeating what I have heard respectable scientists say... I did not make those predictions. Take YOUR sandwich board to the next corner.

@dahermit Sandwich board: [imgur.com] dumbass

0

Drakes equation concludes otherwise.

@TheMiddleWay Indeed... Drake's equation only tells you some important variables to include, each value of which may be 10,000x off, or more. And it even misses a couple variables altogether. It's a blackboard exercise for student discussions, not a real tool for finding an answer. And it can never be tested.

1

While I completely agree with you about taking care of our planet of origin, I believe we'll move outward into near space, then our solar system.....

0

We have not found life on other planets.. Our only chance is to lockup owners who own everything. When it comes down to final survival, the power of the people who always win out throughout human history.

Being a person who has attempted to build 3 self substainable green eco villages. My conclusion is the synthetic system is rigged. It was illegal to live off the Corperationism Grid.

After we lock up the world greatest criminals, bankers and a few politicans.

Then we must build domed encloses a large urban area under a single roof for the danger of sun and floods if we don't recover. The dome is airtight and pressurized, creating a habitat that can be controlled for air temperature, composition and quality, typically due to an external atmosphere (or lack thereof) that is inimical to habitation for one or more reasons. Domed cities have been a fixture of science fiction and futurology since the early 20th century, and may be situated on Earth, a moon or other planet.

1

If people think Mars is an alternative we are way behind schedule

btroje Level 9 July 16, 2018
3

The point of this is that it's really all guesswork. We don't know how common life is (at the microbial level), we don't know the likelihood of microbial life evolving into multicellular life, and we don't know the likelihood on multicellular life evolving intelligence...and even with all that, if we encountered another intelligent species, we might not recognize them as such (consider our very limited understanding of animal cognition).

2

Bad news bro, we're doomed. check out www.naturebatslast.com We have about 10 years before we all die. Live well while you can. PS Considering there are more galaxies than all the grains of sand on all the beaches on the earth....the chance of life is still expotentially great.

3

How would we "fall back on" another planet, exactly? Maybe ship some vials of DNA and hope the good folks there would reconstitute them? Take care of this planet, period!

Right...with the speed-of-light limitation, we are not going anywhere. Even the closest solar system is 10 light years away. It would take us 88,000 years to get there with our fastest rocket. The speed of light is the "final" frontier...all we can expect to do space travel wise is explore the few dead rocks in our own solar system.

4

Humans are so arrogant to even suggest that we are the ONLY life in the hundred billion galaxies we claim to know exist

Xena Level 6 July 16, 2018

at least we are consistent in that arrogance

1

It is a worry though, we are unable to keep ours maintained and are destroying its balance, yet we think we can turn an inter stellar hell into a livable environment?

nice joke huh?

5

Let’s just concentrate on this planet and not destroying it, not because there may or may not be life elsewhere, but because we care enough for this wonderful, amazing one we live on now!

1

No one has colonized the galaxy, not because life/intelligent life has not evolved on other planets, but because no one (aliens), have not concurred (whoops...typo, "conquered" )the speed-of-light barrier...which may be unconquerable.

"concurred"? They disagree with it?

@Gareth "conquered", not "concurred"...typo.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:132025
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.