[Samuel]

Originally Posted by MrQ1701

Samuel mentioned this in another thread and never answered my question. I am unfamiliar with this.

I thought I did.

Among other things, typically it means when figuring something out to throw out all assumptions as well as anything that is in any way based on assumptions. Then come to some conclusions. After that, the most logical conclusion is usually the correct one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor

[MrQ1701]

Originally Posted by Samuel

I thought I did.

Oops! Really? Sorry, I missed it or don't remember!! I probably just forgot seeing it!

Originally Posted by Samuel

Among other things, typically it means when figuring something out to throw out all assumptions as well as anything that is in any way based on assumptions. Then come to some conclusions. After that, the most logical conclusion is usually the correct one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor

Thanks for the extra info. This reminds me of how Sherlock Holmes works cases.

[Saquist]

Originally Posted by MonsieurHood

Hell no. Considering the astounding distance between us and everything else beyond our solar system and how incredibly difficult it has been for us just to get to our own lone sattelite, I don't think even the most advanced civilization could simply bee-bop over to our insignificant planet, or would find us interesting enough to do so. If they're that advanced, then they've been where we've been, done what we've done and nothing we do is any surprise to them whatsoever. If you're that far ahead, why bother looking back? It just doesn't make sense, unless they just can't get enough of "I Love Lucy".

It's pretty clear that there are no species as technologicaly advanced as humans within 50 lightyears of SOL.

The odds are highly unlikely there is species with a culture older than humans say around 500 to 600 years older within a range 250 lightyears for they're world would certainly would have transmitted at somepoint in there existance the same signals man is currently saturating the heavens with

Which leaves some options.
a. Either there is no life out there
b. Either there is life out there but there are no where near us
c. Either there is life out there within range but is not human level
d. Either there is life out there and there development does not include the same abuses in technology man has made part of his make up.

Ultimately the answer is...unless you believe in Angels and Demons the Earth has otherwise not been visited by extraterristrials.

[MrQ1701]

Originally Posted by Saquist

It's pretty clear that there are no species as technologicaly advanced as humans within 50 lightyears of SOL.

The odds are highly unlikely there is species with a culture older than humans say around 500 to 600 years older within a range 250 lightyears for they're world would certainly would have transmitted at somepoint in there existance the same signals man is currently saturating the heavens with

Which leaves some options.
a. Either there is no life out there
b. Either there is life out there but there are no where near us
c. Either there is life out there within range but is not human level
d. Either there is life out there and there development does not include the same abuses in technology man has made part of his make up.

Ultimately the answer is...unless you believe in Angels and Demons the Earth has otherwise not been visited by extraterristrials.

You know, I saw something on TV awhile back that said the idea that our earliest TV transmissions are now 60+ light years out there in all directions, that that idea is misleading. It said those transmissions ARE still radiating outward, but what is left of them is probably indistinguishable from background noise already present in space. If this is true, then our own search for similar signals would be even more futile.

Personally, I find the belief in God, or gods, to be more crazy than a belief in E.T's visiting Earth. On one hand you have an omnipotent being that created everything and knows everything, on the other hand you have a species that has many more years of evolution and technological advancement under it's belt. Which is less logical to believe in?

[FanWriter45]

All life on Earth is of E.T. origin. The theory, that the basic building blocks of life were delivered to Earth via cometary bombardment is becoming accepted. It's known as "panspermia." A quick Google search will tell you all about it.

But, as far as little gray dudes in spaceships, anal probing rustic characters in Missisippi?

...not so much.

[FanWriter45]

Mr Q,

That is one theory as to why we haven't picked anything up from other ETC's yet. But saying that we shouldn't search is wrong. Just because our technique of broadcasting fades out is no reason to think others might be doing things differently. (Our own signal, transmitted from the Ariciebo RT is still pushing outward like a searchlight. Because it was sent in such a tight beam, it would be easily detectable by a similar telescope if it were located on the opposite side of the Milky Way) For all we know, there are civilizations out there who have navigational beacons, or for some reason sweep the galactic lens with a tight radio "Hello, out there!" type signal.

They are aliens. They think in alien ways. They have alien motivations. They could be blasting a signal to the rest of the galaxies for religious reasons, for all we know. Or maybe just to ID the new, emerging kids in the neighborhood, so they can keep an eye on them.

For every anti-SETI theory to come along, there's always a dozen or so, equally likely, "Yeah, but..." arguments to be made in favor of the search. Just 20 years ago, a book was published called "Rare Earth" which tried to knock down the Drake Equasion, saying that Extra Solar planets that could support life were probably as rare as hen's teeth... It was a great book... just utterly wrong! We've found in the intervening years that planets are about as common as grass on a golf course. Even around bianaries (which scientists once thought couldn't have planets due to gravitational chaos) which make up the bulk of the stars in our galaxy, seem to have them commonly.

So too, did the "habitible zone" argument fall with the discovery of extremophiles here on Earth.

I think the universe is teeming with life... some of it is bound to be intelligent. A lot of it will be incomprehensible, simply due to evolutionary differences.

But, they are out there... we jus' gotta dig for the evidence.

[MrQ1701]

Originally Posted by FanWriter45

But, as far as little gray dudes in spaceships, anal probing rustic characters in Missisippi?

...not so much.

What about green dudes in spaceships?


How would you explain seeing a large craft, obviously a craft of some sort, and then it disappearing in a blur with no sound? I suppose the U.S. has already developed some sort of magnetic impulse drive (hence the silence) and have also figured out to build inertial dampeners (if someone is to survive such acceleration). Maybe they are unmanned? Then the U.S. is covertly testing this new vehicle all over the world and in many different configurations.

If I were in the government agency that is testing this amazing new vehicle, then I would be advocating letting it's capabilities be known publicly. Imagine how much of a deterrent it would be if the rest of the world knew we had vehicles that could fly all over the world in the blink of an eye and there was little they could do to defend themselves.

[MrQ1701]

Originally Posted by FanWriter45

Mr Q,

That is one theory as to why we haven't picked anything up from other ETC's yet. But saying that we shouldn't search is wrong. Just because our technique of broadcasting fades out is no reason to think others might be doing things differently. (Our own signal, transmitted from the Ariciebo RT is still pushing outward like a searchlight. Because it was sent in such a tight beam, it would be easily detectable by a similar telescope if it were located on the opposite side of the Milky Way) For all we know, there are civilizations out there who have navigational beacons, or for some reason sweep the galactic lens with a tight radio "Hello, out there!" type signal.

They are aliens. They think in alien ways. They have alien motivations. They could be blasting a signal to the rest of the galaxies for religious reasons, for all we know. Or maybe just to ID the new, emerging kids in the neighborhood, so they can keep an eye on them.

For every anti-SETI theory to come along, there's always a dozen or so, equally likely, "Yeah, but..." arguments to be made in favor of the search. Just 20 years ago, a book was published called "Rare Earth" which tried to knock down the Drake Equasion, saying that Extra Solar planets that could support life were probably as rare as hen's teeth... It was a great book... just utterly wrong! We've found in the intervening years that planets are about as common as grass on a golf course. Even around bianaries (which scientists once thought couldn't have planets due to gravitational chaos) which make up the bulk of the stars in our galaxy, seem to have them commonly.

So too, did the "habitible zone" argument fall with the discovery of extremophiles here on Earth.

I think the universe is teeming with life... some of it is bound to be intelligent. A lot of it will be incomprehensible, simply due to evolutionary differences.

But, they are out there... we jus' gotta dig for the evidence.

So do you believe some of these, or at least one, alien species have visited Earth? I took it as though you did NOT believe in ET based on your earlier post

p.s. I support the search for ET using radio telescopes. I just think it got a whole lot harder than already believed.

[FanWriter45]

Oh, I believe they exist, sure. I just don't think they've visited us.

Interstellar travel takes energies and technical know how of near god-like levels. I strongly doubt that many (if any) life forms out there consider it practical. (Unless, of course, it's a life form that can be frozen for thousands of years at a time, with no ill effects. In which case, hopping from star to star wouldn't be much more difficult for them as mounting a manned mission to Pluto would be for us.)

So no, I don't believe in flaying saucers, UFOs or whatever you want to call them. For one thing, the descriptions of the aliens are far too human looking. I know we Trek fans have been led to think that they would seem like us only with bumpy forehead appliances... but in reality, an alien might look more like a horta, or maybe a Xindi insectoid. At least, they would be that different from us.

[MrQ1701]

Originally Posted by FanWriter45

Oh, I believe they exist, sure. I just don't think they've visited us.

Interstellar travel takes energies and technical know how of near god-like levels. I strongly doubt that many (if any) life forms out there consider it practical. (Unless, of course, it's a life form that can be frozen for thousands of years at a time, with no ill effects. In which case, hopping from star to star wouldn't be much more difficult for them as mounting a manned mission to Pluto would be for us.)

So no, I don't believe in flaying saucers, UFOs or whatever you want to call them. For one thing, the descriptions of the aliens are far too human looking. I know we Trek fans have been led to think that they would seem like us only with bumpy forehead appliances... but in reality, an alien might look more like a horta, or maybe a Xindi insectoid. At least, they would be that different from us.

With descriptions of actual aliens aside, you think ALL sightings of "UFO's" are either natural phenomenon or top secret vehicles?