Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20288535)

intelligent life = technology so regardless of size, that tech would have led to colonization. [Speculation]

we can see a vast majority of the universe. [Unproven]

Wouldn't you agree we are 100% alone (intelligent life) in the visible universe? [Assumption]

Originally Posted by PR_Glen (Post 20288643)

See how that works?

This is an intro to philosophy level argument btw... creating a self serving paradox doesn't imply fact.

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20288544)

I've never claimed to be smart. I am capable of understanding complex subjects. WHile I appreciate you including all the math, I already referred to that by linking Drake's equation to point out exactly what you are reclaiming. Again, in spite of Drake's equation, where is everybody?

Certainly you'd agree with the fact that in the known visible universe which consists of multitudes of galaxies, we are the sole intelligent life?

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20288564)

Here's the line of thinking scientists who are open to all possibilities and who are much much smarter than all of us put together have,

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis (Post 20288654)

I think you seem to think that we can point a telescope at a planet outside of our solar system and determine if there is life, we cannot. Nor could we pick up their radio waves. And that is the CLOSEST planet. So when you say 'visible universe' what exactly does that mean? The Hubble would not be able to determine if there was life on Pluto.

Also you assume other intelligent life would have evolved to the point of interstellar space travel, we are far from that. And then there is the theory that if a planetary species has evolved to an intelligent form they would be the dominant ones on their planet and therefore an aggressive species and killed themselves off by nuclear war or whatever. But really, unless worm hole travel actually exists, or the possibility of manipulating the fabric of space there is simply to much space between planets. And who's to say we're not ancestors of an alien planet?

But remember this; there is NOTHING in the Universe that there is only one of.

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20288647)

I'm not sure why you're choosing to debate this on the merits of logical fallacies but those things you say are assumption and such are actually proven. we can and do see a vast amount of the universe. While I am very much opposed to any view that science is settled, most scientists agree intelligent life requires technology and colonization. Not sure how you can label the fact that within the visible universe, we have not seen or heard from intelligent life, as an assumption.

Originally Posted by PR_Glen (Post 20288667)

another assumption that isn't true.

your assumptions are on the level of a hormonal teenager here...

Originally Posted by PR_Glen (Post 20288675)

untrue again..

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20288635)

There is no reliable evidence aliens have visited Earth and we have observed no intelligent extraterrestrial life with current technology nor has SETI found any transmissions from other civilizations. The Universe, apart from the Earth, seems "dead"

Originally Posted by Slappin Fish (Post 20288706)

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

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

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20288556)

You should email SETI to get them to remove the FErmi link, it taints their credibility. Especially the part where brilliant scientists take Fermi's Paradox seriously.

http://www.seti.org/seti-institute/p.../fermi-paradox

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20288711)

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

Originally Posted by edgeprod (Post 20288718)

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

Originally Posted by edgeprod (Post 20288718)

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

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20288598)

there's our galaxy, the visible universe and the entire universe.

Certainly you'd have to agree with the fact that there's no other intelligent life in the visible universe right? How many galaxies are there in the visible universe?

I extrapolated from that and titled the thread to be about the entire universe. :)

Originally Posted by rogueteens (Post 20288763)

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

Originally Posted by SilentKnight (Post 20288957)

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

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

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

Until then...I keep an open mind.

Originally Posted by edgeprod (Post 20288520)

that, and an ego the size of the known universe, to think that humanity is remotely special, let alone unique.

Originally Posted by Best-In-BC (Post 20288976)

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

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20288415)

The basic points of the argument, made by physicists Enrico Fermi and Michael H. Hart, are:

The Sun is a typical star, and relatively young. There are billions of stars in the galaxy that are billions of years older.
Almost surely, some of these stars will have Earth-like planets. Assuming the Earth is typical, some of these planets may develop intelligent life.
Some of these civilizations may develop interstellar travel, a technology Earth is investigating even now (such as the 100 Year Starship).
Even at the slow pace of currently envisioned interstellar travel, the galaxy can be completely colonized in a few tens of millions of years.

According to this line of thinking, the Earth should already have been colonized, or at least visited. But no convincing evidence of this exists.

Furthermore, no confirmed signs of intelligence elsewhere have yet been spotted in our galaxy or (to the extent it would be detectable) elsewhere in the observable universe.


With no evidence of intelligent life other than ourselves, it appears that the process of starting with a star and ending with "advanced explosive lasting life" must be unlikely.



we are all alone peeps.

Originally Posted by Diomed (Post 20288961)

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

Originally Posted by ********** (Post 20289287)

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

Originally Posted by sarettah (Post 20289018)

This +5 :thumbsup


.

Originally Posted by ********** (Post 20289287)

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

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20289693)

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


what a tard huh!


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

The Evolutionary Explanation For The Fermi Paradox

by John Lambshead

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

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

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis (Post 20289738)

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

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

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

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

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis (Post 20289738)

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

?

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20289755)

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

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



wow, what a logical argument. :1orglaugh