Are We Alone?

The thing is, the places that are further away are not as important. A civilization outside the range of Kepler has much less chance of ever interacting meaningfully with our civilization within the probable lifespan of our civilization. If we can never see it, hear from it, learn from it, or have any certainty of its existence, then it isn't (for our purposes) any different that something that doesn't exist.

It the universe is infinitely large and there are more civilizations but the density is so sparse that the chance of any of the civilizations within its lifetime ever interacting or knowing with certainty they are not alone is infinitesimal, then for all practical purposes they are all alone.

As such a sample by Kepler is a good sample and the weighting towards what is nearest errs in a beneficial way, i.e, that which is likely to matter less is less well represented.

I see your point.

Based on the data we have received from all sources over the history of us (humans) and entering that data into the Drake Equation, can you say that you are (regarding intelligent life outside of our planet)?

1. Certain

2. Fairly sure

3. 50/50 chance

4. Might be

5. Highly unlikely

6. Know there isn't

I'm curious to see what you think.

I'd say there is a chance. I'm not sure I rate it as high as 50/50 but it is probably not highly unlikely.

I suspect chances go up very slowly as time goes on as long as we survive.

I would also say there is a good chance. If we can find evidence of microbial life outside of this planet, even in our own solar system, I would say that chance goes way up.

I'd say there's a very good chance of low life forms out there. The primordial soup is very likely out there somewhere. Then some sort of spark is needed to create a single cell organism. I think it's unlikely that the organism will live long enough to reproduce into a large enough colony, but for that rare instance it does, the next step is to mutate into a multiple cell organisms. My belief is that this is where it most likely ends.

The thing is that we don't know. We can hypothesize as much as we want. Until we have some sort of evidence that intelligent life exists out there, we'll either hope that it does, or believe that it doesn't.

If you open that door a crack, the floodgates of evidence will then swing it wide open.

Oops! Didn't mean to step on your personal argument. The Bible says, "The hosts of heaven...". Who do you suppose they are, hmm?

When this thread got hijacked on religion, I tried to put it back on topic, are our supreme beings literally supreme beings?

How would we go about gauging the difference. One thing I can tell you, none of my mother-in-laws were space aliens. They not only were not hard to spot, they got there and hung around day and night, all weekend long.

Oh, I have two ex mother in laws also, and I just don't know where they are from.....

Whether literal or not, it would be in their best interest to have us believe they are supreme.

My original post did not say I wanted to know if you thought if there was intelligent life outside of this planet, but if you thought there was any life outside of this planet......

Even evidence of microbial life that formed outside of Earth, excites me....

Autobroker commented that we have existed as a civilization for a relatively short period of time.

On a cosmic scale, humans have existed as a species for a relatively short period of time.

Considering that life on this planet is believed to have started as microbial, it is totally logical that SOMETHING must exist outside of this planet, we just may have missed it while we were primordial soup, or THEY may reach us only after we are gone.

One way or another we will never know, and maybe that's better than the possible Pandora's Box that could be opened.

As I noted much earlier in this thread, logic says YES, but experience says NO. (so far)

I disagree with the conclusion of your observation. Logic does say YES life exists elsewhere. Experience (observation) says MAYBE life exists elsewhere. There is no conclusive proof of existence or a prohibition for life to exist elsewhere.

This is not a binary choice.

That's why I included the "(so far)".

I agree. Logic says yes - through the immense space with all galaxies, stars, planets and satellites, it seems very likely that there is life out there. Over the life of the universe, it seems very likely that life has been created at one point or another. Defining life as something as simple as a single cell organism living for even a fraction of a second.

You mean to tell me there is intelligent life on planet Earth?

Sure, dolphins.

And some species of corvids, some species of ants and maybe bonobos. I suspect where life has been around long enough to develop complexity, multiple forms with varying types of intelligence are highly likely.

Of course, what is intelligence is fairly subjective. How much correlation is there between the amount of intelligence detected and the intelligence of the observer doing the detecting?

Are we now referring to anthropomorphism?

I say we sit back, enjoy our high speed ride through the galaxy, have a cold or two while waiting for the aliens to show up and wow us with their trade craft.

We are not alone. The aliens gave me, and me only, the road map to the future. It can be found every day in the sunrise ceremony of the Commanche people. Thank the Mother for allowing you another day in the light.

We are many bloods, yet if one bleeds, then we are of one blood, and one purpose.

Give us your light, Mother, that we may bless our families with sustenance, and smite those who would harm us. (not a quote, but true in the spirit of it).

BTW - the aliens told me how to insulate a shipping container. It is called dirt, although mud (adobe bricks are better) would work just fine. The structure being already present, just add your plumbing stubs, sit the thing down over the stubs (with care), cement them in, make your interconnecting doors, passageways, etc. and windows, and cover the entire thing with adobe. One foot thick adobe is pretty good insulation from nearly all forms of radiation except cosmic ray bursts.

I was just beginning to think this thread was dead. So aliens talk to you, huh? That explains a lot my friend.

Just imagine, on the other end, what the aliens have to explain.

I imagine for them it's don't ask, don't tell.

Mostly just Juan and Jesus, but also Jairo. The three J's.

They know all about Adobe, and Powerpoint also.

I did take a trip on a open-sir space ship once, with the Galactic Being at the helm behind what looked like a Baptist preacher's podium. Stars were whizzing by as we moved effortlessly through the cosmos, but I could not breathe, so he took me back home.

We had another saying in West Texas: "If the booger-man or monster comes and catches you tonight, do not worry, it will turn loose in the morning when it sees what it caught." Scarier than a boogeyman. Meaner than a monster rattlesnake when riled. Do not tread thereupon.

I thought the three "J's" were Jack, Johnnie, and Jim.

There you go, making it all complicated. Who are they, again?

And sometimes Jose... He was sort like Shemp from the 3 Stooges.

Don't forget Jameson.

Ahh, Curly Joe....

Ahem!

...and the oddly strong German ...Jagermeister. How could you forget the Colonel Klink of the group?

Microbial life outside of Earth - Seems very likely and if we do find proof, most likely it'll come from within our solar system (Mars or some debris floating through space).

This post was deleted because it was overly religious or political. While each user is entitled to his or her own opinion on these topics, this forum is not the place for discussion about them. Please review Section 14 of the Site FAQ and the Rules of Conduct.

Haven't heard anyone being sarcastically called 'Mildred' since back when Crabtree was posting.

I see another problem. We've been here as a civilization for a very short amount of time. If intelligent life exists out there, then the happenstance of us communicating over this brief amount of time is very low.

My guess (and it's just a guess) is that it's nearly impossible that we'll be contacted by intelligent life. I also believe that it's very, very unlikely that intelligent life exists out there.

Good Lord! You clearly are belligerent about blocking a discussion on extraterrestrial life.

First you hijack the discussion into debate on your own personal religious beliefs.

Next you try to discredit any statistical approach of this discussion because the p-value is not known. I don't see an obvious null hypothesis here (at least to me) but clearly no null hypothesis was explicitly proposed. A null hypothesis would make bringing up a p-value relevant and that null hypothesis would then determine your missing p-value. {I think you were grasping at anything to stop this discussion.}

Now you propose a statistical analysis with tiny numbers when it is obvious to me you (like many) misunderstand the meaning of the Confidence Interval in a statistical analysis.

The Kepler telescope measured two of seven Drake equation ratios. Two ratios are still pure speculation.

Ignorance should not be forced on others.

Wow, you amaze me. Let me read your last sentence one more time. Yes, that's what I was have been trying to say and you now agree! PURE SPECULATION!

I'll have to look back to see who made the statement about the Drake Equation being correct, due to data that passed some sort of statistical analysis. Hmmmm.

See post 488. You waiver between calling the variables of the Drake Equation PURE SPECULATION, quality data using STATISTICAL ANALYSIS and also state that the 7 unknowns will SOON be proven (or something like that).

I get it now! Be an angry, offensive Mr. Know It All, so nobody questions the inconsistencies!

My mistake; second to last sentence. And it does contradict other statements you've made.

Again, you did say that the two variables are pure speculation, but previously you wrote that the Kepler Telescope has removed the speculation by providing data.

Seems like speculation on top of speculation. Maybe this is what you meant when you wrote PURE SPECULATION.

I get it. You absolutely abhore this discussion.

It offends your soul to the core.

It disturbs you to the point that you literally cannot see straight.

I guess you win because you refuse to STFU.

You've become incoherent in your gibberish to the point that you cannot even keep my sentence structure straight.

Go home.

Kiss your spouse.

Try not to kick your pet.

I ask of you only one thing from this irrational outburst.

Do us all a favor and never try to teach statistics to anyone again. Your misunderstanding of statistics is embarrassing and damaging to a student.

<unsubscribe>

You conjecture seems to propose novel constraints on probability. How many more coin flips do I really need in my sample size when considering 10 billion coin tosses compared to 10 thousand coin tosses?

There is also the consideration that one our samples will be heavily weighted toward what is closest. While the universe may be infinite, the places that are closest have the least barriers to interaction, so this weighting works in our favor.

What I see that's missing from your argument is the p-value. A coin toss has a known set of outcomes with a 50% probability of a heads or tails. Drake's equation has huge unknowns.

Read the section titled "Usefulness". This is what I tried to convey, but I don't think I did it very clearly. Wikipedia Drake Equation

How dare you imply that others cannot read when obviously you refuse to read. I am insulted! I cited that of those four unknown probabilities, two are now measured by the Kepler telescope.

Ignorance is no excuse.

Belligerence is pathetic.

Please READ! These are the four unknowns we're discussing - let's at least make sure we're on the same page. How can the Kepler telescope provide enough data to statistically prove two of the four unknowns? Please enlighten me, because every one of the four unknowns requires knowledge of life outside of our planet. What was that quip about ignorance?

f_l = the fraction of planets that could support life that actually develop life at some point
f_i = the fraction of planets with life that actually go on to develop intelligent life (civilizations)
f_c = the fraction of civilizations that develop a technology that releases detectable signs of their existence into space
L = the length of time for which such civilizations release detectable signals into space^[12][13]

Measure ≠ Proof

Maybe you can read a mathematical symbol.

I was trying to say what you wrote and I don't think I communicated it too well. Very well put! Thank you.

If you want to apply statistical analysis to make a conclusion, you then have a good data sample. Do you feel that we have enough data to make a "good" or even "fair" sample? What denotes "good" or "fair" in this case? We estimate that we know the scientific properties of 4% of the universe. This is the reason I choose to say that we just don't know and any "estimate" is a poor guess. Yes, we can try to quantify it, but if we do, how accurate is it?

Here's another way to think of it. When the media is doing it's election coverage, they list the votes from the % of polls reporting. When 4% of the polls report, they have no idea who will win and they don't make any predictions at that point. How about with 10% of the polls reporting? It's suicide to predict the winner at this point. There is a point where one can be pretty sure of who the winner is.

Here's a really neat article I just read today. It's less than a year old, so I'd consider it fairly recent. http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20160610-it-took-centuries-but-we-now-know-the-size-of-the-universe

"There is a point where one can be pretty sure of who the winner is."

As in "Dewey beats Truman"?

duh...fake news strikes again. LOL

Did you know Truman got mad at a critic that gave a bad review to a gal that performed singing at the White House (or somewhere that Truman was), and offered pound him into the dust for it? What a man (even if he was a Democrat).

Good one! Here's something I just read regarding Dewey and Truman.

Truman, as it turned out, won the electoral vote by a 303–189–39 majority over Dewey and Dixiecrat candidate Strom Thurmond, though a swing of less than one percent of the popular vote in Ohio, Illinois, and California would have produced a Dewey victory.^[5] Instead of a Republican sweep of the White House and retention of both houses of Congress, the Democrats not only won the Presidency, but also took control of the Senate and the House of Representatives.

What I find amazing is:

1. Strom Thurmond was a candidate in 1948.

2. The media completely blew it as the Dems also took control of the Senate and House.

3. Strom Thurmond running for Pres in 1948 - AMAZING!

Nice article, though the title is a bit misleading. The paper mention in the article linked that deals with the size of the universe only suggests a lower limit on the size of the universe, being more than 250 times the size of the observable universe.

Yes, you are the one who wants to use probability to conclude that the variables in the Drake Equation are now factual. But wait, you also said that they're speculation? And later you state that one should not use probability in determining the variables in the Drake Equation. So what gives?

WOW!

Over 6 pages and 500+ entries.

It's the thread that never dies!

It does keep going, doesn't it? We have it back on topic, and slowly it keeps going....

The simple fact that a life form would have to travel faster than light in order to “visit” around the galaxy would place them in a completely different understanding of existence than us. It is possible they may not even be aware of us anymore than we are aware of ants under our feet. Can you imagine the resultant upheaval of our civilization that would occur from the revelation that our entire understanding of everything is wrong. Such a sudden revelation could be devastating.

Or not. Most people are so glued to their phones they do not even notice - -us.

They may seem like Gods to an inferior species.

How many ants do I kill every time I walk across my yard...

How big is your yard, your feet (total area will suffice), how many ants/yard (or square yard)? Where are you going in the yard? How long do you plan your stay for? Will you be needing accommodations?

How many people does God bring into existence every time he sweeps his hand out over His creation? How do you really know He does not?

'....How many ants do I kill every time I walk across my yard......'

.

I'm going with 'at least zero' as the answer. I don't think the number will be the same 'every time' and I think it is highly likely at least one walk across your yard resulted in no ant deaths. I also think it is highly unlikely any of your walks across the yard result in ant resurrection.

Gods, even demigods are hard to come by these days.

A few years ago, I remember reading something about the speed of light being a variable. Here's the article.

http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2017/02/faster-than-the-speed-of-light-physicists-predicts-its-not-constant-view-todays-galaxy-stream.html

Thought I would say that I just got a P.M. from another CR4 member ( former member) that he just got permanently banned from CR4 for religious/political posts. He is a regular and been here for many years, and I enjoyed many of his posts. I would hate to see anymore members get banned so I am just passing on a quiet warning. We need to be good.