Just wondering what people think about the probability of other intelligent species existing out there.

To kick off, I think we have been ''watched'' for a very long time.
I think it is absurd to think we are alone in this reality... and I'd admonish us all to give heed to the words of Stephen Hawkings, who said recently we 'd be best to avoid them (my words). He compared Earth to North America before Columbus, and what happened to the indigent inhabitants afterwards, as an example.

Pity we can't do that though. :-? I find that idea from him that we COULD avoid them somewhat oblique.

Perhaps he is suggesting that we, as human beings, start acting like civilised beings.?

So, I have no doubt that we are NOT alone, and THEY know about us.
I have personally had one unexplainable occurrence that convinces me that we are very much not alone. No..:) not an alien abduction. 8-)

Maybe there were intelligent beings somewhere but their civilisation has long since died out?

its strange but I must have more things to worry about... than whos up there..

I never give it a thought to be honest.

Are we?
I wish

The default position of nearly all species is extinction.
i actually think humans may well be a virus on mother earth .
I'd be very surprised if there is not some catastrophic virus in the next century.
I here there is a mosquito born virus which is devestating south america and producing thousands of babies with brain defects.
Mother nature will surely wipe most of us out.
Things would get extremely nasty in a developed country if everyone missed their next 3 meals.
the likelihood of this would appear very high.
Loyalty should exist to your immediate social circle (about 150 people).
Any concerns for people outside that 150 are really "pie in the sky, fanciful and imaginary"
if and when severe evolutionary stress does occur, dont expect people to all come together and sing koombaya.

get yourself a group of 150 and develop the closest ties you can with them. truly love them and have their back.

the luvvies on Q and A that want universal love dont understand human psychology and will be friendless and alone if stress strikes.

Love , laughter and legacy....the natural state of a human is to protect his kin, protect his tribe and defend them against evil.

when the light goes out...darkness will enter.
All the good that you create , will be attacked , unless you defend it.....to not think so , is just naive  ;)

Emma wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 2:30am:

I think it is absurd to think we are alone in this reality...

Why is that, exactly?

Emma wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 2:30am:

Just wondering what people think about the probability of other intelligent species existing out there. To kick off, I think we have been ''watched'' for a very long time.

Being effectively confined to this small planet,       .....almost always in conflict with each other [throughout our recorded history],      .....and, we [mankind] barely understand anything about our own [real] circumstances,       ....and yet you credit mankind with being an intelligent species.      !!!!!



Emma,

I like a to read a little humour in the morning.          ;)

Mankind.

Clever, and inventive, YES we are!

But an intelligent species ???

As a species, man is brutal, ignorant, proud, vain, driven by motives of self interest and pleasure seeking.

Often rapacious, and ruthless.

A species which will casually disregard [and try to suppress] any truth which threatens its own interests.


e.g.
Barely 170 years ago, the medical establishment in Europe practically ostracized a doctor [Ignaz Semmelweis] for suggesting that doctors examining pregnant women and delivering babies, ought to wash their hands between examining each patient.

He was derided for suggesting that doctors themselves [because of cross-infection], could be the cause of the very high mortality among women who were delivering children, in European hospitals, in those times.



Quote:

Semmelweis proposed the practice of washing hands with chlorinated lime solutions in 1847 while working in Vienna General Hospital's First Obstetrical Clinic..... Despite various publications of results where hand washing reduced mortality to below 1%, Semmelweis's observations conflicted with the established scientific and medical opinions of the time and his ideas were rejected by the medical community. Some doctors were offended at the suggestion that they should wash their hands and Semmelweis could offer no acceptable scientific explanation for his findings. Semmelweis's practice earned widespread acceptance only years after his death,

Google


Mankind.

An intelligent species ?        :D



Yes, we are being watched.




Quote:

The universe itself keeps on expanding and expanding In all of the directions it can whizz As fast as it can go, at the speed of light, you know, Twelve million miles a minute, and that's the fastest speed there is. So remember, when you're feeling very small and insecure, How amazingly unlikely is your birth, And pray that there's intelligent life somewhere up in space, 'Cause there's bugger all down here on Earth.

- Monty Python's Meaning of Life

aquascoot wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 7:52am:

when the light goes out...darkness will enter.

So profound.


http://www.chicagonow.com/lists-that-actually-matter/files/2011/07/smart-horse.jpg

The probability of intelligent life being out there in the universe is extremely close to 1.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 10:00am:

aquascoot wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 7:52am: when the light goes out...darkness will enter. So profound. http://www.chicagonow.com/lists-that-actually-matter/files/2011/07/smart-horse.jpg

the problem with the modern man who DOESNT focus on his social circle, family and close friends is this....

we probably grew up in villages of 100 to 200 people, we knew all these people, they were our kin. We cared not a jot for other tribes (why should we). We had a doctor and a vet and a cook and we had relationships within our 150....all very functional.

nowadays people (and particularly global lefties ) have become divorced from what is functional and normal.

I'm sure many people nowadays look upon Jamie Oliver as the chef in their 150 social circle.
They probably think Dr Oz is their doctor
They think Dr Chris Brown is their local vet.
Hell some deluded girls seriously think Justin Beiber is their boyfirend .

The internet has globalised what should be localised.

People need to get out of this fanciful UN mindset and start to worry about their neighbours (half of whom your average chode who watches ABC and weeps over syria, wouldnt even know the names of their neighbours).

Keep it real, in the end everyone is existentially alone.
Embrace that and then focus all your strength on your immediate brothers and sisters.

Even the ISIS members have a better sense of unity then the average westerner who has facebook friends, is estranged from his family, has porn instead of a girlfriend and scorns the kinship of his local church......

the average western chode is totally alone.
He's so alone, he seeks friendship on the internet.
He watches Q and A and feels identified with other disaffected loner scrubs


How pitiful ;)

Darkness has truly entered his life  :)

aquascoot wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 10:42am:

I'm sure many people nowadays look upon Jamie Oliver as the chef in their 150 social circle. They probably think Dr Oz is their doctor They think Dr Chris Brown is their local vet. Hell some deluded girls seriously think Justin Beiber is their girlfriend.)

As a leftie I can say

Chris Brown is a poo vet
Jamie Oliver uses too much olive oil
Dr Oz peddles rubbish.


Done?

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 10:44am:

aquascoot wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 10:42am: I'm sure many people nowadays look upon Jamie Oliver as the chef in their 150 social circle. They probably think Dr Oz is their doctor They think Dr Chris Brown is their local vet. Hell some deluded girls seriously think Justin Beiber is their girlfriend.) As a leftie I can say Chris Brown is a poo vet Jamie Oliver uses too much olive oil Dr Oz peddles rubbish. Done?

True, but rightards, small business people RECOGNISE the vital importance of actual humans who you can count on.
I can 100 % count on my nieghbours and they can 100 % count on me.
I'll bet your average city chode , living in an apartment block cannot name his neighbours.
I'll bet he watches Q and A and calls himself a "humanist" and gets in the lift in his apartment block and couldnt even be bothered striking up a conversation.

Lefty Intellectuals think they are great humanists , going on little marches over the harbour bridge to say sorry (despite the fact they have never spoken to an aborigine)
going on twitter with #i'll ride with you , to support muslims (despite the fact theyve never spoken to one).

The lefty is simply not grounded.

Your average redneck bogan has his social circle at the pub or the TAB or the footy...he has real friends.

The leftard intellectual is "too much in his head"
He is truly alone  ;) ;)  in the universe

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 10:30am:

The probability of intelligent life being out there in the universe is extremely close to 1.

Why do you say that?

I'd suggest that it's more likely to be 0.5

At least you're consistent in being wishy-washy.

... wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 11:30am:

At least you're consistent in being wishy-washy.

It's not wishy-washy.

"Are we alone in the universe"?

There are only two possible answers:

1) yes

2) no

Thus, the probability is 0.5

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 11:25am:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 10:30am: The probability of intelligent life being out there in the universe is extremely close to 1. Why do you say that? I'd suggest that it's more likely to be 0.5

Why do you say 0.5?


I'm saying near to 1, because even though the probability of life on any one planet is very low, the number of galaxies with the number of stars and number of planets etc means that  I think its close to 1.


Can we contact them though? I put that close to 0 because of the sheer distances involved.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 11:34am:

Why do you say 0.5?

"Are we alone in the universe"?

There are only two possible answers:

1) yes

2) no

Thus, the probability is 0.5


Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 11:34am:

I'm saying near to 1, because even though the probability of life on any one planet is very low, the number of galaxies with the number of stars and number of planets etc means that  I think its close to 1.

I'm sorry, but that argument just doesn't sit well with me.

"There are so many planets out there, that there must be life on one of them".

Why?  Why must there?

It's nothing more than a gut feeling.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 11:47am:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 11:34am: Why do you say 0.5? "Are we alone in the universe"? There are only two possible answers: 1) yes 2) no Thus, the probability is 0.5 Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 11:34am: I'm saying near to 1, because even though the probability of life on any one planet is very low, the number of galaxies with the number of stars and number of planets etc means that  I think its close to 1. I'm sorry, but that argument just doesn't sit well with me. "There are so many planets out there, that there must be life on one of them". Why?  Why must there? It's nothing more than a gut feeling.

Not really. We know the types of conditions which are needed to have life (at least on this planet, there may be different conditions). We have a very good idea about how many galaxies there are etc.


Its more than a gut feeling.

PLus it can't be 0.5.


Even if there are two different answers, they aren't even in terms of possibility like a coin toss.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 11:49am:

Its more than a gut feeling.

Yes.

It's also wishful thinking.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 11:52am:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 11:49am: Its more than a gut feeling. Yes. It's also wishful thinking.

Explain how so?

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 11:54am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 11:52am: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 11:49am: Its more than a gut feeling. Yes. It's also wishful thinking. Explain how so?

Gut feeling, wishful thinking, whatever.

I don't know what's going on in their minds.

Too much TV?  Probably.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 12:01pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 11:54am: greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 11:52am: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 11:49am: Its more than a gut feeling. Yes. It's also wishful thinking. Explain how so? Gut feeling, wishful thinking, whatever. I don't know what's going on in their minds. Too much TV?  Probably.

So no smacking idea, glad we got that out of the way.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 12:01pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 12:01pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 11:54am: greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 11:52am: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 11:49am: Its more than a gut feeling. Yes. It's also wishful thinking. Explain how so? Gut feeling, wishful thinking, whatever. I don't know what's going on in their minds. Too much TV?  Probably. So no smacking idea, glad we got that out of the way.

That's correct.

I'm merely taking a guess.

It's all I can do, as those who believe we are not alone only ever have one "argument":

"There are so many planets, that there must be life on one of them".

Why?

Can you answer that?

Apart from "there just must be", can you offer a plausible explanation?

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 12:06pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 12:01pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 12:01pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 11:54am: greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 11:52am: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 11:49am: Its more than a gut feeling. Yes. It's also wishful thinking. Explain how so? Gut feeling, wishful thinking, whatever. I don't know what's going on in their minds. Too much TV?  Probably. So no smacking idea, glad we got that out of the way. That's correct. I'm merely taking a guess. It's all I can do, as those who believe we are not alone only ever have one "argument": "There are so many planets, that there must be life on one of them". Why? Can you answer that? Apart from "there just must be", can you offer a plausible explanation?

I can do better, I can direct you to some reading


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrobiology


Its quite a big field.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 12:07pm:

Its quite a big field.

It certainly is, and nobody can come up with anything much better than "there are lots of planets out there, so there must be life on one of them".

Why?

Direct observation is difficult.

IF the universe is infinite, it holds that there must also be infinite instances of all known phenomenon, including life.

Not just 1 other instance of life a million years away - infinite instances.

Are we alone?

If you are going to use statistics to figure out the answer, you will come up with NO, and you will be right.

If you use the human quality of irony, it will be Yes, and you will be right.

there may be something else out there.. maybe Dinosaurs  :-? .. who knows..

Hawkins says that for our species to continue to exist we need to colonise other planets...

why?

what right do we have to stuff up another planet after we have stuffed this one up??

Let's hope that no Space Aliens ever discover us here on planet Earth. We would be fish in a barrel.

You can be 100% certain that their attitude towards us would be entirely pragmatic and exploitive, viewing us as an energy source for performing certain kinds of slavery, and possibly also seeing us as a source of protein to be farmed and bred for the abattoirs.

Lord Herbert wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 8:16pm:

Let's hope that no Space Aliens ever discover us here on planet Earth. We would be fish in a barrel. You can be 100% certain that their attitude towards us would be entirely pragmatic and exploitive, viewing us as an energy source for performing certain kinds of slavery, and possibly also seeing us as a source of protein to be farmed and bred for the abattoirs.

and not forgetting the anal probes..

President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 8:05pm:

what right do we have to stuff up another planet after we have stuffed this one up??

I don't know.

Is there some higher power or authority that grants us these "rights", or do we just take them because we can?

President Elect, The Mechanic wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 8:23pm:

Lord Herbert wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 8:16pm: Let's hope that no Space Aliens ever discover us here on planet Earth. We would be fish in a barrel. You can be 100% certain that their attitude towards us would be entirely pragmatic and exploitive, viewing us as an energy source for performing certain kinds of slavery, and possibly also seeing us as a source of protein to be farmed and bred for the abattoirs. and not forgetting the anal probes..

Oh hell yes! I forgot about them. Homos will be climbing their roofs to unfurl huge banners saying "LAND HERE BOYS! THIS IS WHERE IT'S ALL AT! DON'T KEEP ME WAITING!"

aquascoot wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 7:52am:

The default position of nearly all species is extinction. i actually think humans may well be a virus on mother earth . I'd be very surprised if there is not some catastrophic virus in the next century. I here there is a mosquito born virus which is devestating south america and producing thousands of babies with brain defects. Mother nature will surely wipe most of us out. Things would get extremely nasty in a developed country if everyone missed their next 3 meals. the likelihood of this would appear very high. Loyalty should exist to your immediate social circle (about 150 people). Any concerns for people outside that 150 are really "pie in the sky, fanciful and imaginary" if and when severe evolutionary stress does occur, dont expect people to all come together and sing koombaya. get yourself a group of 150 and develop the closest ties you can with them. truly love them and have their back. the luvvies on Q and A that want universal love dont understand human psychology and will be friendless and alone if stress strikes. Love , laughter and legacy....the natural state of a human is to protect his kin, protect his tribe and defend them against evil. when the light goes out...darkness will enter. All the good that you create , will be attacked , unless you defend it.....to not think so , is just naive  ;)

I totally agree..

Yadda wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 9:02am:

Emma wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 2:30am: Just wondering what people think about the probability of other intelligent species existing out there. To kick off, I think we have been ''watched'' for a very long time. Being effectively confined to this small planet,       .....almost always in conflict with each other [throughout our recorded history],      .....and, we [mankind] barely understand anything about our own [real] circumstances,       ....and yet you credit mankind with being an intelligent species.      !!!!! Emma, I like a to read a little humour in the morning.          ;) Mankind. Clever, and inventive, YES we are! But an intelligent species ??? As a species, man is brutal, ignorant, proud, vain, driven by motives of self interest and pleasure seeking. Often rapacious, and ruthless. A species which will casually disregard [and try to suppress] any truth which threatens its own interests. e.g. Barely 170 years ago, the medical establishment in Europe practically ostracized a doctor [Ignaz Semmelweis] for suggesting that doctors examining pregnant women and delivering babies, ought to wash their hands between examining each patient. He was derided for suggesting that doctors themselves [because of cross-infection], could be the cause of the very high mortality among women who were delivering children, in European hospitals, in those times. Quote: Semmelweis proposed the practice of washing hands with chlorinated lime solutions in 1847 while working in Vienna General Hospital's First Obstetrical Clinic..... Despite various publications of results where hand washing reduced mortality to below 1%, Semmelweis's observations conflicted with the established scientific and medical opinions of the time and his ideas were rejected by the medical community. Some doctors were offended at the suggestion that they should wash their hands and Semmelweis could offer no acceptable scientific explanation for his findings. Semmelweis's practice earned widespread acceptance only years after his death, Google Mankind. An intelligent species ?        :D Yes, we are being watched. [quote] The universe itself keeps on expanding and expanding In all of the directions it can whizz As fast as it can go, at the speed of light, you know, Twelve million miles a minute, and that's the fastest speed there is. So remember, when you're feeling very small and insecure, How amazingly unlikely is your birth, And pray that there's intelligent life somewhere up in space, 'Cause there's bugger all down here on Earth.

- Monty Python's Meaning of Life
/quote]


Pay that poster. :)

I think we are intelligent, but I don't think we are civilised, as in, acting for the best outcomes for all of us.
Our internecine savagery is something we must discard, or we are truly lost.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 7:57am:

Emma wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 2:30am: I think it is absurd to think we are alone in this reality... Why is that, exactly?

We exist in a relatively sparse area of space, and the sheer odds of us being the only intelligent life in the WHOLE universe is simply ridiculous.

They would be insane to come here if there was  , we cant even get along with each other .

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 12:06pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 12:01pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 12:01pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 11:54am: greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 11:52am: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 11:49am: Its more than a gut feeling. Yes. It's also wishful thinking. Explain how so? Gut feeling, wishful thinking, whatever. I don't know what's going on in their minds. Too much TV?  Probably. So no smacking idea, glad we got that out of the way. That's correct. I'm merely taking a guess. It's all I can do, as those who believe we are not alone only ever have one "argument": "There are so many planets, that there must be life on one of them". Why? Can you answer that? Apart from "there just must be", can you offer a plausible explanation?

The answer is obvious GP ... WE EXIST.

Its time wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 11:24pm:

They would be insane to come here if there was  , we cant even get along with each other .

... and some of them might convert to Islam and take it back with them to their planet like a deadly virus ...

Emma wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 11:25pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 12:06pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 12:01pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 12:01pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 11:54am: greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 11:52am: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 11:49am: Its more than a gut feeling. Yes. It's also wishful thinking. Explain how so? Gut feeling, wishful thinking, whatever. I don't know what's going on in their minds. Too much TV?  Probably. So no smacking idea, glad we got that out of the way. That's correct. I'm merely taking a guess. It's all I can do, as those who believe we are not alone only ever have one "argument": "There are so many planets, that there must be life on one of them". Why? Can you answer that? Apart from "there just must be", can you offer a plausible explanation? The answer is obvious GP ... WE EXIST.

That answer makes no logical sense.

Emma wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 11:21pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 7:57am: Emma wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 2:30am: I think it is absurd to think we are alone in this reality... Why is that, exactly? We exist in a relatively sparse area of space, and the sheer odds of us being the only intelligent life in the WHOLE universe is simply ridiculous.

Explain your reasoning.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 11:33am:

... wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 11:30am: At least you're consistent in being wishy-washy. It's not wishy-washy. "Are we alone in the universe"? There are only two possible answers: 1) yes 2) no Thus, the probability is 0.5

It doesn't work like that. We have a sample of 1. The only life we know about is here on Earth. We can only guess how life initiated on earth and there are about 3 competing theories. The conditions for life to survive are probably different for the conditions for life to initiate itself.  (Shut up Yadda).

There has been some work carried out by astrobiologists recently that concluded that life may be rarer that we thought.

When you ask if we are alone in the Universe, would primitive monocellular life on Gliese 581 (or whatever) count as not being alone? Or does it have to be intelligent life?

It's one thing to have the right conditions for life to survive, but the question of how life started is unknown, and we know nothing about how easy it is to start. All we know is that it commenced on Earth. We have a sample of 1.

http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2011/aug/01/extraterrestrial-life-could-be-extremely-rare


Quote:

Just because life emerged early on Earth does not mean that this is likely to occur on other Earth-like planets, says a pair of US astrophysicists. The researchers' new mathematical model says that life could just as easily be rare – putting a damper on the excitement surrounding the recent discovery of Earth-like planets orbiting stars other than the Sun.

Now those words of wisdom come from an astrobiologist. That's an interesting profession. They don't actually study life like other biologists. They just think about it, because they don't actually have any extraterrestrial life to study.

Greggary - I maintain that the probability is not 0.5, but rather 0.023809524, which is the inverse of 42. I'm not an astrobiologist, but anybody who spends all day thinking about hypothetical life that nobody knows anything about, must be regarded with a certain amount of suspicion. I conclude that all astrobiologists must be stark staring mad, just like all theologists. 

Ellen Stofan believes that extraterrestrial life will be discovered by 2025.

http://www.space.com/29041-alien-life-evidence-by-2025-nasa.html

I don't share his optimism.  There is much more evidence that life evolved on Earth than on Mars. OK, some of the precursor chemicals may be found in comets, but not life itself, as far as we know at this time.   

NASA is known for making bold claims.

Duplicate post deleted. Forum was having an electroleptic episode (but I didn't break it.)


The truth is out there.  :D

John_Taverner wrote on Jan 28^th, 2016 at 8:04pm:

Ellen Stofan believes that extraterrestrial life will be discovered by 2025. http://www.space.com/29041-alien-life-evidence-by-2025-nasa.html I don't share his optimism.  There is much more evidence that life evolved on Earth than on Mars. OK, some of the precursor chemicals may be found in comets, but not life itself, as far as we know at this time.    NASA is known for making bold claims.

That's right, the only life we know about is on Earth. I can't see what is so hard to grasp.

To say 'life' started on earth is only relative to this very small Solar System .  Life as we know it.

GP , it means perfectly what it says. WE exist, and to believe Earth has the only life in this entire universe, is the thing that makes no rational sense.

I understand stretching your mind around that idea is hard, but think about it, for goodness sakes.

How homocentric of you all . You all admit, quite rightly that you don't know how life comes about. What is that thing that comes and goes without predictability?  No one knows that, and to deduce that we are the only intelligent species in all entirety, completely ignores that there are other sentient beings on this very earth.

Smacks of massive self-importance and hubris.



 

Emma wrote on Jan 29^th, 2016 at 12:47am:

That's right, the only life we know about is on Earth. I can't see what is so hard to grasp. To say 'life' started on earth is only relative to this very small Solar System .  Life as we know it. GP , it means perfectly what it says. WE exist, and to believe Earth has the only life in this entire universe, is the thing that makes no rational sense. I understand stretching your mind around that idea is hard, but think about it, for goodness sakes. How homocentric of you all . You all admit, quite rightly that you don't know how life comes about. What is that thing that comes and goes without predictability?  No one knows that, and to deduce that we are the only intelligent species in all entirety, completely ignores that there are other sentient beings on this very earth. Smacks of massive self-importance and hubris.

Nothing to do with self-importance. People who are smarter than you or me have been talking about it for years.  The only thing that's different now is the recent discovery of hundreds of exoplanets.

Your view is simplistic. Have a read about the anthropic principle. We have a universe where life is possible. Why? Because we are here observing it. If there was a universe where life could not initiate, then nobody would be discussing it. It says nothing about how many instances of life can occur.



Quote:

The anthropic principle (from Greek anthropos, meaning "human") is the philosophical consideration that observations of the universe must be compatible with the conscious and sapient life that observes it.

There are many variants of the Anthropic principle. Read this nicely written article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle

There is also the Drake Equation. Some recent discoveries have filled in some of the unknowns but not all of them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drake_equation

If you want to discuss this, you would be well to do some online research into the subject.

First you need a planet in the Goldilocks zone (tick), then you need a bombardment period that was not so extreme as to destroy life in that very limited opportunity it had to establish itself.  The first life relied on the anaerobic part of the Krebs cycle. There was no oxygen, so it had to use iron or sulphur as its source of energy. The clue to this is in the Oxphos cycle which is the basis of life as we know it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxidative_phosphorylation

That process offers clues on how life first came about. In the NADH-coenzyme Q oxidoreductase (complex I) for example, you can still see the iron and sulphide that formed an important part of early life.

Even so, we don't know all the answers. Life could be rare or it could be very common. The proposed missions to Europa will tell us if there is life in its ice covered ocean or not. We might up with a sample of 2. 


Quote:

How homocentric of you all

Don't call me that. I'm a married man.  ;D

Emma wrote on Jan 29^th, 2016 at 12:47am:

GP , it means perfectly what it says. WE exist, and to believe Earth has the only life in this entire universe, is the thing that makes no rational sense. I understand stretching your mind around that idea is hard, but think about it, for goodness sakes.

There's a big difference between stretching one's mind and fantasising.

What you're doing is fantasising, while I'm remaining rational.

you are the one living in a tiny mind.

I'll spell it out for you.  What has happened once...like Earth  and all our sentient species ... must be possible elsewhere. \to think otherwise is the fantasy.

Are we alone....???

I'd like to think not.

But imo don't expect to find other humans on another Earth.

More likely it wont even be carbon based like we are.

Too many variables as to what life would look like on another planet.

http://i66.tinypic.com/24ortl1.jpg

aquascoot wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 7:52am:

Loyalty should exist to your immediate social circle (about 150 people). Any concerns for people outside that 150 are really "pie in the sky, fanciful and imaginary"

And there you have in a nutshell why right wingers are such violent warmongers

John_Taverner wrote on Jan 28^th, 2016 at 7:36pm:

It's one thing to have the right conditions for life to survive, but the question of how life started is unknown, and we know nothing about how easy it is to start. All we know is that it commenced on Earth. We have a sample of 1.

Being scientifically minded this is a subject that i have put a lot of thought into.

The thing that i find interesting is that not only do we have a sample size of only 1 but in the 4.5 billion years that this planet has been in existence life only started once. You would imagine that on such a favourable planet that new life would be popping up all the time. Instead life started once about 3.8 billion years ago and we are all descended from that.

However there are at least 100 billion stars in our galaxy and there are at least 100 billion galaxies in the universe. Given that we now know that most stars have planets, these mind boggling numbers would suggest that even if life is extremely rare, it is still likely that it has occurred elsewhere.   

The_Barnacle wrote on Feb 7^th, 2016 at 10:53am:

John_Taverner wrote on Jan 28th, 2016 at 7:36pm: It's one thing to have the right conditions for life to survive, but the question of how life started is unknown, and we know nothing about how easy it is to start. All we know is that it commenced on Earth. We have a sample of 1. Being scientifically minded this is a subject that i have put a lot of thought into. The thing that i find interesting is that not only do we have a sample size of only 1 but in the 4.5 billion years that this planet has been in existence life only started once. You would imagine that on such a favourable planet that new life would be popping up all the time. Instead life started once about 3.8 billion years ago and we are all descended from that. However there are at least 100 billion stars in our galaxy and there are at least 100 billion galaxies in the universe. Given that we now know that most stars have planets, these mind boggling numbers would suggest that even if life is extremely rare, it is still likely that it has occurred elsewhere.

Yes but intelligent life is most likely to wipe itself out very quickly -
e.g nuclear weapons or a biological weapons plague -
which means that intelligent life may have developed but died out a billion years ago.

Now THAT is a fantasy par excellence.!!

The_Barnacle wrote on Feb 7^th, 2016 at 10:53am:

John_Taverner wrote on Jan 28th, 2016 at 7:36pm: It's one thing to have the right conditions for life to survive, but the question of how life started is unknown, and we know nothing about how easy it is to start. All we know is that it commenced on Earth. We have a sample of 1. Being scientifically minded this is a subject that i have put a lot of thought into. The thing that i find interesting is that not only do we have a sample size of only 1 but in the 4.5 billion years that this planet has been in existence life only started once. You would imagine that on such a favourable planet that new life would be popping up all the time. Instead life started once about 3.8 billion years ago and we are all descended from that. However there are at least 100 billion stars in our galaxy and there are at least 100 billion galaxies in the universe. Given that we now know that most stars have planets, these mind boggling numbers would suggest that even if life is extremely rare, it is still likely that it has occurred elsewhere.

I find your second paragraph problematic.. BUT I think your ultimate conclusion is reasonable.

The_Barnacle wrote on Feb 7^th, 2016 at 10:34am:

aquascoot wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 7:52am: Loyalty should exist to your immediate social circle (about 150 people). Any concerns for people outside that 150 are really "pie in the sky, fanciful and imaginary" And there you have in a nutshell why right wingers are such violent warmongers

not violent warmongers, more like dedicated to protect
"all the good they have created"

As people keep repeating the same tired old statistical certainty of life elsewhere, I will repeat the one thing about life they are not taking into account; irony. It would be ironic should we poison this planet when we do not have an alternative.

Emma wrote on Feb 6^th, 2016 at 11:25pm:

I'll spell it out for you.  What has happened once...like Earth  and all our sentient species ... must be possible elsewhere. \to think otherwise is the fantasy.

Yes, it's possible. Nobody has said anything to the contrary.

Absolutely no reason to believe it's actually happened, though.

"na noo na noo!'

The_Barnacle wrote on Feb 7^th, 2016 at 10:53am:

John_Taverner wrote on Jan 28th, 2016 at 7:36pm: It's one thing to have the right conditions for life to survive, but the question of how life started is unknown, and we know nothing about how easy it is to start. All we know is that it commenced on Earth. We have a sample of 1. Being scientifically minded this is a subject that i have put a lot of thought into. The thing that i find interesting is that not only do we have a sample size of only 1 but in the 4.5 billion years that this planet has been in existence life only started once. You would imagine that on such a favourable planet that new life would be popping up all the time. Instead life started once about 3.8 billion years ago and we are all descended from that.

Hmmm Probably or maybe, but if you look at Ediacaran biota, it's completely different from Cambrian biota.  There is no obvious connection. One group of lifeforms was wiped out, to be replaced by a second group.

The latest thinking is that there was a limited window of opportunity for life to establish, and that those conditions ceased to exist once we had oxygen in the atmosphere.  The first microscopic life that we can find evidence for , apart from some questionable inclusions in metamorphic rock from Greenland,  are the stromatolites from the banded ironstone formations of WA (3.5 billion years old).  These represent  cyanobacteria, and they were responsible for the production of oxygen leading to totally different life forms that were capable of metabolising faster.  Before they came along, the atmosphere contained no oxygen.  It was in this hot, hydrogen cyanide rich environment that the first living cells would have emerged.   


Quote:

However there are at least 100 billion stars in our galaxy and there are at least 100 billion galaxies in the universe. Given that we now know that most stars have planets, these mind boggling numbers would suggest that even if life is extremely rare, it is still likely that it has occurred elsewhere.

Maybe, but do they have the necessary precursors?  A star that is reasonably stable without too many flares, a planet with a molten (nickel) iron core that produces a  magnetic shield that protects the surface from too much ionising radiation, possibly (it has been argued)  even a sizeable moon with tidal systems that help to provide a system of plate tectonics.   

Then there is the question of the heavier elements. Without the heavier elements from passing gases emanating from a nearby supernova, the solar system would have been deficient in those elements.

It's a subject that I find fascinating too.  They claim that the next generation of orbiting infrared telescopes will be able to resolve the atmospheres of some of these exoplanets.

issuevoter wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 7:49am:

As people keep repeating the same tired old statistical certainty of life elsewhere, I will repeat the one thing about life they are not taking into account; irony. It would be ironic should we poison this planet when we do not have an alternative.

Yeah.  Another group of researchers made the point that life could be a transient phenomenon.

Could be, might be, perhaps.. fact is we don't know. All your responses are based on our own historical and empirical knowledge,  but it only applies in this tiny part of space.

No matter how one chooses to extrapolate from our knowledge, we just do not know.  BUT we do know, as I tried to point out earlier,  that WE exist. As do the billions of life forms currently extant on mother Earth.

To even consider we are unique here on Earth just sounds like the biggest example of 'head in the sand' I can think of.

If Stephen Hawkings is warning us against seeking alien contact, where does it leave you.?
I know he is a lot smarter than me.!! ::)

Emma wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 10:17pm:

Could be, might be, perhaps.. fact is we don't know. All your responses are based on our own historical and empirical knowledge,  but it only applies in this tiny part of space. No matter how one chooses to extrapolate from our knowledge, we just do not know.  BUT we do know, as I tried to point out earlier,  that WE exist. As do the billions of life forms currently extant on mother Earth. To even consider we are unique here on Earth just sounds like the biggest example of 'head in the sand' I can think of. If Stephen Hawkings is warning us against seeking alien contact, where does it leave you.? I know he is a lot smarter than me.!! ::)

But it's more likely that aliens exited & long since died out.
In that case we could still be alone.
The problem is that the time factor is so long that only a small window of opportunity
in time could allow 2 intelligent beings to meet.
We've only had radio communications for 100 years or so -
we could have been wiped out by nukes only 50 or so years after discovering radio.

The better question is -
did intelligent life evolve somewhere else even if it's long gone now?

As an example -

the Earth is 4.5 billion years old.
We only developed intelligent life after 4.5 billions years that could transmit a radio message
& in only 50 years after that we could have easily been totally wiped out by nukes.
You're looking at a 50 year window in 4.5 billion years.

The Universe is 13.7 billion years old - &
let's say it takes 4.5 billion years to develop intelligent life.
Life could have developed on a planet 13.7 - 4.5 = 9.2 billion years ago
& wiped itself out in only 50 years.

In that case they have been dead for 9.2 billion years.

That's the problem - it's the enormous amounts of time.

What's the chance that we would have met such a civilisation?

zero.

I believe we are not - but have no proof.. 

I have a Rhesus negative blood group - A neg and about 6% of population - even though both my parents were positive, one an A and the other a B....and it is impossible for them to have created an RH- child...... some suggest that means I'm a direct descendant of aliens.... crazy that, though.....

I guess I'm a ring-in..... had me a Trooper once who was A neg - I said stick close in case I need you...

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 10:54pm:

I believe we are not - but have no proof..  I have a Rhesus negative blood group - A neg and about 6% of population - even though both my parents were positive, one an A and the other a B....and it is impossible for them to have created an RH- child...... some suggest that means I'm a direct descendant of aliens.... crazy that, though..... I guess I'm a ring-in..... had me a Trooper once who was A neg - I said stick close in case I need you...

:) I have a friend with the same strange blood type. There is only one other person in her extensive family with the same type, and that was her grandfather.!

she IS unusual,  but hey .. I feel like an alien sometimes, and I'm  A+.

Emma wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 11:54pm:

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:54pm: I believe we are not - but have no proof..  I have a Rhesus negative blood group - A neg and about 6% of population - even though both my parents were positive, one an A and the other a B....and it is impossible for them to have created an RH- child...... some suggest that means I'm a direct descendant of aliens.... crazy that, though..... I guess I'm a ring-in..... had me a Trooper once who was A neg - I said stick close in case I need you... :) I have a friend with the same strange blood type. There is only one other person in her extensive family with the same type, and that was her grandfather.! she IS unusual,  but hey .. I feel like an alien sometimes, and I'm  A+.

Anyone with more than a modicum of intelligence and intellect feels like an alien here... now....

Characteristics that could be scientifically proven or observed:

    larger than average head size
    low blood pressure
    low pulse rate
    extra vertebrae or rib
    high IQ
    heightened senses, including vision
    uncloneable blood
    light-colored hair, mostly red or reddish,
    light-colored eyes (blue, green, or greenish brown eyes)
    sun and heat sensitivity
    tendency toward healing professions
    body scars that cannot be explained
    frequent empathetic illnesses


I'd easily fit eight or nine of those without even trying.... not sure about the extra bones, head size and uncloneable blood or the 'empathetic illnesses'.. not sure what they are....

My grandson has the biggest head..... and is super smart.... his head is more proportional as he grows...

Bobby. wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 10:33pm:

Emma wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:17pm: Could be, might be, perhaps.. fact is we don't know. All your responses are based on our own historical and empirical knowledge,  but it only applies in this tiny part of space. No matter how one chooses to extrapolate from our knowledge, we just do not know.  BUT we do know, as I tried to point out earlier,  that WE exist. As do the billions of life forms currently extant on mother Earth. To even consider we are unique here on Earth just sounds like the biggest example of 'head in the sand' I can think of. If Stephen Hawkings is warning us against seeking alien contact, where does it leave you.? I know he is a lot smarter than me.!! ::) But it's more likely that aliens exited & long since died out. In that case we could still be alone. The problem is that the time factor is so long that only a small window of opportunity in time could allow 2 intelligent beings to meet. We've only had radio communications for 100 years or so - we could have been wiped out by nukes only 50 or so years after discovering radio. The better question is - did intelligent life evolve somewhere else even if it's long gone now?

I really find your position that any other intelligences are much more likely than not to be long dead a bit mystifying.

As you point out, time has a role in what we know... we are short - lived. IE we don't know much.

Why this means to you that we are the most recent incarnation of life totally escapes me. It is not logical.
Sounds more like whimsy to me..

X  larger than average head size - Not really
    low blood pressure
    low pulse rate
x  extra vertebrae or rib -never checked
    high IQ
    heightened senses, including vision
  x  uncloneable blood - no idea
    light-colored hair, mostly red or reddish,
    light-colored eyes (blue, green, or greenish brown eyes)
    sun and heat sensitivity
    tendency toward healing professions
    body scars that cannot be explained
  x  frequent empathetic illnesses - not sure at all.....

Think of the odds.
If one in a thousand suns in the Milky Way had a planet with the right conditions for life to evolve - that means that there could be several million planets with life.
The Milky Way is one in a billion galaxies.
So what are the odds? One in a trillion or a trillion to one?

Emma wrote on Feb 9^th, 2016 at 12:09am:

Bobby. wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:33pm: Emma wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:17pm: Could be, might be, perhaps.. fact is we don't know. All your responses are based on our own historical and empirical knowledge,  but it only applies in this tiny part of space. No matter how one chooses to extrapolate from our knowledge, we just do not know.  BUT we do know, as I tried to point out earlier,  that WE exist. As do the billions of life forms currently extant on mother Earth. To even consider we are unique here on Earth just sounds like the biggest example of 'head in the sand' I can think of. If Stephen Hawkings is warning us against seeking alien contact, where does it leave you.? I know he is a lot smarter than me.!! ::) But it's more likely that aliens exited & long since died out. In that case we could still be alone. The problem is that the time factor is so long that only a small window of opportunity in time could allow 2 intelligent beings to meet. We've only had radio communications for 100 years or so - we could have been wiped out by nukes only 50 or so years after discovering radio. The better question is - did intelligent life evolve somewhere else even if it's long gone now? I really find your position that any other intelligences are much more likely than not to be long dead a bit mystifying. As you point out, time has a role in what we know... we are short - lived. IE we don't know much. Why this means to you that we are the most recent incarnation of life totally escapes me. It is not logical. Sounds more like whimsy to me..

My logic is based on reading the book "Cosmos" by Carl Sagan.

It's worth a read if you are interested in this subject.

Watched the story of Carl Sagan on Drunk History the other day. Maybe it's sign of immaturity on my part, but it was funny.  ;D

Back in the days of chemical photography, UFOs were turning up all over the place. Now that everyone has a video camera in their smartfone, the little green men are getting camera-shy.

Yadda wrote on Jan 27^th, 2016 at 9:02am:

Emma wrote on Jan 27th, 2016 at 2:30am: Just wondering what people think about the probability of other intelligent species existing out there. To kick off, I think we have been ''watched'' for a very long time. Being effectively confined to this small planet,       .....almost always in conflict with each other [throughout our recorded history],      .....and, we [mankind] barely understand anything about our own [real] circumstances,       ....and yet you credit mankind with being an intelligent species.      !!!!! Emma, I like a to read a little humour in the morning.          ;) Mankind. Clever, and inventive, YES we are! But an intelligent species ??? As a species, man is brutal, ignorant, proud, vain, driven by motives of self interest and pleasure seeking. Often rapacious, and ruthless. A species which will casually disregard [and try to suppress] any truth which threatens its own interests. e.g. Barely 170 years ago, the medical establishment in Europe practically ostracized a doctor [Ignaz Semmelweis] for suggesting that doctors examining pregnant women and delivering babies, ought to wash their hands between examining each patient. He was derided for suggesting that doctors themselves [because of cross-infection], could be the cause of the very high mortality among women who were delivering children, in European hospitals, in those times. Quote: Semmelweis proposed the practice of washing hands with chlorinated lime solutions in 1847 while working in Vienna General Hospital's First Obstetrical Clinic..... Despite various publications of results where hand washing reduced mortality to below 1%, Semmelweis's observations conflicted with the established scientific and medical opinions of the time and his ideas were rejected by the medical community. Some doctors were offended at the suggestion that they should wash their hands and Semmelweis could offer no acceptable scientific explanation for his findings. Semmelweis's practice earned widespread acceptance only years after his death, Google Mankind. An intelligent species ?        :D Yes, we are being watched. [quote] The universe itself keeps on expanding and expanding In all of the directions it can whizz As fast as it can go, at the speed of light, you know, Twelve million miles a minute, and that's the fastest speed there is. So remember, when you're feeling very small and insecure, How amazingly unlikely is your birth, And pray that there's intelligent life somewhere up in space, 'Cause there's bugger all down here on Earth.

- Monty Python's Meaning of Life

[/quote]
Could not agree more; and knowledge does not seem to improve kindness.
Human beings might have built many things and are technologically very advanced, but otherwise are very little above the instincts of animals.
Semmelweiss case is a point in kind.

issuevoter wrote on Feb 9^th, 2016 at 1:33pm:

Back in the days of chemical photography, UFOs were turning up all over the place. Now that everyone has a video camera in their smartfone, the little green men are getting camera-shy.

Perhaps.
Have any of you noticed that those grainy old photos of flying sauces in the 50's were clunky, riveted,  with ships port holes? Whereas the 80's they were sleeker and streamlined like  they were made of fiberglass.
Recent photos and descriptions are triangular, sharp edged and mat black surfaces - like stealth aircraft.
Maybe the ET's technology is evolving, becoming more fashionable or flying saucers are a terrestrial product.
What do you think?

Bobby. wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 10:49pm:

As an example - the Earth is 4.5 billion years old. We only developed intelligent life after 4.5 billions years that could transmit a radio message & in only 50 years after that we could have easily been totally wiped out by nukes. You're looking at a 50 year window in 4.5 billion years. The Universe is 13.7 billion years old - & let's say it takes 4.5 billion years to develop intelligent life. Life could have developed on a planet 13.7 - 4.5 = 9.2 billion years ago & wiped itself out in only 50 years. In that case they have been dead for 9.2 billion years. That's the problem - it's the enormous amounts of time. What's the chance that we would have met such a civilisation? zero.

What I find fascinating, is when they discovered all those ancient paintings on rock walls from ancient civilizations, that seem to depict space men, wearing helmets or elephant like breathing aparatas.

They drew it as they saw it.

Probably nothing new to them.

Get the feeling we have been abandoned long ago by any space ancestors if there were any.

Maybe at the time, the few humans that were on the earth, were being watched, to make sure they survived, whereas now, we have procreated to such an extent, why would 'anyone or being out there' be watching us now? And for what reason?

Didn't the meteorites bring life, lots of different bugs etc, onto the planet?

Could that have been some distant planet with life, that exploded, and pieces of that planet (meteorites) drifted for goodness knows how many years, until it reached our earth to collide and therefore make life on here?

Emma wrote on Feb 9^th, 2016 at 12:09am:

Bobby. wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:33pm: Emma wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:17pm: Could be, might be, perhaps.. fact is we don't know. All your responses are based on our own historical and empirical knowledge,  but it only applies in this tiny part of space. No matter how one chooses to extrapolate from our knowledge, we just do not know.  BUT we do know, as I tried to point out earlier,  that WE exist. As do the billions of life forms currently extant on mother Earth. To even consider we are unique here on Earth just sounds like the biggest example of 'head in the sand' I can think of. If Stephen Hawkings is warning us against seeking alien contact, where does it leave you.? I know he is a lot smarter than me.!! ::) But it's more likely that aliens exited & long since died out. In that case we could still be alone. The problem is that the time factor is so long that only a small window of opportunity in time could allow 2 intelligent beings to meet. We've only had radio communications for 100 years or so - we could have been wiped out by nukes only 50 or so years after discovering radio. The better question is - did intelligent life evolve somewhere else even if it's long gone now? I really find your position that any other intelligences are much more likely than not to be long dead a bit mystifying. As you point out, time has a role in what we know... we are short - lived. IE we don't know much. Why this means to you that we are the most recent incarnation of life totally escapes me. It is not logical. Sounds more like whimsy to me..

Seems to be the case with many species, that are no longer in existence, such as certain animals, birds, etc for instance.

And then our former neanderthals, were alive and well, survivors of the wild, with skills needed for their survival.....were in existence 100 thousand years ago....then 48 thousand years ago, they just simply stopped being. As it turned out, a huge volcanic blast that effected a lot of europe with it's poisoness ash, blocking out the sun, and suffocating anything living, and it took 100 years for the soil to recover to be fertile again.

That's what happens, we can have that, and also, something worse than that to wipe us out with illness, with all the creations man has made, such as nuclear plants etc. to effect anything living for thousands of years instead.

Richdude wrote on Feb 9^th, 2016 at 4:59am:

Think of the odds. If one in a thousand suns in the Milky Way had a planet with the right conditions for life to evolve - that means that there could be several million planets with life. The Milky Way is one in a billion galaxies. So what are the odds? One in a trillion or a trillion to one?

Indeed.

Sophia wrote on Feb 9^th, 2016 at 5:12pm:

Seems to be the case with many species, that are no longer in existence, such as certain animals, birds, etc for instance. And then our former neanderthals, were alive and well, survivors of the wild, with skills needed for their survival.....were in existence 100 thousand years ago....then 48 thousand years ago, they just simply stopped being. As it turned out, a huge volcanic blast that effected a lot of europe with it's poisoness ash, blocking out the sun, and suffocating anything living, and it took 100 years for the soil to recover to be fertile again. That's what happens, we can have that, and also, something worse than that to wipe us out with illness, with all the creations man has made, such as nuclear plants etc. to effect anything living for thousands of years instead.

Neanderthals still exist:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mWtWz_aGyk

Well it does appear that all of us homo sapiens have Neanderthal genes,  so yes, they do still exist to some extent.

To suggest they were ignorant fools is offensive.

The video was hilarious though.! ;D ;D

Sir Grappler Truth Teller OAM wrote on Feb 8^th, 2016 at 10:54pm:

I believe we are not - but have no proof..  I have a Rhesus negative blood group - A neg and about 6% of population - even though both my parents were positive, one an A and the other a B....and it is impossible for them to have created an RH- child...... some suggest that means I'm a direct descendant of aliens.... crazy that, though..... I guess I'm a ring-in..... had me a Trooper once who was A neg - I said stick close in case I need you...

Common misunderstanding, you get your genetics from your grandparents, not your parents,.

pity I never knew any of my grandparents..  I'd be really interested.

Emma wrote on Feb 9^th, 2016 at 10:12pm:

The video was hilarious though.! ;D ;D

Very funny but also sad that such fools actually exist.

Sophia wrote on Feb 9^th, 2016 at 4:59pm:

Bobby. wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:49pm: As an example - the Earth is 4.5 billion years old. We only developed intelligent life after 4.5 billions years that could transmit a radio message & in only 50 years after that we could have easily been totally wiped out by nukes. You're looking at a 50 year window in 4.5 billion years. The Universe is 13.7 billion years old - & let's say it takes 4.5 billion years to develop intelligent life. Life could have developed on a planet 13.7 - 4.5 = 9.2 billion years ago & wiped itself out in only 50 years. In that case they have been dead for 9.2 billion years. That's the problem - it's the enormous amounts of time. What's the chance that we would have met such a civilisation? zero. What I find fascinating, is when they discovered all those ancient paintings on rock walls from ancient civilizations, that seem to depict space men, wearing helmets or elephant like breathing aparatas. They drew it as they saw it. Probably nothing new to them. Get the feeling we have been abandoned long ago by any space ancestors if there were any. Maybe at the time, the few humans that were on the earth, were being watched, to make sure they survived, whereas now, we have procreated to such an extent, why would 'anyone or being out there' be watching us now? And for what reason? Didn't the meteorites bring life, lots of different bugs etc, onto the planet? Could that have been some distant planet with life, that exploded, and pieces of that planet (meteorites) drifted for goodness knows how many years, until it reached our earth to collide and therefore make life on here?

I think life started on Mars & came here from meteorites or asteroids from Mars.

In that case we're all Martians.

Bobby. wrote on Feb 10^th, 2016 at 6:52am:

Sophia wrote on Feb 9th, 2016 at 4:59pm: Bobby. wrote on Feb 8th, 2016 at 10:49pm: As an example - the Earth is 4.5 billion years old. We only developed intelligent life after 4.5 billions years that could transmit a radio message & in only 50 years after that we could have easily been totally wiped out by nukes. You're looking at a 50 year window in 4.5 billion years. The Universe is 13.7 billion years old - & let's say it takes 4.5 billion years to develop intelligent life. Life could have developed on a planet 13.7 - 4.5 = 9.2 billion years ago & wiped itself out in only 50 years. In that case they have been dead for 9.2 billion years. That's the problem - it's the enormous amounts of time. What's the chance that we would have met such a civilisation? zero. What I find fascinating, is when they discovered all those ancient paintings on rock walls from ancient civilizations, that seem to depict space men, wearing helmets or elephant like breathing aparatas. They drew it as they saw it. Probably nothing new to them. Get the feeling we have been abandoned long ago by any space ancestors if there were any. Maybe at the time, the few humans that were on the earth, were being watched, to make sure they survived, whereas now, we have procreated to such an extent, why would 'anyone or being out there' be watching us now? And for what reason? Didn't the meteorites bring life, lots of different bugs etc, onto the planet? Could that have been some distant planet with life, that exploded, and pieces of that planet (meteorites) drifted for goodness knows how many years, until it reached our earth to collide and therefore make life on here? I think life started on Mars & came here from meteorites or asteroids from Mars. In that case we're all Martians.

Yes I saw that movie too - "Mission to Mars" I think it was called.
Were're not all Martians - my wife is from Alpha Centauri.

Bobby. wrote on Feb 10^th, 2016 at 6:52am:

I think life started on Mars & came here from meteorites or asteroids from Mars. In that case we're all Martians.

Well, you and It_is_the_light are definitely from Mars.

John_Taverner wrote on Feb 11^th, 2016 at 4:22pm:

Bobby. wrote on Feb 10th, 2016 at 6:52am: I think life started on Mars & came here from meteorites or asteroids from Mars. In that case we're all Martians. Well, you and It_is_the_light are definitely from Mars.

I always picked Sir Booby as a Uranus sort of guy.

greggerypeccary wrote on Feb 11^th, 2016 at 4:23pm:

I always picked Sir Booby as a Uranus sort of guy.

Ouch. Well that's certainly scraping the bottom.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diseases_from_Space


These guys actually go further and suggest that mutations are the result of 'infalling pathogens' to which human and other races adapt and thus develop into what they are today... could be a good argument that we are not entirely terrestrial.... however.. that would also apply across the universe (words are flying out like endless rain into a paper cup).... and so to any other species Out There...

I think the odds are for foreign denizens of other planets..... thing is.. how would they cross the distances any more than we can?  Unless there is life closer.... we'll never get to see it....

Here is another example of what makes the Earth more unique. Without a strong geomagnetic field,the Earth would have lost a significant part of its atmosphere long ago.  The latest data from Mars seems to back this up. So add a strong magnetic field to that list for habitable planets that I had earlier.

http://www.space.com/32281-comet-flyby-mars-magnetic-field.html