What's Taking E.T. So Long to Find Us?

[Craitar]

those studies are so stupid and simple minded. life could have started yesterday even if the planet is 100 billion years old. and I mean they could have been here when the dinousars existed and left. just because they aren't here now (at least not openly) in our brief existens on this planet, it doesn't mean they don't exist somewhere. those who evoled and was able to leave their home world could have been here loooong ago and left for other galaxys. and pleast just stop looking for life on planets with water or looking exactly like ours, they might have found it a long time ago if they looked at other places to. I mean they thought just recently that life either existed or exist under ground on mars i thought of that YEARS ago!!! they are to stuck on their math to look at the real world

[xxdarkstar79]

If we use a satellite to look at a monkey, will the monkey know. We are the monkey.

Edited February 3, 2012 by xxdarkstar79

[ohio state buckeyes]

Well now this study has me convinced we're all alone

[sestra15]

They'll reveal themselves when they're ready. Just wonder who will be first.

[Gorrak]

This "study" is moronic. It makes far too many assumptions to be valid.

First it seems to assume that intelligent life would be capable of interstellar space travel near the formation of the milky way. And secondly that they would want to explore every star in the galaxy.

Life evolving on another planet would be unlike anything and everything on earth. It's physicality and abilities have infinite possibilities so there is no way to say what they are even capable of. It sounds idiotic but maybe they've never discovered how to intercept radio signals.... you just never know.

[Axlaiden]

There are many thousands of cases in the 5% of unsolved UFO reports that suggest (mathematically) that "they" are already here. If "WE" are being studied, does a scientist bias a project by interacting? NO. The math doesn't add up when governments like the US go out of their way to use plausible-denyability to make people intentionally look stupid when a report is made. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to prove this study is a crock.

For those people in the world that haven't yet had some sort of encounter which denies modern science, then I can understand your agreement with this "study", but when the day comes when you finally do, Im certain you will see it my way.

Edited February 4, 2012 by Axlaiden

[scowl]

There are many thousands of cases in the 5% of unsolved UFO reports that suggest (mathematically) that "they" are already here.

So angels and fairies are also here. I guess Bigfoot too. So what has been "mathematically" excluded from not existing? Nothing I can see.

Mathematically you can multiple zero with any number you want but the product will still be zero.

If "WE" are being studied, does a scientist bias a project by interacting? NO.

You mean by flying brightly lit craft over populated areas for people to photograph and abducting people out of the bedrooms for medical experiments for example?

[angi chiesa]

We have got to face it,with or without fuzzy photos and lots of lights in the sky.....WE ARE ALONE in this neglected corner of a vast universe.There is NO PROOF of alien activity here,no matter how you want to delude yourselves with UFO sightings.The idea that every American president and hangers on deny alien existance so as not to scare the population is one big LOL

[Englishgent]

Yes English Gent ,given enough space I can prove that the world is flat and is one enormous landing area for alien craft. Also I can prove that we all have alien genes ,but noone will believe it so why trouble. I am italiangent Leonardo was my uncle

Aw, go on, prove the world is flat, There is plenty of space here for your explanation. I will believe you, specially as Leonardo was your uncle (although what Mutant Ninja Turtles have to do with it I really dont know)

[badeskov]

Aw, go on, prove the world is flat, There is plenty of space here for your explanation. I will believe you, specially as Leonardo was your uncle (although what Mutant Ninja Turtles have to do with it I really dont know)

*grabs beer and popcorn*

[DONTEATUS]

Well now this study has me convinced we're all alone

Yepster! We need to sit over there under the apple tree and pop open some of Badeskovs best and ponder the universe! Were all alone no questions asked,no proof,no body parts,no one to even say a word side ways !

Mathmatically speaking right?

Well what about us were Aliens to the ants. And the Ants are alien to the other bugs. So we all must be Witches !

We Float right ?

[angi chiesa]

mutant ninja turtles are real aliens,I saw them clearly on my television. Nothing fuzzy witha turtle.Ok donteatus,the test for a witch is the DUCKING STOOL. So float on

[Teavee75]

If we look at the example of humanity, there are already a range of things looming in the future which I believe threaten our survival on this planet...take Nanotechnology for an example, the destructive potential of that if it went wrong is immense. Is there a case for saying that civilizations reach a certain level of technological advancement and then inevitably will invent something which causes their downfall.

Meaning few if any civilizations ever get to the level of advancement necessary to make interstellar travel routine.

[lost_shaman]

This "study" is moronic. It makes far too many assumptions to be valid.

How so? What assumptions must be made in order to Mathmatically predict Human Civilization on Earth as we know it? Do 'we' ourselves not fit the definition of an "emergent Civilization"? I say we do.

First it seems to assume that intelligent life would be capable of interstellar space travel near the formation of the milky way. And secondly that they would want to explore every star in the galaxy.

Not at all. They ran the simulation out to only 250 million years.

The 'assumption' isn't that one 'Alien' would want to explore every Star, but that each 'daughter' colony woud have a chance of colonizing the next nearest Star in a thousnad year period.

[PeacefulAnarchy]

Give me strength, is this for real!

[ThePhantomFlanFlinger]

Give me strength, is this for real!

Yes it is.....people dont know though that the pesky aliens are stuck on the M25 RingRoad.....thats enough to send all races crazy.....

[Lilly]

There are indeed problems with the application of a mathematical model to the question of alien life.

1) We're basing our expectations of ET life existing on other planets due to the reason that life exists here on Earth.

2) We're basing our notion of what ET development socially and technologically would be like based on human life here on Earth.

3) We're basing our ideas about how readily we could travel through and colonize space based on how humanity did such exploration/colonization here on Earth.

The only proof I can see is that we could be easily deceiving ourselves into thinking such things are much more likely than they really are. The bottom line is that the only concrete way to prove whether there is life 'out there' or not is to prove it, by finding it.

Edited February 4, 2012 by Lilly
clarification

[27vet]

They have found us already, but keeping quiet until they can figure out why we 1. wreck the planet with nowhere else to go, 2. kill each other 3. hit little white balls with sticks trying to get them to go into a small hole only to take them out again.

[DaGreatBeliever]

Ya n I tot they already found us long long ago?!

[itsnotoutthere]

Or alternatively & obviously we actually are all alone in the universe. Works for me.

[Space Commander Travis]

Or alternatively & obviously we actually are all alone in the universe. Works for me.

Do you believe that? You say "obviously". Why is it obvious? do you not believe that there are many, many other planets? If you do, why are you certain that none of them would have any life at all?

[DONTEATUS]

Do you believe that? You say "obviously". Why is it obvious? do you not believe that there are many, many other planets? If you do, why are you certain that none of them would have any life at all?

A safe bet would be to just say that Life finds a way, we did and we are not special in the universial scream of things.

To say we are it would be really small thinking. Look around you next time your at the Mall. Really Look at all the people,into there eyes ,stare into to there eyes,get there attention until they look back into yours.

Now think Reptiallian. Now run away as fast as you can. THat will start a movement or at least the Mall police running towards you. Then just tell them you saw a real Alien. And look into there eyes ! See if they look at you like your an Alien?

Well Its would kill a saturday afternoon at the Mall any way you Look at it.

[Junior Chubb]

'ET should have found us by now'? Who's now, ours or theirs?

[Axlaiden]

So angels and fairies are also here. I guess Bigfoot too. So what has been "mathematically" excluded from not existing? Nothing I can see.

Mathematically you can multiple zero with any number you want but the product will still be zero.

You mean by flying brightly lit craft over populated areas for people to photograph and abducting people out of the bedrooms for medical experiments for example?

A myth is only a myth as long as it is an enigma. By travelling to different parts of the world one will hear many different claims of Fairies, Mermaids, Devils, Ghosts, Angels, Witches, Chupacabra, ET's, Bigfoot, Mothmen, Gnomes, Elves.... the list goes on and on. To say that I personally believe in every one of these claims is preposterous, and even more preposterous is someone claiming that I do; however, many claims I do believe in are deeply rooted in tradition and seeded from truth, or variant of it.

I cannot prove, nor disprove that Angels exist. When the typical person today thinks of an Angel, they usually picture a translucent person with wings and a halo; however, the word Angel is so old and its meaning has likely changed throughout the ages. Suppose for a moment that the word for "Angel" (as proposed in the Bible) is a word to describe what we today would call ET's (hypothetically), then this concept is the same as the Gigantopithecus (which are documented to exist some 300,000 years ago) and the Bigfoot and Yeti, which many believe to see today. Each use different names for what appears to be the same thing.

A person can call an Angel what they want, messengers from God, Seraphim, ET's, etc. Before the technological age, many people have recorded that objects came down from the Heavens (sky??? space???) and would occasionally interact. Moses documented this on Mount Sinai, Christopher Columbus documented such a case in his Captains Log Book while searching for the new world, and more recently Barney and Betty Hill and the thousands of other accounts reported by curious citizens seeing something that defies all logic and scientific understanding. According to some myths, these "Angels" would have wings, because they were flying, and they would glow with a fiery halo. What is this glow? Some form of Anti-Gravity by-product? Some people are so ignorant of the technologies that ancient civilizations must have had. The Great Pyramids, Stonehenge, Machu Picchu, the Easter Island heads, Lalibela, Aztec Pyramids.. and the list goes on.

As for my personal belief in intelligent life other than our own, the math suggests that if 1000 people claim to see an ET, UFO, Bigfoot, Mothman, Gnome, Devil etc... , then it only takes 1 genuine claim for it to be true, even if 999 of the claims ARE false, which is improbable. So the idea of multiplying anything by zero in this subject has no merit, it just isn't relevant to some people if they don't witness it with their own eyes.

For those that don't know the math behind life in space, both intelligent and non-intelligent, it is understood that Drakes Equation (named after Frank Drake), originally just accounted for an estimate of life in our own galaxy; however, it has been modified throughout the years to include for life in other galaxies as well. About 300 Billion galaxies are estimated to exist, and there is an estimated 300 billion stars per galaxy. If we look at only our own galaxy, then lets simplify:

1% of Stars out of 300 Billion in OUR galaxy = 3 Billion Stars are like our own.

IF only 20% of the 3 Billion Stars like our own had planets in them = THEN that would be 600 Million Stars.

IF only 20% of the 600 Million stars like our own had planets, or planets in the Goldilocks zone = THEN that would be 120 Million (Assuming there is only 1 planet per star)

IF only 20% of the planets within the 120 Million stars had planets with water and ingredients for life = THEN thats an estimated 24 Million planets.

IF only 5% of the 24 million planets had simple life = THEN thats 1.2 million planets with simple life

IF only 1% of the 1.2 million planets with simple life had intelligent life = THEN thats 12 Thousand planets with intelligent life in our own galaxy.

Of course these percentages may be much greater or smaller... but no matter which, it's a huge probability for other life.

Just recently ESA, NASA have reported 4 Earth-like planets within only 600 light years...which is far without the technology to move between the stars; however, in astronomy, it is considered our own backyard when the milky way is about 100,000 light years across.

You get the picture I'm sure, but it's just a basic example of how Drakes Equation works on just our own galaxy. Im sure anyone can do the math for 300 Billion other galaxies if they have the time.

Edited February 4, 2012 by Axlaiden

[ChrLzs]

IF only 5% of the 24 million planets had simple life = THEN thats 1.2 million planets with simple life

IF only 1% of the 1.2 million planets with simple life had intelligent life = THEN thats 12 Thousand planets with intelligent life in our own galaxy.

Of course these percentages may be much greater or smaller...

It's those last two that I have serious problems with. If the creation of life is so easy, given the basic ingredients, why have we all apparently evolved from just ONE 'outbreak' of life on this planet? Why has no-one been able to artificially create life, given that we have a pretty good idea of the required ingredients and conditions under which that one incidence of life happened?

But it also ignores several other factors, eg:

Desire - why should intelligent life *want* to seek out others - are our interests so universal?

Timelines - why should 'now' be the time at which other civilisations get to the point they wish to explore?

Disasters - how may potential civilisations get wiped out by cosmological events (asteroid impacts, nova's etc) or by their own inventions?

I do think there is a 'significant' (whatever that means..) likelihood of life elsewhere, but I think it will prove to be incredibly rare, and that there is then a vanishingly small possibility that we will happen to encounter other life during our 'go' at it...

I don't find that depressing - I think it's awe-inspiring... Just as visitation would be..