are aliens likely to exist or not?

[psyche101]

And I just noticed you said

I think the closest you have come is plagiarising the idea of self replicating Robots

Well, that's just downright rude. I don't know why you get so angry and upset.

Why do you think I am angry and upset? Good God man you are sensitive! I am not upset. I am just pointing it out. Heck, I personally have given you links to Von Nueman probes way back, and do not tell me you have never heard this:

History of the concept

The general concept of artificial machines capable of producing copies of themselves dates back at least several hundred years. An early reference is an anecdote regarding the philosopher René Descartes, who suggested to Queen Christina of Sweden that the human body could be regarded as a machine; she responded by pointing to a clock and ordering "see to it that it reproduces offspring."^[5] Several other variations on this anecdotal response also exist. Samuel Butler proposed in his 1872 novel Erewhon that machines were already capable of reproducing themselves but it was man who made them do so,^[6] and added that "machines which reproduce machinery do not reproduce machines after their own kind".^[7]

In 1802 William Paley formulated the first known teleological argument depicting machines producing other machines,^[8] suggesting that the question of who originally made a watch was rendered moot if it were demonstrated that the watch was able to manufacture a copy of itself.^[9] Scientific study of self-reproducing machines was anticipated by John Bernal as early as 1929^[10] and by mathematicians such as Stephen Kleene who began developing recursion theory in the 1930s.^[11] Much of this latter work was motivated by interest in information processing and algorithms rather than physical implementation of such a system, however.

LINK

Come off of it. Are you trying to tell me you came up with self replicating robot's yourself??????

[psyche101]

In fact, there's no point trying to talk to you any more, because you deliberately misunderstand everything I'm trying to say, accuse me of plagrirising, and keep on endlessly acbout Star trek and spaceships full of Robots. I'm sure you're just doing it deliberately.

I see that as a 2 way street, I think it is your deliberately avoiding reading my posts, and just repeating yourself, and then getting upset when I answer your repeat reply. How many times must we go over the C3PO thing? How many times have I given you Alien Planet as an example of your proposed concept, and how many times have you agreed with that as an example, only to pull this same crap again? How many times do I have to tell you that it is not the type of robot that is not working out here, it's the simple fact that the robot idea is not supported by any account, or any evidence? No tech remember. That is pretty important stuff in machinery not to mention you feel we can just re-write each and every account, none of which speak of anything remotely robotic. We have some bendy metal, that is it. How is it possible that you keep missing this most basic, and most important information?????? That no tech exists and no accounts match you claim????

I simply do not agree with throwing every single scrap of information about a case in the bin, and starting with imagination. Never have, and you know that, so why keep trying to get me to do that??