Intelligent alien life unlikely, study claims

[Dejarma]

We have absolutely no idea what's out there. This is why the use of phrases like: 'highly unlikely/ I doubt etc'  -has IMO no meaningful impact in a discussion of this nature

[Dark_Grey]

4 minutes ago, Merc14 said:

Let's say a civilization survived all the perils and pitfalls that befall us and they are a billion years old and a mere 100 light years away or even 1,000.  We should've been found by now.. 

Most likely, yes. A billion year old civilization has time on their side and that's enough time to hit all the planets within a 100 light year radius. But again, that assumes they find Earth during that small window where humans would be aware of it. That limits the scope so much more...if mankind was also a billion years old I'm pretty certain we would have a record of "first contact" by now. One of the biggest problems is that Earth and even more so humans are so young. 

[Dark_Grey]

2 minutes ago, Dejarma said:

We have absolutely no idea what's out there. This is why the use of phrases like: 'highly unlikely/ I doubt etc'  -has IMO no meaningful impact in a discussion of this nature

Well, yeah. We could find out tomorrow that reality is nothing at all like what we originally thought. We can't know what we don't know so we make educated guesses based on the data we have available.

If we are throwing all reservations out the window, I say there are advanced races living on Mercury but they build invisible structures which is why can't detect them. Also, the aliens are made of gasses. 

[Dejarma]

2 minutes ago, Dark_Grey said:

Well, yeah. We could find out tomorrow that reality is nothing at all like what we originally thought. We can't know what we don't know so we make educated guesses based on the data we have available.

If we are throwing all reservations out the window, I say there are advanced races living on Mercury but they build invisible structures which is why can't detect them. Also, the aliens are made of gasses. 

yep of course... now what?

[Fila]

54 minutes ago, Dejarma said:

We have absolutely no idea what's out there. This is why the use of phrases like: 'highly unlikely/ I doubt etc'  -has IMO no meaningful impact in a discussion of this nature

I like this quote. Thanks Dej

[Dark_Grey]

56 minutes ago, Dejarma said:

yep of course... now what?

Now we send carrier pigeons to Mercury!

[Merc14]

2 hours ago, Dark_Grey said:

Most likely, yes. A billion year old civilization has time on their side and that's enough time to hit all the planets within a 100 light year radius. But again, that assumes they find Earth during that small window where humans would be aware of it. That limits the scope so much more...if mankind was also a billion years old I'm pretty certain we would have a record of "first contact" by now. One of the biggest problems is that Earth and even more so humans are so young. 

I would think they'd leave robotic probes in orbit around a planet as active as ours.  Honestly, I am not defending any side as, personally, I don't think we have a clue what's going on.   If we find evidence of life on Mars, past or present, then I may have an opinion.

Edited June 26, 2018 by Merc14

[Minimalists]

My position is we find it when we find it until then it is all nothing but pure speculation and conjecture. But I don't agree with the OP there maybe life out there question is will the human race or Earth last long enough to see it...?

Edited June 26, 2018 by Alien Origins

[pallidin]

On 6/25/2018 at 4:51 AM, UM-Bot said:

Researchers at Oxford University maintain that we are probably the only intelligent life forms in the universe.

https://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/news/319116/intelligent-alien-life-unlikely-study-claims

Oh my God. That is one of the most rediculous conjectures that I've heard to-date!

And please don't ask me why. If one can't figure-it-out on one's own (it's absurdly simple), than I have no desire to offer what one will automatically dismiss and reject.

I have nothing further to say on this.

Carry-on !!!!

[Marcin]

Claims like this remind me of this cartoon drawing I've seen years ago... a bunch of little ant scouts breaks through a grout between floor tiles in a massive hangar - upon entering this vast space they proceed to scout out nearby area, they checked 4 tiles in width, 3 in length, upon return to the hive it's declared that this space is entirely devoid of other life since they haven't spotted any signs of one despite their exhaustive search 

That's us, in a nutshell...

Closest earth like planet supposedly what, 5 light years away or so, barely a stones throw from home in Space terms yet we can't get there anytime soon, but these fellas are already way ahead of us declaring that intelligent life out there is unlikely? Hah, don't know whether it's an arrogant ignorance, blowing own horn or an attempt to water down public interest

 

[pallidin]

Black Holes... Highly considered actual through reasonable scientific inferrance, but not really "proven"

Astrophysics strongly suggest black holes exist in the center of most galaxies but not proven at all.

Since intelligent life elsewhere in the universe cannot be proven (and thus must not exist) and also currently, black holes cannot even be proven, it stands to reason that black holes do not exist.

That's right people, black holes do not exist because it's never been proven that they do, according to this bizarre logic.

 

 

 

[stereologist]

14 hours ago, Dark_Grey said:

Most likely, yes. A billion year old civilization has time on their side and that's enough time to hit all the planets within a 100 light year radius. But again, that assumes they find Earth during that small window where humans would be aware of it. That limits the scope so much more...if mankind was also a billion years old I'm pretty certain we would have a record of "first contact" by now. One of the biggest problems is that Earth and even more so humans are so young. 

A 100 light year radius? Why not further?

We will soon be able to build self repairing, self replicating robots that can explore for us.

People will not have to go out into the cosmos. Our machines will be able to do that for us.

[Golden Duck]

42 minutes ago, pallidin said:

Black Holes... Highly considered actual through reasonable scientific inferrance, but not really "proven"

Astrophysics strongly suggest black holes exist in the center of most galaxies but not proven at all.

Since intelligent life elsewhere in the universe cannot be proven (and thus must not exist) and also currently, black holes cannot even be proven, it stands to reason that black holes do not exist.

That's right people, black holes do not exist because it's never been proven that they do, according to this bizarre logic.

 

 

 

Argument ad ignoratium we get it.  But the Oxford paper is a statistical analysis. 

[Merc14]

4 hours ago, pallidin said:

Black Holes... Highly considered actual through reasonable scientific inferrance, but not really "proven"\

I disagree.  Black holes, by their very nature, cannot be photographed but their effect on space and time can,and boy have they.  If black holes did exist then they would have certain real, observable and testable properties and all of these have been tested and proven to exist, as far as I know.  This leaves us with the fact that if black holes don't exist then what is causing all of these real and observable effects?  The best, and so far only, answer is a black hole and so the impetus in on your to describe something that is a better explanation for these measurable effects than a black hole.  Good luck. 

4 hours ago, pallidin said:

Astrophysics strongly suggest black holes exist in the center of most galaxies but not proven at all.

What would you consider proof if not what we already have? No scientist today denies the existence of black holes because the evidence of their existence is overwhelming. 

4 hours ago, pallidin said:

Since intelligent life elsewhere in the universe cannot be proven (and thus must not exist) and also currently, black holes cannot even be proven, it stands to reason that black holes do not exist.

Wrong again!  No rational person has declared there is no life in the universe other than us, that is you slapping a negative label on those who don't agree with you.  What is being said is that as of now, there is no proof of life off this world but we are spending billions searching for it as science has faith that life exists out there.  

4 hours ago, pallidin said:

That's right people, black holes do not exist because it's never been proven that they do, according to this bizarre logic.

Your bizarre opinion that has nothing to do with what most of us are really saying.

[pallidin]

3 hours ago, Merc14 said:

I disagree.  Black holes, by their very nature, cannot be photographed but their effect on space and time can,and boy have they.  If black holes did exist then they would have certain real, observable and testable properties and all of these have been tested and proven to exist, as far as I know.  This leaves us with the fact that if black holes don't exist then what is causing all of these real and observable effects?  The best, and so far only, answer is a black hole and so the impetus in on your to describe something that is a better explanation for these measurable effects than a black hole.  Good luck. 

What would you consider proof if not what we already have? No scientist today denies the existence of black holes because the evidence of their existence is overwhelming. 

Wrong again!  No rational person has declared there is no life in the universe other than us, that is you slapping a negative label on those who don't agree with you.  What is being said is that as of now, there is no proof of life off this world but we are spending billions searching for it as science has faith that life exists out there.  

Your bizarre opinion that has nothing to do with what most of us are really saying.

Calm down, Merc!

My statements were a mix of sarcasm to illustrate the ludicrous "We are alone theory"

[Merc14]

7 hours ago, pallidin said:

Calm down, Merc!

My statements were a mix of sarcasm to illustrate the ludicrous "We are alone theory"

Calm down?  Dude, I am not excited or angry or anything else, I am just having a debate with you re. a subject I find interesting.  None of us have an answer because we haven't found any life off this planet (I am confident we soon will) so neither of us have anything to base our premise on except what we know so far.  Greater minds than ours have debated this question without settling anything so don't expect any answers .....yet.

[psyche101]

Because we only have one example of intelligent life building a planet wide civilisation it is scientifically sloppy to make assumptions regarding how the frequency of civilizations such as ours emerge.

There is only one fact that we can rely upon, and that is that we presently have no evidence for the existence of extra-terrestrial intelligent life, unless of course you're a conspiracy theory nut job. 

In other news..... 

Extraterrestrial Life Even If It's Staring Us in the Face

Why Alien Life is Very, Very Likely

Scientists Assert That We Will Make Contact With Aliens in the Next Decade

Our Interstellar Neighbors: 5 Potentially Earth-Like Planets Nearby

[pallidin]

There appears to be two camps on this subject.

One camp that believes, without evidence, that there might be extraterrestrial life outside of our solar system or within besides Earth.

The other camp believes that there is no reason to believe in extraterrestrial life since there is no direct evidence that the public is aware of.

This is a significant dichotomy and hopefully in the future will be resolved.

 

 

[Golden Duck]

28 minutes ago, pallidin said:

There appears to be two camps on this subject.

One camp that believes, without evidence, that there might be extraterrestrial life outside of our solar system or within besides Earth.

The other camp believes that there is no reason to believe in extraterrestrial life since there is no direct evidence that the public is aware of.

This is a significant dichotomy and hopefully in the future will be resolved.

 

 

What you've described, I'd call a subtle dichotomy.

[StarMountainKid]

A question I have is, what would be the most desirable situation for an advanced alien species?

An alien species that modifies themselves biologically, then constructs an environment and a society tailored to their needs. They would protect themselves from any outside threat and go on living happily, undetected. Why would they try to contact other civilizations when they have everything they need at home?

 

[Golden Duck]

58 minutes ago, StarMountainKid said:

A question I have is, what would be the most desirable situation for an advanced alien species?

An alien species that modifies themselves biologically, then constructs an environment and a society tailored to their needs. They would protect themselves from any outside threat and go on living happily, undetected. Why would they try to contact other civilizations when they have everything they need at home?

Perhaps they experience profound events that lead to a moral epiphany; and, realise that great power and great responsibility are fellow travellers that are better left unburdened by the baggage of isolationism.

With advanced knowledge a new dawn awakens.

Edited June 29, 2018 by Golden Duck
some grammar (that I noticed)

[pallidin]

Given the age of our Earth as well as the age of human development (with respect to the age of our universe), it would seem, without question, that ET's might be far more advanced than ourselves.

Earth life is relatively recent.

Other "universal life" could easily have evolved millions of years before us.

[Horta]

I really don't think it is unreasonable to propose that we really could be alone as far as human like intelligence goes. Unlikely, but possible IMO.

Then again, intelligence might arise regularly and quickly get to the point it destroys itself or its planet (which is where we seem to be going) before it reaches any form of super intelligence.

If a species gets beyond this point they would likely be synthetic IMO and have long ago left biology and evolution behind. If we somehow manage to create a general human level artificial intelligence (which might not be that far off), this would quickly become our only chance of survival also IMO.

It's a big galaxy though, no saying aliens would ever realise we existed. Outside of this galaxy the chances of aliens realising we exist seems far less than infinitesimal.

[spud the mackem]

On ‎26‎/‎06‎/‎2018 at 9:15 PM, Merc14 said:

Let's say a civilization survived all the perils and pitfalls that befall us and they are a billion years old and a mere 100 light years away or even 1,000.  We should've been found by now.. 

Maybe they did find us ,and moved on. I'm waiting for some archeologist finding something maybe hidden in a cave,that is "not of this world" to prove that we have been visited.

 

 

 

[Essan]

2 hours ago, spud the mackem said:

Maybe they did find us ,and moved on. I'm waiting for some archeologist finding something maybe hidden in a cave,that is "not of this world" to prove that we have been visited.

 

 

 

More likely they would leave a probe on the Moon, in orbit around the Sun, or more likely in closer proximity to one of the moons of Jupiter or Saturn which show far more chance of producing life than a hot rock afllicted with deadly oxygen in the atmosphere and where liquid methane, necessary for life as aliens know it, boils away ....