Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Advenix

Have ET's Already Discovered Earth?

78 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Advenix
Posted (edited)

It has been, by implication, almost certainly so.

NASA: We'll find alien life in 10 to 20 years
http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-nasa-search-alien-life-20150407-story.html

Firstly, the top NASA scientists must make sure that there is life beyond our planet, otherwise their effort wouldn't make sense.

Are we alone in the universe? Top NASA scientists say the answer is almost certainly "no."

Very good. Well, actually not so good, because the degree of certainty expressed as "almost certainly" requires some form of acceptable evidence, not just a hypothesis or an educated guess. Despite that, the confidence runs high...

"I believe we are going to have strong indications of life beyond Earth in the next decade and definitive evidence in the next 10 to 20 years," Ellen Stofan, chief scientist for NASA, said at a public panel Tuesday in Washington.

However, Ellen Stoffan strips the search of its peak excitement.

"We are not talking about little green men," Stofan said. "We are talking about little microbes."

And now is the right time to ask Ellen Stoffan this question: What do you think NASA will find after its 200-million-years search is over? More microbes?

The expected answer that mankind wouldn't very likely exist by then doesn't apply here. Just tell us NASA what you think you'll find if the ideal condition for the search persist for another 200 million years. Heck, the way it's been going, NASA would likely fly its UFOs somewhere around not one, but two or more exo-planets studying the natural habitat of the lesser species living there..

NASA thinks that this organization is the only one, which, in the course of past 200 million years, has been looking for life elsewhere. It's hard to imagine that just 100 million years wouldn't be sufficient time for some ET civilization not to succeed in its effort. Remember that 100 million years gives you plenty of time to come up with technologies of detection that we can perhaps regard as wild science fiction still a million years or so from now.

The failure on the part of ET's to fraternize with speaking mammals like us can hardly be considered the absence of evidence that someone out there has already discovered Earth and has it under study, not to speak about possible interference with the evolution of earthly mammals.

As long as the rule, which says something about not disturbing the natural habitat of Homo sapiens, is enforced, NASA and SETI would never detect any alien activity around and on Earth, nor would both agencies intercept an intelligently formed radio signal from space. The only sign of long lasting alien presence has been, in its explicit form, the UFO manifestation, which can be easily debunked by both NASA and SETI, whose views are considered the official ones. That means the above-mentioned rule hasn't been violated. But to whom is the UFO message directed to, in case NASA and SETI are both dead wrong due to their unfamiliarity with the mind of folks who are a couple of hundred million of years ahead and are probably no longer flesh and bones, meaning their taxonomy no longer says "Kingdom: Animalia."  

That's a real mystery. Go figure...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Advenix
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rlyeh

Hmm. So your defence is some unverifiable rule you just pulled out of thin air?

That's not how evidence works.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Imaginarynumber1

I didn't read your post, but i'm.still pretty certain whatever your conclusion happens to be, it's wrong.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 3
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advenix
2 hours ago, Imaginarynumber1 said:

I didn't read your post, but i'm.still pretty certain whatever your conclusion happens to be, it's wrong.

Sorry to bruise your eternal wit, but my post doesn't end with any conclusion. :lol:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Imaginarynumber1
21 minutes ago, Advenix said:

Sorry to bruise your eternal wit, but my post doesn't end with any conclusion. :lol:

I didn't read your post, but i'm.still pretty certain whatever you said, it's wrong.

  •  
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advenix
4 hours ago, Rlyeh said:

Hmm. So your defence is some unverifiable rule you just pulled out of thin air?

What kind of thought are you trying to put together?

I can only guess, but you probably refer to the rule, which runs parallel to the well-established rule that wildlife biologists go by. Not disturbing natural habitat also means the same as protecting natural habitat.

Suppose that some ET's study the way humans are trying to figure out if they are completely alone in the universe or not. Do you expect the ET's to land in the parking lot of Cornell University and help the PhD's with the search?

The ET's may also be keen on confirming a theory that species like us can last in a civilized form only a very short time. And so, yes, they would hang around to see the disintegration in real-time. You don't expect them to "land" to prevent the demise of human civilization.

You need to redirect your argument regarding the way evidence works to NASA. Those guys are the ones who say that there are almost certain that we are not alone, even though their brethren at SETI say the universe is still deaf-mute. Just email the top NASA experts and then paste their reply here.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rlyeh
38 minutes ago, Advenix said:

What kind of thought are you trying to put together?

I can only guess, but you probably refer to the rule, which runs parallel to the well-established rule that wildlife biologists go by. Not disturbing natural habitat also means the same as protecting natural habitat.

Well no it doesn't. There is no rule about interacting with technological advanced civilizations. That's something you've pulled straight out of your behind.

Quote

You need to redirect your argument regarding the way evidence works to NASA. Those guys are the ones who say that there are almost certain that we are not alone, even though their brethren at SETI say the universe is still deaf-mute. Just email the top NASA experts and then paste their reply here.

NASA along with every biologist has evidence of life in the universe. Where is your evidence?

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alien Origins
57 minutes ago, Advenix said:

What kind of thought are you trying to put together?

I can only guess, but you probably refer to the rule, which runs parallel to the well-established rule that wildlife biologists go by. Not disturbing natural habitat also means the same as protecting natural habitat.

Suppose that some ET's study the way humans are trying to figure out if they are completely alone in the universe or not. Do you expect the ET's to land in the parking lot of Cornell University and help the PhD's with the search?

The ET's may also be keen on confirming a theory that species like us can last in a civilized form only a very short time. And so, yes, they would hang around to see the disintegration in real-time. You don't expect them to "land" to prevent the demise of human civilization.

You need to redirect your argument regarding the way evidence works to NASA. Those guys are the ones who say that there are almost certain that we are not alone, even though their brethren at SETI say the universe is still deaf-mute. Just email the top NASA experts and then paste their reply here.

Quote

Suppose that some ET's study the way humans are trying to figure out if they are completely alone in the universe or not. Do you expect the ET's to land in the parking lot of Cornell University and help the PhD's with the search?

No they can't do that yet..They have to land in Times Square first.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alien Origins
1 hour ago, Advenix said:

What kind of thought are you trying to put together?

I can only guess, but you probably refer to the rule, which runs parallel to the well-established rule that wildlife biologists go by. Not disturbing natural habitat also means the same as protecting natural habitat.

Suppose that some ET's study the way humans are trying to figure out if they are completely alone in the universe or not. Do you expect the ET's to land in the parking lot of Cornell University and help the PhD's with the search?

The ET's may also be keen on confirming a theory that species like us can last in a civilized form only a very short time. And so, yes, they would hang around to see the disintegration in real-time. You don't expect them to "land" to prevent the demise of human civilization.

You need to redirect your argument regarding the way evidence works to NASA. Those guys are the ones who say that there are almost certain that we are not alone, even though their brethren at SETI say the universe is still deaf-mute. Just email the top NASA experts and then paste their reply here.

NASA might be saying we are not alone but they are talking microbes not little green men....

Quote

"We are not talking about little green men," Stofan said. "We are talking about little microbes."

The above from your OP...My thoughts on SETI is that its a waste of time and money...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advenix
Posted (edited)
17 hours ago, Rlyeh said:

Well no it doesn't. There is no rule about interacting with technological advanced civilizations. That's something you've pulled straight out of your behind.

NASA along with every biologist has evidence of life in the universe. Where is your evidence?

I didn't say that we have a rule that prohibits us from communicating with advanced ET civilizations; I said that the hypothetical ET's themselves go very likely by the rule, which is similar to the rule that wildlife biologists go by not to disturb the wild animals under observation. I added a couple of examples, but you still keep no comprende.

What kind of evidence does NASA have, for kristsake? Did you read the article in OP where NASA claims that it would get the evidence within 20 years or so? So how could NASA have the evidence now?

Where is my evidence? Evidence of what? I never said that I have some evidence of something. I just said that a period of 200 million years is sufficient time for someone out there to discover Earth as a planet supporting and developing life.

Edited by Advenix
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advenix
18 hours ago, Imaginarynumber1 said:

I didn't read your post, but i'm.still pretty certain whatever you said, it's wrong.

  •  

I don't know you, but I'm pretty certain that whatever you do is wrong. Just maintain a safe distance between you and steam rollers... :lol:

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Imaginarynumber1
37 minutes ago, Advenix said:

I don't know you, but I'm pretty certain that whatever you do is wrong. Just maintain a safe distance between you and steam rollers... :lol:

It would be mercy killing at this point

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rlyeh
4 hours ago, Advenix said:

What kind of evidence does NASA have, for kristsake? Did you read the article in OP where NASA claims that it would get the evidence within 20 years or so? So how could NASA have the evidence now?

Earth, the one place there is life in the universe.. You're not the sharpest are you?

 

4 hours ago, Advenix said:

Where is my evidence? Evidence of what? I never said that I have some evidence of something. I just said that a period of 200 million years is sufficient time for someone out there to discover Earth as a planet supporting and developing life.

You based your argument on some rule you pulled out of your ass. Ok then you have no evidence of anything, just rambling.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Horta
23 hours ago, Alien Origins said:

No they can't do that yet..They have to land in Times Square first.

As long as they aren't required to land in the New Mexico desert... :)

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
jmccr8
On 7/1/2018 at 3:21 AM, Imaginarynumber1 said:

I didn't read your post, but i'm.still pretty certain whatever you said, it's wrong.

  •  

Waits for ESL alien teachers while listening to space music at 440 and sculpting a pyramid out of my mashed potatoes.:lol::whistle:

jmccr8

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Golden Duck
6 hours ago, jmccr8 said:

Waits for ESL alien teachers while listening to space music at 440 and sculpting a pyramid out of my mashed potatoes.:lol::whistle:

jmccr8

I still play with my mashed potatoes

BmeTjyd.gif

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alien Origins
12 hours ago, Horta said:

As long as they aren't required to land in the New Mexico desert... :)

No..They crash when they get close to that place.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advenix
On 7/2/2018 at 1:48 AM, Rlyeh said:

Earth, the one place there is life in the universe.. You're not the sharpest are you?

 

Read the NASA article in OP again. NASA has been looking for EXTRATERRESTRIAL life, not TERRESTRIAL life, as you erroneously believe it has been so. The reason why NASA hasn't been looking for terrestrial life is that the very existence of this government agency  provides irrefutable evidence that life on Earth exists. Read the article on the NASA effort again and think it over. In case you will still believe that NASA is looking for signs of life on Earth, email the NASA experts for explanation. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advenix
On 7/2/2018 at 1:48 AM, Rlyeh said:

You based your argument on some rule you pulled out of your ass. Ok then you have no evidence of anything, just rambling.

You seems to have a deep problem in distinguishing. The process of acquiring some evidence is not the same state of knowledge as already having the evidence. The cosmologists don't have the evidence of the theoretical elements that the dark matter is made of either, but the  cosmological concept is still alive thriving.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter

Your reply is primarily based on derision and that's why is lacking coherency. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Golden Duck
On 02/07/2018 at 1:43 PM, Advenix said:

I didn't say that we have a rule that prohibits us from communicating with advanced ET civilizations; I said that the hypothetical ET's themselves go very likely by the rule, which is similar to the rule that wildlife biologists go by not to disturb the wild animals under observation. I added a couple of examples, but you still keep no comprende.

...

Your analogy limps. We're talking about studying a civilisation and its culture which is more likely to include participant observation.

You're talking about hypothetical ET, trying to purport some very likely probability is meaningless if not biased.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advenix
1 hour ago, Golden Duck said:

Your analogy limps. We're talking about studying a civilisation and its culture which is more likely to include participant observation.

You're talking about hypothetical ET, trying to purport some very likely probability is meaningless if not biased.

What are you trying to say this time? Do you realize that your arguments are either senseless or very poorly stated?

The topic I've raised is as simple as it can get: Would 200 million years be sufficient time enough for NASA to discover an exoplanet with relatively advanced life and not just a planet ruled by microbes? If yes, then what would prevent an advanced ET civilization from discovering Earth?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Horta
Posted (edited)
On 7/1/2018 at 3:51 PM, Advenix said:

And now is the right time to ask Ellen Stoffan this question: What do you think NASA will find after its 200-million-years search is over? More microbes

Why is it the right time? 

How could they possibly know?

The only obvious and realistic answer would be that they'll probably have a much better idea of that in another 200 million years. lol.

Edited by Horta
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rlyeh
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Advenix said:

You seems to have a deep problem in distinguishing. The process of acquiring some evidence is not the same state of knowledge as already having the evidence. The cosmologists don't have the evidence of the theoretical elements that the dark matter is made of either, but the  cosmological concept is still alive thriving.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_matter

Your reply is primarily based on derision and that's why is lacking coherency. 

You've got less evidence than that supporting dark matter. You're neither acquiring evidence nor do you have evidence, you're just making up crap.

Edited by Rlyeh
  • Like 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rlyeh
4 hours ago, Advenix said:

Read the NASA article in OP again. NASA has been looking for EXTRATERRESTRIAL life, not TERRESTRIAL life, as you erroneously believe it has been so.

I did. Now go read what you responded to.

I'm not sure if you don't want to pay attention or you're just incapable of it.

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Golden Duck
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Advenix said:

What are you trying to say this time? Do you realize that your arguments are either senseless or very poorly stated?

LoL.  It's really simple- look at what I quoted. 

"Every Analogy Limps" is a well known idiom.

Studying a culture is not analogous with studying wildlife. 

Simple.

Quote

The topic I've raised is as simple as it can get: Would 200 million years be sufficient time enough for NASA to discover an exoplanet with relatively advanced life and not just a planet ruled by microbes? If yes, then what would prevent an advanced ET civilization from discovering Earth?

 Like I said before look at what I quoted. 

Man hasn't been around 200 Million years, let alone NASA. So your fantastic, hypothetical question could have any answer. 

Whatever prevents us from finding ET could just as easily prevent them from finding us. 

Edited by Golden Duck
  • Like 3
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.