'Aliens definitely exist' says head of India's space program

[UM-Bot]

Shreedhara Somanath spoke out on the topic of extraterrestrial life during a recent podcast interview.

https://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/news/380479/aliens-definitely-exist-says-head-of-indias-space-program

[joseraul]

Not inviting him to smoke weed and talk about Aliens, sheesh.. that's dismal. 

[jethrofloyd]

He probably meant the Aliens are the microbial world who lives in the clouds of the planet Venus.

[MrsGently]

26 minutes ago, UM-Bot said:

Shreedhara Somanath spoke out on the topic of extraterrestrial life during a recent podcast interview.

https://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/news/380479/aliens-definitely-exist-says-head-of-indias-space-program

Some optimism because it is the weekend. Sure aliens exist and one day they'll kill us all.

 

He's right though direct contact without hazmat is probably a bad idea...

[josellama2000]

An alien is traditionally understood as a being from a foreign land or realm. The way the term is often used today suggests that extraterrestrial beings are already among us. However, invoking the vastness of the universe and the high probability of life existing elsewhere as evidence of extraterrestrial visitation is a flawed argument, known as a fallacy of infinite regress. The existence of life elsewhere in the universe does not constitute proof that extraterrestrials are present on Earth.
Moreover, the entire UFO phenomenon is riddled with logical fallacies, and it seems plausible that it is being used as a distraction to keep people away from deeper spiritual inquiries and understanding.

[MrAnderson]

42 minutes ago, josellama2000 said:

An alien is traditionally understood as a being from a foreign land or realm. The way the term is often used today suggests that extraterrestrial beings are already among us. However, invoking the vastness of the universe and the high probability of life existing elsewhere as evidence of extraterrestrial visitation is a flawed argument, known as a fallacy of infinite regress. The existence of life elsewhere in the universe does not constitute proof that extraterrestrials are present on Earth.
Moreover, the entire UFO phenomenon is riddled with logical fallacies, and it seems plausible that it is being used as a distraction to keep people away from deeper spiritual inquiries and understanding.

We have heard of theses arguments you have just made so many times and they are flawed as always.

The entire debunking movement is riddled with logical fallacies because of its lack of understanding of basic physics and biology.

But here are the words of the Head of India's Space Program

"My conscience tells me yes, although I have no proof. As the chairman of ISRO, I am telling you this. There are definitely aliens out there in the universe."

"Aliens mean living systems and cultures in other parts of the universe. If they are ahead in technology by just a thousand years, or 10,000 years, they would definitely visit us."

It's not if it's when we find them or they find us.

Edited August 31 by MrAnderson

[MrAnderson]

1 hour ago, jethrofloyd said:

He probably meant the Aliens are the microbial world who lives in the clouds of the planet Venus.

No he didn't say this. It's clear what he said and microbial life is also part of this alien extraterrestrial life. But life can be more complex as we all know and probably much more complex that we can ever imagine.

[Essan]

Correctly speaking he simply agreed with everyone who has studied the subject: there is likely to be life on other planets* in the universe

*albeit more likely moons IMO. 

 

Obviously this is an admission that aliens are visiting Earth in the same way that acknowledging the existence of beetles mean you think they built Stonehenge. 

Btw has anyone proved that beetles didn't build Stonehenge 🤔😜

[MrAnderson]

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-66950930

Alien life in Universe: Scientists say finding it is 'only a matter of time

Many astronomers are no longer asking whether there is life elsewhere in the Universe.  The question on their minds is instead: when will we find it?  Many are optimistic of detecting life signs on a faraway world within our lifetimes - possibly in the next few years.  And one scientist, leading a mission to Jupiter, goes as far as saying it would be "surprising" if there was no life on one of the planet's icy moons.  Nasa's James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) recently detected tantalising hints at life on a planet outside our Solar System - and it has many more worlds in its sights.  Numerous missions that are either under way or about to begin mark a new space race for the biggest scientific discovery of all time.  "We live in an infinite Universe, with infinite stars and planets. And it's been obvious to many of us that we can't be the only intelligent life out there," says Prof Catherine Heymans, Scotland's Astronomer Royal.  "We now have the technology and the capability to answer the question of whether we are alone in the cosmos."

[Hawken]

Apparently, NASA thinks they exist. They want to show aliens with our birthday suits on. 

 

[pellinore]

1 hour ago, josellama2000 said:

The existence of life elsewhere in the universe does not constitute proof that extraterrestrials are present on Earth.

42 minutes ago, Essan said:

Correctly speaking he simply agreed with everyone who has studied the subject: there is likely to be life on other planets* in the universe

44 minutes ago, MrAnderson said:

It's not if it's when we find them or they find us.

 

I think that there is likely life elsewhere (or else when) in the universe. The chances of meeting it is remote due to the immenseness of it all.

The idea it has already visited us on Earth, or wants too, is due to our egocentric views as a species. If they did a flyby, our preoccupations with original sin and warfare would make us uninteresting to them.

[Piney]

1 hour ago, josellama2000 said:

An alien is traditionally understood as a being from a foreign land or realm. The way the term is often used today suggests that extraterrestrial beings are already among us. However, invoking the vastness of the universe and the high probability of life existing elsewhere as evidence of extraterrestrial visitation is a flawed argument, known as a fallacy of infinite regress. The existence of life elsewhere in the universe does not constitute proof that extraterrestrials are present on Earth.
Moreover, the entire UFO phenomenon is riddled with logical fallacies, and it seems plausible that it is being used as a distraction to keep people away from deeper spiritual inquiries and understanding.

Well, the Conservative Seventh-Day Adventists are saying aliens are actually demons and NASA is in cahoots with both them and Satan. 🤪

[Resume]

2 hours ago, Essan said:

Btw has anyone proved that beetles didn't build Stonehenge 🤔😜

We don't know.  We.  Just.  Don't.  Know.

[jethrofloyd]

Do you remember the Crypto terrestrial Hypothesis?

Intelligent beings responsible for the UFOs may be 'concelaed in steith' on the Earth or nearby. That could mean the Aliens are underground, on the far side of the Moon or even walking among us and passing as humans.

😎

 

[diddyman68]

23 minutes ago, jethrofloyd said:

Do you remember the Crypto terrestrial Hypothesis?

Intelligent beings responsible for the UFOs may be 'concelaed in steith' on the Earth or nearby. That could mean the Aliens are underground, on the far side of the Moon or even walking among us and passing as humans.

😎

 

This whole conspiracy theory about messing with our dna thousands of years ago seems about 10% plausible to me.maybe adam and eve were genetically engineered by alien ( gods ) .there were many people already around but they were an experiment.

It just seems weird to me how we evolved so quick.

I'm happy to be educated about the bible and evolution

Is my 10% belief waay to high ?

[Hazzard]

1 minute ago, diddyman68 said:

This whole conspiracy theory about messing with our dna thousands of years ago seems about 10% plausible to me.maybe adam and eve were genetically engineered by alien ( gods ) .there were many people already around but they were an experiment.

It just seems weird to me how we evolved so quick.

I'm happy to be educated about the bible and evolution

Is my 10% belief waay to high ?

Yes (if you had studied biology and human evolution beyond 8th grade) it should be zero.

[diddyman68]

39 minutes ago, Hazzard said:

Yes (if you had studied biology and human evolution beyond 8th grade) it should be zero.

I don't know what 8th grade is.i opted out of biology in my 3rd year and i can't ever remember studying human evolution at my school.

I also got kicked out of religious education,apart from reading and writing i didn't get much from my school apart from taking and giving a punch.

So most of what i learned happened after school.

Like i said I'm happy to learn.

[Resume]

53 minutes ago, Hazzard said:

Yes (if you had studied biology and human evolution beyond 8th grade) it should be zero.

Add the Theory of Evolution through Natural Selection, along with critical thinking and logic to primary through baccalaureate curricula.

Sheesh!

[Resume]

2 minutes ago, diddyman68 said:

I don't know what 8th grade is.i opted out of biology in my 3rd year and i can't ever remember studying human evolution at my school.

I also got kicked out of religious education,apart from reading and writing i didn't get much from my school apart from taking and giving a punch.

So most of what i learned happened after school.

Like i said I'm happy to learn.

If you do YouTube, search for biology videos by Forrest Valkai.  

[diddyman68]

3 minutes ago, Resume said:

If you do YouTube, search for biology videos by Forrest Valkai.  

Thanks,but i was more interested in the link between the bible version of adam and eve and the conspiracy theory of dna manipulation.

Neither seem very plausible to me ,but the bible version just seems less plausible.but we did seem to evolve way faster than it seems we should have,what i want to know is how did we get such a big leap in evolution compared to other animals.

[Resume]

4 minutes ago, diddyman68 said:

Thanks,but i was more interested in the link between the bible version of adam and eve and the conspiracy theory of dna manipulation.

Neither seem very plausible to me ,but the bible version just seems less plausible.but we did seem to evolve way faster than it seems we should have,what i want to know is how did we get such a big leap in evolution compared to other animals.

The highlighted is why I suggested you watch biology/evolution videos by an accomplished educator in the field.  

Just as one example, the earth is far older than than the 6 to 12 thousand years proposed by young earth apologists.  Demonstrably so.

Edited September 1 by Resume

[josellama2000]

5 hours ago, MrAnderson said:

We have heard of theses arguments you have just made so many times and they are flawed as always.

The entire debunking movement is riddled with logical fallacies because of its lack of understanding of basic physics and biology.

But here are the words of the Head of India's Space Program

"My conscience tells me yes, although I have no proof. As the chairman of ISRO, I am telling you this. There are definitely aliens out there in the universe."

"Aliens mean living systems and cultures in other parts of the universe. If they are ahead in technology by just a thousand years, or 10,000 years, they would definitely visit us."

It's not if it's when we find them or they find us.

You are allowing them to confuse you, i will prove it.
The word alien in the phrase "There are definitely aliens out there in the universe"  is to manipulate your understanding. It does not the same as saying the "there are definitively life in the universe".  The fallacy may be caused by a wrong translation or by the author.

I respect your point of view because i understand that we all are of different background, experience, and education. But i will not accept an "Argumentum ad Verecundiam" (appeal to authority) fallacy as a valid argument to refute what i said.
On the other hand, I challenge you to articulate the logic that brought you to to conclude that my saying lacks of understanding of basic physics and biology, just by you saying it (without arguments), does not represent anything but your opinion probably based on emotions.

Edited September 1 by josellama2000

[josellama2000]

4 hours ago, pellinore said:

I think that there is likely life elsewhere (or else when) in the universe. The chances of meeting it is remote due to the immenseness of it all.

The idea it has already visited us on Earth, or wants too, is due to our egocentric views as a species. If they did a flyby, our preoccupations with original sin and warfare would make us uninteresting to them.

The cause of confusion is semantic, as the article clear said There are definitely aliens out there in the universe." . This is totally different to what you are saying "there is likely life elsewhere (or else when) in the universe". Aliens are life, but not all life are aliens. This difference is key in understanding the fallacy.
I believe there are strong reasons by the media to use those kind of subtle "errors" which are super common and even popular within the public, and it is to give people a very specific message that is not necessary true but twisted news.

Edited September 1 by josellama2000

[Golden Duck]

This strikes me as a exercise aimed at winning the hearts and minds of the Indian citizens.

 

[MrAnderson]

4 hours ago, josellama2000 said:

You are allowing them to confuse you, i will prove it.
The word alien in the phrase "There are definitely aliens out there in the universe"  is to manipulate your understanding. It does not the same as saying the "there are definitively life in the universe".  The fallacy may be caused by a wrong translation or by the author.

I respect your point of view because i understand that we all are of different background, experience, and education. But i will not accept an "Argumentum ad Verecundiam" (appeal to authority) fallacy as a valid argument to refute what i said.
On the other hand, I challenge you to articulate the logic that brought you to to conclude that my saying lacks of understanding of basic physics and biology, just by you saying it (without arguments), does not represent anything but your opinion probably based on emotions.

How is this phrase manipulative? Which seems to be a major point in your argument. What the guy said derives from basic understanding of physics and chemistry. When he said there are definitely aliens in the universe he meant there is definitely alien life out there. How these two are different?