Aliens!

[The13thMan]

[quote name='Sabrina'][FONT="Tahoma"]Or because they feel that the information out there is what's irrelevant. They've looked at it, for example in the case of aliens, and come to the conclusion that there isn't enough reliable information. It's too easy for your statements regarding aliens to be full of misconceptions.

So, naturally many of us are going to be vague on it because we prefer to not stick our foot in our mouths with statements of, it will be like this or I think it will be like that. In the end it's silly fun and nothing more, in my opinion.

Trying to force an opinion on someone, doesn't really work you know, since you're making the faulty assumption that they've not given it any thought. [/FONT][/QUOTE]

[FONT="Trebuchet MS"]You can very easily come to the conclusion that any given subject doesn't have substantial evidence supporting it one way or another and still have an opinion. You're confusing the two. They aren't mutually exclusive.

You can't stick your foot in your mouth on a subject like this until there is any proof one way or another - alien contact. Of course, you can have a flaw in your logic somewhere, but that's not because of what you know and don't know about aliens. That's simply based on your logical reasoning skills.

I don't think i'm trying to force opinions on people the way you're thinking. I think what you mean here is that i'm trying to force a person to have an opinion, any at all, not a certain one. Of course, that's based on the assumption that a person does not have an opinion to begin with, which as i've already said is usually only the case if the person hasn't given it sufficient thought.

Your logic is flawed. [/FONT]

[Allamorph]

[quote name='The13thMan][FONT="Trebuchet MS"']Your logic is flawed. [/FONT][/quote]
[FONT=Arial]The statement "based on the lack of information, I feel that the forming of an opinion which is highly likely to be biased, fantastical, and false is a waste of time" is a legitimate opinion. In this case, it's also known as "we'll find out when they get here". Do not presume to speak of logic when there is none involved in your own reasoning, by your own admission.[/FONT]

[The13thMan]

[quote name='Allamorph'][FONT=Arial]The statement "based on the lack of information, I feel that the forming of an opinion which is highly likely to be biased, fantastical, and false is a waste of time" is a legitimate opinion. In this case, it's also known as "we'll find out when they get here". Do not presume to speak of logic when there is none involved in your own reasoning, by your own admission.[/FONT][/QUOTE]

[FONT="Trebuchet MS"]The same goes to you.

The statement that "based on the lack of information, I feel that the forming of an opinion which is highly likely to be biased, fantastical, and false is a waste of time" is also an opinion is nothing i ever refuted. Obviously, i recognize this as an opinion. It's basically the same as what an agnostic believes, as i've explained before on this very thread. And if the message isn't clear, i'm agnostic. So for me to not recognize that as an opinion would be very hypocritical of me.

I did, on the other hand, say that that opinion is a lousy one and not one that i'm interested in on this subject.

Damn...[/FONT]

[Rachmaninoff]

[quote name='The13thMan'][FONT="Trebuchet MS"]I did, on the other hand, say that that opinion is a lousy one and not one that i'm interested in on this subject.

Damn...[/FONT][/QUOTE]Too bad, people certainly don't need to change their opinion to suit or fit what you find interesting. (And no I'm not saying you said that but you did ask what people thought and they told you, whether you like it or not is irrelevant). Just as thinking it is lousy is only your opinion and nothing else. Your inability to accept others thoughts without telling them they are wrong somehow is what I find lousy. Also known as "getting the last word in".

Anyway, ironically this bit here:[quote]The statement "based on the lack of information, I feel that the forming of an opinion which is highly likely to be biased, fantastical, and false is a waste of time" is a legitimate opinion. In this case, it's also known as "we'll find out when they get here". [/quote]Is exactly what I think of the whole Aliens spiel. Though some stubbornly insist that they have to do more than that. But I gave up on turning flights of fancy into a legitimate opinion long ago. I'm not a child anymore after all.

[The13thMan]

[quote name='Rachmaninoff']Too bad, people certainly don't need to change their opinion to suit or fit what you find interesting. (And no I'm not saying you said that but you did ask what people thought and they told you, whether you like it or not is irrelevant). Just as thinking it is lousy is only your opinion and nothing else. Your inability to accept others thoughts without telling them they are wrong somehow is what I find lousy. Also known as "getting the last word in".

Anyway, ironically this bit here:Is exactly what I think of the whole Aliens spiel. Though some stubbornly insist that they have to do more than that. But I gave up on turning flights of fancy into a legitimate opinion long ago. I'm not a child anymore after all.[/QUOTE]

[FONT="Trebuchet MS"]Whether i like it or not is very relevant. The relevancy of it is proven by the amount of time i've had to spend trying to get the opinion out of stubborn people. But in no way is that an insult. I'm probably the most stubborn of them all. =D You know that, Rach.

I assure you, my motivation isn't anything as juvenile as "getting the last word in." I simply wish to debate whatever the subject may be until i either bore of it or i feel that it has been settled. The only problem is how rarely that happens with me. ;D

But... don't you wish you still were a child? Overlooking sounding corny, there really is beauty in the innocence and pure joy of a child. [/FONT]

[chibi-master]

[quote name='The13thMan'][FONT="Trebuchet MS"]But... don't you wish you still were a child? Overlooking sounding corny, there really is beauty in the innocence and pure joy of a child. [/FONT][/QUOTE]

Yeah. Rach needs a hug big-time...from an alien!:p

[Drizzt Do'urden]

hmm...sorta got off subject here huh? I'd just like to add a bit of, fuel to the original Alien debate.

What do you think about the possibility that supernatural events have been caused by Alien influences? Have you ever noticed that you can count the number of socks you have, write that number down, and after a month. Even if you take your socks off and put them straight into the laundary hamper every time. You STILL manage to lose socks? (Instead of probing could they be taking our socks?)

On a more serious note, I did mean what I said about supernatural events. Things like, now I can't remember but I think it's called St. Elmo's fire that used to visit sailors? Or the Aura Bori-Alus (No idea if I came close in the spelling of that, but unlike SOME people, I don't feel I need to check everything I write with online dictionaries/encyclopedia's to find the biggest synonym for whatever word I'm using to sound more intelligent (you know who you are) ). Now I know we know "why" the aba exists. But what about the possibility that the egyptians were visited, why else would the gods/goddesses looks so strange?

[The13thMan]

[quote name='Drizzt Do'urden']hmm...sorta got off subject here huh? I'd just like to add a bit of, fuel to the original Alien debate.

What do you think about the possibility that supernatural events have been caused by Alien influences? Have you ever noticed that you can count the number of socks you have, write that number down, and after a month. Even if you take your socks off and put them straight into the laundary hamper every time. You STILL manage to lose socks? (Instead of probing could they be taking our socks?)

On a more serious note, I did mean what I said about supernatural events. Things like, now I can't remember but I think it's called St. Elmo's fire that used to visit sailors? Or the Aura Bori-Alus (No idea if I came close in the spelling of that, but unlike SOME people, I don't feel I need to check everything I write with online dictionaries/encyclopedia's to find the biggest synonym for whatever word I'm using to sound more intelligent (you know who you are) ). Now I know we know "why" the aba exists. But what about the possibility that the egyptians were visited, why else would the gods/goddesses looks so strange?[/QUOTE]

[FONT="Trebuchet MS"]I don't believe in any of that sort of stuff. Have you ever heard the quote, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof."? I think for anybody to take such claims seriously would require substantial evidence to back it up beyond anecdotal evidence. Even so, it's interesting to think about. But when it comes down to it i think the more likely explanation is that people are just imaginative.
[/FONT]

[Rachmaninoff]

[quote name='The13thMan;821690][FONT="Trebuchet MS"]Whether i like it or not is very relevant. The relevancy of it is proven by the amount of time i've had to spend trying to get the opinion out of stubborn people. But in no way is that an insult. I'm probably the most stubborn of them all. =D You know that, Rach. [/FONT][/QUOTE]No that just shows you still have to argue and do this:[QUOTE=The13thMan'][FONT="Trebuchet MS"]I assure you, my motivation isn't anything as juvenile as "[B]getting the last word in[/B]." I simply wish to debate whatever the subject may be until i either bore of it or i feel that it has been settled. The only problem is how rarely that happens with me. ;D

But... don't you wish you still were a child? Overlooking sounding corny, there really is beauty in the innocence and pure joy of a child. [/FONT][/QUOTE]And yes I know you argue endlessly, even if there's nothing to argue over.

As for the last part, no, I prefer being an adult. And finally:[quote name='The13thMan'][FONT="Trebuchet MS"]I don't believe in any of that sort of stuff. Have you ever heard the quote, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof."? I think for anybody to take such claims seriously would require substantial evidence to back it up beyond anecdotal evidence. Even so, it's interesting to think about. But when it comes down to it i think the more likely explanation is that people are just imaginative. [/FONT][/QUOTE]Sounds like you need to do some backing up on the whole idea of Aliens even existing because in reality, it's an [I]extraordinary claim[/I] that has no [I]extraordinary proof[/I] whatsoever. Sounds pretty similar to other opinions that you were not interested in because they refused to come up with possible ideas about aliens.

If your so willing to have an opinion on Aliens possibly existing, why toss out other nonsensical theories as well? Sounds like you're refusing to be imaginative. =P

[The13thMan]

[quote name='Rachmaninoff']No that just shows you still have to argue and do this:And yes I know you argue endlessly, even if there's nothing to argue over.

As for the last part, no, I prefer being an adult. And finally:Sounds like you need to do some backing up on the whole idea of Aliens even existing because in reality, it's an [I]extraordinary claim[/I] that has no [I]extraordinary proof[/I] whatsoever. Sounds pretty similar to other opinions that you were not interested in because they refused to come up with possible ideas about aliens.

If your so willing to have an opinion on Aliens possibly existing, why toss out other nonsensical theories as well? Sounds like you're refusing to be imaginative. =P[/QUOTE]

[FONT="Trebuchet MS"]Once again, Rach, you have failed to fully understand everything i've said.

The existence of aliens isn't nearly as an extraordinary claim (if it actually is a claim) as you think that it is. If you consider the size of the universe and simple probability then it's pretty easy to see that the simple existence of aliens is very likely. Another point you failed to see is that i'm not actually claiming that they exist. I'm not saying, hey they definitely do exist, which would have to be supported by evidence! I'm saying that i think they do exist, which can be supported by speculation. Obviously i have no evidence, which is why i'm not actually making any claims here, only speculation. There is a subtle difference.

On the other hand, the claim that a person has been visited by aliens or has seen them does require extraordinary proof, because it's a claim. They're not saying, "based on so and so speculation i have come to the probable conclusion that i was probably abducted or visited by aliens." Instead they are saying, "i was abducted by aliens!" Hopefully you see that difference.

As for whatever other claims you might have been alluding to, i won't address those here. [/FONT]

[Sabrina]

[FONT="Tahoma"][quote name='The13thMan'][FONT="Trebuchet MS"]The existence of aliens isn't nearly as an extraordinary claim (if it actually is a claim) as you think that it is. If you consider the size of the universe and simple probability then it's pretty easy to see that the simple existence of aliens is very likely. Another point you failed to see is that i'm not actually claiming that they exist. I'm not saying, hey they definitely do exist, which would have to be supported by evidence! I'm saying that i think they do exist, which can be supported by speculation. Obviously i have no evidence, which is why i'm not actually making any claims here, only speculation. There is a subtle difference. [/FONT][/QUOTE]You're forgetting a key element here when it comes to thinking Aliens 'might' exist. You're failing to realize that the "probability of extraterrestrial life" is actually based on the theory that life evolved in the first place, and is thus [I]extraordinary[/I] because it is based on speculation.

So if anyone missed the point here, it is you.[/FONT]

[Raiha]

[quote name='The13thMan'][FONT="Trebuchet MS"]Once again, Rach, you have failed to fully understand everything i've said.

The existence of aliens isn't nearly as an extraordinary claim (if it actually is a claim) as you think that it is. [/FONT][/QUOTE]

[COLOR="DarkOrchid"][FONT="Times New Roman"]Careful now, being patronizing is a job best left to professionals and people that are generally more eloquent than you. Also helpful are people with working shift buttons on their keyboards, the ability to express opinions without being utterly convinced that differing ones are moronic, and possibly a full compliment of wits.

But since you're lacking in all of the above I'll trot out the tired old one liner I had to use in Justin's thread last month or so. The most convincing proof to me thus far on the existence of aliens is that they've not tried to talk to us yet.

And furthermore, gods and goddesses look strange no matter who conceives them. Jesus himself looks decidedly feminine in some renditions while hanging oddly clothed on the cross. Shiva the Pacific has a closed third eye and Shiva of Destruction has it opened. Hathor is merely a cow and woman combined into one. That's been thought up by furry artists around the world. It doesn't take aliens to imagine what gods and goddesses look like. Key word there being [b]imagination.[/b][/FONT][/COLOR]

[Guest Crimson Spider]

I think I will make my grand re-opening with a post in this thread. *ahem*.

Aliens are [i]obviously[/i] real. I've even seen a few. I've never been abducted, because they usually try to remain under the watchful eyes of the law, for illegal activity can revoke their green card.



On a serious note, the only thing that can be said about the presence of aliens is that you truly do not know whether or not they exist. The vast size of the universe prevents us from exploring its ever-expanding boundaries, so we are locked in a dungeon of physical limitation. Left to do nothing but stare at the shadows on the walls, and conjecture about the noises we hear.


The argument here seems to be about probability. I read through this thread a few days ago, so sorry if my information is a little sketchy, but I received the impression that the thread as a whole has misunderstood what probability is. A rather common flaw of naturalism, to look only at the effect and identify an object only as such.

Probability is the observed distribution of a particular phenomena over a population. What probability is not is a cause. No, a probability is dependent on a cause, and the cause is independent of the observed distribution that is eventually discovered. Take, for example, the distribution of STDs among American society. According to avert.org, about 449 thousand individuals in the United States have HIV/Aids. With a population of 300 million, this means that 0.15% of the population has Aids. What this does not mean is that any random person is equally as likely to have Aids as any other person, as if they are subject to some random "probability" divining that arbitrarily wills them infected. The aids virus is spread by having unprotected sex with multiple partners, one of which has the aids virus on them prior. This transfer of aids will occur regardless of any observed probability.

Because probability and cause are independent, the arguments for the existence of extraterrestrial life begins to crumble. The fact is, lots of space =/= cause. A big population does not mean a big distribution. Floating rocks in space =/= cause. Again, how many rocks there are in the sky operates independently of the presence or absence of life. Adding more rocks doesn't make life suddenly occur. Lots of time =/= cause, either. An event only needs a minimal amount of time, and adding extra time will not make this event happen. The factors that constitute the event must be present and in action, and waiting for extended amounts of time won't make the factors spontaneously generate out of the void.


Chances are, you are going to respond with the very obvious argument:
Earth is a planet.
Earth has life.
Therefore, planets have life.

Which spawned this entire debate in the first place, though this does little more than beg the question. In order to claim probability, you will need several things that are missing. Namely, an accurate sample size. Our solar system if 8 planets, a dwarf planet, and a bunch of asteroids doesn't give us enough information to make any claim towards the distribution of life in the universe. Heck, it doesn't give us enough information to conjecture about our own galaxy.

Claiming probability then becomes an argument from ignorance: You don't know, so you assume that it is possible. To be truly neutral, you have to admit only one thing: You do not know if there is life on other planets.


What people do, however, is make a statement based on their belief systems about aliens. Such as the claim that life on another planet is not an "extraordinary thing". I, myself, do not believe in the existence of intelligent life, because the contexts of the Bible give very little reason to believe that there is life outside of our immediate planets. Even then I do not truly know, for even then there are things such as the theory of the organosubstrate that limit me from making any conclusive statements. We've demonstrated that what we predict God will do or has done is inaccurate too often to continue doing so, limiting us to what is explicitly told to us.

For another belief system, like naturalism, it is obvious that the rocks in the sky spawn life themselves, so adding rocks really DOES increase the population of life in the universe.

At its purest form, the debate over aliens becomes an indirect debate over religions, which then progresses into a direct debate over religions. I will take my leave with this last statement.

[Raiha]

[COLOR="DarkOrchid"][FONT="Times New Roman"]You're also forgetting the part where we're also surrounded just outside our immediate solar system with enormous whizzing chunks of ices and toxic gases. Ten points if you can name for me this region that would probably prove a bit of an annoyance for any inter-galactic traveller.

Just because Earth is a planet with life- and here even that begins to dissolve into a debatable topic- that doesn't mean that there can't be other planets with life. But since they have yet to engage us in any meaningful conversation and also appear to be pretty close-mouthed on the subject of whether or not we're even worth the time...
...It's a fairly safe bet we're better off discussing our more immediate problems. [Insert your own joke about dirty foreigners here].[/FONT][/COLOR]

[The13thMan]

[quote name='Sabrina'][FONT="Tahoma"]You're forgetting a key element here when it comes to thinking Aliens 'might' exist. You're failing to realize that the "probability of extraterrestrial life" is actually based on the theory that life evolved in the first place, and is thus [I]extraordinary[/I] because it is based on speculation.

So if anyone missed the point here, it is you.[/FONT][/QUOTE]

[FONT="Trebuchet MS"]Wow... this sucks. You've just opened up a whole can of worms. And here i am, without my fishing pole! Instead, let me be blunt. Evolution > creationism. There's a lot of evidence for evolution, therefore, you are wrong. ;D[/FONT]
[quote name='Raiha'][COLOR="DarkOrchid"][FONT="Times New Roman"]Careful now, being patronizing is a job best left to professionals and people that are generally more eloquent than you. Also helpful are people with working shift buttons on their keyboards, the ability to express opinions without being utterly convinced that differing ones are moronic, and possibly a full compliment of wits.

But since you're lacking in all of the above I'll trot out the tired old one liner I had to use in Justin's thread last month or so. The most convincing proof to me thus far on the existence of aliens is that they've not tried to talk to us yet.
[/FONT][/COLOR][/QUOTE]

[FONT="Trebuchet MS"]Ad hominem logical fallacy.

Besides, i wasn't trying to be patronizing.

i don't get the deal with the shift key, though... unless of course you're refering to the times i don't capitalize i. to which i respond... i don't care. =D get it? i'm still not using my shift key! sorry, sorry, i'm being a jerk now. feel free to call me on it.[/FONT]
[quote name='Raiha'][COLOR="DarkOrchid"][FONT="Times New Roman"]You're also forgetting the part where we're also surrounded just outside our immediate solar system with enormous whizzing chunks of ices and toxic gases. Ten points if you can name for me this region that would probably prove a bit of an annoyance for any inter-galactic traveller.

[/FONT][/COLOR][/QUOTE]

[FONT="Trebuchet MS"]I'm not sure what you're talking about here, unless you are talking about the asteroid belt between the inner and outer planets. Thanks to wikipedia i found out about some other stuff outside the solar system. Beyond that, i don't know.

Crimson Spider

Your discussion on probability really wasn't necessary. When i used the word i was using its colloquial definition. I wasn't going for anything as formal as probability based on mathematics... which i admittedly know little about. The argument, "I think there must be life other than our own somewhere in the universe because it's so vast," is valid as long as its not meant to be a logical argument to prove the existence of aliens. It's only a speculation giving a speculative conjecture to back up and justify an opinion.

I never meant for this discussion to be so serious. I was only looking for other people's speculations and opinions. Of course speculation and opinion isn't worth much and isn't conclusive in any way. I think that's perfectly fine, given the subject. Even so, i do enjoy and appreciate all the opinions, even the skeptical ones. [/FONT]

[Guest Crimson Spider]

The entire post wasn't aimed directly at you, though. I have head the probability argument thrown around more often than it should be. My discussion was for the entire board to see.

It is a very common misunderstanding that people have. Not too dissimilar from the before the fact, after the fact fallacy, where only vague behaviors of any incident are taken then applied to other areas where they shouldn't be.

It is best that I cast aside this notion as early as possible.

[Raiha]

[quote name='The13thMan'][FONT="Trebuchet MS"]Wow... this sucks. You've just opened up a whole can of worms. And here i am, without my fishing pole! Instead, let me be blunt. Evolution > creationism. There's a lot of evidence for evolution, therefore, you are wrong. ;D[/FONT]

[COLOR="DarkOrchid"][FONT="Times New Roman"]Objection: Subjective reasoning. Badgering a witness speaking in faith. Evolution and Creationism arguments can not be reduced to 'greater than' or 'equal to' or 'greater than or equal' to signs without infinite knowledge of life, the universe, and everything. And since you are lacking in said knowledge, you are wrong in your convictions that Sabrina is wrong. Got it memorized?[/FONT][/COLOR]

[FONT="Trebuchet MS"]Ad hominem logical fallacy.

Besides, i wasn't trying to be patronizing.

i don't get the deal with the shift key, though... unless of course you're refering to the times i don't capitalize i. to which i respond... i don't care. =D get it? i'm still not using my shift key! sorry, sorry, i'm being a jerk now. feel free to call me on it.[/FONT]

[COLOR="DarkOrchid"][FONT="Times New Roman"]You're being a patronizing jerk, and a wrong act done in ignorance is still wrong. Ethical statement. If you're really sorry you'd do yourself a favor and jump-start the "shut up" filter that all guys are presented at conception. It doesn't start out turned on, so that might require a little effort on your part.[/FONT][/COLOR]

[FONT="Trebuchet MS"] Beyond that, i don't know. [/font]

[COLOR="DarkOrchid"][FONT="Times New Roman"]Ain't that the truth. If you answered Kuiper Belt, then go to the head of the class. If you didn't get that far in your Astronomy studies, go back and sit down.[/FONT][/COLOR]

[font="trebuchet MS"]I never meant for this discussion to be so serious. I was only looking for other people's speculations and opinions. Of course speculation and opinion isn't worth much and isn't conclusive in any way. I think that's perfectly fine, given the subject. Even so, i do enjoy and appreciate all the opinions, even the skeptical ones. [/FONT][/QUOTE]

[COLOR="DarkOrchid"][FONT="Times New Roman"]If you didn't want serious, you probably should have kept the tone light and friendly instead of accusatory and insulting. I.E. "Your feeble ideas on Creationism are nothing compared to my Science." If you wanted to express the enjoyment you receive from our indignant irritation at your absurdly pathetic logical hoop-jumping you could've just added a disclaimer to your signature. Something to the effect of: "Don't take me seriously, I love skeptics, Christians, animals, and logic. But only in the skeptical capacity."[/FONT][/COLOR]

[Korey]

[quote name='The13thMan'][Font="TrebuchetMS"]
Crimson Spider

[B]Your discussion on probability really wasn't necessary[/B]. When i used the word i was using its colloquial definition. I wasn't going for anything as formal as probability based on mathematics... which i admittedly know little about. The argument, "I think there must be life other than our own somewhere in the universe because it's so vast," is valid as long as its not meant to be a logical argument to prove the existence of aliens. It's only a speculation giving a speculative conjecture to back up and justify an opinion. [/FONT][/QUOTE]

[FONT="Franklin Gothic Medium"]I don't find that statement the least bit un-patronizing. If any argument or discussion should be had, it should be done where people don't discredit others opinion outright, but instead appeal to logic or simple fact. From what I can gather, it seems that anyone else's opinion is immediately discredited by yourself. I [I]kindly[/I] disagree with such practices.

Now I take the high road out.

Aliens existing? I have my doubts. In this isolated niche of the universe that we live in, we simply do not have the resources at the time to either prove or disprove creatures live on other planets. The same can be said of religious phenomena. There is no proof either way showing that these events have ever happened or not. All we have is a collective belief on one side or the other. Is there a probability of aliens existing? Yeah, same as there is a probability of you walking down the street and you trip and fall. Anything's possible, but it's all up in uncertainty land at the moment.[/FONT]

[The13thMan]

[quote name='Crimson Spider']The entire post wasn't aimed directly at you, though. I have head the probability argument thrown around more often than it should be. My discussion was for the entire board to see.

It is a very common misunderstanding that people have. Not too dissimilar from the before the fact, after the fact fallacy, where only vague behaviors of any incident are taken then applied to other areas where they shouldn't be.

It is best that I cast aside this notion as early as possible.[/QUOTE]

[FONT="Trebuchet MS"]Yes yes, i realize your probability post wasn't aimed only at myself. I apologize if by saying it was unnecessary i was patronizing. That was not my intent. Neither did i mean to say that it wasn't unnecessary for anybody to hear. I was speaking only for myself. So let me reiterate: I did not find any useful information when i read your post on probability. I did, however, enjoy and appreciate it. I mean that sincerely.
[quote name='Korey'][FONT="Franklin Gothic Medium"]Aliens existing? I have my doubts. In this isolated niche of the universe that we live in, we simply do not have the resources at the time to either prove or disprove creatures live on other planets. ...

...Is there a probability of aliens existing? Yeah, same as there is a probability of you walking down the street and you trip and fall. Anything's possible, but it's all up in uncertainty land at the moment.[/FONT][/QUOTE]

[FONT="Trebuchet MS"]To the first part of this: We actually do have the resources to prove whether creatures live on any given planet or not. We can look at them. If we see some little space-kittens running around then we can conclude that life does exist on said planet. But you are right in saying we cannot disprove (with 100% certainty) whether any life is on any given planet. This is purely because it's difficult to disprove a negative... or prove a negative? Yes... prove a negative. Because you can say, well life isn't on the surface of this planet, but you don't know whether there's any life underneath or anywhere else. So yeah... you got it half right.

To the second part: I'm going to have to disagree with your comparisson. I would say it's more likely that aliens exist than it is i'll trip on the sidewalk. This is because i do not ever trip. I have perfect balance. BEAT THAT LOGIC! :smirk:[/FONT]
[/FONT]
[quote name='Raiha'][COLOR="DarkOrchid"][FONT="Times New Roman"]If you didn't want serious, you probably should have kept the tone light and friendly instead of accusatory and insulting. I.E. "Your feeble ideas on Creationism are nothing compared to my Science." If you wanted to express the enjoyment you receive from our indignant irritation at your absurdly pathetic logical hoop-jumping you could've just added a disclaimer to your signature. Something to the effect of: "Don't take me seriously, I love skeptics, Christians, animals, and logic. But only in the skeptical capacity."[/FONT][/COLOR][/QUOTE]

[FONT="Trebuchet MS"]Hm... perhaps you are right. Let me reflect back on the thread and see what happened.

::reflection::

Ah... i know what happened. In my head i come off as sounding nice and logical and expect the same back from whoever i'm addressing. But, seeing as this is a message board and not some sort of thought transfer device, people didn't quite get that. And this is of no fault of their own. I rarely intend to come off as a jerk. Whether i do or not is (apparantly) a completely different matter. I've realized i'm much more apologetic and light-hearted in face to face conversations with people than i am with written conversations. So!... i am going to take your advice and include a disclaimer in my signature. And, with your permission, i will accredit the disclaimer to you.

Oh... and this is another of those cases where i'm not trying to be a jerk. So don't take it that way! :animesmil:animesmil[/FONT]

[Korey]

[quote name='The13thMan'][FONT="Trebuchet MS"]

To the second part: I'm going to have to disagree with your comparisson. I would say it's more likely that aliens exist than it is i'll trip on the sidewalk. This is because i do not ever trip. I have perfect balance. BEAT THAT LOGIC! :smirk:[/FONT]
[/FONT]
[/QUOTE]

[FONT="Franklin Gothic Medium"]Famous last words, I'm afraid. In fact, you're more likely to trip than we are to see Aliens. If you're saying you've never tripped before in your life, you're either A) Lying or B) Lying. That's just arrogant. [/FONT]

[quote name='the13thman']To the first part of this: We actually do have the resources to prove whether creatures live on any given planet or not. We can look at them. If we see some little space-kittens running around then we can conclude that life does exist on said planet. But you are right in saying we cannot disprove (with 100% certainty) whether any life is on any given planet. This is purely because it's difficult to disprove a negative... or prove a negative? Yes... prove a negative. Because you can say, well life isn't on the surface of this planet, but you don't know whether there's any life underneath or anywhere else. So yeah... you got it half right. [/quote]

[FONT="Franklin Gothic Medium"]You're being awfully condescending here. There is no plausible way we can prove things just by pure image alone.Even with our sophisticated techonological advances in aeronautics, we have yet to prove any signs of sentient life or life at all in our immediate solar system. I find it highly doubtful we will find life on these planets if we haven't found anything within the 40+ years we've been at it.[/FONT]

[Nomurah!]

[SIZE="1"][COLOR="HotPink"]You guys havn't considered the possibility that there could many aliens on our planet as we know it. Whether they are in the form of our own, or if they're invisible, etc. The world may never truly know, however, we know that UFOs are real, whether or not they belong to actual aliens. Of course, our sun is not the only one. So of course, many aliens are out there, and even versions of ourselves, with their own histories, and their own doubts and wonders of worlds beyond their own. That's what keeps me up at night. Thinking of what other galaxies are like. We will never know. [/COLOR][/SIZE]

[size=1]edit: I forgot the dramatic music to end the post on.

[I]...duhn duhnnn.[/I][/size]

[Sabrina]

[FONT="Tahoma"][quote name='The13thMan][FONT="Trebuchet MS"']Wow... this sucks. You've just opened up a whole can of worms. And here i am, without my fishing pole! Instead, let me be blunt. Evolution > creationism. There's a lot of evidence for evolution, therefore, you are wrong. ;D[/FONT][/quote]Very well I shall be blunt too... you should get your reading comprehension checked because not once did I actually say or refer to creationism. You put meaning into my post that didn't exist. So how can I be wrong over something I did not mention? [/FONT]

[The13thMan]

[quote name='Sabrina'][FONT="Tahoma"]Very well I shall be blunt too... you should get your reading comprehension checked because not once did I actually say or refer to creationism. You put meaning into my post that didn't exist. So how can I be wrong over something I did not mention? [/FONT][/QUOTE]

[FONT="Trebuchet MS"]Actually, my dear friend, you are the one extracting meaning from another's post that was not explicitly stated. I did not say you mentioned creationism. I am the one that mentioned creationism. So perhaps it is you that should get your "reading comprehension checked." =D

Besides, i was trying to be dismissive. [/FONT]

[quote name='Korey'][FONT="Franklin Gothic Medium"]Famous last words, I'm afraid. In fact, you're more likely to trip than we are to see Aliens. If you're saying you've never tripped before in your life, you're either A) Lying or B) Lying. That's just arrogant. [/FONT]



[FONT="Franklin Gothic Medium"]You're being awfully condescending here. There is no plausible way we can prove things just by pure image alone.Even with our sophisticated techonological advances in aeronautics, we have yet to prove any signs of sentient life or life at all in our immediate solar system. I find it highly doubtful we will find life on these planets if we haven't found anything within the 40+ years we've been at it.[/FONT][/QUOTE]

[FONT="Trebuchet MS"]To the first part, Holy Camole! I was trying so hard to be sarcastic and silly here... didn't you pick up on it? Or maybe you did pick up on it and are now replying in your own silly and sarcastic way, in which case i am the blind one. But, in my defense, if that were to be true i would have to say you're very bad at it.

...Anyways, yes, obviously i have tripped before. The point i was (kind of) alluding to was that it's fruitless to say any one thing is more or less probable because we simply do not know in this case. You don't know when i'll trip again (if ever), and you also don't know how probable it is for life to exist other than here on Earth. So.... yeah.

To the second part. I'm afraid that you have once again missed my point. I'm saying that we are capable of proving the existence of life if we observe it. If we do not observe it then we prove nothing. But! Buuuut! If we DO observe it, then obviously we have proved the existence of life on the other planet. Of course, this is assuming that our observations are accurate, but that's irrelevant to this argument, or at least to the point i was trying to make. On the other hand, if we do not observe any life we are not proving that there is no life. If we notice there's no life on one side of Jupiter, who's to say there's not life on the other side of Jupiter? All i'm getting at here is it's easy to prove a postive but very difficult (if not impossible) to prove a negative.

Gooooooosh. :animeswea

EDIT:
Actually, after rereading your post, you're almost agreeing with me that it's difficult to prove a negative. After 40+ years we still have not been able to prove or disprove life on the planets that we have been observing for all those years, yet we still search, unable to prove that there is no life. But if we find that there is life, then our search will immediately end. Understand what i'm getting at?[/FONT]

[Allamorph]

[QUOTE=The13thMan][FONT="Trebuchet MS"]Actually, my dear friend, you are the one extracting meaning from another's post that was not explicitly stated. I did not say you mentioned creationism. I am the one that mentioned creationism. So perhaps it is you that should get your "reading comprehension checked." =D

Besides, i was trying to be dismissive.[/FONT][/QUOTE]
[FONT=Arial]Fail.

Let's breakdown:
[QUOTE][I][FONT="Trebuchet MS"][I]Wow... this sucks. You've just opened up a whole can of worms. And here i am, without my fishing pole! Instead, let me be blunt. Evolution > creationism. There's a lot of evidence for evolution, therefore, you are wrong. ;D[/I][/FONT][/I][/QUOTE]
What is she wrong about, if she never mentioned Creationism and you admit that she did not? The statement was simple: Evolution is a Theory, and unprovable. She did not say that Creationism was therefore right; obviously both are Theories, and both are unprovable. Your eagerness to launch a debate about [I]anything[/I] has undone you there; you have pulled in an issue that was not brought up.

Remember, by your own words, any claim that cannot be substantiated is fantastical. Ergo, your claim on the probability of the existence of life on other planets is fantastical because it is either based on the unsupportable position that life evolved from matter or on the unsupportable position that God created another sentient species on another planet.

End result: open, flagrant attempt to stir up unnecessary arguments. This is trolling. Cut it out.

[QUOTE][FONT="Trebuchet MS"][I]To the first part, Holy Camole! I was trying so hard to be sarcastic and silly here... didn't you pick up on it? Or maybe you did pick up on it and are now replying in your own silly and sarcastic way, in which case i am the blind one. But, in my defense, if that were to be true i would have to say you're very bad at it.[/I][/FONT][/QUOTE]
This is also trolling. Cut it out.

[QUOTE][FONT="Trebuchet MS"][I]...Anyways, yes, obviously i have tripped before. The point i was (kind of) alluding to was that it's fruitless to say any one thing is more or less probable because we simply do not know in this case. You don't know when i'll trip again (if ever), and you also don't know how probable it is for life to exist other than here on Earth. So.... yeah.[/I][/FONT][/QUOTE]
Fail. Breakdown:

In statistics, we learn about this thing called "observational data". We can then use said data to estimate the probability of an event's occurrence?[B]within a certain degree of error[/B]. This type of estimation is used every day; you know this, so why are you forcing me to spell it out for you? Or maybe your decision to find no useful information in [COLOR="DarkRed"]Crimson Spider[/COLOR]'s post was also dismissive? (An erroneous decision, to be sure. No knowledge is worthless; you who crave debate should guzzle it up.)

Probability can either be exact (die roll) or estimated (shopping tendencies). Estimated probability is quite obviously inaccurate, but is as accurate as we can make it with the data we have observed. Obviously you have tripped. Obviously we have seen no planets with life. Ergo, the attempted humor you presented was woefully ignorant?to which you [I]also[/I] admitted, as I shall show you.
[QUOTE][I][FONT="Trebuchet MS"]If you consider the size of the universe and simple probability then it's pretty easy to see that the simple existence of aliens is very likely.
[CENTER]//[/CENTER]When i used the word i was using its colloquial definition. I wasn't going for anything as formal as probability based on mathematics... which i admittedly know little about.
[/FONT][/I][/QUOTE]
There is no colloquial definition of probability. It is the simple ratio of success to total. If you know little about something, either don't argue with it or don't get hissy when people tell you you don't know what you're talking about. The only thing that such action will reap is more unnecessary argument.

Need I repeat myself? Cut it out.

[QUOTE][I][FONT="Trebuchet MS"]All i'm getting at here is it's easy to prove a postive but very difficult (if not impossible) to prove a negative. [/FONT][/I][/QUOTE]
Fail. Breakdown:

A reaction between two chemicals in a balanced solution will always use all chemicals.

This statement's negative is very easy to prove; all you need is one trial where you have perfectly equitable amounts of both reactants and the actual yield does not match the theoretical yield. However, your line of thinking is almost correct: it is very easy to prove or disprove any hypothesis when either it or its opposing hypothesis are all-encompassing.

E.g.: "there is no life on another planet" is, as you said, very easy to disprove once, because the hypothesis is that there is no life [I]at all[/I], and one instance of life will instantly prove the statement wrong.

[QUOTE][I][FONT="Trebuchet MS"]i don't get the deal with the shift key, though... unless of course you're refering to the times i don't capitalize i. to which i respond... i don't care. =D get it? i'm still not using my shift key! sorry, sorry, i'm being a jerk now. feel free to call me on it.[/FONT][/I][/QUOTE]
Consider yourself called. Also, yet more trolling.

[QUOTE][I][FONT="Trebuchet MS"]I never meant for this discussion to be so serious. I was only looking for other people's speculations and opinions. Of course speculation and opinion isn't worth much and isn't conclusive in any way. I think that's perfectly fine, given the subject. Even so, i do enjoy and appreciate all the opinions, even the skeptical ones. [/FONT][/I][/QUOTE]
And yet you continually dismiss the opinions of those who do not wish to speculate? Nicely done. You wanted people's opinions, and when they expressed the opinion that they'd like some more information (ostensibly so that they would not waste their time forming a completely erroneous, premature, and biased opinion), you called it a non-opinion.

Appreciation, check.

[QUOTE][I][FONT="Trebuchet MS"]But, seeing as this is a message board and not some sort of thought transfer device, people didn't quite get that. And this is of no fault of their own.[/FONT][/I][/QUOTE]
In this, at least, you are correct. Half of the miscommunication is the emotionlessness of the internet, which no one can control.

Half is your word choice. Example:
[QUOTE][I][FONT="Trebuchet MS"]Once again, Rach, you have failed to fully understand everything i've said. [/FONT][/I][/QUOTE]
The polite version of this statement: "No, Rach, that's not quite what I meant." Such wording does not directly imply that Rach is stupid, but makes the situation ambiguous; either he didn't read it right, or you didn't say it right; both of which are equally possible. So while a disclaimer in your sig is all well and good, I'd suggest you work on your word choice, so people don't get the erroneous impression that you're being condescending?if you truly are not.

And for the record, all of the tone in this post is completely intended.

Carry on.[/FONT]

[James]

[font=franklin gothic medium]Guys, instead of dissecting one another's posts and determining who implied what, why not actually discuss the subject at hand? Thanks. 13thMan, several people now are "misunderstanding" you - perhaps you should consider refining your delivery rather than suggesting nobody understands you.

Earlier on I mentioned that the discovery of alien life would have major religious implications, although I did not mean this in terms of Creationism. Actually I meant it in terms of the Bible overall - it is a book that really centers around the idea that a) Earth is the only planet with life and b) that mankind is essentially at the epicenter of that life.

Of course there are Creationist implications, but I see that as less relevant, because Creationism itself has pretty much been dismissed by any serious bodies throughout the world (the Catholic church, for instance, no longer denies evolution). I think the U.S. is about the only country in the world where Creationism is still under debate.

When I say Creationism, of course, I am referring to the story of Genesis - [i]not[/i] the idea of "Intelligent Design".

There are some Creationists who cloak their intellectually dishonest "science" as either "Creation Science" or "Intelligent Design". But these people do not represent legitimate Intelligent Design theory.

In fact I think there are many organizations - including scientific bodies - that see Intelligent Design as something with potential. It is certainly not mutually exclusive to Evolution, that much is certain (in fact, the two go hand-in-hand quite well).

So yes, in short, I do think that the discovery of alien life may have an impact on these types of debates.

At this point, as far as I know, there is now clear evidence that water existed or exists on Mars. There are now strong theories about life on Mars, but I don't think it's been definitively proven.[/font]