I personally do believe that life exists elsewhere in the universe, simply because of the vast size and also because I find the Panspermia theory to be the most plausible explanation of how life began on our planet.
Do you believe in extraterrestrial life?
Started by Mew, Sep 11 2012 05:51 AM
120 replies to this topic
#1
Mew
-
-
- 626 posts
Posted 11 September 2012 - 05:51 AM
I personally do believe that life exists elsewhere in the universe, simply because of the vast size and also because I find the Panspermia theory to be the most plausible explanation of how life began on our planet.
#2 Guest_idonotexist_*
Guest_idonotexist_*
Posted 11 September 2012 - 05:55 AM
Well, I think you also have to address what you mean by "life".
Because many uneducated people automatically assume by "life" you mean walking, communicating, living in dwellings "creatures".
I'm sure that's not what you mean, so I'm going to say yes. I believe there is some form of life out upon other planets.
I had never heard of Panspermia Theory but it basically fits the ideal I've had for some time.
I always find it silly that some people think this planet, our galaxy, millions of other galaxies were all created for us and we are the only life to exist within all of it. o__o
Because many uneducated people automatically assume by "life" you mean walking, communicating, living in dwellings "creatures".
I'm sure that's not what you mean, so I'm going to say yes. I believe there is some form of life out upon other planets.
I had never heard of Panspermia Theory but it basically fits the ideal I've had for some time.
I always find it silly that some people think this planet, our galaxy, millions of other galaxies were all created for us and we are the only life to exist within all of it. o__o
#3
Nymh
-
-
- 4626 posts
Keeper of Secrets
Posted 11 September 2012 - 06:00 AM
I can't fathom anyone not believing in extraterrestrial life.
#4
Mew
-
-
- 626 posts
Posted 11 September 2012 - 06:04 AM
Well, I think you also have to address what you mean by "life".
Because many uneducated people automatically assume by "life" you mean walking, communicating, living in dwellings "creatures".
I'm sure that's not what you mean, so I'm going to say yes. I believe there is some form of life out upon other planets.
I had never heard of Panspermia Theory but it basically fits the ideal I've had for some time.
I always find it silly that some people think this planet, our galaxy, millions of other galaxies were all created for us and we are the only life to exist within all of it. o__o
Yeah I didn't necessarily mean "intelligent" life, I was thinking more along the lines of bacterial life, although I think if there was "intelligent" life it would be more likely to be insect like than anything else.
Sadly I know a fair amount of people who don't believeI can't fathom anyone not believing in extraterrestrial life.
#5 Guest_Kate_*
Guest_Kate_*
Posted 11 September 2012 - 06:05 AM
I can't fathom anyone not believing in extraterrestrial life.
^ this.
The Universe is infinite. How cocky would we have to be to believe we are the only intelligent life in it?
On another note. I am one of those people that believe "The Gods" were actually extraterrestrials.
Zeus being their "Leader". Demi-Gods being human-alien hybrids.
I'm weird.
#7 Guest_Kate_*
Guest_Kate_*
Posted 11 September 2012 - 06:09 AM
No it's not.
Well no one knows that for sure. My point wasn't meant to be taken literally.
I mean, it's really fucking big.
#8
Mew
-
-
- 626 posts
Posted 11 September 2012 - 06:13 AM
^ this.
The Universe is infinite. How cocky would we have to be to believe we are the only intelligent life in it?
On another note. I am one of those people that believe "The Gods" were actually extraterrestrials.
Zeus being their "Leader". Demi-Gods being human-alien hybrids.
I'm weird.
I actually believe that the stories in the various religious texts were the people of the times way of trying to describe extraterrestrials and the incredible technology they had at their disposal. Naturally the people believed them to be gods.
However that is an entirely different discussion
#9 Guest_Kate_*
Guest_Kate_*
Posted 11 September 2012 - 06:14 AM
I actually believe that the stories in the various religious texts were the people of the times way of trying to describe extraterrestrials and the incredible technology they had at their disposal. Naturally the people believed them to be gods.
However that is an entirely different discussion
Mhm, we're on the same page then *highfives*
#10 Guest_idonotexist_*
Guest_idonotexist_*
Posted 11 September 2012 - 06:17 AM
No it's not.
Wow, such an insightful addition to the conversation -___-
That coupled with your amazing status complaining about advanced membership. I can see you're going to be an amazing new citizen to the Codex community...
I actually believe that the stories in the various religious texts were the people of the times way of trying to describe extraterrestrials and the incredible technology they had at their disposal. Naturally the people believed them to be gods.
However that is an entirely different discussion
This reminds me of a Star Trek Voyager episode and thus....I approve and agree.
Speaking of which, we need a Star Trek smilie!
#11
Bone
-
-
- 3638 posts
no
Posted 11 September 2012 - 06:19 AM
Relevant: the Drake equation.
Sure, it's speculative, but it gives perspective on how not-special we are.
Sure, it's speculative, but it gives perspective on how not-special we are.
Wow, such an insightful addition to the conversation -___-
That coupled with your amazing status complaining about advanced membership. I can see you're going to be an amazing new citizen to the Codex community...
- Yes. It was.
- You don't know what you've awakened.
#12 Guest_Kate_*
Guest_Kate_*
Posted 11 September 2012 - 06:24 AM
- Yes. It was.
- You don't know what you've awakened.
*Yawn*
He really could have said more than 3 words.
He didn't contribute to the conversation at all. Just spammy spammy bo bammy.
#13
Bone
-
-
- 3638 posts
no
Posted 11 September 2012 - 06:28 AM
*Yawn*
He really could have said more than 3 words.
He didn't contribute to the conversation at all. Just spammy spammy bo bammy.
It was a relevant correction and as long as it needed to be.
#14
Waser Lave
-
-
- 25516 posts
Posted 11 September 2012 - 06:28 AM
Wow, such an insightful addition to the conversation -___-
That coupled with your amazing status complaining about advanced membership. I can see you're going to be an amazing new citizen to the Codex community...
He's not new (he actually used to be a programmer here years ago), he just likes to request having his post count reset for some reason.
As for the question this topic is based on, I'd say somewhere in the universe there is probably some form of life (most likely bacteria).
#15 Guest_Kate_*
Guest_Kate_*
Posted 11 September 2012 - 06:30 AM
It was a irrelevant correction and as long as it needed to be.
#16
Mew
-
-
- 626 posts
Posted 11 September 2012 - 06:31 AM
*Yawn*
He really could have said more than 3 words.
He didn't contribute to the conversation at all. Just spammy spammy bo bammy.
If he had of expanded on why the universe is not infinite then that would have been perfectly fine.
However like you said, he hasn't contributed to the conversation just made himself look arrogant.
#17
Bone
-
-
- 3638 posts
no
Posted 11 September 2012 - 06:33 AM
Sorry, I forgot how facts are second to ~contributing~ on this forum.
#18 Guest_Kate_*
Guest_Kate_*
Posted 11 September 2012 - 06:34 AM
If he had of expanded on why the universe is not infinite then that would have been perfectly fine.
However like you said, he hasn't contributed to the conversation just made himself look arrogant.
Yep, and like I said, he took what I said too literally.
I just meant it's big. lol
*Shrugs* I'll admit, it's hard to detect the tone of a post online, so you can't blame him for correcting, even if it was a little half assed and spammy.
Anyways, back on topic.. I definitely believe in extra terrestrial life. It's very easy to believe in the grand scheme of things.
Sorry, I forgot how facts are second to ~contributing~ on this forum.
I'm not even going to feed you right now, just starve mmkay?
#19
Mew
-
-
- 626 posts
Posted 11 September 2012 - 06:35 AM
That is not what I meant at allSorry, I forgot how facts are second to ~contributing~ on this forum.
#20 Guest_idonotexist_*
Guest_idonotexist_*
Posted 11 September 2012 - 06:37 AM
Sorry, I forgot how facts are second to ~contributing~ on this forum.
It's a fact that universe is not infinite?
I have but one thing to say;
No it's not.
#21 Guest_Kate_*
Guest_Kate_*
Posted 11 September 2012 - 06:37 AM
That is not what I meant at all
Meh, seems like Bone is forgetting that it's not actually a fact that the Universe isn't infinite.
No one knows if it is or not.
So if we're going to start correcting people *chuckles*
#22 Guest_coltom_*
Guest_coltom_*
Posted 11 September 2012 - 07:14 AM
How do you know that the universe is not infinite, if you consider time as one the parameters, while there is a start there is never an end. Given an infinity of time,.,.,
However, define life.
However, define life.
#23
Mew
-
-
- 626 posts
Posted 11 September 2012 - 07:16 AM
However, define life.
The condition that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic matter, including the capacity for growth, reproduction, functional activity, and continual change preceding death.
Edited by Mew, 11 September 2012 - 07:17 AM.
#24
Nymh
-
-
- 4626 posts
Keeper of Secrets
Posted 11 September 2012 - 07:20 AM
But...
Assuming that either of the modern theories regarding the birth of the universe are true (the Big Bang and the Big Bounce), the universe would have started out considerably smaller than it is now (or in the case of the Bounce, would have imploded first), and has continued to grow since the current iteration of our universe began. These theories have been backed up by extensive research, expanding on Einstein's theory of gravity.
Something that is growing cannot be infinite, because the process of growing implies that it has boundaries. Yes, those boundaries continue to expand, but the very fact that the universe is expanding negates it from being infinite.
Assuming that either of the modern theories regarding the birth of the universe are true (the Big Bang and the Big Bounce), the universe would have started out considerably smaller than it is now (or in the case of the Bounce, would have imploded first), and has continued to grow since the current iteration of our universe began. These theories have been backed up by extensive research, expanding on Einstein's theory of gravity.
Something that is growing cannot be infinite, because the process of growing implies that it has boundaries. Yes, those boundaries continue to expand, but the very fact that the universe is expanding negates it from being infinite.
#25 Guest_coltom_*
Guest_coltom_*
Posted 11 September 2012 - 07:24 AM
Tell me the difference between a self-producing machine and life, explain to my self-expanding AI program is not life, explain to me a virus.
What is the end point of the universe? A ray has a beginning, yet is infinite. (infinity)/(infinity)=finite number.
But...
Something that is growing cannot be infinite, because the process of growing implies that it has boundaries. Yes, those boundaries continue to expand, but the very fact that the universe is expanding negates it from being infinite.
What is the end point of the universe? A ray has a beginning, yet is infinite. (infinity)/(infinity)=finite number.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
