We Are Not Alone

and you miss-quote me.
there was one more line in that paragraph.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

On many occasions, I have posted my view that intelligent cultures are extremely rare in the universe & that we might be the only such in our galaxy. I consider it incredibility ignorant or at best naive to believe in the existence of a proliferation of intelligent cultures in the universe.

BTW: I do not claim that there are no other intelligent cultures. I would be surprised if it could be shown that there were none. I only claim that it is likely that many galaxies have no intelligent cultures, and that we might be (not surely are) the only such in our galaxy.

I have made such posts because of the seemingly wide spread belief that there are large numbers of intelligent cultures. Such belief is often accompanied by further belief in the existence of cultures way beyond us in technological development. There are also beliefs in the existence of intelligent life vastly different from us in physiology & biochemistry.

Such beliefs are incredibly arrogant speculations because they are based on little (if any) analysis of what is required for the evolution of intelligent life.

Other than references to the Drake equation (naive at best) & mention of the billions of stars per galaxy, there is never any cogent argument to support such views.

I keep hoping that presentation of my views will result in some cogent analysis supporting opposing views. It has yet to happen.

I once posted some views on the characteristics of intelligent species which might exist elsewhere in the universe. The responses were accusations of being closed minded because I did not believe in intelligent fish-like creatures, intelligent Centaurs (& other creatures with 6-10 limbs, ), intelligent creatures without an appendage capable of holding a tool, and other Scifi intelligent species. Of course there are never any cogent arguments supporting such opposing notions nor any rational critique of the reasons I presented for my views.

While I enjoy & read a lot of Scifi, it usually requires suspension of rational analysis. Insects the size of tigers (or bigger), biological species not fazed by bazookas, telepathic creatures, et cetera are unreasonable although often providing an entertaining story.

BTW: I also enjoy a well written ghost story or plots involving other occult phenomena, but consider such notions to be strictly fictional.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

No. I didn't.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I consider it incredibility ignorant or at best naive to believe in the nonexistence of a proliferation of intelligent cultures in the universe.

I make these posts because of the seemingly wide spread belief that there are not large numbers of intelligent cultures. Such belief is often accompanied by further belief in the nonexistence of cultures way beyond us in technological development. There are also beliefs in the nonexistence of intelligent life vastly different from us in physiology & biochemistry.

Such beliefs are incredibly arrogant speculations because they are based on so little analysis of what is required for the evolution of intelligent life.

I keep hoping that presentation of my views will result in some understanding & recognition of what it takes to make & support such statements. It ain't happened yet.

 

It is equally ignorant and arrogant to assume that life is widespread. The real answer is, we do not know. Drake's equation can be spun any which way, yielding answers ranging from incredibly small (10[sup]-8[/sup] or smaller) to rather large (tens of thousands). Something with a 12+ order of magnitude uncertainty is absolutely worthless. We do not know how likely it is for life to arise, how likely it is for intelligent life to arise given that life arises, how likely it is for technological life to arise, nor how long advanced civilizations survive.

 

Bingo. So why then do you pretend like you do when you make statements such as "extremely arrogant to believe this"?

 

It is arrogant to assume life is widespread. Not enough information yet.

 

Quite right. There is actually no evidence life exists anywhere else. Even the shear statistics that supposedly prove through logic that life must exist is speculation at best. There is no evidence. Some have transformed this quandary into a Pseudo-Religion. Hope all you want too, and into the future we go.

 

It is arrogant to assume Life is not widespread in the galaxy, or universe.

 

Nice juxtaposition.

Neither one is arrogant so much as unjustified.

 

I think weve strayed from talking about intelligent life to life in general.

For me there is NO doubt life exists somewhere else.
I mean we have found life in many places scientists originally thought it was impossible for life to exist! Im talking about organisms that can survive with nothing but a little water and rocks miles into the crust. Not to mention deep sea vents which are boiling hot, toxic, and under enormous pressure but still life persists.

I think the lesson is if the ingredients for life are around, life WILL pop.

The question is then where do humans fall in the intelligence timeline? Are we the first to evolve this intelligence and thats why we dont see anyone else? Are we so slow to evolve social intelligence that other aliens want nothing to do with us for fear of their own safety?

 

What benefit does it have for humans if we find life on other planets?

 

We do not know what the ingredients for life are.

 

A new and different type of alien fast food resturant would be a good guess I think.

 

To claim life is widespread or not, first define life. Certainly the ingredients for life as we know it exist beyond our solar system. Though we have only found 300-odd planets with our very primitive equipment, planets are probably common and since there is maybe 7 x 10^22 stars, there could be untold trillions of "Earths" out there. Of course, well over 99% of life in the universe might be no more than molds, fungi, bacteria, etc, but the remainder is still a possibility of billions if not trillions of races out there.

It is now generally accepted that Mars has bacterial life below the surface, thanks to the huge quantities of "summer methane" there.

 

To claim life is widespread or not, first define life. Certainly the ingredients for life as we know it exist beyond our solar system. Though we have only found 300-odd planets with our very primitive equipment, planets are probably common and since there is maybe 7 x 10^22 stars, there could be untold trillions of "Earths" out there. Of course, well over 99% of life in the universe might be no more than molds, fungi, bacteria, etc, but the remainder is still a possibility of billions if not trillions of races out there.

It is now generally accepted that Mars has bacterial life below the surface, thanks to the huge quantities of "summer methane" there.

 

I think a more pressing question would be: What benefit would it be for humans if other life found us?

 

Perhaps it is arrogant to assume it is. While I am not saying that it isn't; it in itself is not even an issue, only individual speculation. All the calculations ever conceived are only that. But it is nice to dream.

 

I think it's nice to dream there's much life in our galaxy, much more in the universe. I know the difference between dreaming & knowing tho.
I wonder if many people, including some scientists, think it's nice to dream there's none (other than Earth) or extremely little.