I believe that it is very unlikely that aliens have actively watched the human race. I mean humans are below stone aged intelligence compared to aliens, not only are we very unintelligent but we are boring and dangerous. We are stationed in an uninteresting galaxy on an uninteresting planet in the middle of nowhere so I find it very unlikely that aliens would find our civilazation the least bit interesting.
Why would aliens be interested in us?
- Thread starter bystander
- Start date
Blacktubby
Registered Senior Member
>I believe that it is very unlikely that aliens have actively watched the human race. I mean humans are below stone aged intelligence compared to aliens, not only are we very unintelligent but we are boring and dangerous. We are stationed in an uninteresting galaxy on an uninteresting planet in the middle of nowhere so I find it very unlikely that aliens would find our civilazation the least bit interesting.
------------------
According to many scientists, the likelyhood of a race, however advanced, discovering intellegent life, is impressively low. Should some other form of intellegent life discover us, it is very, very unlikely that they would not take a great deal of interest in us.
------------------
Blacktubby,
"Reality has a way of catching up with you, the way the ground catches up with an airplane that runs out of fuel."
------------------
According to many scientists, the likelyhood of a race, however advanced, discovering intellegent life, is impressively low. Should some other form of intellegent life discover us, it is very, very unlikely that they would not take a great deal of interest in us.
------------------
Blacktubby,
"Reality has a way of catching up with you, the way the ground catches up with an airplane that runs out of fuel."
The Communist
Registered Member
The reason why alien's would be interested in us is quite simple. They study us for the same reason's why we study the animal's of Earth. These animal's are also very primitive to us, but there is an urge in human's to understand them, the alien's who are interested in us are also driven by the same need to understand.
In a way, I get the point of your question, bystander. Assuming that they are just one of many intelligent forms of life out there, why would they be interested in us?? Then again, I don't make that assumption. The reason they're interested in us is because we have very valuable souls. By the way though, what are we and this particular planet boring in comparison to?
------------------
God loves you and so do I!
------------------
God loves you and so do I!
The Communist
Registered Member
To Lori,
What makes you think we have valuable souls. For all we know our souls could be useless in comparison to the more advanced races we are talking about.
What makes you think we have valuable souls. For all we know our souls could be useless in comparison to the more advanced races we are talking about.
Blacktubby
Registered Senior Member
To The Communist
What makes you think we have souls? How would their value be quantified?
------------------
Blacktubby,
"Reality has a way of catching up with you, the way the ground catches up with an airplane that runs out of fuel."
What makes you think we have souls? How would their value be quantified?
------------------
Blacktubby,
"Reality has a way of catching up with you, the way the ground catches up with an airplane that runs out of fuel."
The gospel of Jesus would make me think that our souls were valuable. And I didn't say "valuable in comparison to...".
And why does it always come down to quantification? I was just about to ask Boris the same thing on a different thread. I think that he's trying to argue that you can't study something without being able to measure it. May I point out that gravity did very well exist before someone measured it and put a label on it. And so did the electricity in the clouds, and every other thing in nature and science. Space...the final frontier. Are you denying the possibility of another dimension because of the fact that you can't observe or measure it? I don't think that's good judgement regarding the basic argument, not to mention all of the paranormal activities that have always existed throughout history, and very much to this day. Including alien activity. You know, there was a guy that used to post out here that was agnostic, and was skeptical of all things. He didn't believe that people had souls. Then he told me his house was haunted, and that he had experienced and seen unexplained things. I could never understand how someone who had seen a spirit didn't believe in spirits. LOL!
------------------
God loves you and so do I!
[This message has been edited by Lori (edited September 21, 1999).]
And why does it always come down to quantification? I was just about to ask Boris the same thing on a different thread. I think that he's trying to argue that you can't study something without being able to measure it. May I point out that gravity did very well exist before someone measured it and put a label on it. And so did the electricity in the clouds, and every other thing in nature and science. Space...the final frontier. Are you denying the possibility of another dimension because of the fact that you can't observe or measure it? I don't think that's good judgement regarding the basic argument, not to mention all of the paranormal activities that have always existed throughout history, and very much to this day. Including alien activity. You know, there was a guy that used to post out here that was agnostic, and was skeptical of all things. He didn't believe that people had souls. Then he told me his house was haunted, and that he had experienced and seen unexplained things. I could never understand how someone who had seen a spirit didn't believe in spirits. LOL!
------------------
God loves you and so do I!
[This message has been edited by Lori (edited September 21, 1999).]
Blacktubby
Registered Senior Member
Lori,
Was that an answer?
(edit: OOPS! I read your post before you fixed it. Sorry, my bad.
)
------------------
Blacktubby,
"Reality has a way of catching up with you, the way the ground catches up with an airplane that runs out of fuel."
[This message has been edited by Blacktubby (edited September 22, 1999).]
Was that an answer?
(edit: OOPS! I read your post before you fixed it. Sorry, my bad.
)------------------
Blacktubby,
"Reality has a way of catching up with you, the way the ground catches up with an airplane that runs out of fuel."
[This message has been edited by Blacktubby (edited September 22, 1999).]
Lori,
Let me save you the trouble. No, indeed you cannot study something that you can't observe or quantify. While gravity existed prior to Newton, nobody even realized it was there. In fact, part of the argument against a spherical spinning earth was that everything would just fly off the surface. While there indeed was electricity in the atmosphere, until it was understood as such, the best people could do is attribute it to some mysterious workings of God or nature; people certainly could not study it. Only once testable hypotheses, such as Ben Franklin's, began to be proposed, was a study of atmospheric electricity possible.
That's why the claims of "soul" are empty. Not only is that proposed phenomenon unobservable and inquantifiable; it is also totally uncalled for given our current knowledge of how the world works. We simply do not need the soul to explain any mystery we encounter; it contributes nothing to our understanding, and it is certainly not a workable hypothesis, and by far not a subject that can be "studied".
------------------
I am; therefore I think.
Let me save you the trouble. No, indeed you cannot study something that you can't observe or quantify. While gravity existed prior to Newton, nobody even realized it was there. In fact, part of the argument against a spherical spinning earth was that everything would just fly off the surface. While there indeed was electricity in the atmosphere, until it was understood as such, the best people could do is attribute it to some mysterious workings of God or nature; people certainly could not study it. Only once testable hypotheses, such as Ben Franklin's, began to be proposed, was a study of atmospheric electricity possible.
That's why the claims of "soul" are empty. Not only is that proposed phenomenon unobservable and inquantifiable; it is also totally uncalled for given our current knowledge of how the world works. We simply do not need the soul to explain any mystery we encounter; it contributes nothing to our understanding, and it is certainly not a workable hypothesis, and by far not a subject that can be "studied".
------------------
I am; therefore I think.
The subject of "souls" most certainly can be studied. One can pursue knowledge in this subject by observation, reading or research.
I agree that the subject of "souls" is not a hypothesis. The existence of souls has been verified repeatedly throughout history. To verify is to prove the truth of by the presentation of evidence OR testimony. There are many of us who have and who will continue to testify that we have had contact with souls. (Those who have not had contact, and wish to, you truly need to keep your hearts and your minds open to the possibility). It's usually a cool experience! and it's certainly not boring!
[This message has been edited by truestory (edited September 21, 1999).]
I agree that the subject of "souls" is not a hypothesis. The existence of souls has been verified repeatedly throughout history. To verify is to prove the truth of by the presentation of evidence OR testimony. There are many of us who have and who will continue to testify that we have had contact with souls. (Those who have not had contact, and wish to, you truly need to keep your hearts and your minds open to the possibility). It's usually a cool experience! and it's certainly not boring!
[This message has been edited by truestory (edited September 21, 1999).]
Blacktubby
Registered Senior Member
>The subject of "souls" most certainly can be studied. One can pursue knowledge in this subject by observation, reading or research.
---------------
How can you "observe" souls? Reading and research will only involve reading and researching other people's philosophies and ideas about "metaphysics". (ie. They are not based in fact.) It cannot be studied except in the way that tooth fairies can be studied. (P.S. I am trying to think of an example of a myth which no one here could *possibly* believe. Is the tooth faerie OK, or does someone believe in that too?)
---------------
>I agree that the subject of "souls" is not a hypothesis. The existence of souls has been verified repeatedly throughout history. To verify is to prove the truth of by the presentation of evidence OR testimony.
---------------
Verified repeatedly throughout history? Where? How? When?
Testimony on it's own means absolutely nothing in a case like this. About this evidence...
---------------
>There are many of us who have and who will continue to testify that we have had contact with souls. (Those who have not had contact, and wish to, you truly need to keep your hearts and your minds open to the possibility). It's usually a cool experience! and it's certainly not boring!
---------------
Could you explain the concept of "contact with souls" in a bit more detail? Thnx.
(Edit: Maybe we should move this to the religious debate forum... Just a thought)
------------------
Blacktubby,
"Reality has a way of catching up with you, the way the ground catches up with an airplane that runs out of fuel."
[This message has been edited by Blacktubby (edited September 22, 1999).]
---------------
How can you "observe" souls? Reading and research will only involve reading and researching other people's philosophies and ideas about "metaphysics". (ie. They are not based in fact.) It cannot be studied except in the way that tooth fairies can be studied. (P.S. I am trying to think of an example of a myth which no one here could *possibly* believe. Is the tooth faerie OK, or does someone believe in that too?)
---------------
>I agree that the subject of "souls" is not a hypothesis. The existence of souls has been verified repeatedly throughout history. To verify is to prove the truth of by the presentation of evidence OR testimony.
---------------
Verified repeatedly throughout history? Where? How? When?
Testimony on it's own means absolutely nothing in a case like this. About this evidence...
---------------
>There are many of us who have and who will continue to testify that we have had contact with souls. (Those who have not had contact, and wish to, you truly need to keep your hearts and your minds open to the possibility). It's usually a cool experience! and it's certainly not boring!
---------------
Could you explain the concept of "contact with souls" in a bit more detail? Thnx.
(Edit: Maybe we should move this to the religious debate forum... Just a thought)
------------------
Blacktubby,
"Reality has a way of catching up with you, the way the ground catches up with an airplane that runs out of fuel."
[This message has been edited by Blacktubby (edited September 22, 1999).]
To use one of my favorite cliche sayings:
"You are thinking inside of the box"
Everything we observe is either directly from our senses, or by an instrument that allows us to amplify or measure something beyond the range of our senses, or outside completely such as radio waves.
In a situation like this, we can't be conclusive either way...yet. So, just because our 5 senses don't readily show us evidence for these things is not grounds for ruling them out, as there is always room for evolution or the unlikely discovery of quantifying these phenomena.
"You are thinking inside of the box"
Everything we observe is either directly from our senses, or by an instrument that allows us to amplify or measure something beyond the range of our senses, or outside completely such as radio waves.
In a situation like this, we can't be conclusive either way...yet. So, just because our 5 senses don't readily show us evidence for these things is not grounds for ruling them out, as there is always room for evolution or the unlikely discovery of quantifying these phenomena.
Blactubby,
One can pursue knowledge in (study) a given subject through observation, reading OR research (it is a logical, defining statement). The definition of study is NOT the all-inclusive observation AND reading AND research statement, nor is it the limiting observation ONLY statement.
Again, I presented the logical, defining OR statement with regards to "verify", you choose to exclude "testimony" from the definition.
So... rewrite the dictionary to suit your purpose!
Here is an example of contact with a soul:
My mother died in 1976. In 1982, her soul was manifested in a way that I could see her. It was a translucent energy, but I could see her for the purpose for which she came. She gave me a message which made absolutely no sense to me and asked me to pass the message along to a certain family member. Of course, I did not ignore my mother. I passed the message along as she had asked. The family member sobbed in relief. The message (which I will not repeat because it was extremely personal) freed the family member from something which they had been secretly torturing themselves about, emotionally, for decades. It involved another soul (which noone else in the family knew about). My mother's soul apparently learned the truth in the afterlife and was able to free someone from the fear of the unknown and the resulting emotional pain which it had been causing.
I hope this helps.
[This message has been edited by truestory (edited September 23, 1999).]
One can pursue knowledge in (study) a given subject through observation, reading OR research (it is a logical, defining statement). The definition of study is NOT the all-inclusive observation AND reading AND research statement, nor is it the limiting observation ONLY statement.
Again, I presented the logical, defining OR statement with regards to "verify", you choose to exclude "testimony" from the definition.
So... rewrite the dictionary to suit your purpose!
Here is an example of contact with a soul:
My mother died in 1976. In 1982, her soul was manifested in a way that I could see her. It was a translucent energy, but I could see her for the purpose for which she came. She gave me a message which made absolutely no sense to me and asked me to pass the message along to a certain family member. Of course, I did not ignore my mother. I passed the message along as she had asked. The family member sobbed in relief. The message (which I will not repeat because it was extremely personal) freed the family member from something which they had been secretly torturing themselves about, emotionally, for decades. It involved another soul (which noone else in the family knew about). My mother's soul apparently learned the truth in the afterlife and was able to free someone from the fear of the unknown and the resulting emotional pain which it had been causing.
I hope this helps.
[This message has been edited by truestory (edited September 23, 1999).]
Hmm, i just read my post above and it doesn't make a bit of sense LoL.
I'm trying to say that it's possible that we can measure things like souls or psychic activity, given that we evolve the ability to do so. I personally think we are headed to a phase of new awareness that will reveal all of this. A new sense if you will, or perhaps a super-sense.
I'm trying to say that it's possible that we can measure things like souls or psychic activity, given that we evolve the ability to do so. I personally think we are headed to a phase of new awareness that will reveal all of this. A new sense if you will, or perhaps a super-sense.
I have to agree with JMitch. Just because we do not have the ability to observe or quantify something doesn't mean it doesn't exist. That's a fact, not an opinion. I mean, look at all the things we've discovered in the last few centuries that previously had only been speculated at; yet they existed, didn't they? It comes down to this: reality is not based on our perceiving of it, obviously. I cannot see any one of the people posting replies in this message board, yet I assume you all exist, no? Unquantifiable or sometimes even unqualifiable things do exist. But I think we're getting off the subject here. Back to aliens...
JMitch,
But how do you know that your experiences were not an artifact of your mind (like the delusions of a schizophrenic might be)? That's why we need a measurement, a recording of these purported "events" through the sorts of instruments that simply cannot fabricate data, or falsely associate it with some memories or mental images.
For example, if people really are abducted by UFO's, I want a digital recording of the visit, a material proof that the person was actually gone from their bed and indeed from their building, through no doing of their own, I want a UFO to crash into a bird and send it down with broken bones, I want a remote viewer to correctly and completely describe the colors of all the chemicals present on Titan's surface before such measurements are carried out scientifically. There actually is a million-dollar prize out there for indisputable proof of a psychic phenomenon. Years later, the prize remains unclaimed.
If Poltergeists really can throw things around, I want an actual recording of the event. If ghosts can be seen by our eyes, then they can be seen by our cameras. But what makes me most suspicious is the claims of the NDE people. They claim to have "seen" things and "heard" things -- but obviously not through their real eyes and ears, which were resting together with their body in a hospital or wherever. Yet, the experience of seeing and hearing is intimately connected to activity in the corresponding visual and auditory corteci. For example, applying mild electric stimulation to these areas of the brain during open-brain surgery evokes sounds and images in the patients' mind. The acts of perception and memorization inherently speak of physical phenomenology within the networks of the brain. Such are the acts of the body, not the (inexistent) soul.
------------------
I am; therefore I think.
But how do you know that your experiences were not an artifact of your mind (like the delusions of a schizophrenic might be)? That's why we need a measurement, a recording of these purported "events" through the sorts of instruments that simply cannot fabricate data, or falsely associate it with some memories or mental images.
For example, if people really are abducted by UFO's, I want a digital recording of the visit, a material proof that the person was actually gone from their bed and indeed from their building, through no doing of their own, I want a UFO to crash into a bird and send it down with broken bones, I want a remote viewer to correctly and completely describe the colors of all the chemicals present on Titan's surface before such measurements are carried out scientifically. There actually is a million-dollar prize out there for indisputable proof of a psychic phenomenon. Years later, the prize remains unclaimed.
If Poltergeists really can throw things around, I want an actual recording of the event. If ghosts can be seen by our eyes, then they can be seen by our cameras. But what makes me most suspicious is the claims of the NDE people. They claim to have "seen" things and "heard" things -- but obviously not through their real eyes and ears, which were resting together with their body in a hospital or wherever. Yet, the experience of seeing and hearing is intimately connected to activity in the corresponding visual and auditory corteci. For example, applying mild electric stimulation to these areas of the brain during open-brain surgery evokes sounds and images in the patients' mind. The acts of perception and memorization inherently speak of physical phenomenology within the networks of the brain. Such are the acts of the body, not the (inexistent) soul.
------------------
I am; therefore I think.
But how do you know that your experiences were not an artifact
of your mind (like the delusions of a schizophrenic might be)?
Boris, In the post you read of my expreriences, I effectively said the same thing.(though it was months ago) I take the stance in my posts of things being real because I like to speculate things as if they are real, and writing "if this is real..." in every one of my posts is snooze for all.
There actually is a million-dollar prize out there
for indisputable proof of a psychic phenomenon. Years later, the
prize remains unclaimed.
And I'd like to be the one to claim it. My experiences are sporadic, that's why I take the "if" position.
of your mind (like the delusions of a schizophrenic might be)?
Boris, In the post you read of my expreriences, I effectively said the same thing.(though it was months ago) I take the stance in my posts of things being real because I like to speculate things as if they are real, and writing "if this is real..." in every one of my posts is snooze for all.
There actually is a million-dollar prize out there
for indisputable proof of a psychic phenomenon. Years later, the
prize remains unclaimed.
And I'd like to be the one to claim it. My experiences are sporadic, that's why I take the "if" position.