To quote my college physics professor: "The only way someone could convince me there was a God is if they could somehow prove to me that Earth is the only place with life on the universe."

That logic is preposterous. What does that have to do with anything? He is saying that in order for there to be a god that there must only be one planet with life. That makes no sense.

In one of the recent Star Trek movies there was an interesting scene where aliens saw the enterprise lift off from below the ocean surface, and take off into the sky. They immediately ran back to their camp and started drawing the ship within the dirt. It reminded me of all the Ancient Alien series shows on TV. Isn't that what we would do if we witnessed something that incredible? In fact it is what we do because people who think that they saw a UFO do exactly that. Considering all of the strange cave drawings and ancient discoveries that we have found, is it possible that our ancient ancestors did exactly that? Well, sure it is possible. It is certainly logical that E.T. contact of some kind or UFO encounters resulted in some of those drawings, sculptures, and/or other forms of artwork. Could the concept of Angels be nothing more than our ancestors telling us that they met people that can fly, and not that the people literally had wings? Although finding life seems incomprehensible to us, technologies that we have not discovered yet would seem equally incomprehensible.

kempofighter wrote:
That logic is preposterous. What does that have to do with anything? He is saying that in order for there to be a god that there must only be one planet with life. That makes no sense.

While I agree it is somewhat of a tangent to bring up god at all, what he's saying there is a critique on the rooted arrogance of Christianity. Its teachings center around the idea that humans are god's favored creation, that he created us in his image, and that we are superior to all other forms of life.

That is a pretty terrible and pompous view to have -- and it would come to blows if we actually do meet other forms of intelligent life.

Isn't that what we would do if we witnessed something that incredible? In fact it is what we do because people who think that they saw a UFO do exactly that. Considering all of the strange cave drawings and ancient discoveries that we have found, is it possible that our ancient ancestors did exactly that?

The problem is... when the medium is "cave drawings", you can't distinguish "historical recordings" from "doodles" without more context.

We can look at some drawings and use other information from other artifacts we have at the time to build a larger picture -- and in that sense, drawings can help recover lost history.

But when drawings are the only thing you have to go by? Forget about it -- they're worthless.

It is certainly logical that E.T. contact of some kind or UFO encounters resulted in some of those drawings, sculptures, and/or other forms of artwork.

I disagree. I think making that connection requires a huge leap of faith that defies all rational (and logical) odds.

If aliens did make contact with ancient Earth -- there would be tangible evidence of it. Or hell, they'd still be here. I mean, why would they leave? Humans have never left anywhere they've been.

We're still on the moon for crying out loud. And that's a barren wasteland of a rock. Imagine if we found another planet with life, natural resources, etc, etc, etc. We'd colonize the shit out of that place.

The idea that they came to visit, said hi, had their picture taken, then left forever -- it's absurd. It doesn't stand up to basic logic. There'd be no reason for them to do that.

Could the concept of Angels be nothing more than our ancestors telling us that they met people that can fly, and not that the people literally had wings?

Mythology is mythology. If you entertain these kinds of ideas you're just letting yourself get overwhelmed.

I mean... why stop there? What about centaurs, or unicorns, or <insert other mythological creature here>. Maybe they are aliens! There are much more reasonable and rational explanations for all that crap. "It must have been aliens" is tin-foil hat nonsense.


Instead of making up reasons why it could be possible and asking people to disprove it -- maybe you should be doing the opposite: Assume it didn't happen until someone can prove it did. Because when you objectively look at the likelihood of it ever happening -- it's very clear that it couldn't have.

Although finding life seems incomprehensible to us, technologies that we have not discovered yet would seem equally incomprehensible.

I agree. But that doesn't improve the odds of intelligent life finding us among the billions and billions and billions and billions of planets.




EDIT:

I'll let my role model and globally renowned astrophysicist, Dr. Neil DeGrasse Tyson, give a more elaborate explanation of my viewpoint:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSJElZwEI8o

The idea that they came to visit, said hi, had their picture taken, then left forever -- it's absurd. It doesn't stand up to basic logic. There'd be no reason for them to do that.

Isn't that arrogance on your part to suggest that you would know exactly why Aliens would or would not stay or leave? I think so. Your conclusions are absolute and leave no room whatsoever for debate simply because you presume to know all about what Aliens would do simply because of what you think that Humans would do.



I'm not convinced that Christianity teaches that we must be the only form of life anywhere within the universe. From which Christian doctrine did you derive that from? While part of what you wrote there is true (people vs. animals), the rest of it is highly subjective.

Isn't that arrogance on your part to suggest that you would know exactly why Aliens would or would not stay or leave?

I suppose so.

It's possible that they would have some reason that I don't understand -- but I'm just trying to be logical. Logically I can't think of a single reason it would be beneficial for any species to do that. None whatsoever. And sure, maybe that's because I'm not smart enough... or because I don't understand their needs or whatever.

But this is hardly my main point. My main point is that there's no hard evidence anywhere of alien intervention on our planet. That, combined with this side point of logical analysis (or at least -- human logic) saying "it doesn't make sense for aliens to visit us".

I'm not convinced that Christianity teaches that we must be the only form of life anywhere within the universe.

I never said it did.

I said it teaches that human life is the superior form of life. So that if we were to discover other intelligent life in the universe, strong believers would likely assume superiority over them. After all, if the One True God created us in his image... and if we are the center of all creation... then we must be the superior creatures... right?


While I don't know of any specific passages where this is mentioned, it does seem to be common consensus from what I've always been taught. Even doing a google search and asking about the existence of a soul in human life vs. other forms of life... at best, answers say "yes animals have souls, but they're not like ours" -- reaffirming that humanity is somehow superior -- that we are favored.

Just take a look at this bullshit answer written by someone who clearly has never worked with animals:
http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/do-animals-have-souls-like-human-beings

Every answer to this question I can find on Google reads like this. "Yes animals are nice but ultimately they are only here to serve us"

That logic is preposterous. What does that have to do with anything? He is saying that in order for there to be a god that there must only be one planet with life. That makes no sense.

I think the point is that: life only on earth, given the size and scope of the universe, is so unlikely, that the event could only be explained by a miracle. Of course it's not valid logic, but it's not really intended to be a sound logical argument, it's just a humorous way to express an opinion about how unlikely it is we are alone in the universe.

If aliens did make contact with ancient Earth -- there would be tangible evidence of it. Or hell, they'd still be here. I mean, why would they leave? Humans have never left anywhere they've been. We're still on the moon for crying out loud. And that's a barren wasteland of a rock. Imagine if we found another planet with life, natural resources, etc, etc, etc. We'd colonize the shit out of that place. The idea that they came to visit, said hi, had their picture taken, then left forever -- it's absurd. It doesn't stand up to basic logic. There'd be no reason for them to do that.

I have always thought that it's much more likely that we encounter alien probes, likely fully autonomous and self replicating, programmed to explore and send back data.

The idea that aliens come to Earth in mass, with intentions on living here, is much less likely than simply sending robots, or possibly a small crew just to explore. Interstellar exodus is just such a gigantic operation and feat. The human race will probably succeed in sending artificially intelligent self replicating probes our to explore the galaxy in the near future. Very possibly our lifetimes. But we probably wont try to colonize a planet in another solar system until the last resort. And if we actually are capable of pulling it off, then we will have already figured out how to live in space ships. And by the time we get to a new planet with life, it might scare the hell out of us to leave our comfy ships to walk around on a planet full of alien life. Besides, it's unlikely they would be able to breath our air, or even endure the earths temperature. And it's possible they would be susceptible to disease. In addition, it is possible they would not like to disturb the planets ecosystem. They may be happier just watching us for entertainment. In addition, there is the possibility they would like to keep their presence unknown to us in fear of us targeting them militarily. Maybe they would just try to contact some of us as needed for whatever purposes they have. And there is no way that the government would tell the public if they knew of such things. I don't think the government would tell us if they found microbial life unless they couldn't feasibly keep it a secret. If fact, I strongly suspect we have already found microbial life ( at least ), but it is ...

I have always thought that it's much more likely that we encounter alien probes, likely fully autonomous and self replicating, programmed to explore and send back data.

I agree that is much more likely.

Though again -- landing on pre-space-age Earth and then escaping Earth's atmosphere is... questionable. It takes a LOT of energy to do that. And if they do one-way trips with their probes (as we do), then we'd have them.

And post-space age Earth -- for them to slip by our constant monitoring and our shell of satellites orbiting the planet -- it's crazy to think they'd go by unnoticed. Unless they exist on some other plane of existence.


So the only thing that's reasonable for me is, they could have come to pre-space-age Earth, scanned us from orbit, then moved on.


But there are no implications of that... it has zero repercussion on our existence, so there's no point to even suggest that it happened -- because even if it did it was meaningless.

The idea that aliens come to Earth in mass

*en masse

I don't think the government would tell us if they found microbial life unless they couldn't feasibly keep it a secret.

And 15 other tin-foil hat conspiracy theories.

NASA has been extraordinarily transparent throughout its history. They post raw image data, they write articles discussing their findings, they do television broadcasts, and they do all sorts of other stuff that is publicly viewable. They're scientists -- they're exploring for the sake of science. They're not trying to capitalize on hidden space treasures.

They have ZERO history of keeping secrets from the general US public. Sure they may have kept technology secret during the space race with Russia -- but that's different.

There is no reason to think they'd keep discovery of alien life a secret. It's purely paranoia spurred by bad science fiction shows.

(Seriously... go to nasa.gov and look around once. They publish TONS of stuff.)

EDIT:

Besides... it's not even government anymore. Multiple countries have a presence in space, not just the US. Hell, the private sector even has a presence now. Even if the US government wanted to keep alien life a secret, even if they had a reason to... they couldn't. Too many people are involved now.

There is no reason to think they'd keep discovery of alien life a secret. It's purely paranoia spurred by bad science fiction shows.

I disagree. In fact, I have a book produced by NASA in which they go in depth about whether it would be wise to disclose this information to the public. The conclusions of that study suggested that they may choose not to. Their study suggested that it would have a possible dramatic effect on society, from religion, to war and peace. In addition, it is NASA protocol ( law ) that only information is released to the public on a need to know, or purpose based basis. And don't forget, NASA is born from a highly secretive military organization ( perhaps one of the most secret in existence ). The attitude of miiltiary intelligence is to use ridulous amounts of discresion.

Touche. I stand corrected.

Perhaps it's not as much of a conspiracy theory as I thought.

Honestly, if NASA decided to hide its discovery of intelligent alien life (more than just some microbes), I would completely understand. The public tend to react very poorly to major events that spark strong emotional responses, so keeping that kind of thing secret as they figure out what to do sounds a hell of a lot more reasonable than letting everyone on earth freak out.

I think "everyone on Earth freaking out" is an exaggeration. I don't think it would be that spectacular.

I don't think it's an exaggeration. I mean... look at how Baltimore reacted to the last African American that was carrying illegal paraphernalia (criminal), fled from law enforcement (criminal), and somehow died during the arrest. If the death of a single criminal incites that kind of reaction, what would aliens cause?

Apart from trivializing extremely complex race relations, you are comparing something that cuts extremely deep to people on a personal level to something far more abstract.

Plus, keep in mind htirwin specifically was talking about microbial life. I don't think people will equate that with "aliens" in the traditional sense.



People might freak out and riot if they met aliens in person because that makes it a personal connection and will provoke fear and confusion. But news of "hey we found some bacteria on Ganymede" is too abstract. It isn't going to freak anyone out. The only people it'll freak out are scientists who understand how freaking cool it is -- and it'll be the good kind of freak out.

Disch wrote:
Plus, keep in mind htirwin specifically was talking about microbial life.

Ispil wrote:
more than just some microbes

I won't deny trivializing the whole 'all cops are racist' thing going around by not tip-toeing around it. I guess I just can't understand or fathom the complexity of everything? It seems very simple and straight-forward to me when the evidence is laid out.

* and for the record, foreign microbial life scares the hell out of me 1000x more than little green men. The Europeans decimated the Native American population with the microbes that they brought over from across the ocean. I would hate to think what a malignant alien microbe would do the the entire earth.

Microbial life only worries me if it had any chance of getting here. Generally, it doesn't. If there isn't any on Mars (which there isn't), then odds are that there aren't any planets particularly close by that will hold life, even in the microbial form, that could end up back on Earth to do anything of any significance, good or bad.

Dammit, all of this just makes me hope even more that that weird EM drive result wasn't a fluke.

Whoops, I missed that part of Ispil's post. I thought we were talking about microbes. Regardless, even if they were going to riot, who would they riot against?

@Disch

I dunno, innocent bystanders? I was more referring to the violence, looting, and burning of private property whose owners were in no way associated with who the riot was against. I'm not at all convinced that most of the rioters even care about human life given their actions against the innocent. (Bigger than bacteria) alien contact would likely be just another reason to go out and practice anarchy on a much grander scale.

Disch wrote:
I thought we were talking about microbes ... if they were going to riot, who would they riot against?

The pharmaceuticals industry?

Damn it, I now need to read through one hell of a lot of posts.....