Outer-Space Life Forms

earlier i posted a source saying that there were approximately 500billion galaxies and counting. In DBC's formula, the "galaxy" factor is 100billion.

none of the numbers SAY that there is intelligent life out there. and yet on a distant planet with sentient, intelligent beings they could say the same thing-- nothing proves that there is intelligent life out there, which is true.

why do you think all species of life are dumber than you? embrace the fact that there is a possibility of more intelligent beings. you completely deny it...

1- show me statistics showing that all life in the 5billion galaxies are less intelligent than us
2- earlier point: you asked "Why should there be more intelligent life out there?" which was a rhetorical question. when i asked a question back, you said it was rhetorical and that argument was void.
3- do you know how big a galaxy is?

Quote :

Actually, looking at it again...Where the hell are you getting any of these numbers? Your calculations are bullshit. They range from 0-100 for many of the things, and that's shit you just can't know....These numbers are completely made up. Your calculations assume 20%? That's not low. That's fucking HIGH as hell for what they represent.

what DO you think they represent? why do you think they're high when those numbers were gathered by scientists (even though the galaxy count is extremely low)? go show me statistics to contradict it. (you've been asking for statistics to prove things lest they be irrational... so you go gather some statistics for me, mmkay? btw you cant call that BS... have you recently read a science magazine, or seen the "TRUE" equation with the 'REAL' numbers? (also DBC it would help to cite a source, and jay.j it would help to google it to see if you COULD disprove it before calling it utter BS)

WHY DO YOU RENOUNCE INTELLIGENT LIFE!? (it would be nice if you would answer this question apart from your devil's advocate thing, as it is harder to find specific things in there.)

why do i support the intelligent life idea? because there is too much space out there to not be, (5billion) probability says so, i am an optimist-- pretty much more 'open' to ideas and things having to do with the great beyond. plus, keep in mind DBC's equation calculates probability that we will MEET another alien civilization thingy. jay.j you say a 1/100,000,000 chance to meet another civilization is high o.O lolz. so i guess you will also renounce the fact that, if these are the chances we would meet them, that the chances of them existing are, potentially, VERY high.

Spoiler:

Quote :

N = N* fp ne fl fi fc fL

N* is the average rate of star formation in our galaxy
fp is the fraction of those stars that have planets
ne is the average number of planets that can potentially support life per star that has planets
fℓ is the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop life at some point
fi is the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop intelligent life
fc is the fraction of civilizations that develop a technology that releases detectable signs of their existence into space
L is the length of time such civilizations release detectable signals into space.

Quote :

Okay... so lets make that equation. The first one I'll make, I'll be a pessimist.

100,000,000,000 x 20% x 2 x 20% x 20% x 10% x 1/100,000,000...

Again - I said I didn't fully understand it and asked someone like Zync to explain it to me.

Quote :

Perhaps someone with a bit more mathematical knowledge (Preferably that's on my side) such as Zync, would be so kind as to explain it to me .

Quote :

Realistically I don't understand that calculation. However, from what I do - it doesn't seem to calculate INTELLIGENT life.

Why? Because that's not how evolution fucking WORKS. You don't evolve TOWARDS something. You evolve towards your NEEDS. If you have no NEED to become intelligent, you don't BECOME intelligent. You can't just make up statistics for that. The fact that we're around and kicking is ridiculously lucky. You're also assuming how a planet can produce life. We have no clue. No clue at all. We don't KNOW if other planets can support life in completely different situations as Earth. Hell, we don't know if even similar planets LIKE Earth can support it.

Pretty sure this is where DBC got it. Even the site says they don't have a CLUE on ANY of the numbers. The numbers DBC used are MADE UP. They estimate shit With 0 evidence. Actually 0. Like None. I don't know if this is getting through. But that means they are BULLSHIT numbers. Which means the conclusion is BULLSHIT.
Here is the link I'm pretty sure. Now, why don't YOU do a quick google search, Mmm K?

You can't use inductive methods. You can't use deductive methods. You can use abduction - and the furthest you really get is to life. Which is where I am. Intelligent life is...just no REASON. You said I didn't give the possibility - but I did. EVERYTHING is possible. However, there is no REASON to believe. Again - repeating myself, which is why I said I'm done, yet I keep going....no evidential, nor prudential reasons to believe in it.

Another link, with the a similar equation isisHere. This is an actual textbook. We don't know. We don't have the technology for most of it. Regardless - even with estimates "Intelligent" life revolves around animals with this equation. Complex life forms. Not "Aliens". Not intelligent life to the extent of being anywhere near as complex as us. Seriously, I think you take for granted how lucky we are. How amazing it is that we are alive. The chances of not just your life, but the life of the human species in general.

Now, again. You claim to say "There's so many planets out there" as your evidence. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that doesn't really matter. It's how many have actual hospitable planets. Sure that number may go up with the amount of overall planets...but even then. Then take into account of how life would reach this point. It's fine staying at just a single cell level. Then of those planets....how many of them make it to multi-celled organisms? How many of them reach Intelligent standards of say, a dolphin? How many of them reach, or exceed the intelligence of ourselves. Now ask yourself this....what am I basing this all on? The first answer. Then I progress, right? Do you actually know ANYTHING about the first answer? The answer seems to be know. You have a weak foundation, and even weaker building of your argument.

Also I didn't say your rhetorical question was void. Re-read what I said about it. Also, this thing was long. Who actually read this >.>. I'm really expecting a lot of people responding without actually reading. Which is why I'm going to have to repeat shit. I thought I said I was done. This is frustrating.

The previous percentages that you pointed out were made up, only the two percentages. But I did mess up on R.

This equation I just made is 100% true, I got all of it using common sense. If you still say its wrong, you might as well as say the distance scientists measured from distance of planets, or anything exponentiated is wrong too.

Quote :

R => 400,000,000,000 (From NASA)
fp => 1/4
ne => 2 This includes bacteria.
fl => 1/2 Evolution from the latter
fi => 1/10 And again.
fc => 1/10
L => 1/100,000,000

400,000,000,000 x 1/4 x 2 x 1/2 x 1/10 x 1/10 x 1/100,000,000 =
400,000,000,000 x 0.25 x 2 x 0.5 x 0.1 x 0.1 x 0.00000001

N =10

Even if the number was below 1, you could possibly multiply it by other galaxies, and it'd end up being above ONE.


So Jay.J if you want to prove this wrong, please take it up with NASA, and we've been using exponentiation for hundreds of years. So is that completely wrong? So good luck to you.

does intelligence include like the first humans that got together and build little camps and hunted with weapons or does it mean guns that go pew pew?

Tank, pretty sure it means any kind of civilisation.

Jay, you are REALLY annoying, you are SO stubborn, you keep basing your damn, weak argument on the stupid idea that animals only evolve because of NEED, what you fail to realise, is that when 1 animal evolves, by any means, (mutations, genetics, etc.) that 1 species will be the one getting most of the food/resources (ussually the main reason of evolution, species trying to get enough food/water to survive, and by doing so, leaving the others with less) so the others will NEED to evolve to "catch up", either they process the resources they got in better ways, or they learn how to get more of it.

CHECK MY DAMN POST ABOUT CROWS.

following up bal,

"evolution is caused by need and only need so that it is impossible (i believe your theory is 'IMPOSSIBILITY' of smart aliens) that there are creatures out there smarter than us."

based on your theory, why do we have buildings, spaceships, guns, computers... all of this? we didnt need it... yet why do we have it??? answer this please. feel free to devils advocate it.

Kuro, i'll answer that, as i said on my most recent post on this thread, creatures evolve in order to "catch up" with the competence, we, humans, tough we aren't seemingly evolving in a biological way, we are "evolving" our intelligence, capacities, social status, etc.
All of this things you mentioned are caused by emotions, such as greed, that impulse to have more and more.

Quick question before I take any time to answer any of this, more than likely repeating myself - did you guys actually look at the links? This is getting frustrating.

@DBC: R is the only value that's accurate. Everything, and I mean absolutely everything else is pure guess work. You can't use "Common sense" because we have no knowledge of those things - such as what kind of environments can support any type of life. Earth like or not.

Did anyone even look at this before they posted?

I'm going to assume no. You guys aren't reading what I write, or post - so I'm not going to bother taking the time to respond. Or at the very least, are nit-picking at what I say - and to seriously have to clarify my self over such stupid questions (No offense) is getting annoying.

Jay.J wrote:

Quick question before I take any time to answer any of this, more than likely repeating myself - did you guys actually look at the links? This is getting frustrating.

@DBC: R is the only value that's accurate. Everything, and I mean absolutely everything else is pure guess work. You can't use "Common sense" because we have no knowledge of those things - such as what kind of environments can support any type of life. Earth like or not.

Did anyone even look at this before they posted?

I'm going to assume no. You guys aren't reading what I write, or post - so I'm not going to bother taking the time to respond. Or at the very least, are nit-picking at what I say - and to seriously have to clarify my self over such stupid questions (No offense) is getting annoying.

Jay, you don't seem to know what to exponentiate is. Thats how every spacial measurement is found. By saying its all guess work, its more accurate then just GUESSING. After you exponentiate something, you'll find out its pretty damn accurate after you are finished. All of the values I placed there ARE legit. I'm pretty sure you hardly read it, or took the time to understand WHY I picked those numbers.

R => 400,000,000,000 This is an estimation that NASA made, along with any other spacial distance they have found. This along with everything else that has been used in exponentiation, is pretty damn accurate.
fp => 1/4 Pluto is no longer considered a planet, so that leaves 8. Which four are made out of gas, so 1/4.
ne => 2 Earth has life, and Mars used to have live, it has ancient bacteria, and used to have water.
fl => 1/2 Since there is only 2 planets that had/have life at some point, 1/4 becomes 1/2.
fi => 1/10 One being Earth.
fc => 1/10 One being Earth.
L => 1/100,000,000, Hows this a guess, if we've already DONE IT?


So, Jay.J... How are these made-up numbers? When they have all happened. Right now as you stand, you're saying our solar system does not exist... Seriously, this equation is based on using our galaxy, and exponentiation. You know, Ive repeated myself too here. -.-

Your argument is bad, I'm giving you damn accurate numbers. All your doing is denying it, and pulling up random pages you found on google.

Although, I do agree with that page. But then again 1/2 of our planets have/are supporting life. On habitable planets ofc.

Question!!!
If evolution is needed then why are we needed?
you'd think the Earth would be better off w/o out our pollution and war and what not.
we are destroying the world (according to the hippys and tree huggers)
really we are just surviving like any other animal using our resources and fighting over land and money (though animals don't have money[or do they :OOOO])
HMMM UNCLE JAY? or do you prefer Lt. Jay (I've was suppose to be calling you that like i call Sin Gen. Sin)
(srry for the spam in the last area :CC)



EDIT: Jay even i slightly get DBC equation if you really read it (he made me :OO) its not all that hard

No no - I had no problem with the formula at all. You can't use our galaxy as an example. Why? Because we can actually see other galaxies and see they are NOT that similar to our own. I use the word "see" very loosely here, but I think you know what I mean. You're using Induction as your method....which DBC - you're actually the first person in this thread who has given me SOMETHING that might have possibly changed my mind because it's actually using something and is intelligent. However, I still disagree with it. Here's why...

Quote :

N = N* fp ne fl fi fc fL

N* is the average rate of star formation in our galaxy
fp is the fraction of those stars that have planets
ne is the average number of planets that can potentially support life per star that has planets
fℓ is the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop life at some point
fi is the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop intelligent life
fc is the fraction of civilizations that develop a technology that releases detectable signs of their existence into space
L is the length of time such civilizations release detectable signals into space.

You're using our solar system as a basis of every other one. We, however KNOW that is not the case. What you're doing is a lot better than Bal & Kuro as you're giving me something to work with however. It's taking one scenario - and a biased one - and trying to place it on all other scenarios.

The method of reasoning you're using is Induction. It has 2 things that determine how weak or how strong it is of an argument. Sample Size, and Sample Bias. You have a very LOW sample size using the numbers you're using .... that is 1. You're using one solar system as a basis of those numbers. You're bias is very HIGH. You're using OUR solar system. We know that there are some solar systems with 0 life forms, using that as the model - you will find that life cannot exist statistically. If you had a lot larger amount of solar systems and did this calculation it might be a bit more convincing (Still not much). You create a very WEAK induction with this. However, you are the only person who has given me ANY reason to believe it. A WEAK argument, is better than NO argument.

However, using another type of reasoning which is what we've been doing before would be inferences to the best explanation. Using that, we can determine life in general is a very "Random" thing to happen. The scenarios for life to develop are very unlikely. The link earlier shows examples of this, and even though it was googled is very reliable. It's a textbook >.>. Now, given the number of planets, solar systems, galaxies etc. We can assume that there is a good chance of life in general. Using that same reasoning, we can't assume there is intelligent life however because of how intelligent life comes to be (Or at least how our intelligent life came to be). Assuming evolution - the chances of getting to where we are today are very close to 0. Now given every possible life form out there - it has just as likely a chance for it to have reached that point. Given the amount of life forms out there (Which we know of none) it's not hard to think that none of them evolved very far beyond bacteria. Even if they evolved into multi-cellular organisms, there's no reason to think they evolved to intelligence beyond a dolphin, let alone reach our own - or what you're trying to argue surpass ours.

@Tank: I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. For all I know, you're talking out of your ass and spamming. I prefer just Jay.J. No title.

See now you avoided my question to fire at DBC
and we haven't disproved low life in our own solar system yet there are (or is) a moon(s) out there they think have water under the frozen surface and also think there is life in that water not like a fish more like bacterium
and fuck you get b/c im joking around with your serious ass lighten up

Enough arguing, get back to the debate.

Be logical or don't post.

That is logical............ they think that moon(s) (i cant remeber if its one or many srry) has water under it and possible life

EDIT: they think that a ice moon which its surface is frozen over but under the surface they think is a layer of water caused by the friction under the surface

Okay, I see what your aiming at. Although this equation is very logical. Someone would have to plug in at least a hundred or so solar systems. But the equation requires that any form of life had been present. So basically, this argument will go on until we actually find intelligent life, not ancient bacteria. But, we'll probably kill ourselves before then. And I wasn't arguing intelligence surpassed ours. I really think there's other intelligence around our level somewhere in our galaxy. If it greatly surpassed, they would have found us by now. Anyways, I declare this thread un-debatable its more opinion-ated. Since either side can never win, until this event actually happens. And even though intelligent life past our own is extremely unlikely, the size of the universe makes up for it. So if there actually is, I would suppose its 1,000's of light years away.

Oh, and I have a question. Does the bible even talk about the solar system? I'm sure the bible said we were the ONLY life. But we found that ancient bacteria on Mars... o_O

Oh, and Tank. You're thinking of Jupiter's moon, Europa.

the bible NEVER talked about the solar system. the bible NEVER said there wasn't any intelligent life out there-- it only talked about humans.

would an alien as smart as a retard with A.D.D. count as surpassing us?

also, why do you all (or most of you) think that we are the ONLY intelligent life in this universe of 5billion galaxies? we are one in... a lot more than that, because each galaxy has many stars, planets, and solar systems. of course, we may never find one, (its probably too far ) but who's to say it doesn't exist? i'll stop debating once you show me proof that there ISN't any smart alien life out there. Jay.J i want this proof from you- so far you haven't put up any sort of statistic although DBC has for our side.

most of us believe in more intelligent life its mainly Jay that doesn't believe
and after the conversation with bal and Jay last night i can kinda see where Jay gets off at it

kuro wrote:

the bible NEVER talked about the solar system. the bible NEVER said there wasn't any intelligent life out there-- it only talked about humans.

would an alien as smart as a retard with A.D.D. count as surpassing us?

also, why do you all (or most of you) think that we are the ONLY intelligent life in this universe of 5billion galaxies? we are one in... a lot more than that, because each galaxy has many stars, planets, and solar systems. of course, we may never find one, (its probably too far ) but who's to say it doesn't exist? i'll stop debating once you show me proof that there ISN't any smart alien life out there. Jay.J i want this proof from you- so far you haven't put up any sort of statistic although DBC has for our side.

Kuro, did you read Jay's link? It lists many reasons though. Like the distance from the sun, our rotation. A planet needs to perfect mix of things to create life. Jay has shown proof for his side.

Mars had the potentiality to create evolved life. But I guess that ran out of water, and etc.

its atmosphere basicly leaked away

Quote :

Kuro, did you read Jay's link? It lists many reasons though. Like the distance from the sun, our rotation. A planet needs to perfect mix of things to create life. Jay has shown proof for his side.

This Kuro. I'm glad someone actually understands me that has a different opinion .

Quote :

most of us believe in more intelligent life its mainly Jay that doesn't believe
and after the conversation with bal and Jay last night i can kinda see where Jay gets off at it

I wouldn't say "Most" Zync, Dark, myself, Dragon (?). I believe in LIFE on other planets. That I understand fully. I believe in it pretty strongly as well. However....I Kuro, you really are taking granted how lucky we are in getting any sort of intelligence. I really don't think you understand the concept of evolution, or how intelligent life would form. Out of the billions of galaxies - only a few of them have life. I would assume at the single stage level. Multi-cellular....I can maybe believe that. I don't - but I can see me believing in it. (I'm talking like animal multi-cellular). Then out of those few that might exist....To think that one is actually intelligent...Just seems so unlikely.

I have no reason to believe it. Evidence is lacking. I don't feel good for believing in it. Prudential reasons are lacking. Why now, should I believe it?

Quote :

but who's to say it doesn't exist? i'll stop debating once you show me proof that there ISN't any smart alien life out there. Jay.J i want this proof from you- so far you haven't put up any sort of statistic although DBC has for our side.

Can't prove a universal negative. You're asking me to do the impossible. I can however, tell you why it's unlikely, and unlikely enough for me to not believe in it. Again - look at the links I had up before. Look at conditions for life, types of planets etc...It's amazing that we're even here today. A debate works like this...you make a claim and have to prove it to me. I don't have to prove it to you....If I say there are 3 silver unicorns....Do you have to prove to me they don't exist? I don't think so. I would have to prove to you they do exist. If I fail to do so, you would fail to believe. Same thing - you've failed to prove they're even likely to me, so I fail to believe. That's how rationality works.

Quote :

Anyways, I declare this thread un-debatable its more opinion-ated. Since either side can never win, until this event actually happens

Except if the event of intelligent life being discovered happened - you wouldn't need statistics to prove they could exist...you have proof they exist right there lol. Regardless I agree. This has gone on for a while...and it doesn't seem to have a clear end - however I think both sides understand the other one better after this discussion .

Quote :

Oh, and I have a question. Does the bible even talk about the solar system? I'm sure the bible said we were the ONLY life. But we found that ancient bacteria on Mars... o_O

Don't know, not Christian. And my knowledge of the Bible only pertains to popular or controversial things. Google it? Lol

i guess we can't rid eachother of our own beliefs and ideas.

at least we can understand eachother


1- its VERY VERY VERY unlikely
2- but there's 5billion galaxies for probability to try itself out on.

hum.

Quote :

I wouldn't say "Most" Zync, Dark, myself, Dragon (?). I believe in LIFE on other planets. That I understand fully. I believe in it pretty strongly as well. However....I Kuro, you really are taking granted how lucky we are in getting any sort of intelligence. I really don't think you understand the concept of evolution, or how intelligent life would form. Out of the billions of galaxies - only a few of them have life. I would assume at the single stage level. Multi-cellular....I can maybe believe that. I don't - but I can see me believing in it. (I'm talking like animal multi-cellular). Then out of those few that might exist....To think that one is actually intelligent...Just seems so unlikely.

Life DOES exist on other planets so no need to believe, but as far as we know its only been bacteria. Any planet with microbes has potential to evolve. Actually, scientists are finding signs of life no many planets, just microbes. Some can survive temperatures over hundreds of degrees. Wouldn't it be interesting to see what multi-cellular organisms could derive from in such places?

Out of curiosity Kuro, did you look at This Link?

wait wait why do you need the exact living conditions as us?
life can exist basically anywhere (not like the surface of the sun i mean in more extreme environments then ours) so whats saying theres not an intelligent being that lives on a planet 100 degrees hotter then ours? or colder? or water covered? or CO2 is the main gas?
we are adapted to our environment thats how we don't die when we walk outside

TanK_OwneR wrote:

wait wait why do you need the exact living conditions as us?
life can exist basically anywhere (not like the surface of the sun i mean in more extreme environments then ours) so whats saying theres not an intelligent being that lives on a planet 100 degrees hotter then ours? or colder? or water covered? or CO2 is the main gas?
we are adapted to our environment thats how we don't die when we walk outside

Its not exact living conditions as us. It just has to be a perfect mixture of dozens of different variables for life to exist in the first place. Then it has to be able to support life for thousands of years. Without its atmosphere, and many other things happening. Evolution takes along time you know. Theres just way too many variables involved. Even when it evolves, it would have have a need to become intelligent.


Oh, and only certain microbes can survive in under some of these conditions. So that means some of them CANT evolve.