PDA

View Full Version : Have We Been Visited?



jsc248
2004-Jun-14, 08:04 PM
<_< Hi All,
I would like to ask a simple question.
With all the cave drawings supposedly showing beings in "space helmets", and with the countless sightings and reported abductions, who believes that we have actually been visited by aliens?
I would like to keep an open mind but which way does the evidence point?
I&#39;d like to hear anybodys opinion on this subject.
Hope to hear from you soon,
jsc248.

canadaguy
2004-Jun-14, 08:41 PM
There is irreputable evidence of advanced life visiting earth, not many know this but there are over a million websights devoted to the study of E.T.(Extra Terrestrial) life on the internet.Sights designed by normal everyday people from all countries and all walks of life...coincedance? Hardly... think about it for a second...Photo proof...testimony from everyone including astronauts to U.S.presidents to police to judges...I&#39;m sure every household has a story of the something strange happening at some time in their lives.
We as a species are not ready to partake in any knowledge of E.T. life yet, as we havn&#39;t matured enough as a species socially only technologically.We can&#39;t even get along with other nationalities never mind a highly advanced civilization travelling through time and space from other worlds...Myself yes, I witnessed a facinating sighting with 5 friends we will all never forget.And it wasn&#39;t even remotely something that could be passed off as imagination,weather or anything psychological.Although I concider myself very lucky to have been part of something far beyond the normal everyday,it was extremly distracting in my life to say the least for which I had to drastically change my thought patterns and beliefs for the most part,being reminded we are far from the center of life in the universe.People always ask me why don&#39;t "they" try to contact us,I always reply it&#39;s like a child with an antfarm in his/her room.They study the ants be it farmer ants-worker ants-leaf cutter ants ect ect.We learn all we have to about them and in the end...would you or I or anyone really need to have a voice chat with the ants in order to better understand them?we know all we need to know aboiut them so why?...we on earth are very much like an antfarm only on a greater scale.

Millions believe in a God they&#39;ve never seen but millions see ufo&#39;s and almost nobody wants to believe.

•"Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored." --Aldous Huxley (1894 - 1963)[/COLOR]•"Space and time are modes in which we think, not conditions in which we live." --Albert Einstein
•"If a man takes no thought about what is distant, he will find sorrow near at hand." -Confucius (c.551-479 B.C.)

BlackTearsofapril
2004-Jun-14, 09:02 PM
I beleive that it is a definite possibility. It has been proven that we are not the only living creatures in the universe, or the galaxy. Cave drawings do not lie, for they supposedly had no reason to create any sort of propoganda. But I do question their styles of drwing and depicting creatures, becasue that could possibly just be the way they draw humans. I think that visits were more frequent back then, becasue of our populaion, but now, the posibility of awidespread terror is great, and I think anyone would have enough common sense, knowing that we have nukes that can blast the crust of the earth, would steer clear.

And then, THINK. What would we do? What would we do if we had the ability to go to an inhabited planet? I think we would survey it, and take a few samples. Would we care if they thought like us? No, we would view them as inferior unless they had a gov&#39;t set up. And even then, we would want to take alot of samples and obsevations. Probably station people all over the place to keep tabs on them. )If we looked like them) just to study them.

So... the question is whether or not the aliens have done exactly what we would have. Personally, I beleive that we have been viseted and studied, and I think taht MAYBE, just MAYBE, (judging by the sudden appearance of our species) we were placed here, as a genetic mutation of our neaderthal cousins. Okay... you can stop laughing now.

stevenowens23
2004-Jun-14, 09:33 PM
I hope I don&#39;t open up a can or worms with this post, but I thought I&#39;d try and argue against some of the points previously made:

The plural of anecdote is not evidence: millions of people say they have seen UFOs, or claim to have been abducted. Fine. But I ask, from a scientific point of view, that they prove it. And they can&#39;t. I&#39;m not just talking about psuedo-proof ("honestly, I swear I saw it&#33;"), but verifiable, repeatable, scientific proof.

Otherwise you might as well accept anything - fairies, ghosts, crystal healing, the yeti, the loch ness monster.

The original post said "I would like to keep an open mind", suggesting that the opposite point of view would be a (negative conotation) closed mind. This is not the case. Where masses of evidence exists, the opposite of an open mind is an informed mind. And in the case of UFOs, an informed mind would conclude that there is no such thing.

True, as canadaguy says, there are millions of websites devoted to UFO sightings and abductions. But there are millions of websites devoted to Yogic Flying, spoonbending, and David Hasselhoff, but that doesn&#39;t make them any more credible.

So I urge you all: KEEP AN INFORMED MIND

Greg
2004-Jun-19, 07:12 AM
There is as yet no proof that extra-terrestrial life exists. It is not that we are not looking for it, however. THe difference between seeing a UFO and finding a working ray-gun in a UFO wreck are entirely different things. So far nobody has provided concrete and tangible evidence to back up their UFO sightings or abduction stories. Like it or not, there are always going to be people who are either crazy or just plain charlatans out for some secondary gain by promoting UFO and abduction stories. Until somebody does we will continue to look in the universe for signs if intelligent life the best way we know how.

Dave Mitsky
2004-Jun-19, 08:54 PM
As others have said already there is absolutely no irreputable proof of any alien "visitations". I&#39;ve read science fiction since I was 7 years old so I&#39;ve been exposed to the topic far more than any five ordinary people but I feel no need to believe in what is essence a 20th century version of a fairy tale without some compelling evidence. I have been using a telescope since age 12 and have spent thousands of hours observing the skies and have NEVER seen anything that couldn&#39;t be explained without resorting to LGM.

Dave Mitsky

Greg
2004-Jun-19, 11:43 PM
Actually I liken it to a cult rather than a fairy tale. Alot of people have seen things in the sky that they cannot explain. I cannot say that I am one of them. I do not discount out of hand that there could be phenomena occurring in some places at some times that defy rational explanation. Most likely such things would be natural phenomena that simply havent been discovered before since they occur infrequently.
Going from this point to saying that you know the cause of unexplained sightings without any evidence or proof as to what they really are is totally irresponsible in my view. If an intelligent extra-terrestrial or intra-dimensonal travleller were to take the extraoridnary effort to visit this planet, it is unlikely that they would be unable or unwilling to communicate with us. In fact they most likely would be eager to communicate with us after going through all the effort to reach us. And you cannot argue that they are following some sort of non-interference rule or they would not make themselves visible at all to us.
If aliens wanted to perform experiments on humans, they would not fool around with abducting them and then putting them back. They would take lab samples back to wherever they came from and perform their experiments on them in a CONTROLLED environment, the same way our scientists do with lab animals. An uncontrolled environment would likely make their research useless by ruining their results. I am pretty sure that stories of alien abductions are nightmares remembered incorrectly, as all of these abductions occur when people are asleep. I find it amusing stories of implanted devices, yet none have ever been surgically removed and identified as alien technology.
To paraphrase a famous Missourian, show me the (tangible) evidence and I will believe it.

Jan
2004-Jun-25, 01:20 AM
i have something to say ..........

the space is a big thing to be alone in it......
isnt that enough evidence that we arent alone......

second ......
why would people say such things " i saw an alien spaceship....." if they knew nobody would believe them.....the answer is.....to tell someone....to get it out... and feel better...the simplest of all explenations.


the big question "THE ONE WE SHOULD ALL FEAR IS ....."why is the american goverment so TOP-SECRET abaut this topic?


jan

stevenowens23
2004-Jun-25, 07:20 AM
the space is a big thing to be alone in it......
isnt that enough evidence that we arent alone......

No, that isn&#39;t enough evidence.

You&#39;re right, Jan, the sheer size of the Universe does make it seem impossible that we are alone here, and I would say that I am inclined to agree that there must be alien life elsewhere. But that&#39;s not evidence either. That&#39;s just my opinion.

In order for me to accept that there are aliens in the Universe, I want evidence. Repeatable, scientific evidence. As yet, no one has shown me any.


why would people say such things " i saw an alien spaceship....." if they knew nobody would believe them

Answer: Because they thought what they saw was a spaceship, but it really wasn&#39;t. Or that they were drunk / stoned and began seeing things. Or they want attention. Or they are so obsessed with the idea of UFOs that they want to add their own little story to the hysteria... There are many reasons more plausible than actual UFOs.


the big question "THE ONE WE SHOULD ALL FEAR IS ....."why is the american goverment so TOP-SECRET abaut this topic?

Perhaps because there&#39;s nothing to cover up... Perhaps because having the nation obsess over UFOs means that the spotlight is off the goverment in other areas... Bread and circuses worked for the Romans...

John L
2004-Jun-25, 04:45 PM
Canadaguy,

How can there be millions of websites if not many people know? I can take a picture of a hubcap I tossed in the air, but that doesn&#39;t make it a flying saucer.


BlackTearsofApril,

First, silly name. :P Second, why would you proscribe different motives to cave painters than you would to modern people. Do you think our TV commercials will be taken literally ten thousand years from now because we&#39;d have no motive to lie. They were either not space helmets, but some sort of wierd ornamental head-dress no longer used, or they were high on peyote buttons and making stuff up.


Jan,

Tha people who talk about this kind of stuff as though they&#39;ve actually experienced it are sad, depressed, or lonely, and are just looking for attention. Even if you label them as nuts and laugh at them, at least you&#39;re not ignoring them.


The Earth is a tiny rock orbiting an average yellow-dwarf star in an ordinary spiral galaxy with a few hundred billion stars. The signals we&#39;ve emitted that could be detected by any supposed intelligence have been traveling through space for only 68 years. For someone to have heard this and responded or come here means they would have to be within 68 lightyears and have the ability to travel across the vast distances of space to find us. There is, therefore, little to no chance IMO that any alien has ever tried to come to Earth. There is no reason to.

stevenowens23
2004-Jun-26, 08:53 AM
On the topic of UFO sightings, I&#39;d like to submit this short true story that I felt compelled to write after I saw a UFO last year in Glasgow, UK:

I’d like to take a few moments of your time to narrate an actual event that took place last night (Tuesday 4th Feb 2003) as I left work. The following is entirly true, and changed my world view in a big way. I hope you read the whole thing, and don’t dismiss any of it until you’ve read it all.

I worked late last night, leaving about 8pm. It was cold and crisp outside, and the sky was crystal clear. As I walked along the riverside to Bell’s Bridge I was busy looking up at the stars (Orion was up, and both Jupiter and Saturn we clearly visible). I passed a man with a dog and was temporarily distracted. When I looked back up I caught something moving in the sky, near Orion. I’ll explain my observations and thoughts in the order that they happened.

In the first split second that I saw something moving I realised that it was moving at the same speed a satellite would move; that was my first thought, that it was an artificial satellite. That was an initial reaction based on a split second observation, and was due entirely to the speed at which it was moving.

After I focussed on it, I realised that it was orange/red in colour, and figured that it wasn’t a satellite. The next thing I noticed, just moments later, was that it had size. My reaction to that was that it was a trail from a shooting star, a puff of colour as a bit of space rock was vapourised in the upper atmosphere.

I continued to watch though, and it kept moving, at too slow a rate to be a shooting star – it was still moving at satellite-speed. In addition, there was no trail, ruling out shooting stars altogether.

All these observations and thoughts happened within the first second. As I stood craning my neck to watch it, it passed overhead, and I realised that I could make out a shape. It was almost too small to see, but what I saw was a perfectly triangular object.

It was still travelling at the same speed, roughly east to west, and I turned to watch it pass overhead. As I watched it I realised that it wasn’t quite travelling in a straight line, it was zig-zagging erratically, very fast, back and forth, as it kept moving westward.

Eventually it faded from view, and I was left staring after it, my mouth hanging open. It was totally inexplicable. As an astronomer I’ve spent a lot of time watching the sky and I had never seen anything like this. I was at a total loss to explain it. At that instant I’d seen a UFO. It was totally Unidentified.

However, this lasted for only five seconds. As I stood watching the sky, dumbfounded, I saw another one, following the same path. It was the same colour, the same shape, was moving at the same speed, and zig-zagging like before. But this one was bigger. It was bigger because it was lower; low enough in fact that I could see it clearly. It was a bird.

I laughed out loud (attracting a funny look from a passer-by) at how easily fooled I was. Here I was, someone who is used to looking at the night sky, and I saw something I couldn’t explain. I’m about as skeptical as they come, but in those few seconds I was in the same group as the multitude of UFOlogists who claim to have seen just such wing-shaped craft zigging and zagging through the sky in fantastic ways.

But it was just a bird&#33; If I hadn’t seen the second bird, who knows what I’d be writing now. As it is I feel totally privilleged. It was as if the Universe looked at me and said; “I’m going to show you something amazing, something that thousands of other people have seen, but that is totally inexplicable… and then, just for you, I’m going to explain.”

Ultimately it has given me a better understanding of people who claim to have seen UFOs. They might quite innocently report just such an observation and be told rudely: “It was just the planet Venus.”

“No,” they’d reply. “I know where Venus is; it wasn’t that.”

“Well, in that case, it was just a bird reflecting light from streetlights below.”

To which the upset reply would be something like: “I think I’d recognise a bird when I see one.”

I didn’t.

Sp1ke
2004-Jul-03, 12:19 AM
Excellent story, Steven.

It&#39;s all too easy to interpret unusual sightings as something mysterious or alien. And it&#39;s almost impossible to view something without putting your own hopes and desires onto the interpretation.

I&#39;m sure any visiting aliens would do something more spectacular than fly around and ambush random people in remote locations. Maybe a landing on the pitch during the F.A. cup or the Superbowl would convince me :D

DippyHippy
2004-Jul-03, 02:06 AM
Cracking story, Steven :)

Given the number of people who have seen Venus and mistaken it for a UFO, I find it hard to take the testimony of those who say "I saw a light in the sky" seriously...

...but I wouldn&#39;t be surprised if we&#39;ve already been visited. If I were an alien visiting today, I wouldn&#39;t stick around thought. Planet Earth might be considered "mostly harmless" by many of the galaxy&#39;s hitch-hikers, but I&#39;m sure the majority of advanced civilisations would find us very immature. I think the only interest an alien race would have in us would be to see if we survived or not.

zrice03
2004-Jul-03, 05:08 AM
I think that there hasn&#39;t been very much intelligent life in the universe.

If we suddenly disappeared, we would have left behind some pretty obvious signs that we were once here, like New York. Yet, there is absolutely no conclusive evidence that aliens have landed here. A single base would suit me, or maybe an abandoned spacecraft. Also, no evidence either on or around any of the other planets. Like in 2001, the Moon would keep any artifacts essentially forever. No erosion, no large moonquakes, yet no definitive proof there either.

If there is (or has been) intelligent life in the universe the have 1) never been to Earth, which seems quite likely, or 2) they covered up their tracks very well, which begs the question: Why?

DippyHippy
2004-Jul-03, 11:12 PM
I agree about the base, but I think we&#39;re just curious to know if they&#39;ve visited... whether they set up camp here is another matter :)

sarahnade_me
2004-Jul-05, 09:41 PM
I don&#39;t think that we are alone in the world and i don&#39;t know if anybody has been here, but I did see a UFO....just kidding. i think that we should keep our eye on the sky and listen to what people are saying but just keep it in the back of our mind for when the aliens get here. I do have a question about the UFO in that picture...oh gosh was it of Mary or was it just that old....it was a painting. I know that there are people out there that think Jesus was an alien...i don&#39;t know about that, but it is kinda weird that he walked on water and all that stuff. All i know is that when I look at my daughter i know that life is a miracle wherever it may show up.

hoarem
2004-Jul-05, 11:23 PM
To my mind this is more to do with "our arrogance". To believe that we are alone in the Universe is a silly as putting, £1000 on Greece to win EURO 2004 at 100 to 1, before even the competition began ( how many of us had a bet on Serena to win at Wimbledon?) itis a sure fire bet, far more likely than winning the National Lottery and I play every other week&#33; We are not alone&#33; "No doubters now." When one accepts that as fact , in the same way that millions of people believe in a God we can not see,(Yea like all around us,) then all our questions are revealed. Yes maybe we have been visited and yes we maybe like ants, unable to perceive our selves or that which we can observe, like ants can&#39;t perceive themselves, and are just chemical connections, but I think we do perceive the Universe and that we do understand it all quite well, up until the beginning 400,000 years after the big bang. Due to the recent on going golden age of cosmology(please Nasa keep servicing Hubble) we can see that we came into being so that the Universe had away of knowing itself.
Our knowledge of the universe says that nothing travels faster than the speed of light, but I disagree,thought does. It was not let "there be light" it was more "We thought, let there be light." So in the same way "I thought I saw an alien, I thought Venus was an uFo, (flying being the relevant part) we willed extra terrestials into being, who wants to be alone in that vast space made just for us on our little blue rock.

Lomitus
2004-Jul-07, 05:25 AM
I&#39;m going to toss my opinion in here without reading the rest of these replies, so forgive me if I add something redundant.

First let me state that I am a very firm believer that there is other intelligent life out there. Mathmatically speaking alone, its highly improbable that we&#39;re totally alone out here (Carl Sagan&#39;s infamous "billions and billions" of stars and planets comes to mind). There are just so many stars and so many galaxies out there that I find it so very unlikely that Earth is the only life bearing planet in the universe.

Now, with that said..while I&#39;m sure it&#39;s quite possible that we may have visitor&#39;s from time to time, I think it&#39;s -very- unlikely that it&#39;s as frequent as many of these website and "UFO nuts" claim. Let&#39;s think about this for a second....alien abductions...why??? Any species thats advanced enough to achieve space travel is certainly going to be considerably more advanced and probably evolved then we are. Yea, it&#39;s possible they may be "curious" and may want to examine us to see how we work, but why would they go out of their way for it? Remember our location in the Milky Way...we&#39;re really out in the burbs here. It would most likely be similar to one of us travelling to the moon to study a colony of ants....and we certainly wouln&#39;t want to mate with them&#33; Yes we may want to study them for our own diabolical purposes, but they&#39;d hardly be aware of our presence. This leads me to my next point...

Ok...any species thats cabable of inter-galactic travel is certainly going to be much more technologically advanced then we are...this is a gimme. Is it not likely that a species at this level of tech would be able to "study" us in a completely obscure way? Lets face it here...we already work with stuff like "stealth technology" and have for several years. To borrow a concept from Star Trek, its highly likely they&#39;d have some kind of "cloaking" techonology or a similar concept...aka we would not know they were here unless -they- wanted us to know they were here. Speaking of Star Trek, I&#39;m also a firm believer in the idea of "non-interference". This is a -very- dare I say logical idea to me. It is very possible that advanced species from other planets would adopt such an idea. To me at least, it&#39;s man kinds arogance that says we have the right to mess with whatever we please (and look at how we&#39;ve screwed up the planet because of it&#33;). There is a certain wisdom in allowing things to unfold naturally. I would also like to add to this that any species smart enough to travel the stars is also smart enough to know that we&#39;re still a very primative and violent species. Take a look at what goes on in the world...wars, rape, suicide bombers, petty (and not so petty) greed, people of our own species starving to death, hunting other species on our planet to exstinction, destructions of the rain forests, religion, politics, pollution...geezzzz...the list is huge&#33; -If- there are people watching us, they know we&#39;re -NOT- ready&#33; In addition I have no doubt that they would not want to bring our "bad habits" out to the stars.

As far as these people that have pictures of UFO&#39;s....rubbish. It is sooooooooooo easy to fake a photo and has been done since the advant of photography itself. Thats the great thing about photography is that it can not only capture a moment, it can in a sense create them&#33; I&#39;m sure there really are people out there that watch Star Trek and movies like Star Wars who -really- think that stuff is real, but these same people also need to move out of their parents basements and get real lives&#33; I would also like to add that a university once (I forget which) had faked a UFO encounter as a phycology experiment. Sometime after faking it, they came out about it being fake, yet there are -still- people that believe it was real&#33; There were "experts" that had examined the photos before the university had exposed their own fraud who had said that the photos were -NOT- fake (even though they clearly were)...even "experts" can be fooled. The people from the university showed precisely how they did everything step by step, but theres still folks that think they saw a real UFO...it&#39;s amazing. If theres anyone that really thinks their looking at a picture of a UFO, regardless of the source, then I urge you to take a look at my post under the Astrophotography section under the thread titled "What do you guys think of this" (or something similar). I included a picture of the much over-looked "King" Nebula. Honestly, if anyone gets a picture of a UFO, then it will most likely be someone like NASA with the Hubble or something (and probably quite by accident) and not a farmer or some looser with a Poloroid looking to make a buck at the National Enquirer.

Lastly, there is no real conclusive -proof- that we have been visited. As far as all the people that claim to have seen UFO&#39;s let alone those that claim to have been abducted, I would also like to point out all of the people that still believe in Christianty&#33; Without turning this into a theological debate, if you look at the Christian religion objectively, I&#39;m really not sure how any sane, rational person can put blind faith in such a religios system thats eronious at best and (historically speaking) out and out lies in many cases. A very smart man once said, "theres a sucker born every minute"...aka people will believe what they want to if they want to believe it badly enough and I don&#39;t know a single person who hasn&#39;t told a lie or indulged in the great art of "b.s." at one point or other (some more then others, but you get the idea). People can scream government conspiracies and cover ups all they want, but stuff of this nature would not stay covered up for long. Hell, even the stuff on JFK is starting to come out&#33; LOL&#33;&#33;&#33; I"m not saying it&#39;s impossible, but to me at least, it&#39;s highly unlikely.

Honestly, I would simply -love- to meet a person or persons from another planet. I&#39;ve been waiting for the mother ship to pick me up for a lot of years (and I&#39;m sure many people wish they&#39;d hurry up about it&#33; LOL&#33;&#33;&#33;). While I&#39;ve only been into astronomy for a very short time, I&#39;ve been facinated with the universe and the idea of other life for as long as I can remember. However when you look at the facts...the actual facts and not what yo-yo&#39;s post on websites or even write books about (to make money I might add&#33;) and when you really think about things logically, while we may have had one or two "fly by&#39;s" over our history, I think that most of the stuff on UFO&#39;s you see and hear is simply either delusional, mis-interperated or just total bunk.

If they are out there and they are watching us, they&#39;ll let us know when they think we&#39;re ready. Until then, we still have a very long way to go.

Bright Blessings & Gentle Breezes,
Jim

p.s. If any of "them" happen to read this, as long as I can take my wife, my dogs & cats and a guitar or two with me, I can be ready to go first thing in the morning&#33; I&#39;ll have a fresh pot of coffee on waiting for ya :D

sarahnade_me
2004-Jul-07, 03:46 PM
I&#39;m with Jim. ever since I saw E.t. which was when I was three about 50 times in the theatre with my mom (I still cry when he dies even though I know he&#39;s going to come back to life) I&#39;ve wanted to meet someone from another planet. I hope that they aren&#39;t to small for us to see. Hey it could happen. They would be able to use the resources on their planet a lot longer than we will. Therefore, my idea of what the inteleegent species on any other planet besides ours will be the size of ants. HEEEYY, maybe ants and cockroaches ARE aliens. :D

Bosco D. Gamma
2004-Jul-08, 01:44 AM
They could live in the burbs also. We&#39;ve gone to the moon to study rocks.

Why did we go to the moon to study rocks? Why did we drop down from trees, leave caves? Why has there been human progress at all? Because we are aggressive. Why are we aggressive? Because life is a competition. Every species that ever exsisted on Earth has competed with others. Humans are doing what evolution taught us to do. That aggession has given YOU everything you enjoy it has also given us everything you don&#39;t like. Welp that&#39;s the way it is and if it really bothered you, you would compost your computer, live in the hollow of a tree and survive by eating mushrooms.

BTW all your negitivity about mankind should be channeled into supporting a space program. A highly aggressive space program. Wouldn&#39;t it be nice at some time in the future if all industry is moved off the planet?&#33;?&#33; Turn Earth into a park. There is very little you mention that couldn&#39;t be solved by moving into space.

A non-aggressive species is called sheep or cows. Sorry but self-loathing has never been a good argument. It certainly isn&#39;t a productive one.

"... any species smart enough to travel the stars is also smart enough to know that we&#39;re still a very primative and violent species ..." What makes you think they aren&#39;t ? We might taste good to them, we might make good target practice, maybe they are some kind of avian intelligence here to liberate the chickens and put them in their rightful place at the top of the pecking order. Who knows ? Traveling between stars would be a technological feat to be proud of but it doesn&#39;t need to follow they would be pacifists (ironic pacifist contains the word fist in it), or particularily wise.

If anything I would think they would be highly aggressive. You don&#39;t get to be a planet&#39;s top dog by letting another species eat your puppy chow.

"If- there are people watching us, they know we&#39;re -NOT- ready&#33; In addition I have no doubt that they would not want to bring our "bad habits" out to the stars."

How do they know we aren&#39;t ready? By what arrogance do they judge? Even if they had an opinion what are they going to do about it ? Repeat the Prime Directive? What bad habits? Afraid we&#39;ll put up trailer parks around every star in the universe and bring down property values in M81? Somehow I think the universe is big enough to contain our "bad habits".

If I were smart I&#39;d stop now but since I ain&#39;t ...

Aliens are ... "more advanced and probably evolved then we are." What does more "evolved" mean. They have a better body morphology than us? Or by "evolved" do you mean, more mature, wiser, emotionally stable? "There is a certain wisdom in allowing things to unfold naturally" in context you are saying they are wise and we aren&#39;t. In fact you follow up those words by pointing out the many ways we are so evil. They are smart enough to know we are a "...primative and violent species." "they&#39;ll let us know when they think we&#39;re ready. Until then, we still have a very long way to go." So they judge us? They have standards and we fail them, oh if we could only be as good as them&#33; eh?

"...still believe in Christianty&#33;" Gasp&#33; A debate requires more than one, what you did not want to do was go off on a rant but did anyway. I won&#39;t debate religion with you but I can&#39;t help noticing your Aliens have a lot of the qualities of a Christain God. Even to them coming down to Earth for your salvation and whisking you away to heaven.

Sigh

jsc248
2004-Jul-08, 07:40 PM
:rolleyes: Hi All,
I think seeing as I started this topic off I should thank everyone for their opinions and stories. As an astronomer of over 30 years I have seen only one object in the night sky that I could not account for. A single light that moved west to east, shining at about -4 on the stellar magnitude scale. I thoroughly investigated it, it was no satellite natural or man made. It was no plane or helicopter tail or flight light, and to today remains a mystery. Yes the chances are it could well be natural in origin, but it did make me stop and think.
I remain open minded, and as Jodie Foster states in the movie Contact " If we are alone in the universe, it would be an awful waste of space".
Thanks again for your thoughts
jsc248.

Sphinx
2004-Jul-08, 11:54 PM
Commenting on Lomitus&#39; post and Bosco&#39;s counter:

What lomitus points out is his opinions of the flaws of our current species, only placing them through the eyes of a more superior alien race. Bosco&#39;s counter is classic and I find it righteously intuitive. For me, there are two levels at which one can interpret Lomitus&#39; post. 1.) As Bosco has already done, is the literal. His literal counter is right on the mark as far as I&#39;m concerned. However, there is a 2nd interpretation here, one that I myself relate with quite a bit. 2.) The philisophical interpretation. I think it is safe to say that everyone agrees that the world is not a perfect place, that there are problems with it. Lomitus expresses his opinion that until we are more stable socially, we probably aren&#39;t ready to interact with another intelligent species; that on the whole pacifism will be the best social approach in the intergalactic community. Again, I&#39;ll reiterate that these are Lomitus&#39; opinions interpretated through the eyes of an advanced alien race. What the alien race represents is an outsiders view of our own species - much the same way one reflects on an argument or conversation to get a better perspective of events. Wether or not the alien race is literally there or not is inconcequential.

Having said this let it be known that I am not expressing any opions of my own on the topic, but instead merely reflecting on the interpretations of others&#39; opinons...which is of course an opinon- but only of others&#39; opinions....make sense?

I&#39;d now like to take this moment to side with a point that Bosco brings up. The agressiveness of life. Now this is an opinion that I hold and I actually wrote a short paper on an analogy of the chaos of life. I utilize chaos theory to help with this but I am no mathematician nor even that educated so please, no literal dissections. I am merely trying to convey a picture here of the chaotic struggle that life has. I apologize in advance if this is too long. The assaignment was actually to explain which of the three sociological perspectives I most closely relate with, Conflict theory, Functional Analysis Theory and Symbolic Interactionism Theory. So here it goes.

I believe that all three perspectives offer something to be seen about life but the perspective I relate the most with is the Conflict Theory. Now, to explain why I most relate with the Conflict Theory one must understand how I see life and to do that I will utilize the Chaos Theory. "Chaos theory states: Chaos theory is the qualitative study of unstable aperiodic behavior in deterministic nonlinear dynamical systems." (http://www.duke.edu/~mjd/chaos/chaosh.html) Everything exhibits unstable aperiodic behavior - the sun, the earth, a body of water, or even a small bird...everything. And a deterministic nonlinear dynamical system in reference to life is as such - all things are born and all things die, everything has a beginning and an end and in this sense, it is determined. What is not is how one goes from birth to death, from beginning to end and in this sense, life itself and the existence of everything is nonlinear and a very, very dynamic system. This abstract view of chaos theory runs parallel to my comprehension of life which could also be explained as the Conflict theory of Sociology. Everything is a part of this greater whole with only so much to be had. Like throwing a 16 oz steak in the middle of 10 starving, rabid dogs, each will fight without regard for the other. Every-single-thing operates in this manner - fighting for their share of life, for their right to be included into this over-all system of existence. Squeeze but a little, and it will retaliate. I was once told that the most dangerous creature alive is one that is afraid. I believe this to be very true. For example, 4-5 people die in the Philippines from a flu caused by chickens so we humans kill something like 40 thousand chickens out of fear. We are by far the most afraid creatures alive and by far the most dangerous, hence, conflict. Another example, this one hypothetical but based on fact to some degree - strip all the water from the trees and what happens? They all dry out and die; the system dies or acquires a lesser part of the system. In its place the insects begin to flourish because of the over abundance of food and shelter left by the dying trees, hence another system gains a greater part of the system. Something similar happens because of acid rain which is caused from the burning of fossil fuels. So, how does this apply to the sociological perspective of Conflict theory? Humans are quite creative and for reasons best understood using the symbolic interactionist’s theory of sociology, we place meaning to a variety of ideas in our lives which gives rise to all sorts of other systems that can fight for their own right to survive. i.e. family systems, educational systems, social systems, political systems, etc, all demanding attention, hence, conflict theory. Just to note, I believe the functional analysis theory of sociology is the management of these human systems that we&#39;ve created. Another note, chaos theory is a mathematical theory and has nothing to do with life so my connection with life is an abstract one. The citation site explains the chaos theory as referred to math and not to life.

I hope you have found this some what more entertaining than dull to read. Here&#39;s another question that I have for so called UFO sightings. Why would a space ship zip across the sky with big flashing lights? Lol....I chuckly at the notion of this. " I saw a strange light and therefore concluded it a UFO." hahahaha. Again, sorry if this is too long.

Sphinx

onesandzeroes
2004-Jul-09, 02:24 AM
Hello All
May I suggest that anyone curious about the validity of the UFO phenomenon read a book titled "Behold A Pale Horse" by William Cooper.
This book goes into many other aspects about our government beyond the UFO question, But based on the personal experiences of the writer and his credentials (along with many others), I would say that many accounts of Alien Visitors are real.
Hey now I&#39;m new here so please don&#39;t bombard me with attacks but please provide me with your opinion either way. I&#39;ve enjoyed reading all the post on this topic so far.
I could be wrong, but I believe (the word has a lie in the middle of it) we have been visited in the past and will be visited in the future.
The Universe is so large & old that the possibility of other life forms both older and younger must be real. The odds are in our favor even if the life forms no longer exist or have yet to develope the ability of space travel.
Anyway - read the book - see what you think afterwards.
And yes my username comes from the binary code of 1&#39;s & 0&#39;s or on & off.

Bill Mc Bride
2004-Jul-09, 02:49 AM
with the confirmation of sirius c, it gives support to robert temple&#39;s book the sirius
mystery. aliens helped the egyptians build the pyramids. the ets that abducted
betty hill came from the sirius system.see her star map of sept.19,1961

sarahnade_me
2004-Jul-09, 05:11 AM
Que? Who and what are you talking about? Are you saying that there are actual people that are posing as aliens. This sounds a little odd. How , would they do it? What is the Sirius System? If there are really aliens from there why hasn&#39;t our government spent years with our telescopes pointed there? is it because the "aliens" call it the sirius system and we call it the "not so serious" system? I&#39;m just kidding with you. i will only go out and get this great book if you give me a pretty good summary on it rather that just "betty hill is from the Sirius System."

Sarahnade_me in Texas

spedmen
2004-Jul-09, 05:56 AM
but maybe all those UFO "sightnings" are just human from the future that have discovered and mastered space travel and are archiologists that are traveling back in time to discover their ancestors? hmm. what a stupid idea&#33; but, its possible&#33; :P

virtualutopia
2004-Jul-09, 10:22 AM
I should point out before I say anything that I am ordinarily all for a policy of non-interference, but I thought I&#39;d give the "open mind" thing a go:

Question... why is the &#39;Prime Directive&#39; of non-interference logical? Why does it make sense? I agree that it does seem a noble notion - leaving other species&#39; to develop without giving them knowledge or power that they are possibly not ready for (not that we&#39;re ready for any brand new technology that we discover of our own accord). And besides, it does create the necessary tension and occasional ethical dilemma to keep the Star Trek series&#39; running so successfully.

But could it be argued that a policy of engagement has just as much merit?

Even throughout terrestrial history more technologically advanced cultures have engaged with less advanced cultures. We don&#39;t have to be on an equal technological footing to be of interest to an alien race. We could talk about many non-technological things, such as art, religion, the meaning of life, cake recipes...

Why should we, or any aliens, be so wary of popping in to say "G&#39;day"? Surely if we were so scared of destroying some finely tuned cosmic balance, we wouldn&#39;t have the nouse to undertake interstellar travel in the first place?

Maybe the non-interference policy was invented to explain why "they" are here, but are so hard to see?

eburacum45
2004-Jul-09, 11:12 AM
Originally posted by Bill Mc Bride@Jul 9 2004, 02:49 AM
with the confirmation of sirius c, it gives support to robert temple&#39;s book the sirius
mystery. aliens helped the egyptians build the pyramids. the ets that abducted
betty hill came from the sirius system.see her star map of sept.19,1961
Sirius C has not been confirmed despite a search by Hubble;

http://www.solstation.com/stars/sirius2.htm

If it does exist it is an incredibly dim, small red dwarf or brown dwarf, and its existance would prove exactly nothing about UFO&#39;s.

Bobunf
2004-Jul-11, 11:48 PM
I think the assertion that the existence of life on Earth has been broadcast for only 68 years is grossly in error since it ignores astronomical detection of biomarkers and technology markers.

In 2007 the Kepler mission will be able identify Earth size planets transiting a hundred thousand stars. In 2009 the Space Interferometry mission will be able to detect Earth size planets orbiting the nearest 100 or so stars whether or not they transit the star. In 2014 the Terrestrial Planet Finder should be able to directly detect the light from Earth-like planets within 45 light years. The ESA has the Darwin mission planned which will search for biomarkers on any Earth-like planets orbiting several thousand nearby stars.

The signatures of oxygen, water vapor, carbon dioxide and methane will enable us, in less than twenty years, to identify life-bearing planets within a hundred light years or so. From there, we could move on to the identification of gasses and other evidence indicating agriculture and indus-trial activity, such as the presence of chlorophyll, lead, carbon monoxide, volatile organic gasses, and freon.

If we can do this within two decades, then a technology only a little more advanced than ours (say, just a few centuries) could have determined that Earth is a life bearing planet billions of years ago. And today, they should be able to pinpoint pretty closely the level of our technology.

All it takes is fancy telescopes.

Bobunf
2004-Jul-12, 01:05 AM
Billions and billions really is evidence of nothing. It’s just turning your mind off. The number of life system is a product not only of the number of stars, but of the probability that life is associ-ated with a star. If that probability is much less than one divided by the number of stars; then other life is improbable. One could as cogently argue that, since there so very many very small numbers, life must be incredibly rare.

There as many small numbers as large—just take the reciprocal. Forget the billions and billions. It’s like saying there’s billions and billions of grains of sand on beaches; so there must be many diamonds on beaches.

We do have some knowledge to assess the probabilities; and it is absurd not to use that knowl-edge, but to just chant “billions and billions” like some Tibetan mantra.

First, there is life on Earth, which apparently arose almost immediately after the Earth cooled. This suggests that, if conditions are right, life arises very rapidly—there’s no billions and billions of years of preparation. But there isn’t any life on the Moon, even though it must have been seeded from the Earth multiple time. So, those conditions aren’t good for life. If there is life on Mars, it’s not very robust—those conditions are tough for life at best.

Second, after life arose, it took about 3½ billion years for complex life to evolve. And after that it took another half billion years or so for a potentially space faring civilization to arise. Apparently the real bottleneck is the transition from life to complex life.

Third, the survival of life on Earth required a lot of stability even with impacts, a sun increasing in luminosity, supernovae and other unfriendly galactic phenomena. A technological civilizaiton requires additional conditions such as the world not be covered in ice or water.

Fourth, we haven’t seen any evidence of technologically advanced civilizations beyond Earth. No beacons, no stars moved into pretty patterns, no little green men saying, “Take me to your leader,” and no anything else.

That all is a basis for coming up with some quantitative estimates—something better than an annoying chant.

Calibre
2004-Jul-13, 07:57 AM
My opinion on most of the abductions: a coping mechanism many people use for bad childhood experiences that were shuffled to the subconscious that now have an outlet that does not point the finger at the person that did interfare?

Our position in the galaxy: We may well be in the prime life zone where Nova and other interactions of closer stars don&#39;t upset the systems orbit around the galaxy to much. But one theory is that every 30 million years or so a perturbation in our orbit upsets the oort cloud and shakes things up a bit driving evolution by clearing the board at reasonably regular intervals. Maybe this would be worth study if you were a space faring race.

A left field suggestion on UFO&#39;s. If they did exist most people assume that they are space craft holding aliens? But what about probes? Things that move though time - from our future, our science is still very young? Things that move through dimensions - differing realities? My main point being there is a sea of &#39;real&#39; knowledge and I think we as a race have only just wet our feet.

As for the "alien conspiracy take over nutters" my opinion is that any race able to travel between stars would have given up competing and waring. Competition is an early driver to succeed but to travel between stars I assume most races would need long peaceful times to develop interstellar space technology. After many generations war and aggression would breed and condition out of a race and become socially unacceptable. We protest wars now: public opinion can stop them now. If a race developed technology to get between stars they would probably be above competing for resources etc. For example if a race had the ability to change matter to energy and energy to matter they would find stars and gas giants (-matter pools-) more use than already occupied planets such as Earth with all its problems.

Given the number of stars and galaxies and the age of the universe I think that there could be many life hosting planets around. BUT I&#39;m not convinced that a practical technology to travel between stars is possible without a very long flight time? Even a massive amount of antimatter fuel would take years to get an interstellar probe a few light years away. Sleeper ships maybe? Robot ships with genetic librarys? Engineered space beings/ships?

Earth is 4.5 billion years old, = 4500,000,000 years
We became complex life say 49,000 years ago,
Now we have the technology to destroy the worlds population with rapid jet transport of disease, pandemic or man made virus. Add to that conventional weapons, atomic weapons and genetic warfare. I&#39;ll be generous and give us another 1000 years before our race ends. Thats 50,000 years of humans in 4500,000,000 years = 1/90,000th of the Earths time we have been here.

Now based on life being so common that every planet developes sophistocated life at some stage, and using Earth as an example any race visiting Earth would have a very low %age chance of being here at the life time. Where I am going here is that a race just starting space travel would probably be of great interest to other races. Lets say we have a 1000 years to get it together "mature" and become interstellar OR war/evolve?/stagnate and die on our one little home planet.

Maybe it is a pet subject of mine but as I see it we are at the point that populations are so high that random disease could wipe us out, we could wipe ourselves out, yet we are also at a stage that moving money to space/energy/medical sciences we should be able to spread our eggs to more than one basket and cope with most such problems.

I&#39;d expect that we have been visited rarely by stealth probes, but if they were common then more evidence and social knowlegde of them would exist and legends involving UFO&#39;s and aliens would be stronger.

Algenon the mouse
2004-Jul-14, 05:18 AM
Okay, I am going back to the first post.

I do believe that there is intelligent life out there somewhere, whether or not they have visited earth is a different story.

The so-called alien cave drawings are NOT aliens. Nor were the pyramids in Mexico or the Nazca drawings draw by aliens or made for aliens . That was a story that was made up by people who could not believe that another culture could be superior enough to build or make such things. Unfornately a movie was made to perpetuate the theory so it lives on. You can look at a lot of drawings, rock formations and buildings and make up any story for it. Anyone remember the face on Mars?



Although I think we are not alone, I do think that it would be incredibly difficult for other intelligent life to visit us. And, if some intelligent life was within "striking" distance, the first transmission they would hear from us would probably be "I love Lucy". That would probably scare them away.

Bobunf
2004-Jul-14, 05:20 AM
Complex life usually means multi-celled life; and the appearance of such life is identified with the Cambrian geologic period about 545 million years ago. Our own species evolved about 150 thousand years ago. Hominid species have generally lasted a few million years, which would suggest that our species will continue for more than a million years.

Hominid species have been succeeded by other related species that have engaged a greater and greater use of technology and symbolic manipulation. The record of the past does not come close to suggesting a demise of technology using symbol manipulators from the Earth.

It seems to me that predicting something will happen that’s never happened before is a very uncertain undertaking. If one were to predict that it will rain tomorrow: well, rain has happened a lot; we’ve got lots of data and theory; that is voluminous observations and explanations of how those observations came to be. And weather theories are tested every day.

I would opine that human society is incredibly more complex that weather systems. Speculations that lead to unique occurrences in human society probably don’t have much basis.

I don’t think your “pet subject” has any validity at all. The higher the absolute number of individuals in a species, the greater their chance of survival, holding genetic diversity constant. There’s no indication that humans have experienced a decline in genetic diversity; quite the opposite. As almost a tautology, species with low absolute numbers of individuals are less likely to survive. It seems to me that should be very obvious.

When has a species ever disappeared, in nature, as a consequence of large numbers of individuals? I think no such instance is known.

Tinaa
2004-Jul-14, 05:20 AM
I think one of the first things broadcast was Hilter&#39;s speech opening the Olympic games in Germany. Now ain&#39;t that scary?

Calibre
2004-Jul-14, 06:08 AM
Not really trying to say we will be wiped out: but it is a risk. As in we could develope space technology or keep giving the biggest budget to our military. Some threats could well be avoided by heading for the stars, while the military option keeps status quo. Politically it is safer and no big technological changes would reorder society, wealth structures or global dominance of certain economies. Move that money to science and technology and nations would boom and bust along with booms and busts as various nations gain and loose advantages depending on what resources they have to tap the new technologies which would likely change quickly. Meaning resources such as labour, skills and materials would go in and out of vouge quicker as developement progressed.

When has a species on this planet ever had enough scientific knowledge to create biological weapons, chemical weapons, genetic weapons or even atomic weapons?

Add to that 6 Billion people and an increasing population. Common germs are getting tougher and some disease and virus mutate as they spread, some even cross over between species. Mad cow disease is simply a protein that crosses species, it teaches emzymes a new fatal way to build proteins in the brain. Mad cow was blamed on increasing herd population. The mutation that caused the population was called a one in a million chance, but there are many millions of cattle. My drive is that greater population can lead to more new disease strains, and a very bad one would be highly infectious, fatal but incubate slow enough that hosts would spread it befor becoming i&#39;ll and the strain becoming known.

I&#39;m not saying this will happen, but I am using it as an example of one risk. And there are many other risks. Even given a terrible pandemic some people would surely survive - due isolation or immunity.

Survival of species is not really about the best, because we can&#39;t know what comes tomorrow. Really that whole survival of the fittest thing is a bit wrong in that what life does is diversify such that when an extinction or change of climate or conditions occurs there are many options and hopefully most survive. Some will be dead wrong.

Tinaa - yes it is really, and that bubble of broadcast from a bad time will grow around us for who knows how many thousands of years before it spreads to thin to detect?

Bosco D. Gamma
2004-Jul-16, 03:52 PM
"develope space technology or keep giving the biggest budget to our military"

it&#39;s not an either or, well it is to you apparently, which suggest you have limited abilities. space technology is worthless if you can&#39;t defend yourself. by far the biggest budget item is social welfare spending, most of which is mandated, with a mandated rate of increase. social welfare spending is a min., of 3x&#39;s military. Back less than 5 years ago the gao couldn&#39;t decide if Medicare was losing 12 billion or 28 billion per YEAR to fraud and mismanagement the books were so badly kept. plz spare us your use of the military as a whipping boy.

po-
2004-Jul-17, 05:00 AM
we are as close to knowing everything completely as we are of someone or thing telling us all the knowledge there is.

Bobunf
2004-Aug-06, 08:42 PM
Calibre,

Glad you’re not really saying we’ll be wiped out. I’m not prepared to go yet.

I don’t understand the reference to military spending in opposition to spending on space. The United States spends less than 5% of its GDP on the military, other nations generally far less, and none of it seems like a compete determinant of the future of our civilization.

Obviously it’s possible Homo Sapiens could become extinct; it’s not only possible, it’s as certain as death. About 99% of all species that we know about are extinct. No hominid species has lasted more than a few million years at most.

But, I don’t think, any species in nature has ever succumbed to overpopulation. Not ever.

Shifting to mad cow disease, the scenario there would be that we would be wiped out, not by too many people, but by too many cows. I think this is actually as ridiculous as it sounds, but would add that mad cow is an extremely rare disease; even in the most extreme cases affecting less than one in a million people per year. Your chances of being killed by lightning are certainly greater—maybe depending on where you live and what you eat.

Bacteria and viruses have been mutating and crossing species for a very long time—at least hun-dreds of millions of years. And only in the last century have we had medical science to defend us. Far fewer people die of infections today than ever in the story of our species. Follow the trend.

“Add to that 6 Billion people and an increasing population.” If this had any validity, wouldn’t it suggest that areas of high population density would have higher disease rates and lower life ex-pectancy? Empirically, exactly the opposite is the case.

Bob

Betelgeuse
2004-Aug-06, 09:09 PM
This is a bit of a random comment, however, I would like to have my say in this topic.

I believe that the only way we can have some sort of idea whether there is life out there is by looking to see if there is any movement in the night sky.

We can&#39;t have any idea what so ever if "alien&#39;s have invaded" because, who are we to know what aliens actually look like&#33;

:huh:

sarahnade_me
2004-Aug-07, 12:13 AM
Or are we the invaders?...discuss :)

sarahnade_me in texas having an Xfiles moment

Betelgeuse
2004-Aug-07, 09:01 AM
Do you mean "are we the invaders on earth" or "in space"?

Well, if you meant in space I could see your point that we are some sort of invaders, but then again, I see it more as exploring more than invading though. Then again, we seem to be looking for life on planets out of our solar system, and if we finally found life there, would we "invade"?

That is an interesting question and I think it&#39;ll be interesting to see other people&#39;s views on it&#33;

GOURDHEAD
2004-Aug-07, 01:48 PM
Then again, we seem to be looking for life on planets out of our solar system, and if we finally found life there, would we "invade"?

No&#33;&#33;&#33; Not in a military sense. That wouldn&#39;t work if their civilization were on par with ours. However, we&#39;d probably go there (could be called a passive invasion) and invite them to come here. If their development were where ours was 100,000 years ago or earlier, we would colonize and "benevolently guide" them to our level of technology and social development. If there were no obvious sentients, we would develop it to our liking provided those microbes would permit it.

Betelgeuse
2004-Aug-07, 05:35 PM
I see - we wouldn&#39;t invade in a military sense.

I&#39;m going to pick up on what you said about colonization except in a different sense. Would anyone here support a colonization to the moon or Mars or find it remotely interesting or possible?

sarahnade_me
2004-Aug-08, 01:48 AM
Definately possible. Not in OUR lifetime of course. We kind of already started our habitation of mars. it has a satellite and to automated beings on it right now. and I don&#39;t know if i meant if we were invader of space or earth I was just having a moment. but there are people who DO believe that we come from space...not here.

jitte
2004-Aug-08, 03:32 AM
Originally posted by John L@Jun 25 2004, 04:45 PM
Tha people who talk about this kind of stuff as though they&#39;ve actually experienced it are sad, depressed, or lonely, and are just looking for attention.* Even if you label them as nuts and laugh at them, at least you&#39;re not ignoring them.

Sorry, but that&#39;s a generalization. You might as well say they all wear red too as have the same mental state. And how else would someone talk about something that happened to them, than as if they&#39;d actually experienced it?

Most people who talk about having seen a UFO probably do seem sad, depressed, or lonely though. The "sane" ones keep their mouth shut rather than have people laugh at them and think they&#39;re nuts.

astromark
2004-Aug-08, 07:27 AM
Most of what I&#39;ve seen here could not be argued with..ie; No proof.
I will not dismiss the posabilaty that earth was at some time visated. It is posable, just not likly. The size of the universe ond the time line seem to almost prohibat it.. mark.

Betelgeuse
2004-Aug-08, 09:09 AM
Originally posted by Tinaa@Jul 14 2004, 05:20 AM
I think one of the first things broadcast was Hilter&#39;s speech opening the Olympic games in Germany. Now ain&#39;t that scary?
That is perfectly true - and very scary&#33;

I was talking about that with someone a while ago - out in space somewhere you can probably still faintly here the old man&#39;s voice due to the radio wave - who knows perhaps some other life form somewhere might have heard it&#33;

astromark
2004-Aug-08, 10:19 PM
Our contrabution is small. To hear our feble radio broadcasts a alian spiec., would need to be looking in this direction and within the distance those signals would have traveled as yet. In order to find us.. they need to want to. they need the technolagy to do it. Can we amagine what we might find...No we cant. We can speculate untill dawn. doesént mean a thing. They could have come zooming past our little blue dot. recorded our igsistance, rolled about laphing and left...I think we are being paranoide. We might be the only life form that cares to wonder what.
We are still very primative. We could be concidered to unstable to contact. there are many who still practice religiose beliefs that could only be discribed as finaticle.
The science driven minds are few. reason seems to go out the window when religiose belief steps up to the plate. We are unstable, Dangerous. And untill we change we might never find ET...they might just be ignoring us... like the Ants in the garden.

Bobunf
2004-Aug-09, 03:06 AM
"like the Ants in the garden"

Humans don&#39;t ignore ants, in the garden or anywhere else. We have been studing ants in very great detail over very extended periods of time--thousands of years. Thousands of people have devoted entire careers to the study of ants.

Will advanced ETs be any less curious?

Molecular
2004-Aug-09, 04:47 PM
I think it&#39;s quite possible that we have been visited before. Not only do I think we&#39;ve been visited, I believe that we are also being watched regularly. Now, whether there has actually been any physical contact between aliens and us, as the the UFOists like to declare often <_< , is a different story, as there would just be too many variables in accomplishing that task, this may take a while.

In the area of communication, there are three ways (so far) that I know of, to send a messege to someone else.........sight, sound, and touch. And each of these ways can be as simple, or, as sophisticated as the person, and/or thing, wants it to be. It&#39;s up to what ever it is on the receiving end to have enough knowledge about how to go about intercepting a potential incoming transmission, that the messege will be read.

Now, I would think that THE best possible, fastest, way to send a messege out to someone else , from an enormous distance, would be via a light source, since it is the fastest moving thing ( I could be wrong) :huh: . At the closest distance, it would be through touch. And where sound is involved, it could possibly be from a medium distance. A combination of these, would make things more interesting in getting information from one part of the universe, to the other. Though I would bet, that the likelyhood of us finally finding what these messeges are, will be found through observation of the night sky.........as stars are twinkling (blinking), some glowing brighter than others, patterns are there..........as well as some other things that might be detectable when the surrounding area of the observer is consumed in darkness. ;)

A side Note:

As a child, I once had a pair of binoculars, and I would become fascinated in observing various, not too distant, things in the immediate area of my neighborhood, and yes, these included girls. :P I had a thought one day about what would happen if I were to take two pairs of binoculars, and hold them end-to-end......I would be able to see things at an even further distance, up closer........I was right, but there was no way for me to get the image I wanted to observe, focused............it was too close, and blurred. So, I had been thinking just recently, why hasn&#39;t this sort of thing been done with our current technology today. I would like to call this device a "Baton Telescope", or "Baton Technology". What I mean is, what if there were a series of telescopes sent out to a certain distance in space. An area of the universe would be marked for observation, the telescopes would be all contained inside one object that would be lauched into outerspace.........and at different intervals, or, distances traveled, a component of the many telescopes would be ejected and remain stationary, then as the device traveled on, another part would be ejected, to remain at that location............until all parts of the "Baton Telescope" were now adrift in space. The one closest to the targeted area would then open it&#39;s lens, find the spot designated for viewing, zoom in, send the signal to next telescope behind it, in turn, that would send a signal to the one behind it, and so on........until a main satellite orbiting earth picks up the signal, and sends it to some land-based observatory. Also, these telescopes in space, like a slinky or snake, could be stretched out to greater distances, or, brought closer together to make these images more detailed.

Sorry for going a bit off-topic here. :unsure: :ph34r:

spedmen
2004-Aug-12, 04:04 AM
hmm i like your side note Molecular, and it sounds kinda possible but with such enormous distances conserning space and a perfect aligment (counting in eartch rotation) and all the gravitational pulls exerted by planets as big or possible bigger than the sun and their tramendous pull that idea sounds more of a nice idea and possible real in tehory than possible in reality. (sorry for the grammar misspellings)

Betelgeuse
2004-Aug-12, 06:24 PM
I was looking at the "Persides" shower last night and I actually saw a UFO. This bright light cam from no where, stayed in the sky for a while, then dimmed slightly, moved across the sky for a while and then completely disappeared&#33; It may have been a jet with it&#39;s landing light, however I need to contact the local RAF valley to find out. So, we may have been visited after all&#33; .............................

Molecular
2004-Aug-12, 07:00 PM
Originally posted by spedmen@Aug 12 2004, 04:04 AM
hmm i like your side note Molecular, and it sounds kinda possible but with such enormous distances conserning space and a perfect aligment (counting in eartch rotation) and all the gravitational pulls exerted by planets as big or possible bigger than the sun and their tramendous pull that idea sounds more of a nice idea and possible real in tehory than possible in reality. (sorry for the grammar misspellings)
Thanks for the reply Spedmen.......no worries about the grammer, I understood you completely. :)


The telescopes wouldn&#39;t necessarily have to be in perfect alignment or formation, or, even distances from each other....... as there would be a reflective device at the end of each of components that picks up the signal, or, diverts the signal to the next one. Sort of like what can be done with a lazer beam in a lab. ;)

Not sure about the gravitational equations though :huh: But I believe that that could be worked out somehow. :)

astromark
2004-Aug-14, 11:40 AM
:unsure: Sorry if I&#39;m off subject a tad here, but i wanted to share this thought.
If were looking or being looked at we need to consider this, That here on earth, we seem to be the only life form that is attempting to comunicate with other spieces or life forms both on earth and in space. But is that a measure of development or intelagance? To defend our selves from each other we have developed all this technoligy. Why we would expect any other life form to have done the same is beond me... electrics are not the measure of advanced technoligy, are they? remember the russion guy who said ... three stages of development, 1 atomic power 2 soler control 3 galaxy control.
we&#39;ve just taken the first step... the dolphins may be brighter than us. :(
:huh: :) :P

John L
2004-Aug-17, 09:22 PM
Originally posted by Rigel@Aug 12 2004, 01:24 PM
I was looking at the "Persides" shower last night and I actually saw a UFO. This bright light cam from no where, stayed in the sky for a while, then dimmed slightly, moved across the sky for a while and then completely disappeared&#33; It may have been a jet with it&#39;s landing light, however I need to contact the local RAF valley to find out. So, we may have been visited after all&#33; .............................
It was probably a satellite flare. The panels on satellites catch and reflect sunlight. NASA has a web sight that tells you when and where you can see some of the more common ones (Hubble, ISS, GOES, etc), but the spots and times from which you can see them is small. They will appear to be too small in the sky to be an airplane, but will clearly be a moving "light," usually rising from the horizon or dropping down toward it. Then they dim (as the satellite slowly tilts away going from direct sunlight reflection towards you to incidental), and then they blink out completely (when they cease reflecting any light directly toward you or enter the Earth&#39;s shadow entirely). Its cool to see, but definitely man-made.

ASEI
2004-Aug-17, 09:49 PM
Aaaaah&#33; Interstellar peeping toms&#33; Sneaking around in their stealth spacecraft, attempting to avoid detection while they abduct poor livestock and farmers and . . . . Perverts&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33; :P

xXxDarkSkyNitexzxXx
2004-Aug-24, 12:45 PM
maybe we have been visted we never know as there is no historians recording facts few million years ago. I think we might have been. Beacuse, there couldn&#39;t be only one high-tech civilisations like us.

sarahnade_me
2004-Aug-24, 08:17 PM
Has anyone here read the Minervan Experiment. if you haven&#39;t you should. It is really great. It really makes you think about space colinization and if we would ever know if we were colinized here. If we were actually an experiment that was left to be discoved many thousands of years later to have worked. what if aliens came down from the skies and looked just like us? Or what we might look like after more years of evolution. i mean we talk about terraforming...why wouldn&#39;t other planets. MMMMmm...my creative juices are flowing&#33; :)

Sarah in texas

ironpirate
2004-Aug-25, 01:06 AM
I personally believe, no, we have not been visited. I do believe there are countless numbers of planets that have life. Some much more advanced than ours. The problem I have with visitation is the vast distances to be traveled. Light years are not a good judgement of distance, for travel purposes. What I mean is, say 100 light years distance would require 100 years to travel at light speed. But, light speed would require your body, ship, etc to be broken down into pure energy, a photon, to travel at light speed. And it would have to maintain this lack of structure for the requisite 100 years. Then reconstitute, in perfect order, to it&#39;s original form, inside a ship that has reconstituted into it&#39;s original form. All this without getting atoms and molecules inter mixed from one to the other.
As I said, it&#39;s my opinion that we have not, but I&#39;m no expert. However, physics and the universe would probably force everyone to play in their own little corner of space, and look up at the stars and wonder, just like us.

Victoria
2004-Aug-25, 01:26 AM
Well jsm 248, :unsure:

Victoria
2004-Aug-25, 01:29 AM
248jsc-after all that, and a little bit o&#39;luck and then evolution in the 21st Century could happen :D

AndyHolland
2004-Aug-25, 12:57 PM
OK - maybe I&#39;ll get in trouble for this, but ...

I used to design nuclear reactor cores for a living, and I am a pretty hard-nosed scientific engineering type. Certainly, there is strong delusion of some sort attending these "observations" of ET.

My viewpoint is pretty old fashioned. I strongly believe the Earth was visited - by God, the divine Logos (Word - Logic) in Jesus Christ. And if you want scientific proof, just go to Jerusalem on Orthodox Holy Saturday around noon, and go into the Church of the Holy Resurrection (Holy Seplucre is the world&#39;s name for it). Or pick up a Bible for &#036;20.00, and pour over it for twenty years, and be brutally honest with yourself when you read it.

Look a real ET would use remote observations or something, they wouldn&#39;t have their expensive inter-stellar FTL spacecraft breaking down, or hovering over government nuclear installations. The energy/logic/knowledge required for interstellar spaceflight is enormous, and why bother with the sort of antics sometimes reported?

That sort of ET is just plain evil. "Close encounters" always are attended by an evil smell. Certainly, there are strange observations, and not everyone making them is a complete nut. But they do not follow a consistent, scientific or logical pattern for rational scientific "explanations".

This is because they are not from a friendly intelligence (and I personally think Earthquake lights, methane and military aircraft account for 99.999% of all UFOs). The more sensational cases with professional military observations are possibly from an evil intelligence.

The Church has known about this for 2000 years. Believe, make the sign of the cross, say a prayer, and ET should go away.

andy

John L
2004-Aug-25, 09:57 PM
The question I always ask is "Why would aliens, ET&#39;s, etc, even want to come to poor little Earth?" We are a tiny blob of rock and water orbiting a completely average yellow dwarf star in the outskirts of the Milky Way galaxy. The only way you could know we are even here from any distance is from the radio signals we emit, and those didn&#39;t even start leaving the Earth until the 1930&#39;s with enough power to be heard.

Over the years we&#39;ve increased the power and the number of frequencies, but those signals, since the first, have only been travelling into the galaxy for about 68 years. That means an alien civilization that can travel at light speed would have to be or pass within 34 light years of Earth to hear us and reach us. FTL stretches it out to the full 68 light years, but they&#39;d really have to be listening out at the edge of that sphere of radio signals. Worse of all, with the expansion of cable and direct satellite communications, our signal is actually dropping off. It is possible that in 30 or 40 years we will no longer emit any signal into space strong enough for an alien species to detect.

Another line of thinking is our nuclear weapons and their tests would attract an alien. The problem is that same with radio, and we&#39;ve only been using nukes for 59 years, so the gamma burst sphere is smaller than the regular radio sphere.

The odds that an inteligent civilization would be within the few hundred stars out of the hundreds of billions in the solar system to could possibly hear us is so small that I seriously doubt it has or will ever happen. All ET&#39;s are weather balloons, military aircraft, and crazy people.

Bobunf
2004-Aug-26, 04:50 AM
John L, you said, "Why would aliens, ET&#39;s, etc, even want to come to poor little Earth?" and continued, “We are a tiny blob of rock…”

Why would humans want to visit a tiny blob of rock in the middle of the Pacific Ocean and study finches for a harrowing amount of time? Why would humans want to visit hunks of ice near both poles, enduring very unpleasant conditions to study penguins and microbes, and do this for half a century and more, with no signs of stopping? Why do sophisticated people spend huge parts of their lives visiting really primitive people? Illiterate, totally unaware of the wider world, with abysmal political and economic systems, living conditions so horrid it passes belief.

Life--the most unusual, complex and diverse thing one can find in the whole universe. What would any human give to study life that has evolved independently from us from the beginning of time? And what is the potential knowledge to be gained? Past imagining.

If ETs have any curiosity at all, any desire for new knowledge, new art, and a host of other talents, they’ll be very interested in other life.

ETs will rush here, because we are so very special.

Bob

Bobunf
2004-Aug-26, 05:23 AM
John L, you said, “with the expansion of cable and direct satellite communications, our signal is actually dropping off.”

Where did you get this information from? Per the Statistical Abstract of the United States, 120th edition, Table 910:

From 1970 to 1998 the number of broadcast commercial AM radio stations in the United States increased by 11%.

FM broadcast stations increased 159%

And television broadcast stations increased 82%.

Per the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, Statistical Tables and Culture Indicators, Table 3, worldwide radio ownership increased an average of 8½% annually from 1980 to 1997.

In what Brave New World does an approximate doubling of broadcast services in 28 years suggest a decline? A quadrupling of radio ownership in 27 years?


Bob

sarahnade_me
2004-Aug-26, 05:53 AM
Wow, Bob you have a lot of time on your hands. :) SO my first statement is that everyone has some sort of blind faith. Mine is my car. Even though I don&#39;t do anything right to it, I have faith that it will get me to where I&#39;m going. Anyways, why can&#39;t some people that believe in Jesus leave the people that believe in Science alone. I am a spiritual person that believes in a higher power. Lord there has to be someone better than we are out there.

Second statement, we may live on a tiny piece of rock, but who says that people from another planet live on a planet larger than ours? Who says that they may not break down. Listen, in the 60&#39;s we shouldn&#39;t have even made it to the moon. We went because we felt like we could. What if the "aliens" have found a way to go really fast to come to other planets to look at the animals and it goes really fast but they forgot to get their oil changed?

This may sound dumb to some of you, but we keep deifying all of these supposed aliens. What if we aren&#39;t the red headed step child of the universe? What if the "aliens" that are visiting are the trailer trash of the universe?

Sorry it&#39;s late. i tend to go crazy at night

AndyHolland
2004-Aug-26, 01:00 PM
Dear sarahnade_me,


Anyways, why can&#39;t some people that believe in Jesus leave the people that believe in Science alone.

Sorry, I just wanted to admit my scientific bias up front. [That does however, beg the question as to why I have to subsidize the preaching of a scientific materialist religion to children.]

I do believe you are correct that these are not the upper-crust of the universe.

The major point however, is that it takes an inordinately sophisticated and expensive setup to break "the bars of time". While I think most UFO sightings are hogwash, there have been some rather consistent observations of ET over millenium - even by some recent professional observers.

John L
2004-Aug-26, 02:17 PM
Bobunf (the first response),

My point was that the aliens would need to know we existed to have any reason to come here. My point was that our signals into the universe leave a very tiny footprint compared to even this arm of the Milky Way. My point was that the odds of being noticed, like a lone and tiny atoll in the vastness of the Pacific Ocean, is very small unless there is a whole lot of aliens out there doing nothing but charting and exploring and filling the galaxy around us.

Bobunf (the second response),

I read a statement (http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99996255) from somebody at SETI last week on New Scientist.com. The SETI guy talked about the conversion to wired and direct signal communications is (or would) reduce our signals into the galaxy until we disappeared. He was actually gald about this because he felt it explained why we haven&#39;t already picked up tons of civilizations. If they all eventually convert to more efficient direct communication methods then that would explain the lack of signals.

GOURDHEAD
2004-Aug-26, 08:31 PM
The SETI guy talked about the conversion to wired and direct signal communications is (or would) reduce our signals into the galaxy until we disappeared.

These omnidirectional signals from radio and television transmitters are probably not very easily detected signals from earth anyway so I think we haven&#39;t lost much in the way of announcing our presence. Highly directional radar and laser signals are much better beacons as the article notes. A highly likely method of supplying energy needed for a sizable vehicle to traverse interstellar distances is the highly directional beaming of chunks of the stars energy to the ship. If such exist, they should be easily detectable when sent our way.

Bobunf
2004-Aug-27, 05:07 AM
Gourdhead, you said, “we haven&#39;t lost much in the way of announcing our presence” and I think you’re right about this for the reason you stated, but more significantly, because the most important and easily detected signals we send are those having to do with atmospheric gases and other signals from the effects of life and of intelligence.

Also of some relation to all of this is that the amount of broadcast radio energy has not been declining, but has been going up.

How can it be that this fact is just ignored? Doesn’t reality have some relevance to these discussions?

Maybe if I put it in all caps? BROADCAST RADIO ENERGY HAS BEEN INCREASING THROUGHOUT THE TWENTIETH CENTURY.

John L, you said, “I read a statement from somebody at SETI last week “

But he was wrong, or at least there are very significant contrary indications. Even in the internet age does the truth never catch up with the lie?

This isn’t a hard thing to figure out. Oodles of reliable information are published from a huge variety of sources. It’s not a nuanced question, subject to all kinds of interpretation, but one subject to easy empirical investigation.

How can it be that we can’t get this very simple fact straight?

Bobunf
2004-Aug-27, 05:29 AM
John L, I don’t think there are any tiny atolls “in the vastness of the Pacific Ocean” that haven’t been thoroughly investigated for interesting biological and other qualities. Not exhaustively, just thoroughly.

I don’t think the footprint of life is small at all—it’s been broadcast for about four billion years with an antenna of about 140 million square kilometers. Even we, before the end of the next dec-ade will be able to detect methane or oxygen producing life within 50 light years or so of Earth. By the end of the 21st century, it’s hard to imagine that capability won’t be extended to a distance of many thousands of light years.

Looking for the footprints of intelligence is harder, but I feel confident that very clever people will figure out ways to tease out the signals of wide scale agriculture, industrial activities, and other effects of intelligent beings in ways we haven’t even imagined, yet.

I also think advanced ETs will be as capable as us

Bob

eburacum45
2004-Aug-27, 06:05 PM
It would take detemined searching and very sensitive instruments to detect the emissions that Earth gives out;
see
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/astronomy/faq/par...section-12.html (http://www.faqs.org/faqs/astronomy/faq/part6/section-12.html)

the 300 metre Arecibo telescope could detect our tv transmissions no more than 0.3 light years away.

I expect advanced civilisations will have bigger instuments, but in the unlikely event that there is a civilisation on Alpha Centauri at our current level of technology, they could not detect our broadcast messages at all.

Only tight beamed messages, like those sent from Arecibo itself, or high powered radar beams could be detected at such distances.

John L
2004-Aug-27, 06:45 PM
Originally posted by Bobunf said+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Bobunf said)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Maybe if I put it in all caps? BROADCAST RADIO ENERGY HAS BEEN INCREASING THROUGHOUT THE TWENTIETH CENTURY.[/b] We are no longer in the 20th century, Bob. The direction communications technology has been taking for the last 5 years has been toward direct signal and wired, both requiring less power than the old omni-directional technology. The article I cited is refering to the growth of this trend in reducing the amount of signal that escapes both the Earth and the solar system.


Originally posted by Bobunf also said@
I don’t think there are any tiny atolls “in the vastness of the Pacific Ocean” that haven’t been thoroughly investigated for interesting biological and other qualities. Not exhaustively, just thoroughly. I was speaking metaphorically. The size of the Pacific Ocean is a poor comparison to the vastness of intra-galactic space. My point is that there are somewhere between 100 and 500 BILLION stars in the Milky Way, most of which are red and yellow dwarf stars. There has to be a very compelling reason to pick which you would visit, and a drop off in our radio emmissions would take away a prominent reason. Even at half the speed of light you are talking about decades of travel just to reach nearby stars. I would want to know there was something worth seeing before I took off on a multi-decade flight to another solar system.

<!--QuoteBegin-Bobunf furthermore said
I don’t think the footprint of life is small at all—it’s been broadcast for about four billion years with an antenna of about 140 million square kilometers. Even we, before the end of the next dec-ade will be able to detect methane or oxygen producing life within 50 light years or so of Earth. By the end of the 21st century, it’s hard to imagine that capability won’t be extended to a distance of many thousands of light years.[/quote]Your assumption is that our atmosphere has almost always been Nitrogen-Oxygen with Methane, CO2 and such, which it hasn&#39;t, but I agree its been that way for at least half a billion years - a long time even in my book. But seeing those emmissions, seeing the actual Earth next to the brightness of the Sun is no simple task. You would have to assume that the aliens in question are curious enough to look, have technology sufficiently advanced enough to see, be close enough to our solar system to see, and then have the motivation to spend decades traveling sub-light just to pay us a visit. And why would they come here and not make contact after such an immense journey? You figure if they&#39;re smart enough to see the Earth for what it is in the multitude of other stars in this section of the galaxy alone, to hear our weak and now diminishing radio signals leaking out into space and recognize them for what they are, and to have the technology to do all this and then actually reach us, then they&#39;d probably be smart or powerful enough to come up with a way to introduce themselves when they finally did arrive without scaring us to death, causing a global panic, or driving us to try to blast them out of the sky.

Bobunf
2004-Aug-28, 03:16 AM
John, you said, “The article I cited is refering (sic) to the growth of this trend in reducing the amount of signal that escapes both the Earth and the solar system.”

Is there any data at all—anything whatsoever—that supports this assertion? Even if we can’t yet access 21st century data about the number of AM, FM and TV broadcast stations and their energy output, is there something? Anything? Has there been a decline in the sales of radio receivers? A collapse in the price of broadcast radio or television stations? A sudden opening of available frequencies?

I didn’t think so.

I’ll make a prediction: When the date is available, it will be found that the number of FM, AM and TV broadcast stations operating in 2004 was more than in 1998 or 1997—the years I cited. And don’t get confused about the difference between absolute numbers and market share.

The idea, with zero supporting data, that, “We have cable so there is less broadcast” is just fuzzy thinking. And the statements about decline are just sloppy. What&#39;s meant is that the speaker thinks a decline will occur or is occurring. To which, if properly stated, I would reply, "Well, maybe, let&#39;s see."

But we haven&#39;t seen yet, and this is no slam-dunk. Technologies don’t necessarily replace each other. We have airplanes; but we still have trains, automobiles and busses traveling to identical destinations. People still ride horses.

In 1995 more candles were produced in the United States than in 1800. Sorry, I don’t have any data on that subject for the 21st century.

It&#39;s not nice to write obituaries about entities (like broadcast radio and television) until there&#39;s a least some hint they may not be completely healthy. Who was it who said, "The report of my death has been greatly exaggerated?"

Bob

Bobunf
2004-Aug-28, 04:32 AM
John, I didn’t make any assumptions about an oxygen-nitrogen atmosphere. My understanding of the history of Earth’s atmosphere is that it has consisted primarily of nitrogen for at least four billion years with concentrations generally exceeding 80%. About 2.3 billion years ago the first oxygen revolution occurred and the concentration of oxygen rose to about 12%, an unmistakable indication of photosynthesis and life.

Before there had been a concentration of methane of about one-tenth of one percent, which the oxygen pretty much removed causing the first snowball Earth Ice Age. I understand that methane in that concentration at Earth’s temperature would be an indicator of life—and this signal was transmitted from about 4 billion years ago to about 2.3 billion years ago.

About 600 million years ago oxygen increased to about 20% of the atmosphere.

Thus the signals sent out that life exists here may have been:

Methane in biology requiring concentrations: from about 4 billion to about 2.3 billion years ago.
Oxygen at a 12% concentration: from about 2.3 billion to about 600 million years ago.
Oxygen at a 20% concentration: from about 600 million years ago to present.

I did notice an error in my previous post: the area of the surface of the Earth is about 600 million square kilometers, not 140 million.

Bob

Bobunf
2004-Aug-28, 04:52 AM
John, you said ”But seeing those emmissions (sic), seeing the actual Earth next to the brightness of the Sun is no simple task. You would have to assume that the aliens in question are curious enough to look, have technology sufficiently advanced enough to see, be close enough to our so-lar system to see”

I am making an assumption here: that advanced ETs will be at least as capable as us, and will have been so for awhile. But isn’t that like the definition of an advanced ET?

In the next decade NASA’s Terrestrial Planet Finder and the European Space Agency’s Darwin missions are designed to do just that: see those emissions next to the brightness of their Star. We’re curious enough to look; we have technology sufficiently advanced to see; and we’re close enough to several hundred stars.

If we can do this now, of what will we be capable in 2100? Or 2200?

If we can do it, how hard can it be for ET?

Bob

eburacum45
2004-Aug-28, 11:02 AM
Oxygen in a planet&#39;s atmosphere is no guarantee of biological origin, neither is methane;
All four outer gas giants have detectable levels of methane, while oxygen was detected in the atmosphere of HD 209458b;
oxygen can be expected in any planet which has water and is exposed to high UV levels; photolysis will split the water, and the hydrogen component may evaporate if the escape velocity allows; this will produce an abiotic oxygen atmosphere.

Bobunf
2004-Aug-28, 07:47 PM
Eburacum45, you said, "oxygen can be expected in any planet which has water and is exposed to high UV levels; photolysis will split the water, and the hydrogen component may evaporate if the escape velocity allows; this will produce an abiotic oxygen atmosphere."

From the University of Michigan’s Fall 2004 course “Global Change, Evolution of the Atmosphere-Structure and Composition, Current Lectures” by Professor Perry Samson.

“Photolysis of water vapor and carbon dioxide produce hydroxyl and atomic oxygen, respectively, that, in turn, produce oxygen in small concentrations. This process produced oxygen for the early atmosphere before photosynthesis became dominant.

“Oxygen increased in stages, first through photolysis of water vapor and carbon dioxide by ultraviolet energy and, possibly, lightning:
H2O -> H + OH
produces a hydroxyl radiacal (OH) and
CO2 -> CO+ O
produces an atomic oxygen (O). The OH is very reactive and combines with the O
O + OH -> O2 + H
The hydrogen atoms formed in these reactions are light and some small fraction excape to space allowing the O2 to build to a very low concentration, probably yielded only about 1% of the oxygen available to-day.”

1% is a lot less than the 12+% oxygen concentration Earth has had for 2.3 billion years. I think our advanced ETs will be able to figure this out. 12+>1.

Bob

Bobunf
2004-Aug-28, 09:43 PM
Eburacum45, you said, “neither is methane. All four outer gas giants have detectable levels of methane”

Methane is still detectable in the atmosphere of the Earth. Even with all the oxygen—a conse-quence of the activity of still extant methogens, and another indication of life.

As for more than 2.3 billion years ago, my understanding is that the probable amount of methane in the Earth’s atmosphere was in excess of 0.1%, an amount that could not have existed for more than a few tens of thousands of years, not alone billions, without biological activity, because of the photolysis that will occur in the upper atmosphere releasing hydrogen to space.

Again, I think advanced ET will be able to figure this out.

Bob

eburacum45
2004-Aug-29, 06:43 PM
Any world which has encountered a large number of icy comets and is within the so-called comfort zone may become a so-called &#39;water world&#39;; these worlds are generally expected to have abiotic oxygen atmospheres and very little carbon dioxide.
What may happen is that the oxygen will combine with nitrogen (if present) to form toxic nitrogen oxide compounds; this is a slow process but will eventually produce a toxic oxygen, nitrogen and nitrous acid atmosphere.

Methane as well is not an indication of life on Titan, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus or Neptune; it is present on Mars but may not indicate life either. It is admittedly a sign of life on Earth; but this is the only life bearing terrestrial planet we know about, so this indication may not hold good for all terrestrial worlds with methane.

If we detect oxygen or methane in an extrasolar planet&#39;s atmosphere we must be sure that abiotic processes have not created this oxygen or methane. Without a full understanding of all possible planetary chemistries we cannot expect to be sure of signs of life.

yes, a hypothetical ET may be able to distinguish signs of life at a distance; but it could not do so using the level of knowledge we have today.

John L
2004-Aug-30, 06:51 PM
Originally posted by Bobunf said
In the next decade NASA’s Terrestrial Planet Finder and the European Space Agency’s Darwin missions are designed to do just that: see those emissions next to the brightness of their Star. We’re curious enough to look; we have technology sufficiently advanced to see; and we’re close enough to several hundred stars. We hope we&#39;ll have technology sufficiently advanced to see, and I honestly hope we will, too. I know what we will see are very faint points next to the blocked light of the central star, and the stars we will be able to use this technique, with our current level of technology, will all by necesity be only those stars very close to our own. With those faint points of light we will be able to search for emmission and absorption lines to identify the atmospheres main components in a general way, and possibly even identify a small terrestrial world, or moon of a gas giant, that has a nitrogen-oxygen atmosphere like ours.

Unfortunately that tells us nothing about the life on that world, as eburacum-45 aptly points out, or whether it is intelligent. We won&#39;t have close up surface images to see roads, or cities, or great domes, or the geometric patterns produced by organized agriculture - and all that is assuming that the supposed lifeforms leave any visible trace of their existence. Furthermore, all of these stars have been searched by SETI and their complimentary university and international partners with no results indicating any transmitting civilizations.

Now I want to make one point that may not have been clear before. I believe with 100% certainty that the universe is filled with life. With hundreds of billions of galaxies containing hundreds of billions of stars each, and even more dwarf galaxies teaming around and between them, I find it utterly impossible to believe that the events on the Earth that gave rise to inteligent life are unique in the whole universe. I also beleive, however, that those events are probably rare enough (for inteligent life at least) that there is none within the distance of our current search technology, and we are very likely not within the search technology of another.

Bobunf
2004-Aug-31, 05:01 AM
John L, I entirely agree with your points with two exceptions:

I’m not nearly as confident as you that there are advanced civilizations elsewhere in the Universe. It seems to me the fact that there are billion and trillions suggests absolutely nothing. The number of advanced ETs is a product of the number of possible worlds and a probability. There are as many small numbers as there are big.

If the probability of an advanced civilization arising were the reciprocal of the number of possible places times a million; then the probability of another advanced anywhere in the Universe would be about zero—actually one in a million.

Since our understanding of this probability is so sparse, I don’t feel there are any guarantees on this subject at all. And, of course, there’s Fermi’s question, “Where are they?”

The second point is that I think you underestimate the advances that we ourselves will see in detection technology within a few decades. The understanding and the technology are really almost here today. Larger interferometers at greater distances from the Earth and the Sun, the use of transits, gravitational lensing, polarized light, and other possibilities I can’t begin to imagine.

Then add a thousand years to our technology and think of what ET might be capable.

You don’t have to image architecture to see the results of intelligence. Let me suggest three ways that ET, a thousand years ahead of us, could remotely determine our level of industrial activity

1. Detecting freon in the atmosphere, and observing its distribution over time, would not only show we are here, but would pinpoint the state of our technology within a few decades. Wide-spread use of freon only goes back to about 1929.

2. Coal has been widely used for more than a thousand years. Burning coal releases radioactive uranium and thorium into the atmosphere. The distribution patterns of these pollutants over time would make it quite possible to differentiate natural occurrences from on-going technological use, and to develop ideas about the level of technology being employed.

3. One of the human introduced pollutants in our atmosphere is lead. Environmental Science and Technology of November 26, 1997 contained a paper entitled “Lead from Carthaginian and Roman Spanish Mines Isotopically Identified in Greenland Ice Dated from 600 B.C. to 300 A.D.” It was reported that lead increased hundreds of times above normal levels 2500 years ago.

Lead has been used in metal working for more than 8500 years. I would think it would be quite possible to differentiate on-going metal working by-products from sporadic natural events, such as lead emissions from volcanic eruptions.

There are lots and lots of other possibilities such as DDT (1870s), kerosene, naphthalene and gasoline (1850s), benzene (1860s), Chloroform (1840s), and many others.

So, I think advanced ET will know we are here and have a pretty good idea of what we are up to. Even if super-luminal communication is impossible, certainly any within a thousand light years should be pretty much on top of things on Earth.

Earth
2004-Sep-02, 08:37 PM
:blink: ..............theres no such thing as aliens I think scientists waste their time tring to find them. :(

Aqualung
2004-Sep-19, 08:52 AM
This is my first post, so be gentle.

Because of the distances involved I do not think we have been visited by aliens of any type or description.

I do think that there are alot of civilisations throughout the Universe and in our Galaxy who are communicating with each other.

If two planets in the same system harboured intelligent life capable of radio communication I expect them to be talking to each other on adaily basis and possibly visiting each other.

If two nearby stars were home to planets with intelligent life I would expect them to have a constant stream of information passing between them. It would take several years to arrive but &#39;secrecy&#39; would hardly matter. Physical communication I would expect at the very most to be the exchange of unmanned vehicles at some point in the dim distant future.

astromark
2004-Sep-19, 10:07 AM
:unsure: Three points... One, As much as I would like to be witness to an alian visate, and mankinds reaction to it. I fear it may never happen. And yes I mean never. There is not conclusive evadance that earth has ever been visated buy an alian life form. As many crazies as claim the fact. No I&#39;m sorry, no evadance as yet prosented as convincing, or compeling.
Two, The distances involved are enormouse, The length of any jorney is in itself a barrier. Time and distance. and at what point life evolves into the being that evan cares to know.
Three, We call ourselves Man. There seems to be some gaps in our evalution, there is parts of our history missing. we can and have found basic biped ansestors of man, but the leap in our technoledgy is a bit of a mistory. Is it possable we are the desendance of gods ? Hmmm.... why is it that all the great civilisations seem to have the same rule book. called the qu&#39;rn, bible or the writings of budda. and theres others. This is not astronomy... but it might be.
So there you have it. just a string of thoughts, a thread. But it looks oddly tangled from where I stand. So no, it will not happen, not ever. sorry.

GOURDHEAD
2004-Sep-19, 12:31 PM
So no, it will not happen, not ever. sorry.

It most certainly will happen, but not soon enough for you to have to eat your words. But, keep them sugar coated just in case.

Sometime in the distant future someone may become able to say: "we have found the aliens and they are us".

astromark
2004-Sep-20, 12:42 AM
:rolleyes: Gourhead, If I understand you. You are sagesting that we will find alian life forms and visate them. Thus becomming the alians we are looking for, our selves. My english is not perfect nor is my ability to express myself, and you seem to have missed my point. We may well be, or have been poluted by, alians. We may be the desendance of them. But the proof does not present itself to me in a convincing fashion. My perception and understanding my well be floored, but I dont think we will find ET&#39;s advanced further than ourselves. I would hope That single cell or other microbic life does not mean I have to eat my words. We may find that within this solar system. If we find or are visated by Saperior life forms, I would be thrilled to eat my words.. I am waiting...

GOURDHEAD
2004-Sep-20, 12:12 PM
Gourhead, If I understand you. You are sagesting that we will find alian life forms and visate them. Thus becomming the alians we are looking for, our selves.

No, just another failed attempt at humor on my part. I was projecting into the future when our progeny are so scattered throughout the MW that on first encountering our distant cousins, neither set of our progeny will realize that they are realatives. They will have lost track, maybe even tract, of each other.

mark mclellan
2004-Sep-20, 02:05 PM
maths alone makes me believe that the universe is probably awash with intelligent life, many billions of stars, if only a few have life supporting planets we will have millions of ET&#39;s out there&#33; The bigger problem is the vastness of the universe, even if an intelligent species can travel at close to the speed of light they still have an insurmountable (forgive the spelling) task in getting anywhere&#33; Speed of travel is not the problem here, it is time itself that will dash there chances of ever getting. I know that as you get closer to the speed of light time slows down but even then they are going to need to live in these modestly sized craft (average UFO sighting) for decades, possibly hundreds or thousands of years&#33; We cannot as yet send a couple of men to Mars because of the 10 months it would take to get there. They will need to perfect suspended animation before being able to travel at light speed to cross the vastness of the universe ,and if they did perfect that then their travelling speed is irrelavent. No i do not believe we have ever been visited by an intelligent alien species.

eburacum45
2004-Sep-22, 07:03 AM
Developing suspended animation looks a lot easier to me than making a spacecraft powerful and robust enough to cross interstellar distances.

The amount of energy involved in getting close to light speed is mind boggling; so high that the spacecraft is likely to evaporate when you fire the engines. Not to mention the friction from the interstellar medium.

So simply preserving a living body in an inactive state for a lengthy period seems to be a less difficult task.

GOURDHEAD
2004-Sep-22, 01:44 PM
So simply preserving a living body in an inactive state for a lengthy period seems to be a less difficult task.

The line between suspended animation and death is dangerously fuzzy. Any similarity between what was suspended and what is recovered is largely indeterminate.

We understand the physics of how to travel at large fractions of the speed of light, although we have a ways to go to perfect the engineering and production techniques. This is not so for the biology of suspended animation. For now it is a science fiction writer&#39;s pipe dream.

eburacum45
2004-Sep-22, 04:29 PM
Yes; but the physics of interstellar flight shows that you have to have rockets more powerful than a million nuclear explosions behind you to accelerate, and the dust and gas in space will turn into a continuous explosion at your bow;

the limits of materials science are much better understood than the limits of biology, and they say no material we know of or even speculate about could stand up to the rocket blast needed to accelerate to interstellar speeds.

But biology and life science does not rule out hibernation, or better still biostasis as described by Eric Drexler...
active nanotech preservation of living tissue by repairing damage from within;
my adaptation of the concept here
(which is, admittedly, science fiction, but there you go)
http://www.orionsarm.com/tech/nanostasis.html

astromark
2004-Sep-23, 12:53 PM
:P Science fiction pipe dream. Probebly. and yes, I agree that we will be able to reach up to and maintain light speed. We may just crack it and achieve speeds far greater, but we will not be able to suspend our life while we travel. In order to attain this advancment we need to be able to freeze life for decades. I have a problem with that idea. Our brain reqiers a flow of oxygen enriched blood in order to stop it entering a state of decay ( death ) A prolonged deep sleep will not do as we would still be ageing. Unless we adopt the notion that we live in transit. So its galactica or enterprise type ships that we need to be building in order to breed generations while we travel. Note there are some moral issues that need to be sorted out here. Lets just &#39;make it so...&#39; At near to or above light speed it is obvious that we need some sort of forward screen to protect the craft from the particals we would be coliding with. Could we send a fission reactor ahead of us to clear the way. or some other device to act as a sweeper.

astromark
2004-Sep-23, 12:59 PM
creat a controled black hole and send it off. its gravity could just drag us along for the ride. No it looks like a dumb idea now that its been writen down...sorry.

eburacum45
2004-Sep-23, 11:48 PM
No; not such a bad idea after all; just forget about being dragged along by the gravity- that would be painful because of the tidal forces involved.

Just take a small black hole (a hundred thousand tonnes perhaps)- then it will be radiating very strongly thanks to Hawking radiation; it could be used as an energy source.
Run your rockets off this energy; when the black hole looks like evaporating completely, chuck some more mass in and it will keep going indefinitely- straight mass to energy conversion.

muunbiem
2004-Sep-27, 10:09 AM
Have we been "visited"?

OF COURSE, we have.

The "space people " have been here...

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/spacepeople.shtml

:blink:

astromark
2004-Sep-28, 12:46 PM
:angry: No. Its not right to make light of handycaped people. Muunbiem. your link is amussing but uncool. I stand by my early&#39;er statment, No proof that earth has ever been visated by an alian spiecies. Not a single case. none, zip, zero, nill... We may well find life on Mars, but it will be microbic at the very best. The chances of life being found elswhere in this solar system are not huge. I have little dought that life is prolific across the universe. The chances of it being technicaly advanced however is very small. We have lived a very short time period. As intelagent sentiant beings. This planet has been the pearl that has allowed life to regenerate after each mass extinction avent, had any of them not happened the way they did. We may not have risen out of the wildlife that seem to be our ansestors. Just to add a thread here tho, are we the alians ansestors.? Did they drop in and breed with us, get stuck here or just visate and leave a rule book and a bunch of stories.... :D Umm... no, but maybe... This planet is aproxamatly four and a half billion years old. Life has been here for about three billion years. The history of Man is only a very short fraction of this planets history. Will we be able to find other beings that have had the time and enviroment to evolve as we have or not ? :( Not seems to be the answer.

daniel_l_v
2004-Oct-03, 07:32 AM
Hello All

I think that if Earth has indeed been "visited" either in the past or as we speak, then it would be rather subtle and probably through technology that in no way involves the physical form of the aliens to be here at all ... remote technology beyond our wildest dreams could possibly be the standard means of alien planet and civilisation research.

I think if we have been visited, it would be as part of research, and not on humans per se (we are rather self-centred when it comes to invisaging that any possible aliens would find us special enough to grab in dozens and experiment on).

However, it is good to have an open mind, but as I am keen on the scientific method, I may not believe in god, but I think that if something offers a good and reliable path to understanding the true nature of things, it is science.

Regards

Daniel V
Australia

astromark
2004-Oct-03, 08:08 AM
:huh: Daniel, you like the scientific methode, and yet you seem to think that alians are amongst us or have visated, or even abducted... what or where did you get all that from,? Steven Spielberg. I fear you may be grasping at straws.
:blink: Allthough there have been some incidents as yet unexplained. There has been flying object that have not been identified. None of that is proof that this earth has or is being visated by an alian life form. go on prove me wrong. I would like to be wrong, but ... I dont think so.
:( The shear size of the universe and the length of time requiered to evolve into a race of technicly edept beings may prohibate us ever making contact. Thats a pity becouse it would be enlightening a... So go on prove me wrong... :P

GOURDHEAD
2004-Oct-03, 06:09 PM
There will be some real engineering challenges in designing systems or processes to interface with a black hole of any size to either send it to a designated place or to use it as a power supply. It may be easier to unravel them into hydrogen or whatever comes out and use that for fuel.

qraal
2004-Oct-18, 12:27 AM
Hi All

Ride a laser or a particle beam to the stars - easier than trying to find black holes in your back-yard.

As for the topic I think there&#39;s sufficient historical evidence to suggest some kind of Contact millennia ago and perhaps ongoing robotic monitoring.

But are they sampling us today as Abductionists believe? Or are they so strange that the only interface they can create between us and them is through the hypnogogic experiences people confuse for abductions?

Imagine creatures made from plasma able to manipulate our brains&#39; electromagnetic fields, but at a gross level - they&#39;re trying to talk to us but the channel is noisy and we confuse it for UFOs, religious visions and rectal probing...

qraal

edwinksl
2004-Oct-25, 12:37 PM
Has anyone thought that aliens may have created this matrix for us to wonder about our own existence?

bluegirl
2004-Oct-31, 10:09 PM
I believe in UFO&#39;s. It would be arrogant to assume the we are alone in the universe. As for evidence, I&#39;ve seen enough to convince me. I&#39;ve lived long enough to know that things that happen leave certain traces, testimonies, pictures, etc. If you really look into it, there&#39;s enough to convince. I also believe that the government has colluded to keep it a secret because they made a deal, alien technology for access to earth and it&#39;s people. When you really look into it and combine it with life experience of other things the government has done it makes sense.

bluegirl
2004-Oct-31, 10:31 PM
From my research many of the aliens that come here are believed to be from Zeta Reticuli. As for the distance, they have ways to travel that we don&#39;t, as we have methods that didn&#39;t exist one hundred years ago. Methods used now would have been thought impossible a few hundred years ago, even the Wright Brothers were denouced by learned experts.

We just don&#39;t know how they get here. That&#39;s doesn&#39;t mean they don&#39;t. When white men first went to Australia, the aboriginal people saw their ships on the horizon but ignored them. It didn&#39;t fit with their frame of reference. Finally when their leader acknowledged this and spoke about it, they were able to see the ships.

Why wouldn&#39;t at least some of them come here in person? We send astronauts IN PERSON. Western white males have explored every corner of this earth, IN PERSON, risking their lives to do so. Why wouldn&#39;t aliens be interested in us? We are the center of life in our galaxy, we have things they do not. Why wouldn&#39;t they experiment on us? We have done this to animals and indigenous people, and others. If we went to a planet with intelligent life, or they came here, we would experiment on them. Why would they be different? As for how they found us, if they are intelligent enough to travel through space, that would not be difficult.

astromark
2004-Nov-01, 12:01 PM
:D Goverment conspiracy... nonsence.
:P evadance ... where? :lol: I egerly await this evadance. :rolleyes:
This is a subject that has held my interest for years, I have read dozens of books about alian sightings. Not one of those acounts could be proved to be an alian visating this planet. Not one. :blink: Eric Von Danicken got me going for a while untill I discounted him as a compleat lunartick. Interesting idea gone way to far.
If you baleave that the earth has or is being visated by craft controled by alian beings, the onnus is on you to prove this redickulouse asertion... Oops for the spelling, english is not my first langage. sorry. :( I would like to be wrong about all this, but as yet the evadance does not suport your ideas. It is with regret that I have conclouded that we may never find intelagent alians. the universe is just to big. the time line to short. Our voice never to be herd. :unsure:

Jakenorrish
2004-Nov-09, 01:11 PM
Lets bring this discussion back to the realm of science, rather than the fantasy that seems to have been expressed on many of the posts.

Firstly, if there is life elsewhere in the universe, then it will be a long way from us. If there was life within 100 light years of our star, then we would take 100 years to get there at the speed of light, which according to Einstein, can never be broken. More to the point, anything visiting us would also have to follow the same laws we would. Now all sorts of theories about worm holes and shortcuts have been bandied around, but there is absolutely no scientific evidence that this is or is ever going to be a plausible means of interstellar travel.

Lots of UFO believers tell us to open our minds to the possibilities, but do not realise the enormity of the effort required by any aliens to get here. Also the chances of Alien life stumbling across our planet would be trillions upon trillions upon trillions. We have only been sending radio communications for about the last 50 years, so how would any civilisation beyond 50 light years away know we are here? 50 light years is almost insignificant in the vastness of space.

I or anyone else can&#39;t say for definite that we haven&#39;t been visited, but there is absolutely no evidence that we have had alien visitors. Besides, the SETI (Search for Extra Terrestrial Intelligence) is still looking for proof. I think that we should stick with that method of discovery as it is the most likely way we&#39;ll discover intelligent life....

rahuldandekar
2004-Nov-10, 04:20 AM
Vey right , jake. Even if we have life within 100 life years of us, It will take another 50 years to search for it. Aliens won&#39;t find us till they have noticed our signals. And that&#39;s not going to be soon. Then there&#39;s the problem of coming to us. Even if they travel at the spped of light, a physical impossiblity, they will take 100 years to reach us. So there&#39;s little chance of them reaching us.

Another thing is, almost all UFO reports say that the aliens were much like us. Now, what is the reason that aliens will have a head with two eyes, two hands, two legs, and be upright. They will be shaped by their environmental conditions.

Matthew
2004-Nov-10, 05:40 AM
Maybe the Ga&#39;uld (hope I spelt it right) took them from earth and spread humans throughout the galaxy.

On a more serious note: we see aliens as having two arms and legs because thats what we&#39;re used to. Humans who report it aern&#39;t too imaginitive, unless of course they do look like us....

Dave Mitsky
2004-Nov-10, 06:27 AM
Originally posted by rahuldandekar@Nov 10 2004, 04:20 AM
Vey right , jake. Even if we have life within 100 life years of us, It will take another 50 years to search for it. Aliens won&#39;t find us till they have noticed our signals. And that&#39;s not going to be soon. Then there&#39;s the problem of coming to us. Even if they travel at the spped of light, a physical impossiblity, they will take 100 years to reach us. So there&#39;s little chance of them reaching us.

Another thing is, almost all UFO reports say that the aliens were much like us. Now, what is the reason that aliens will have a head with two eyes, two hands, two legs, and be upright. They will be shaped by their environmental conditions.
It would take at least 200 hundred years, since half way between an alien planet 100 light years distant and our solar system the spacecraft would have to start declerating. Otherwise, it would speed by Earth at nearly the speed of light.

IMO, there is absolutely no credible evidence that Earth has ever been visited by extraterrestrials.

Dave Mitsky

Matthew
2004-Nov-10, 07:40 AM
There is no credable evidence, but that does not mean that it has never occured. However unlikely.

If an alien 100 light years away picked up on a 1950 TV transmission, then replied instantly we would not recieve a meessage until 2150. Though the chances of life residing within 100 light years is extremely remote.

Jakenorrish
2004-Nov-10, 10:17 AM
Its nice that the last few posts have been so constructive on this issue. It annoys me when people start going on about hangar 18, or whatever other conspiricy theories are fasionable this week without putting their minds to the logistics and evidence. I have a friend who is convinced that we&#39;re visited regularly by aliens, but whenever I ask him how and why, he can offer no evidence whatsoever, or logical arguement&#33;

Jake B)

astromark
2004-Nov-10, 11:31 AM
:rolleyes: Yes its pleasing to see like minded indaviduals expresing the same logical arguments. Live long and prosper... I would asume that the local stars would and have been studied for any tell tale wobble, being the indactor of a planetary system. If not why not. For it is these stars that we will one day venture to. It would be a good idea to search the local area for any indacation of planets. dont ya think?. What do I concider local you ask?... any thing within fifty years. As stated quiet rightly by Mathew and Dave. the time of exelaration and decelaration have to be concidered in this sort of travel :( and I agree that its not likly that we could ever venture much ferther for a very long time. :huh:

GOURDHEAD
2004-Nov-10, 02:55 PM
Also the chances of Alien life stumbling across our planet would be trillions upon trillions upon trillions. We have only been sending radio communications for about the last 50 years, so how would any civilisation beyond 50 light years away know we are here?
Maybe the chances are better than you think (since probabilities don&#39;t get larger than one, I assume you meant "one in" to be added before your first trillion). Note how our technology for planet searching has improved over the last 30 years and it is not slowing down. In 2 or 3 hundred years we will be able to spectrally diagnose the atmospheres of planets within a few thousand light years of our instruments. If significant amounts of molecular oxygen are found in the atmosphere, such as has been the case on earth for more than 0.5 billion years of signal emission, of a planet we can be quite sure that it supports carbon based life such as are we and without prejucice as to its level of intelligence or technology development. The significant levels of atmospheric molecular oxygen on earth have been available for detection over distances greater than the diameter of the MW for some time now provided they could be sorted out from all the noise also available.

Any planet on which our level of technology development occurred a few thousand to millions of years ago will no doubt be able to detect other planets with significant levels of atmospheric molecular oxygen, hence life. Based on such discoveries they can elect to launch probes, crittered or not, to promising locations. Curiosity is a strong motivator among intelligent species. It is also likely that they would have launched robotic "life detection probes" to search areas of the MW out of reach of their telescopes.

rahuldandekar
2004-Nov-10, 03:56 PM
Is our technology advanced enought to find an earth sized planet within 100 light years? And what is the range of the distance from the star that the planet should have so that it has life on it? (Basic life) . You know, I think it depends on the amount of energy recieved per unit area.

However, the numbers may not be as low as one in a trillion. I emphasize MAY.

Jakenorrish
2004-Nov-10, 04:27 PM
Hi Gourdhead&#33;

Why, if as we&#39;ve already discussed, would any alien civilisation send probes out when it would take so long to get them there and back, and the huge distances to overcome would make it a logistical nightmare? Just doesn&#39;t add up to me.

Cheers,

Jake B)

kenyan
2004-Nov-18, 11:26 AM
:D First Posibility:
We should have been visited before without realising; how many scientist rush to do things without considering the consequences? May be Eliens did put all this into consideration thus visiting us without us realizing if any those few occations we&#39;ve sighted UFOs something went wrong with thier spaceships. As far as we know the earth is not occupiying a special position in the universe but a position just favorable to us only, ever considered onother planet same position in another system? could even be with far much advanced civilization.

B) Second Posibility:
Eliens are definately there only, that they can not visit us just the same way we can not visit them&#33; To get this Put Relativity into use and get it that it will take the current civilization alot to visit the Eliens 4 million light years away yet fail to know about the outcome because our civilization will be long gone&#33;&#33; Only the astronauts will know about it&#33;&#33;

So have we been visited before? They seem to ask too&#33; Have we ever visited another planet and found another civilization&#33;? NOOO&#33;&#33; We could be the Elsewhere to each other should there be the Eliens......they can influence us neither can we to them......we dont belong to each others past or future&#33;&#33;

I Believe In The Past, Future And The ´ELSEWHERE´ .........read Einstein&#39;s Relativity and Quantum Revolution Physics.

:unsure:

Jakenorrish
2004-Nov-18, 03:24 PM
Hi there.

I agree that anything is possible, but have yet to see any concrete evidence to even remotely suggest that we have been visited by any intelligent alien life-form. I have seen plenty of evidence including the mathematical evidence such as the theory of relitivity to suggest that intelligent life from another planet has almost certainly never visited us. The idea that they a) would know that we are here and B) they&#39;d be able to get here just seems far fetched to say the least.....

Feel free to prove me wrong&#33;

GOURDHEAD
2004-Nov-19, 02:43 PM
Why, if as we&#39;ve already discussed, would any alien civilisation send probes out when it would take so long to get them there and back, and the huge distances to overcome would make it a logistical nightmare? Just doesn&#39;t add up to me.
Because they are curious about the universe and what&#39;s in it. They would not expect to get the probe back. Just the information about the universe that it had collected would be sent back. An intelligent species must be eternally vigilant in their pursuit of the many ways the universe will, without malice of forethought, do them in. Attitude can transform nightmares into beautiful dreams.

damienpaul
2004-Nov-19, 11:56 PM
I could not agree more, Gourdhead. - Patience and vigilance

astromark
2004-Nov-21, 09:07 AM
:rolleyes: Lets hope you are right... but our track record is not good in this regard. If we think we are the civalized spiecies here... :( Oh dear. Have a thought for the way we treat the other life forms on this planet. :unsure: I would expect the alian race to come charging in here and kick the sand castle, boot the ant nest, burn the beehive... I could go on, but you must see my point a... :lol:
Have we been visated by an alian spieces? Not yet, Whew....

wstevenbrown
2004-Nov-24, 04:17 AM
Interesting that in this string the focus is on us, and on our limitations. I consider it possible that out there a society already exists, where everybody knows everybody (except us). How? I don&#39;t know. Perhaps they don&#39;t teach their children the Einstein Fables. David Brin has written an excellent series of novels in which the chiefest of status symbols was to adopt a developing species and assist it to become civilized-- so much so that it was the basis for credit and commerce. Then again, we may truly be the Crown of Creation. That scares me. ;) S

astromark
2004-Nov-24, 09:56 PM
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: As yet, :blink: The evadance is not aparent to me that the earth has ever been visited by an alien spiecies... :unsure: from all of those UFO stories, theres not one that has presented us with evadance of alien visitation.
I&#39;m looking with an open mind for real proof. Something like a DNA test that concludes a extra terestial life form. Or maybe the remnance of the space craft. Have Any of you actually got any real evadance that we are not alone?
The subject; Have we been visited? ... No :D I think. Could we set up an interview on Opra with some visitor from..... No. not yet anyway. :P but then I look at my wife and wonder where she&#39;s from. :huh: :blink:

qraal
2004-Nov-25, 11:57 AM
Of course we&#39;ve been visited, probably hundreds of times, over five billion years. But no one wants to wreck natural life-bearing planets because it&#39;s easier and more ethical to make your own out of dead moons and asteroids.

Some ETIs could still be here watching us via probes and laser-links back to their bases in the Kuiper Belt.

qraal

Jakenorrish
2004-Nov-25, 01:32 PM
Hi Graal,

you say &#39;of course we&#39;ve been visited&#39;. Can you provide any evidence to back it up? I&#39;m interested to hear from you. I myself can&#39;t say whether we have or haven&#39;t been, but all evidence currently available, ie the laws of Physics and mathematics suggests that it is highly improbable that we have.

In response to the earlier post saying that alien beings may not live by einsteins rules, I&#39;d remind him that Einstein didn&#39;t make the rules, he simply discovered what was already there and quantified it. Any intelligent alien life would have to abide by the laws of Physics and mathematics. They too would face the same problems we do.

Jake B)

wstevenbrown
2004-Nov-26, 06:37 PM
Jake-- The Law of Gravity used to read: "What goes up must come down." Uncle Albert simply widened the universe of discourse. I&#39;m not saying his rules aren&#39;t true and applicable to what we presently see. We are sentient creatures, and Option IV is available to us-- alter the circumstances. If, as some theories hold, there are additional dimensions to those we normally participate in, geometric options not involving velocity may come about. Perhaps it would be better to say that we would need to alter our definitions of velocity and distance to suit the new wider circumstances. On the personal side, I hand-crafted some of the instrumentation that went out in Pioneers 9-13, and Voyagers 1-2. Those items may come down somewhere, but it won&#39;t be here, where everything &#39;must&#39; come down. ;) Best Regards--Steve
PS. If their problems truly are our problems, they will seem less alien, DYT ?

Jakenorrish
2004-Nov-28, 04:16 PM
Hi there&#33;

As usual the question of have aliens visited us still comes back to one thing. Where&#39;s the evidence to even remotely suggest they have? I can&#39;t say they have or haven&#39;t been here, but there again I can and have given reasons and facts to back up my feeling that they almost certainly haven&#39;t.

Many people in this discussion seem convinced we&#39;ve had aliens visit us with absolutely no credible evidence to present at all. I say to them, without this evidence, I will dismiss their arguments out of hand. The only arguments I&#39;ve seen in favour of us having been visited have consisted of speculation and worse still, conspiricy theory. There is absolutely no scientific fact available as yet to say we&#39;ve had flying saucers or little green men turning up.

I agree that our interpretation of the laws of science may have a way to go yet, I believe strongly through the law of averages that there is life out there (I can&#39;t say there is any evidence that there is though) but if there was can&#39;t see how it could get here, or why it would want to. There are billions of far more interesting places for any intelligent alien race to want to explore than an insignificant star such as ours&#33;

antoniseb
2004-Nov-28, 04:31 PM
Originally posted by Jakenorrish@Nov 28 2004, 04:16 PM
I can&#39;t say they have or haven&#39;t been here, but there again I can and have given reasons and facts to back up my feeling that they almost certainly haven&#39;t.
Hi Jakenorrish,

I normally don&#39;t contribute to this thread, as like you, I believe that there is both little likelyhood, and no evidence that we&#39;ve been visited. I think, using my best guess numbers for the Drake equation, that we are probably one of three to three hundred civilizations currently active in the galaxy. This puts the distance to get here at a pretty substantial number of light years.

None-the-less, like you I am aware that we also have no proof that we haven&#39;t been visited, so I make no such claims on an absolute basis.

If we ever do connect to alien life, we will learn things about it. Until then speculation is pretty wide open, with nothing that can ever really narrow it down to real knowledge.

Jakenorrish
2004-Nov-29, 11:36 AM
Hi Antoniseb,

Totally agree. Its nice to talk about a subject that people are so passionate about, whether they agree with me or not&#33;&#33;

Jake B)

stpbutcool1
2004-Nov-29, 03:31 PM
ok this is all very posiable but y would they come to earth????
what for ?????
y would they need people?????
what evidense do we have ????
Cave dwellings from three thousend years ago????

thanks&#33;&#33;
stpbutcool1 :ph34r:

John L
2004-Nov-29, 11:54 PM
I&#39;ve said this before and I&#39;ll say it again today. We&#39;ve been sending out signals substantial enough to escape our solar system for 68 years now. That means, for an alien civilisation to even know we exist, they would have to live within a 68 light year radius sphere centered around our solar system, or they would have to travel through it. Furthermore, they would have to be able to identify our extremely faint (by then) signal as coming from an intelligent source, and then trace it back to our solar system. Furthermore, even traveling at the speed of light, they would have to be within 34 light years to have heard our signal, traced it back to the source, and then traveled through the vast distances between the stars to get here today. I fully and whole-heartedly believe that our planet is NOT the only one in the universe with life on it, and I seriously doubt we are even the only one with inteligent life, but I can&#39;t believe that there are any alien races that even know we are here or would care if they knew. If they have the ability to hop around the galaxy from star to star, then they would have filled them all by now, including ours. If they don&#39;t, then the ability either doesn&#39;t exist and we&#39;ll never meet or we&#39;ll find it first and fill the galaxy before they get off their own world. We&#39;ll be the "aliens" then...

stpbutcool1
2004-Nov-30, 12:02 AM
Earth is 4.5 billion years old, = 4500,000,000 years

what proof do wo have that the world is 4.5 billion years ago ??????????

i thank that the earth is only about 3-5 thousand years old

if u look at some chineese ""dragons"" they kinda look like dinos dont they what makes u thank that people where not alive when the dinos where on earth????

what makes u thank that dinos are not still on earth????
there have been lots of people reported that they have seen a dino...

thanks,
stpbutcool1 :ph34r:

wstevenbrown
2004-Nov-30, 01:09 AM
Okay, there is no incontrovertible evidence. So what? I have no trouble visualizing entire societies, in "generation ships", wandering the MW for no other reason than curiosity, spirit of adventure. If I had the means I&#39;d do it myself-- leave you all behind in a heartbeat--hell, half a heartbeat&#33; What started out as generation ships might end up being point-to-point transport for single generations. Where there&#39;s a will, there&#39;s a way. :P S

Jakenorrish
2004-Nov-30, 11:00 AM
In total agreement with John L.

Okay, there is no incontrovertible evidence. So what? I have no trouble visualizing entire societies, in "generation ships", wandering the MW for no other reason than curiosity, spirit of adventure.

Erm just the small matter of proof? This isn&#39;t a science fiction website, its a science fact site. Lets stick to the facts shall we?&#33; As we&#39;ve said before, its all very well to say things like the above quote, but go to the lord of the rings site, and join the multitude of daydreamers who also believe in middle earth&#33;&#33;

astromark
2004-Nov-30, 11:35 AM
Yes to John&#39;s reply. Please provid the evadence for the wild &#39;facts&#39;that some of you are quoting. Where is the evadance of all these aliens landing here on our earth.? This year 2004. and still people look for hob goblins and spirate beings...lol ... What hope humanity?
Lets try and be realistic a... and stick to the science, astronomy.

wstevenbrown
2004-Nov-30, 05:39 PM
My post was in answer to the question "Why would they bother...?", iterated several times in this string, as support for the hypothesis "We have not been visited." If you wish to use your assumption set to prove your assumption set, you are guaranteed success. Yr srvnt, S

ulgah
2004-Nov-30, 09:28 PM
Originally posted by wstevenbrown@Nov 30 2004, 01:09 AM
Okay, there is no incontrovertible evidence. So what? I have no trouble visualizing entire societies, in "generation ships", wandering the MW for no other reason than curiosity, spirit of adventure. If I had the means I&#39;d do it myself-- leave you all behind in a heartbeat--hell, half a heartbeat&#33; What started out as generation ships might end up being point-to-point transport for single generations. Where there&#39;s a will, there&#39;s a way. :P S
Gosh, that would be mighty boring to me&#33;&#33; But I&#39;ll be gone before I ever have to worry about cruising the stars. LOL. I used to dream about that when I was young, but think about time spent in a ship, compared to the beautiful Earth, that we are accustomed to. :D

John L
2004-Nov-30, 10:05 PM
Originally posted by stpbutcool1@Nov 29 2004, 07:02 PM

Earth is 4.5 billion years old, = 4500,000,000 years

what proof do wo have that the world is 4.5 billion years ago ??????????

i thank that the earth is only about 3-5 thousand years old

if u look at some chineese ""dragons"" they kinda look like dinos dont they what makes u thank that people where not alive when the dinos where on earth????

what makes u thank that dinos are not still on earth????
there have been lots of people reported that they have seen a dino...

thanks,
stpbutcool1 :ph34r:
Dating methods based on radio-isotope ratios is how we came up with that number. We&#39;ve spent the last century developing a detailed understanding of the decay rates of certain unstable isotopes, and then found them in nature and measured their abundance compared to that of their daughter products. One of the most important of these is Uranium to Lead. Find a natural deposit, measure the abundances, compare that to the known decay rate, and you can say how long that uranium has been sitting in that rock. Based on large numbers of Earth studies, as well as lunar and meteorite material, it appears that the Earth and other terrestrial bodies in the solar system are no younger than about 4.5 billion years old.

And there are dinosaurs still alive on Earth today. We now call them Birds. They are the only branch of the dinosaur family to survive past the end of the Cretaceous period. That layer of rocks, BTW, the one where there are dino fossils below and none above, was dated using the same technique breifly described above at 65 million years ago.

As for 3,000 to 5,000 years, you have to understand that carbon dating, the same process as the uranium/lead dating but working over more recent time periods using the decay rate of the Carbon14 isotope has dated evidence of human civilization older than that. We&#39;ve found beadwork, weaving, pottery, etc well over 10,000 years old, and the remains of modern humans for far more than 50,000 years.

So, either our entire understanding of nuclear physics and quantum mechanics is wrong (which make this forum possible), or the Earth is about 4.5 billion years old, dinosaurs (except for birds) went extinct 65 million years ago, and man has been around in our current form for well over 50,000 years.

SpockJim
2004-Dec-01, 04:40 AM
Show me proof of an alien spaceship and then I will believe it. But for now, NO, There are no aliens. Why would God create creatures that could harm us? He is the creater of all things.

astromark
2004-Dec-01, 11:52 AM
:rolleyes: As has been the rule; Another good reply from John L
Please dont bring your god bothering attitude in to this forum Jim.,and stpbutcool1.
I am happy to see you motivated to contribute but I fear your point is wasted on the sciencetific comunity and me. I enjoy a good debate, but can you understand that this universe was not created for us. We the human race inhabit this perfect earth. in a common solar system. Orbiting a star that is about half way through its nine to twelve billion year life at a distance that has allowed life as we know it to astablish itself and thrive as it does. This solar system is found in a stable area of this galaxy aproxamatly two thirds of the distance out from the much more active and dangeriouse hub of the Milkyway galaxy. We astronomers have observed the universe is expanding still and at presant might be as large as therty billion light years across and includes millions or is that billions of galaxyies very much like this one.
And for the dino idea... here in New Zealand we have a relic of the dinosours. Still living. The &#39;Turatara lizard&#39; is cold blooded does have teeth that are part of its jaw bone and is a direct descendant of the dino&#39;s you mentioned...what about the crocks., and the moniter lizard. pelicans.
there is plenty of proof the earth is older than 5000 years, coal, oil.and all those dino bones. How do you explain the very strange life forms that sevive deep in our oceans near to volcanic fumaroles (vents).they cant leave the area they are in becouse of the temprature, presure,.
There are lots of things we dont have explanations for yet. But we will prevail.
We might be the only life form in this area of the cosmos, but we might not be also.... :blink:

Jakenorrish
2004-Dec-01, 01:22 PM
This question seems to be stirring up quite a few good opinions&#33; Mine as you&#39;ll all know by now is that this being a scientific discussion, should contain scientific facts. The last couple of posts have been very constructive.

To the people who believe in aliens I ask them this. Please use facts to disprove the likes of myself, John L, astromark et al. If you have any evidence I want to see it, as I&#39;m sure everyone else here does.

All I&#39;m saying is that I&#39;m convinced that we haven&#39;t been visited because of the overwhelming evidence that supports my belief. However, if anybody can tip the balance with some proof then go for it. Don&#39;t bother me with mindless speculation and imagination&#33;&#33;

SpockJim
2004-Dec-01, 03:27 PM
I have my opinons and beliefs, If you don&#39;t like it too bad&#33;

wstevenbrown
2004-Dec-01, 04:00 PM
Oxymoron:


mindless speculation and imagination&#33;&#33;

Thank you, Jake. That&#39;s one for the archives&#33; :D Steve

astromark
2004-Dec-01, 09:19 PM
:unsure: Yes, it is wrong to critisise the views of others. and sorry if I touched a tender spot. I do not intend to be judgmental. You and I and anyone else is welcome to jump right in here and have a say; This forum is an exelent platform to express our selves in.
:rolleyes: see what Jake said; I&#39;m with him. Find the words, study the facts. Look for the sciance.

SpockJim
2004-Dec-02, 03:52 AM
There is NO other life out there. If there was we would know it.

Dave Mitsky
2004-Dec-02, 08:04 AM
Gentlemen,

May I remind you of one of the UT forum rules:

7. No Politics or Religion

Discussions about politics and religion nearly always turn ugly, and frankly, I don&#39;t have the time or interest in policing conversations that do little but make people angry at each other. So, don&#39;t start or contribute to a topic that&#39;s going to just start people yelling at each other. The moderators and I will shut down or delete any thread that has obviously taken an overtly political/religious direction.

Dave Mitsky

Jakenorrish
2004-Dec-02, 09:26 AM
Hi Steve&#33;

Re my oxymoron, yeah, that&#39;s what happens when you try and type your message in during a quick lunch. Doh&#33;&#33;

Thanks for the reminder Dave.

Jake B)

SpockJim
2004-Dec-02, 01:32 PM
Dave the only reason topics turn nasty like that is because a few bad apples can&#39;t handle the discussion.

You show me proof of other intelligent life then I might believe. But for now I&#39;m gonna stand by my beliefs.

John L
2004-Dec-02, 03:07 PM
SpockJim,

There is no proof, yet. There may never be in our lifetimes. I personally believe that in a universe with hundreds of billions of galaxies, each with hundreds of billions of stars, the odds are more likely that there is other life in the universe and some of it may be inteligent than we are all there is. I&#39;m not saying they&#39;re two star systems to the left and drop by every few years. I&#39;m not even saying they&#39;re necessarily in our galaxy. I&#39;m just saying that it seems highly unlikely that in a universe this size that we are all there is.

wstevenbrown
2004-Dec-02, 07:05 PM
I am with you in spirit, JohnL. It seems to me the height of arrogance to presume we are the only aspect of the universe able to contemplate it. That said, it is only opinion. My experience shows me that being too &#39;positioned&#39; when the data set is small sets me up for disaster when it enlarges.

Jake, please accept my apology-- I should not have been so catty.

On the existence of ET life, I regard it as a very strong probability. Local experience shows that life tends to fill every possible niche. With regard to ET visitation, I am open-minded enough to entertain the possibility, but not so empty-headed as to accept it as fact in the absence of proof. I am not a true believer, IOW.

Back to the discussion. Those having positions, please explain. We all know the ground rules. Best regards--Steve

Jakenorrish
2004-Dec-02, 08:53 PM
Hi Wstevenbrown

Accept my apologies also, I haven&#39;t been paying enough attention to your messages.

I&#39;m hopeful that there is life out there, and more to do with the law of averages than any knowledge I have about it am sure we can&#39;t be alone. I would think that we&#39;ll more likely find evidence of some kind of life past or present on Mars sooner or later. Maybe not in my lifetime but hopefully soon. The problem with my belief is that at the moment it is just that- a belief. There is lots we can&#39;t rule out about life elsewhere. However, Spockjim has a point. We don&#39;t know about it. But Spockjim, there is a slim chance we&#39;ll find some (albeit non intelligent) on a relatively nearby body.

The thing is There is lots we can rule out space travel accross distances of hundreds or thousands of light years with what we currently know about the science of physics and the laws of mathematics. It remains hugely ublikely that any life can travel to the earth. Information (radio waves) or light would find it difficult enough to make it a few thousand light years across space let alone further than than that. Its just inconceivable that any lifeform could journey from one star to the next with what we currently know. I know that I&#39;ve never experienced an alien encounter, it only seems to happen to truckdrivers in Utah don&#39;t you think?&#33;

Kind regards,

Jake

wstevenbrown
2004-Dec-02, 09:23 PM
One way life can get from star to star is freeze-dried, floating on rubbish. At non-relativistic velocities, this takes millions of years, so there isn&#39;t much commercial potential there. A number of lifeforms here have the ability to shut down when times are harsh, and start back up when circumstances change. Viruses go inert. Some protozoans sporulate; that is, they form a dried-out egg with zero metabolism. On adding water, the daughter creatures swim away. I&#39;m not particularly promoting panspermia here, just recapping. One reason why a species might travel would be if it foresaw its own demise-- no choice, migrate or die&#33; If they couldn&#39;t solve the Einstein riddles, they&#39;d find a way for something of themselves to survive the non-relativistic trip. Eggs in stasis, frozen germ cells tended by robots-- whatever.

Pardon my rambling. I have personally opened up a bit of millions-of-years-old shale, and found the fern still green inside. The fern didn&#39;t survive, of course, but what about its microscopic parasites? Sometimes the forces that drive a migration have little to do with choice. And the thing we need to keep foremost in mind when considering the possibility of alien life is that it might be... alien. I don&#39;t have any of the evidence you seek of actual, real-life aliens, unless we are they, but that&#39;s philosophy, not hard science. Steve

Bobunf
2004-Dec-05, 12:56 AM
“Dating methods based on radio-isotope ratios is how we came up with that number.”

John, I thought you explained this well, and I would like to add that radio-isotope dating is not, by any means, the only way in which dating is done.

Humans have kept astronomical records in China for about five thousand years. It’s possible to correlate these records with historical events in China and elsewhere.

Something as simple, as easy to understand, and as unambiguous as tree ring dating can demonstrate a time line going back about 11,000 years. In the Southwestern United States there are hundreds of thousands of petroglyphs that can be dated by measuring the amount of desert varnish deposited on these Native American works of art. A substantial number have been dated to more than 7,000 years old.

Sedimentary deposits in glacial lakes, known as varves, are set down in fairly distinct annual layers, and can be counted like tree rings. Such dating has been taken as far back as 40,000 years ago.

There are many other approaches to dating such as themoluminescene, archeomagnetic and obsidian hydration. And there are many approaches to relative dating such as bone-age dating, analysis of linguistic and genetic drift, and seration analysis of technological, architectural, and artistic developments.

Radio-isotope and fission track dating, combined with stratigraphic dating, typological cross-dating, all of the above methods, and many others, allow one to check and cross-check the reliability of all of these dating methods, of individual dates, and of the grand chronology of the Earth. With all of this we have developed considerable confidence about our overall understanding of dates in pre-history and in geologic time.

astromark
2004-Dec-05, 10:21 AM
:unsure: There must be life more advanced than us out there. Its unreasonable to usume otherwise. Concidering the age and size of the galaxy we are part of.We know the stable zone far enuff away from the galaxy core and all that radiated from it. As long as the planet has not undergone majer impact events for a few million years. Theres a good chance life will be evolving and thriving as it does here. Finding it or any trace of it is another question. We may never.
Finding information here on earth has not been easy, and when found not redally exepted. just looking at the datting of earths history is of some concern to some. I think there is ample evedance to suport the science of evolutionary progresion., but we can never all agree, nor should we. From questions come answers, its called progress. If we are not the desendance of aliens, or are not the resolt of some genetic experoment. Then are we the evolutionary resolt of the ape,? could be. I do like banana&#39;s. Have we been visated,? probebly not. Will we ever know,? same answer. :rolleyes:

jsc248
2004-Dec-05, 12:30 PM
:o Hi Gang,
This was obviously a subject we all feel very passionate about. I would personally like to thank everyone who has replied it&#39;s been a most interesting read, Thanks.
jsc248.

Bobunf
2004-Dec-05, 02:56 PM
John, you said, “I&#39;ve said this before and I&#39;ll say it again today. We&#39;ve been sending out signals substantial enough to escape our solar system for 68 years”

Well, I&#39;ve said this before and I&#39;ll say it again:

The most important and easily detected signals we send are those having to do with atmospheric gases and other signals from the effects of life and of intelligence.

I don’t think the footprint of life is small—it’s been broadcast for about four billion years with an antenna of about 600 million square kilometers. Even we, before the end of the next decade will be able to detect methane or oxygen producing life within 50 light years or so of Earth. By the end of the 21st century, it’s hard to imagine that capability won’t be extended to a distance of many thousands of light years.

I think, almost by definition, advanced ETs will be at least as capable as us, and here are some of the things we know ET can look for (ET, thousands of years more technologically advanced than us, certainly than me, will know a lot more):

1. Oxygen and Ozone at levels higher than possible from non-biological sources of which we are currently aware. More than 20 times higher over the last 600 million years, and more than 12 times higher for more than two billion years.

2. Methane in quantities not possible on a sustained basis from non-biological processes of which we are aware on a planet as hot, as irradiated and with as much oxygen as Earth. With varying strength this signal has been sent out from Earth for about four billion years.

3. One of the human introduced pollutants in our atmosphere is lead, which has been used in metal working for more than 8500 years. The Romans increased the lead identified in Greenland ice cores hundreds of times above normal levels 2500 years ago.

4. Coal has been widely used for more than a thousand years. Burning coal releases radioactive uranium and thorium into the atmosphere.

5. Chemicals which came into widespread use in the 19th century, such as DDT (1870s), kerosene, naphthalene and gasoline (1850s), benzene (1860s), and chloroform (1840s).

6. Widespread use of freon has taken place for the last 75 years. For those 75 years we’ve used a 600 million square kilometer antenna to broadcast 24/7-360 degrees that we use refrigeration, have substantial electrical distribution and freight delivery systems, fractional horsepower electric motors, measures of some kinds of industrial activity, and lots of other implications.

There are lots of other opportunities for advanced ET, such as remote detection of chlorophyll.

And there will be lots of opportunities for us, in the next thousand years, to exploit all of these possibilities and many more I don’t know about; that no human knows about—yet. We’re on the cusp of doing many of these things within most of our lifetimes.

What is ET to think of a world with the right temperature, water vapor, an oxygen atmosphere, and too mcuh methane? All things transmitted from Earth for at least 600 million years. And then add chlorophyll.

How could advanced ET not know we are here? At least, if they’re within a few thousand light years. By 3000 AD we would know.

Bob

astromark
2004-Dec-05, 08:43 PM
:rolleyes: Good to see another optomist view. Yes we are on the cusp of discovery, and our abilaty to detect the signatures of life will find it. These are going to be interesting times. As you would note, I am on the hornes of a delema. On one hand I want to see alien life found, but becouse of the shear size of the universe wounder if we will find it near enuff to act on. This is an interesting subject for all of humanity. With as many issues to ponder as stars with planets.
You know it is posible we have been detected. They are comming..... :P lets put the coffee on.

Molecular
2004-Dec-05, 10:21 PM
I would hope that some of the phenomenons we are observing going on in outer space, as viewed through Hubble or other means, are NOT just natural events, but are also possibly the work of some super advanced ET&#39;s. Whether it is that they do these things to show us that they are here, or, that what things we are seeing are part of some grand construction of theirs.

It may very well be a mistake of humankind, to have too much focus in particular areas, while at the same time, missing out on opportunities that are right before our very eyes. Is it not possible that ET has been making itself as obvious to us all along??.......it&#39;s worth investigating. ;)

astromark
2004-Dec-06, 11:40 AM
This sounds like a adaption of Erick von Danikens Ideas. Diferent enuff to be read. and dismised as rubbish. Could we be the descendants of aliens who came to earth ... at what point of our history was this ment to happen.? Find some proof, and I will listen some more. Until then this theory is fiction, or a good idea for a book.

ulgah
2004-Dec-06, 09:55 PM
Hey Eyaj,
astromark just asked for proof, while your at it, please provide us all with some proof. That sounds wonderful, if true. I could have the blood of a god in my veins. Praise be&#33;&#33; :lol:

astromark
2004-Dec-06, 10:08 PM
No you missed my point; or I never made it..lol
I am interested, and will read almost anything about this subject. Is it to much to ask for proof? I don&#39;t think so. It is easy to make speculative coment about what may have happened in our past. ,But how do or can we prove any of this. Only with evedance, proof. please.
I am interested in any ideas you have and belive myself that all of those biblical stories and wrightings of the moslim faith and even the budists and others no dought have stories that are very simular. In respect of the mesage given. Like a rule book for our servival. so what do think of that, Not bad for an athiest a...

John L
2004-Dec-06, 10:52 PM
You are all wrong&#33; We are decendents of time traveling humans from the future&#33; Those so-called grey aliens are actually highly evolved humans from a million years in the future that ocassionally come back in time to guide the development of their own species, which they themselves first started on Earth. Ok, I just made that up, but I&#39;m sure I could find evidence that it was true without actually having any evidence that it was true. Ancient texts interpreted by someone (whethered credentialed or not) is not evidence. Eveidence is the mummified corpse of an alien (or god). It is a piece of obviously advanced (alien or godly) technology buried in a 10,000 year old clay pot in an ancient tomb. It is a text that clearly says (not interpreted by someone) that the aliens came from a star or world they called this in their ships and gave us this and that. You should also probably have the this or that as proof. Does this mean in 10,000 years someone will find a copy of Isaac Asimov&#39;s books and think that there was an advanced galactic empire that must have completely died out or that we&#39;ve lost all contact with?

astromark
2004-Dec-07, 12:59 AM
yes.

Jakenorrish
2004-Dec-07, 12:23 PM
Hi Eyaj,

all very interesting, but I couldn&#39;t for a minute class your articulate words as scientific proof of us having been visited sorry. A lot of previous posts in favour of aliens having been here have been along similar lines, I&#39;m not sure if any have been as well researched as yours though&#33;

I for one don&#39;t take them seriously at all. Along the same lines as John L I would argue that if one of our descendents in 4 thousand years found an Arthur C Clark book and used it to argue in favour of ET visitation, then it would be laughable. As for the information concerning the planets? I would need to see the texts myself to make up my mind.

yours,

Jake

Bobunf
2004-Dec-08, 05:04 AM
Let’s try a little critical thinking.

Who&#39;s reading these Sumerian writings besides Sitchin? No other scholar has interpreted early Sumerian writing as descriptive of an eighth planet. There are tremendous difficulties and pitfalls in translating a language that nobody&#39;s spoken for thousands of years, with very limited material, originating in a cultural milieu to which we have effectively zero access.

To me it&#39;s not believable that one could determine with even a reasonable probability fine distinctions like that between "lord," "watcher" or "god." Think of the difficulties we have accurately and meaningfully translating modern German or French, let alone Japanese. We don&#39;t know even what Shakespeare intended in some cases--and he wrote in English, he wrote a lot, and we know a huge amount about the milieu in which Shakespeare lived.

To move four thousand years earlier, move to a different, very foreign language, and a virtually unknown cultural milieu…how do you even have any idea what words go with what colors?

"Neptune was known in antiquity, I wrote; and the discoveries that were about to be made would only confirm ancient knowledge. Neptune I predicted, would be blue green, watery, and have patches the color of &#39;swamplike vegetation.&#39;"

What did the ancient knowledge say? Not a modern paraphrase, but the literal words, with the issues of does this word mean this or that. Things you encounter reading any Shakespearean play.

Science, or any real scholarship, is filled with questions, uncertainties, discoveries waiting to happen. Sounds like Sitchin doesn&#39;t have many doubts. Certainty is the realm of faith, not science. "Proven true" sounds more like a preacher than an archeologist.

If Sitchine&#39;s is the only one who reads the stuff this way, how do we know he&#39;s not just making it up? Or maybe he&#39;s believes it, but nobody else would read it that way. Remember Percival Lowell who mapped the canals of Mars so carefully and in such detail.

Bob

John L
2004-Dec-08, 07:03 AM
...the theory of a cataclysmic origin for our present solar system does answer many questions. For one thing, the Sumerians generally considered to be the first advanced civilization on Earth, knew the number of planets in our solar system and depicted them around our sun. But the arrangement, by size, on such depictions as a third-millennium BC Akkadian cylinder seal (VA/243) in the State Museum of East Berlin shows the planets in a different order than they are presently found, with Pluto preceding Neptune. Pluto has a massive seventeen-degree orbital variation from the rest of the planets and is so erratic that in 1976 it moved closer to the sun than Neptune. Three of Urnaus&#39; four moons show unquestionable evidence of violent collision; one of them, Miranda, estimated to have been hit no fewer than five times, shows considerable signs of collision, including a titanic gouge in a chevron shape on it&#39;s surface.Got a link that shows this seal? Of every thing I&#39;ve ever read on astronomy and history, only the planets visible to the naked eye (Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn) were known to anyone before the invention of the telescope. Some say Pluto isn&#39;t even a planet, but a member of the Kuiper Belt, which generally shares the orbit of Pluto and has members with much more eccentric orbits. What do the tiny icy moons of Uranus prove? They&#39;re still in fairly circular orbits, so a major event would either throw them out of orbit completely or destroy them.


The asteroid belt situated between Mars and Jupiter has long been considered even by opponents of collision theory to be the remains of a shattered planet, which is exactly what the Babylonian myth of the war in the heavens between Marduk and Tiamat says it is, according to Sitchin: they call it the "hammered bracelet" in the heavens, as does the Bible.The mass of all the asteroids is tiny. It wouldn&#39;t even be as big as the Earth&#39;s Moon if it was all clumped together. No one has ever said it was a shattered planet. It is simply the same material that made all of the other terrestrial bodies in the inner solar system, but it was not allowed to come together due to the gravitational influence of Jupiter. That is what everyone agrees. And WHERE in the Bible is there a mention of some kind of "hammered bracelet"?


"According to Sitchins reading of the myth, Tiamat was an astronomical body with too many moons and too much gravitational mass that threatened the stability of the other planetary bodies. It was eventually struck by a much larger body, called Marduk, that smashed it into two remains in the solar system-one the nearly obliterated fragments that are the asteroid belt, and two, the planet Earth. Tiamats moons were thrown far away becoming captured by the other planets, and the orbit of the outer planets was changed and reestablished. One of Tiamat&#39;s moons called in the myth Kingu, became Earth&#39;s Moon. As we have already seen, the evidence is in favor of our Moon having been captured in antiquity, and it is older than our own planet, which means the mythical tablets are not in conflict with modern scientific perceptions. Additionally, the Moon&#39;s glassine surface may have been caused by heat in that collision." The Moon is the same age as the Earth based on radio-isotope studies. Both are about 4.5 billion years old. And the accepted idea for the formation of the Earth-Moon system is that a MArs sized world collided with the proto-Earth, and the resulting debris thrown into space coalesced into the Moon. And how could the gas giants capture moons into nearly circular orbits if they were flung off into space? Orbital mechanics don&#39;t work like that. And what happened to Marduk? I&#39;m sorry, but these tablets are in complete conflict with modern scientific preceptions...

Jakenorrish
2004-Dec-08, 03:25 PM
Eyaj,

the imformation you provide is up there with the interpretations of Nostradamus&#39; writings.

It is very articulate, but my thoughts are that this is a scientific forum on whether or not we have been visited by alien life, not a speculative one about what Sitchen thinks about some ancient texts. Until you can provide firm evidence please discuss your theories elsewhere. Sorry.

Jake B)

astromark
2004-Dec-09, 01:55 AM
Jake makes a good point Eyaj. I aree with him. . . I have been reading all these links you have provided, Whew... Its all interesting enuff, but. If you discuss some thing for more than a reasonable time arent you in danger of becomming paranoide about it. As interesting as it is I dont see the proof of fact. It reads like a science fiction story not science facts. But your efforts have not been wasted. I am at least aware of this Satchin fellow. like Douglas adams...lol, lighten up fellows. Dont go taking me to seriously, I dont.

Bobunf
2004-Dec-09, 03:00 AM
As I understand it, Sitchin got his knowledge of Neptune’s colors from the four thousand plus year old writings of the Sumerians.

Think critically: How does he know what color is associated with what word? Even if you have clues, which I doubt, like X Y Z where
X is a color
Y is somehow determined to be a descriptive connector, such as “was,” “appears,” “look like,” etc.
And Z is somehow determined to be an apple, as opposed to an orange, grapefruit, fig, flower, or who knows what.

So you come up with an interpretation that X refers to the color of an apple. But even that doesn’t help a lot. Could it be a green apple? What exact color were the apples growing in Sumeria 4000 years ago? I don’t know; maybe somebody knows; with enough money it could probably be determined. But did Sitchin do that? How did he figure out the colors?

One is confronted with wave after wave of unlikelyhoods.

You quote Sitchin as saying, “Neptune I predicted, would be blue green, watery, and have patches the color of &#39;swamplike vegetation.&#39;"

Think critically: Where did he make this prediction and when? What did he actually say—the literal words, not some paraphrase. It easy to predict after the event; it’s also easy to color your prediction after the event.

Also, whenever he made the prediction, what was known about the coloring of Neptune. Any large Earth based telescope can easily image Neptune; what colors can be seen with a reasonably large telescope? Many people on this forum can probably attest to what can be seen with a good backyard telescope. To what extent were the colors produced by Viking an artifact of the photographic processing, and to what extent were the same artifacts introduced into 1976 and earlier Earth based imaging?

Line by line, word by word, critical analysis, use of original sources, full disclosure, precise use of words, competent use of logic and mathematics are all absolutely required in any scientific endeavor--just for a start.

Doesn’t sound to me like Sitchin has started.

Bob

kenyan
2004-Dec-09, 05:17 AM
;)

Jambo Jakenorrish and Eyaj,

I do believe it would be wise for Jakenorrish to tackle it out of the forum with Eyaj through his email address than to hurt here; maybe you might continue there and get Eyaj&#39;s point of view. Eyaj, its true bring it on through another chanel, for this is a scientific forum.


Kenyan
:ph34r:

Jakenorrish
2004-Dec-09, 08:45 AM
No, I am not a moderator Eyaj, but someone who is making an effort to understand our topic on a scientific basis. I have absolutely nothing against either you or your beliefs, but do not think this is the correct place to try and prove the theories of someone who isn&#39;t relevant to this discussion.

Jake B)

rawan
2006-May-14, 05:53 PM
<_< Hi All,
I would like to ask a simple question.
With all the cave drawings supposedly showing beings in "space helmets", and with the countless sightings and reported abductions, who believes that we have actually been visited by aliens?
I would like to keep an open mind but which way does the evidence point?
I'd like to hear anybodys opinion on this subject.
Hope to hear from you soon,
jsc248.

hi i'm new here its my houner to share u ...ur question "jsc248" is really important and i thint that astronomics have to say the truth about alians and not to be frightened about ppl reaction since it the hole thing of the ufo's existance made a huge confusion in our minds..some people said they seen some of these creatures and gave stories as proofs whish really seems convinsable!!!!!!!!!!:question: :question:

Blondy
2006-May-22, 02:16 AM
I think its mathematically impossible for us not to have been visited. There is another discussion going on about about fossilised alien bacteria so not only have we been visited but we have the evidence. If its really bacteria tunnelling ofcourse. Could be some other incredibly complex chemical condition we haven't encountered.

Van Rijn
2006-May-22, 02:53 AM
I think its mathematically impossible for us not to have been visited.

We used to have a person here that thought that, with math, they could show that ET was mathematically impossible. The problem with math is that you need good solid evidence to base it on. Without that, it's just a matter of picking whatever assumptions you want to reach the conclusion you want.



There is another discussion going on about about fossilised alien bacteria so not only have we been visited but we have the evidence. If its really bacteria tunnelling ofcourse. Could be some other incredibly complex chemical condition we haven't encountered.

There are two issues there: First, as you noted, it could be something else. Until and unless it is conclusively shown to be evidence of life on Mars, it doesn't advance the case at all. Second, there is a very large gulf between bacteria on Mars and visitations by technological ETs.

For sure, though, if and when we have conclusive evidence of ET life, that will advance the general case for technological ETs.

HenrikOlsen
2006-May-22, 11:40 AM
I think its mathematically impossible for us not to have been visited. There is another discussion going on about about fossilised alien bacteria so not only have we been visited but we have the evidence. If its really bacteria tunnelling ofcourse. Could be some other incredibly complex chemical condition we haven't encountered.
Unfortunately, given the right assumptions you can easily prove anything mathematically.

As examples, it's been proven mathematically that bumblebees can't fly, that kangaroos can't move by jumping and that cities of over 1 million people are impossible.