Is there life in outerspace?

[TBone48]

Originally posted by: chambersc

Originally posted by: IdioticBuffoon

Originally posted by: scottish144
10$ says the first 20 posts contain at least one bible thumper!

Is the bible in contradiction with the concept of extraterrestrial life?

yes because it says the univ. is x years old when science says its x + 10billion.

The age of the universe (per the Bible) is irrelevant to the existence of life elsewhere.

 

[Illusions89]

Yes

 

[Mo0o]

Originally posted by: IdioticBuffoon

Originally posted by: F22 Raptor
But, my answer is definitely yes, and I believe they may be more developed, and some less developed, but the problem is, on another planet far off from here, maybe in another universe (If you believe in the tunnel theory) what defines life?

Interesting. I think the definition of life remains the same, i.e. a living thing that can function independently. Add intelligence to it and you have an intelligent life form as opposed to flora, coral reefs etc.

Defining life as something living is pretty redundant. And what do you mean function independently. What kind of function. Coral Reefs are more advanced than plants.

 

[FoBoT]

yes, there are humans in other star systems

 

[FeuerFrei]

Life? No not likely. There is death. Definitely death in outerspace.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: chambersc

Originally posted by: IdioticBuffoon

Originally posted by: scottish144
10$ says the first 20 posts contain at least one bible thumper!

Is the bible in contradiction with the concept of extraterrestrial life?

yes because it says the univ. is x years old when science says its x + 10billion.

I'm curious, where does it say that?

 

[darkxshade]

Of course there is, when God created Earth, he messed up so he made the universe bigger and tried again elsewhere, and that's why we haven't heard from him since. And he made the universe so huge so that we couldn't possibly get close enough to infect his masterpiece. It's quite a bummer really.

 

[IdioticBuffoon]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: chambersc

Originally posted by: IdioticBuffoon

Originally posted by: scottish144
10$ says the first 20 posts contain at least one bible thumper!

Is the bible in contradiction with the concept of extraterrestrial life?

yes because it says the univ. is x years old when science says its x + 10billion.

I'm curious, where does it say that?

I think he's referring to "For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is..." (20:11)

Still doesn't relate to WHY there could not be life out there.

 

[datalink7]

Of course we can't know for sure, but just looking at pure probablity it would seem that there would be many more intelligent, and less intelligent, more advanced, and less advanced forms of life out there.

 

[SlitheryDee]

Originally posted by: F22 Raptor

Originally posted by: Malak
Some people believe there is because it would be a waste of space if there weren't. This is irrational, and has no basis on any real facts. Some people believe there isn't, but once again with no real basis on facts. They honestly don't know or have any clue. In fact, this arguement is about as bad, if not worse, than political arguements. Since nobody here knows anything about the topic, and has no facts on it whatsoever, there is absolutely no reason to even discuss it.

Wow I believe this is the stupidest comment I have seen on here in a while.



But, my answer is definitely yes, and I believe they may be more developed, and some less developed, but the problem is, on another planet far off from here, maybe in another universe (If you believe in the tunnel theory) what defines life?

Well we came up with the word life and all it's various associations, so I guess we define life. It's a human word invented to describe a certain state of things on earth, if something doesn't fit that criteria then it is not "life" as we define it currently.

We could expand the definition of life to include other things as we discover them or declare them not alive if we are unable to fit them in to our definition.

Kind of a hard question, but since humans are the only ones we know are posing it I'll have to stick with humans being the ones who define life right now.

Edit: I vote maybe BTW

 

[imported_LoKe]

Most definitely!

 

[ElFenix]

yes. there is life on mars, actually. if not native stuff, some of it came over on our landers

 

[SlitheryDee]

Is there life on earth?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: IdioticBuffoon

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: chambersc

Originally posted by: IdioticBuffoon

Originally posted by: scottish144
10$ says the first 20 posts contain at least one bible thumper!

Is the bible in contradiction with the concept of extraterrestrial life?

yes because it says the univ. is x years old when science says its x + 10billion.

I'm curious, where does it say that?

I think he's referring to "For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is..." (20:11)

Still doesn't relate to WHY there could not be life out there.

How long were those "days" before the earth and sun existed?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: datalink7
Of course we can't know for sure, but just looking at pure probablity it would seem that there would be many more intelligent, and less intelligent, more advanced, and less advanced forms of life out there.

So what you're saying is that I'm more likely to get more heads than tails if I flip a coin a billion times instead of a hundred?

The Drake Equation is crap. An equation with no known constants is not science.

x = a + b + c

Solve for x :roll:

 

[Yossarian]

sure, there are bound to be lots of Class M planets out there.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Yossarian
sure, there are bound to be lots of Class M planets out there.

I love Star Trek, but everytime I watch a show, 2 questions always come to my mind.

First, why is there an up and a down in space?

Second, when the ship comes to a "full stop" (relative to what I don't know), what relativistic time implications occur to the crew? Do they experience 10 years in a second relative to earth-speed? I mean, who knows? What bit of matter in the universe is NOT moving?

 

[chambersc]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Yossarian
sure, there are bound to be lots of Class M planets out there.

I love Star Trek, but everytime I watch a show, 2 questions always come to my mind.

First, why is there an up and a down in space?

Second, when the ship comes to a "full stop" (relative to what I don't know), what relativistic time implications occur to the crew? Do they experience 10 years in a second relative to earth-speed? I mean, who knows? What bit of matter in the universe is NOT moving?

as far as your first question, mine is the exact opposite. why isn't there an up and down in space. if space if 3d, idk if it actually is, then why not portray it realitsically? i assume that space is 3d and thus, has an up and down.

 

[SlitheryDee]

Originally posted by: chambersc

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Yossarian
sure, there are bound to be lots of Class M planets out there.

I love Star Trek, but everytime I watch a show, 2 questions always come to my mind.

First, why is there an up and a down in space?

Second, when the ship comes to a "full stop" (relative to what I don't know), what relativistic time implications occur to the crew? Do they experience 10 years in a second relative to earth-speed? I mean, who knows? What bit of matter in the universe is NOT moving?

as far as your first question, mine is the exact opposite. why isn't there an up and down in space. if space if 3d, idk if it actually is, then why not portray it realitsically? i assume that space is 3d and thus, has an up and down.

So what designates up? I know that on earth, up generally indicates the direction opposite the force of gravity. Up is what's above us, relatively speaking. To label ALL of space as existing in 3 dimensions you'd need a reference point right?

 

[RCN]

My guess is yes at but we will likely never know even if the universe was "full" of intelligent life. The universe is just too big and the odds are against two "intelligent" groups of beings finding each other during the time that they exist.....

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: SlitheryDee

So what designates up? I know that on earth, up generally indicates the direction opposite the force of gravity. Up is what's above us, relatively speaking. To label ALL of space as existing in 3 dimensions you'd need a reference point right?

Headings and bearings in the show are based on the galactic plane. Up and down are related to the galaxy's north and south directions.

 

[So]

Originally posted by: IdioticBuffoon
My personal thoughts are .. no. Despite the unfathomable expanse of the universe, if there is life out there, I don't think it's more developed than humans.

So, whaddaya guys think? Is there life in the universe other than what's on Earth? And if so, how advanced?

I'm with you. Probably life. Intelligent life? It seems that there isn't any close enough that they could make it here, or not advanced enough, at least.

 

[letdown427]

I think there is. I see no real reason why there shouldn't be more developed life, less developed life, whatever. Just because we haven't been contacted doesn't discount more intelligent life. Perhaps we just haven't noticed their 'calls',or can't pickup their method of transmission. Or maybe they don't see any reason to contact us? Either way, I think it's pretty likely we aren't alone in the universe.

Also, Vic,

"So what you're saying is that I'm more likely to get more heads than tails if I flip a coin a billion times instead of a hundred? "

What he's saying is that you're more likely to get at least one head if you flip it a billion times instead of a hundred. Which is true.

 

[So]

Originally posted by: letdown427
I think there is. I see no real reason why there shouldn't be more developed life, less developed life, whatever. Just because we haven't been contacted doesn't discount more intelligent life. Perhaps we just haven't noticed their 'calls',or can't pickup their method of transmission. Or maybe they don't see any reason to contact us? Either way, I think it's pretty likely we aren't alone in the universe.

Also, Vic,

"So what you're saying is that I'm more likely to get more heads than tails if I flip a coin a billion times instead of a hundred? "

What he's saying is that you're more likely to get at least one head if you flip it a billion times instead of a hundred. Which is true.

That's assuming a 50/50 chance. The fact is, we have a sample size of n=1, so we have no clue what the odds are.

 

[ForumMaster]

Originally posted by: IdioticBuffoon
My personal thoughts are .. no. Despite the unfathomable expanse of the universe, if there is life out there, I don't think it's more developed than humans.

So, whaddaya guys think? Is there life in the universe other than what's on Earth? And if so, how advanced?

ok, you say no to life more developed then humans. that does not mean that simpler life doesn't exsist. and are mircobes not alive? anyway, yeah i do believe that there is other life in space. maybe as advanced as we are, mb more, mb less. we simply don't know. the milky way galaxy is estimated to have around 400 to 600 bilion solar systems. the odds are that even in our own galaxy there is other life. but there are other galaxies out there that are much bigger and most definently have life. the environment on the earth in which life began is special, but not unreplicable. to summerize, yes i most definently believe that there is other life in outerspace.