/sci/ - Science & Math

>>14670047
>can people honestly look at a picture that proves nothing and still disagree with my sci-fi opinions?????
Apparently.

>>14670047

You have to realize, a lot of people are not guided by reason and logic.

They are guided by emotion and group think. In this case, emotion dictates them not to think about it, because the thought of 'higher' powers scares them, and group think dictates they don't think about it, because it is taboo.

>You have to realize, a lot of people are not guided by reason and logic.
>They are guided by emotion and group think. In this case, emotion dictates them not to think about it, because the thought of 'higher' powers scares them, and group think dictates they don't think about it, because it is taboo.
It's always surreal to read posts like this. OP's statement is "logic and reason" apparently, and so is the incoherent spergout about imaginary strawmen and their higher powers, in pop-soi schizo world.

>>14670047
the Universe is only 13 billion years old. comparing its lifetime to that of a human it is in the first second of its life.
the reason why we dont see any other intelligent life out there is because we are it. its just too early.

>>14670075
So you think that out of all those galaxies, with all those stars, not a single one produced a planet similar to earth that has intelligent life on it? I never said we need to see proof of their existence. I just think its extremely improbable that intelligent life formed in only 1 place in the universe: Here. What makes our little corner so special?

>>14670047
The Bible doesn't say anything about G_d making life on planets other than this one

>>14670088
>its extremely improbable
How about you prove ti instead of talking about your subjective feelings? LOL

>>14670090
>>14670057
>sameschiz

>>14670047
whats more probable, that there are trillions of galaxies with trillions of planets that are unfathomably far away, or you're just looking at a 3D hologram and are the victim of a cunning ruse?

>>14670047
Are you telling me there are what trillions of different advanced civilizations out there in space and none of them said something like ''hey let's go and make our presence known to these earth niggas!''
Give me a break

>>14670101
>replies: 9
>poster count: 5
>>14670057
>>14670090
>>14670101
Sameschizzing intensifies.

>>14670105
>checking IPs, poster cross checking, reply counting.
fuck I wish I had your life. take your meds

>>14670104
I literally said "a single", as in "at least 1" not "there's intelligent life everywhere LOL"
And I never said they would be more advanced than us.

>>14670104
maybe advanced intelligences arent as dumb as humans and think letting the Universe know where you are is an incredibly stupid thing to do

>>14670110
Sorry that you struggle with small integers.

>>14670047
There is already far and away overwhelming evidence that we have been visited by other worlds for a long time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roscoe_H._Hillenkoetter
>first director of the Central Intelligence Agency
>"Behind the scenes, high-ranking Air Force officers are soberly concerned about UFOs. But through official secrecy and ridicule, many citizens are led to believe the unknown flying objects are nonsense"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haim_Eshed
> retired brigadier general in Israeli Military Intelligence, Eshed was director of space programs for Israel Ministry of Defense for nearly 30 years
>Eshed claimed in an interview with Israeli national newspaper Yediot Aharonot that the United States government had been in contact with extraterrestrial life for years and had signed secret agreements with a "Galactic Federation" in order to do experiments on Earth, and that there is a joint base underground on Mars where they collaborate with American astronauts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1952_Washington,_D.C.,_UFO_incident

>>14670096

You are the schizo.

>>14670141
Homo.

>>14670047
>tfw there are ayylamos on the far end of this picture looking out towards us wondering the same thing

>>14670047
Complex life is one thing. /Intelligent/ life is another. The Dinosaurs won the game of evolution, until an asteroid conveniently and at just the right time hit the Earth and wiped them out. Would humans have evolved if the asteroid just whizzed by and never hit at all?

>in a galaxy far far away, there is a Star Trek civilization
Anyone who seriously believes in aliens has watched too much sci-fi

IF G_D HAD MADE LIFE ON OTHER PLANETS HE WOULD HAVE WROTE ABOUT IT IN THE BIBLE STOP TALKING ABOUT THIS

>>14670047
I don't think any inteliigent species was involved in the making of this image either.

>>14670222
Humans? No.
Intelligent life? Why not, Gondwana was always going to break up and smaller continents, more opportunities for niches that don’t just get steamrolled by landwhales.

>>14670344
quiet heeb

People think that billions/trillions of stars and galaxies is a big number. But why exactly should you consider that big? It's a human invention. 10^20 and 10^200 have a gigantic difference, yet both are considered just "big."

If the probabilities of life coming out of non-life are in the ballpark of numbers of the caliber of 10^200 or something similar, a billion billion stars would be nothing compared to that.

>>14670781
>If the probabilities of life coming out of non-life are in the ballpark of numbers of the caliber
__________ass pulled number

>>14670781
You have 0 pattern finding skills do you.

>>14670781
>ballpark of numbers of the caliber of 10^200 or something similar
What a mouthful. Try “~10^-200” next time.
Rubbery af figure though, and thing is it’s an upper bound; every time we investigate a limiting factor, it’s more trivial than pessimists expect.

>>14670862
So, you have some scientifically confirmed number to give, right?

>>14670900
100%, for all planets we’ve been able to thoroughly investigate.

>>14670909
Here we see atheist's logic skills. If you flip a coin and you get tails, that proves that the probability of getting tails is 100% right?

Oh, it gets worse. Noo-one has proven that even life on earth started from non-life. That's why the subject is constantly being debated.

>>14670047
Considering those are most likely fresh galaxies, most likely there indeed was no life in them as we see them, and by the time there is life in them, most likely we will have crossed their cosmic event horizon, just as they have already crossed ours.

>>14670932
>If you flip a coin and you get tails, that proves that the probability of getting tails is 100% right?

No, but it it is absolutely evidence that the probability of getting tails is not 0%, which is essentially the assumption you need to justify the belief there is no other intelligent life in the universe.

>>14670932
Yeah OK that was a cheap shot, not inaccurate but it doesn’t lead anywhere.

Moving on, what’s the biggest factor you think is present in that 10^-200 figure?
Amino acids spontaneously forming, right?

Well here’s the thing, they form naturally in space.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17628-found-first-amino-acid-on-a-comet/
Not a good source but a trivial one from half a second duckduckgoing. 2009.

We’re not talking one tiny - well planet sized but still tiny - petri dish for the formation of life as we know it, but interstellar gas clouds. Strange chemistry happens at that extremely low temperature, extremely low pressure, and extremely large time scales.
And the nubbin is, even baby ISGCs weigh thousands of solar masses, not locked down in gravity wells, no, just free to create strange chemistry.
Amino acids included.

So, we’re down to ~10^-90.
What other limiting factor are you imagining that we ought investigate?

>>14670948
NTA but he doesn't need to justify any assumption. You do. Go ahead and prove that the likelihood of life forming is high enough that it must've happened more than once. Protip: you literally cannot.

>>14670948
All that we really know is that life exists on earth; how it came to be is a separate subject. Even if for the sake of argument we assume that life on earth started out of non-life, that would still tell nothing about the probability of that happening on a randomly chosen planet.

Simple; Because two books came out in quick succession.

That's it. It was a pop-soii fad. I read them both, cover to cover. I remember I kept thinking "boy, these guys are both begging the question and ignoring induction." Later I checked the wiki (no bully) and saw a lot of the same complaints. The refutation portion is longer than the main article body and far more interesting to peruse. This miss too many targets by too wide a margin for the theory to have predictive power. I think it took hold because humanity is grasping at the last straws of being special, or having the ability to forecast.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare_Earth_hypothesis#Criticism

Rare earth is garbage. Its worse, its fringe. Advanced civilization happening exactly once is not something worth entertaining.

When you worry about "where are the Kardeshev 1,2,3, We should see them!!," remember that this is what a Type 0 civilization thinks a higher civilization would do, like we can have the faintest concept.

>>14670960
See>>14670139

I'm curious if you can cope with your cognitive dissonance long enough to read that.

>>14670990
>muh alien seed
>muh UFOs
LOL. Look, I enjoy seriously contemplating /x/ schizo stuff but not in this context.

>>14670091
There is no evidence of extraterrestrial life in Universe. Show me some evidence or the debate will devolve into 'I think' and 'I believe'.

There has to be other life out there.
The probability of us being the only life in an observable universe of 95 billion lightyears is so ridiculously small it is ridiculous.

>>14670900
>So, you have some scientifically confirmed number to give, right?
Of course, just pull a number out of your ass for me that alligns with your biased belief

>>14670963
>remember that this is what a Type 0 civilization thinks a higher civilization would do, like we can have the faintest concept.

>>14670047
other?

>>14671131
Are we going to pretend that the original idea, that the universe is full of life, was not pulled from anyone's rear end

>>14671607
Today I saw an apple tree. It is likely the only apple tree in existence and anything else is pulled from someone's rear end.

>>14670075
typical fucking retard

>>14671607
>that the universe is full of life
not a single person in this thread has claimed that

>>14671610
>compares life to apple trees

y'know, i often ask myself what i would say to an advanced alien species if given the chance, and if i could somehow communicate with them. would i ask them what the point of life is? if religion is real? if immortality is possible or worth pursuing? idk

>>14670047
Spontaneous generation has never been proven and until it is should be viewed as a statistical impossibility.

>>14671638
If it doesn't care enough to directly interact with earth on a everybody knows basis, you likely will have a bad time hanging out with them. The good news is they are probably not bloodthirsty. The bad news is they probably don't much care if they have to slay a human or dozen. Sort of how we might perceive mountain gorillas if there were billions of them all over the place. "Cool primates and all but God damn they can rip you to pieces when they feel like it."

Can people honestly watch a video like this and claim that there is life anywhere in the universe except on earth as we know it?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_tYrnv_o6A

>>14671647
maybe they'd humor my silly questions, who knows.

>>14671017

You are trapped in cognitive bias and refusing to face the evidence.

>>14671736
We are a fluke of the Universe. And believe it or not, the Universe is laughing behind our back..

>>14670963
>remember that this is what a Type 0 civilization thinks a higher civilization would do, like we can have the faintest concept.
on fucking point. what we should be taking from the lack of space constructs isn't "why are we alone", it should be "why are interstellar civs not building space constructs".

for all we know, if string theory is true and the universe is comprised of 1-dimensional string values, an advanced civilization could just modify the strings like they were code and literally teleport shit instantly by changing position values.

>>14671752
>We are a fluke of the Universe.

This is what you desperately want to be true.

>the Universe is laughing behind our back..

Of course. These ants deny that humans exist despite the evidence because they would rather delude themselves into thinking they're at the top of the food chain than face the harsh reality they are just as vulnerable as ants.

>>14671760
the aliens all eventually figure out that reality is purely deterministic and commit mass suicide.

Heard someone on a podcast saying he expects bacteria to be all over the place in the galaxy because of the extreme Earth conditions bacteria survives in. Problem with that is those bacterias have been evolving on Earth for billions of years and have just discovered unique Earth-life niches. What I'm saying is, God is real and the Bible.

>>14670959
Let’s not forget everyone’s favourite brainlet take from 20 years ago, “maybe the solar system is unique, stars with planets are super rare, we just don’t have the data”.
That was good for idiots thinking there might be only 10 planetary systems in the whole milky way galaxy, and we now have the evidence that it’s actually super common, it’s the norm even.
From 10 systems to 50 billion say, factor 10^9, brings the probability down to 10^-81.

>>14671822
>it’s the norm even.
given that the majority of starts are in paired or multiple star systems and that there are no stable solutions to the three boy problems, it is still a reasonable assumption that the majority of stars are incapable of supporting life, you should reduce your assumed probability by a factor of 10

>We're special! Everything revolves around the Earth!
wrong.
>We're special! Our star is big and the others are tiny!
wrong.
>We're special! We live in the one Milky Way galaxy!
wrong.
>We're special! We're the only place in the universe with life!
Surely we're right this time bros...

https://voca.ro/1cWf2m8doEJc

The universe is teeming with life.

Why does everyone automatically assume that another intelligent species must have crazy sci-fi technology and just chooses to ignore us? Can't it just be that maybe in a distant galaxy another species has emerged that only has the same technology we do?

>>14671871
>given that the majority of starts are in paired or multiple star systems
source

>within

>>14671911
So I read once too beyond dumb hypocrisy

>>14671921
This is science blackpill, no matter how advanced alien civilization had become, they never could overcome speed of light to visit everyone

>>14672067
Hope so?

>>14672078
A 4d portal might not require an interlinear connection.
StatSpecs data instead.

>>14672088
Holographic universe strata and segment teleporting and jumping

>>14672067
>>14672081
>>14672088
>>14672090
>>14672090
Hyperscience investments? Nah buh
5G buh
We g buh

>>14671820
>he expects bacteria to be all over the place in the galaxy because of the extreme Earth conditions bacteria survives in
>Wasting hours listening to idiots ramble on podcasts to get your opinions
It's one thing to survive. It's another for nonliving matter to coalesce into biological machines. Extraterrestrial life is a cope and pseudoscience and belongs in the realm of science fiction. >>>/x/

>>14672094
Yeah but pronounce the g after the five like your an elite white buh
Then we get 6g buh
Then we can send 6g buh messages and detect other 6g buh messages buh

*to grasp or not to grasp*

>how can there be no aliens if there is one gorillion galaxies
if there is N chances for intelligent life to arise in the universe and the probability of each chance being successful is 1 in N, then we are expected to be alone no matter how big N is

>why do we just look after life as we know
yeah there could be life that's completely different from what we know but the issue is that we have no example of any of it, so we don't even know where to look after

we just don't have enough information so any take about aliens is simply a guess

>>14670047
Point to where you think you see an "intelligent species" in this photograph.

>>14672078
It’s not such a critical limitation, it only takes 200,000 years to traverse the Milky Way at half c, there’s plenty of time to do that several times over if a civilisation wanted to.
Does mean however if aliens visited this system they probably did so 10 million years ago - interesting bit there tho is 2001 is probably correct, they would likely have left a monitoring station.

>>14672104
Earth exceptionalism is a cope and lack of life anywhere else in the universe belongs in the realm of science fiction. Or is it religious fiction, tautological as that may be?

>>14672199
>it only takes 200,000 years to traverse the Milky Way at half c
does this take into consideration the energetic and material cost necessary to start and survive the journey?

>>14670047
There are no aliens

all empirical evidence says there are no aliens
this is 100% fact

>>14672202
Sorry honeybun but it seems as though you are lost. I'm not sure what board you thought you were on but this is the science and math board. And being on the science board you should know science is based on observation. Aliens have not been observed and there is no reason to believe as such therefore aliens are off topic. Unless you are trying to tell us you have had such observations of little green men hailing from distant planets, possibly visiting you in your sleep and have probed your anus as evidenced by your gaped out asshole, in which case you might be suffering from delusions and hallucinations and we'd implore you to cessate any illicit substances you might be taking and please go visit a psychiatrist to get yourself checked out. Otherwise please return to /x/ where you can talk about your fairies and space monsters with the rest of the overly imaginative children to your precious little heart's content.

>>14672199
Light travels 186,000 miles a SECOND

for years.

670,000,000 mph

What's do you think a possible probe can travel?

Maybe 100,000 mph, even that seems absurd. 6,700 times less than light.

40 light years is 470 Trillion miles.

My math may be wrong but that would take 500,000 years traveling 100,000 mph which seems extremely fast.

Supposedly voyager 1 is traveling 30,000 mph

>>14672288
1 light year is 5.8 trillion miles.

>>14670047
Looking into the sky and hallucinating an other "you" looking back is not science.

If they exist, you will never see any sign of them. Which is indistinguishable as if they did not exist. So why bother believing in them?

>>14670057
>>14671889
>let me project my world into infinity, surely that disproves those "speshuls"
It's hilaroius how euphorics are even more anthropocentric than the Jesus freaks they accuse with it.

Yet another proof that the little green men are just bootleg gods for materialists.

>>14672277
It’s like you’re ignoring conservation of mass, dude.
No special observer, frame independence, is one of the principles we’ve built science on.
And you want to trash that, for why? Because you believe that because 2 fully functioning humans won’t spontaneously materialise out of a bowl of CHON the precursor steps are each necessarily the same level of improbability?
Tell me, were you one of those idiots who thought exoplanets had to be extremely rare too? I’ll laugh at you in 10 years when another of the “barriers” to carbon life genesis gets drastically revised down, but I could do with laughing at your stupidity now too.

>>14670047
the only conclusion I can make from this picture is that photoshop exists

I think "life" definitely exists
Intelligent life? Depends on what you consider intelligent, even dolphins and elephants and some other animals have some degree of intelligence
My questions are: who says life has to be based on water and nucleic acids? Most planets have wildly different conditions to ours and maybe that allows a different set of chemicals to act in a way we could call life
At that point another question is: if consciousness came to be with those completely different conditions, then maybe they experience things very differently, hell we might even be transparent to them

>>14672601
Water might not be essential, but Carbon is probably a must for complex life. There just is no other element that can mix and match freely enough to allow life to eventually come into being.

>>14670047
>and claim that there's not a single other intelligent species within it?

Nobody, except the most retarded religious nuts, thinks that. The kind of people that are not far from Flat-Earthers on the retardedness scale.
It's pretty obvious there must be at least thousands of other intelligent species in the universe.

It's the claim that they are visiting us/aware of us that are bullshit. They're very likely stuck alone in their corner of the universe, like us.

>>14672552
not him but I laugh at you all the time since there have been no aliens since the day you were born and up to now and I'm still right

>>14672775
>t. would have argued with Copernicus
Wrong is wrong, “to the best of current knowledge” is no excuse when it’s this obvious.

>>14672317
>1 light year is 5.8 trillion miles
In the example using an exoplanet 40 light years away. 5.8 trillion times 40?.

>>14672734
>Water might not be essential, but Carbon is probably a must for complex life. There just is no other element that can mix and match freely enough to allow life to eventually come into being.
Is there anyway different elements or molecules have vastly different abilities under vastly different gravities, proximities to stars, surrounded by other elements and molecules?

But anyway, carbon is likely abundant on many planets?

There's probably "intelligent" life all over the place. The numbers are just to big for it not to have happened in other parts of the universe. However, like us, it's going to spend it's existence trapped at the bottom of it's gravity well until it's star consumes it.

>>14670047
I look at it and wonder what early life might look like.

we're going to find life on other planets and it's just going to be gay bacteria and viruses

>>14674051
We won't set foot on Mars for another 100 years minimum, probably never. If we had the ability to do so we would've done so already instead of saying "w-we're gonna do it in a few years we mean it this time!" every few years.
Also there is no "other planets (plural)". Mars is the only other planet we could possibly visit, probably the only other celestial body. And interstellar travel is still science fiction at the moment.

>>14674176

That's quite a doomer mindset. I doubt we will get to Mars in this or the next decade, but 100 years is pretty extreme

I can see there being a new moon program and landing by 2030. Then if Musk is feeling brave, we MAY get the first Mars landing in the 30's. Musk's idea of getting humans to Mars by 2025 is completely delusional, though. I doubt he believes it himself.

What is worth noting is that those astronauts that will go to Mars will have probably the shittiest lives ever. Being on a planet millions of miles away/8 months away if Mars is close to Earth will cause them to feel like shit. Not to mention all the fucking risks. If something goes wrong, the whole mission is fucked and you are left to drift through space until you starve or something. When you go to the moon, you are only a few days away from Earth. You still see the blue marble very clearly. Not so much from fucking Mars. Any mission beyond mars is atleast a century away definitely. Except for probes of course. Dragonfly is getting launched in 2030 iirc

>>14674700
>That's quite a doomer mindset. I doubt we will get to Mars in this or the next decade, but 100 years is pretty extreme
the folly in your presumption of progress is reflected in the decadal number of moon visits over the previous several decades. progress isn't a guarantee, previous generations of people were highly skilled and intelligent, people of the current era are not guaranteed to surpass them or even equal them.
the long term trends in space flight say that the last man to orbit the earth will happen in a few decades, but satellite launches will continue to grow

I am not a professional quote maker, but I submit to thee this pearl of reason:

"You have to realize, a lot of people are not guided by reason and logic."

Art thou an Science intellect like me?

>>14673806
Yes

>>14670047
i can count at least 100 species out there

should we even care about other galaxies though?
Can we ever hope to communicate with another galaxy, or even discover stuff in it?
No we are limited to the milky way, and here perhaps we are rare.

>>14670139
>visited by other worlds
If that happened we would all be dead. Worlds don't just skip up to each other and say "Hi". Gravitational forces would rip both apart.

>>14670047
Why not? It's basically a fluke that we exist in the first place, how likely do you think the same fluke would happen twice? And even if it does, what makes you think they will happen at the same time? Another intelligent species could exist in another galaxy, but they could already be extinct by 1 million years, or may not exist until another 1 million years time.

>>14670047
Until there is proof one way or another, this is no different from believing that God exists.

>>14675183
Well you may want to care about Andromeda considering we are meant to crash into it soon enough.

>>14675211
You seem to be severely underestimating just how many stars there are.
With that many stars, its entirely possible another planet out there formed exactly the same way Earth did, with the same set of circumstances and conditions.

aliens are real, i am an alien myself

>>14674176
>Mars is the only other planet we could possibly visit, probably the only other celestial body

As usual, people never remember that others moons and asteroids exist.
Callisto is an interesting place for landing, maybe Ceres too.

>>14675240
Please tell me which moon besides our own we would last more than 60 seconds on. MAYBE Titan, but thats so much further than Mars, which already takes months to get to, is it even worth going there?

>>14675246
Callisto is outside the radiation belts. Titan is not that good because of the cold atmosphere, maybe other Saturn moons like Iapetus.
>is it even worth going there?
For now humans could still get more science done than robots, not sure if the cost would compensate it desu
There is also the pride factor in this

>>14670047
I'm not gay

>>14674176
Mission of 10 at once massive drills, sent to 10 scouted locations on Mars to drill 100s of feet beneath the surface, all automated and supervised by robots rovers and ai, within 10 years.

Also, bio materials experiments;

Inflatable pools, covered and uncovered, greenhouses, full of various biological materials, cells, gels, liquids, lipids, DNA, microbes, plants, insects, compost stews,

Is 10 years for these missions too soon? The aim will be 15-20 then.

>>14675309
this would take a concentrated worldwide effort to achieve.
have you looked around at the state of the world lately?

>>14670047
If they exist then where are they?

>>14675240
>>14675246
https://youtu.be/42EwbQ3afPA

>>14670047
There most likely is, but nothing advanced enough to ever traverse that distance and visit us.

>>14675319
>this would take a concentrated worldwide effort to achieve.
>have you looked around at the state of the world lately?
No way are you kidding?

They are testing and flying new space x rockets and all that stuff every other day. The world is full of drills and mining equipment, robotics, ai's, space agencies have 100s of probes and stuff flying around. What I detail in this post >>14675309
Should have been what jwst budget was spent on, plus whatever would be raised from this Patreon and go fund me, and however much Elon, Jeff and Bill would have chipped in.

>>14675319
>>14675293
>>14675246
>>14675240
Is there technology (like whatever is used to scan surface to see if their might be oil underneath, phonon spectroscopy?) That has scaned the surface of Mars and these asteroids and moons to determine if there's anything interesting under neath?

>>14675370
Probably in other galaxies.
Why do you automatically assume that any other life that exists must be close by?

>>14670963
Yeah, the general faith in our own ability to predict future development is ridiculous.
Uncontacted tribes most likely could not guess what more developed humans do technologically and we are the same fucking species very close in terms of time spent developing.

>>14672078
idiotic low development species take
there is nothing to suggest the speed of light inhibits max travel speed

if there is life out there then it's guaranteed that interstellar travel/communication is not possible and is a guaranteed filter of the universe

>but my Start Trek/Wars

it's over

>>14671921
because, in terms of vast time spans, humans have appeared, and instantly began exponentially improving our tech with no end in sight
the stage we are at is likely the blink of an eye, an exceedingly rare event in the universe and in a species development, whereas the singularity we (might) eventually reach would stretch for eons into the future

>>14675512
No, it's not. It would just mean that our current level of development (abysmal caveman tier) cannot detect them.
Amazing how many anons have been brainwashed into
>le humans are high tech we live in the future!
meme.

Make no mistake:you, me, everyone else alive now probably got unlucky being born now. Why? because we are most likely in a generation right before the cusp of a technological singularity and everyone born/created/whatever after that will have a fraction of the worries and a far superior life.

>>14675512
This reminds me of this article a renowned physicist wrote for Forbes about the multiverse. He wrote that if the multiverse is real, some advanced intelligence already travels between universes/creates new universes all the time. As such, we should see some evidence of this activity. But we see none.

REMINDER: UAP are CONFIRMED real. They have been since the 1940s but you have been too low info and low IQ to realise. Aliens (or their artificial creations) are literally here, RIGHT NOW.

>>14675545
>UFO is now UAP
WOW! The acronym change means it is REAL! I want to watch X-Files all of a sudden.

>>14675554
explain the endless evidence
explain historical evidence

>>14675540
why does reality have to be so boring?

>>14675564
>>14675540
what kind of brainlet would believe that they would be able to detect a multi universal super entity?

>>14675564
Reality is not boring. Have you ever considered a rock? Its existence totally inexplicable. You know literally nothing. And you dare to call existence boring?

>>14675564
>Reality is boring
nigga have you ever heard of quantum mechanics? reality is ANYTHING but boring.

>>14670047
The probability of an intelligent specifies evolving is likely so close to zero that the only reason we exist is because of the anthropic principle.

>>14675536
At least we weren't there in the middle age

>>14675545
why can't people understand that the U in UFO/UAP stands for unidentified?

>>14675545
The bit that amuses me, is you never saw helicopters in wwII.
But they were in use in the 50s.
>muh hovering aerial phenomena
Yup. Sad that people in developed countries ascribe phenomena they can’t quite describe to gods like any savage in bumfuckistan, but it shouldn’t actually be that surprising.

>>14676097
>anthropic principle
philosophy mumbo jumbo, not science.

>>14676422
The idea that the universe must be teeming with life because, uh, it just must be, okay?! is also philosophical mumbo jumbo. and the best answer to infalsifiable philosphical mumbo jumbo is superior infalsifiable philosophical mumbo jumbo.

>>14670047
Can you show me the other intelligent species?

This is a science board. We don't believe anything. We agree with, disagree with, or neutrally observe evidence.

Congratulations. By process of deduction, you can acquire the answer to your question.

>>14676450
>we don’t work with hypotheses on the science board
Sounds like you’re an engineer.

And yes, it is going to very hard to test this hypothesis on that group of galaxies. Better we do it within this galaxy.
Will you take oxygen atmospheres as sufficient evidence of life as we know it being present?

>>14676475
lol no
show the space ships

>>14676767
>>14676450
>seeing is believing
I too agree that the electron doesn't exist.

>>14676776
electrons can be detected, unlike alien spaceships.

>>14670047
There are realistically a dozen civilizations per galaxy, maximum.

>>14670047
life started once in 4.5 billion years on earth. that implies its a one time event.

>>14676852
life started almost as soon as it possibly could have on earth. that implies it is common for earth-like planets.

>>14676940
there is only one earthlike planet

>>14676954
Depends on your definition of earthlike
The usual definition is a warm, rocky planet with liquid water exposed to the atmosphere. There are many such planets.

>>14676940
if it could start more than once, it would have on earth. but it hasnt.

>>14676097
>>14676430
how do you know life is unlikely to form retard?

>>14677276
We haven't encountered signs of any other lifeforms yet, therefore there is no evidence that life is likely.
Second, we have plenty of proof that /intelligent/ life is unlikely. Intelligence most likely requires multicellular life, yet it took 3.5 billion years for even multicellular life to emerge. And dolphins, one of the most intelligent non-human species, have existed for 40 million years--over 200x longer than H. sapiens--and have yet to develop technology beyond wrapping sponges around their beaks for protection.

>>14670057
>By rationality I can claim that aliens exist! If you disagree then you are an emotional empiricist!!

>>14677397
>We haven't encountered signs of any other lifeforms yet, therefore there is no evidence that life is likely.
proof it isnt likely=/= proof it is unlikely, and this isnt even proof
>we have plenty of proof that /intelligent/ life is unlikely
No, we do not. Multicellular life evolved as you said, only 600 million years ago. That means it took only 600 million years to go from simple (and tiny) multicellular life to intelligent life, with at least one major extinction event inbetween slowing it down even further. On top of that, the evolution towards intelligence produced more than one line of relatively intelligent species-sapiens being only one, neanderthals, denisovans and other unknowns being others.

600 million years isnt much in a 14 billion y/o universe and allowing for potential worlds where a dinosaur extinction type event didnt happen, we could cut that figure in half again to only 300 million being likely.

>>14676972
You think there’s anywhere on earth where a puddle of warm tasty amino acids would be left unmolested for a century?

>>14676450
The military quite literally released footage of their craft.

You are locked in conservatism bias and confirmation bias.

The evidence has been released, and you keep pretending that it hasn't been. >>14670139

honestly? no

>>14670047
there might be something wrong with me i see the merchant in that pic

>>14678672
prob a ferengi

>>14670047

>>14670047
>intelligent species
You obviously don't belong to them.

>>14670047
We have absolutely no idea how life started here on Earth (inb4 memiogenesis), so we can't even begin to calculate the probability of it existing elsewhere. The probability could be small enough to make Earth the only planet with life in the universe.

>>14678790
We may not know how life started, but we do know how long it took for life to start. And since life started pretty much as soon as Earth's conditions would allow it, and we know that life can survive and thrive in the most extreme conditions, its not hard to imagine life forming elsewhere. Whether or not it could evolve into intelligent or even complex life can be debated, but certainly the case for simple life is pretty good.

>>14678790
>The probability could be small enough to make Earth the only planet with life in the universe.

That probability would essentially be 0.

Anyway, I wish life had never started on this god forsaken piece of useless planetary garbage.

>>14678807
>We may not know how life started
>since life started pretty much as soon as Earth's conditions would allow it, and we know that life can survive and thrive in the most extreme conditions, its not hard to imagine life forming elsewhere
Knowing how life started is key here. If you remove every single organism on planet Earth right this instant, how long do you think it would take life to spontaneously appear? The correct answer is "I don't know", because no one has been able to figure out how the fuck inanimate matter started self-organizing and replicating.
>>14678842
yes

>>14678897
>yes
So life is impossible and exists nowhere in the universe?

>>14678902
Life is obviously possible because it exists on Earth. Whether life exists on other planets, we can't even attempt a guess until we understand how life came to exist on Earth.

>>14678807
Are you retarded? If you don't know how life starts, how can you even imagine how hard it is to form elsewhere? You don't know anything about it, you are just begging the question with your reasoning.

>>14671610
If you have no evidence of another apple tree existing, why would you assume there is. Until you find reproducible evidence that this isn’t the case you should believe in that.

>>14671911
How do you know this?

>>14678000
Pure speculation this is how life started, experiments have not yielded anything that shows amino acids forming into self replicating cells.

>>14670047
>Believing that's a real picture
Ngmi

>>14670047
If it does, it is EXTREMELY sparse. I'm of the opinion that we are one of, if not the first intelligent species in the universe. It took nearly all of cosmic history for humans to emerge, and as this anon said >>14670222 it was a complete accident, that probably wouldn't have happened without an extremely unlikely cosmic event.

>>14678951
>pure speculation
Not really, no.
Might be if most all the competing hypotheses didn’t have worse prior probabilities.

Pure speculation and “puddle of amino acids” has the same probability as “John from accounting fell through a time hole and snotted out his left nostril in surprise, giving rise to all life on the planet”.

It’s informed speculation, and in case you haven’t noticed, that’s the grist the scientific method needs to go anywhere in the first place.

>>14670047
I'm looking at a post like yours and find it hard to believe intelligent life exists at all

>>14670047
I could believe maybe like a slime mold type thing exists, but full blown sentient intelligent life?
It's a miracle we exist. Not just the single cell bacteria on a young crazy planet, but the crazy path we took to get here, including a myriad of almost 100% extinction events to produce the first ever species with the desire and capability to put together a telescope

>>14681041
We're talking quintillions of stars in that image alone, and that's just a tiny section of the sky.
When you start talking about those kinds of numbers, even the most impossibly unlikely scenarios start to become possible.
>what are the odds of me rolling 50 dice and getting a 6 on all 50 of them?
>what if I throw the dice 1 trillion times?

>>14670047
If the universe is infinite and eternal then somewhere out there is Cybertron

>>14679127
>dinosaurs get nuked
>apes emerge
>a climate fluke pushes apes out of the forest
>the continents and geography is such that they can make their way to another continent
>other continent has such a climate that it forces the apes to develop more and more tools and intelligence
>geography is such that they can develop settlements near waterways and trade with other far away settlements
>the right minerals are present for developing more and more advanced metallurgy
Etc., there are so many known and unknown factors which allowed the current human civilization to happen. There are other regions with humans, but they were stuck in the stone age because the conditions weren't right. So it's not even enough that a by chance a sapient species emerges, they can still get cucked by the environment and climate if it happens in the wrong place at the wrong time. It's fluke after fluke after fluke

>>14681109
>muh childhood comic book fantasies are going to come true!!!!
your parents neglected you so you formed an emotional bond with tv shows instead of them.
you come from a shitty family, big cringe

>>14670047
ok so where are they? no alien civilization has ever looked at this planet and said "that looks nice to live on why don't we settle it" in 3.7 billion years? so what does that tell us about our future, that we're never destined to make it to the stars?

>>14683162
In other galaxies, with no hope of ever being able to leave just like us.

>>14678672
Kek

>>14681157
if you just use common sense and see what's in front of you here in earths history and extrapolate, basic life is probably dime a dozen, complex life is I think somewhat rarer than the average bum would think, and intelligent life is incomprehensibly rare. it took 9000 extinction events and transformations of earth before it even got to the dinosaurs and picked up where you finished. hell we have to breath in a normally extremely toxic gas constantly to survive. on the other end I think how oxygen feeds life here shows that life can manifest in countless ways we don't think about and I think of there is intelligent life, it could be incomprehensibly different from how we think. I don't really buy the convergent evolution theory regarding life in the universe

it is a guess though, I think anyone saying they have a good idea about any of this is full of themselves

>>14670047
>Can people honestly look at an image like this and claim that there's not a single other intelligent species within it?
Yes. Very easily.

People vastly over estimate the odds of life happening anywhere let alone intelligent life. Sure it's a lot of stars but that's nothing when compared to the many, many orders of magnitude lower probability of abiogenesis.

>>14683268
The time in which it took life to form is also vastly overlooked.
Either we got extremely lucky, and the conditions for life to form just happened to be there right after Earth cooled, or, the conditions for life to form aren't very strict at all.
Now, considering the entire history of life's formation is basically lucky break after lucky break, I'm not saying the former isn't the case. But still, the fact that the only time we've ever seen life appear, it happened almost immediately, is strong evidence for the latter. Its the same as reaching into a jar of balls that has either 100 balls or 1,000,000 balls, and the first ball you pull out is #10. Can you conclude from that one ball for certain how many balls are in there? No, but what are you more likely to believe?

>>14670047
Yes. Don't know the probability of the cascade of events that led to us happening. Could be the 1st, 3rd, or 100th time.

>>14670047
any claim put forward without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. the onus of proof is on you to show intelligent life in your image not to speculate

>>14683162
I favour the gardener idea, that being a super civ is less interested in more copies of themselves and more in the aesthetics of a rosebush. Or planetary biosphere.
But yes it’s an open question.

>all these people arguing about how life started on Earth
Idiots. It's clear how life started on Earth: GOD!

>>14675536
Maybe, but for now I can sift through the Women Presenting and Smiling thread of Sexy Beautiful Women. It's still a great time to be alive.

>>14670047
Perhaps its possible that life starting is quite common, but life SURVIVING for any great length of time is quite rare. For example Earth has not 1 but 2 celestial bodies, Jupiter, and the Moon, defending it from large space threats. Then consider the fact that Earth has had 5 major extinction events that life has barely managed to skate through each time. Like how do we know a Permian-level volcanic eruption isn't about to happen a few years from now? Would humanity survive that? How do we know a stray asteroid in the oort cloud didn't just send 50 others headed towards the inner solar system? What if the Sun decides to throw a tantrum and send us back to the stone age? And people wonder why we don't see any Type-1 civilizations.

>>14683379
That argument against that is if life is "easy" to appear and if the conditions were ideal in the early earth then why did it only happen once? Why does all life on earth, and the fossil records, show that everything has a single common ancestor. From the simplest bacteria all the way up to humans, all have the same identical chemical makeup.

>>14683242
>I think of there is intelligent life, it could be incomprehensibly different from how we think
If we look at what works the best on Earth, I'd think there will be some common traits. You don't want to be in water because you won't be able to use fire, you want to have hands to make stuff, and then you probably only want to have two legs because more limbs than that would be a waste of energy. And then you're walking upright. Sure there's probably all kinds of crazy lifeforms elsewhere, but I don't know how many of them would be in an environment where it's actually a benefit or a feasible path to evolve in a direction where you rely on tools. After all it's only happened once even on Earth, everyone else manages fine without tools

It seems like a massive accident that something like humans happen, essentially you have to end up with apes so weak and fragile that they're forced to use tools for everything, but still manage to survive somehow. Otherwise there's no pressure to keep going in that direction, and you can just keep chilling eating fruit in the forest

>>14670047

>Can people honestly look at an image like this and claim that there IS not a single other intelligent species within it?

Logical error, you are only able to see whether there WAS a single other intelligent species within it?

>>14670047
yes

What if we are just in a region of space where life is rare and there are other parts in the universe where life is common?

Did anyone stop to consider this?

>>14686473
Fun fact, the Local Group is smack-dab in the middle of a 3-billion-ly void. This probably at least contributes to the problem.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KBC_Void

>>14686473
what if life is just rare everywhere and we're the only life?

did anyone stop to consider this?

>>14686514
there are trillions of likely life-friendly planets in the Milky way alone, and billions of billions of billions of galaxies. of course there's life somewhere else in the universe. just not anywhere near us.

>>14686522
>of course there's life somewhere else in the universe.
of course theres other life in the universe THERE JUST IS OKAY?

>>14686534
Do you truly believe that we are the only life inside a 95 billion light year observable universe with trillions upon trillions of galaxies that all have hundreds of billion or trillions of planets each?

We already know of several earth like planets in our galaxy.

There is just no way that we amoungust it all can be the only planet with life.

>204 posts
>no Fermi paradox
The Fermi paradox annihilates almost any probabilistic reasoning people come up with. The earth is not a ‘rare’ planet, as in, there are many observable planets near us with near identical astrological environments. So then, if intelligent life were a mere statistical probability, any reasonable probability would dictate that intelligent life out there would be clear and obvious to us. However, since this is not the case, either earth and life is impossibly rare, or the probabilistic interpretation as we know it should really be scrapped.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox

>>14686547
theres just NO WAY that there can't be other life
there JUST IS okay?

>>14686547
Then where are the signs of life? They’ve had billions of years

>>14686549
>there would be clear and obvious to us
How? We can't observe any of the distant galaxies in enough detail to tell if intelligent life exists.

>>14686552
Kill (you) self

>>14686560
Maybe life is common where they exist and they aren't really bothered because to them life is everywhere so they don't need to go searching across the other side of the universe for us.

>>14686573
>no argument
teeming with life fags btfo

It is rather obvious that they are not sufficiently intelligent to communicate via twitter or snapchat.
Checkmate!

>>14686575
>no argument
Try reading the other part of my post

>>14686564
Any amount of technological advancement would be spewing EM waves into the universe. If there were a second humanity out there it would be as clear as a star

>>14670075
It is very early, you are right. But it's still highly improbable that we are the only ones.
I think perhaps no species has never figured a way around the light speed barrier no matter how advanced they get, maybe it's just simply impossible. Yea that would be a black pill but it might be the truth.
That combined with mass extinction events that happen over and over again, maybe the ultimate one that does it being the creation of synthetics like the Mass Effect lore. Who knows.

>>14686564
lmao. Our radio bubble barely extends past the solar system, and you think we could spot another one between galaxies? The Fermi Paradox is one of the most retarded and flawed arguments in all of science, and makes so many unreasonable assumptions it shouldn't even be taken seriously.

>>14686614
The Milky Way is only 100,000 ly across. If there were any intelligent life within the Milky Way from its inception to now, the likelihood that it’s too recent for us to see it is retardedly small. So either there is no intelligent life in the Milky Way besides us or…?

>>14686614
This. Distant intelligent life could be observing earth right now and have no idea we are here. We may have already looked back at them as well and had no idea.
That said, we have been dabbling in radio for a long time and they travel at the speed of light, it certainly extends past our solar system. Assuming it doesn't dissipate.

>>14686560
yeah, just let me go get my galaxy-sized telescope so I can take a good look at Ayys on planet OaIsfhuahfioua 10 billion light years away.
retard.
>>14686596
>If there were a second humanity out there it would be as clear as a star
what is inverse square law
we couldn't detect ourselves a mere 100 light years away
>>14686631
see above.

>>14686645
> we couldn't detect ourselves a mere 100 light years away
Proof

>>14686645
I think

>>14686631

is referring to radio waves sent by earlier civilizations not earth/humanity

>>14686631
The argument has been made several times in this thread that perhaps intelligent life is so rare that it only happens maybe once or twice per galaxy, sometimes not at all. In that case how would you ever be able to detect them? We can't even get good quality images of the stars in Andromeda, our next door neighbor.

>>14686652
Prove that we could.
How the hell do we really know for sure how far radio signals can be detected without putting detectors hundreds or thousands of lightyears away from us first?
Space has a noise floor, radio signals get quieter until they go below the floor. Perhaps they even break up in ways we currently do not understand.

>>14686631
Isn't there an entire area of the Milky Way that we can't see at all because there's too much shit in the way? How do we know the ayys aren't right there?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zone_of_Avoidance

>>14686670
From your article
> the Milky Way is effectively transparent at radio wavelengths.

>>14686663
> How the hell do we really know for sure how far radio signals can be detected without putting detectors hundreds or thousands of lightyears away from us first?
Maxwell’s equations, for one

detected ur mums biosigniature at a distance of 10000000ly

>>14686695
You cannot prove it without trying it.

>>14686708
>evolution didn't happen because I didn't see it happen

>>14686652
If an EM signal is 1 terrawatt at a distance of 100km, it will be 1.11×10^-8 microwatts at a distance of 100 light years.
for the record, 1 terrawatt is ~5% of ALL human power consumption. We don't emit any signals anywhere near that strong, not even 2 inches from the antenna let alone 100km.

>>14686695
The same sort of equations that brought us dark matter and instead of figure out where it went wrong we just assume dark matter is really even a thing?
Humans are way too cocky. They always just appeal to certain authorities and assume they are true because someone bearing a certificate of smartness says so. Covid hoax kind of blew the lid off the whole operation and exposed it.

>>14686730
>neutrinos don't exist because... they just don't, okay?

>>14686721
Evolution is actually observable in real time and provable through fossil records. Nice false equivalence you midwit.

Maybe ayys have sent out signal, they would still take millions/billions/trillions years to reach us.

They are sending them through god knows what, dust, radiation,past black holes. They might not even reach us or be so faint we can't detect them. If they are advanced they might be sending signals we can't even perceive.

They may not sense things the way we do and might be sending all kinds of signals known to man.

>>14686734
You aren't worshipping science hard enough you heretic. Where in the holy book of Scientism is it stated that dark matter is neutrinos? You have been misguided and must repent.

>>14686735
>Evolution is actually observable in real time
Just like the inverse square law!

>>14686753
Evolution is literally observable though, as in it can happen within a single human lifespan with simpler lifeforms. It's not even a difficult concept to understand.

>>14686549
you can't properly extrapolate from a singular event. You don't know the "statistical probability" for life. It may be 1 to 10 universes over their entire lifespan and we are 10% fluke.

>any reasonable probability
you don't have any numbers. You don't have any probability to draw any conclusions from, you fucking moron. Fermi paradox is retarded and it's not even a paradox.

>>14686757
I wasn't disagreeing, I was just pointing out that the inverse square law is even easier to observe.

>>14686757
That’s adaptation, not evolution. Also, doesn’t change anything as the inverse square law is still demonstrable in any time frame you like

>>14686764
>It may be 1 to 10 universes over their entire lifespan and we are 10% fluke.

This is another interesting take I have thought about. It seems life was only formed on earth once (but maybe viruses were a second event). Humans have been trying to create life and have so far been unsuccessful. What if not only the planetary conditions need to be perfect, but an event must occur on that planet that must also be perfect and even more statistically unlikely than the perfect planet itself?

>>14686783
The universe is way too vast for any “unlikely” event to render life unique to earth based on chance.

>>14686768
Small changes = big changes over time. Seriously I don't feel like debating evolution, it's low hanging fruit. It simply happened and happens.

>>14686797
If something is statistically unlikely enough then you could be completely wrong.

>>14686806
Try to come up with any example or theory that would lead to that improbability. You literally can’t, because it defies the logic of the universe

>>14686797
>The universe is way too vast
sauce? You don't know that.

>>14686812
>it defies the logic of the universe
shirley, you can't be serious.

>>14686812
You don't even know how life was formed yet you tell me it's impossible for it to an extreme statistical unlikelihood. Seriously?
Use your imagination. Maybe it has to be an exact assortment of atoms and compounds that rarely align themselves in one specific way at one specific temperature with an exact amount of voltage generated by a perfect lightning strike and then for that life to survive for more than a second is just another massive hurdle?
Neither of us knows how life forms. You cannot close your mind off.

>>14686812
atoms randomly assembling themselves to form galaxy sized image of billie eilish's tits. Universe is so big. Why don't we see that? We should have a Billie Paradox.

>>14686797
based "uhh my maths means you're wrong sweetie" retard

>>14686812
One criteria physicists use to decide whether a theory should be taken seriously or not is whether or not the theory allows for Boltzmann brains or considers them more likely than the real universe existing; if it does, the theory is retarded as rubbish (hence why physicists scoff at "quantum fluctuation big bangs")

>>14686851
You’re missing the point. If life were as rare as the tits Galaxy, it would make no sense for us to exist. You guys want life to be so rare that we never see it, and yet take for granted that life exists here. We live on the a planet with Billie Eilish’s tits in the flesh. What are the odds of the universe forming those? And yet we know they are there.

>>14686898
>we exist therefore there must be infinite life out there
oh my science

>>14686898
Weak anthropic principle. If there is no life in the universe, obviously we won't be around to see that there's no life in the universe. And if there is only one life in the universe, then obviously that life will be us since we're alive. This does not prove that life is rare, but it does prove that we have no grounds to assume that it isn't.

>>14686898
> If life were as rare as the tits Galaxy, it would make no sense for us to exist.
No it wouldn't. Have you thought about this? It would just mean that we are rare in the universe.

>You guys want life to be so rare that we never see it
I don't want this. Quite the contrary. But you have faith that life has to be everywhere, I do not. I am open to the idea that it's extremely rare.

>We live on the a planet with Billie Eilish’s tits in the flesh. What are the odds of the universe forming those? And yet we know they are there.
Let's entertain the idea that Earth is the only planet in the entire universe with life. Well someone needs to be that life and experience it, right? What if that's us? I mean, it's not like the rocks on the other side of the galaxy are experiencing anything.

>>14686912
>>14686913
>>14686925
Not my point. If life were so rare that we are the only ones in the universe, it would be infinitely more likely for us to not exist at all. I don’t believe life is MORE likely than you are suggesting, I believe it isn’t a random probability in the first place.

>>14686932
Plus I don’t believe there are infinite universes and we happen to be the one with life, as the Anthropic crowd likes to suggest. That’s just silly

>>14686932
>it would be infinitely more likely for us to not exist at all
and yet here we are, the only life in the universe

>>14686932
Again, this selection bias is inherently addressed by the weak anthropic principle. If you don't exist, then you inherently cannot observe your nonexistence.
>>14686937
Whether the universe is infinite or a one-time deal is irrelevant to the anthropic principle. If there was no life in the universe, then there would be no observers in the universe.

>>14686932
>it would be infinitely more likely for us to not exist at all

Not infinitely, just vastly. And if it happens one time, that life would exist and have experiences, and it could be us.

That said, what if life only exists in a billion unique places in our universe right now? That sounds like a big number, but that still means life would be exceedingly rare. So rare that we would very likely be the only life in our galaxy.

>>14670047
When there are 8 billion people and the far extremes of the bell curve you're gonna find some pretty fucked up shit.

>>14686946
If there were a billion unique occurrences of life right now, think about how likely it would be for life to have formed in the 13 billion years before right now, and how we might have noticed that

>>14686945
The anthropic principle doesn’t give credit to the rare earth theory. Me being on fire doesn’t give credit to the theory of spontaneous combustion; rather, logic dictates that an outside influence set me on fire.

An arbitrarily large amount of planets is not going to help you if the probability for life to emerge is arbitrarily smaller.

>>14686955
think of how fucking hard it is to detect shit in our own galaxy, let alone in another one.
best we can do is detect sugars and amino acids in interstellar space within a few hundred light years, but sugar and amino acids aren't life. and even if they do settle on some planet and sow the seeds of life, we'll be long dead by then.

>>14686955
>think about how likely it would be for life to have formed in the 13 billion years before right now, and how we might have noticed that

We actually probably wouldn't have noticed. If a civilization existed and perished four billion years ago on a distant star in our own galaxy we would only know if they were advanced enough to leave evidence of their existence to still exist after four billion years, which would be a a huge feat. If we perish right now nothing would know we existed in four billion years, it would be like we never existed at all. What are the chances of something discovering voyager drifting in deep space? How many times would it have been hit be debris? Hell, just think of the radioactive decay. Time claims all.

>>14686975
If there were seeds of life, they would have sown themselves on the other planets billions of years ago, and had billions of years to become recognizable, and even billions of years still to die off. Billions and billions of years for signs of life to reach earth is a lot more than needed within our galaxy

>>14686993
>If there were seeds of life, they would have sown themselves on the other planets billions of years ago
Have you spotted such potential seeds? What are you basing this assumption on?
>Billions and billions of years for signs of life to reach earth
signs of life will never reach Earth unless we build a massive telescope the size of Earth's orbit. we literally can't see the planet next door let alone zoom in for a closer look. Best we can do is see a star dimming slightly when something comes between it and us.

>>14687017
the planet *at the star next door

>>14670047
>pic of high redshift galaxies only a billion or so years old, with presumably low metal content
>life requires high metal content to evolve
>evolution takes a billion years
>OMG BUT THERE MUSH BE ALENEZ ON PICX!!!!
>I FUUKKKENN LOOOVEE SOIIYENCE!!!!

>>14687017
> Best we can do is see a star dimming slightly when something comes between it and us.
Retard. How do we know the chemical composition of the planets then? It’s easy to see and analyze the em waves coming to us from the planet itself, which is exactly what “seeing it” is

>>14670047
Low iq thread

>>14687035
>How do we know the chemical composition of the planets then?
By looking at the star when it dims.

>>14687037
Give us your high iq take.

>>14687069
There are no high IQ takes to be had in this low IQ thread.

>>14687072
Prove it, faggot.

>>14670047
>Can people honestly look at an image like this and claim that there's not a single other intelligent species within it?
Well yeah, it's just an image. I don't look at a picture of a human, and think to myself "that picture is an intelligent species."