/sci/ - Science & Math

Yeah and they would probably write it in english...

if we aren't alone, at this point the aliens clearly want nothing to do with us, so it's a moot point.

also with convergent evolution ,there is a good chance they wouldn't be as exciting as we think they would be anyway.

>>4251566
You know, that was something people usually call "An Example!".

>Something like a huge grafiti spanning the whole Moon saying
The "Something like" is very important when trying to understand this sentence.

You seem to fail to grasp the astronomical size of the universe. Perform a youtube search and look for watch some videos of Neil DeGrasse Tyson talk about extraterrestrial life.

We are most likely alone in every practical sense. The universe is nearly 14 billion years old. Cycles of stellar formation should have produced at least a couple of billion years for intelligent life to form ahead of us, in this galaxy alone. A lifeform like ours could colonize across the galaxy in about 10 million years. So the sky should be ALIVE with their signaling or other detectable aspects of their travel and system alterations. Instead we see NOTHING, no matter where we look, or which EM freq we look in. We see no fusion or fission sparks from ships. We see no Dyson Spheres or their derivatives. We in fact see NO solar occlusions from artificial activity, nor do we detect any spectral emissions at all that indicate artificial alterations.

The absence is the evidence. It's evidence that our galaxy doesn't have space-faring civilizations. And that's a rank condemnation of the sustainability of industrial civilizations in the first place. Read about the Drake Equation and stop denying what's abundantly clear: Technological civs destroy themselves.

I think there is enoguh evidence ( i have seen UFOs myself) to believe that there is life besides our planet (believe not would be very close minded)
I have seen lots of evidence, in documentals, conferences and shit.
I believe in aliens but i dont believe that they are here since millons of years and they use us like ants.

>>4251570
>also with convergent evolution ,there is a good chance they wouldn't be as exciting as we think they would be anyway.
Yeah. But I am talking about "Any life at all!" and I don't really care if they are like us or not.

It's simply more likely that we are alone because if we go out there, we will leave signs for others to find, to give them hope to find life.

>>4251587
actually this is the best universe tour I've ever found.
http://youtu.be/17jymDn0W6U

>>4251594
>And that's a rank condemnation of the sustainability of industrial civilizations in the first place. Read about the Drake Equation and stop denying what's abundantly clear: Technological civs destroy themselves.

Err what? One assumption was just rendered unlikely and you go a few billion steps ahead and say well, life is pretty likely eventhough I have just said something else but we don't see signs because they always comitt suicide.

ARE YOU STUPID?

>>4251598
>( i have seen UFOs myself)
So, why don't they talk to us? Finding life would be reason enough to communicate.

We even try to comunicate with apes and other animals. Why don't these high evolved being try to talk to us?

>(believe not would be very close minded)
Now you sound like some Creationist.

>>4251599

there is definitely, 100%, more than just earth out there with life. However the universe is so huge that there could be millions of earth-like planets out there without any of them ever knowing it.

>>4251623

>So, why don't they talk to us? Finding life would be reason enough to communicate.

nope. If I was an alien and discovered another race of intelligent beings on another planet I wouldn't communicate. 50/50 they would shoot us out of the sky.

>>4251623
I said i have seeen UFOs, not aliens, derp.
However, the universe is pretty fucking big, and yes, it would be STUPID not to believe there is LIFE out there, or other things we DONT KNOW YET.
And its also possible travel to the space using The Einstein-Rosen Bridge, that means that UFOs could be ourselves, military just triying out weapons.

>>4251629
Neh, intelligent enough "lifing things" knows that if they want to accomplish something, its better with help.
However.. if they are looking for natural resources or such, they would kill us all.

>>4251594
>Technological civs destroy themselves.
Have you ever considered other alternatives, like everyone just inventing virtual reality? I know I would cease giving a shit about the outside universe if I could play god inside the computer.

>>4251627
They would have had several hundred million years to spot Earth.

After that they would have several hundred million years to develop at least a sublight spaceship.

Then they would have another hundred million years to come here, explore life, explore Earth and leave signs for any possible sentient being that could ever evolve to find.

Why wouldn't they leave signs? Why shouldn't they try to contact us? Even if we are savages compared to them, we also make contact to savages and let them know we are here.

We could never pose a threat to them and even if we could they could simply leave and never return.

>>4251594
Jesus fuck you are retarded. We can barly detect planets next to other stars let alone see whats on them. At a certain distance radio waves become useless. We ain't seen shit son. The verse is HUGE.

>>4251629
>50/50 they would shoot us out of the sky.
Develop interstellar technology just to play punks and randomly destroy without any reason at all?

>>4251651
You're attempting to ascribe human thought to alien beings. Didn't lovecraft teach you anything?

>>4251651
Leaving signs? contact? who is managing all of that here? how can we know that they never trid to contact before?
Just saying, you are not president nor am i.

>>4251564
OP:
"You see, Earth has been around for a few billion years now and it has had an oxygen rich atmosphere with life for roughly 500-600 million years."
Wouldn't most neighbor planets that you are presuming also be doing the same thing?
Give them time to develop, too.
(And let go of the 'oxygen' idea completely; it means nothing.)

"Wouldn't that have been a lot of time for an intelligent species to set up some telescopes and look out for lifebearing planets?"
Look, yes.

"I mean if there was anyone else in the Milky Way, wouldn't they have seen Earth by now and sent a probe or maybe even some explorers?"
You are ignoring completely the vast distances involved, and it is really really important that you notice them.

>>4251656
You can't think of a reason?
I can think of three good, practical, and important reasons off the top of my head.

Well, if a lifeform that has the means for interestellar travel exists, why would the try to contact us?

To teach us? Or enslave us? I don't think we are significant enough for this. I think a very cliché but plausible theory is that they'd wait for us to develop some kind of tech/drive, more or less as a test.

Or not.

>>4251570
'convergent evolution' is not a rule:
it certainly does NOT establish a grade of chanciness.

Can't understand how you'd find alien life less interesting if it looked similar, vastly different, or exactly like us.

>>4251643
>if they are looking for natural resources or such, they would kill us all.
Why would they come to Earth for that? The Jovian Moons have far less gravity and far less rednecks with guns. There is also a huge shitload of asteroids.

>>4251651

Let me explain why that is bullshit.
>They would have had several hundred million years to spot Earth.

Humans have only bin a technological species for around a hundred or so years. We cant even analyze the atmosphere of a extrasolar planet from this distance yet . What makes you think they would be able to see us? Verse is fuckn huge.

>After that they would have several hundred million years to develop at least a sublight spaceship.

Do you have any idea how long it takes to get to another star at sublight speed?

>Then they would have another hundred million years to come here, explore life, explore Earth and leave signs for any possible sentient being that could ever evolve to find.

They would barley be able to get here with the known laws of physics let alone leave signs. Your also forgetting the whole economics and logistics of such an endeavor.

>Why wouldn't they leave signs? Why shouldn't they try to contact us? Even if we are savages compared to them, we also make contact to savages and let them know we are here.

Because they cant and even if they could it would be fucking expensive or they simply haven't found us.


>We could never pose a threat to them and even if we could they could simply leave and never return.

Spaceships are fragile and highly limited by weight. I am certain a nuke would pose a prity big threat. Also why the fuck would any species intelligent enough to get to us want our planet? We have nothing of value.

Don't know if troll or just retarded.

>>4251623
"finding life would be reason enough to communicate."
I cannot agree, at any level.

There are many reasons to avoid other life, many reasons it is very very difficult, and many reasons it would have no value to the spacefaring civ.
To say, bluntly, that talking to an idiot animal is obviously valued and important shows you haven't thought of it from any perspective but your own.

>>4251679
>(And let go of the 'oxygen' idea completely; it means nothing.)
That's right, you don't need oxygen it's not absolutely neccessary. There are other possibilities.

But aliens wouldn't have to look for oxygen to find life. A constant atmospheric cycle should be enough to find life. Trace elements that are steadily ejected into the atmosphere and also removed again.

Signs that can't be explained with volcanism. You don't have to look for oxygen or liquid water.

>people saying alien races would give enough of a fuck to actually destroy our civilisation

really? They probably know how scarce life is and try to protect it/teach them their ways. However, as long as we are savages to them, I think they'd rather be spectators than actively do something.

>>4251636
"And its also possible travel to the space using The Einstein-Rosen Bridge,"
Laughing; you write that like it's not only proven, and possible, but an actual bridge that someone's built somewhere.

Look, all those ideas people have had to travel fast or far?
All the theories and concepts?
Treat them with suspicion -- they haven't been built and it's still possible _none_ of them will do what they once proposed.

Stop discussing these topics like they are all true:
there still could be no aliens
there still could be no way out of our system
there still might be antagonistic aliens
lightspeed might still be an absolute limit for matter

>>4251679
>Wouldn't most neighbor planets
Also, not neighbours but anyne anywhere in the galaxy would have had enough time to spot Earth and come here.

In a thousand years we will have 3D maps of all planetary systems in our Galaxy and likely the next fex neighbouring Galaxies.

A thousand years are nothing compared to the amount of time aliens would have had to find Earth and come here.

Humans have always wondered about what was out there. But, on the scale of time, the amount of time we have had tools to examine, in any way other than looking up, has been small. Technology, has been progressing faster abd faster, abd we have advanced more in terms of technology, in the recent century or two, than we have for the entire history of the human race.

Why is this relevant?
Becvause the way knowledge runs, with an ``intelligence'' relative to ours, a trend such as this is likely. Therefore, is an alien race were to ``discover'
' us, it is likely they have entered this same slope; therefore, out contect will go from NULL, then increase at a rate that will leave many heads scratched. This is because any race with the tools to communicate is developing tools to communicate at an unreal rate. If they did exist, as soon as they made contact, we would know, and forever be reminded. This is not extremely relevant, but this may explain some things.

>>4251636
No offense, but you sound like you don't have the faintest clue of what you are saying

>>4251721
"They probably know how scarce life is and try to protect it/teach them their ways.
Why teach something your way rather than simply propagate?
You're assuming the Otherness Paradigm, when you have no reason.
(You also just destroyed the implicit presumption that life is common by stating life is scarce.)

"However, as long as we are savages to them, I think they'd rather be spectators than actively do something."
Why spectators? if they are already far beyond us in most other things,
what do you imagine you'd have to offer that is worth the trip, the time, the expense?

>>4251721
>However, as long as we are savages to them, I think they'd rather be spectators than actively do something.
Why do you constantly try to make up excuses for why we don't see any evidence of aliens?

I wouldn't mind if there were no aliens. It means we have the Galaxy for us and we are free to spread everywhere and evolve into aliens to eachother.

>>4251587
and a species with only our level of technology would have inhabited every corner of the galaxy by now.

So either they're invisible or we're alone. I for one agree with OP

>>4251648
Hmm.. can't believe I have to explain this:

You're talking about occupying your mind, but the real world still has demands upon you.
You can imagine a virtual world that is distracting and even one that replaces some fundamental activities with virtual or automated ones,
but most of the population will always have to do the real-world work -- farming and building and operating.

>>4251654

False. Wrong. I spoke about MORE than just EM transmissions. And we've found 700 extra-solar planets so far. They are hardly difficult to find once existing techniques were combined.

There would be more than one type of indication if the galaxy had been over-run with a space-faring, technological, intelligent species. Instead we see NOTHING. There are ZERO indications.

The absence is the evidence. Stop denying what's abundantly clear: Life destroys itself once it gets ahold of technology, or it destroys its ability to become space-faring. We're following the same path. A century from now, spaceflight will just be a dream buried in history (for those who have access to historical records, that is).

>>4251752
Why do you pretend I am running around screaming ALIENS EXIST NASA CONSPIRACIES etc.

All I'm saying is that a race capable of interstellar travel has probably no interest in contacting us rather then just observe us.

>>4251737
"Also, not neighbours but anyne anywhere in the galaxy would have had enough time to spot Earth and come here."
No, you are still ignoring the vastness of space, the massive difficulty of learning anything at a distance, and the enormous effort it would take to change that.

"In a thousand years we will have 3D maps of all planetary systems in our Galaxy and likely the next fex neighbouring Galaxies.
Sorry, again Nope.
Our own galaxy I could buy; but you still seem to think in terms of stuff being close. Neighboring galaxies I cannot accept without a specific supposition.

"A thousand years are nothing compared to the amount of time aliens would have had to find Earth and come here."
A hundred thousand years is NOTHING compared to actually having to traverse the amount of space you are talking about!
Look at the math: even if we were talking about moving in a single, known direction, it could take ALL of that time to get the first probe here from there!

>>4251762
>the absence of signs of other races is the evidence that life always inevitably destroys itself/it's ability to become space-faring

Oh come on

>>4251752

Holy shit you are fucking stupid.

Are you the angry simian guy?
Dyson Sphere sites have already been confirmed in our galaxy alone, cited by the goverment. ( See: http://home.fnal.gov/~carrigan/infrared_astronomy/Fermilab_search.htm )

No one cares because It's "stupid".

See this as well: http://www.tgdaily.com/space-features/60744-almost-all-milky-way-stars-have-planets


Here's why we haven't "seen" any evidence.

You cannot travel faster then the speed of light.

You are fucking stupid, come up with your own sources and citations and explain how my sources are wrong or I am correct.

ALSO

If radiowaves somehow NEVER deteriorated (They become in-comprehensible background noise after only 5 LY) we would "see" or "hear" evidence every fucking where.

You can logically derive that we're not alone using only our position in the milky way. Fuck the psuedo intellectuals on this board are just FUCKIGN STUPID FUCKKKKKK YES I AM MAD BECAUSE YOURE TROLLING OR YOURE BELOW 90 IQ FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK

>>4251754
> So either they're invisible or we're alone.

Concur, but why would they be invisible? If Humans spread across the galaxy we'd have a fucking Hypernet broadcast system running that allowed knowledge to spread across Humanspace to keep everyone updated. Every planet or system-of-habitats we'd colonize would start emitting on the EM spectrum like a fucking small star. Stray transmission from thousands of worlds would cross the galaxy and some sort of signal analysis would find patterns.

But we don't see that from the galaxy. There are no patterned signals other than those from astronomical objects that emit regularly, like pulsars (which were originally suspected to be artificial sources).

We have to not only face the fact of our solitary fate, but we should also face the fact of what's likely to happen to our own civilization: Increasing warfare until the massive Last War knocks Humanity down into being sheepherders pretty much FOREVER.

one thing that always bothered me about people that think life exists elsewhere is that there are certain rules that govern our universe, some materials conduct electricity, others do not, is it too far fetched to think that life cannot exist without water or without being carbon based?

people keep thinking we're gonna find life on some shitty gas planet just because it's near a star, there's a lot more to it than that, maybe it's a universal law that there is no life without water

You know why you're wrong OP?

Here's why.

This is a FACT.

Every single planet that has flowing liquid oceans has life on it.

Every single one.

Are you mad yet? It's a fact, get more mad kid. Owned.

>>4251784
maybe it's a universal law that there is no life without water

I'm pretty sure we can agree here

>>4251766
>Why do you pretend I am running around screaming ALIENS EXIST NASA CONSPIRACIES etc.
I don't.

>All I'm saying is that a race capable of interstellar travel has probably no interest in contacting us rather then just observe us.
That makes no sense. You have three big reasons to travel out into the Galaxy:
1. Colonization
2. Research of other planets
3. Making contact to sentient life

I believe we should shift our interest more to Colonization and research since all evidence leads us to believe there is noone else but if we find life, the 3. reason to go out there would become the most important again.

I also don't believe that there is any reason to believe that any given civilization would evolve so far that our current state would appear to them like an ant hill.

>>4251771
> Are you the angry simian guy?

No, I'm the "Violent Simian Guy". Why can't you FAGGOTS ever even get the name right?

> Dyson Sphere sites have already been confirmed in our galaxy alone

Bzzt! Wrong. False. Not one star has ever been observed to be a Dyson Sphere. Stop lying, FAGGOT.

> You cannot travel faster then the speed of light.

The galaxy can be crossed by a race like ours at STL in about 10 million years. And yet we see no sign of the sky being alive with intelligent signals and indications, which means the entire assumption is DEAD FUCKING WRONG.

What's the primary computation (if you're honest, which as a FAGGOT you aren't) is that the latter parts of the Drake Equation are FAR SMALLER than anyone is willing to admit. But I'll admit it. And it spells DOOM for our own technociv.

The absence is the evidence.

>>4251782
>what's likely to happen to our own civilization: Increasing warfare until the massive Last War knocks Humanity down into being sheepherders pretty much FOREVER.

Wtf? You make such a good comment and then you take a huge pile of hippie/"we must become one unified Earth under one ruler" shit and smear it all over it.

>>4251564

>Something like a huge grafiti spanning the whole Moon saying

Saying what exactly? How should we understand their language?

>>4251794

Get mad kid, you're always wrong and everyone is laughing at you.

And yeah just call me a FAGGOT and disregard my cited sources when you have none.

>The absence is the evidence.

That's the most retarded thing I've ever read. every time I see your logically flawed posts they always surprise me.

>Drake Equation are FAR SMALLER than anyone is willing to admit.

OK I don't get it, you seem to jump from "NO LIFE EXISTS AT ALL OTHER THEN US"
to "THERE IS LIFE OUT THERE BUT ITS SO RARE JUST IGNORE IT PLS"

What are you trying to support? You're logic is so flawed I can't even understand what you're arguing for.


You always ignore the "radio signals degrade over very small distances compared to the distances between stars" argument every single time.

I'm just going to stop and leave until you actually answer it, if you don't I know you know deep down inside I'm right.

>>4251807

Also, here's a source for the radio signal degradation argument.

This is probably the sole reason we can't see any signals. Signals can be extremely hard to read eve at distances between near stars.

http://www.faqs.org/faqs/astronomy/faq/part6/section-12.html

>>4251801

And where EXACTLY THE FUCK did I get all hippie and laud the One World government under machines of loving grace? OH WAIT, I FUCKING DIDN'T, FUCKFACE.

It's hardly hippie to tell people to STOP MAKING WAR BEFORE IT ENGULFS EVERYTHING. A strong defense with measured responses will accomplish that.

You pound penises with your face.

>>4251754
When people talk about the immense size of the universe, you should listen:
not just ignore it and go on with the same argument 'but a lot of time has passed.'

Yes, it is possible a lot of time has passed -- but the universe is very very huge.
We know of no shortcuts around that; so we cannot assume there are many.
But a species with, as you say, 'only our level of technology' is not only unable to get around that space completely, it is unable to get to ANY other space.
Our level of tech? Are you insane?
Our current level of tech doesn't even provide us a way to get outside our own solar system, let alone 100,000 times further or with better reliability!

>>4251737

Technology isn't magic. There is a limit on how fast you can go. There is a limit to how strong you can make an object. There is a limit to how fast a computer can be.

>>4251762
You keep getting stupider and stupider. We cannot detect earth-sized earth-massed planets within the habitable zone of a star our size. Even if we could the only information we would have is that its there. How big it is and its mass. That is it.

This isn't scifi. If the aliens are space fearing it is out of necessity and the ships and structures you see in movies are impossible. What they would have is space stations, and cryo ships. If a species absolutely NEEDED to get off its planet and couldn't develop the cryogenic technology needed for interstellar space travel they would be forced to build generation ships. We have the technology to be a spacefaring species RITE NOW. Its simply not economical. Now if our planet was dieing our our star was going to go nova that is a different story altogether. At that point almost all of any species that values self preservation and has the resources/intelligence would probably do it regardless of the economic cost.

>>4251802
How about a huge, perfect circe and inside the circle their location as a starmap.

That would be equal to:
"Hey, if anything intelligent ever evolves on Earth, we want to just say: 'Hi, we were here and you are not alone! Keep searching for life!' "

And I can't find any reason why they would hide from us.

>>4251790
I don't think contacting - means that there will be an exchange of intelligence - a race that shows little interest (or maturity, if you want) in the exploration of space makes much sense. As far as I know, civilizing tribes that had no contact with our civilisation usually doesn't end in them 'fitting in' but rather becoming addicts/criminals. You can say that's a stupid analogy and that I am talking out of my arse, which I probably am, but your 'I don't see anything with tech I know is very limited as of now, therefore there is nothing' isn't very good either.

Let's just agree to disagree. Maybe I'm just stupid and don't get it, but let's stop before we begin to call each other names or similar.

>>4251812
It's pretty much hippie to spread apocalyptic crap like we all bein completly doomed becaus we be makin dem weapons of nukes derrrp.

That's fucking retarded fearmongering. We don't have to become atheists if that shit is the future, the new religion of fear. We just exchange one armageddon crap against the other.

>>4251807

I never said that life didn't exist out there, FUCKFACE JR.

I said that technocivs destroy themselves. The silent sky supports that, since THE ABSENCE IS THE EVIDENCE. And our own example of being Violent Simians just SEALS THE DEAL.

When animals become intelligent, it takes a short time compared to other physical development. That only layers intelligence on top of a fucking mountain of RUINOUS ANIMALISTIC BEHAVIORS. So when tech hits, it just gives a gun to a child, and then Bad Things Happen. It only took us a couple of years from the first atomic explosion to drop a couple of 'em on our own people. And we stand ready to do that THOUSANDS OF FUCKING TIMES at the virtual drop of a hat.

Lifeforms clearly play a balance between COMPETITION AND COOPERATION. The first factor is what's ruins it all; our competitive urges have done terrible things. The entire Dark Ages are the result. The Cold War was the result. And now this worldwide Second Great Depression is the result, with the ongoing Resource Wars.

>>4251651

This whole thread is one big fucking troll orgy BUT

If the universe is 14Byo and Earth formed about 4.5By ago, and life came around 4By ago. It took that 4By to get to where we are now. Only within the past 100 years or so have we been able to send out radio signals into space. We've essentially only sent out a 100 Light Year radius around us, and as for us actually searching, we've got lets say 50 Light Years.

The actual development of galaxies and planets only began to take place around 8By-ish ago. If you account for the fact that at best other species have had only a few billion years ahead of us to evolve and do their own thing and we've only searched about 50 Light Years around us, then its pretty fucking unlikely that we'd have ever come across anything.

And all of that is assuming that extraterrestrials would evolve in even a similar manner as we have, which is fairly absurd.

>>4251771
The Dyson Sphere quest you cite found 4 'amusing' possibilities, of which only one was worth a second look, and that one is assumed to be an overlapping gas cloud.
You don't have a very high bar for 'proving' things.

It also wasn't 'cited by the government' (for whatever that helps your argument) or 'confirmed' in any way at all.

>>4251784
I don't think anyone is assuming there cannot be life without water; the statement is usually 'earth-like' life without water.
But,
"is it too far fetched to think that life cannot exist without water or without being carbon based?"

"people keep thinking we're gonna find life on some shitty gas planet just because it's near a star,"
gas planets seem to be common, and all of them are near stars -- not sure what you thought you were saying here.

"there's a lot more to it than that, maybe it's a universal law that there is no life without water"
Did you just argue both sides of that same statement?

>>4251790
I can agree that colonization and research are two big motivations;
I see no reason at all to assume contacting other forms of life is a presumable motivation; unless you agree that destroying that life is included.

>>4251829
>It only took us a couple of years from the first atomic explosion to drop a couple of 'em on our own people. And we stand ready to do that THOUSANDS OF FUCKING TIMES at the virtual drop of a hat.
your dumbe

The nukes were dropped because the alternative would have claimed far more life. You either fight a long and drawn out war against batshit fanatics or you sacrifice a few towns and stun them into submission with the awesome power of the atom. The fact that you use this example as OH HOW FOOLISH WE HUMANS ARE is just further proof that YOUR DUMBE.

There's nothing to say that life requires oxygen and water. Life could probably sustain itself using different materials and at different temperatures. Those lifeforms would be completely different from us, down to the molecules. They might not think of a planet like ours being able to sustain life because they're used to their own cornerstones of biology.

>>4251801
Nothing at all about unifying or hippie crap in that statement; what did you read?

>>4251852
>There's nothing to say that life requires oxygen and water.
except the fact that there is no life without oxygen and water

jackass

>>4251818
"How about a huge, perfect circe and inside the circle their location as a starmap."
I wonder what you think a starmap would look like, and what it might look like on the moon after 100,000 years of bombardment.

"And I can't find any reason why they would hide from us."
Really? You can't imagine there is something out there that is aggressive?
or even one motivated alien race that believes it needs to destroy competitors?
If you assume benevolent aliens, might the best thing they could do for us be dissuade us from spacefaring for a few million years?

>>4251850
You know, not that I would agree with the dumbass you are arguing with, but justifying dropping two nukes on cities to 'end the war' which was pretty much lost for the japs is bullshit. I'm not trying to start the usual X vs. US thread that develops out of this. Just saying.

>>4251794
>>4251807
>>4251812
>>4251829
>>4251850

Great; you children ruined an interesting thread, again.
Get over yourselves; sometimes it's worthwhile to have a discussion.

Forget about 'simian' and 'hippie' crap, and look at it this way: we continue to fight, and have no sign of a way to avoid fighting, ever.

If we can avoid fighting (not make excuses like 'had to drop bomb to avoid even more killing), then we might have a chance, and have reason to figure other civs can do the same.

>>4251787
No one is ever 'owned' because a know-nothing troll doesn't get it,
and then proves that he doesn't get it,
and then gets snotty and rude because he doesn't get it.

>>4251866
No, you're being the jackass:
we're discussing possibility, and you can't use our extremely (one planet!) narrow amount of knowledge of the topic to claim it's outer boundaries.

Even within our single planet, we have seriously damaged almost every assumption we used to have about the formation of life:
that it is uncommon to have the spark
that solar radiation is the pervasive source of energy
that gaseous oxygen is necessary
etc.

>>4251879
Just because they are guaranteed to win the war doesn't mean that the Japanese would go down without a fight; we're talking about the inventors of seppuku, after all. But when they went lol wiped 2 cities off the face of the earth in a second each the Emperor basically instantly surrendered.

>>4251866
>except the fact that there is no life without oxygen and water
Life as we know it. Why can't life use other chemicals? What's so fucking magical about oxygen and water that make them the only two things that can support life? There are plenty of temperature ranges that have various liquids and gasses suitable for making complex molecules.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothetical_types_of_biochemistry

Cunt

op you assume that life can only develop on a planet.

for all we know there are galaxy sized monsters born in clouds of unknown elemental structure and completely unlike carbon based life in all regards.

We are just as unlikely as a robot made by DARPA, in fact, a robot made by DARPA occurred naturally by all standards but a human's (a tree produces a fruit, a man produces a robot and an adaptive organizer).

Anything man has fathomed or built or learned, has been nothing more than a formation of the brand of nature that presented itself in this corner of the universe.

>>4251917
because if that were the case we would find life on jupiter or venus

OP, you base your entire argument on the assumption that they will try to contact us.

Think of the negative or destructive consequences which could easily come about by aliens alerting us to their presence.

If we came across a civilization hundreds, thousands, or even MILLIONS of years younger than ours, would it be wise to go around mind fucking them with zany symbols? No.

Think how much we could learn about ourselves by observing another intelligence. Think how much THEY could learn about themselves by watching US.

tl;dr: saying "if aliens exist they'd have contacted us by now!" is amazingly presumptuous, and it is far more likely that they observe our activities in more desecrate ways.

>>4251913
As I said, I don't want to start a discussion about this. But I do think that dropping a fucking nuke on a city, instanly killing almost half a million civilians cannot be justified in my eyes when both nations have an army of soldiers trained and more or less ready for war.

But let's just drop that, shall we?

I just wanna say something and if someone wants to answer please do so.

We as a species are the latest product of a really freaking long term process of evolution. It all started at t=0 just right after the Big Bang. From then, it took thousands of millions (don't want to use the word "billions" since it seems to me that works different for many people) of what we know as years for biomollecules to appear and a few million years more for us to exist.

Wouldn't you think that if there is life (somewhat similar to what we understand by that term here in planet Earth) somewhere else in the universe, it would be on a scientific/social/whatever state similar to the one which we humans are?

Inb4 dark ages, church or other crap.

tl;dr: Wouldn't extraterrestial beings not necessarily be more advanced than us, but instead, on practically the same evolutionary state that we are?

>>4251953

The nukes prevented a longer, drawn-out war.

The nukes may have been barbaric and hellish, but more would have died should the war have had continued.

>>4251960

Religion would most likely be a common concept because of natural things that cannot be explained until you reach a certain intelligence (Big scary lightning! Big ball in the sky!)

However I'd like to think we're the only ones that still have a few Idiots clinging to the idea of a creator that visits their planet.

>>4251960
Complex life on earth has existed for a very large portion of the age of the earth, even assuming that life started popping up around the same time, intelligent life forms could be billions of years ahead of us.

>>4251972
Yeah but I mean, if it took those complex forms of life a certain amount of time to evolve and become what we call Homo Sapiens Sapiens, why wouldn't it have taken the same (or similar) time for other forms of life (maybe biomollecules just like those here on Earth or maybe completely different) to reach the same evolutionary state that we have know?

I mean, time passes almost in the same way almost everywhere in the universe (though my knowledge is quite limited, this is as far as I understand) and there are the same types of atoms everywhere in the universe. Why should we be waaaay "behind" in scientific development/evolution?

>>4251972
Which means very little because there is a physical cap on technological development.

>>4251991
The reasoning for us being 'way behind' in development would be that a spacefaring race that is able to visit us needs to have very advanced means of transport.

I think you underestimate how small of a time window the last 2000 years of human development are.

>>4251991

Because it's most likely not a SET time. Why would it be?


It's not going to be "After exactly 993748 years and 52 seconds life will emerge."

It's more reasonable to say it's going to be a range, with an average. Let's assume we're the average. We might be the LONGEST it's ever taken life to evolve. or we might be the FASTEST. Maybe life can emerge (In the PERFECT conditions) in as little as a few million years.

>>4251965
Soldiers. People that fight wars.
Funny thing: these two bombs killed more people than iraq under hussein did with the human rights violating use of mustard gas and the other horrible shit - at least according to the wiki estimations.

but enough

>>4252010
Not really. If we had our backs to the wall we could do. Sher standard of living wouldn't be high and nether would life expectancy but when your entire species is going to go extinct otherwise then i think that is the least of your problems. Pic related.

>>4252012
Dude, I never said that exactly after x time life emerges everywhere. I am just wondering why we have always thought that there exist some incredibly more advanced civilizations than ours and why we have almost never considered that, if there are other life forms, why couldn't they be on a somewhat similiar cultural state than ours.

>>4252010
True that the last 2000 years have been shockingly importante, but that is something very relative and depends a lot of the conditions that society/ies have for scientific development.

>>4251998
We don't know that, or where that cap is if there is one.

>>4252036
>I am just wondering why we have always thought that there exist some incredibly more advanced civilizations than ours and why we have almost never considered that, if there are other life forms, why couldn't they be on a somewhat similiar cultural state than ours.
1. The Milky Way galaxy was not the first galaxy ever created

2. Intelligent beings could evolve faster then us

3. Due to how technology evolves, it will usually never evolve at exactly the same time (Discoveries giving boosts etc)

4. We're not the fastest and best race at evolving technology

>>4252043
We do have the laws of physics to deal with and all that good shit. In fact we are soon going to hit the limits of silicone and at that point its on to carbon nanotubes but even then theirs the problem with leakage.

We probably cant move matter faster then light. You need an enormous amount of energy to accelerate an object to relativistic speeds.( a antimatter powered spaceship would be over 60% fuel )

>>4252048
1.Talking about the universe, not galaxies.

2.Why would they be more "intelligent" than us?

3.I also consider this to be true.

4.Lol, do you know other real races that are faster evolving than us?

>>4252062

1. Ok? All the galaxies/stars in the universe were not created at the same time.

2. Why are people with an IQ of 150 more "intelligent" then you?

4. You believe that we're evolving at the fastest possible speed any species would ever be able to achieve?

>>4252069
1.True, many have been destroyed, maybe many had life like ours but it just died. I am just saying that it may be possible for ours to be one of the few intelligent species "nowadays" in the universe.

4.Please answer my question first.

2.Oh silly me, I should have realized earlier that I was being trolled.

>>4251787
I admit, I chuckled

Every single species that becomes advanced enough turns into energy beings.

They made a documentary about it in the 1960s called Star Trek. Didn't you watch it?

I swear, you guys are morons.

The universe is fucking gigantic. If an alien race has the technology to traverse the entire universe in a few million years, then we would be so far below them I doubt they'd even bother trying to contact us. Do you stop and talk to earthworms and attempt to communicate with them? I do habeeb there is life elsewhere in the universe. Will we find life we can communicate with? Highly unlikely. We're barely out of our own solar system.

Also, this >>4252113

>>4252097

Why do you think you're being trolled?

2.Why would they be more "intelligent" than us?
2. Why are people with an IQ of 150 more "intelligent" then you?

Those are the same questions and have the same answers you retard.

>>4252062

>2.Why would they be more "intelligent" than us?

They wouldn't be, but any form of civilization at or near our level is not worth even considering because there is virtually 0 chance we will ever come into contact with. We are genuinely reliant on an advanced species to contact us, we haven't even put a dent in it from our point of view.

Another issue is what if one of us is biologically harmful to the other?

For example they may carry a bacteria natural to their planet which is extremely harmful to us or vice-versa.

The conclusion of most organic life is to transform itself into a matrioshki computer. As there is not enough bandwidth in the universe for these things to communicate, all et life is silent to us. Plus it lives in unending virtual heaven outside of time in some sense. The end

>>4252062
>1.Talking about the universe, not galaxies.
We can be relatively sure that in a distance of a few million lightyears around us is intelligent life since nobody ever tried to come here or send probes.

This means if life was really that ubiquitously in the Universe, we would get messages every now and then from new emerging civilizations and shortly after spaceships from them would enter the Solar System to great us.

Even if they sent the messages a thousand years ago.

>2.Why would they be more "intelligent" than us?
They wouldn't. You'd probably see them as something like in Ghost in the Shell. Higly advanced beings that have access to vast knowledge but there is nothing that indicates they would be or would have to be more intelligent than us or even evolve to become godlike beings with superpowers. That's only Star Trek/Star Wars spiritual sciencefiction.

>4.Lol, do you know other real races that are faster evolving than us?
That was just hippie-/newagecrap a la we must be of evolvings spiritually herpaderpa

Aliens no being of contactings us because they be godlike oh wait! That's why they don't contact us because surely I know shit and absolutely nothing about biology and evolution therefore it must be godlike starfish aliens who have no hands to grab any tools but develop highly evolved technology and they surely must have telekinesis and telepathy because that looks so cool in Star Trek and Star Wars, ehy why don't we start to believe HERRPADERRPA!

>>4252922
>The conclusion of most organic life is to transform itself into a matrioshki computer.
I know because I saw it on TV!

>implying the universe hasn't been inimical to life until very recently
>implying humans aren't one of the first crop of intelligent species in the universe
>implying we will not be the mythical ancient species whose immense artifacts the coming species will hold in awe and warily explore

>2012
>lacking imagination and then speaking in absolutes

>>4253712
>implying we're not dumbfucks out to destroy ourselves

>>4253722
>implying we're dumbfucks out to destroy ourselves

>>4253731
>implying he's implying that we're dumbfucks out to destroy ourselves

>>4253738
>implying you're implying that he's not implying that we're dumbfucks out to destroy ourselves

>>4253748
>implying that i'm implying that i'm implying hes not implying that were dumbfucks out to destroy ourselves

Maybe we are the advanced species? Someone has to be the first.

As someone above said, we could be the race that future species uncovers slowly.
We could have a galatic empire that eventually crumbles and gives way to the next batch of life.
Or we could be just one of the hundreds of races in the first crop of potential space faring species and there just isn't anything more advanced yet.

As we evolve as species we like colonization less and less.
Since intelligent life is sparse very advanced civilizations probably don't want to interfere with its development.
A civilization that would be developed 80 million years ahead of us(if it would survive the cultural enui) would be so advanced that contact would stop our own unique progress.
Also the idea that we would colonize whole galaxy is silly. Maybe clusters and interesting sites but certainly not the whole galaxy due to logistics and time and distance involved.

I'm very disappointed. All these posts, and not one mention of the Fermi Paradox.

bump