Yes, it's time for a new poll

[barmar]

I find the results of this thread to be interesting in conjunction with the Noah's Ark thread, with respect to the burden of proof being on the side ascribing to an affirmative belief and the posts focused on holding to beliefs unsupported by evidence.

 

Is the support for the belief generally, "Well, it's a REALLY big place that's been around a REALLY long time, so it seems like there should be," or something else? If the former, does that constitute evidence?

Although the poll is worded as if it's about absolute knowledge, I think most of the respondents interpreted it as "do you think it's LIKELY that there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe". A question like that doesn't demand scientific proof. Only a believer in UFOs being alien invaders could truthfully answer the poll question literally.

 

Thus, the question is analogous to asking a scientist "Do you believe someone will win $50 million in the lottery?" He obviously can't answer it either way with certainty, but he can state whether he thinks it's likely (e.g. "unlikely next week, but very probable within a year").

 

And the same logic goes for intelligent life. My feeling is that if it can happen once, it's not impossible. And even if it's a 1-in-a-million chance, there are probably hundreds of millions of opportunities spread out through the universe. Thus, it would be really surprising if we were unique.

[Winstonm]

Intelligent life would certainly be wise enough to steer clear of our little cluster***** of a planet, so the lack of alien contact should strongly imply intelligent life exists elsewhere.

 

Of course, Dick Cheney doesn't believe there is any valuable life outside the Executive branch of the U.S. government so aliens have torture and rendition to avoid even if they do land.

[Lobowolf]

Intelligent life would certainly be wise enough to steer clear of our little cluster***** of a planet, so the lack of alien contact should strongly imply intelligent life exists elsewhere.

 

Of course, Dick Cheney doesn't believe there is any valuable life outside the Executive branch of the U.S. government so aliens have torture and rendition to evoid even if they do land.

Your ability to work Bush and/or Cheney into just about anything is becoming a source of morbid fascination for me. The possibilities are limitless.

 

A grasshopper walks into a bar. The bartender says, "You know, we have a drink named after you." The grasshopper looks down from a newscast of Dick Cheney lying about Iran's nuclear weapons program and says, "No *****? There's a drink called Steve?"

[jdonn]

Intelligent life would certainly be wise enough to steer clear of our little cluster***** of a planet, so the lack of alien contact should strongly imply intelligent life exists elsewhere.

 

Of course, Dick Cheney doesn't believe there is any valuable life outside the Executive branch of the U.S. government so aliens have torture and rendition to evoid even if they do land.

Your ability to work Bush and/or Cheney into just about anything is becoming a source of morbid fascination for me. The possibilities are limitless.

He is an expert at getting Obama in too.

[Gerardo]

It would make for a better poll to ask if there is intelligent life on earth.

Obviously not! Well, maybe dolphins, but...

And above all, lab rats, obviously :)

[Gerben42]

I find the results of this thread to be interesting in conjunction with the Noah's Ark thread, with respect to the burden of proof being on the side ascribing to an affirmative belief and the posts focused on holding to beliefs unsupported by evidence.

 

Is the support for the belief generally, "Well, it's a REALLY big place that's been around a REALLY long time, so it seems like there should be," or something else? If the former, does that constitute evidence?

 

Defenitely the explanation is "Well, it's a REALLY big place that's been around a REALLY long time, so it seems like there should be". Since there are about 10...<lots of zeroes>...000 planets, and we see that once you have life it sticks around even after quite large catastrophes, the chance that there is no life anywhere else should be negligible.

 

The chance that the number of planets in this huge universe that have intelligent life is exactly one should also be very small. Either it's zero because the concept is impossible, or it's "a lot" because the universe is so big.

[shintaro]

It would make for a better poll to ask if there is intelligent life on earth.

:D

 

agree with this quote

:)

 

 

However I would never ever have the audacity some of our voters have by saying they DO NOT believe there is intelligent life eleswhere

 

But then I suppose they are 'Bridge Players' afterall

 

;)

[helene_t]

we see that once you have life it sticks around even after quite large catastrophes, the chance that there is no life anywhere else should be negligible.

I think this reasoning is wrong (or at least incomplete).

 

Suppose there are one quadrillion planets in the universe that has harbored life and on each the ecosystem had a probability of 1/quadrillion of surviving all the disasters they are exposed to until they evolve into the stage where contract bridge and internet gossip is invented. Say the number of planets whose ecosystem actually survived is one. Then we are bound to live on the one surviving one. The probability of that is not 1/quadrillion. It is 1.

[Al_U_Card]

And one can only hope (or have faith in a merciful God) that in all the multiverses in this infinite reality, there is only one BBF, not so that we would be unique and special, just to limit the damage... ;)

[kenberg]

I find the results of this thread to be interesting in conjunction with the Noah's Ark thread, with respect to the burden of proof being on the side ascribing to an affirmative belief and the posts focused on holding to beliefs unsupported by evidence.

 

Is the support for the belief generally, "Well, it's a REALLY big place that's been around a REALLY long time, so it seems like there should be," or something else? If the former, does that constitute evidence?

I stayed out of the Noah's Ark discussion but I don't think Noah had two of every species on board. The story probably does refer to a real flood, perhaps there was a real Ark, perhaps there were some animals on board. So if I get to vary the story a bit I might find the general idea plausible I imagine civilization woould have survived anyway, which is, i think, a big change from the intended message.

 

With intelligent life elsewhere, I can imagine disputes over what constitutes both life and intelligence, but I don't find it hard to believe that somewhere in the universe there is something that can reasonably described as life exhibiting some sort of behavior that could reasonably described as intelligent.

 

The biggest difference in the two situations that I see is this: My former minister would have insisted that I absolutely must believe in the Noah story otherwise my soul is damned. I don't think anyone claims such consequences for my soul based on my views of extra-terrestrial intelligent life.

[mikeh]

I don't 'believe' either way.. that there is or is not intelligent life elsewhere.

 

I believe it to be highly probable, but in the absence of more evidence than we currently have, I don't go further than that.

 

I hope there is intelligent life, I suspect that hope is well-founded and would be delighted (I hope...) if the evidence arrived.

 

Is there 'life' elsewhere? I think there is enough evidence for us to say that the odds are overwhelming that self-replicating organisms of some kind almost certainly exist, almost certainly in staggering numbers, on an absolute basis.

 

The frequency with which such organisms respond to evolutionary pressures to evolve what we call intelligence is another matter, in respect of which the evidence is far more limited.... depending on one's definition of intelligence.

 

Further, I suspect that for most of us we equate intelligence with consciousness. One of the best novels I have read in recent years is Blind Sight, by Watts... it is cience fiction, and the book has a number of themes but the main one arises from 'First Contact', with a life form that is highly intelligent but utterly lacking in consciousness. Chilling. His thesis appears to be that consciousness can be a handicap.

[hanp]

I would have voted "don't know" as well. Really strange to me if people think they know the answer to this question.

[Al_U_Card]

I would have voted "don't know" as well. Really strange to me if people think they know the answer to this question.

Would it be better to have asked:

 

Do you believe that there is more intelligent life than ours elsewhere in the universe? B)

[hanp]

Not particularly, in my opinion.

 

I've heard Gerben's argument a lot of times and I don't find it very convincing. There are just too many things involved that we do not understand. I think. But Gerben knows much more about it than I do so maybe I just don't get it.

[mikeh]

we see that once you have life it sticks around even after quite large catastrophes, the chance that there is no life anywhere else should be negligible.

I think this reasoning is wrong (or at least incomplete).

 

Suppose there are one quadrillion planets in the universe that has harbored life and on each the ecosystem had a probability of 1/quadrillion of surviving all the disasters they are exposed to until they evolve into the stage where contract bridge and internet gossip is invented. Say the number of planets whose ecosystem actually survived is one. Then we are bound to live on the one surviving one. The probability of that is not 1/quadrillion. It is 1.

This is of course a variant of the larger arguments that arise from the fact that the fundamental relationships between various physical forces is such that this universe, and we, exist. Change any of the fundamental ratios or masses, and we have an entirely different universe, probably incapable of forming matter, let alone life. if there are a quadrillion universes with different initial constraints and only one of them permits life as we know it, and we are here... then the odds are 100% that we live in that universe.

 

OTOH, it appears that the constraints underlying our universe are such that most of whatever was around at the Big Bang ended up as stuff that is incapable of forming matter anyway (or at least didn't end up as matter that is capable of forming planets, bacteria and bridge players/philosophers), so maybe there is a universe somewhere most of the universe became usable in that sense.... the tournaments would be much larger than we have B)

 

Sorry, I know this is off-topic

[slothy]

Does this poll include asking whether one believes Intelligent Life exists in West Chicago?

[slothy]

I cant remember whose equation it was (i am sure someone will trigger my memory B) I think he was some white-ivory-towered prof from MIT quite high up in the echelons of SETI) but someone came up with an equation to find the probability of life, life per se not 'intelligent life', existing somewhere else in the Universe (our Universe, if not one of many :) )

 

What is quite uncanny is that

 

1) the number of variables, although not arbitrary, were selected from a harvest of many more based on what he, and his esteemed collegues, assumed were most important in sustaining and procreating 'life' in general (ie not in our immediate galactic environment and one that he was familiar with, but ANY???? );

 

2) these were 'mashed-up' using some 'proven algorithm' (this is a quote: how the hell can something so expansive be proven within the confines of some frilly-wallpapered badly-lit office on a z80 processor does beg another question)

 

3) the equations themselves were formulated and conceived within the confines and parameters of our own collective intelligence!! (ie OUR mathematics, at least the direction and momentum that human mathematcis has taken ( and arguably the pinnacle of human intelligence [besides the invention of checkback stayman, of course]) : another intelligent life may have something similar to mathematics but may have a means of defining the existence of intelligence elsewhere in the Universe differently (ie NOT through the conscious and meaningful juxtapostion of a finite set of symbols ie 'a number')....

 

I think this whole idea of contemplating or even trying to discover whether Intelligent Life exists anywhere else in the universe is a fatuous one. And let us say IF it did, we are presuming they would not be a hostile civilisation and see us a threat and exterminate us?? (now we are venturing into the realms of Star Trek...i am sure i played against a Vulcan-like personality just the other night)

 

To put it in perspective: The amount of money the defunct U.S.S.R. and U.S. spent on landing on the moon (what for??????? for a game of golf??) could be equated to 240 times more than the estimated investment lost in this recession. What remained could alleviate the collective debt of every developing country FOUR TIMES OVER.

 

ie. why not focus our own intelligence into making the world and life on a planet we KNOW exists into one which will maximise the collective standard of living and happiness of the people living on it, and for our ancestors, instead of fumbling around on some wild-goose chase trying to find out whether some green-coloured people with 4 eyes exist somewhere else?

 

The money that is being spent on the anticipated landing on Mars (does water exist on Mars - who fookin cares!! - and will we find unicellular organisms mulling over a cryptic crossword light from the Sunday newspaper?? (Sunday??? This is a noun used to describe time??? Other intelligence may perceive time differently or may not perceive or have any concept of time at all!!!! it is a dimension that we have evolved to experience and which shapes our lives!! Newspaper - words, language, images, communication (female breasts with specific allusion to the UK Sun Newspaper) ?? we assume that other intelligences would have something similar or even dare say it, communicate telepathically???) is mind-boggling and i am convinced, beyond any doubt that the most optimistic outcome of the journey cannot warrant what will be spent on it (its already spiralling out of control). There are much more pressing concerns within a 50,000 mile distance to overcome than any that may be discovered approximately 48 million miles away.

 

If an intelligent life existing 160 million light years (quite near apparently according to some) and were aware of our existence and had a powerful enough telescope to see us they would see dinosaurs roaming about an Earth totally unrecognisable from our own (assuming they not managed to harness something beyond the speed of light).

 

Even 3 million light years away they will see badly-shaved men throwing spears at mammoths!

 

I think to contemplate the probability of whether life exists somewhere else is to look a bit closer to home: we should think of the enormous serendipity of our planet and the conditions, at least 'geoically'. of the planet we live on. A few things to mull over:-

 

1) if the average orbital distance of our planet was 2% of its actual distance closer to our 'sun' it would be too hot for water to exist as a liquid: it would be a vapour. Life, as we know it would not exist. THe atmosphere would not be able to absorb the extra enthalpy.

 

2) if the average orbital distance of our planet was 2% of its actual distance farther away from our 'sun' it would be too cold for water to exist as a liquid: it would be a solid. Life, as we know it would not exist. THe atmosphere would not be able to compensate for the loss of enthalpy.

 

3) If our sun was in, human terms, 30 years old, when it was 28 years old the ravaging heat of its core would be way too hot .... if it were 32 it would be way to cold.ie it could not sustain any life that had managed to procreate itself in those conditions.

 

There are many more astounding facts to do with pressure, composition of our atmosphere and our core and our surface and our own evolution as well as that of our planet.

 

I dont give a ***** whether life exists on some rock 4 billion miles away. If it did, i couldnt see myself going to play a bridge tourney there (i might bvecome an Exterrestrial Life Master there, who knows?)

 

Anyway need a smoke and i am getting pissed off....

[Winstonm]

Intelligent life would certainly be wise enough to steer clear of our little cluster***** of a planet, so the lack of alien contact should strongly imply intelligent life exists elsewhere.

 

Of course, Dick Cheney doesn't believe there is any valuable life outside the Executive branch of the U.S. government so aliens have torture and rendition to evoid even if they do land.

Your ability to work Bush and/or Cheney into just about anything is becoming a source of morbid fascination for me. The possibilities are limitless.

He is an expert at getting Obama in too.

Dick Cheney and Barrack Obama walk into a bar on Mars....with a blue dog....a singing blue dog.....a really intelligent singing blue dog....

[hrothgar]

I cant remember whose equation it was (i am sure someone will trigger my memory :) I think he was some white-ivory-towered prof from MIT quite high up in the echelons of SETI) but someone came up with an equation to find the probability of life, life per se not 'intelligent life', existing somewhere else in the Universe (our Universe, if not one of many :) )

 

.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drake_equation

[pigpenz]

So, if there is intelligent life out there somewhere, does it have access to salvation? That requires belief in Jesus Christ, right?

i always use to wonder when i was a little kid if Jesus had to make the rounds from galaxy to galaxy to repeatedly get crucified, sort of a Christian version of GroundHog Day

[dicklont]

Do you believe that there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe?

Yes, but more importantly: do they play bridge?

Will there ever be an interstellar bridge championship?

 

I suppose the Borg can't compete, their basic abilities make them cheat the whole time.

[Aberlour10]

Do you believe that there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe?

Yes, but more importantly: do they play bridge?

Will there ever be an interstellar bridge championship?

 

I suppose the Borg can't compete, their basic abilities make them cheat the whole time.

To get the answer to these questions, we should engrave f. ex. Meckwells's CC in the Voyager Gold Record and send it with the next mission. :lol:

[Al_U_Card]

Do you believe that there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe?

Yes, but more importantly: do they play bridge?

Will there ever be an interstellar bridge championship?

 

I suppose the Borg can't compete, their basic abilities make them cheat the whole time.

To get the answer to these questions, we should engrave f. ex. Meckwells's CC in the Voyager Gold Record and send it with the next mission. :)

Better not, those that found it would think that they had found the original tablets with the Commandments on them... :lol:

[Feegle]

Slothy makes some good points at the beginning of his 'essay' (on Drake's Equation). I found the following thoughts interesting:

 

"It is entirely possible that our backwater of a planet is literally the only one that has ever borne life. The point is that if there were only one planet that had ever borne life, then it would have to be our planet, for the very good reason that 'we' are here discussing the question! If the origin of life is such an improbable event that it only happened on one planet in the universe, then our planet has to be that planet. So, we cannot use the fact that Earth has life to conclude that life must be probable enough to have arisen on another planet. Such an argument would be circular." [Richard Dawkins].

 

He goes on to say that we have to have some independent arguments about how easy or difficult it is for life to originate on a planet before we can even begin to answer the question of how many other planets in the universe have life.

[pigpenz]

He goes on to say that we have to have some independent arguments about how easy or difficult it is for life to originate on a planet before we can even begin to answer the question of how many other planets in the universe have life.

i would think it would be a matter of odds