Does anyone NOT believe in extraterrestrial life?

[envirodude]

I was thinking that if Curiosity finds evidence of life on Mars, it would be a BIG DEAL - the first scientific proof that "we're not alone". But on reflection, I realised that I've always ASSUMED that extraterrestrial life exists, so finding it won't really change my worldview much at all. I would expect the vast, vast, vast majority of Rationals (xNTx) to have arrived at the same conclusion. Butcha never know; hence my question.

I'm just asking about life, not sentience.

[Architect]

The Vatican has an astronomer in residence (the name escapes me - an Italian guy) reportably to start working on how they'll account for Alien life. They were caught off guard by the discovery of the New World, which wasn't anywhere in the bible, and so want to be prepared this time.

[intpz]

What, god decided to create other life forms later on?

[Absurdity]

Originally Posted by Architect

The Vatican has an astronomer in residence (the name escapes me - an Italian guy) reportably to start working on how they'll account for Alien life.

I want that guy's job.

[Vrecknidj]

It seems reasonably likely that elsewhere in our own solar system there will be evidence of organic chemistry (either presently or evidence for its existence previously). However, I would be shocked if we were to find sentience anywhere in our solar system.

Whether we'll find an intermediary (i.e. living organisms, even single-celled) seems only likely in the most esoteric of forms (not unlike the non-light-requiring critters living on undersea vents here on Earth). But, I don't expect we'll find anything advanced beyond that.

As for the rest of the universe, or even our own galaxy, I'd say that the odds favor life (though not necessarily anything like what we've found here on Earth), but not necessarily sentience.

I'm not of the opinion that there are any religious reasons why sentient life would be unique to humans on Earth. However, just on odds alone, things aren't so hopeful. On Earth, 5 billion years passed and natural selection tried hundreds of millions of species before generating a single symbol-understanding species capable of domesticating fire.

Dave

[Cognisant]

(though not necessarily anything like what we've found here on Earth)

Well chemistry and physics are universal so it follows reason that any life we encounter won't be too bizarre, at least not by the standard set by how bizarre life on Earth gets, now I'm not saying that it would be exactly the same but most fish will be fish-like and if there is intelligent tool-using life it would obviously have appendages of some sort that in some way are dexterous enough to enable tool use, and for a non-aquatic species this seems most like to occur in a endoskeletal climber of some sort...

I think intelligent aliens may look surprisingly like us, maybe even humanoid, although I think it's highly improbable that either of us would find the other attractive, but in terms of science and technology there would be surprising similarities, after all as I said chemistry and physics are universal, once we figure each other's notation out the engineers and scientists will overtake the diplomats in discourse.

[Architect]

Originally Posted by Absurdity

I want that guy's job.

If the stories I hear about the Vatican are true; probably not

[snafupants]

Originally Posted by Cognisant

Well chemistry and physics are universal so it follows reason that any life we encounter won't be too bizarre, at least not by the standard set by how bizarre life on Earth gets, now I'm not saying that it would be exactly the same but most fish will be fish-like and if there is intelligent tool-using life it would obviously have appendages of some sort that in some way are dexterous enough to enable tool use, and for a non-aquatic species this seems most like to occur in a endoskeletal climber of some sort...

I think intelligent aliens may look surprisingly like us, maybe even humanoid, although I think it's highly improbable that either of us would find the other attractive, but in terms of science and technology there would be surprising similarities, after all as I said chemistry and physics are universal, once we figure each other's notation out the engineers and scientists will overtake the diplomats in discourse.

Oh, there would be alien-human fetishes to be sure. Even if "intercourse" singed or pancaked or otherwise permanently mutilated one's dong or yoni, there would be people lining up to try it. I was framing the issue in the same way though. I'd expect a carbon-based life form, somewhat close to a star, with an environment conducive to replenishment and growth over millions of years alongside a rudimentary understanding of nuclear fusion and/or wormhole travel. The conditions of life on Earth aren't that rare. Judging by the vastness of the cosmos, limitations of most forms of intergalactic conveyance, and possible inharmoniousness of intellectual development, however, I wouldn't hold my breath over meeting E.T. or three eyed fauna any time soon. They may have already visited.

[skip]

Hm... are you thinking of José Gabriel Funes? He's Argentinian although his Ph.D. is from an Italian university. He's been the director of the Vatican Observatory, one of the oldest observatories in the world, since 2006.

Or Monsignor Corrado Balducci? He passed away several years ago. He was a theologian but not an astronomer that I know of. He was very outspoken and on Italian tv a lot.

[envirodude]

Originally Posted by Cognisant

Well chemistry and physics are universal so it follows reason that any life we encounter won't be too bizarre...

Agreed. Form follows function. Dolphins evolved from ungulates (no shit, that freaks me out). As far as Mars goes, I figure unicellular life is what we might reasonably hope for.

[Absurdity]

Originally Posted by Architect

If the stories I hear about the Vatican are true; probably not

It seems like Willy Wonka. Guards in funny uniforms, pope-mobiles.

Come on.

[Architect]

Originally Posted by skip

Hm... are you thinking of José Gabriel Funes? He's Argentinian although his Ph.D. is from an Italian university. He's been the director of the Vatican Observatory, one of the oldest observatories in the world, since 2006.

Or Monsignor Corrado Balducci? He passed away several years ago. He was a theologian but not an astronomer that I know of. He was very outspoken and on Italian tv a lot.

I was thinking of Guy J. Consolmagno, however doing a little search turns up that the Vatican has a full astronomy dept. including an observatory

http://vaticanobservatory.org

Originally Posted by Absurdity

It seems like Willy Wonka. Guards in funny uniforms, pope-mobiles.
Come on.

My understanding, from a friend with very close ties, is you have to be gay as a jay bird.

[EditorOne]

"The Vatican has an astronomer in residence (the name escapes me - an Italian guy) reportably to start working on how they'll account for Alien life. They were caught off guard by the discovery of the New World, which wasn't anywhere in the bible, and so want to be prepared this time."

It really hasn't been all that long since they formally abandoned Copernicus and apologized to Galileo for unleashing the Inquisition on him over heliocentrism, has it? No one can ever accuse the church of being hasty....

[cerebedlam]

I believe, based on the evidence, that intelligent life is possible elsewhere...But, there has to be a good reason why we don't find any of it anywhere when we look at the immediate neighborhood...

I think that the formulas which most folks use to deduce whether it's probable that intelligent life exists is WAY TOO SIMPLISTIC...

Anyone ever read books like Probability ONE? http://www.amazon.com/Probability-On...robability+one

The author is usually cited as the first cat to string together some form of mathematical probability formula for extraterrestrial intelligent life.

The problem, as I see it, is that his formula has way too few variables up for consideration, the probabilities he assigns to each of them is far too liberal/generous/optimistic...And, of course, the book concludes with a designation of 100% certainty that there are smart souls out there.

For instance, the author begins the formula with the first variable in the equation, which is - - What's the probability that a yellow star exists? The second variable, I think, was whether that yellow star has any planets circling it that have 'water...

The variables aren't many in the equation, and certainly don't consider all the billions of things that can go wrong between the eon-long stages of 'primordial soup' at one end of the timeline, and the intricacies of advanced biological evolution at the other end...

[Felan]

Originally Posted by cerebedlam

I believe, based on the evidence, that intelligent life is possible elsewhere...But, there has to be a good reason why we don't find any of it anywhere when we look at the immediate neighborhood...

...

Well it could be that Earth has some aspect of uniqueness that accelerated the formation of intelligence using electromagnetically based technological. Of the Earth-like conditions that stand out, our moon is the most prominent. It's size relative to it's parent (Earth) is unusually large given what we see elsewhere in the solar system. Our larger moon means stronger tides, which may have pushed life forwards. It's larger size also means it may have shielded us from space rocks to a larger extent then a smaller moon would have. I think it would be immensely amusing if our moon (rather than our planet) was in fact the most unique aspect of life here.

[walfin]

The definition of life might have to be revisited. There might be membraneless cells, non-carbon-based lifeforms, or even crawling strings of DNA/RNA or something else that looks like it. Not to mention that even cellular based life probably wouldn't look like cellular based life here, since there's so little water on mars.

[intpz]

Originally Posted by cerebedlam

I believe, based on the evidence, that intelligent life is possible elsewhere...But, there has to be a good reason why we don't find any of it anywhere when we look at the immediate neighborhood...

You mean our solar system? Well could it be that Mars has cooled down a lot more than Earth did, which changed it quite radically in comparison? The rest of the planets are either gas giants or almost unexplored planets with quite hellish conditions: plains or lava. Different forms of life can exist, but that's where the unexplored part comes in.

Not to mention the planets further away... We need those Star Trek guys to design a warp drive. After all, there was quite a lot of repairs and engineering involved in their TV shows!

[travelnjones]

Its seems like there should be other life. But would be hilarious if there wasn't.

[intpz]

Your argument, and even more so your conclusion, is hilarious.

[7even]

I think Earth is the 'Wild' card.
There aren't the right set of conditions on any other planet to support life (to our present knowledge) - correct me if I'm wrong?
I don't see why it would be hilarious if there wasn't life on any other planet. I just don't see why people would think that extra-terrestrial life is so likely.
If extraterrestrial life within our solar system (my astronomical knowledge is poor, forgive me) existed, I think we would be aware of it given our obsession with the unknown.
If there was life of 'higher intelligence' on the other-hand, I assume, by now, we would have encountered each other, given that they are also curious assholes.
I don't think we should be spending money trying to figure whether there is extra-terrestrial life, we have more important issues to address on OUR planet.
Don't want humans probing around with the galaxy either; things will undoubtedly only get worse from there, a few industries are planning projects on our fucking moon. Watch it be privatized in years to come. Fuck.

I'd like to say that I do not disregard the possibility of extra-terrestrial life existing though. I just see no evidence.

[intpz]

Originally Posted by 7even

I think Earth is the 'Wild' card.
There aren't the right set of conditions on any other planet to support life (to our present knowledge) - correct me if I'm wrong?
I don't see why it would be hilarious if there wasn't life on any other planet. I just don't see why people would think that extra-terrestrial life is so likely.
If extraterrestrial life within our solar system (my astronomical knowledge is poor, forgive me) existed, I think we would be aware of it given our obsession with the unknown.

There may be different life forms, life forms that don't require oxygen or water to survive. In fact, I think that's likely.

There are billions of stars in the universe. In fact, in our galaxy alone there's an estimate of 200 to 400 stars alone! How likely is it that one planet is unique and superior to the universe? How arrogant is it to think that Earth is special?

If there was life of 'higher intelligence' on the other-hand, I assume, by now, we would have encountered each other, given that they are also curious assholes.
I don't think we should be spending money trying to figure whether there is extra-terrestrial life, we have more important issues to address on OUR planet.
Don't want humans probing around with the galaxy either; things will undoubtedly only get worse from there, a few industries are planning projects on our fucking moon. Watch it be privatized in years to come. Fuck.

I doubt that I've said that space exploration is a priority. In fact, I believe I've mentioned that I think that they shouldn't spend the money on that shit as well.

I'd like to say that I do not disregard the possibility of extra-terrestrial life existing though. I just see no evidence.

Because there aren't any due to the limitations posed by the lack of sophisticated technology at earthlings' hands and possibly due to the avoidance of cultural contamination by the other life forms.

[nanook]

pfft alien propaganda. they come here with their superhuman skills and want to rule us in secrecy. too bad rulers get all of our attention.

[nanook]

seriously i don't see how intelligent life could be unlikely, given the amount of infinity out there. and even technology that allows to a) locate us b) get here c) "in reasonable time" only seems unlikely if seen through our current understanding of how things work. that's the same poor (unimaginative) "understanding" (by that i mean comprehension of possibilities, not solid science) that let us (myself 10 years ago) to believe, that highly intelligent life (space traveling) is unlikely. this type of comprehension of possibilities seems to progress in stages. the world-view progresses in stages. from a world-view wherein we feel like we have roughly figured it out, seen it all, essentially, to a view of a world that is respected for being itself so full of potential that it itself matches our definition of intelligent. it's essentially all about "opening your mind" as they call it, only it's not a choice. there is just this nagging: "i want to believe, that it's more unlikely than we can tell now" in the back of our heads. that could be some dissociated intelligence, but it feels more like the voice of fear to me.

[7even]

There may be different life forms, life forms that don't require oxygen or water to survive. In fact, I think that's likely.

Perhaps, tell me though, on what basis would that be 'likely'? Because there is life on one planet, there should be life on others? That's pure assumption.
Why isn't it just as likely that the rest of the universe, excluding the Earth, is purely inorganic matter? That seems more likely to me.
Also, are you speaking of life within our Solar System, or beyond that?

There are billions of stars in the universe. In fact, in our galaxy alone there's an estimate of 200 to 400 stars alone! How likely is it that one planet is unique and superior to the universe? How arrogant is it to think that Earth is special?

Based on what we can observe now, Earth is special.
How is it arrogant to make a judgement based on logic and not a guess?
Also, I wouldn't say Earth is 'superior' because it has life. Life can mean destruction. The Earth would be better off without life, at-least that way nothing would interfere with its equilibrium.

[nanook]

Why isn't it just as likely that the rest of the universe, excluding the Earth, is purely inorganic matter? That seems more likely to me.

look at your understanding of likeliness then. isn't that derived from the assumption that life is generally very unlikely. circular reasoning fused into a single word! if life is so unlikely sure then it won't repeat it's success story somewhere else. i would agree, that's how i thought about it (less than) 10 years ago. but how is life unlikely, really? who says so? it's just an old un-reflected assumption, most likely based on how we can not understand how intelligent life was even possible, with our incomplete theories of darwinistic selection. and that's just our stupid understanding. it's subjectivity. the facts speak a different language. life is right there. you see it? nothing unlikely about it. unlikely-ness is a subjective fiction. the only thing that is "unlikely" is that we completely understand life, at the moment. how is earth special? only in aspects that are considered to be relevant, based on our poor understanding of 1) what life is suppose to need and 2) HOW a cosmic ("material") situation falls together to either provide or not provide such needs. we think our solar system as such is already so "unlikely," again for the same reason: we don't understand why it came to be that way. our subjective understanding introduces "unlikeliness". it's a pattern you can see everywhere, where we ever tried to apply understanding. that pattern becomes part of our worldview: we see that unlikely-ness is a part of our subjectivity and thereby transcend it and end up in a completely new worldview. oh, but the objectivist rationalist is a bit scared of letting go. the concept of unlikely-ness has it's origin as a subjective cognitive operator, it has no existence in objective reality. it's not objective things that are in any way unlikely, they just are, it's our ideas that are being unlikely to match objective reality. so with that understanding of the word, again: how likely is it, that the statement "life is unlikely" is true? zero. it couldn't be! life isn't "likely" either, life just happens to be an integral aspect of this kosmos, along with it's others properties, that are a) it's wasting a lot of time and space and b) it's fucking infinite, and so wasted space doesn't get in the way of having plenty of places that allow a blossoming of property c) the kosmos is alive. how likely is it, that the statement "intelligent life exists elsewhere" is true? we may not be able to find out through speculations, if our understanding of HOW things come to be is as void as it is. i don't say there must be intelligent life, only that the sentence "intelligent life is unlikely (to occur somewhere else)" has lost all it's reality to me.

[7even]

[MENTION=5316]nanook[/MENTION]

Shit... I get you. Yes, yes, yes, I agree! ... I take back what I said. Goodbye old idea.

[intpz]

Too bad, can't answer anymore.