UFOs are far more likely terrestrial in origin.

Discussion in 'Science' started by bricklayer, Nov 12, 2019.

  1. bricklayer

    bricklayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    8,898
    Likes Received:
    2,751
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Unless. But even then, far less likely. The least unlikely is terrestrial.
     
  2. bricklayer

    bricklayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    8,898
    Likes Received:
    2,751
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Mutations don't work that way. Human beings did not increase in functional genetic complexity by chance.

    Something can't come from nothing, and chance is not a creative force.
     
    ToddWB likes this.
  3. perotista

    perotista Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2014
    Messages:
    16,902
    Likes Received:
    5,680
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    I take UFO's as they are, unidentified. Unidentified doesn't mean they are of extraterrestrial origin, but the possibility remains. Vast distances could be overcome by the use of worm holes, they certainly exist. Perhaps another possibility that our scientist's are looking into today is the folding of space. Who knows what type of technology or knowledge exists out there by what we term as ET's.

    Yes, presently we here on earth are limited to our propulsion systems we presently have, our present day technology and knowledge. The speed of light is certainly a barrier to us, but to another civilization out there somewhere if they exist, perhaps not. I find it hard to believe we are alone in this vast universe. Time and space can be and will be manipulated at some point in our future if we don't wipe ourselves off the face of the planet before that happens.

    Which brings me to a documentary I saw on the science channel where the hypothis was put forward that there are and has been intelligent life all over the universe. But that intelligent life advances to a point where they're capable of destroying themselves and do. Then life begins anew and the cycles continues.
     
  4. bricklayer

    bricklayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    8,898
    Likes Received:
    2,751
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I couldn't get past "certainly".
     
  5. Moonglow

    Moonglow Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2013
    Messages:
    20,754
    Likes Received:
    8,047
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    What happened to all the demonic and angelic traffic on the planet? I know they were I.D.ed as UFO.
     
  6. Shook

    Shook Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    1,571
    Likes Received:
    546
    Trophy Points:
    113
    A recent unidentified visitation to Ireland baffled concerned police, who weren't quite afraid enough to shoot it dead, but weren't sure why they weren't afraid. They just knew they wanted it gone!



    I agree. That thing is ugly.
     
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2019
    Moonglow likes this.
  7. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Clearly, that just isn't true. One can easily find changes in nature where the changes are a benefit.

    You're now even arguing against microevolution.
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  8. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    50,653
    Likes Received:
    41,718
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Scientists have already replicated the formation of proteins.

    https://www.livescience.com/3214-life-created-lab.html

    That was 2009. Further research is ongoing.

    https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/03/researchers-may-have-solved-origin-life-conundrum

     
  9. bricklayer

    bricklayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    8,898
    Likes Received:
    2,751
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Change is not evidence of chance. Chance is not a creative force.
     
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2019
  10. Gelecski7238

    Gelecski7238 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2012
    Messages:
    1,592
    Likes Received:
    196
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    When did they ever increase in functional genetic complexity by any means?
     
  11. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    In the last 20,000 years humans acquired blue eyes, the ability to digest milk as adults and smaller brains (by about the size of a tennis ball).

    Are you suggesting God or some ET came and gave us that?
     
  12. wgabrie

    wgabrie Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    May 31, 2011
    Messages:
    13,830
    Likes Received:
    3,054
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You couldn't be more wrong. Chance is often a creative force.
     
  13. Badaboom

    Badaboom Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2018
    Messages:
    5,754
    Likes Received:
    3,162
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There's also the problem of communication... Whales, Dolphins, apes are intelligent. So are horses, dogs and cats. When was the last time you had a real meaningful conversation with one of those? How about ants and bees?

    What I'm getting at is that an alien species who has a totally different view on life and technology may see us just like we see the ants and bees. They also have some form of regulated society. They also build structures. They have quite complex form of communication. Yet we don't really try to comminicate with them.

    We humans believe we're special, but in the great scheme of things, we're not.
     
  14. Durandal

    Durandal Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    May 25, 2012
    Messages:
    55,518
    Likes Received:
    27,044
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Well, I suppose it depends on the objectivity of a lifeform that can build machines and fly them across the galaxy. Would such a lifeform have so little regard for another form of life that is likewise building machines that can be flown around Earth and even beyond it? Surely we would have to have something in common, and surely an alien lifeform out visiting other planets would have to have some curiosity and regard for the life it encounters, especially when it is as intelligent and technologically capable as we are.

    As for communicating with animals, some of us do try. It's not terribly widespread, but scientists at least do study animal communication and attempt to communicate, whether it is by trying to learn to understand what animals "say" or trying to teach them to understand and use human language, e.g. apes being taught sign language. A gorilla that can communicate by sign language is a pretty wondrous thing that forces us to think about animal intelligence and our own relationship to them in new ways.

    Finally, I don't think that an alien intelligence is likely to be all that much greater than our own. In fact, it may well be that an intelligent alien flying craft around to explore the galaxy might actually be something of a savant relative to humanity, something like a space ant or a highly sophisticated artificial intelligence which, while being technologically competent, is not generally intelligent the way a human is and would not appreciate human culture or other life the way we do. Now that is some interesting food for thought, isn't it? We might be visited by "dumb" aliens scouting around for something of use, but not even capable of appreciating humanity because it lacks our sophisticated primate ways of thinking.
     
  15. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Bald assertions you’ve been corrected on numerous times.
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  16. One Mind

    One Mind Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2014
    Messages:
    20,296
    Likes Received:
    7,744
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So there is evidence that something can come from nothing?

    I would love to watch those experiments that saw something manifest from absolutely nothing.

    Sounds rather like magic not .science.

    When liferesponds to a change in environment why must that be mere chance over some intelligence that underlies needed mutation?
     
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2019
  17. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    strawman.

    I would love to see the evidence of a creator. You can’t provide any of course.

    Because you are using a strawman.
    because there is zero evidence for the existence of this intelligent creator/designer.
     
  18. One Mind

    One Mind Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2014
    Messages:
    20,296
    Likes Received:
    7,744
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You addressed the something from nothing and I replied to you doing that. Not my straw man.

    I am agnostic. But it is more plausible to me that an intelligence is involved in life manifesting complete with the ability to evolve over mere chance.

    Plenty of mathmaticians show such odds as being basically impossible short of a miracle.

    It just seems more likely an intelligence far greater than your own was involved over blind chance
    given the odds.

    If such intelligence exists outside of its creation evidence would be outside of the realm of science to touch.

    Anyone who claims certainty on either side of a debate of this nature displays arrogance that they are not entitled to and are like the monkeys in a Kipling novel that when asked how they determine what is true replied, "we all say so, so it must be true".
     
  19. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You made up an argument and attributed it to me. That is a strawman.

    Which is fine. But there is absolutely no evidence to support that belief.

    no they don’t.

    There is no evidence to support that belief.
    I’m not claiming certainty. I simply do not entertain the existence of things for which there is no evidence.
     
    WillReadmore and Derideo_Te like this.
  20. JCS

    JCS Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2019
    Messages:
    1,933
    Likes Received:
    819
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    You're assuming ET's were not on earth long before humans.
    You're also assuming ET's had no hand in creating humans.
    You're also assuming ET's don't or can't have the technology to travel such long distances.
    You're also assuming ET's don't originate from other dimensions or other timelines (eg, our future).

    In either of these cases, the issue with distances would be irrelevant.
     
  21. One Mind

    One Mind Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2014
    Messages:
    20,296
    Likes Received:
    7,744
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Entertaining ideas without evidence can yield new discoveries.
     
  22. rahl

    rahl Banned

    Joined:
    May 31, 2010
    Messages:
    62,508
    Likes Received:
    7,651
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Believing in unicorns or magical sky fairies does not.
     
    Derideo_Te likes this.
  23. OldManOnFire

    OldManOnFire Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    19,980
    Likes Received:
    1,177
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There's something about the terminology that bothers me with UFO's. There are lots of definitions to UFO; from anything in the sky that can't be identified to something in the sky that cannot be scientifically identified, etc. We should not assume that extraterrestrial beings will emerge only from the sky...maybe from deep in the Earth or oceans? From my perspective I only care about extraterrestrial visits in which there is no doubt who they are. To see some lights in the sky, or some strange maneuvers, or anything that appears foreign to an observer, is meaningless to me. So...does the definition of UFO mean terrestrial or extraterrestrial? If it means extraterrestrial then I think we need a new name, or acronym, for unidentified terrestrial objects...just saying...
     
  24. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Over the last 20,000 years humans acquired the genes to allow for digestion of milk as adults, for blue eyes, and for human brains to shrink by about the volume of a tennis ball (presumably gaining in complexity such that capablitiy was not lost).

    Are you suggesting that God came along and tweaked humans in those specific ways?

    Or, do you accept the overwhelming results of science that indicates that there were numerous acts of chance from which selective processes retained those specific changes?

    Or, do you have some other idea in mind?
     
  25. bricklayer

    bricklayer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2011
    Messages:
    8,898
    Likes Received:
    2,751
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I have no good reason to believe that human beings "acquired" genes via mutation or that those mutations accumulate into sophisticated systems.
     

Share This Page