Atheists To Hold Massive Rally On National Mall Next Month

Extraterrestrial life - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia





en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraterrestrial_life


Many prominent scientists consider extraterrestrial life to be plausible, but no direct ... noted "odds are pretty high" that there may be life on other planets but " the odds of ... For example, NASA scientists believe that the color of photosynthesizing ... skin, with a large head, as well as four limbs—i.e. fundamentally humanoid

 

Science is just one way of ascertaining "truth". It's not the only way.

Care to explain this lofty assertion?

 

If you admit that it could exist, then why are you so certain that you're right?

That's just your personal opinion. Mathematically, it's a pure 50/50 operation. That may seem counter-intuitive to you, but that's the implication of quantum mechanics and probability.

Since we have NO IDEA whether it exists or not, there is no other way to quantify the probability. We certainly cannot say it's a 100% probability that it doesn't exist, and we certainly cannot say it's a 100% probability that it does exist, and since there is no evidence either way, we cannot assign either possibility a higher probability than the other. Either possibility is equally likely in terms of pure probability.

Sorry, but the last time I checked, quantum mechanics and theoretical physics were not "dumb".

And your analogy is ridiculous. You can directly observe that you are typing on a keyboard. Our argument concerns speculating in the total absence of evidence. And when you speculate in the total absence of evidence, and there are only two possibilities, then it's 50/50 operation. This is what science tells us!

 

Really, the blockage of same sex marriage heads the top of the list. Many of my friends are not allowed to be married because or the religious. Birth control is being attacked because of those morns as well. How long have those idiots gone on about abortion. Those are all being driven by religious opinion. There is no other basis for the problems.
Handing out condoms to the youth is blocked by this archaic way of thinking as well. That adds to the STD's and youth pregnancies. Stem cell research is being held up because of it as well.

So now you tell me how they are not blocking those things.

 

How do you define "science"? That seems vague.

I want to just flat out say "you only believe (*)(*)(*)(*) if there's evidence for it", but..

I guess we could say that this is all a matrix and nothing is real about the universe. It's not impossible. We could say that we're all just computers of sorts, in a different universe, that don't follow the physical laws of this universe but are programmed to think that this universe exists and that if follows these apparent laws...and that we're dead wrong about 2+2=4, and every other basic, apparently obvious axiom, and everything else that we ever observe or assume. It could be that there is no "we", that it's just you that exists and everything else is part of this simulation of sorts. I know that it isn't just you, because I know that my mind exists, but then again, maybe YOU are part of this simulation and I'm talking to myself.

Nothing is for certain. Maybe even there are things for certain, thus making "nothing is for certain" false; so I'm not even certain about saying that nothing is for certain.

It's all about probability. We don't try to necessarily determine whether something is certainly true or certainly false; it's all about (rough estimates, or perhaps in some cases more precise estimates of) probability.

 

Life on other worlds is a numbers game. We assume that the conditions for life that exist here could exist elsewhere. Given the number of stars and planets it's projected that there would be so many planets which could support life that another planet would. It's a fairly reasonable assumption.

 

My electric bug assertion is no more ridiculous than saying that something has a 50/50 chance of existing just because I made it up in my head.

 

Government doesn't stay out of religion. It hasn't sense this country was born. I think what most of you atheist don't like is religious people being elected to office and maybe influencing policy with religious values. I can understand that. But I don't think that is any different than many Conservatives worrying about Liberals being elected with their values. I can only wonder how our forefathers would feel if they could see what we have done with some of the rights they gave us. For it seems to me that we have flushed much of the moral values we use to have right down the toilet.

 

I don't care if someone religious gets elected. They should keep their personal and the key word is personal views exactly that personal. Their religion should in no way creep out into the public debate. The moronic ideas expressed in the bible are nonsense and there should be no religious discussion at all. If the religious of the US want a theocracy let them move to Iran and they will have one.
There are no such things as morals and will not debate that on this thread. All they are is catch words to manipulate a people who need leadership and controls. Those would be the followers one normally finds in religion. If you are unable to have a life follow one and join a religion. The folks there are happy to tell you how to live, breath, vote and pee.