Its not my theory. The Many Worlds Theory has been around since the 1940s. I cited work from Quantum Cosmology. And I cited the opinions [certainly not theories!] of some physicists who have discussed this with me. In fact, it isn't opinion as much as a logical deduction. It is a simple matter of applying Occam's Razor. Given the choice of ET or time travelers, based on the physics we know, time travel is the simplest explanation.
Yes Fwiw, there has been intelligent life on earth for many millions of years. But only recently has it become possible to communicate with other civilizations. And think how, even now, we have difficulty communicating with other imtelligent life on this planet. If we discovered elephants, or chimps on another planet.... what would we say to them?
Oh, it's pretty complicated. You don't just have to rule out Earthly Technologies, you also have to rule out hallucinations, optical illusions, bad testimony, fakery, etc etc Good luck with that. hint : you will need a lot more than some grainy video, or a fuzzy picture, or some bad testimony.
We were talking about definitive technologies. You specifically mentioned an alien craft. So if you don't change the argument you won't get confused. Of course there are many other variables involved. But when there is no doubt about claimed observations, when you have multiple witnesses as well as RADAR or other data clearly showing something operating in a manner inconsistent with the known limits of physics and/or aerodynamics, there comes a time when you have to consider what people actually say they saw; especially when they are people like military pilots and missile base commanders. In many cases, these are the people you are trusting with nuclear weapons; the ones who determine if there is a threat to national security No video can ever prove anything. There are great videos but you can never prove they weren't faked. That is true for surveillance, security, and even news videos. The best video and film evidence is that which predates CGI. Bruce Maccabee, an optical physicist who has specialized in various UFO cases, says a true 3D video is harder to fake and he could detected a fake. But regular videos are a lost cause now. They are only meaningful to the extent that they are supported by multiple eyewitness accounts, RADAR data, or other supporting evidence. You arguments show you know nothing about the subject. You are arguing out of ignorance.
Okay. My argument: reality, yours: hypothetical. Got it. Eyewitness testimony is completely unreliable. Period. What radar? Show the tape. There isn't any? Hmm, guess that is eyewitness testimony, too. No, the testimony that "we don't know" I no way compels a rational person to believe the explanation is alien tech.
I believe the "Intelligent Designer" wants us to recognize Truth and deal with our own problems. If there is life out there....He/she is not going to allow it to distract .
Perhaps according to logic and evidence. Go ahead, say they are flawed... That reflects on you more than it does on evidence and reason...
No it reflects on your opinion that your logic is higher than the One that created you into existence.
Which is exactly what you have,an opinion. Is there irrefutable evidence of a Creator/ Intelligent Designer? Kindly get back to us when "that" miracle takes place. /sarc/
Is their irrefutable evidence things just happened on there own and left you here to decide how for us all? Of course there is nothing greater than you. Don't bother getting back.....it seems you have decided.
That's odd...I have no idea what the logic of the gods is. Apparently you do. Would you like to detail it for us?
I hear there is a chance we could fine life on Europa. There's flowing water underneath it's icy crust that's heated by underwater volcanic heat. We may not find complex life on that moon, but the possibility of encountering simple basic life is scientifically possible. We do have extremeaphiles on Earth that can survive in the freezing arctic ice or the water from boiling geysers.
Humans being "poofed into existence" is a primitive belief held by creationists/fundamentalists;It has nothing to do with science.Science only deals with natural events, not supernatural ones thus, by definition, creationism can never be scientific. Is there irrefutable evidence for evolution? The answer is yes and ignoring it will not make it go away. In fact I think any answer I give is a more reasonable one than simply attributing everything to the actions of some omnipotent supernatural entity.
Attributing anything to magic or gods is not an explanation. In fact,it is the opposite of explanation. It explains nothing. Furthermore, it makes people think they have answers, when, in fact, they have none.
It's much easier to be stupid. It's much easier to worship others. It's much easier to live vicariously through others. It's much easier to hide in our comfort zones. It's much easier to be righteous.
We don't know, therefore <your idea>. But, that is argument from ignorance. We need to dial in some humility. The fact of the matter is that we don't know. It's fine to keep exploring our universe - I'm way in favor. But, building an elaborate scaffolding of belief based on "we don't know" seems absurd to me.
Amen. We known whole galaxies that are far enough away that the time for light to travel here is 3 times longer than Earth's existence. Yet, someone thinks we've explored the universe for life??? Really?
The other problem is the definition of "intelligent life." We could be surrounded by alien "intelligent life" that is so greatly different that we have no ability to perceive it - and visa versa.
Getting form point A to point B Scientist asks, "What possible path could have been taken?" Creationist: "There was no path, everything was placed at the end by a higher power." Scientist: "Ok, but lets theoretically ask, "If there were a path, what would that look like, how would it start, and where would it end?" Creationist: "You don’t have the right to ask questions. It happened one way and one way only." Scientist: "Yea, ok, I get that, but I’m just asking what it would look like and what experiments you could run if a path did exist?" "I have some data, it’s not complete or definitive in any way, but it at least may provide some more questions." Creationist: "You don’t have any evidence, or all your evidence is superficial." Scientist: "That could be true, but should I stop asking questions and then testing them every time they "may" make you feel like your beliefs are being challenged?" Creationist: "Yes."
