Aliens exist: Here is the proof

As with so many ( if not most ) of the posts here that claim "proof" in the title.. absolutely no proof was provided.

Having 50 sextillion habitable planets does not mean that any of them are in fact inhabited .. it just means they are inhabitable ..

Has life actually formed on any of those planets? .. quite possibly.. but you presented no proof .. so the title is incorrect... you should have the title "Aliens MAY exist: Here's why" ..

And none of this is even new.. the first I heard of this math was from Carl Sagan on the original series of Cosmos .. and he didn't originate the idea.. the idea came well before I was born.

a reply to: Emerys

Technologically speaking, there is no guarantee that:
1) They will develop technology similar enough to ours to be detectable
2) If they do develop similar technology that they haven't already moved past it long before we started listening and therefore would not be detectable to us
3) They developed said technology but destroyed themselves with other technology

Cosmically speaking, there is no guarantee that they were not wiped out during a period of development similar to our industrial age or earlier by any number of cosmic events (comet/meteor strike, extreme gamma ray burst, supernova near to them, star changing stages of its life cycle)

Chronologically speaking, there is no guarantee that:
1) They haven't already lived and died long before the earth even came to be. We are late in the game on the cosmic time scale.
2) They simply haven't developed broadcast technology yet (which is primarily what we are looking for)
3) They are not intellectually developed enough to begin seeking out any technological advances beyond those of mere survival.

Biologically speaking, there is no guarantee that:
1) They have intelligence measurable to us.
2) They are recognizable as a life-form by our current narrow standards (i.e. must be carbon based or at a stretch silicon)
3) They, despite having advanced intelligence, are not on a world conducive to much in the way of scientific discovery within certain realms (i.e. a water world would not be one in which electricity was likely developed, much less consumption of fossil fuels) and therefore are experiencing arrested development.
4) They aren't microscopic.

Ultimately, there are far more reasons to explain why we haven't heard/seen anything concrete yet, as far as life beyond Terra is concerned, than there are to argue the contrary. The view of "we surely would have found them by now" is simply a pessimistic view adopted by scientists and citizens who either suspect that technology will not advance to the point of being able to initiate first contact within their lives and are bitter/depressed about it or they are so absorbed in the flawed perception that we are the pinnacle of biological life in the universe that until we advance beyond this point no other civilizations could reach it. Both propositions are erroneous and preposterous if you ask me.

They are both coping mechanisms, the first is for a sense of grief at the briefness of our lifespan and the second is borne of a fear that, by looking, we run the risk of finding a far more advanced race than ourselves, that they may or may not be benevolent and ultimately either possibility would shatter their sense of superiority. Life is out there, and the more we find, the more we look and discover, the closer N in Drake's Equation gets to being equal to the number of potentially habitable planets/moons in the universe.

I will end with a quote by Thomas Carlyle, on the stars and potential life, "A sad spectacle. If they be inhabited, what a scope for misery and folly. If they be not inhabited, what a waste of space."

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: Legman
a reply to: Emerys

Take your argument in reverse....

There 5*1022 inhabitable planets. In billions of years available for an alien species to develop evolve and create new travel technologies we have seen zero proof.

Therefore I conclude earth is the exception to the rule that there is no life in the universe.


Bad Proofs are easy without math and evidence huh?

Just to play Devil's advocate for a second, you can't say "we have seen zero proof". "Our modern civilizations don't recognize anything as proof" is the accurate statement. Just as a microbe can't recognize our cars or airplanes, we simply may not be able to recognize their technology, even if it was around us right now.

We assume aliens would use technologies which are comparable to ours. But this is a bad assumption because it projects our weakness onto them. As an example, let's look at a technology humans are just dabbling into: nanotechnology. If our civilizations are allowed 1,000 years of interrupted advances in nanotechnology, modern humans wouldn't recognize that technology either. Not just because of the literally microscopic sizes, but also because of the applications of that technology that we can't even fathom right now.

Even our modern smartphones would be considered the greatest magic trick of all time just 200 years ago. And being able to skype someone on the other side of the world in real time would make you a prophet!

Good points

originally posted by: MarsIsRed

originally posted by: Emerys

Number of living species on Earth
About 8.7 million (give or take 1.3 million) is the new, estimated total number of species on Earth -- the most precise calculation ever offered -- with 6.5 million species on land and 2.2 million in oceans


So....if we have that many living things just on this tiny little blue dot in space...

You've completely missed the point. Everything is related; meaning it's quite possible that abiogenesis happened exactly once on this planet - meaning that that sample size isn't 8.7 million, but just one. It's very difficult to extrapolate from a sample size of one. So your "proof" is utterly meaningless and nonsensical.

Another excellent point.

originally posted by: Emerys
One man, a man more credited than you will ever be, more respected, educated, and open minded had evidence that aliens exist. Tangible, scientific evidence. Do you know who I am talking about?

Dr. John Mack. Pulitzer Prize Winner. Head of Harvard Psychiatric School. But, he doesnt count does he? Please troll somewhere else.

I was really into Mack at one point and I don't think his writings are valueless.

However, if you're going to tout Mack's academic credentials including his association with Harvard you also have to include that he was investigated by a committee established by the dean of the Harvard Medical School that issued a report highly critical of his research methods.

You also have to take into account that he worked with Budd Hopkins including studying experiencers referred by Hopkins. Hopkins most definitely was NOT a respected or "credited" researcher in the scientific community.

originally posted by: Emerys
a reply to: AdmireTheDistance

I was waiting for one of you to post! Let's define "proof"

proof
1. evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement

I think I have established an argument helping to establish a fact?

No.. You have not proven anything.

its not like anyones argument here recreates reality. Aliens are real and are here. Could argue until the invasion occures and it still wouldn't matter.

Prove isn't even nessisary. It's just a warning. If someone runs down a trail you are walking and says "There's a cougar down the trail RUN " Would one of the proof demanders say * Where's the proof? *

* The building is on fire! Everyone out! " " I donno i need proof, go up there and film it. With a time stamp. Then i'l believ-" Guy takes off running before letting proofer finishing talking.

The conclusion. It really does not matter. But if you have fun debating go ahead it's you're life. Just keep in mind that aliens are living horror stories. Kinda like being trapped in a fire you can't escape from. If you're down for real life horror debate the aliens all you want. The only reason why i tell people aliens are real is so they are at least minorly prepared for the insainity when it decides to blow up into full preportion, People who doubt it altogether tho will be the ones to lose their minds come Judgement day.

My argument is absolute fact.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

That would be like saying the mice don't exist until the moment you notice them

I guess I need to get more specific. I'm talking about mice that come inside my house and stay for the winter. I usually expect them late September into October. These are real sneaky critters that can get into the tiniest openings and you really don't notice them unless you know what to look for

I remember my first encounter. It was late at night and I was on the computer and I saw something out of the corner of my eye move real fast. I suspected that I was just seeing things. Then I noticed some droppings in the garage and I thought there was no way into the house. Then someone said that if they are in the garage, they are in the house. And late at night, when everything was quiet, I would hear scratching sounds inside the walls. Then Halloween came and they trashed the pantry. They got into the candy bowel and pooped all over my food!

Yes, then I started noticing them everywhere. And since they are real physical things, sneaky as they are, they leave physical evidence of their existence everywhere!

Of course they existed prior to me realizing it. But I know for sure when they don't exist in my home. I guess there "could" be some new unknown type of mice that don't poop and stay in a corner of my basement where i never look. But what would I tell the exterminator? Should I tell him that I see things out of the corner of my eye? Should I get belligerent when he doesn't believe in my non-pooping mice?

originally posted by: Emerys
There is other proof aliens exist besides the countless eyewitness testimony, photos, crop circles, etc. Is this more scientific for you? Or will you still find ways to troll this thread?

Post the one, single most compelling piece of "evidence" you can think of, and we will show you that it does not in any way constitute proof of extra-terrestrial aliens.

a reply to: DelMarvel

However, if you're going to tout Mack's academic credentials including his association with Harvard you also have to include that he was investigated by a committee established by the dean of the Harvard Medical School that issued a report highly critical of his research methods.

And then there is research that followed him that showed that hypnosis doesn't really recover memories.

a reply to: Emerys

While I agree most of those are crap reports. We cannot just discount every single case. If the courts use eyewitness accounts, why can't we?

Semantics aside, you have an extremely valid point there. People's lives are placed every single day upon the mercy of a jury who will decide, based on evidence (not concrete, verifiable, tangible proof ) how they will spend the rest of it...or not get the rest of it...and eyewitness accounts are one of the most powerful evidentiary tools in law to help the jury make that decision. And it is not the eyewitness who must prove that what he/she said is true. The court already assumes that as established. It is the opposing counsel's responsibility to prove that the eyewitness's verbal account of what he/she saw can be disproven.

So I would say that by the dictionary definition of "proof", you have reasonably shown that your calculations and extrapolations do in fact belong in the "reasonable evidential proof" file. Perhaps when people ask you to provide irrefutable proof that what you say is accurate, you could ask them to provide irrefutable proof that it is not. They can't. Because until we are able to travel to other worlds and live to tell about it and see things right in front of us, everything; beliefs and theories about other sentient life in the Universe and even things that people widely accept as fact are really at the end of the day only our best educated guess. None of us know precisely, beyond a shadow of a doubt what is out there, so you aren't able to 100% prove or disprove anything at this point...no one is.

This was very well written by the way, S&F

originally posted by: AnuTyr
If someone runs down a trail you are walking and says "There's a cougar down the trail RUN " Would one of the proof demanders say * Where's the proof? *

Of course I'd most likely run just to be safe. But it doesn't mean there really was a cougar down the trail. Maybe it was a cougar. Maybe it was a bobcat and the person sounding the alarm was mistaken. Maybe it was any number of other animals off in the woods somewhere. Maybe the person didn't really see anything at all.

And all this talk of eyewitness reports being accepted in court overlooks the fact that no one is convicted in court based on eyewitness testimony if there is no other evidence of a crime even being convicted which is really the equivalent situation here.

originally posted by: tigertatzen
a reply to: Emerys

This was very well written by the way, S&F

I completely disagree with that statement. The argument used as proof is not well written. For a start, there is no definition of 'alien' – it could be any type of life at all. If it's microbial then I would agree that aliens almost certainly exist. If it's intelligent life similar to our own, then I would refer you to my post made earlier – that our own existence is more or less a fluke and it is not destined to be on this planet, or any other.

originally posted by: AnuTyr


Prove isn't even nessisary. It's just a warning. If someone runs down a trail you are walking and says "There's a cougar down the trail RUN " Would one of the proof demanders say * Where's the proof? *

* The building is on fire! Everyone out! " " I donno i need proof, go up there and film it. With a time stamp. Then i'l believ-" Guy takes off running before letting proofer finishing talking.

Depends.... Is the person screaming "fire or cougar" slightly on the outside of normal and do they shout "fire or cougar" on a daily basis?

Since this isn't a fire or cougar.... And it's shouted everyday (here and other places) I'll wait for proof.

There's only one species visiting this planet. And the government is hiding it for obvious reasons.
Do you think the public would want to know that aliens that are Etheral are visiting our planet? Being made of Energy that are immune to any weapon we can create because they exist in this form on a different vibratory wave length through highly compressed nano particles. That their very presence has an AOE effect on all life surrounding them. As in an overwhelming presence simply because of the extremely high density they are created from alters the state of physics where ever they go. Would humans feel comfortable knowing that these beings can shapeshift into any form and teleport. So even if you wanted to *Try* to protect your kids from abduction nothing in humanities arsonal can possibly stop it?

Governments statement * We are actively being engaged by a species that resembles living poltergeists, They can teleport into your rooms so do not be alarmed as we have no way of engaging on conflict, Be weary of their methods of communication. As Unfathomable Dread and Terror may occure and not from your person but as a resault of Emotional supressive telepathy, This broadcast is a warning that we as a species are completely !@#$%ed and there is nothing any government officials can do to help you other than to prepare the enivitable screams from our citizens. You may return to your regular programing *


No one wants to hear that. Not many people want it even to be part of reality. All them saucers and lights in the skies. Piloted by living poltergiests who have a wide range of supernatural abilities not even requiring technological tools.... Telekinesis, Telepathy, Teleportation, Energy transfer and absorption, Alteration of electronic devices as well as altered states of existance. Yup as a government official, they would say amongst themselves. Well this being sure dampens the party of self ignorance and arrogance of our species! Lets not let the people find out or we could have a potencial crisis on our hands. Create some physical image of an alien to reprisent something other than this Terror. Something similar to humans so they are more comfortable because this poltergiest crap will make the schizophrenics even more schizophrenic. sir our art devision made this. its called a grey. looks stupid but the public will accept it.

Anu, I'm not knocking your beliefs – everyone has a right to believe in what they want – but how do you know this if it's a secret? Are you not afraid that some secret official will come looking for you now that you've made it public knowledge?

originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: DelMarvel

However, if you're going to tout Mack's academic credentials including his association with Harvard you also have to include that he was investigated by a committee established by the dean of the Harvard Medical School that issued a report highly critical of his research methods.

And then there is research that followed him that showed that hypnosis doesn't really recover memories.

Of course, the counter argument is that Mack claimed that most of his subjects came to him with conscious memories. However, he used Stansilav Grof's Holotropic breathing and hypnosis to "flesh out" the stories. The Grof technique was developed to replace a substance that cannot be name here that Grof used before it became illegal and the technique produces all sorts of wild visions. I think a red flag for me as far as the researcher influencing the subjects is that Mack was very concerned about the environment all almost all his subjects eventually reported that the aliens were there to warn about ecological damage.

a reply to: DelMarvel

well you sir are smarter than the average bear. Better to be safe than be mauled to death lol.

a reply to: Legman

Yes this is where the story of the boy who cried wolf has relevance.