It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by ShadowXIX
Long Lance raised another interesting point though Im not sure if I follow it correctly. I think your suggesting advanced intelligent races might eventually evolve (Acsend?) into a higher state of being which takes them out of our dimension all together?
I dont know how likely that would be through natural evolution since during billions of years of earth evolution we have never witnessed any such thing. I would think it would be more likley a process of technology rather then natural selection if possible....
Originally posted by The_Doctor
The pressence of water is not necissarily evidence of life. It is just life as we know it for all we know ET may not need oxygen or water to thrive. As for Europa it has a theoretical ocean they aren't 100% sure of that.
Now the equation above is false since we can't tell which planets support life to which ones don't. Also since we give life a false Earthly definition it is more likely you will find life that is absolutly different both mentally and physically from human beings or otherwise. The planets we find aren't really planets at all it is actually the stars movements that we use to detect planets. We never actually see planets but the wobble of a distant star is indication of gas giants.
Originally posted by Long Lance
Option Z:
there is an evolutionary path which leads beyond life as we know it, therefore taking mature civilisations out of the picture (space and time as we know it). if you consider evolution an infinite process and not a dead-end, this option is inevitable, isn't it?
Originally posted by Yarcofin
Apparently the Drake Equation is completely subjective, according to that Wikipedia entry. In one part, it estimates 5000 intelligent civilizations, and at another part 0.0000008.
Originally posted by The_Doctor
Let's say there are 400 billion stars in our galaxy now according to science only a small fraction of those have life and even then an even smaller fraction with advanced civilizations. the odds of us existing at the same time as another advanced species is probably a billion to one as opposed to the 100k to 1 shot of finding micro organisms and other primative lifeforms.
I figure there can be no more then just a few advanced species in the galaxy and that our chances of finding them within my lifetime are pretty slim.
Think of a civilization a a flash of light when compared to the age of the universe. now these blinks of light occur randomly and not that often. So what our our chances of living in a galaxy full of advanced civilizations. Not very high at all.
I figure there can be no more then just a few advanced species in the galaxy and that our chances of finding them within my lifetime are pretty slim.
Originally posted by merka
Evolution, by definition, require offspring. So I dont think you could ever go "beyond life".
Plus I dont think there will ever be a demand for it. I mean what is there to adapt too if its unreachable in our existence?
Originally posted by ShadowXIX
A post ago you mentioned "stubborn scientific equations which amount to crap because scientists will not think outside the box " and then you make statement about the galaxy like that.
I wouldnt be shocked one bit if humans turned out to be the most egocentric animals in the entire galaxy. All this "earth is so special" and the "center of the universe" bunk. When infact earth is a spec of dust orbiting a mundane star in outskirts of a average Galaxy. There is no evidence to suggest earth is remotely close to being a billion in 1 shot
[edit on 18-5-2006 by ShadowXIX]