small theory why we are alone

reply to post by Mr_skepticc


and as usual.... you make little to no sense in your response. "we are along... we're not alone"

This is the thing, The recipe for life or earth is pretty simple.

Water.
Chemical building blocks like carbon, oxygen, hydrogen and nitrogen.
An energy source

www.bbc.co.uk...
This is assuming that life can only consist in the rules of what we know of terrestrial life.

Life .. is a easy game really, this is why so many people now openly say life outside Earth just makes sense.

There is nothing special about Earth, we got lucky being the the HZ of The Sun.

Mediocrity principle

(1) life on Earth depends on just a few basic molecules;
(2) the elements that make up these molecules are (to a greater or lesser extent) common to all stars, and
(3) the laws of science we know apply to the entire universe (and there is no reason to assume that they do not),
(Conclusion) then – given sufficient time – life must have originated elsewhere in the cosmos.

en.wikipedia.org...
See .. Easy game

[edit on 26-1-2010 by nophun]

[edit on 26-1-2010 by nophun]

Originally posted by DoomsdayRex

Originally posted by UFOexisist
If you look at the humans on the planet. You see that there are a lot of humans. So many humans that ther must be one like you. but the truth is that there is no one like you . You are unique. however there are 6 billion people.

I was a bit too harsh and made a simple declarative statement without any cogent argument to support it in my last post.

In my opinion, you weren't too harsh: sometimes one believes that one line is enough and what matters in this case is that your one line made the point and did not offend the OP in any way: since the opinon is yours, you must be free to express your thoughts. I like your posts because you post only where you can express some straight answer, and you don't care about the "trend" of a thread.

Back to topic, an important step has been the discovery of the molecular structure of DNA (AKA The Double Helix by dna model Watson & Crick).
Take a carefully look at THIS,
because this is how you and me are made: each small piece of you and me is structured this way;

this make us humans unique, and each human unique himself, because the amount of possible combinations: we are unique but at the same time different: my fingerprints can't be the same as yours, and DNA would be (theoretichally) a way to narrow the field, but actually you can do huge mistakes:
the article is in italian, but basically it says that some innocent guy from england, Peter Neil Hankin, had been cleared of any accusations: "the DNA was wrong". One wan was going to be declared the perpetrator of some crime because "dna test gone wrong?" There was some match, but the guy was far away the day of the crime and never physically been on the crime scene.
The truth is that we are very ignorant about ourselves: we believe to know our planet but we miss points like the ones in which Mother Nature expresses its best:

There are so many things on this planet that are so nice to leave you breathless: and they exist only because they're nice, like some brand of flowers which smell can't be reproduced, or like those geniuses of music Some things happen only because it is nice that they happen, life has the flavour that you choose. Trust me, the man able to PROVE that we are alone, does NOT exist.

reply to post by UFOexisist


This is certainly an interesting idea. However, it would be more coherent with some mathematical statistics to back up your logic train. I don't quite follow you're comparison. In my opniion, this is similar to comparing the Macroscopic scale to the Planck scale.

Fairly easy theory to dismiss actually: Consider this.

We have stars...lots of stars. We cannot even still fathom how many stars are out there. Hubble keeps snapping pictures deeper and deeper into space and we keep seeing mega galaxys and all sorts. there may be tens if not hundreds of billions of galaxys out there.

Within a normal galaxy, there are billions of stars...each star has the potential to have a planet in its "habitable" zone...This is according to what we personally feel would be habitable based on factors such as liquid water, etc...but one thing we note is that life here on earth will survive and thrive in almost every environment.

The only other planet we have somewhat personal knowledge of is the one right next to us...mars...and the debate is raging on about if there was once life there...be it microbial or otherwise.

Our only real knowledge to date is of earth..and so far, of the planets we studied, it has been 100% life ridden...our neighbor mars will show us more.

If...If there is found to be life on mars, past or present, even if its little more than single celled amoebias...it makes it almost certain that life will exist in any environment it can sink its feet into...which means that the universe is a very crowded place. now, go back to considering how many planets around the stars, and how many stars in the galaxy/supergalaxy/universe...

The smart money is that we are about as unique to the universe is as a blade of grass is to a golf course the size of canada.

reply to post by UFOexisist


Just having the thought of no other life than US in the galaxy can only come from a very unintelligent creature. As a psychologist i would worry ALOT.

reply to post by UFOexisist


Your theory is also impossible.

reply to post by Arizonee


Hello Arizonee, Thanks for your post. I agree that if there are folks
able to visit earth from afar they may have taken a quick look and
decided to use their time looking for something more interesting.

I look at fire ants and hornets occasionally, but I never get very close intentionally. I may observe animals and insects and notice that they apparently communicate with among their group. It would not occur to me to try to talk to other species.

If we have been observed by visitors from beyond our earth it is easy
to imagine the observer has concluded " nothing much of interest here" and gone on to look at other planets.

reply to post by Arizonee


Hello Arizonee, Thanks for your post. I agree that if there are folks
able to visit earth from afar they may have taken a quick look and
decided to use their time looking for something more interesting.

I look at fire ants and hornets occasionally, but I never get very close intentionally. I may observe animals and insects and notice that they apparently communicate with among their group. It would not occur to me to try to talk to other species.

If we have been observed by visitors from beyond our earth it is easy
to imagine the observer has concluded " nothing much of interest here" and gone on to look at other planets.

reply to post by UFOexisist


Seriously, this attempt at an argument would be disappointing coming from an average sixth grader. Nobody is arguing that ET life is identical to human life, so what does your non-sequitur logic prove? If anything, your statement about how all 6 billion of us exist, yet are all 'unique,' could be better articulated as an argument that unique life is likely to exist elsewhere (and that's before bringing up all of the non-human, sometimes intelligent, life also on earth).

Best,
Skunknuts

interesting hypothesis.
Within the past half year Coast to Coast - it was George Noory I believe had an interesting guest who indicated that if we look at the soul level evolution, not only physical, there is at least a dozen people who are soul copies of us on this planet. We experience our daily life in day dreaming, night dreaming. Apparently there is an immediate connection like that and then of course there is the theory of global planetary consciousness.

Thought I'd throw that in the formula.

Someone once said that a chimpanzee with a typewriter and enough time would eventually produce a duplicate copy of the 40-million word text of the Encyclopaedia Brittanica. The universe has had enough time - or has it? We know the age of the Universe fairly accurately (accurately enough for these arguments anyway). But is that long enough for it to evolve the civilisations (for want of a better word) 'we' assume must exist?

As to the popular anthropormorphication of visiting 'aliens', let's not forget that 'we' exist because of a singular global catastrophy that wiped out the dinosaurs. I guess it could be argued that a similar evolutionary accident will have occurred on numerous 'Planet Xs' and given rise to versions of 'us'. I personally thinks it's all down to a self-fulfilling need for something else 'out there' and 'beyond us' that's built into the human psyche. It wouldn't really surprise me if we eventually conclude we are indeed alone. The question is how long will we have to search? Is there enough time left?

The current solution to the Drake equation suggests about 50,000 likely planets in the Milky Way galaxy alone. All we have to do is find one, only one. But will we have enough time to find it?

WG3



[edit on 27-1-2010 by waveguide3]