many stars have an earth

like people with opened minds always believed we now have so called experts confirming it,hopefully in my life time we will have the proof.


news.sky.com...

1 = earth

So the question becomes if life sustaining planets are so prevalent, where are the advanced civilizations.

Drake equation is lacking in its accuracy from a poor data set.

So, complex life may be hard for what ever reason, could be to hard to rise up out of the muck and not immediately self destruct (as our civilization seems so set on trying.)

To simply the universe being a hazardous place, gama ray burst etc...

benrl
So the question becomes if life sustaining planets are so prevalent, where are the advanced civilizations.

Drake equation is lacking in its accuracy from a poor data set.

So, complex life may be hard for what ever reason, could be to hard to rise up out of the muck and not immediately self destruct (as our civilization seems so set on trying.)

To simply the universe being a hazardous place, gama ray burst etc...

benrl
So the question becomes if life sustaining planets are so prevalent, where are the advanced civilizations.

Drake equation is lacking in its accuracy from a poor data set.

So, complex life may be hard for what ever reason, could be to hard to rise up out of the muck and not immediately self destruct (as our civilization seems so set on trying.)

To simply the universe being a hazardous place, gama ray burst etc...

who said they were advanced?they could be as primitive as we are,why does everyone think that any life out there is more advanced than us?see thats peoples problem,they think for any life to exist then it must be star trek stuff,why?

sparky31

benrl
So the question becomes if life sustaining planets are so prevalent, where are the advanced civilizations.

Drake equation is lacking in its accuracy from a poor data set.

So, complex life may be hard for what ever reason, could be to hard to rise up out of the muck and not immediately self destruct (as our civilization seems so set on trying.)

To simply the universe being a hazardous place, gama ray burst etc...

who said they were advanced?they could be as primitive as we are,why does everyone think that any life out there is more advanced than us?see thats peoples problem,they think for any life to exist then it must be star trek stuff,why?

Hell we were using electronic communication in the 1800s, early 19 for radio, I don't want star trek, Id settle for pre-industrial on the way to advancement.

It would be a sad thought to be the first technological advance life to rise, and if others couldn't even come close to that, well what would even be the point of knowing they where there if they could never get to the communication point with us?

Probably just lead to another dark chapter of human history where we go around taking these planets from the indigenous life.

benrl

sparky31

benrl
So the question becomes if life sustaining planets are so prevalent, where are the advanced civilizations.

Drake equation is lacking in its accuracy from a poor data set.

So, complex life may be hard for what ever reason, could be to hard to rise up out of the muck and not immediately self destruct (as our civilization seems so set on trying.)

To simply the universe being a hazardous place, gama ray burst etc...

who said they were advanced?they could be as primitive as we are,why does everyone think that any life out there is more advanced than us?see thats peoples problem,they think for any life to exist then it must be star trek stuff,why?

Hell we were using electronic communication in the 1800s, early 19 for radio, I don't want star trek, Id settle for pre-industrial on the way to advancement.

It would be a sad thought to be the first technological advance life to rise, and if others couldn't even come close to that, well what would even be the point of knowing they where there if they could never get to the communication point with us?

Probably just lead to another dark chapter of human history where we go around taking these planets from the indigenous life.

eh still to know that life existed else where,it could be as dumb as my cat i don,t care but to know that life was else where would be enough for me.i,m one that wants to believe that 1 spec in the universe isn,t just it.

What it says is one in five stars of the same type as Sol may have habitable planets.

Which is still pretty good, but you have to first filter down to "stars like Sol", which pretty much eliminates a bunch of stars, then divide by 5.

sparky31

benrl

sparky31

benrl
So the question becomes if life sustaining planets are so prevalent, where are the advanced civilizations.

Drake equation is lacking in its accuracy from a poor data set.

So, complex life may be hard for what ever reason, could be to hard to rise up out of the muck and not immediately self destruct (as our civilization seems so set on trying.)

To simply the universe being a hazardous place, gama ray burst etc...

who said they were advanced?they could be as primitive as we are,why does everyone think that any life out there is more advanced than us?see thats peoples problem,they think for any life to exist then it must be star trek stuff,why?

Hell we were using electronic communication in the 1800s, early 19 for radio, I don't want star trek, Id settle for pre-industrial on the way to advancement.

It would be a sad thought to be the first technological advance life to rise, and if others couldn't even come close to that, well what would even be the point of knowing they where there if they could never get to the communication point with us?

Probably just lead to another dark chapter of human history where we go around taking these planets from the indigenous life.

eh still to know that life existed else where,it could be as dumb as my cat i don,t care but to know that life was else where would be enough for me.i,m one that wants to believe that 1 spec in the universe isn,t just it.

edit on 2013 by sparky31 because: (no reason given)

An entire universe filled with simple life, would still be a mystery, as what the hell was up with earth.

Really I think mans yearning for life else where tends to fall under simply having someone else to ask "what does this all mean"

To find no other intelligence would be worse than finding no life at all.

benrl

An entire universe filled with simple life, would still be a mystery, as what the hell was up with earth.

Here's you one - what if you could explore some of these candidates, and some of them were able to sustain life, and HAD complex life at some point, but now they're all pretty much empty? All you see now are really primitive life forms like mosses and lichens, and what MIGHT be cave dwellings on one planet (but it's not really clear that they are).

Maybe there used to be advanced life but it's all gone, except us.

Bedlam

benrl

An entire universe filled with simple life, would still be a mystery, as what the hell was up with earth.

Here's you one - what if you could explore some of these candidates, and some of them were able to sustain life, and HAD complex life at some point, but now they're all pretty much empty? All you see now are really primitive life forms like mosses and lichens, and what MIGHT be cave dwellings on one planet (but it's not really clear that they are).

Maybe there used to be advanced life but it's all gone, except us.

which is equally depressing.

Theres a book by David Brin, called Crystal Spheres, its about exactly that topic.

Pretty good story, highly recommended.

reply to post by sparky31

who said they were advanced? they could be as primitive as we are

Or a lot more primitive. Indeed, they may not exist at all.

On Earth, there are some animal species with considerable intelligence, but none to compare with human beings. There may have been a few in the past (all closely related to us), but they failed the test of natural selection, and now they are gone. We are the sole inheritors.

This suggests there is a great gulf fixed between life and intelligent life. On Earth, it took three and a half billion years, or a quarter of the age of the universe, to bridge that gap. It may be that the event is a rare, almost-unheard of one.

Think of it: six billion almost-Earths teeming with life, and no spark of intelligence on any but a tiny handful of them. To many of us, that scenario would be a terrible disappointment; but would-be galactic empire-builders will see it as an opportunity — while the religious will undoubtedly propose it as evidence that Man is more central in the scheme of things than modern science presently allows. Just wait till the creationists get wind of this.

Astyanax
reply to post by sparky31

 

who said they were advanced? they could be as primitive as we are

Or a lot more primitive. Indeed, they may not exist at all.

On Earth, there are some animal species with considerable intelligence, but none to compare with human beings. There may have been a few in the past (all closely related to us), but they failed the test of natural selection, and now they are gone. We are the sole inheritors.

This suggests there is a great gulf fixed between life and intelligent life. On Earth, it took three and a half billion years, or a quarter of the age of the universe, to bridge that gap. It may be that the event is a rare, almost-unheard of one.

Think of it: six billion almost-Earths teeming with life, and no spark of intelligence on any but a tiny handful of them. To many of us, that scenario would be a terrible disappointment; but would-be galactic empire-builders will see it as an opportunity — while the religious will undoubtedly propose it as evidence that Man is more central in the scheme of things than modern science presently allows. Just wait till the creationists get wind of this.

i said they may be primitive but it could also work the other way that we,r so primitive that how we try to communicate it will never work till we become more advanced.what if our intelligence doesn,t compare to aliens?god forbid we are the inferior species.oh thats right no matter what that will never be the case.

Perhaps the aliens that once colonized Earth in the remote past, eventually chose Earth as their candidate only because Earth’s location was hidden , remote and far from other planets with life in the milky way. Thus we can conclude that life on Earth was some sort of ‘hidden’ away by purpose by our alien forefathers. Perhaps this was done, after having learned from earlier experiences.

After all. If there exist a multitude of different civilizations on different planets in a more central part of the Milky way (perhaps where our alien forefathers came from), one must assume that warfare and the quest for a better life, riches and resources are very common in these civilizations also. Perhaps our alien forefathers decided to make a copy of their own planet and life forms (backup) , and thus picked a planet they knew not could be spotted so easily by other civilizations.

sparky31
like people with opened minds always believed we now have so called experts confirming it,hopefully in my life time we will have the proof.


news.sky.com...

DId you not see that there was already a thread on this here?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Astyanax
reply to post by sparky31

 

who said they were advanced? they could be as primitive as we are

Or a lot more primitive. Indeed, they may not exist at all.

On Earth, there are some animal species with considerable intelligence, but none to compare with human beings. There may have been a few in the past (all closely related to us), but they failed the test of natural selection, and now they are gone. We are the sole inheritors.

This suggests there is a great gulf fixed between life and intelligent life. On Earth, it took three and a half billion years, or a quarter of the age of the universe, to bridge that gap. It may be that the event is a rare, almost-unheard of one.

Think of it: six billion almost-Earths teeming with life, and no spark of intelligence on any but a tiny handful of them. To many of us, that scenario would be a terrible disappointment; but would-be galactic empire-builders will see it as an opportunity — while the religious will undoubtedly propose it as evidence that Man is more central in the scheme of things than modern science presently allows. Just wait till the creationists get wind of this.

My reply in the other thread (the original one on this topic which I started early this morning):


You realize our solar system is young compared to most of the Milky Way galaxy right?

Most stars are about 2-4 billion years older than our Sun and Earth. As such they would have had far longer
to develop intelligence than we did.

There is no good reason to believe that evolution would take longer on other planets than it took on Earth.

I am with Copernicus on this stuff. The more we think we are special the less special we learn we are other than we might be the youngest intelligent species contemplating all of this in our section of the Galaxy.

And even then, only one species ever evolved sufficient intelligence to produce a technological civilisation. To me that suggests that the evolution of high intelligence is a very rare occurrence. Odds of one in a hundred may be far too short. One in a million may be more realistic.

At this point they're all guesses re: intelligence - until we detect one.

But I would guess on the side of us being average because every other thing we thought was special about the Sun, our planet, the elements in our solar system and the likelihood of other planets like the Earth has shown that if anything, we've been too conservative in our estimates, not too optimistic.

I remember my elementary school science teacher scoffing at the the idea that there could be another Earth in our Milky Way. He said, "there's a good chance we're the only one, but there might be one in the Andromeda Galaxy 3 million light years away."

He said that with a straight face and it seemed plausible at the time. How quickly things change. From 3 million light years away to 12 light years away.

Might intelligence also be the natural path of evolution throughout the universe? I see no good reason why not.



The "Rare Earth" hypothesis took a huge blow today.

reply to post by JadeStar


I didn't bother to reply on your thread, because the argument isn't very profound or interesting. But I'll reply you on this because you're being so proprietorial about the thread you started. Those planets don't belong to you, you know...

As far as the number of intelligent civilisations in the Galaxy is concerned, your guess is as good as mine. And the discovery that Earthlike planets may be very common makes absolutely no difference to the calculable odds. Why? Because there are too many variables, too many imponderables. For all we know Earthlike environments are the least hospitable in the Galaxy for intelligent life.

The present discovery simply gives more credence to the idea that other intelligent lifeforms that like environments similar to ours may exist. But we can't even tell that for certain.

This sort of news excites UFO hobbyists, alien-encounter enthusiasts and science-fiction readers (you may number me among the last group), but in the end it adds little to our calculations.

benrl
So the question becomes if life sustaining planets are so prevalent, where are the advanced civilizations.

We don't have the technology to DETECT advanced civilizations. We don't have the technology to "see" whether a planet discovered light years away has life. We can get a hint, as far as I know through analysis of the spectrum whether a planet may have water/methane etc. (correct me if I am wrong) but we cannot see or confirm life far from the distance.

Therefore we also cannot say whether "complex" life is hard/rare..we don't have the data to make any assumption about the amount of life in the universe and how "rare" it is.

Even if they were advanced enough, why should they ring our bell and pay us a visit?

I remember watching a science oriented show (I can't remember exactly what show it was, although it was on a channel like the science channel, discovery, or another similar network.) and they claimed that through calculation, they have come to the conclusion that there are probably 50,000 earth-like planets that are capable of sustaining life in each galaxy.

Personally It's hard to say how accurate that claim is, but I won't exactly knock it. The Universe is a very, very large place. And i'm sure somewhere, anywhere some sort of life forms are on another planet somewhere out in the cosmos. Their probably much closer than we think. And I'm not talking about a stereotypical alien either, simply a single cell organisms could suffice. But then again those type of aliens could possibly be out there.

Hell, maybe our universe is just a sub universe within a super universe, and maybe that super universe is just a sub universe to yet another larger "universe." Think of it as a Russian Matryoshka doll type scenario. And maybe there are alternate realities in endless dimensions. When you think of stuff like that, you just think just how little we know about this universe we live in, and just how small of an impact we really have in the whole grand scheme. I guess all we have to do is wonder, and try to scratch the surface. And if you ask me, thinking about this is quite fascinating. I actually do it often.