Submitted by PapaStump on Mon, 05/02/2011 - 12:00pm
... is super real.
Comments
I'm copying this comment from something that I left on another highdea about aliens, except I'm editing out some of the douchebagness and making it more relevant to here, and I'm going to post a link to a couple of articles about this stuff:
http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/07-04-25/
http://jcolavito.tripod.com/lostcivilizations/id26.html
I know that I'm going to get a lot of flack for this, but I find the notion that extraterrestrial life has visited the earth to be absolutely ridiculous. There probably is intelligent life out there, so I'm not saying that it doesn't exist. However, the nearest star is 4 light years from us, and the nearest star that has planets that might be able to support life is about 12 light years away. Let's assume that the planet does have life, which is a giant assumption as it is. Now, let's assume that the life on the planet evolved into some intelligent form of life. Even still, we must assume that the lifeforms are capable of designing a vehicle that can travel light years across space in a timely manner. Another assumption that we have to make is that the resources to actually construct and fuel such a vehicle are available, else the vehicle can't possibly ever be constructed. We also have to assume that the aliens have a method of keeping the crew on their vehicle alive in the middle of space for a minimum of years without starving to death or running out of stuff to breathe. Another assumption is that such an alien can survive coming out of microgravity despite being it it for years. The last assumption that we have to make is that the aliens are capable of navigating through space without being able to contact their home planet. After all, the time that it takes to send messages to and from a vehicle in space is dependent on the speed of light (constant) and the distance from the home planet (increasing over time). Even if we assume that all of these wildly enormous assumptions are all true, we still haven't considered the amount of kinetic energy that it would take to achieve the fastest speeds possible to travel to the earth. The kinetic energy per unit mass to get close to the speed of light is E/m=((1-v^2/c^2)^(-1/2)-1)c^2. Going from 10 percent to 99.9 percent of the speed of light by increments of 10 percent, the actual values for energy per unit mass are 4.52x10^14 J/kg, 1.85x10^15 J/kg, 4.34x10^15 j/kg, 8.19x10^15 J/kg, 1.39x10^26 J/kg, 2.45x10^16 J/kg, 3.60X10^16 J/kg, 5.99x10^16, 1.16x10^17 J/kg, 1.92x10^18 J/kg, and that's for objects of just one kilogram. Any vehicle capable of space travel will be at least 10000 kg, perhaps even over 100000 kg, so you can do the math as to how much energy that would be. Also, the amount of energy to both speed up the vehicle and to slow it down to come to earth would be double the energy values that I posted.
Now I know that someone is going to come along saying something along the lines of, "what if the aliens have some superior technology/energy source that we haven't discovered." To me, that just sounds like a baseless what if scenario that can't be backed up without making the assumption that aliens actually have traveled here, which is make the case the possibility of alien travel a circular argument. Without the assumption that makes the argument necessarily circular, the "what if" scenario that I described is a special pleading fallacy. I also predict that some UFO fanatic is going to come in with some story about something about some weird shit that they saw, and then make the argument from ignorance fallacy to justify that it was an alien spacecraft. Someone's going to say some shit about a government coverup, but fail to provide any reliable evidence. Someone is probably going to make a comment using a combo of an argument from ignorance and an argument from personal incredulity saying that they have no idea how some ancient thing was built or how some ancient civilization achieved what the achieved. Just because we may not have found something out about ancient cultures or just because you can't imagine how they would have done something back then does not, let me repeat, does NOT give the idea that aliens did it. Now, if aliens never came here, which seems most likely, then ancient astronaut "theory" and shows line Ancient Aliens are necessarily incorrect.
Someone's also going to give a misdirected accusation at me for being close minded. As a skeptic, I have to be open-minded by default. Being open-minded doesn't just granting that everything that everyone says might be possible. Being open minded is about seeing an idea and be willing to analyze whether or not it is likely to be true or false based on its merits. Often times people will analyze ideas about aliens coming to earth and they find that they is most likely false, perhaps even beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore it is possible for an open-minded person to hold the position that aliens haven't come anywhere near close to our solar system.
BTW, I'm way more likely to respond to private messages than to forum posts, but I'll do my best to respond to things posted here in response to what I said.
Let the shitstorm commence!
To all of this I say, look how far we have come in a paltry 200 years and tell me its not possible. Take a technologically advanced race with a spaceward ambition and have them have evolved only 5,000 years ahead of us and they would be incomprehensibly more advanced than us. There are over 2,000 stars within a hundred light years of us. I would bet you anything something has been or will be on its way.
Being advanced is one thing, but traveling at extremely high velocities takes both an enormous amount of energy, and an enormously long time spent in space. Since nothing can reach the speed of light, aliens would have to travel decades, centuries, millennia, millions, if not billions of light years in space, in microgravity. How would an alien ship be able to provide food to keep people their crew alive for that long? I highly doubt that aliens have come near the earth.
A species 5,000 years more advanced than us would most likely have found some tricks around our "laws" of physics as we see them. Even if they didn't figure out a way around the light barrier, or develop artificial gravity generators, they would still be able to make it here.
The nearest Earth like planet we've found so far is 20 light years away. Even traveling at a rate of 250,000 MPH the trip would only take about 56,000 years. The only reason you can't see someone doing that is because of one mindedness. If it doesn't happen in your lifetime what is the point, right? Well once again a race far more advanced than we would have a means of extending or suspending life indefinitely, I mean we ourselves are less than a century from figuring that out. Even if that isn't the case a hundred breeding pairs could develop a sustainable colony. Or they could all be in deep freeze with the ship on autopilot.
Microgravity is a weak argument. We already know that basic artificial gravity can be achieved with simple centrifuges. Genetics would play a big part too. Genes could easily be rewritten to stop or repair the damage created in a microgravity environment anyhow.
"A species 5,000 years more advanced than us would most likely have found some tricks around our "laws" of physics as we see them."
Regardless of technological advances, there is no way around the laws of physics. While engineers can use the laws of physics to their advantages, anything that an engineer designs that must require that the laws of physics are broken will not work.
"Even if they didn't figure out a way around the light barrier, or develop artificial gravity generators, they would still be able to make it here."
Based on what evidence? You are just making an assertion.
"The nearest Earth like planet we've found so far is 20 light years away. Even traveling at a rate of 250,000 MPH the trip would only take about 56,000 years."
That would take an incredibly large ship, because it would need to house thousands of crewmen, as well as food and supplies of thousands of crewmen. This is so that inbreeding depression does no occur. This would necessarily increase the amount of energy that it takes to get the ship going fast. Assuming that there is some way to create food and supplies on board the ship, it would require loads and loads of energy to maintain such a long time like 56,000 years, and there wouldn't be any methods for renewable energy, except for solar, which wouldn't really yield much usable energy given that stars at night won't cause even the best solar cells to work, since the electric and magnetic fields of the stars are practically nonexistent at distances on the order of light years. Basically, in the scenario that you described, the ship would run out of energy fast.
"The only reason you can't see someone doing that is because of one mindedness. If it doesn't happen in your lifetime what is the point, right?"
Straw-man argument. Plus, I already explained why traveling light years is most likely impossible in the original comment that you replied to, so you have no reason to make up bullshit about my positions in order to respond to them.
"Well once again a race far more advanced than we would have a means of extending or suspending life indefinitely,"
Based on what evidence? You are just making an assertion.
"I mean we ourselves are less than a century from figuring that out."
Based on what evidence? You are just making an assertion. Now, it is true that we are discovering methods of reducing aging, but it has not been demonstrated that extending life indefinitely is possible, and even if it was, the methods that would apply to us would probably not apply to extraterrestrials, since they would have evolved differently than us in different conditions. There's no guarantee that they'd be similar to us at all. Your assertion that aliens would have means of extending life is unfounded.
"Even if that isn't the case a hundred breeding pairs could develop a sustainable colony."
This seems the most plausible, except there would need to be a way to feed the colony, and I already explained my objections to that in this comment, so I don't need to repeat myself.
"Or they could all be in deep freeze with the ship on autopilot."
There's no evidence that suggests that one could survive the unfreezing process, and plenty of evidence to show that one would die when being unfrozen, granted that they didn't die in the freezing process. Let's assume that it is possible. It would still be a bad idea because if there were some mechanic issue that required the attention of the crew, they'd have to be unfrozen and it could possibly be too late to save the ship by that point. We don't know if surviving the unfreezing process in cryonics is possible. Regardless, you are making a bunch of "what if" arguments, so let me repeat what I write earlier in a previous comment, since you seemed to have missed it. Here it is: Now I know that someone is going to come along saying something along the lines of, "what if the aliens have some superior technology/energy source that we haven't discovered." To me, that just sounds like a baseless what if scenario that can't be backed up without making the assumption that aliens actually have traveled here, which is make the case the possibility of alien travel a circular argument. Without the assumption that makes the argument necessarily circular, the "what if" scenario that I described is a special pleading fallacy.
"Microgravity is a weak argument."
Fine. I won't use it then. It's not like I really need it anyway.
I agree 100%, I highly doubt aliens have visited our planet Earth, what would they even need from our planet? Intelligent life would clearly know to stay away from humans. What good have humans done for the environment? None, we are if anything destroying the natural planet. Aliens would first go to planets rich of chemicals to refuel, in my personal opinion. Now that i have made my point that i agree, you dont need to be a dick about it man (you may say, dude, i am not being a dick, look at my evidence). Well, the tone i get from reading your work is an attacking tone. Just make your points loud and clear and they will be heard, don't shove them down people's throats saying they are wrong, WITH AN OPINION... Live and let live, comeon we are all friends here!
Alright you want a shitstorm, so be it, haha.
To start off, I don't believe you are close-minded at all. Everyone has different views of what the universe and reality really are. I think you just aren't seeing the biggest picture in the scope of space AND time.
The universe, as most of the physicists around the world say, is around 13,750,000,000 years old. You have to keep in mind the scope of that number, because people tend to toss it around lightly just because we know about a number so large. Keep in mind that humanity, the human race, Homo sapiens, whatever, have been around for 0.0000145% of that time.
The moment at which stars coalesced into galaxies is probably the earliest point at which complex life could arise due to the violent conditions and temperatures that existed in the very early universe. We have found ten such galaxies that we have determined (by finding their distance from us) to be around since 500,000,000 years after the 'beginning' of the universe. This seems like a inordinate timescale, but even this is less than 5% of the duration of the universe.
If intelligent species arose in one of those galaxies 13,250,000,000 years ago then they have 13,250,800,000 years of technological evolution on us. It does seem obviously likely that we won't be able to travel to solar systems in thirteen billion years (I am being completely, 100% sarcastic in every single sense of the word).
Remember that we have more options that just light speed travel. Just because we can't conceptualize the image or construction of an Einstein-Rosen bridge doesn't mean that this nearly limitless universe doesn't have the potential. It doesn't break any laws of physics as we know them. Yet 'wormholes' (although I don't like calling them this because it sounds informal) aren't the only option.
An Alcubierre drive is something that you obviously know about (being a physicist); stretching space behind and compressing space in front a vehicle to get to the places you need to, all the while avoiding motion at all and therefore the problem of gaining infinite mass as you reach the speed of light. This doesn't break any physical laws either and just because we don't know how to expand or contract pure space without the help of gravity doesn't mean it can't be done.
Let's even goes as far as saying that an intelligent race of beings emerged at around the time of the extinction of the dinosaurs just 65,000,000 years ago. A half a million years go by and they have roughly the same limitations as us [I'm not saying that they would evolve in the same way, at the same pace, or even have the same level of curiosity or intelligence that humanity has (because they didn't have intervention by knowledgeable extraterrestrial sources like we did, of course) so I'm allotting over double the timescale it took us for the sake of this example). This still gives them 64,500,000 years to perfect cosmic travel, and it is impossible for me to believe that we will still be chained to this island that we call Earth even in the timescale of a few thousand years, let alone the potentially millions of years that intelligence has been around across the entire universe.
Realistically, if we have only been around in this vast cosmos for less than a 14,000,000th of the time that it has existed, this basically means that civilizations anywhere (even in our galaxy alone this is not farfetched) could have perfected anything possible if you look at it unbiasedly (which in all honesty and no offense, I don't think you will).
I don't blame you at all for thinking less than widely, because that's human nature at it's finest. Humanity has this concept that if we can't imagine it or define it with our perceptions or our severely limited mathematics and language (even though the concepts of the most complex mathematics we can think of are entirely beyond me in every way), then it must not be real. This is only because we are barely a blip compared to all of the information that exists in the mutliverse, and even the collective amalgamation of seven billion human minds can't comprehend this; we are still driven by primeval concerns and instincts.
Human intelligence hasn't even been born into the world yet (if we consider the world to be the universe). We are merely an insignificance that we can't accept, but this will change within a few thousand years only.
I mean, try to imagine what millions of years will do to the way society and technology will work. It's comical because no one has the slightest idea, but we act like we have it all figured out, which is our greatest downfall and our biggest ignorance.
Think of everything in the definition of SCOPE along the grandest scale and imagination can't create the things that our possible (even physicists say that ANY and ALL probabilistic outcomes exist 'somewhere').
NOTE: It is comical that you reject any notions of 'what-if'. For one, that's is the only way you can approach any of physics; nothing that we know is set it stone, we've disproven everything we know about the universe and the particles that make it up numerous times within a few thousand years. This rejection also tells me that you believe the knowledge given to you by limited species (us) to be complete facts in and of themselves. That makes absolutely no sense...
Most definately, I watched that show when it was on History er whatever.
hhaha i never intended this highdea to get popular anyway i just think its a cool theory and its strange how we dont truly know our own human history back 1000 years or even less let alone 3000 years who knows what the truth is. there is evidence of nuclear explosions in Pakistan that date back thousands of years, and so so many more strange unexplained things, places, and huge megaton stone structures (such as precise stone cutting at Pumu Punku or mountains with the tops simply missing and flattened like runways) people need to open their minds and stop getting spoon fed information from other people when they should go to the actual places themselves and see (if only we could all teleport for a small fee DAMN SCEINCE get on this lol)
"we dont truly know our own human history back 1000 years or even less let alone 3000 years who knows what the truth is."
We have scientific evidence that gives us a history of around 4 million years, back when Australopithecus was around. We know human history way past 3000 years.
"there is evidence of nuclear explosions in Pakistan that date back thousands of years, and so so many more strange unexplained things, places, and huge megaton stone structures (such as precise stone cutting at Pumu Punku or mountains with the tops simply missing and flattened like runways)"
Let's see it. Post a link to that shit then.
dude im not talking about scientific evidence im talking about our own history written by humans i mean who ever won the wars got to write the history and dude scientists once thought the earth was flat...science is all theroy and always changing until the next big discovery you say your open minded but it seems like you believe everything "science" or what other humans suggest is true idk man and here are your links on
Pumu Punku http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ndvGrqscuY&feature=related
and Pakistan vitrified rocks.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCEY6CcW8O4
idk bout the mountain ones ill look later.
Youtube doesn't load on my computer, so could you proved me with some non-youtube sources?, if you don't mind.
"dude im not talking about scientific evidence im talking about our own history written by humans"
And you'd still be wrong. Written history goes back much farther than 300 years.
"i mean who ever won the wars got to write the history and dude scientists once thought the earth was flat..."
I don't feel like touching the "science was wrong before" fallacy, so I'll refer you to someone who has:
http://skeptico.blogs.com/skeptico/2005/11/science_wrong.html
"you say your open minded but it seems like you believe everything "science" or what other humans suggest is true idk man"
Science has data to back up it's claims. Do you? I'm open-minded because I look at things based on their merit. Simple as that.
i'm sorry dude but i'm reading your shit and its killing my high..
Yeah and the force required to flatten those mountain tops would have been equivalent to several hydrogen bombs.
Papa i want to believe some of the stuff your posting but your just being an asshole about this and closed minded. your just like, nope it aliens, aliens did this aliens did that. The things that stonephysicist is staying are more believable. Dont get me wrong, i believe in aliens a ton, but you need to be able to accept others ideas as POSSIBILITIES.
ps. im not trying to argue with you, im just saying what i thought man
its cool brah i just felt like stonedphysicist is a know it all asswad like this kid i know lol and i didnt think i stressed aliens just the fact that early mankind had some crazy tech we dont know about and that aliens could very well have helped us
my dick could very well be made out of hershey's chocolate, based on my speculations (my girlfriend likes to taste hershey's, she also likes to taste my dick, therefore they must be one and the same). and since nobody can possibly provide evidence that my dick is NOT made out of hershey's chocolate, the possibility remains valid. stonedphysicist could spend all day showing me evidence that proves that it is more and more UNLIKELY that a human being could ever possibly grow a penis that is made of hershey's chocolate. and i could spend all day telling him that he is close-minded for being unwilling to accept the possiblity that my dick is made of hershey's chocolate. frankly dude, the possibility of aliens having visited ancient humankind is about as likely as the possibility that my dick is made out of hershey's chocolate.
Hahahaha damn, Stonephysicist just came in here an merk'd just about everyone with an opinion!!
"which by Occam's Razor" ..................... Really? I mean yeah, it may be the easiest explanation and most likely correct, but who states Occam's Razor? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Made my day.
I already have a solution for deep space travel that should be completely viable in a century's time. With the advent of artificial neural networks and the approach of quantum and magnetic computing the human race will undoubtedly advance to downloading the human mind. Download large sums of the human race and throw them into storage on a void crossing factory of a ship. Ship makes it to a suitable planet, drops the self assembling factory and memory stores. The factory then goes to work constructing not only goods needed by humans, but the humans themselves, building bodies from the ground up and downloading the stored minds into new bodies. The people simply wake up on a new world with a knowledge of everything they need to know to make a go of life. If you dream big enough you can make anything happen.
the future will surley rage hard bro i wish i was alive to see it dammit
Interesting what if scenario. Sounds like some Ray Kurzeil stuff. I have a few questions:
I'm not that familiar with artificial neural networks. How do they compare to the computing power of the human brain? From what I've read, they are still a mathematical model. When do you think they will become a reality, and why that time? Assuming that what you described could actually work, can you guarantee that extraterrestrials would have figured it out and whether or not they have the resources to make it happen?
I like your idea, but I don't think we can guarantee that the aliens would have figured it out, even if they are incredibly advanced compared to us.
Guarantee? Can you guarantee that our understanding of the physical world is correct and that our "laws" are immutable? No you cannot. Just like I can't guarantee that aliens would have thought to do anything of the kind. It is really easy to win a debate of nothing but assumptions and opinions when you ask for a guarantee.....
The point is how do you know the fairy isn't a crazy glue sniffer? Build a model airplane says the little fairy! Well we're not buying it. If he sneaks into your house once, that's all it takes. Next thing you know there is money missing from the dresser and your daughter is knocked up. I've seen it a hundred times.
"Can you guarantee that our understanding of the physical world is correct and that our "laws" are immutable? No you cannot"
I've never made the claim that our understanding of the physical world (as opposed to what else) is correct. I will make the claim that it works. Now, as for the laws of physics being immutable, I think that it is a reasonable claim. If the laws of physics could be changed, then there would be no laws of physics. For example, let's look at electromagnetism. According to Gauss's law for magnetism, the net magnetic flux over any closed surface is zero. Let's say that today Gauss's law for magnetism holds, but tomorrow, a magnetic monopole is discovered and ways to create a magnetic monopole that work are also discovered. Then overnight, Gauss's law goes back to what it was today and the methods used to make magnetic monopoles do not work. If that were the case, a mathematical statement about the divergence of magnetic fields could not be made since consistent measurements of the same setting can't be made. Now, in the scenario that I made, it could be the case that fluctuations in what the laws of physics are the result of a grander set of laws. If those laws can be changed, then the argument that I just made can apply to them as well to say that the grander set of laws doesn't exist, and this can be continued. Thus, if the laws of physics can change, there would be no laws of physics. Since we've never observed the laws of physics change, only our interpretations of them, we can conclude that it is extremely likely that the laws of physical are immutable.
"It is really easy to win a debate of nothing but assumptions and opinions when you ask for a guarantee..... "
I see what you are trying to say. I'll retract my statement asking for a guarantee. My questions that don't ask you to guarantee anything are still on the table.
"The point is how do you know the fairy isn't a crazy glue sniffer? Build a model airplane says the little fairy! Well we're not buying it. If he sneaks into your house once, that's all it takes. Next thing you know there is money missing from the dresser and your daughter is knocked up. I've seen it a hundred times."
I have no idea what the hell you are trying to say here.
I watched 2 episodes. It's hard not to consider it
"I don't know, therefore, aliens"
- That white guy with the jerry curl from Ancient Aliens
actually i think we're an alien science project that got out of hand... ha!
think about the way we explore space. we've put man on the moon, sure, but we're only able to explore the planets closest to us. we continue to chart out the outer reaches of our galaxies with mechanical probes, satellites, and cameras. due to the vastness of space, it is simply more efficient and practical to explore it with mechanical creations. the stress of space travel is simply too severe for any lifeform to be able to handle at massive distances. if there is life somewhere else, we know now that it is much too far away for any in-person visit to be practical. this isn't star trek, where almost every planet they visit is populated by a different exciting species, traveling through space would be like passing millions of dead rocks with no real destination in mind. if they're advanced enough to travel through space then they've mastered powerful technologies, and would have to be knowledgable about conserving their resources. therefore, chances are more likely that if we were contacted at all, we'd be contacted by some kind of mechanical probe, or maybe even an alien robot ;] but if you believe that some aliens were willing to come all the way to our planet far away from their homeworld just to show some primitive monkeys how to make shit glow, then you watch too much scifi.
maybe they knew how to make reflective surfaces, such as mirrors, or rocks that were smoothed out enough to reflect light. it wouldn't be hard to reflect natural sunlight into the pyramids.
@stonedphysicist, I completely understand where you are coming from, but what I dont get is how you believe you are open-minded.
You are bias on the side of disporving anything anyone says, basing everything you say on things that we already know. You never refer to the hypotheses and possibilities that those hypotheses are trying to make sense of.
Do you think that Benjamin Franklin invented the perfect lightbulb his first try? Of course not, but he had ambition, and belief that he could create a technology that no one believed to be perfected for centuries.
It's all about possibility, innovation, ambition, and dedication.
I'm going to bet anything that back in the 1800's, people didn't think that we would know what we know now, or harness the technology we now possess for thousands of years after their time.
You don't seem to believe anything or anyone but yourself, or these things that are fed to you..
"I completely understand where you are coming from, but what I dont get is how you believe you are open-minded."
Let me repeat what I wrote in my original comment, which outlines why I can call myself open-minded. Someone's also going to give a misdirected accusation at me for being close minded. As a skeptic, I have to be open-minded by default. Being open-minded doesn't just granting that everything that everyone says might be possible. Being open minded is about seeing an idea and be willing to analyze whether or not it is likely to be true or false based on its merits. Often times people will analyze ideas about aliens coming to earth and they find that they is most likely false, perhaps even beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore it is possible for an open-minded person to hold the position that aliens haven't come anywhere near close to our solar system.
"You are bias on the side of disporving anything anyone says, basing everything you say on things that we already know."
This is a half strawman. I base my arguments on what we already know because arguments based on "what ifs" are always unfounded. I am not "biased on the side of disproving," as you claim. What I am doing is analyzing ideas and seeing if they seem plausible or not.
"You never refer to the hypotheses and possibilities that those hypotheses are trying to make sense of."
The only hypothesis made in this thread were by pipedreams when he gave a hypothesis that we'd be capable of light year travel in the next century. His idea meets the criteria to be a hypothesis (It's falsifiable), but he doesn't have data for it yet, and it would take 100 years to get the data, so I can't use his hypothesis until 2111.
"Do you think that Benjamin Franklin invented the perfect lightbulb his first try? Of course not, but he had ambition, and belief that he could create a technology that no one believed to be perfected for centuries."
Thomas Edison invented the light bulb, Franklin, but that doesn't negate the point that you are trying to make. Edison didn't just blindly guess his way through making the lightbulb. He formulated hypotheses and acquired data. In other words, he applied science.
"You don't seem to believe anything or anyone but yourself, or these things that are fed to you.."
This is a complete strawman and my previous comments in this thread show why your statement is incorrect.
Wow, I can't believe I said Benjamin Franklin, what A fucking idiot..
But nah man, I respect your outlooks on the subject, I just don't see why you try to disprove EVERYTHING. :l
Oh well, I guess everyone has their opinions, huh?
And personally, I like to read what you put down on subjects like this.
You are clearly well educated, and use science in the most keen of ways.
I love science, and it's just kind of fascinating to read what you say, even though I don't agree with alot of it, lol.
stonedphysicist is closing his mind to the possibility of aliens having helped the egyptians with electricity. you're closing your mind to ALL OTHER POSSIBILITIES except that one. you can't be subjective about anything without doubting somebody's opinion. if you're truly arguing on the side of being open-minded, then it would make far more sense to take all of these speculations into account, and wait until there are more conclusive findings about the matter. if you think that mild speculation and the absence of contrary proof provide grounds for proof, then we might as well bring the sasquatch, chupacabra, loch ness monster, and slenderman into this conversation...
"if you're truly arguing on the side of being open-minded, then it would make far more sense to take all of these speculations into account,"
Open-mindedness means being willing to examine whether or not ideas work and judging them on their merit. One can reject the possibility for ideas to be true and still be open-minded.
http://highdeas.com/hd/Project_Daedalus_The_50000_Ton_Interstellar_Suici... A space ship that could possibly lead to the discovery of such things.
aliens might not have built the pyramids, but they definitely brought Lady Gaga from whatever fucking planet they came from.
All of you are thinking of aliens as being biological beings.
Have you though of an extra dimensional entity? These foreigners are living in a whole other dimension, and therefore, actual time travel could be totally different in that dimension. One of their seconds could be a 1000 of our years. Who knows?
"All of you are thinking of aliens as being biological beings."
Sure.
"Have you though of an extra dimensional entity?
Let's assume that there are extra dimensions of space beyond the three that we perceive and we'll call such a space n-dimensional space. If that is true, then we are n-dimensional beings and any extraterrestrial life form would be that way.
Submitted By
Popular
Upcoming
