How our space Brothers/Sisters etc. get here.

[Ophiolite]

The most common thing i hear about ET visitation from skeptics is its to far and it would take forever even at the speed of light.

Point 1: I suspect by skeptics you mean people who do not accept the likelihood of UFOs being alien spacecraft. This is the weakest argument against that conclusion by far.
Point 2: Skeptics who use this argument are displaying a singular lack of logic, knowledge and intellect. Why do I say this?
a) They assume that the lifespans of aliens would be of a comparable order of magnitude to ours.
b) They assume that alien races would share our remarkable ability to think long term means a few years, or at most a century.
c) They assume that alien races would vest the same importance in the individual's life and achievements and goals as we, rather than in the goals etc of the species.
If any or all of these assumptions are invalid (and they probably are) then the time taken to cross interstellar distances becomes incidental.

The skeptics who use this argument have forgotten, or have never understood what the word alien means.

IMO something intelligent enough to create a universe with sheer mental power or will would be intelligent enough to know we would want to travel the universe and make it a possibility(and it not take generations to do so).

What makes you think a creator would have more than a passing interest in the ambitions of a bunch of primates with ego problems?

Therefore something within me tells me that the speed of light limitation is bunk, the IS a way around it or some other faster means of transit.

Ah, if only it were bunk. A noted physicist once remarked that many a fine theory had been blown away by the first hard fact. The same thing happens to wishes even more frequently.

 

[Balerion]

Point 1: I suspect by skeptics you mean people who do not accept the likelihood of UFOs being alien spacecraft. This is the weakest argument against that conclusion by far.

You know, I've never really considered that before. I've never taken into account that maybe an alien race visiting us might share a lifespan of hundreds of years. I suppose it's possible. Maybe not likely, but possible.

But even so, you have to imagine that if the origin of supposed Energizer Alien is 1 million light years away, we're still talking insurmountable distances.

The skeptics who use this argument have forgotten, or have never understood what the word alien means.

I really don't even know how to tackle this whole thing. If you want to say that these aliens are visiting from Planet Zenon which lies 200 million light years away because these aliens have lifespans around the 6 billion year range, then why dont' we just say that aliens are also living among us, riding unicorns, with leprechauns on their shoulders while they blow the horn they were given when they went on vacation to Atlantis? I mean, it's the same thing. There's probability, and then there's fantasy. Sure, it's a possibility that there is some race of alien that lives to be 500 years old or so, but c'mon, man...you're really reaching on that one.

Ah, if only it were bunk. A noted physicist once remarked that many a fine theory had been blown away by the first hard fact. The same thing happens to wishes even more frequently.

Kind of speaks against your long-lasting alien theory, doesn't it? The hard fact is that light speed is the speed limit of the universe, and there just ain't a way around it.

JD

 

[Ophiolite]

JDawg,
it is apparent that even after being told that the word alien means different in possibly unimaginable ways, that you still don't grasp it.
What a geocentric world view you have to assume the lifespans present on Earth are somehow representative of all life spans, everywhere in the Universe.
Moreover, life on Earth displays much larger lifespans than the three score years and ten of humans.
a) Turtles and crocodiles can live well past one hundred.
b) The oldest living thing is a few thousand years old.
c) Bacteria, which reproduce asexually just like the cells in your body, are arguably immortal.
d) Within the next few hundred years medical science may find ways of extending human life indefinitely.
To say that I am reaching to suggest a lifespan of five hundred years is showing as much imagination as a barbequed armadillo. I had really thought, based upon reading of many of your posts, that you had more imagination than that.

Beyond that you have completely ignored the other points: that alien life may take a long term view, spanning many generations; that alien life may not perceive of the individual as being of significance, only the species, so that setting off on a journey thatg will see the demise of many generations would be quite natural.

 

[Novacane]

JDawg,
it is apparent that even after being told that the word alien means different in possibly unimaginable ways, that you still don't grasp it.
What a geocentric world view you have to assume the lifespans present on Earth are somehow representative of all life spans, everywhere in the Universe.
Moreover, life on Earth displays much larger lifespans than the three score years and ten of humans.
a) Turtles and crocodiles can live well past one hundred.
b) The oldest living thing is a few thousand years old.
c) Bacteria, which reproduce asexually just like the cells in your body, are arguably immortal.
d) Within the next few hundred years medical science may find ways of extending human life indefinitely.
To say that I am reaching to suggest a lifespan of five hundred years is showing as much imagination as a barbequed armadillo. I had really thought, based upon reading of many of your posts, that you had more imagination than that.

Beyond that you have completely ignored the other points: that alien life may take a long term view, spanning many generations; that alien life may not perceive of the individual as being of significance, only the species, so that setting off on a journey thatg will see the demise of many generations would be quite natural.

Actually, barbecued armadillo is not too bad. I recommend soaking the armadillo in a bucket of cheap red wine for approx. two hours the next time you barbecue, especially if you want to impress the neighbor's wife with your cooking skills.

 

[Ophiolite]

Absolutely. It is the only sensible way to prepare armadillo. However, I think you will concede, which is the point I was making, that throughout this process the armadillo itself displays very little evidence of a currently active imagination.
I could have said barbecued aardvark, but these are more difficult to obtain, plus I am working my way through the alphabet of dead, unimaginative creatures that may be cooked to advantage. (I'm sorry you missed the avocado and anaconda delight.)

 

[Balerion]

it is apparent that even after being told that the word alien means different in possibly unimaginable ways, that you still don't grasp it.

Says who? Who says that intelligence can come in just about any form you can think of? Perhaps intelligence is the result of the most successful design. If you look at Earth, there have been two species to reach intelligence: One was the Homosapien, the other was the Nieanderthal. To me, the most logical theory is that the bipedal form with opposable thumbs is the absolute best design for intelligence. So what makes you think that just because this supposed race might be from another planet that they'd be THAT much different? Look at all the designs on Earth which haven't reached intelligence...

I personally think that there is a limit to what we should expect from an alien race.

a) Turtles and crocodiles can live well past one hundred.
b) The oldest living thing is a few thousand years old.
c) Bacteria, which reproduce asexually just like the cells in your body, are arguably immortal.
d) Within the next few hundred years medical science may find ways of extending human life indefinitely.
To say that I am reaching to suggest a lifespan of five hundred years is showing as much imagination as a barbequed armadillo. I had really thought, based upon reading of many of your posts, that you had more imagination than that.

.

OK, so see my first reply. I still don't see why we should just assume that aliens are these long-living things. You can't just mold the argument to fit your own side, man. You're just taking the fantasy side of it and shaping it in your view to try to make me wrong, but it's not gonna work. It just isn't.

Everything you're saying is complete and total speculation. Nothing you've said has any basis in reality.

Beyond that you have completely ignored the other points: that alien life may take a long term view, spanning many generations; that alien life may not perceive of the individual as being of significance, only the species, so that setting off on a journey thatg will see the demise of many generations would be quite natural.

Yes, and they might also have a death ray aimed at our planet, and they might be able too poop ice cream from their nipples. Don't you see that you are just making shit up now? We can't have this discussion, because you are using complete and total fantasy as your argument...fantasy...there is no fact to back you up here...you just thought it up all on your own...so we can't discuss this, man. Because no matter what I say, you'll just say "Well, what if this is the case? What, are you stupid that you can't see that these aliens might be a thousand feet tall? I mean, duh!"

Sorry.

JD

 

[Ophiolite]

I must offer you my sincere apologies JDawg. I had no idea you were young, unimaginative, and, the most debilitating point, wholly uninformed.

I do wish I could claim credit for the ideas I have presented here, but I rather think none of them are original. Anyone working in the field of exobiology recognises the limitations when we are faced with a sample size of one for life.

You may be correct. The human design may be the most efficient and effective, but if you know anything about evolution you know that we came about by a concatentation of many chance events. The likelihood that life on another planet would chance through a similar series of events is likely very restricted. This is broadly recognised within any writings on the subject. Your ignorance of this suggests you have done little or no reading in this area.

That's fine. Ignorance is correctable, but please don't take the fatuous line that I am building clouds in the air and trying to land a 747 on them. My reasoning is perfectly in line with current informed thinking on the topic. Do some research. You may be surprised. Alternatively you can bask in the comfort of your ignorance. I rather hope you opt for the former, then we can have an intelligent discussion.

 

[Balerion]

I must offer you my sincere apologies JDawg. I had no idea you were young, unimaginative, and, the most debilitating point, wholly uninformed.

I never once made a personal insult towards you. I simply said you were arguing with fantasy, which you are, but I never said anything about your own personal character. I'm reporting your post to the moderators, if they haven't already seen it. I don't need this fucking shit when I'm discussing. You simply cannot handle the fact that someone is pointing out to you that you're being completely irrational about this, and you jump down their throats with personal insults? That's not only immature, but reeking of the ignorace you so blatantly accuse me of.

Funny that a man who spends enough time on this forum that it has actually prevented him from ever kissing a girl comes at me with a smug attitude. That's really funny.

I do wish I could claim credit for the ideas I have presented here, but I rather think none of them are original. Anyone working in the field of exobiology recognises the limitations when we are faced with a sample size of one for life.

But you rather think none of them are original? Bullshit. You just told me that aliens live for thousands of years and still dont' think in terms of their own lifespans. You really did just make it up, so stop saying it's a shared sentiment.

We haven't even seen an alien yet, Ophie. I'm sorry, but we haven't. And you're already giving them attributes to overcome the cosmos with. You're going to have to make your peace with that. And then shove it up your ass.

You may be correct. The human design may be the most efficient and effective, but if you know anything about evolution you know that we came about by a concatentation of many chance events. The likelihood that life on another planet would chance through a similar series of events is likely very restricted. This is broadly recognised within any writings on the subject. Your ignorance of this suggests you have done little or no reading in this area.

If you read my post, I never said that any intelligent alien life had to look exactly like us. What I am saying is that for intelligence to develop, there are prerequisites. Tool manipulation, which requires the freeing of at least two appendages, is a fairly concrete requirement. And that would lend to bipedal locomotion, would it not? Less (or at least more focused) bodily hair growth lends to the ability to sweat, as opposed to panting, which can open the door for the larynix to decend and speech to arrise.

As it stands, the earliest Human has built more advanced structures and used more advanced tools than any other species on the planet. They have also formed the most advanced speech. Do you find these complete coincidences in the theme of intelligence?

What I'm saying is that apparently what Homo Sapien (and to an extent, Nieanderthal) has the design which works, and the only design which has allowed for intelligence, despite the fact that we have been around for less time and spent less time dominating our environment than other species on the planet.

Take the Crocodile, for example. Their ancient lineage lies back with the Dinosaurs, and it said that they have changed very little since then. Now, a species that dominant, that successful in their environment, and they have not evolved into an intelligent speicies. Why is that? To me, that says that no matter how great the Crocodile is, they are not of a form that allows for intelligence. They never developed hands as we know them, nor thumbs which can oppose the fingers, and hence have never been able (or had the need) to manipulate the world around them.

And I agree with you that our form came thanks to events which cannot be predicted all throughout history. Chance encounters with events that caused mass extinctions and population bottlenecks, and the ancestors of Humanity survived every single one of them. It is an extraordinary example of luck that we are here today, and with all that said, the possibility of finding a race on another world that resembles us must be fairly low.

But all that says to me is that the chances of finding intelligent civilizations on other worlds is even lower than that. I really do believe that our intelligent counterparts in outter space, if they exist, will be remarkably similar to us at least in physical structure. If I am to be proven wrong someday, then so be it, but as of right now, there are no examples from space to either support or contradict that. What we do have, however, are prime examples on Earth of what it takes to be inteligent, and many more of extremely successful designs that still exist today that are not intelligent.

The evidence, in my opinion, speaks for itself.

JD

 

[Ophiolite]

JDawg, your entire posts have been filled with belligerent attacks on the fantasies I have dreamed up . You have implicitly called me a liar and decried my logic and knowledge in a field that I have been studying, albeit it in a casual way, for a couple of decades.

Then you have the gall to say you have not indulged in personal insult, and further show you are completely unable to handle a lighthearted poke at your pretensions. Please report away: you have me quaking in my shoes at the consequences.

For the future, since you are unable to deal with vigorous exchanges, I shall limit myself solely to facts and clearly focused speculation. Let me deal with some of your contentions:

Item 1:

You just told me that aliens live for thousands of years and still dont' think in terms of their own lifespans. You really did just make it up, so stop saying it's a shared sentiment.

First Point:
This is not at all what I said. I clearly stated that aliens may live for thousands of years: that is not the same thing, at all, as saying they do live for thousands of years.
It is inaccurate and limiting to believe that the human life span is somehow representative of the lifespan we can expect aliens to adhere to. I have little idea how long aliens may live for, but I certainly do not place artificial limits upon the possible lifespans that are based upon an anthropocentric viewpoint.
Lifespans are quite closely related to body mass: the examples of the shrew, dead at two, and the elephant, lving as long as humans, are typical. There are, however, quite clear exceptions. Birds live three as long as mammals of a similar mass. Humans live four times as long as may be expected for their average mass: that is almost an order of magnitude difference. Bats, about the same mass as a shrew, can live to over thirty.

It is thought that equally as important as mass is the risk of dying before achieving successful reproduction. Animals, that by their character, can survive readily (they are the target of few predators, for example, or like humans are endowed with intelligence) will tend to have long life spans. That is not a tautology. There is a trade off between fecundity and longevity. You can inform yourself about this through the work of Austad, Holmes and others. (For example, The Evolution of Senescence and Post-Reproductive Lifespan in Guppies (Poecilia reticulata), Reznik, et al, PLoS Biology, January 2006.)
So, on this planet we have animal species living to over two hundred years (ranging from the quahog clam to the bowhead whale). We have plants living for thousands of years - a bristlecone pine in California is 4,700 years old.
Moreover, we see an order of magnitude difference in age for a given mass is entirely natural.

Given all that, is is no stretch at all to postulate that alien life may have a longevity greater than humans, by an order of magnitude. That yields natural lifespans in the range of several hundred years.
And all this without considering that just as we are investigating ways of delaying or ameliorating the onset of aging, so too may alien species. An alien species with a seven hundred year lifespan, that through the application of medical and genetic science doubles or triples that lifespan, it would be alive for over 2,000 years. Are you seriously contending that there is no way humans will be unable to double or triple their lifespan in the next hundred, thousand, or ten thousand years?

And in all of this I have not even considered the immortality of many prokaryotic life forms. Bacteria, which reproduce by simple cell division, produce two identical daughter cells indistinguishable from the original. If that isn't immortality, I don't know what is. It is only when asymmetric cell division is present that we see evidence of aging in one of the daughter cells. (Ackermann, M., Stearns, S. C., and Jenal, U. (2003) "Senescence in a bacterium with asymmetric division." Science 300(5627):1920) Aging is something that came in with the eukaryotes and is associated, intimately, with sexual reproduction. A multi-cellular prokaryote that did not elect to take the sexual route, could be effectively immortal. (It would, incidentally, look quite unlike anything you would think of as capable of interstellar travel. A smart slime mold would be a good starting point.)


Second Point:
You state that I have claimed that aliens live for thousands of years, yet don't think in terms of their own lifetimes. I did not do so. I presented these as alternative scenarios: the aliens may live a long time, compared to humans, or, they may be indifferent to their individual lives, subsuming that interest for the good of the species or tribe. The example of colony species, such as ants or bees springs immediately to mind.

Third Point:
You state I am alone in this belief that aliens may live for a long time.
Here is a member of another discussion forum who shares the view:
http://www.newmars.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2677&sid=c3a9eeb97c095eac8d777f05e5f57f29

Or this comment “… and who is to say that they do not have a "warp drive" or 10,000-year life spans?” from http://www.geocities.com/area51/corridor/8148/glass.html

Or this, “Plus, who says ETs have to have lifetimes limited to a few decades...?” from
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1030426/posts

Here the notion is explored in some detail:
http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/updates/2005/nov/m01-007.shtml

The likelihood of lifeforms based on ammonia as the active solvent, rather than water are explored here. The consequence of extended lifespans associated with the lower temperatures of ammonia based biochemistry are noted.
http://geog-www.sbs.ohio-state.edu/courses/G820.01/Schulze-Makuch and Irwin_20 2.pdf

And in passing we might note that there are some who claim that man, as detailed in the Bible, lived for spans of nine hundred years. Nonsense, of course, but it serves to demonstrate that what you think of as my personal ‘delusion’ is rather widespread.
Fazale R. Rana, Hugh Ross, and Richard Deem, "Long Life Spans: Adam Lived 930 Years and Then He Died; New Discoveries in the Biochemistry of Aging Support the Biblical Record," Facts for Faith, no. 5 (Q1 2001)

Not directly related to lifespans, but as illustrative of the sort of thinking that has gone into issues of alien character, consider this tongue in cheek piece, with a serious undertone, from Omni in the 1970s.
http://www.rfreitas.com/Astro/IllegalAliens.htm

I trust the point is made and you will feel it appropriate to retract your earlier remarks.

That is sufficient for the moment. I can pursue the other points you have raised later in your post. In each instance you are failing to apply the imagination and vision that seems to me a commonplace. That is not a personal attack on you, but an objective statement of fact. I believe I have adequately demonstrated that my ideas are not original, are not unique to me, and are founded on reasonable projection of our current scientific knowledge.

 

[Balerion]

OK, well, let's talk about this, then, eh?

I simply took issue with you repeatedly telling me that I was unimaginative and uninformed. I said that you made up what you said, and you made personal (and false) observations about my character and personality. That's all. I don't appreciate it.

I shall limit myself solely to facts and clearly focused speculation

Well, that would be nice, and a first in this thread on your part. As a matter of fact, this is the first post you made that wasn't completely whacko.

clearly stated that aliens may live for thousands of years: that is not the same thing, at all, as saying they do live for thousands of years.

Well, forgive me, then. But in your first post, you pointed out specifically that the "even at the speed of light, it is too far for them to traveL" was the weakest point of contention against UFO visitation. I may be wrong, but the way you said that made me believe that you felt these longer lifespans were strongly probably, not a matter of "they merely might". Again, I could be wrong, but when you say that the distances required to travel are too great is not only a weak, but the weakest argument, I tend to believe that you're making a stance for your theory.

It is inaccurate and limiting to believe that the human life span is somehow representative of the lifespan we can expect aliens to adhere to. I have little idea how long aliens may live for, but I certainly do not place artificial limits upon the possible lifespans that are based upon an anthropocentric viewpoint

You're absolutley right. There is no reason to limit a hypothetical species to merely a few decades, when in fact, they might have a life expectancy of 300 years. I'm not going to say that it's not possible, as we do have instances of long-lasting lifespans on this planet. It's interesting, because I only learned of the bowhead whale the other day, and I found it amazing that there is a non-plant being on this planet that so far outlives Humans. I mean, this isn't even close!

That said, I still think you're asking for a lot. You've said yourself that the "distances" argument is weak, when in fact, it isn't. Pick a random place in the universe, and it's pretty damn far from Earth. Even at the most generous alotted lifespan your imagination can muster, you'd be pushing the limits. I think that if an alien race lived a hundred thousand light years away, you're talking far beyond a realistic lifespan of an alien visitor.

That isn't to say aliens don't live in the Andromeda Galaxy, because that's fairly close at light speed. But that brings up the whole argument if anything can even go that fast that isn't radiation! Imagine the power involved in that? I could not imagine (and no, that isn't to say it's impossible) how any species could manage to gather the energy needed to power a light-speed travel from one galaxy to the next. I just can't see it.

You state that I have claimed that aliens live for thousands of years, yet don't think in terms of their own lifetimes. I did not do so. I presented these as alternative scenarios: the aliens may live a long time, compared to humans, or, they may be indifferent to their individual lives, subsuming that interest for the good of the species or tribe. The example of colony species, such as ants or bees springs immediately to mind.

You're splitting hairs now. I'm sorry I misread your post, or misspoke my own. It wasn't intentional.

I do agree with the colony idea, and that's a possibility. I think Humanity would be well served to sacrifice a generation or two of space-farers for the sake of science on a trip to, I dunno, Andromeda. Just to see what it looks like up close. I think if Humans thought in the same way, then perhaps we'd know things about the universe that we normally wouldn't for centuries or millenia, if ever.

You state I am alone in this belief that aliens may live for a long time.

I will dig right in following this reply. Thanks for the links.

And in passing we might note that there are some who claim that man, as detailed in the Bible, lived for spans of nine hundred years. Nonsense, of course, but it serves to demonstrate that what you think of as my personal ‘delusion’ is rather widespread.

I'm not saying the delusion is your own, and I apologize if you took it that way. There are plenty of people who not only speculate it, such as yourself, but who truly believe it and won't budge from their stance. It's non-scientific and absurd to be that way.

And of course the ages in the Bible were nonsense. Nobody ever considers that a good deal of it was written as works of fiction. Nobody ever assumes that perhaps this may have been a compliation of some of the earliest works of science fiction in Human history.

I trust the point is made and you will feel it appropriate to retract your earlier remarks.

Retract? No. I still believe that you are reaching (as are the others) in your stance that the immense distances between Earth and other potential civilizations don't matter. I think that no matter the lifespan, the universe is too big to traverse. I will say that if we have a close neighbor who lives in our galaxy, then perhaps, but even then, the galaxy is huge, and I can't see aliens zipping back and forth with the regularity that UFO believers claim. I just can't see it. That doesn't make me unimaginative, it just makes me a realist.

As a matter of fact, I don't see why there can't be hundreds of thousands, if not millions or billions, of intelligent species on planets all across the universe. If we are here, then there must be others as well; that just makes sense. But again, we are a small speck of a planet in a rather mediocre star system, and it would truly surprise me if these aliens even knew we existed.

But again, that's speculation. I hope that there's an alien race closeby who has some interest. I would love to know that we aren't alone, and that there is hope for a civilization who, by nature and circumstance, has a shelf life. I would love to know that the technology exists to perhaps draw resources from another planet when the need arises, or even leave this planet altogether when the time comes.

JD

 

[Ophiolite]

in your first post, you pointed out specifically that the "even at the speed of light, it is too far for them to traveL" was the weakest point of contention against UFO visitation. I may be wrong, but the way you said that made me believe that you felt these longer lifespans were strongly probably, not a matter of "they merely might".

It is the weakest point in the argument, but at the risk of the boredom that comes with repetition I offered several reasons why this might be so, of which long lifetimes was merely one. For wahtever reason you chose to zero in on one of that suite of explanations and headed of down a dark corridor of your own making.

Even at the most generous alotted lifespan your imagination can muster, you'd be pushing the limits. I think that if an alien race lived a hundred thousand light years away, you're talking far beyond a realistic lifespan of an alien visitor.

It is as if you have read nothing I have written. You certainly do not appear to have understood it. [No, that is not a personal attack. I know what the fuck I meant, and I know just as surely that you haven't grasped it. So, I'll take responsibility for that and keep trying, but really put in some effort yourself, if you don't mind.]
Firstly, I have indicated that some life forms might have no interest in the survival of the individual through the end of the voyage, merely the survival of the species. The individual lifespan, which you appear to have got hung up on, would be irrelevant.
Secondly, I have indicated that some lifeformes may be immortal. Stop. Don't deny the possibility. We already have, and I have already discussed, lifeforms on this planet that are immortal.
Thirdly, while we have no way of knowing how close, if at all, an alien race may live, 100,000 light years places it way to heck on the other side of the galaxy. You are therefore declaring, in such a scenario, that there are no more than two civilisations per galaxy. Maybe yes, maybe no, but that falls way below the popular estimates.

That isn't to say aliens don't live in the Andromeda Galaxy, because that's fairly close at light speed.

No it isn't. It's two and a half million light years away. And that is not close at the substantially sub-light speeds we are envisaging.

I could not imagine (and no, that isn't to say it's impossible) how any species could manage to gather the energy needed to power a light-speed travel from one galaxy to the next. I just can't see it.

Do you know how frustrating that is JDawg. You object to me calling you unimaginative, then - in your own words - you write down that you cannot imagine something that others have imagined. What word do I use to describe that if it is not unimaginative? If you have not read the works of Kardishev or Zubrin, what is the alternative word to uninformed? I trust you see my difficulty.

I think Humanity would be well served to sacrifice a generation or two of space-farers for the sake of science on a trip to, I dunno, Andromeda.

Once again, if you hope to do the 2.5 million light year trip in a couple of generations you are going to have to go at relatavistic velocities, which I am assuming in this discussion are not practical: that is one of the premises that was established before I even became involved in this. So the trip to Andromeda is off for conventional spacefarers.

At this point it is worth introducing an alternative method of exploration and colonisation. We send out robot craft, loaded with AI, and equipped with sperm banks and ova, that will allow a new generation of humans to be born when a hospitable planet is found by the robot craft.

I think that no matter the lifespan, the universe is too big to traverse. I will say that if we have a close neighbor who lives in our galaxy, then perhaps, but even then, the galaxy is huge, and I can't see aliens zipping back and forth with the regularity that UFO believers claim. I just can't see it. That doesn't make me unimaginative, it just makes me a realist.

Firstly, you are still hung up on the lifespan.
Secondly, where have I spoken about aliens zipping back and forth? I'll give you a clue. Nowhere. My posts have not been in support of UFO believers, but have been decrying a single weak argument used by the skeptics. I vehemently object to weak arguments when they come from pseudoscientists and crazies. I become apoplectic when such arguments are proffered by individuals who should know better.
Finally, trust me on this one JDawg, you are unimaginative. It can be corrected, but the solution is in your hands.

 

[Novacane]

'Why' would any advanced alien space travelers want to travel hundreds of light years to visit planet Earth at all? For a good hamburger maybe? Doubtful. To see Niagra Falls? Doubtful. To shake hands with GWB? Very very Doubtfall. To exchange technology? Doubtful. What would be a logical reason for their visit? You tell us. We're waiting for your answer. O.K?

 

[Ophiolite]

Why would we, with our primitive technology, send space probes to Mercury, Venus, the Moon, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto, and to the comets and asteroids of our system. Curiosity.

If intelligent aliens exist it is arguable that they are also curious. If we do not destroy ourselves in the next couple of centuries we shall be sending out interstellar probes. As our technology and science advance, so will the sophistication of those probes. It is not any kind of a stretch to envisage that in this regard aliens may behave in a similar way. [On Earth, morphology differs much more than motivation. A signature feature of life?]

 

[Balerion]

Maybe yes, maybe no, but that falls way below the popular estimates.

But since we have no idea if intelligent civilizations live AT ALL outside of Earth, "popular estimates" can go fuck themselves. I think it's insane that people are actually putting numbers on something like that. How can you even estimate something like that? It's impossible to even guess, and yes, I've seen the mathematical equation used by that guy (don't remember his name) but it's all bunk. You may be able to put a probable number on how many planets could support life, but not how many have civilizations. Not possible.

No it isn't. It's two and a half million light years away. And that is not close at the substantially sub-light speeds we are envisaging.

You're right, it's not close. But it's the closest galaxy to us. But I concede, it is a poor example.

Do you know how frustrating that is JDawg. You object to me calling you unimaginative, then - in your own words - you write down that you cannot imagine something that others have imagined. What word do I use to describe that if it is not unimaginative? If you have not read the works of Kardishev or Zubrin, what is the alternative word to uninformed? I trust you see my difficulty.

First of all, enough of this. I have plenty of imagination, and I do not have to prove it to you. I don't have a degree in anything related to the field, so yes, I am uninformed. I've done some reading, though, and while I am not even close to being able to say I fully understand it all, I can tell you that I have yet to read anywhere that light speed travel is possible. I have, on the other hand, read in many places that the chances of us being able to do so are very slim. Someday, I will read these works by Kardishev and Zubrin, and hopefully others, but as it stands, the "popular estimates" state that it's going to be a tough sell to get Humans to travel that fast.

Once again, if you hope to do the 2.5 million light year trip in a couple of generations you are going to have to go at relatavistic velocities, which I am assuming in this discussion are not practical: that is one of the premises that was established before I even became involved in this. So the trip to Andromeda is off for conventional spacefarers.

Again, I wasn't taking the actual distance into account...I was merely pulling a name out of the hat. Maybe we should travel to the closest star...is that better?

At this point it is worth introducing an alternative method of exploration and colonisation. We send out robot craft, loaded with AI, and equipped with sperm banks and ova, that will allow a new generation of humans to be born when a hospitable planet is found by the robot craft.

I agree. I don't know if the ova and sperm are neccessary, but whatever. Let's get this damned robot in the air and get it going.

Firstly, you are still hung up on the lifespan.
Secondly, where have I spoken about aliens zipping back and forth?

I'm hung up on the lifespan because it makes sense to be. And as far as the "zipping" aliens, I never once said that you said that. I stated that "UFO believers" say that.

My posts have not been in support of UFO believers, but have been decrying a single weak argument used by the skeptics. I vehemently object to weak arguments when they come from pseudoscientists and crazies. I become apoplectic when such arguments are proffered by individuals who should know better.

Of course not. But I still dont' see how it is a weak argument. It isn't. It's a good argument. Even if you take into account the possibility that aliens may live for longer times, or have different approaches to life and, in turn, spacetravel, you have to accept that the distances still play a strong part in where these aliens go.

I could accept that it might not be so strong of an argument if the aliens may be close to us, as in a nearby star, but not because of these supposed lifespans or goals. I just don't think it's fair to argue that point, because it's purely conjecture. Yes, I suppose it's all conjecture, but still.

Finally, trust me on this one JDawg, you are unimaginative. It can be corrected, but the solution is in your hands

For the last time, get over it. I'm trying my best to understand this stuff, and in doing so, I'm trying to stay away from the fantastical flights of fancy. If I'm taking the wrong approach, fine, but trust me, Ophie, it's intentional. I'm purposely trying not to make these vague assumptions, or just throw wild ideas in the air. I could all day say that perhaps the aliens use a fossil fuel that we can't produce on Earth which provides more than enough energy for extended lightspeed travel, and that they use forcefields to protect their vessels against space debris that would normally rip to shreds their craft at that speed.

I choose not to because I would be called a baseless whackjob for doing it. I'm trying to stick to the few things I know and understand in an effort to understand more. Can you understand that?

JD

 

[Novacane]

Why would we, with our primitive technology, send space probes to Mercury, Venus, the Moon, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto, and to the comets and asteroids of our system. Curiosity.

If intelligent aliens exist it is arguable that they are also curious. If we do not destroy ourselves in the next couple of centuries we shall be sending out interstellar probes. As our technology and science advance, so will the sophistication of those probes. It is not any kind of a stretch to envisage that in this regard aliens may behave in a similar way. [On Earth, morphology differs much more than motivation. A signature feature of life?]

So far it doesn't appear that the air ways have been filled with alien space probe signals from deep space lately. If so, it is highly likely that we would have picked one or two of them up with our so-called 'primative' radio signal technology. Just maybe the so-called 'intelligent' aliens (if they exist) aren't doing what we're doing down here on planet Earth (being curious) or just maybe there are 'no' aliens to do anything at all.