• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Astronomers to Earth: You've got some newly found near-twins

I wonder what will happen when we eventually bump into another alien civilization. We're getting closer and closer every year to finding a planet with intelligent life on it. What happens when we do find them or they find us? It would put a lot of religions under scrutiny if they've never heard of any earthly gods.

Odds say otherwise. Trillions of stars, billions of planets, the conditions for life are more than likely to occur on more than one little insignificant planet.

That's the common misunderstanding that I'm talking about. There are billions of planets, but nobody knows how abiogenesis happened, but we have no reason that there is any likelihood that the chances of abiogenesis happening.

The chances of abiogensis taking place on a given planet may be one in a million, or it may be one in a quadrillion. We just don't know.

So it is highly unscientific and faulty reasoning to say, "Oh, there's a lot of planets, so it is highly likely some of them have life."
 
That's the common misunderstanding that I'm talking about. There are billions of planets, but nobody knows how abiogenesis happened, but we have no reason that there is any likelihood that the chances of abiogenesis happening.

The chances of abiogensis taking place on a given planet may be one in a million, or it may be one in a quadrillion. We just don't know.

So it is highly unscientific and faulty reasoning to say, "Oh, there's a lot of planets, so it is highly likely some of them have life."



Panspermia.
 
Panspermia.

Funny, I was just thinking that. If we do find extraterrestrial life, and especially if it's in the solar system, panspermia is probably the more likely explanation for it than a second instance of abiogenesis.
 
That's the common misunderstanding that I'm talking about. There are billions of planets, but nobody knows how abiogenesis happened, but we have no reason that there is any likelihood that the chances of abiogenesis happening.

The chances of abiogensis taking place on a given planet may be one in a million, or it may be one in a quadrillion. We just don't know.

So it is highly unscientific and faulty reasoning to say, "Oh, there's a lot of planets, so it is highly likely some of them have life."

And yet many scientists do indeed believe it. And the funding for SETI is a pretty good indication that there's a solid foundation for their belief. (And SETI is a search for intelligent life, not just life.)
 
Given our lingering colonial values, I hope we don't find ET anytime soon, unless they are equal to or greater than us. Humans are not mature enough as a species to treat other life with respect and care.

What makes you think they'd be any better?
 
And yet many scientists do indeed believe it. And the funding for SETI is a pretty good indication that there's a solid foundation for their belief. (And SETI is a search for intelligent life, not just life.)

SETI is now privately funded. Congress cut the funding.
 
There ya go libs...A planet all your own...Good luck...:lol: Just kidding....However, this is really cool...

No, they get to stay here, trapped on this planet and in very small pockets of it.

They will not spread their child like emotionalism to the stars.
 
SETI is now privately funded. Congress cut the funding.

Doesnt really change my point. The foundation is based on what scientists believe.
 
There have been several earth like planets discovered so far. Since meteors contain massive amounts of water it is a fact that even Jupiter's moon have water, Mars had water and since meteors full the universe water exists everywhere and what little microbes of life live in that water???? It is only a matter of proximity to a star that gives life like Earth a chance elsewhere.
 
To think that our planet is the only one that contains life the universe is not only naive but also arrogant.
 
To think that our planet is the only one that contains life the universe is not only naive but also arrogant.

You might be right. And you know what? You will probably never know.
 
And yet many scientists do indeed believe it.

Yeah. That's pretty stupid of them.

And the funding for SETI is a pretty good indication that there's a solid foundation for their belief. (And SETI is a search for intelligent life, not just life.)

No, that's a fallacious line of reasoning called argument by appeal to authority.
 
What makes you think they'd be any better?

They might not be necessarily... but since that's unknown, I'm just judging my own species. We aren't mature enough.
 
They might not be necessarily... but since that's unknown, I'm just judging my own species. We aren't mature enough.

no some us are, why should those who are not be the ones to keep us trapped on this planet?
 
no some us are, why should those who are not be the ones to keep us trapped on this planet?

Because we are a complex interdependent species, not just with members of our same species, but of the entire biosphere of this planet. If we're ****ing things up here we will definitely transplant our problems somewhere else.

And btw, people who claim they are the most mature usually aren't.
 
Yeah. That's pretty stupid of them.



No, that's a fallacious line of reasoning called argument by appeal to authority.

It's laughable that you think your opinion is more credible than the top scientists on the planet, including Stephen Hawking and Carl Sagan (deceased). Because those people and organizations provided funding based on those scientific facts, opinions, and statistics.
 
It's laughable that you think your opinion is more credible than the top scientists on the planet, including Stephen Hawking and Carl Sagan (deceased). Because those people and organizations provided funding based on those scientific facts, opinions, and statistics.

Stephen Hawkings is an attention whore that enjoys saying outrageous **** for attention.
 
Stephen Hawkings is an attention whore that enjoys saying outrageous **** for attention.

Yeah. One misunderstood comment about Jesus and everybody gets their panties in a bunch. Boo hoo hoo if you werent bright enough to understand it.

His reputation and research isnt based on public media....lol you've just been reading what little pap you thought you could understand.
 
Yeah. One misunderstood comment about Jesus and everybody gets their panties in a bunch. Boo hoo hoo if you werent bright enough to understand it.

His reputation and research isnt based on public media....lol you've just been reading what little pap you thought you could understand.

I don't know what you're talking about. I'm talking about his ideas on how the world will end, which is completely unsupported gibberish.

Run! The robots are coming!
 
I don't know what you're talking about. I'm talking about his ideas on how the world will end, which is completely unsupported gibberish.

Run! The robots are coming!

I'm sticking with you on this one. If anyone knows about completely unsupported gibberish it's you.
 
Back
Top Bottom