Aliens and religious beliefs.

[Polymath257]

Since science is both observation and experiment it is difficult to argue with your point.

However theory must be based on experiment. Some observation is very similar to experiment but there is a distinction between the confirmation of experiment through observation and the establishment of theory through observation.

One does not 'confirm experiment through observation'. Experiments are *one* type of observation. Specifically, they are observations where the conditions are under our control to some extent.

We all see what we expect whether what we expect is derived from the interpretation of experiment or through blind faith.

And that is clearly false in general. There have been many cases where the observation was distinctly surprising and not at all what we expected.

is there an effect? Yes. Is it universal and all pervading? No.

No expert can just observe anything and invent theory but this is the way a great deal of "science" is done now days. There is no science in predicting the genome of long extinct simple species. Such predictions are merely going to reflect whatever we believe rather than theory or observation.

Observation and experiment are not the same thing even though there is some "overlap". But no theory can be based on anything except experiment.

Clearly false. For example, most theories of cosmology, or stellar evolution, or galactic organization, (and many others) are based purely off of observation. They are still testable and therefore are scientific theories.

The "theory" of evolution has no support for its conclusions based on Darwin's belief that populations are stable even over the long term. According to Darwin's thinking when populations went down its food supply would go up resulting in an increase in population. He was wrong and he was wrong about abiogenesis because he was unaware of consciousness.

First, I very much doubt that Darwin was unaware of the phenomenon of consciousness.

Second, what does that have to do with evolution? Nothing that is supported by any evidence.

Darwin was what he ate and his conclusions were founded on his assumptions. This is just the way it is for "homo omnisciencis". Abiogenesis is most probably quite rare in the cosmos and probably because of contamination from space.

Huh? If it is from contamination, it isn't abiogenesis. And whether abiogenesis is rare or common is simply not known.

As to the dearth of visible life it's because it's so far away, perhaps faster than light travel is impossible, and anyone who has come chose to remain hidden. Other than to colonize or restock there might be very little reason for any species to visit earth.

There is probably very little reason for interstellar space travel at all. The economics are against it.

 

[cladking]

And that is clearly false in general. There have been many cases where the observation was distinctly surprising and not at all what we expected.

Indeed. But the more strongly one believes in science or anything else the less likely he is to detect an anomaly and the quicker to write it off as coincidence.

Every experiment shows we see what we expect and to see anything that is real and unexpected is not typical. It's not that it can't happen, merely that it doesn't.

Specifically, they are observations where the conditions are under our control to some extent.

Even experiment is subjected to the interpretation within the prevailing paradigm. Observation that is uncontrolled is subject to the whims of the observer and the paradigm.

Clearly false. For example, most theories of cosmology, or stellar evolution, or galactic organization, (and many others) are based purely off of observation. They are still testable and therefore are scientific theories.

There are more exceptions to general rules is astronomy than most fields.

First, I very much doubt that Darwin was unaware of the phenomenon of consciousness.

He certainly had no working definition for it.

Second, what does that have to do with evolution? Nothing that is supported by any evidence.

I believe consciousness is life and the basis of change in species. I believe this is what all observation and experiment suggest.

If true then there is no chance Darwin could have understood the nature and cause of evolution. Indeed, he couldn't understand even its nature with the assumption that populations are stable and tend toward a mean. The nature of change in species is sudden and results when populations are low. He never stood a chance.

Huh? If it is from contamination, it isn't abiogenesis. And whether abiogenesis is rare or common is simply not known.

Exactly. Life might have only been generated once or a few dozen times and spread throughout the universe.

I think the fact it probably didn't arise on earth suggests it is at least uncommon. We were like a big petrie dish yet, unless the life at the black smokers is terrestrial, it might have never arisen here.

 

[cladking]

There are several properties of life that suggest it is ubiquitous. It expands to fill every niche and contaminate every surface. It spreads its seed everywhere. The simple dandelion can populate the world in a season if all its seeds fall on fertile ground. Because it is conscious it can seek niches or establish new ones. Because it is so common and will consume its entire food source mere randomness will spread it. While species can be eradicated in almost any event another will be aided by it. Life is complex and can adapt to any environment. It changes to better suit existing conditions. Every individual strives to succeed and prosper even if it's wholly out of its element. It is relentless in aggregate and as individuals.

Why should space or the solar wind be free from life.

 

[gnostic]

As to the dearth of visible life it's because it's so far away, perhaps faster than light travel is impossible, and anyone who has come chose to remain hidden. Other than to colonize or restock there might be very little reason for any species to visit earth.

There are only 2 things that can travel at the speed of light, the Universe “expanding”, and light itself.

Interstellar and intergalactic space travel travel, would take to long travel between stars, and even longer between galaxies. No human or other alien could construct crafts to travel at the speed of light, because of the power and energy are not there, nor can crafts be sustained for tens of thousands of years or millions of years.

For instance, the distance between the Milky Way and Andromeda Galaxy is over 2 million light years...

...”light year” being how long light will take to reach from point a to b, at the speed of light, and this distance, which is 9.46 x 10^12 km or 9 trillion kilometres.

Can any vessel, humans or aliens travel this distance for that long and sustain for this long, even if it could hypothetically achieve the speed of light?

But no humans and no aliens (if any) would spend over 2 million years even if they were capable of light speed, travelling between galaxies.

But no vessels created by humans or aliens could even reach a tenth of speed of light.

And if we are talking about interstellar space travel between stars, we (and any alien) are not capable of building any manned vessel to travel at light speed, therefore it is going to take tens of thousands if you of going to the nearest star, Proxima Centauri (4.24 light years), or hundreds of thousands or millions of years in other stars.

Even our most distant unmanned crafts, the Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 have travelled beyond the heliopause, the boundary of the Solar System, travelling at 17 km/s, have not come close to even reaching 1 light year. And it’s been space for 44 year. By 2025, it will have no electricity whatsoever. If I remember correctly, Voyager 1 has travel less than 0.0025 light year. At its current speed it will reach 1 light year, NASA has calculated that it will take 17,565 years.

Once a manned ship goes in interstellar space, there would be no where to refuel, no ways to restock on food and water, and air can only be filtered or recycle for so long before it become poison.

The ideas of interstellar space travel only exist in science fiction.

The very idea that aliens would come here, to abduct/experiment on humans or to colonize or to invade, are just more fiction.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

No. I don't accept the Look and See Science assumptions that change is gradual and caused by survival of the fittest.

Species will tend to keep a record of where they have been and this record suggests that life has been elsewhere, long before 3.8 billion years ago.

That is a problem for you. You finally posted a definition of 'look and see" science. Basically, you are talking about making the evidence fit apriori positions and that is not what science does or what biologists have done with evidence that supports the theory of evolution. It does appear to be what you have promoted with your own ideas on this forum.

The more you post, the clearer my understanding of your position and how you have arrived at some of it becomes.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

There are several properties of life that suggest it is ubiquitous. It expands to fill every niche and contaminate every surface. It spreads its seed everywhere. The simple dandelion can populate the world in a season if all its seeds fall on fertile ground. Because it is conscious it can seek niches or establish new ones. Because it is so common and will consume its entire food source mere randomness will spread it. While species can be eradicated in almost any event another will be aided by it. Life is complex and can adapt to any environment. It changes to better suit existing conditions. Every individual strives to succeed and prosper even if it's wholly out of its element. It is relentless in aggregate and as individuals.

Why should space or the solar wind be free from life.

There is no evidence for your look and see idea that consciousness is life. You may want that to be the case, but it is clearly your a priori notion that you are trying to force the evidence to fit. Unfortunately for you, there is no evidence that dandelions have a consciousness. Since you claim no one understands consciousness, that would include you. Rather puts a limits on your ability to respond meaningfully to that obvious defect in dandelions. Unless, you are now claiming to be the expert on consciousness.

A species can change the environment it exists in, but there is no evidence that all of them do that or that they do it consciously. If you are claiming that they do, then you need to pony up the evidence and the reasoned argument supporting that claim.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

There are several properties of life that suggest it is ubiquitous. It expands to fill every niche and contaminate every surface. It spreads its seed everywhere. The simple dandelion can populate the world in a season if all its seeds fall on fertile ground. Because it is conscious it can seek niches or establish new ones. Because it is so common and will consume its entire food source mere randomness will spread it. While species can be eradicated in almost any event another will be aided by it. Life is complex and can adapt to any environment. It changes to better suit existing conditions. Every individual strives to succeed and prosper even if it's wholly out of its element. It is relentless in aggregate and as individuals.

Why should space or the solar wind be free from life.

I agree with you. The evidence demonstrates that life does indeed evolve under the selection of the environment.

 

[gnostic]

Why should space or the solar wind be free from life.

Is that a question or rhetoric?

I am assuming it is a question, missing a question mark.

Solar winds don’t blow air, they carry plasma of charged particles.

I don’t think you want to be hit by blast of plasma from solar wind anymore than you want to be hit by plasma from lightning strike.

And even if there are no fear of solar wind, in space, unshielded and unprotected, there other stellar radiation and cosmic radiation.

Solar flares can produce any types of EM radiation, from the harmless radio waves to the other ends of ionizing radiations, including ultraviolet, x-rays and gamma rays.

Unprotected, you would suffer from burn from the sun’s ultraviolet radiation. Gamma radiation will do even more damage, especially to internal organs and bone marrow.

The combination of Earth’s magnetic fields deflect most radiation and the atmosphere will filter the radiation down.

And in space, there are matters of air.

Although oxygen is the 3rd most abundant element/substance in the universe, in space, oxygen is very dispersed, therefore you could move for thousands of kilometres and will not find oxygen, therefore you will not be able to breathe.

All of these that I have mentioned should have been apparent to you, since you are genius, so I do not see why you are asking such question if the answer should already be obvious to you.

 

[InChrist]

When I was a theist, I did not believe in aliens, as there were no mention of them in the Bible.
Tonight, I was looking up to the night sky as a possible deist, and for the first time I got excited at the thought that there were other life forms in the vast vast cosmos. From a deist POV, belief in the possibilities of aliens is completely reasonable I think.
I wonder if intelligent aliens have a conception of God(s).
Do you believe that intelligent life forms exist beyond Earth? How does your religious/spiritual beliefs affect your view on aliens?

No, not physical life. Although, we have been inundated with movies, books, TV shows, sightings and claims of alien abductions for years, I believe any other life in the cosmos is spiritual and these “ alien and UFO” encounters are demonic with the purpose of deceiving humans.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

And as far as whether life ever arose on earth there is no science either. I am merely suggesting the most likely scenario based on logic and very scant evidence.

We know that all change in life is sudden so abiogenesis would be a rare exception rather than the rule if it's true that life is common in the universe.

It is known that change in life varies over time depending on the change being observed. There is no evidence to support or even suggest that all change in life is sudden. We have been over this numerous times. Others have been over this with you.

You repeat this claim like a mantra, but never have you even tried to make a weak argument in support of it.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

All "known" science is experimental science and all experimental science would progress similarly. Any creature that invented science would do so only because he had no other recourse and would do so to make predictions. Determining what will be is the essence of curiosity.

Omniscient creatures wouldn't be likely to invent science, since they would not need ask questions about the world around them or anything else for that matter.

 

[rational experiences]

Science says the alien abducted my spirit. Reasoned by all the victims scientists ever studied. Concepts all from humans biological experience.

Our living spirit is oxygenated water.

As natural human is first. Biology life is living a biology as one greater body than an ape. Nothing like the alien cult science studies theories or beliefs of just humans.

Every human for thousands of years a baby human by sex. Already owns human identified memory. The human reborn experiences that says that type of theorising should be outlawed. As life human contradicts such evil themes.

So you explain to the atheist. You are a human the whole time you think. Never are you not a human.

As a man human the O ovary is where your baby whose consciousness you cannot defect by science lives. Unlike small boys. So we say the baby saved us from your evil human adult thoughts.

The man self adult says I transform back in time to my father's body whose consciousness memory says he's dead. No longer a female O ovary life. I inherited man life over death.

Planet earth nature garden oxygenator biologies life support exact.

So a man adult human theist human baby lied. As he doesn't own a woman's ovary he always owned sperm. His self idea I moved back into my own human man's form.

Is what father told me about your lying. Human brother scientist.

Your alien thesis ends up being a direct theme to your machine only. Another one of your coercive public lies. Collider to alien is direct.

So you already know it's only about machines.

As the human designer of science you are living biology. The theist designer builder owner operator knows a machine is nothing like biology.

But if you notice predictive biology intent future instead of biologies owned future states..... building machines I want robots to take my place building machines then controlling machines.

All applied by my human thought control now.

Yet at the moment human inventor biology is doing all controls.

So as he uses unnatural human biology conscious predictions feedback his ideas begin to lie to him.

As the study humans consciousness is real.

You then see a destroyed machine body with its designer thought image destroyed hovering above the earth's face crop circle.

As the machine history itself isn't destroyed earth mass as you cooled it to own it's machine body. So the effect hovers as if it's a manifesting machine.

As the machines reaction virtually removed destroys the machine itself as earths mass beginnings. Is applied daily by its reaction.

Why you knew as a human in science application 2012 was going to end biologies nuclear fallout attack. Knew the whole time.

Only because you implemented extra cooling by human choice doesn't the machine blow up. Yet it tries to.

So in fact you witness the death destruction of your built machine everyday leaving earth in mass and gas.

So it's machine phenomena bio waters life support caused by biology designer taking life's water to live away from biologies health. Abducting our life continuance to cool his machines reaction.

Water having living microbiology in it already.

Said father.

So ground mass removal destroyed man's designed upper heavenly cooled old machine transmitters of image held in clouds.

His other machines not reacting use those transmitters. Old human life already taken to cause image recording voice recording in heavenly transmissions.

Why our human DNA wouldn't heal.

Is what you attacked yourselves.

What an alien machine being god earths machine now destroyed by its designer the biological human scientist caused.

Just as you were told you had caused it yourselves as humans scientists before.

Artificial is to take earths mass by humans non stop biological thinking contriving and control it's change. Making you personally superior to all creation that you destroy.

By human choice. Naming all conditions man chooses to force change by humans man ipulation.

Thinks self the most superior of being in all of the created universe is a pretty big human ego.

How a sin hole nothing is the real proof you knew exactly what beginning nothing theories would give you at machines end as nothing also.

You were 100 percent already taught you anti caused the presence of earths gods owned gas spirits in mass.

Once you've remove form it never comes back. Why you said as a human in science the alien is your god. As you caused it yourselves.

So as you theoried from anti state back to held created earth mass you said it was not God in form entity but a satanic act.

As only Satan owned the body of a star not a planet as God was.

You themed our heavens was a star by terms a moon not a planet by mass the gases in all states heavens mass plus some old star dust mass.

So then the asteroid star came and slammed into earth. As the part of mass you wanted put back.

You track the asteroid yourselves that every now and again blasts so moves its body closer to earth in star movement change.

As a star theist you want to receive the stars on earth as a new resource from out of space.

As the nuclear memory came to your man's brain in star fall from human biology attacked a long time ago. Brain changed to hearing Satan's voice. Recorded science of men.

Hence you are possessed by it.

As earths O space mass body origin a planet now is so small as compared to the origin. Theist says star to planet human only thesis wants a huge mass body to come back as origin science itself.

How a star became a planet.

And it's because he designed machines out of space back to earth transmitters that he believes if he opens all past line trajected hot paths it will come direct.

At the moment the Satan angels that return also part of his own predicted personal human themes keeps replacing the cloud mass.

Yet he doesn't want angels he wants aliens only.

Is why any alien theist would be considered lifes destroyer.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

All "known" science is experimental science and all experimental science would progress similarly. Any creature that invented science would do so only because he had no other recourse and would do so to make predictions. Determining what will be is the essence of curiosity.

What is unknown science? Whatever a persons wants to make up? By definition, if it is unknown, then it cannot be known to even exist and no one can talk about, since there is nothing to talk about.

Not all science is experimental that which isn't is still science.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Since science is both observation and experiment it is difficult to argue with your point.

You really can't, but you will I am sure.

However theory must be based on experiment. Some observation is very similar to experiment but there is a distinction between the confirmation of experiment through observation and the establishment of theory through observation.

See.

What is the difference between observing the results of an experiment or counting the number of oak trees in a woodland per unit area?

We all see what we expect whether what we expect is derived from the interpretation of experiment or through blind faith.

What is your evidence to support this claim?

You do realize that your claim means that we cannot observe and learn from experience, experiment or observation.

No expert can just observe anything and invent theory but this is the way a great deal of "science" is done now days.

Can you show your evidence that you used to make this claim? How do you know you are correct?

Your look and see view point is literally not how it is done.

There is no science in predicting the genome of long extinct simple species.

No. So what? I fail to see what this obscure and irrelevant statement has to do with what can be observed and what can be experimented on.

Such predictions are merely going to reflect whatever we believe rather than theory or observation.

No one has made such a prediction. No one has the evidence and theoretical basis to make such a prediction. It is a nonsense point.

Observation and experiment are not the same thing even though there is some "overlap".

The goal posts are starting to move. Again, show me how you know this. How did you come to this conclusion? What is your basis for this conclusion. To me it seems very much look and see. You want something to be the way you think it is and then you just declare everything is that way.

But no theory can be based on anything except experiment.

Not true at all. Observations of nature can and has lead to the formulation of theories.

The "theory" of evolution has no support for its conclusions based on Darwin's belief that populations are stable even over the long term. According to Darwin's thinking when populations went down its food supply would go up resulting in an increase in population.

What? Are you familiar with the theory of evolution and the work of Darwin?

He was wrong and he was wrong about abiogenesis because he was unaware of consciousness.

Here we go again. I doubt very much that Darwin was unaware of consciousness. Maybe not to the level of understanding we have today, but aware never-the-less. He just didn't have a priori beliefs about consciousness that he was trying to force reality to fit.

Darwin was what he ate and his conclusions were founded on his assumptions.

Not true. Darwin based his conclusions on observations of the natural world. He was not alone. Wallace independently came to the same conclusions as Darwin from making his own observations.

This is just the way it is for "homo omnisciencis".

Since H. o. is made up, not much can be said about it's ways or ways for it.

Abiogenesis is most probably quite rare in the cosmos and probably because of contamination from space.

No idea what this means. You do realize that we are in space too? Right?

As to the dearth of visible life it's because it's so far away, perhaps faster than light travel is impossible, and anyone who has come chose to remain hidden. Other than to colonize or restock there might be very little reason for any species to visit earth.

You may actually have a point here.

 

[gnostic]

I believe any other life in the cosmos is spiritual and these “ alien and UFO” encounters are demonic with the purpose of deceiving humans.

Or perhaps, people deceiving others (eg money, seeking attention or fame), or they are deceiving themselves (eg misinterpreting what they see or suffering from delusions).

Demons don’t exist anymore than angels and fairies.

And while I do think there are life in other planets, it doesn’t mean aliens ever coming to Earth.

 

[InChrist]

Or perhaps, people deceiving others (eg money, seeking attention or fame), or they are deceiving themselves (eg misinterpreting what they see or suffering from delusions).

Demons don’t exist anymore than angels and fairies.

And while I do think there are life in other planets, it doesn’t mean aliens ever coming to Earth.

How do you know demons, nor angels don’t exist? I don’t believe fairies existing either, although if people claim to have encounters with fairies, I consider those to be demonic entities, also.

I find it is telling that all who claim to have been abducted by extraterrestrials all share similar experiences and claim they were given information/instructions/ wisdom which interestingly shares commonality with antichrist and occult teachings. As well, when abductees report calling on the name of Jesus for help, out of their fear, the “aliens “ release them, disappear, and the abductees find themselves back home, in their car or wherever they were

 

[Subduction Zone]

How do you know demons, nor angels don’t exist? I don’t believe fairies existing either, although if people claim to have encounters with fairies, I consider those to be demonic entities, also.

I find it is telling that all who claim to have been abducted by extraterrestrials all share similar experiences and claim they were given information/instructions/ wisdom which interestingly shares commonality with antichrist and occult teachings. As well, when abductees report calling on the name of Jesus for help, out of their fear, the “aliens “ release them, disappear, and the abductees find themselves back home, in their car or wherever they were

People are often affected by what others supposedly saw. There are variations. But we tend to fixate on some of the more common ones.

The problem with aliens and demons and other such beliefs is that they tend to always go away when proper methods of observation exist.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

When I was a theist, I did not believe in aliens, as there were no mention of them in the Bible.
Tonight, I was looking up to the night sky as a possible deist, and for the first time I got excited at the thought that there were other life forms in the vast vast cosmos. From a deist POV, belief in the possibilities of aliens is completely reasonable I think.
I wonder if intelligent aliens have a conception of God(s).
Do you believe that intelligent life forms exist beyond Earth? How does your religious/spiritual beliefs affect your view on aliens?

I do believe that life could exist out on another planet, possibly even intelligent life,. But like the rest of the world, I do not know that it does or have any evidence for it. I think it is worth a look though. Considering the immensity of the universe and the time since it formed, there certainly seems like the chance is good.

You might be interested in some of the short fiction by David Brin. He is an astrophysicist and sci-fi author. He tells a good story and uses his fiction to pose speculation about questions regarding life out there. He writes serious scholarly work on the subject as well. What if we are among the earliest intelligent life and there really isn't anyone or very many others out there? What if we are late to arrive on a stage billions of years old with players that have risen, lived and passed on? Those sorts of questions.

 

[ppp]

I do believe that life could exist out on another planet, possibly even intelligent life,. But like the rest of the world, I do not know that it does or have any evidence for it. I think it is worth a look though. Considering the immensity of the universe and the time since it formed, there certainly seems like the chance is good.

You might be interested in some of the short fiction by David Brin. He is an astrophysicist and sci-fi author. He tells a good story and uses his fiction to pose speculation about questions regarding life out there. He writes serious scholarly work on the subject as well. What if we are among the earliest intelligent life and there really isn't anyone or very many others out there? What if we are late to arrive on a stage billions of years old with players that have risen, lived and passed on? Those sorts of questions.

Love me some Brin.

 

[rational experiences]

As consciousness. AI recorded all previous life biology to grounds mass removal.

AI human science machine cause only.

God sealed dusts sealed earth all biology living before a human even thinks.

Thinking abstractly is a humans problem on earth.

Immaculate burning gases filled in space plane. No light place. Clear gas.

Gases burning movement away from space holding clear gas is all in our minds. Concept aware conscious human feelings.

No AI first as we live in the sealed earth gods position first was a teaching the seal.

Only humans caused AI by breaking the seals of a fused planet introduced a new concept. Humans practiced science to destroy what God had formed.

In science was a planet held firm including non gases. As we lived supported by a gas water heavens mass.

So evil intention was to produce an alight stone mass to gain a gas yourself.

Which isn't a time shift it was direct science human awareness what I want.

As it owns no other definition.

As light is fixed in our heavens gas burning void position.

If a ship burns cold clear gas to produce propulsion then it is light moving itself as invented mass by light gas.

Bodies of mass that visited hence were burning gas as travel.

As oxygenated water above ground entered the body mass of stone itself it's earths own proof that life lived in water first.

We don't want to be put into your human science proposals that life began in stones chemistry. Themed by you opening earth new sin holes to put life by inventions human only invented beginning thesis. The position point return to it by machine inventions.

As our light is heavens fixed in space voiding womb.