• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Where Is Everybody? Where Are The Aliens?

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
It seems likely that one civilization will be the first to become technologically
advanced, enabling detection of other life. We could be that civilization.
It could also be that it takes a very long time for 2 civilizations to be advanced
enuf & close enuf for one to detect the other.

Well, one assumption of Fermi's that leads to the paradox is that civilizations survive for millions of years.

Our species is about 150,000 years old, we have had agriculture for about 10,000 years and have had radio for just over 100 years. I've yet to hear anyone confidently claim we will be around another 10,000 years, let alone 1 million.

This also ignores the economic aspect of travel to other stars. For example, at this point in time, we have sent a couple of probes out that can get to other stars *in a few tens of thousands of years*. The likelihood of those probes actually being found (once they are radio silent) is pretty much zero.

To actually send a probe out that will collect information and return it to the source in a reasonable amount of time is a HUGE problem. Getting to speeds close to the speed of light takes a *lot* of energy. Lower speeds simply won't get the information back before the society changes. And such energy resources will be valuable no matter what species we are talking about.

So, until there is a LOT of extra energy produced by their society, it won't be economic to travel in any real way to the stars *unless* they also figure out how to *automatically* search and mine asteroids and planets and have everything done by automatic probes.

Again, not exactly an economical thing to do directly, although there are clearly economic advantages on shorter time periods.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
I didn't think of this, but they could've been arguing over creation vs evolution ha ha. It's a possibility. If it is a possibility, then we should be seeing some kind of evidence of a nuclear holocaust or other holocaust even if they are so far away.

No. if we blew up the Earth, it wouldn't be visible from even the nearest star as anything major. Remember our whole *sun* is a pretty dim star as stars go. if it were even 20 light years away, we wouldn't be able to see it at night.
 

james bond

Well-Known Member
So many misconceptions in the OP. Life may be widespread in the universe. In fact it probably is widespread. That does not mean that intelligent life is widespread. Take our one planet as an example. Life here took over three billion years to advance past single celled life. It very well could be that even if life can be found on other planets that the vast majority of it will be very simple life that has not even evolved beyond the colony stage of single celled life. And then even after complex life evolved here it took at least another 600 million years for intelligence to evolve. For our one example intelligent life has existed for a very small percentage of our history. Then there is the assumption that somehow the aliens would be able to or would even care to announce their existence to the rest of the universe. I doubt if you could decipher any I Love Lucy episodes by the time the signal even gets as far as Alpha Centauri. How are we to detect life from what may be a very short spurt of radio noise before they advance to better ways to transmit ideas to each other? And space travel between the stars may not even be feasible. Complaining about a lack of visitors proves less than nothing about the existence of a god, but it does tell us about the lack of education of the person making the complaint.

The idea is not "may" or "probably," but should be widespread in the universe according to evolution. If intelligent life didn't arise, then that goes against evolution. One can't have it both ways. If intelligent life didn't arise, then the fine tuning theory gets a boost. Or some other extinction type theory. The distance argument is BS. We should be seeing some kind of evidence if there is intelligent life elsewhere. SETI backs me up on this.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
That may be. Tomorrow marks the 13th anniversary of his death and I'm sure much has been learned in the field of evolutionary biology over that period. I'd be interested in hearing what, specifically, you had in mind.

More specifically, we have learned a lot about extra-solar planets in the last 13 years. if you go back 13 years, there may have been 10 known. Now there are thousands.
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
I would think the Rare Earth hypothesis backs up the Bible as earth being a very special place designed as such by God.
That strikes me as an excellent example of thoughtlessly seeing what one wants to see. As a gross over-simplification, I would imagine that a non-designed cosmos would to some degree evince a bell curve of natural phenomena: some exceedingly rare, much remarkably common, and all reflecting the so-called laws of nature.
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
I tell them the same thing all the time; look for the science, not the academic opinion, but maybe it would work better coming from another atheist!
My question was, "Why are you going to quote me."

So let me get a little more pointed. Why do you find human authorities so compelling? Why do you think that I am an authority worth quoting?
Tom
 

jonathan180iq

Well-Known Member
The idea is not "may" or "probably," but should be widespread in the universe according to evolution.
Nope. That's a gross mischaracterization of biology.

If intelligent life didn't arise, then that goes against evolution.
Again, nope.

One can't have it both ways.
One isn't trying to...
One needs only understand the basics of Biology to know this.

If intelligent life didn't arise, then the fine tuning theory gets a boost.
Again, nope.

Getting a math problem wrong doesn't make Astrologers more right...

Or some other extinction type theory.
You mean, regular extinction?

The distance argument is BS.
No. Distance and Time are everything.

Imagine throwing a baseball. If you're off by a tiny amount when you first release, you have no chance of hitting the mitt, right?
Now, expand that principle to 100 miles...
1,000 miles...
6 Trillion Miles...
If you're off even the slightest amount, then over time and distance the inaccuracy will only compound.

We should be seeing some kind of evidence if there is intelligent life elsewhere. SETI backs me up on this.
You should read more than one article before posting things on the internet.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
The bottom line is still, if evolution is true, then where is everybody? Why no contact in 200K years? Are there no other earth like planets? That's further evidence of science backing up the Bible.

You just don't like the part where this backs up the Bible and evidence for God because it messes up your worldview. My next point would be can any creatures, not just humans, be able to live on another planet or asteroid? I don't think they can according to fine tuning theory. I don't know if these kinds of experiments were done on the moon. Are you saying that due to lack of atmosphere and oxygen that there aren't any earth creature that can survive by experiment? Humans would have trouble colonizing the moon.

Furthermore, I put the link to the paper on Drake's equation using Monte Carlo theory up to make the parameters more realistic. It's from Cornell, the university that hired Carl Sagan after he was denied tenure at Harvard. You can download the paper by pressing the button on the top left. BTW Carl Sagan wasn't an atheist after all. Another misleading claim by atheists to make him one of their own. Sagan was one who helped create SETI.

Here's what Fermi could figure out. He could estimate the number of piano tuners in Chicago.


Ross 128b, latest of many earth like planet discovered. Keplar has discovered thousands of planets, many are earth like.

Why are you timing the evolution of possible alien civilisations to be in sync with ours, that is a very egotistical attitude.

200k years? I really didn't think radio astronomy was that old? You learn something new every day eh?

How does it back up the bible again? I missed it first time you explained it. What i did see was some wild leaps of faith but no actual evidence.

What is this fine tuning theory? Is that the one debunked by facts that a/ there is no theory of quantum gravity and b/ there is no theory of everything, c/ we know no other universe to how can anyone tell if ours is fine tuned or just the norm? And d/ none of the myriad universal constants are infinitely accurate, in that error there are infinite quantity of values that could be required for infinite other universes. Meaning that ours is nothing special. All of which destroy fine tuning theory

D'oh!!! Do you think that humans could not live in habitats on the moon? Sure there would be problems with radiation exposure and bone loss but people are by nature, explorers.

Not sure about the moon but cellular experiments have been done on skylab
https://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/nmc/experimentSearch.do?spacecraft=Skylab

You don't seem to understand, the parameters of the drake equation cannot be realistic until we actually know the values and untill interstellar travel is possible those variables will remain unknown or best guess.

Yes i know carl sagans story, what is your point in that last little diversion? You want another one, richard dawkins isn't an atheist either and guess what, that helps your argument just as much as the carl sagasn diversion does... Not at all
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
The idea is not "may" or "probably," but should be widespread in the universe according to evolution. If intelligent life didn't arise, then that goes against evolution. One can't have it both ways. If intelligent life didn't arise, then the fine tuning theory gets a boost. Or some other extinction type theory. The distance argument is BS. We should be seeing some kind of evidence if there is intelligent life elsewhere. SETI backs me up on this.


Nope, the failed fine tuning argument does not get a boost. That life evolved is a fact. You are merely using an extremely poor argument. I can't really answer poorly asked questions, why don't you try again?
 
Top