Jump to content
Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī

Scientists Assert That We Will Make Contact With A

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

It still is an alternative to carbon based life. Sceptics do not carry much logic, you are only sceptical for the sake of it.

Given the size of the universe, it's possibly out there, but it won't be in the places we look. Silicon chain molecules are only stable in very high heat and the absence of liquid water. At present, scientists use water and temperate temperature as boundaries in the search for life. Silicon molecules are about as active as carbon molecules, but much less stable. 

I have no doubt there are "people" out there. I just doubt we will encounter them in our lifetimes. Maybe in our lifetimes we will find simple life, but probably not sentient life. 

I do kind of hope I'm wrong - that would be cool. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hasanhh said:

Plausibility is the minimal state of Likelihood. Plausible, lexicographically, is "apparently likely" and 'apparent' requires "readily seen"; "visible".  So it is not 'plausible' -as you write- that life exists elsewhere because nothing has been seen. The idea is, at this time, speculative. Speculative as in the NOVA, PBS program that said other planets have "land whales" :hahaha:

l was looking for place on SC for this quotation from Richard Feynman (1964) in a lecture he gave on gravitation l saw this morning. This appears the place:

"... nowdays more modernly in working out the motion of satellites and ... to calculate the predictions of the planets' position(s) which have great utility for astrologers to publish their predictions and horoscopes in the magazines. That's the strange World we live in that all of the advances in understanding are used only to continue the nonsense which is existed for 2,000 years. 

What you have promoted here is no different than how the ltalian word canali lead to Martian lnvasion Ridiculousness in the early part of the 20th Century.

Nice fallacies you employed there, you firstly engaged in semantics. Pluasible means it can still occur; hence your ruling out of it makes no logical sense. Secondly you are engaging in the argument from ignorance fallacy, assuming because we haven't discovered any life outside this earth, that no such life exists. That is also non-sensical. 

You've cut that Feynman quote, why don't you quote the whole thing he stated before that? It's not even speaking against me but religon lol...

 

Quote

SALT LAKE CITY — What are the odds that alien life exists elsewhere in the universe? At a major physics meeting, experts talked about updates to historic predictions about whether humans are alone in the cosmos.

In 1961, astronomer Frank Drake wrote an equation to quantify the likelihood of finding a technologically advanced civilization elsewhere in the universe. The so-called Drake equation took into account factors such as the fraction of stars with planets around them and the fraction of those planets that would be hospitable to life.

In the years since 1961, scientists have updated the values in the Drake equation to incorporate newly acquired scientific information. For example, when Drake wrote his equation, scientists didn't know for sure if stars other than the sun had planets around them; now, researchers have evidence that most stars host planets. But science wasn't the only thing that influenced Drake — even current events factor into his calculation. [The Father of SETI: Q&A with Astronomer Frank Drake]

http://www.space.com/32711-searching-for-alien-life-are-we-alone.html

Quote

Many scientists believe we are not alone in the universe. It's probable, they say, that life could have arisen on at least some of the billions of planets thought to exist in our galaxy alone -- just as it did here on planet Earth. This basic question about our place in the Universe is one that may be answered by scientific investigations. What are the next steps to finding life elsewhere?

https://www.nasa.gov/content/finding-life-beyond-earth-is-within-reach

 

Edited by Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

You've cut that Feynman quote, why don't you quote the whole thing he stated before that? It's not even speaking against me but religon lol...

 

 

1] Feynman was ridiculing astrology. Not religion --unless you find hope-in-stars is religion.

2] the space denoted by the ellipse ( the "..." ) only contains planets and rockets as l remember.

 

Similarly; you probably saw this afternoon the massive landslide burying a quarter mile of road at Big Sur. But, did you know yesterday, a kilometer plus crack appeared in Bungo-ona, Oita-ken, Japan which is part of the Aso volcanic system?  So, more Worldly, do you think Rodan and Mothra are reappearing? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?Rodan_(film) 

Well, a question like that is just as plausible as life-forms surviving a GBR.

BTW, "semantics" means "pertaining to meaning". lf there is no meaning defined in words, then a sentence and the associated idea has no meaning.

 

Edited by hasanhh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, hasanhh said:

1] Feynman was ridiculing astrology. Not religion --unless you find hope-in-stars is religion.

2] the space denoted by the ellipse ( the "..." ) only contains planets and rockets as l remember.

 

Similarly; you probably saw this afternoon the massive landslide burying a quarter mile of road at Big Sur. But, did you know yesterday, a kilometer plus crack appeared in Bungo-ona, Oita-ken, Japan which is part of the Aso volcanic system?  So, more Worldly, do you think Rodan and Mothra are reappearing? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?Rodan_(film) 

Well, a question like that is just as plausible as life-forms surviving a GBR.

BTW, "semantics" means "pertaining to meaning". lf there is no meaning defined in words, then a sentence and the associated idea has no meaning.

 

You were basing your point off semantics, hence it is a fallacy. Don't try and act smart.

I showed you two links, one from Nasa's own website that clearly indicates scientists believe ET exists out there. Hence your non-sensical scepticism doesn't matter. You also ignore the Drake equation:

You also ignore the addressing of the fermi paradox. If life exists on this planet, it can exist on other planets. 

Edited by Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

You were basing your point off semantics, hence it is a fallacy. Don't try and act smart.

I showed you two links, one from Nasa's own website that clearly indicates scientists believe ET exists out there. Hence your non-sensical scepticism doesn't matter. You also ignore the Drake equation:

You also ignore the addressing of the fermi paradox. If life exists on this planet, it can exist on other planets. 

Both Drake and Fermi are using probabilities.

But it doesn't matter how high the probability or even if it at one point certainly occurred.

A GRB eradicates all live forms at a galactic level. That is why other scientists say the probability is very low.

:dwarf::dwarf::dwarf:  This has been like telling a teenager he can't have the car and we get barraged by hypothetic hysteria.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, hasanhh said:

Both Drake and Fermi are using probabilities.

But it doesn't matter how high the probability or even if it at one point certainly occurred.

A GRB eradicates all live forms at a galactic level. That is why other scientists say the probability is very low.

:dwarf::dwarf::dwarf:  This has been like telling a teenager he can't have the car and we get barraged by hypothetic hysteria.

GRB WAS TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT INTO THOSE PROBABILITIES... Are you seriously this blind? GRB also effects us, but we are still here....  and your point contradicts itself, "probablity doesn't matter but erm yh it's a low probablity that life exists outside our planet..." That literally makes no sense. 

You keep spewing "the probability is low", what mathematical equation did you use to determine that?

You've not provided any evidence, show an actual link.

Quote

 

Edited by Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, hasanhh said:

Besides, why hasn't SETI found anything in a century.?

The universe is really big.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, notme said:

The universe is really big.

Neil DeGrasse Tyson was on Charlie Rose Wednesday night and was talking about current speculation about multiverses. 

This stuff gets crazier all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, hasanhh said:

Neil DeGrasse Tyson was on Charlie Rose Wednesday night and was talking about current speculation about multiverses. 

This stuff gets crazier all the time.

Multiverse is an interesting theory, but as far as I can tell it can never be proven or disproven, so is effectively irrelevant. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, hasanhh said:

You still can't have the car.

Besides, why hasn't SETI found anything in a century.?

Because they've only starter "properly" searching in the last decade. Surveying millions of planets and scanning them for life is difficult. There are many markers of life that need to be anaylised. Secondly who is to say we haven't been contacted? The WOW signal 1974 which still cannot be explained today without invoking the possibility of it being an alien signal. Also Tabby's star definately could be a dyson sphere. You seem to be sceptical for no reason. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

.... "properly" searching in the last decade. ...

Then what about the previous century? All of those efforts were improper?

And "Bow-Wow" was an AM pattern that can be repeated with matter moving in-front-of a signal source. Reference: AM Broadcasting.

You still can't have the car.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

You have to imagine the universe since we humans do not have the physical capabilites of viewing its entirety with our own eyes... EXACTLY  :clap:  lt is all been in your imagination -- justified by probability upon probability.

You  imagined ... You imagined ... You got it !

Now, in recognizing the error of your probabilities, YOU NOW may have the car.

And remember, this is a one-over-[a number exceeding the number of atoms in the universe] probability that a telephone pole can materialize right before your eyes. Please avoid that probability.

Remember: Do Not Dream and Drive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, hasanhh said:

Then what about the previous century? All of those efforts were improper?

And "Bow-Wow" was an AM pattern that can be repeated with matter moving in-front-of a signal source. Reference: AM Broadcasting.

You still can't have the car.

 

Can you provide proof for that claim in regards to the 'wow' signal? 

What did we actually search in the prior century that amounts to a great quantity, qualifying your statement?

Edited by Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, hasanhh said:

You  imagined ... You imagined ... You got it !

Now, in recognizing the error of your probabilities, YOU NOW may have the car.

And remember, this is a one-over-[a number exceeding the number of atoms in the universe] probability that a telephone pole can materialize right before your eyes. Please avoid that probability.

Remember: Do Not Dream and Drive.

Your sarcasm isn't funny nor patronizing, just childish. You literally have nothing to offer here and are just being rude. 

Secondly, there is no comparison bewteen that and aliens; literally none. 

Edited by Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now you can't have the car.

The  WOW/Whoopie signal was AM analyzed because FM and PM does not exist in Nature. There are many ways a nearly steady energy source can appear as an AM signal. Partial interruption (shielding) is one way.

You also have not defined "alien".

And truly, the statement "there is a finite probability that a telephone pole can suddenly materialize right before you eyes" is a 50 years ago college quip. Excluding the requirements for organized cell structure and just using the 'same' number of atoms, as our physics teacher showed us on the board, quantum mechanically, the chance for all the atoms in a telephone pole to suddenly move into another displaced position is far less than once in  the number of atoms in the Universe. But it is still a probability. Don't ask me to re-work it, l don't remember.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@hasanhh

Quote

The  WOW/Whoopie signal was AM analyzed because FM and PM does not exist in Nature. There are many ways a nearly steady energy source can appear as an AM signal. Partial interruption (shielding) is one way.

You haven't provided me actual evidence, just speculation on the wow signal.

Quote

You also have not defined "alien".

Alien is anything that is ET.

Quote

And truly, the statement "there is a finite probability that a telephone pole can suddenly materialize right before you eyes" is a 50 years ago college quip. Excluding the requirements for organized cell structure and just using the 'same' number of atoms, as our physics teacher showed us on the board, quantum mechanically, the chance for all the atoms in a telephone pole to suddenly move into another displaced position is far less than once in  the number of atoms in the Universe. But it is still a probability. Don't ask me to re-work it, l don't remember.

Your telephone analogy is 50 years old? Then what relevance does it have now? The science has moved on, if anything it still doesn't make any sense in regards to alien life existing. Secondly on that point, the Drake equation goes against that, it states there are atleast 10,000 possible alien civilizations in our galaxy alone. That isn't a low probability but high one; hence the failure of that example.

Edited by Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

@hasanhh

You haven't provided me actual evidence, just speculation on the wow signal.

Alien is anything that is ET.

Your telephone analogy is 50 years old? Then what relevance does it have now? The science has moved on You mean Quantum Mechanics is no longer used?, if anything it still doesn't make any sense in regards to alien life existing. Secondly on that point, the Drake equation goes against that, it states there are atleast 10,000 possible alien civilizations in our galaxy alone. That isn't a low probability but high one; hence the failure of that example.

You want to dream in ET, then dream in ET. You just can't drive my car.

Try some more Earthly speculation.

You know what is revealed about jinni. Created from a fire.  Speculate on what kind of diseases jinni get when they are created from fire as compared to the diseases we from wet clay get.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@hasanhh

Quote

You want to dream in ET, then dream in ET. You just can't drive my car.

Deflection...

Quote

Try some more Earthly speculation.

What does that mean?

 

Quote

You know what is revealed about jinni. Created from a fire.  Speculate on what kind of diseases jinni get when they are created from fire as compared to the diseases we from wet clay get.

So you acknowledge Jinns but not aliens? Right....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎5‎/‎25‎/‎2017 at 5:21 PM, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

Because they've only starter "properly" searching in the last decade. Surveying millions of planets and scanning them for life is difficult. There are many markers of life that need to be anaylised. Secondly who is to say we haven't been contacted? The WOW signal 1974 which still cannot be explained today without invoking the possibility of it being an alien signal. Also Tabby's star definately could be a dyson sphere. You seem to be sceptical for no reason. 

 

On ‎5‎/‎25‎/‎2017 at 5:56 PM, hasanhh said:

Then what about the previous century? All of those efforts were improper?

And "Bow-Wow" was an AM pattern that can be repeated with matter moving in-front-of a signal source. Reference: AM Broadcasting.

You still can't have the car.

 

Follow-Up --in the argumentative sense:

https://www.space.com/37579-weird-radio-signal-ross-128-star-satellite.html 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recent Posts on ShiaChat!

    • What racist comments?
    • Hello, Not a single rebuke from fellow Shia Chat members or Edits from Shia Chat Moderators?  But, to date, there are two likes? This post clearly violates Shia Chat rule number 4, No swear words, unmannered replies or racist comments, especially when directed at other members. A warning followed by a temporary ban shall be met. If a member repeats their offensive or racist language, a permanent ban will take place. No excuses. Overt slogans of "death" or "destruction" (or similar wording) of any specific government, nation, people, group, or religion is not permitted. However, constructive criticisms of the above are welcomed and encouraged. And, I question the morals of those that would allow a post such as Darth Vader's to go unanswered.  Many of you like to lament about the irrationality of "Islamaphobia."  Yet, you only clap and praise such racist and divisive post. It has been nice chatting with you all.  I have learned what I came here to learn. All the Best, David
    • Wasalam  Are you not allowed to see your daughter anymore sister?  If Allah سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى can understand our thoughts I have no doubt that the creator of heaven, earth and hell can determine our dreams. Anything is possible sister and this very much could be a mercy of Allah bestowed upon you. 
    • Jungle main mor nacha kis ne dekha?? @shiaman14
    • I heared a scholar saying that every sinner will burn in hell. And this burning is to cleanse him from sinns he committed. And this burning of sinner is mercy of Allah. Once he is cleansed from sins he will be send to paradise. 
×