Enter the wet and Squishy part ... preferability the part with no teeth or what represents teeth. Like avoid the Squids Beak
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
At Least 36 Intelligent Alien Civilizations
- Thread starter Lowlight
- Start date
Enter the wet and Squishy part ... preferability the part with no teeth or what represents teeth. Like avoid the Squids Beak
Stop trying to throw logic into my Alien conspiracy threads...
When they land in Central Park, you'll only look foolish
Guys they are already here. Below is your evidence.
Ancient astronaut theorists say ‘Yes.’
In all seriousness though, seen plenty of UFO’s while living in So Fl.
In all seriousness though, seen plenty of UFO’s while living in So Fl.
36 Intelligent Alien Civilizations? I guess it all depends what they think Intelligent means. Is a microorganism considered Intelligent? Cosmic evolution based calculation? People actually get paid to do this bullshit. I need that job! Just make shit up and get paid! Haha kind of like my local weatherman!
Don't worry, when everything else fails and it will, this will be the Dims last "Hail Mary" and of course, it will be Trump's fault! Mac
You’re missing the point. You or someone else is now supposed to poke holes their hypothesis.
I only have three questions for our new guests ...
MIL or MOA, .308 vs 6.5, and 45ACP or 9mm
MIL or MOA, .308 vs 6.5, and 45ACP or 9mm
You do realize there is probably at least one orafice on said alien - for several folks here pretty sure that qualifies as good.
Maybe they should provide “proof of life” to non-believers like me. I’ll believe that bs about the time I figure it’s a grand idea to whup up on two cops and steal their Taser, run and point the stolen Taser at the pissed-off cops while expecting a BLM GET OUTTA JAIL FREE CARD (All without getting my dumbshit Hide perforated multiple times). It is what I am owed, ya know. Just ask Uncle Milt and Aunt Nancy
There Are At Least 36 Intelligent Alien Civilizations In Our Galaxy, Say Scientists
A new cosmic evolution-based calculation that say that there are likely to be more than 36 ongoing intelligent civilizations throughout our Milky Way galaxy.www.forbes.com
More and more they are conditioning us to accept the fact, we are not alone.
Don't worry, when everything else fails and it will, this will be the Dims last "Hail Mary" and of course, it will be Trump's fault! Mac
'bout fuckin' time we get a proper "October Surprise"!
If faster than light travel isn’t possible it’s unlikely that they’d ever find us, but if they did it would probably just be an AI to harvest our DNA so they could farm us for delicious universe sampler charcuterie boards.
If that were the case, I hope we get a warning first.
That way, I can make the run down and help our new interstellar friends pack up those traitors for a lifetime of well-deserved anal probing.
Offtopic, but here we are on page 2 and not a single reference to the martian chick with three knockers from Total Recall. smh.
TO THE ALIENS READING THIS THREAD: IF YOU LURK HERE LONG ENOUGH AND DRY FIRE EVERYDAY, YOU CAN LEARN HOW TO GAME THE PRIZE TABLE TOO
Headline: "Scientists confirm there are aliens".
Reality:
- Professor in England with zero credentials in biology made an equation filled with assumptions and popped out a number.
- No actual evidence of the kind he says we would use to confirm existence of these aliens exists.
- Forbes runs misleading click bait headline, which is then picked up by 50 other news organizations competing for clicks
And that's how people get hoodwinked by the media.
Reality:
- Professor in England with zero credentials in biology made an equation filled with assumptions and popped out a number.
- No actual evidence of the kind he says we would use to confirm existence of these aliens exists.
- Forbes runs misleading click bait headline, which is then picked up by 50 other news organizations competing for clicks
And that's how people get hoodwinked by the media.
Well, to start with, that wasn’t the headline. People get “hoodwinked” by mis-reading headlines and making assumptions after not reading/understanding the actual article.
Well I just hope they ain't Klingon women. Those bitches beat the shit out of you before you eff them. Plus they need you to beat them into orgasm. Not my style.
Exact QUOTE of Forbes headline posted 27 hours ago:
There Are At Least 36 Intelligent Alien Civilizations In Our Galaxy, Say Scientists
I understand the study and where the numbers came from. Your assumption about my lack of understanding is just silly.
And today Forbes posts this headline:
36 Alien Civilizations In The Milky Way? The Science Behind A Ridiculous Headline
So the same news organization that posted the stupid headline posts commentary on their own "ridiculous" headline the next day.
Bamboozle at its finest.
That’s a great laypersons book for many things, but is limited simply by having been published 17 years ago. Scientific knowledge and advances continue to change what we “know” to be true. Here’s an excerpt from the article on this book in Wikipedia, pointing out examples of at least three things that have changed since then.
I think out of the thousands of posts here in the Pit there are maybe 36 intelligent ones. Mostly Shankster's...
Guess what hasn't changed since this book was written? There is zero credible evidence or confirmation of extra terrestrial life.
You say that you read and understand the article and still are arguing about evidence and proof. The article specifically states and discusses that the chances that intelligent life could exist at the same time and could be detected within the human existence span are statistically almost impossible due to the sheer size of the Milky Way and how long it would take for evidence to reach earth that an intelligent species other than ourselves exists/existed.
Keep trying to spin it your way and we’ll all know how much you actually read and understood.
Those in charge will Not allow any credible evidence of alien life until they feel it's the time they want it out (unless of course some aliens come an do open war on the earth).
Much like much in Geology is heavily suppressed because it's not what people are "supposed" to think.
For some reason you don't understand that "odds" are not proof or even good evidence when those odds are literally guessed at, based on a sample size of exactly one (i.e. we only have one example of a planet with life on it). Odds start the questions, they don't answer them.
Until the authors actually demonstrate that their assumed odds that they used to base the equations on are valid, the equations are literally meaningless, or at the very best, misleading. I don't use unsupported and non-demonstrated assumptions to "prove" anything or as evidence to support a hypothesis.
And the time to believe aliens are in or have been in our galaxy, or even our universe, is AFTER it has been demonstrated.
EDIT: You wrote, " Keep trying to spin it your way and we’ll all know how much you actually read and understood."
I have no reason to spin this at all. I'm discussing how we rationally use equations to make predictions. And I am very happy to let any readers judge my understanding vs. yours.
If you are actually curious about why the study is so silly, just read the massive response from people who actually study this for a living. They are more than happy to point out every flaw in the reasoning the two authors. And there are bunches of these articles. If you really cared, you could have read several of them in less time than it took to respond to me on this thread. There is nothing wrong with wanting to believe something. But recognize that the time to rationally believe something is after it has been demonstrated.
REBUTTAL FROM FORBES, THE VERY NEWS AGENCY THAT POSTED THE MISLEADING CLAIM THAT I QUOTED IN THE FIRST PLACE:
As we get into the more advanced questions involving alien life, our understanding gives way to ignorance.
- We do not know how frequently, given an Earth-sized world in an Earth-like orbit around a Sun-like star, life will arise on that world.
- We do not know how frequently, once life arises, it takes hold and thrives, sustaining itself for billions of years in an unbroken tree of life.
- We do not know what the odds are, on the worlds where life arises and thrives, of that life evolving into something complex, multicellular, and highly differentiated: something that only first occurred on Earth in the earliest stages of the Cambrian explosion.
- And we do not know, given the odds that all of these steps occur, what the probability is that an intelligent, technologically advanced species will arise on such a world.
- All we know, if we're being honest, is that things occurred on Earth the way they did, and everything else is nothing more than healthy speculation, at best.
Last edited:
Well, I suppose that we should ignore all odds in science and never try to prove or disprove them then. That sounds like a sure way forward now doesn’t it? An example from your hero’s book was already posted. Bryson wrote that the Higg’s Boson “...was invented simply as a way to endow particles with mass.” Most physicists at the time slammed the concept as not having any proof and merely throwing stuff at the wall to see if it would stick.
By your logic, many of the most amazing discoveries and inventions would never exist today. Scientists discover and prove things every day while following fools paths and throwing stuff at the wall. Much more is discovered while working to disprove concepts and suppositions.
Oh, and I never said that there was proof that there is extraterrestrial life. You supposed I did since I pointed out that what was considered once impossible by the scientific community at a given time is often proven to be otherwise. But then I imagine you also still believe that the earth is flat, right?
Still missed the point. Again, odds start the conversation, which you then investigate to verify. Nobody said there was definitely a Higgs boson until it was verified. But in this case, even the odds are guesses. Did you even take the few seconds required to read the Forbes rebuttal? If you did, I'll save my conversations for someone who can understand the most basic arguments when they are presented in a way that should be obvious to the most casual observer.
You also seem to be making a habit of inventing sorts of assumptions about me that aren't supported by evidence. Again, not surprised. I am a fucking scientist and an engineer. None of the things you say would follow from what I believe or from what I posted. I never said you shouldn't investigate based on a hunch. Did I? But newsflash, almost NO discoveries come from "fools paths". Most come from very carefully following what we know to discover what we don't know. But again, nothing I said would imply that I believe anyone should not follow any path of investigation they choose. Literally the point I made was that the time to believe something, or the time that you can reasonably say it is true, is after it has been demonstrated. Instead of pretending to know things about me you can't and don't know, why not just stick to this topic. I'm guessing you are moving on to further insults because I hurt your feelings by demonstrating you were wrong after the first time you insulted me. For this topic, YOU started out by saying I didn't have understanding of the article or the study. Then you stated the headline didn't say what I said it said. Did you apologize when I posted the exact quote that showed you were shown to be wrong? Nope. And as for proof, I was completely specific when I addressed belief. I included proof as well, but the belief part was specifically addressed to those who were bamboozled by the click bait post and flawed study into believing it was true.
I'll make you a deal. If you don't directly address me in a post, or snarkily address me in a post where it would be reasonable to assume you are referencing me, I won't exchange any further posts with you.
Last edited:
Somewhere, on another planet in our galaxy, an alien is saying the same thing.
Are you familiar with Dr. Steven Greer's work? He has some interesting experiences and theories. To my mind much of what he says makes sense. He has also provided council to some high level world leaders on matters of UFOs and govs' dark spending projects.Stop trying to throw logic into my Alien conspiracy threads...
When they land in Central Park, you'll only look foolish
Steven M. Greer - Wikipedia
Similar threads
