Scientists are god-less liberals

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
barfo said:
Ask Uhura to put their sub space transmissions through the universal translator.

Yes, maybe they've figured out how to use gravitons to communicate. Or maybe they just don't communicate over long distances. We had a civilization for hundreds/thousands of years before we came up with radio, after all.

barfo
Click to expand...

but the long distance communication was typically fire signals, which we perceive through light, which is... electric and magnetic waves which is also radio waves.:ghoti:
 
Denny Crane said:
Do the math.

.01 * .01 * 1000 = 1

That would be:

  • i = 0.01 (1% of which will be intelligent life)
  • fc = 0.01 (1% of which will be able to communicate)
  • L = 10,000 years (which will last 10,000 years)
That leaves the # of planets that support life at zero.
Click to expand...

No. It doesn't. First of all, you are limiting it to this galaxy (R*). If you want to talk about
all life, you need an R* number for the universe. That will be a number much bigger than 10. I have no idea how big, but lets just say 100,000,000 for laughs.

Secondly, fc and fi don't apply if you want to talk about all life and not just intelligent life that can communicate with us.

Finally, L will presumably be much longer than 10,000 years since the life is no longer required to communicate with us. Let's say 100,000 years.

So then the number of planets that have life in the universe would be

N=100,000,000 * 0.5 * 2 * 1 * 100,000 = an obviously big number.

barfo
 
Denny Crane said:
Stars of the same class as the sun. I wouldn't assume that any other kind can support life.
...
Click to expand...

Some astronomers have recently started considering different stars to support life, with planets just closer. This increases the chances only about 3 or 4 times i think though, i honestly forget the numbers, but it does increase.:ghoti:
 
westnob said:
but the long distance communication was typically fire signals, which we perceive through light, which is... electric and magnetic waves which is also radio waves.:ghoti:
Click to expand...

So? We can't perceive a fire burning on a distant planet. We are talking about communications that we can receive.

barfo
 
barfo said:
So? We can't perceive a fire burning on a distant planet. We are talking about communications that we can receive.

barfo
Click to expand...

my point was that it's still essentially through the same format through-out our entire history, light.
 
westnob said:
my point was that it's still essentially through the same format through-out our entire history, light.
Click to expand...

True, but completely irrelevant - unless you are making the point that they'd be likely to develop radio because it is a logical extension of the fundamental tools (em radiation) that they'd already be using. To which I say, maybe. Maybe a chance discovery leads them to leap ahead of us and skip radio altogether in favor of, I don't know, sharks with frickin laser beams on their heads.

barfo
 
Last edited:
BlazerWookee said:
Fixed...
Click to expand...

Fixed? Does that make you a Muslim? Because they recognize too. Or are you a Hindu? Jew? Mormon? Do you believe in the flying spaghetti monster?

It fixes nothing, it comes back to the idea that "my idea that I can not prove in any way shape or form is better than someone else's idea that he can not prove in any way, shape or form".

You want to believe in something? Fine. No problems with me. I just can not believe in anything like that where it's validity rests on a long line of people that might (make that certainly) have manipulated it to their own benefit - be it grabbing land, sodomizing choir boys, forcing others to convert or take their belonging...

No one expects the Spanish Inquisition... but many seem to support the ideas that made it what it is...

Good luck with that.

The trouble is that I am talking in philosophy, but you are listening in gibberish.
 
barfo said:
No. It doesn't. First of all, you are limiting it to this galaxy (R*). If you want to talk about
all life, you need an R* number for the universe. That will be a number much bigger than 10. I have no idea how big, but lets just say 100,000,000 for laughs.

Secondly, fc and fi don't apply if you want to talk about all life and not just intelligent life that can communicate with us.

Finally, L will presumably be much longer than 10,000 years since the life is no longer required to communicate with us. Let's say 100,000 years.

So then the number of planets that have life in the universe would be

N=100,000,000 * 0.5 * 2 * 1 * 100,000 = an obviously big number.

barfo
Click to expand...

Multiply by your handful / 15000 and you come up with somewhere between 6 and 25.

The .5 number and 2 number are ridiculously optimistic. I think it's optimistic at .2 and .1. Now you're below 1.
 
Denny Crane said:
Multiply by your handful / 15000 and you come up with somewhere between 6 and 25.
Click to expand...

That's arithmetically incorrect.

100,000,000 * handful/15000 * 2 * 1 * 100,000 does not equal between 6 and 25.

The .5 number and 2 number are ridiculously optimistic. I think it's optimistic at .2 and .1. Now you're below 1.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you are trying to prove. I said maybe there are only a few. You seem to seem to be trying to prove that a few means less than one. It doesn't.

And besides, I merely said maybe there are only a few. Maybe there are more. Maybe there are none. Maybe there are billions. No way to tell for sure at this point.

barfo
 
Denny Crane said:
Anyone read Carl Sagan's book, "Contact" or seen the movie?

What do you make of all the religious symbolism throughout? This was a very well known but dying scientist who wrote the book. Maybe faced with mortality, even the most devout believer in science wants something more...

Examples of religious symbolism:
Jodie Foster basically goes to heaven and meets her dead father there.
There's the whole bunch of religious zealot imagery throughout the film and book. The guy who blew up the multi-$trillion alien device was one of those zealots.
The special advisor to the president was a man of the cloth, but also a believer in science.
She was initially refused as the one to ride on the alien device because she testified before congress that she was godless.

And finally, when she testified at the end of the movie, when everyone saw and the videotapes recorded her trip took a matter of seconds, she burst into tears and begged everyone to believe her; that she had this very real experience and everyone would basically have to take her word (on FAITH) about it.

More related to this thread...

Why does light travel at 186,000 miles/second and not 187,000 or 185,000? Why is water 2x hydrogen and 1x oxygen?

As a not at all religious person, I can see that we accept the Rules to be what they are, but nobody ever really talks about why the Rules are the way they are. Like someone could have written them.
Click to expand...

It could be just as easily said they are completely random. Somebody wrote them because of the movie "Contact"? Give me a fargin break.
 
Considering we don't even know what the majority of matter in our universe actually is, isn't it a little early to make conclusions about how much life populates it?

For all we know, dark matter is a form of matter that some life form evolves into. Or maybe every extraterrestrial species that achieves a certain level of technology figures out the dark matter lifestyle is way more cool and they just stop caring about things like reaching Earth. *shrug*
 
I like turtles.
 
barfo said:
How many turtles are there in the universe?

barfo
Click to expand...

If my allegory is correct, just one.

And if you don't believe me, take off!
[video=youtube;1BFPt001PYU]
 
There is just one. And there are 4 elephants on top of it. And they carry the discworld.

Paul_Kidby_Discworld.jpg
 
barfo said:
How many turtles are there in the universe?

barfo
Click to expand...

The most widely known version appears in Stephen Hawking's 1988 book A Brief History of Time, which starts:
“ A well-known scientist (some say it was Bertrand Russell) once gave a public lecture on astronomy. He described how the earth orbits around the sun and how the sun, in turn, orbits around the center of a vast collection of stars called our galaxy. At the end of the lecture, a little old lady at the back of the room got up and said: "What you have told us is rubbish. The world is really a flat plate supported on the back of a giant tortoise." The scientist gave a superior smile before replying, "What is the tortoise standing on?" "You're very clever, young man, very clever," said the old lady. "But it's turtles all the way down!"[2] ”
 
barfo said:
How many turtles are there in the universe?

barfo
Click to expand...

Henry David Thoreau, in his journal entry of 4 May 1852,[6] writes:
“ Men are making speeches… all over the country, but each expresses only the thought, or the want of thought, of the multitude. No man stands on truth. They are merely banded together as usual, one leaning on another and all together on nothing; as the Hindoos made the world rest on an elephant, and the elephant on a tortoise, and had nothing to put under the tortoise.
 
hasoos said:
It could be just as easily said they are completely random. Somebody wrote them because of the movie "Contact"? Give me a fargin break.
Click to expand...

I think you missed the point of my post.

Sagan seemed to have been looking for something more than what science offers when faced with his own mortailty. It is something you can see from his book.

The question I asked at the end of my post are the big questions that science doesn't have answers for.

There is a branch of science that is way out there and is tackling those kinds of questions. String theory. Scientists are in love with it because it has mathematical beauty, even though none of it is observable. This is why it is called "theoretical physics."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_theory

For example, scientists tend to agree that there was a big bang, but nobody has an answer as to why there was a big bang, or what was there before the big bang. String theory proponents have suggested that the big bang occured due to the collision of two "branes" in an alternate universe/dimension.

And more interestingly (to my previous post), they propose that there are alternate universes where the laws of physics are not the same as here (e.g. speed of light is not 186,000 miles/sec).
 
Denny Crane said:
Sagan seemed to have been looking for something more than what science offers when faced with his own mortailty. It is something you can see from his book..
Click to expand...


it has been a long time since i read it, but i seem to recall in the book ellie discovers evidence for an underlying order to the universe - something that could be evidence of some sort of purpose to life, but not necessarily something "more than what science offers". the book was more about discovering that there might be more to the universe than we think through science.

i also recall being surprised at how much to gist of the movie will all the emphasis on religious-type faith seemed different than the book.
 
westnob said:
I'll look around to try to find the article, but I heard somewhere that a new calculation has been done, and some have realized/proposed that the radio signals would be too weak by the time they get out of our solar system or maybe into the closest, i forget.

As far as the mars situation, one thing we take for granted is our wonderful spinning molten iron core. Why do you ask? Well I'm glad to explain that this spinning iron, creates a magnetic field, called the ionosphere! This ionosphere protects us from radiation from the sun and space that would go right through the rest of the atmosphere! Mars' core has stopped spinning long ago, although some believe it did spin at one time. The scary part, is that at some point our core will flip, and the ionosphere will disappear briefly. Birds will get messed up, and there will be A LOT of cancer cases.
Click to expand...

Do you have any more information on this. I know I heard a few months back somewhere that the poles were already in progression towards a flip and that it mostly likely would happen within the next 50 years.

Edit - Nevermind, found some info which is interesting and says we may have a few thousand years more...

http://scienceblogs.com/highlyallochthonous/2009/02/is_the_earths_magnetic_field_a.php
 
Last edited:
The sad part is most people don't believe in God because of religion but religion is NEVER mentioned in the bible nor does it say to believe in one, crap it barely even mentions going to church. God does not ask you to give money to church or rape kids. Quit blaming God for people who are abusing there power (Priests, Religion) and trying to take advantage of everyone. We live in a shady ass world and it doesnt stop at religion. Science is corrupted, The president is corrupted, the list goes on.

The Biggest test you can do is just ask God, Pray and talk to him yourself and TRULY mean it. Clear your mind of doubts and give it a shot, It wont hurt ya and if you feel like its a big sham then move on and say you gave it a try.
 
crowTrobot said:
i hope you mean the *politics* of science is corrupted, not science itself. the scientific community itself very effectively self-polices against non-scientific agendas.
Click to expand...

in his defense, scientists are occasionally corrupted, and make up evidence. but that only lasts for about a year before they got ostracized forever.
 
Denny Crane said:
I think you missed the point of my post.

Sagan seemed to have been looking for something more than what science offers when faced with his own mortailty. It is something you can see from his book.

The question I asked at the end of my post are the big questions that science doesn't have answers for.

There is a branch of science that is way out there and is tackling those kinds of questions. String theory. Scientists are in love with it because it has mathematical beauty, even though none of it is observable. This is why it is called "theoretical physics."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_theory

For example, scientists tend to agree that there was a big bang, but nobody has an answer as to why there was a big bang, or what was there before the big bang. String theory proponents have suggested that the big bang occured due to the collision of two "branes" in an alternate universe/dimension.

And more interestingly (to my previous post), they propose that there are alternate universes where the laws of physics are not the same as here (e.g. speed of light is not 186,000 miles/sec).
Click to expand...

I've heard that some physicists are backing off on the "holy grail" that is string theory. Somethings weren't being found that should, or measurements were off from expected values. I would have liked it to be true though =[
 
westnob said:
in his defense, scientists are occasionally corrupted, and make up evidence. but that only lasts for about a year before they got ostracized forever.
Click to expand...


that's rare and it doesn't mean science itself is corrupt. the scientific community by its own rigorously self-policing nature weeds out potential corruption very quickly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top