your thoughts on aliens/ extra terrestials?

[dad]

I suppose, but even in calm waters it would have drifted to an extent. Any wind, movement in the water from the rain early on, etc.

Drifting insinuates that God did not direct. GPS.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Drifting insinuates that God did not direct. GPS.

Considering that god apparently has unlimited control over the weather, I would consider those natural means by which the ark drifted to either be accounted for by god or influenced in some way by god. We both agree that should the flood story be true, the ark didn't end up in the same spot it started out in, so let's leave it at that.

 

[stevevw]

I would be surprised if there were not aliens in our multiverse.

Doesn't the multiverse hypothesis say that there could be another you or me out there but living a different life in a different world. Or doesn't it say there could be many universes where there could be some with strange creatures or some that never created any life. In fact there is suppose to be a different scenario for each universe as each one was slightly different so that it could explain how ours was so right that it created us and has the perfect conditions for life.

 

[SkyWriting]

The evidence says Earth bears life. It does not say ONLY Earth bears life.

Yes, we even checked the moon for life contamination from earth. None.
No other found in our system. The only system with life at all.
No signs found on meteors from deep space.
No signs of life "trying" to form out of minerals.
No random efforts of life from rock or chemicals or minerals.
Nothing.

 

[SkyWriting]

To think we are the only life forming planet in the universe is <snip>...

Realistic.

Nothing found. Most important, no natural laws or chemical "laws" that "lean toward" life.
No random attempts for minerals or chemicals to procreate. Nothing to suggest in
examining the elements that they would form life if they could. Nothing to suggest it
would ever happen.

 

[Noxot]

Doesn't the multiverse hypothesis say that there could be another you or me out there but living a different life in a different world. Or doesn't it say there could be many universes where there could be some with strange creatures or some that never created any life. In fact there is suppose to be a different scenario for each universe as each one was slightly different so that it could explain how ours was so right that it created us and has the perfect conditions for life.

maybe the only thing that is real is myself and each person is in their own universe and I see my own version of everyone else while at the same time everyone else in their own universe sees their own version of me. thus there are many different versions of me as well but the me that is typing is me in my universe and you are my perception of yourself but I also get information from your own universe as well that helps to make a basic 'what you are' and then my universe mixes with it to create a unique reality and a unique version of you... but you are just a copy and distorted version to some degree so that everything can be ordered and sorted to an even more perfect and higher degree than would otherwise would be allowed if we all shared the same universe.

maybe the universe splits off into as many different universes as there need be and maybe it is forever increasing and multiplying by all possible factors. so as i live my normal human life this adds new variables for the universe to make more math for all possible conditions and maybe each electron does the same thing and so the multiverse could be so infinity large that there is no possible way for a human being to ever grasp the realities we are part of.

another theory about reality that i have heard is that the Word/Logos of God is like the programming language for all of reality but it does not mean all possible realities exist. it does mean that every possible reality can exist if it needs to. so in a way they exist but they are hidden in the freedom of God and also the freedom of man...and what is, is due to it being experienced or 'created'.

i would say if God does things then he probably does a lot of things. to believe that there are no aliens is a product of the tiny tiny vision that humans have. i'm pretty sure God has an infinite number of children and they won't all fit on the earth but probably fill all of reality for ever and ever. if God does lots of things then so do his children. and so eventually we find ourselves in this strange place...

 

[SkyWriting]

Considering that god apparently has unlimited control over the weather, I would consider those natural means by which the ark drifted to either be accounted for by god or influenced in some way by god. We both agree that should the flood story be true, the ark didn't end up in the same spot it started out in, so let's leave it at that.

He seems to have special powers over water. It's possible that water is under the direct influence of the Holy Spirit.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Doesn't the multiverse hypothesis say that there could be another you or me out there but living a different life in a different world.

That's the 'many worlds' interpretation of quantum mechanics - each particle's 'choice' creates two distinct universes, and never the twain shall meet.

Or doesn't it say there could be many universes where there could be some with strange creatures or some that never created any life.

That's the 'anthropic principle' (hard or soft, I forget which) - the idea that a sufficiently large number of planets means extra-terrestrial life is all but guaranteed. If there are multiple universes, there are that many more planets!

In fact there is suppose to be a different scenario for each universe as each one was slightly different so that it could explain how ours was so right that it created us and has the perfect conditions for life.

It's often said that Shakespeare exists encoded somewhere within the digits of pi, because it has an infinite non-repeating decimal expansion. But that property alone isn't enough to ensure Shakespeare exists, as it's quite easy to select a number with an infinite non-repeating decimal expansion which absolutely doesn't have Shakespeare encoded somewhere therein*.

So I've never been convinced that 'infinite universes explains life without god' is actually sound, as one can envision infinite empty universes with no life whatsoever.

*My own personal construction is this: consider the number 0.12345678910111213141516171819202122232425... obviously a concatenation of the integers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5... and so one. Now suppose I took that number and replaced the digit '2' with the digit '0'. I'd get: 0.10345678910111013141516171819001000304050607080931303334353637383940... and so on. This is a perfectly ordinary number except that there exists no digit '2'. This number has an infinite non-recurring decimal expansion that doesn't contain every combination fo digits - '1234' never exists in that number.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Yes, we even checked the moon for life contamination from earth. None.
No other found in our system. The only system with life at all.
No signs found on meteors from deep space.
No signs of life "trying" to form out of minerals.
No random efforts of life from rock or chemicals or minerals.
Nothing.

So all that tells us is we've not found life yet. We've barely scratched the surface of the planets and moons in our solar system - no, wrong,we've barely seen the planets and moons in our solar system, let along conclusively proven there's no life there.

So I reaffirm what I said: the evidence does NOT say life exists only on Earth. Do you, or do you not, disagree?

 

[SkyWriting]

So all that tells us is we've not found life yet. We've barely scratched the surface of the planets and moons in our solar system - no, wrong,we've barely seen the planets and moons in our solar system, let along conclusively proven there's no life there.

So I reaffirm what I said: the evidence does NOT say life exists only on Earth. Do you, or do you not, disagree?

You're not listening because you refuse to believe the science:

No signs of life "trying" to form out of minerals.
No random efforts of life from rock or chemicals or minerals.
Nothing.

All evidence says life does not form naturally.
Use all your brains and try to make some.
Then ask a dog to try it.
Then ask a fly to form some life from minerals.

You can see the direction this is heading.
Science says life is impossible to create. And far less probable to stumble upon.

 

[dad]

Considering that god apparently has unlimited control over the weather, I would consider those natural means by which the ark drifted to either be accounted for by god or influenced in some way by god. We both agree that should the flood story be true, the ark didn't end up in the same spot it started out in, so let's leave it at that.

How would I know? If God guided it, it ended up in just the right place.

 

[SkyWriting]

There are various theories about how that distance could be circumvented.

Not really. Those are pure fiction.
If your body could squeeze through a pinhole
in space, you may have a shot. Even then
the pinhole is only a math model.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

You're not listening because you refuse to believe the science:

No signs of life "trying" to form out of minerals.
No random efforts of life from rock or chemicals or minerals.
Nothing.

All evidence says life does not form naturally.
Use all your brains and try to make some.
Then ask a dog to try it.
Then ask a fly to form some life from minerals.

You can see the direction this is heading.
Science says life is impossible to create. And far less probable to stumble upon.

Look at what you're saying:

1) No signs of X
2) Therefore, science says X is impossible

This is not rational thinking.

 

[SkyWriting]

Look at what you're saying:

1) No signs of X
2) Therefore, science says X is impossible

This is not rational thinking.

You look at what I said instead of a very poor spin on a paraphrase of an idea of a memory of what you read.

"You're not listening because you refuse to believe the science:

No signs of life "trying" to form out of minerals.
No random efforts of life from rock or chemicals or minerals.
Nothing.

All evidence says life does not form naturally.
Use all your brains and try to make some.
Then ask a dog to try it.
Then ask a fly to form some life from minerals.

You can see the direction this is heading.
Science says life is impossible to create.
And far less probable to stumble upon.

I didn't say what was missing was "life".
I said what was missing was any evidence
of any process or trends or laws-of-science
or indicators of any kind that life in inherent
in non-living matter.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

You look at what I said instead of a very poor spin on a paraphrase of an idea of a memory of what you read.

I stand by my paraphrase.

You said: "No signs of life "trying" to form out of minerals. No random efforts of life from rock or chemicals or minerals. Nothing."

And from that you concluded: "All evidence says life does not form naturally. Science says life is impossible to create."

You said, "There are no signs of life on these specific objects, so therefore science says life is impossible to create."

That is genuinely what I believe you said. If I am wrong, explain to me my error.

(I want to have a rational, civil discussion with you, so please do me the courtesy of not being so nasty as to hurl insults my way. Or does 'love your neighbour' mean nothing these days?)

 

[SkyWriting]

I stand by my paraphrase.

You said: "No signs of life "trying" to form out of minerals. No random efforts of life from rock or chemicals or minerals. Nothing."

And from that you concluded: "All evidence says life does not form naturally. Science says life is impossible to create."

You said, "There are no signs of life on these specific objects, so therefore science says life is impossible to create."

That is genuinely what I believe you said. If I am wrong, explain to me my error.

(I want to have a rational, civil discussion with you, so please do me the courtesy of not being so nasty as to hurl insults my way. Or does 'love your neighbor' mean nothing these days?)

There is no courtesy in a paraphrase. If you feel insulted by misquoted people
then don't. I see that you don't understand what quote marks are for.
They are to be used when you make an "Exact Quote" from the source.
You don't get to rephrase a quote in quotes. Use the quote button.

I say there are no indications that life is trying to form by any process.
For that reason, life is scientifically not possible.
There needs to be both motive and method. We've found no motive
or method. So to speak.


Not only that, but no life anywhere else within
spitting distance either. Nor signs of life in radio or visual spectrum's.
Or in gamma ray spectrum. Nothing anywhere, ever.

Not even on comets.
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2014/01/21/phone-home-esa-sign-life-rosetta/

 

[Noxot]

Look at what you're saying:

1) No signs of X
2) Therefore, science says X is impossible

This is not rational thinking.

haha... god = x

 

[Sofaman]

Not only that, but no life anywhere else within
spitting distance either. Nor signs of life in radio or visual spectrum's.
Or in gamma ray spectrum. Nothing anywhere.

In Cosmic terms the spit hasn't even left the lips with regards to how far we've searched.

We've been transmitting radio signals for all of 70 years. At the speed of light that means we've covered a 70 light year radius. Considering any recipient would have to send a signal back t the same speed, you can reduce that bubble to to 35 light year radius.

The Milky Way galaxy is 100,000 light years across. We haven't even begun to make the scratch in the surface.

Add to the fact that intelligence is not essential for survival of any species. Of the billions of species that have lived on earth, only one has developed the means to use technology then intelligence could be quite rare.

Then we are assuming that any alien civilisation would have the inclination to respond.

 

[stevevw]

So I guess if we have only began to scratch the surface with sending signals out and the same for any other life forms out there if they exist we can assume that every UFO sighting that has occurred is a fake. Every story of abduction and visitation are all fakes as any aliens would live so far away that they would never be able to reach here.

 

[Sofaman]

I give as much credence to UFO sightings as I do to ghost, Bigfoot, Yeti or divine being sightings.

That's not to say they're all fake, more like misguided. The word unidentified is key in UFO. Someone sees a flying object that is unidentified then it takes a ridiculous leap of faith to say it must be extra terrestrial beings. Much like all God the gaps arguments.

And if an alien civilisation has the ability of intergalactic travel, chances are, to them we'd be as insignificant as an earwig is to us. Why would they bother with us