NASA: we will find alien life by 2025

[Habit7]

Whose words am I twisting?

Pseudo science is saying evolution is the basis of all biology. Say what factual science I deny and I will publicly denounce it.

The discovery of planets within the habitable zone proves that planets exists within the habitable zone. Any conclusion beyond that is faith, something you say doesn't exist in science.

faith is not a requirement to carry out science. It is however a requirement for religion.

You claim the earth was created in 1 week. You claim the earth is 6000-12000 years old. You claim therefore that dinosaurs lived at the same time with humans. You claim that there was some magic that explains how the universe is only 6000-12000 years old yet we can see stars that are millions of lightyears away that took the light from it millions of years to get to us.

Faith is a requirement in religion, but if according to you the theory of evolution is the basis for all biology then your biology is faith in a theory, not deductions from fact.

Factual, observable, testable, repeatable science has multiple theories for the following:
Timespan of the formation of Earth (BTW the Bible says the Earth was created on the 1st day, not 1 week)
The age of the Earth
When dinosaurs roamed the Earth

Whatever answer you have for those are based on consensus not on objective truth. The truth to that is whatever answer you give to those questions it is quite likely it can change next week.


WRT the "magic" that explains speed of light, this is what you said:

Young earth creationists cunningly obfuscate anisotropic synchrony convention to suit their claims, claiming that light does not travel at the same speed all the time and infact light that is coming towards the earth travels at an infinite speed and light that is going away form the earth travels at a much slower speed. I say "cunning" since there is no real way to test this and even if it were true the universe would still look the same way it does to us using the "constant speed of light" convention.

Like I said above, theories on the speed of light has factors that would not make it constant. Anisotropic synchrony convention is one which would for all for the creation of stars on the 4th day and their arrive instantly to an observer on Earth yet be lightyears away.


Bringing it all back to aliens, we both have evidences and thus derive theories which whether you like it or not are exercises in faith/hope. I lack the faith to exercise it in aliens, yourself and others may lack the faith to exercise it in God. But you need to separate your fact from theory, if you are equating theories with fact then you are exercising a faith/hope much stronger than mine.

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

But you need to separate your fact from theory, if you are equating theories with fact then you are exercising a faith/hope much stronger than mine.

you've really perfected the art of throwing red herrings - you do it so deftly!

Theory - a supposition or a system of ideas intended to explain something, especially one based on general principles independent of the thing to be explained.

Scientific Theory - a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation e.g. Theory of Evolution.



must we go over this in every thread?

Isn't Evolution Just Another Religion That Requires Faith?
No. A religion is a set of beliefs based on the supernatural, which by definition is untestable and impossible to disprove (or "unfalsifiable"); Faith, in the religious sense, can be stated as "belief without evidence." No aspect of science works this way, including the Theory of Evolution. All scientific theories have been scrutinized through years of experimentation, and can all be falsifiable. For example, the Theory of Gravity can be proven false if a scientist can devise an experiment where two bodies did not attract each other. Likewise, the Theory of Evolution could be proven false if a scientist ever documents the evolution of a new adaptation to an organism which did not in any way benefit the organism's ability to survive, reproduce, or ensure the survival of its species as a whole.

While scientists may place faith in a scientific theory, their faith is based on past evidence. For example, all scientists have faith that the Law of Thermodynamics will hold true during an experiment because there is overwhelming past evidence to support this belief. This is completely different than placing faith in a religious belief, which has no supporting evidence at all.

Isn't Evolution Just a Theory?
Evolution is often criticized by opponents as being "just a theory." This argument is especially common in America, where the word "theory" usually means an unproven idea. However, in science a theory is the highest degree of certainty. Gravity is "just a theory." The Earth orbiting the Sun is "just a theory." By definition, a scientific theory is a hypothesis which has withstood rigorous testing and is well-supported by the facts. There is overwhelming evidence for biological evolution, just as there is overwhelming evidence for gravity.

Why Isn't Evolution Considered a Law?
This is an issue which often confuses the general public, as the two words, theory and law, have very different common meanings. But in science, their meanings are very similar. A theory is an explanation which is backed by "a considerable body of evidence," while a law is a set of regularities expressed in a "mathematical statement." This is why Newton's Laws of Motion are referred to as laws and not theories. They are expressed with simple equations (like f = ma for his 2nd Law of Motion). Evolution, and most of Biology, cannot be expressed in a concise mathematical equation, so it is referred to as a theory. A scientific law is not "better" or "more accurate" than a scientific theory. A law explains what will happen under certain circumstances, while a theory explains how it happens.

[The Paleontologist]

For everyone else not bent on making this a religious discussion: do you think it would be scarier to find out we are not alone, or to find out we are alone?

Both are equally terrifying.

[streetbeastINC.]

Alien proof. God of the bible events in the bible, the vimanas vedas, hindu gods and chariots so much proof yet , we were sheeped into thinking that thers is this great existence called a god....but the sumerians and there annunaki.that there is something....

[Richard Marshall]

We are not alone...
Alien life do exist...
Alien life don't exist...
They are here...
But they are not what they seem to be...

[Daran]

It seems a lot of you want to pretend to understand real science with your markedly over confidence statements are grandeur posturing.

Firstly, no one wants you to believe in evolution. It's a biological fact that's been proven, observed (through the fossil record), been demonstrated in labs (ecoli evolution) and it pretty much makes DNA make sense. Understanding that organisms evolve via mutations is what enables us the make new antibiotics.

No real scientists (and they're a lot of Christian pretenders out there) would dispute these evidences.

Also, as Duane thankfully provided. A Scientific Theory is a body of knowledge that explains how something happens, a scientific law is one that states exactly what will happen. What you should take away from this is that, it's an extremely well studied topic done by tens of thousands of the worlds brightest minds.

There is no motive for not disproving a theory in science. In fact, quite the opposite, scientific research's aim is about filling gaps in knowledge. Any scientists who could legitimately prove evolution false would be a Super Stat scientist.

So, what scientists are doing now is filling the gaps in the evolution theory. There's A LOT to be discovered especially in the mechanisms motivating mutations (it's random, but not always), specifies divergence etc.

With respect to Abiogenesis, that's a different kettle of fish altogether. There's not as much work being done here, but at present some of the worlds brightest scientists are looking into a brand new overlapping area of Quantum Biology to explain Abiogenesis. Quantum Biology is not sciencefiction, far from it, in fact it's predicted to be a fast growing field, and in fact, it explains the efficiency in photosynthesis.




Now onto Aliens and my 'belief' in their existence.

Let's talk a bit about belief....I'm an amateur statistician and belief to me means, based on data and evidence, what is the probability of X being true.

So let's look at it this way. We know earth has life and we know the conditions one earth that allow life to be supported (doesn't mean it has to be this way, but it's our first assumption).

We then know they're literally billions of earth like planets in the milky way alone. We also, strongly suspect and have observed signs of simple life on Mars.

So GIVEN that prior information, you can say there is a very STRONG belief that life exists or has existed in places other than earth.

This cannot be compared to anything with believing in God. God being supernatural is akin to believing in leprechauns, Douens, ghosts and Santa Clause.

[88sins]

such a bold statement, such conviction
Richard Nixon made a similarly bold statement, with just as much conviction in the declaration of war on cancer & that there'd be a cure within a decade.











That was 50 yrs ago

[Chimera]

I honestly believe that due to the profitability of having cancer around. There will never be a cure out in the open.

[Daran]

I honestly believe that due to the profitability of having cancer around. There will never be a cure out in the open.

LOL please stop showing your stupidity.

[dougla_boy]

For everyone else not bent on making this a religious discussion: do you think it would be scarier to find out we are not alone, or to find out we are alone?

Both are equally terrifying.

i was gonna say it depends, but when u think about it, it nuh go end well for any of us....

if they are superior, we would be the indians, they would be the spanish.
if they are inferior, we would be the spanish, they would be the indians.

even if they are microbes or anything like that, gonna find a way to exploit them for our gain

[meccalli]

I honestly believe that due to the profitability of having cancer around. There will never be a cure out in the open.

Don't say that! Science solves problems and helps people. That's your conspiracy, don't you know?


Scientific Theory - a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation e.g. Theory of Evolution.

Well according to that definition, evolution is unscientific. Evolution continually rests upon a foundation of faith. The 7 assumptions I listed earlier. None has been replicated and demonstrated to be true. If you're familiar with the scientific method, you would realise this.

[Habit7]

Scientific Theory - a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation e.g. Theory of Evolution.

At least quote Wikipedia nah.

A theory is true if it describes unobservable things that really exist and describes them accurately. Otherwise it is false. This shows the mistake in contrasting "theory" and "fact." A fact is an actual state of affairs in nature, and a theory, or any statement for that matter, is true if it matches fact. Some theories are true (atomic theory), some are false (caloric theory), and the scientific method is what directs us in deciding which are which. To say of some idea, That's a theory not a fact, is a confusion of categories, a comparison of apples and oranges. Facts are; theories describe. And a theory can describe facts.

Pg 8, A Summary of Scientific Method By Peter Kosso, https://books.google.tt/books?id=lkioLp ... &q&f=false

There are aspect of the theory of evolution are factual, there are other aspects that are unobservable. But to say that the unobservable are as factual as the observable is a ridiculous as claiming evolution as the basis for all biology.

[Daran]

meccalli, It's absolutely apparent you are not a scientist and clearly do not understand the scientific method.

scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation

is not possible with many scientific theories. Hence the need for modelling many of these systems. This is something extremely common in science.

Now, it is a FACT organisms evolve. It has been observed via the fossil record and replicated in a lab (micro evolution, because macro is too slow to observe). Yet somehow, you fail to either not look at the evidence or ignore the mountains of peer review scientific papers supporting evolution.

Now, back the idiotic 'there's a cure for cancer being kept secret for profit'. That is utterly ridiculous and shows that you get your science knowledge from some New Age Crystal Healing Conspiracy Theory and Spiritual Science blog.

There's literally thousands of types of a cancer, each caused by several different factors. There's so much money being poured into this research and many breakthroughs daily. I find your views on this insulting to these hard working scientists.

It really is ridiculous that people like meccalli, Habit7 and ABA Trading LTD are allowed to parrot their asinine scientific commentary without any semblance of even CXC knowledge of science.

[Daran]

Scientific Theory - a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation e.g. Theory of Evolution.

At least quote Wikipedia nah.

A theory is true if it describes unobservable things that really exist and describes them accurately. Otherwise it is false. This shows the mistake in contrasting "theory" and "fact." A fact is an actual state of affairs in nature, and a theory, or any statement for that matter, is true if it matches fact. Some theories are true (atomic theory), some are false (caloric theory), and the scientific method is what directs us in deciding which are which. To say of some idea, That's a theory not a fact, is a confusion of categories, a comparison of apples and oranges. Facts are; theories describe. And a theory can describe facts.

Pg 8, A Summary of Scientific Method By Peter Kosso, https://books.google.tt/books?id=lkioLp ... &q&f=false

There are aspect of the theory of evolution are factual, there are other aspects that are unobservable. But to say that the unobservable are as factual as the observable is a ridiculous as claiming evolution as the basis for all biology.

Evolution is the basis of Biology was simply a metaphor used by Duane to explain that what brings the study of Biology together is Evolution.

Sort of like how Math is kinda important to Engineering.

[Chimera]

Okay daran.

Yuh want a hug for your hurt feelings or something?

[meccalli]

Yeah, I just paid 1$ and got my bio degree, it's worthless.

[Daran]

meccalli, not your degree, but your knowledge.

ABA Trading LTD, nah I'm good bro.

[Chimera]

All your scientific knowledge aside, one day you will understand how the pharmaceutical companies work and spend billions to develop drugs that will keep you alive but do not cure your problem. Cancer is a very profitable business. One day you will understand that $$$ is the most important thing

[zoom rader]

All your scientific knowledge aside, one day you will understand how the pharmaceutical companies work and spend billions to develop drugs that will keep you alive but do not cure your problem. Cancer is a very profitable business. One day you will understand that $$$ is the most important thing

And you making how much?

[Chimera]

Depends on how much newspaper i sell for the day. Weekends is the most money.

But i really sounding crazy so i guh stop posting now

[Daran]

ABA Trading LTD, I know how their business model works. I'm not arguing that they're not spending money in finding cures etc. I'm in the academic field and I'm fully aware of how much research and money is being spent on cancer.

However, the truth is, there probably is never going to be a magic cure for cancer. Maybe the most common cancers will solved first. But given that cancer occurs almost as a random process (error) in cell generation, then the treatment may never be a cure, but be in early detection and successful treatment.

There is and will be money in that, and probably just as much or more than currently being earned in cancer treatment.

[Habit7]

Evolution is the basis of Biology was simply a metaphor used by Duane to explain that what brings the study of Biology together is Evolution.

Sort of like how Math is kinda important to Engineering.

Well it seems you don't know what a metaphor is.

It is great for you to allow for liberty and reinterpretation for Duane's erroneous statement yet hammer meccalli for disagreeing with you.

But as I said before biology existed long before Darwin. Evolution is NOT the basis for ALL biology.

[Daran]

Evolution is the basis of Biology was simply a metaphor used by Duane to explain that what brings the study of Biology together is Evolution.

Sort of like how Math is kinda important to Engineering.

Well it seems you don't know what a metaphor is.

It is great for you to allow for liberty and reinterpretation for Duane's erroneous statement yet hammer meccalli for disagreeing with you.

But as I said before biology existed long before Darwin. Evolution is NOT the basis for ALL biology.

Evolution is what brings it together and makes it make sense, otherwise biology would be segmented. Quit nitpicking on wordings and realize what Duane meant.

And Habit7, what is your alternative to evolution?

[dougla_boy]

Intelligent Design maybe..

[Arrow]

For everyone else not bent on making this a religious discussion: do you think it would be scarier to find out we are not alone, or to find out we are alone?

Both are equally terrifying.

i was gonna say it depends, but when u think about it, it nuh go end well for any of us....

if they are superior, we would be the indians, they would be the spanish.
if they are inferior, we would be the spanish, they would be the indians.

even if they are microbes or anything like that, gonna find a way to exploit them for our gain

^^that.
Throughout history, when 2 civilisations meet, things do not end well for the less-advanced one.

[Daran]

Intelligent Design maybe..

That is certainly not a worthwhile hypothesis. It basically says 'i give up, i cyah figure out why this happens'.

If everyone adopted that attitude we'd still be in the dark ages thinking diseases and natural disasters were the work of God.

[Daran]

For everyone else not bent on making this a religious discussion: do you think it would be scarier to find out we are not alone, or to find out we are alone?

Both are equally terrifying.

i was gonna say it depends, but when u think about it, it nuh go end well for any of us....

if they are superior, we would be the indians, they would be the spanish.
if they are inferior, we would be the spanish, they would be the indians.

even if they are microbes or anything like that, gonna find a way to exploit them for our gain

^^that.
Throughout history, when 2 civilisations meet, things do not end well for the less-advanced one.

Generally true, but I disagree. I think a super advanced civilization would not wish to harm us. In fact, quite the opposite. They'd probably appreciate and monitor us from far and make sure we don't kill ourselves. Also, given the fact that they've become super advanced (meaning they survived wars) means that they're peaceful. They also don't and won't need earth for resources given they advanced technological knowledge.

It's more analogous to think of it like if we were to discover some rare super deep underwater Gigantic Squid. We wouldn't want to kill it (knowing that it could be rare), so we'd observe it without harming its habit.

[meccalli]

^ O yeah?

Evolution is what brings it together and makes it make sense

If everyone adopted that attitude we'd still be in the dark ages thinking diseases and natural disasters were the work of God.

So Koch, Pasteur and all their nobel prize winning students who adhered to a creationist world view and revolutionized microbiology and medicine were working on a foundation of nonsense when they formulated the Germ theory?

[Daran]

^ O yeah?

Evolution is what brings it together and makes it make sense

If everyone adopted that attitude we'd still be in the dark ages thinking diseases and natural disasters were the work of God.

So Koch, Pasteur and all their nobel prize winning students who adhered to a creationist world view and revolutionized microbiology and medicine were working on a foundation of nonsense when they formulated the Germ theory?

There is and will always be people who segment their science from religious beliefs and rightfully so.

[Arrow]

For everyone else not bent on making this a religious discussion: do you think it would be scarier to find out we are not alone, or to find out we are alone?

Both are equally terrifying.

i was gonna say it depends, but when u think about it, it nuh go end well for any of us....

if they are superior, we would be the indians, they would be the spanish.
if they are inferior, we would be the spanish, they would be the indians.

even if they are microbes or anything like that, gonna find a way to exploit them for our gain

^^that.
Throughout history, when 2 civilisations meet, things do not end well for the less-advanced one.

Generally true, but I disagree. I think a super advanced civilization would not wish to harm us. In fact, quite the opposite. They'd probably appreciate and monitor us from far and make sure we don't kill ourselves. Also, given the fact that they've become super advanced (meaning they survived wars) means that they're peaceful. They also don't and won't need earth for resources given they advanced technological knowledge.

It's more analogous to think of it like if we were to discover some rare super deep underwater Gigantic Squid. We wouldn't want to kill it (knowing that it could be rare), so we'd observe it without harming its habit.

It depends on just how 'super advanced' they are.
If they made their mistakes in the past and learned from it, then perhaps.
And it also depends on how bad they want resources as well.

I like your squid analogy, but facts is... if dat squid living on top of a oilfield, or if a protein in Mr Squidward could cure cancer, AIDS or herpes, things will not end well for him.