only one answer | Syracusefan.com

only one answer

Aleins?

  • Poll choice...

    Votes: 1 100.0%
  • Poll choice...

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    1

No Hoyas

2nd String
Joined
Sep 24, 2011
Messages
678
Like
1,061
As I was watching TV, the real answer became obvious- James was helped by ancient aliens.
Hey according to this show, they are responsible for everything that has ever happened or been built
Although if the team all came out with Georgio tsouklis hair, it would be really intimidating.:bang:
images
 
As I was watching TV, the real answer became obvious- James was helped by ancient aliens.
Hey according to this show, they are responsible for everything that has ever happened or been built
Although if the team all came out with Georgio tsouklis hair, it would be really intimidating.:bang:
This means something. And Georgio is just a hop skip and a jump over in Ithaca he could have the answer for us.
 
Opps! spelled Aliens wrong.
Hey mods- how do you edit a poll?
Thanks!
 
I love that dudes hair, LOL, it get bigger and bigger with each episode.

In all seriousness though aliens is as valid an explanation as anything else.
 
I love that dudes hair, LOL, it get bigger and bigger with each episode.

In all seriousness though aliens is as valid an explanation as anything else.

It started out just messy, and it got out of hand as he gained notoriety. Love that show though.
 
Intelligent little green men are very improbable.
1) Once a technological society masters reproducing bots THEY COULD EXPLORE ALL LIKELY planets in about 1 million years. If they were out there their probes would have found us.
2) We are unique. Most stars are binary whose planets have elliptical orbits = no intelligent life. A rocky planet must be protected from asteroids by a nearby gaseous giant and it must be protected from wobble by a moon. It must have a molten core. It must have the right size sun. Larger ones burn out too quickly. It cannot be too close to the base of its galactic arm. The arms rotate and pass through radiation belts. Too close = not enough time for evolution. I am only touching the surface. A recent book by a known astronomer covers these factors.

The old statistical argument in favor of a universe filled with intelligent life is a house of cards. Don't count on SETI ever finding anything.

Of course, there is no definitive proof one way or the other, but we should not take it for granted that we are not all alone.
 
Intelligent aliens are very improbable.
1) Once a technological society masters reproducing bots THEY COULD EXPLORE ALL LIKELY planets in about 1 million years. If they were out there their probes would have found us.
2) We are unique. Most stars are binary whose planets have elliptical orbits = no intelligent life. A rocky planet must be protected from asteroids by a nearby gaseous giant and it must be protected from wobble by a moon. It must have a molten core. It must have the right size sun. Larger ones burn out too quickly. It cannot be too close to the base of its galactic arm. The arms rotate and pass through radiation belts. Too close = not enough time for evolution. I am only touching the surface. A recent book by a known astronomer covers these factors.

The old statistical argument in favor of a universe filled with intelligent life is a house of cards. Don't count on SETI ever finding anything.

Of course, there is no definitive proof one way or the other, but we should not take it for granted that we are not all alone.
What's the book?

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2
 
Intelligent aliens are very improbable.
1) Once a technological society masters reproducing bots THEY COULD EXPLORE ALL LIKELY planets in about 1 million years. If they were out there their probes would have found us.
2) We are unique. Most stars are binary whose planets have elliptical orbits = no intelligent life. A rocky planet must be protected from asteroids by a nearby gaseous giant and it must be protected from wobble by a moon. It must have a molten core. It must have the right size sun. Larger ones burn out too quickly. It cannot be too close to the base of its galactic arm. The arms rotate and pass through radiation belts. Too close = not enough time for evolution. I am only touching the surface. A recent book by a known astronomer covers these factors.

The old statistical argument in favor of a universe filled with intelligent life is a house of cards. Don't count on SETI ever finding anything.

Of course, there is no definitive proof one way or the other, but we should not take it for granted that we are not all alone.

So you're telling me it was aliens?
 
How many bongs has that dude ripped in his life? Guy is forever lit..and I love it.
 
There is lots of stuff we cannot explain on our own planet, in our own bodies. Just saying aliems is as valid an explanation as anything else we have come up with. God could be an alien. Evolution is something we can prove somewhat but it doesn't explain the beggining nor the monumentel jump forward that humans represent compared to all other primates existing or in the fossil records. Aliens still does not answer the over all question of the very beggining because something had to start them as well.
 
I just couldn't resist the temptation to join this discussion. First on the evolution issue, just to be clear- it doesn't explain the origin of life because that is not what it was designed to explain; such an explanation would be within the realm of chemistry. On the habitable planet issue and the odds of intelligent life arising, we have found that life on earth exists pretty much everywhere. From solid rock to arctic ice sheets, if there's an opportunity to exist- a niche to fill- life will fill it. Shelter from radiation, moisture, a few basic elements, and an appropriate temperature are all that are needed to begin the reactions that result in basic organic molecules. This has been observed in a laboratory setting. Once life gets started, its trial and error process of development gives it the capability to go forth into foreign environments and further adapt.

Contrary to AlaskaSU's examples, a lot of the deal breakers he lists do not apply since there are many ways to achieve the conditions I mentioned above. Also, what's to say a group of aliens that discovers us won't just say "next" and move on? Or just ignore/observe? As the detection capabilities of their new toys improve, astronomers are discovering more and more earth-like planets literally by the day, and are also better able to model the locations of habitable zones, which vary with each unique solar system. I haven't read the book AlaskaSU mentions, but if the author is defining habitable zones as fixed distances from stars, and at the same time counting out binaries, those are two titanic blunders. Binary systems DO have habitable zone(s) and in fact, I remember reading an article fairly recently about a gas giant found within one that could have moons harboring life. I would not be surprised if relatively simple, microbial-type life is relatively common. The real question is whether or not life can take the next step from simple to more complex organisms such as the plants and animals we see in everyday life, and then an additional step to sentience. There is really no way to know how or why this can happen; even knowing the history of human civilization and its development, we can only make educated guesses as to how our species became so "brainy" and capable of processing information the way we do.

In summary, I think extraterrestrial life is probably common. BUT it will be in the form of microbes and other non-intelligent forms. There is no way to accurately model the development of sentience since we have only one example to work with and we don't even understand how that happened. There was very complex life on this planet for a VERY long time before anything here took that leap forward, so my opinion is that intelligent is probably pretty rare, even if life itself is relatively common.
 
I just couldn't resist the temptation to join this discussion. First on the evolution issue, just to be clear- it doesn't explain the origin of life because that is not what it was designed to explain; such an explanation would be within the realm of chemistry. On the habitable planet issue and the odds of intelligent life arising, we have found that life on earth exists pretty much everywhere. From solid rock to arctic ice sheets, if there's an opportunity to exist- a niche to fill- life will fill it. Shelter from radiation, moisture, a few basic elements, and an appropriate temperature are all that are needed to begin the reactions that result in basic organic molecules. This has been observed in a laboratory setting. Once life gets started, its trial and error process of development gives it the capability to go forth into foreign environments and further adapt.

Contrary to AlaskaSU's examples, a lot of the deal breakers he lists do not apply since there are many ways to achieve the conditions I mentioned above. Also, what's to say a group of aliens that discovers us won't just say "next" and move on? Or just ignore/observe? As the detection capabilities of their new toys improve, astronomers are discovering more and more earth-like planets literally by the day, and are also better able to model the locations of habitable zones, which vary with each unique solar system. I haven't read the book AlaskaSU mentions, but if the author is defining habitable zones as fixed distances from stars, and at the same time counting out binaries, those are two titanic blunders. Binary systems DO have habitable zone(s) and in fact, I remember reading an article fairly recently about a gas giant found within one that could have moons harboring life. I would not be surprised if relatively simple, microbial-type life is relatively common. The real question is whether or not life can take the next step from simple to more complex organisms such as the plants and animals we see in everyday life, and then an additional step to sentience. There is really no way to know how or why this can happen; even knowing the history of human civilization and its development, we can only make educated guesses as to how our species became so "brainy" and capable of processing information the way we do.

In summary, I think extraterrestrial life is probably common. BUT it will be in the form of microbes and other non-intelligent forms. There is no way to accurately model the development of sentience since we have only one example to work with and we don't even understand how that happened. There was very complex life on this planet for a VERY long time before anything here took that leap forward, so my opinion is that intelligent is probably pretty rare, even if life itself is relatively common.

Read the book. For eg. elliptical orbits cannot produce INTELLIGENT life. At the apex water freezes and at the nadir it boils. After you read the book, I'm curious what you will think. Just because everyone accepts an old argument, does not mean that it is correct.

The fact that life is everywhere, and you might have added the presence of organic molecules in space, does not mean that it could lead to intelligent life. These extreme environment niches are evolutionary dead ends. They are not our genesis. Again, much is published about this. I agree that primitive life in niche environments is probably not uncommon.

We know that evolution takes time and mass extinctions are probably an important ingredient. Environments must be relatively stable and hospitable for long periods of time. Elliptical orbits do not meet this requirement, nor do large stars, stars too close to the base of their galactic arms, planets that do not have molten cores, a moon and a nearby gaseous giant and many more criteria... There are countless planets. do they have the right ingredients for INTELLIGENT life?
 
Read the book. For eg. elliptical orbits cannot produce INTELLIGENT life. At the apex water freezes and at the nadir it boils. After you read the book, I'm curious what you will think. Just because everyone accepts an old argument, does not mean that it is correct.

The fact that life is everywhere, and you might have added the presence of organic molecules in space, does not mean that it could lead to intelligent life. These extreme environment niches are evolutionary dead ends. They are not our genesis. Again, much is published about this. I agree that primitive life in niche environments is probably not uncommon.

We know that evolution takes time and mass extinctions are probably an important ingredient. Environments must be relatively stable and hospitable for long periods of time. Elliptical orbits do not meet this requirement, nor do large stars, stars too close to the base of their galactic arms, planets that do not have molten cores, a moon and a nearby gaseous giant and many more criteria... There are countless planets. do they have the right ingredients for INTELLIGENT life?
I think we're making a big assumption that the requirements we have observed to produce intelligent life are the only possible requirements.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2
 
From my reading it seems there are millions of possibilities for intelligent life to arise, as it did on earth. It seems incredible that in our galaxy alone we are the only planet that has intelligent life?? Again, even if the criteria make it "rare," how do you define rare? "Rare" still equals thousands of planets in the Milky Way galaxy. And we are one of several billion galaxies.

Still, I would have to bet that our beautiful planet is a rare jewel, which makes our pollution of it so horrible.

I enjoy these discussions, whether pro or con. Helps with the waiting...waiting...waiting...
 
AlaskaSU . . . CANNOT? this is hillarious seeing as we barely know anything about our own species in the grand scheme of how much there is to know. Our doctors are like children who poke around at something they have some basic knowledge of and fail more often than they succeed. Even their success isn't always that just look at antibiotics. We cannot discover all the answers in our own house and backyard yet we are going to make definite statements about parts of the universe that we can only view from afar? Humans over time have constantly made the arogant mistake of making scientific ultimatums that are entirely wrong and have us floundering in the wrong direction for quite sometime until the truth of our mistakes hits us in the face so hard we can no longer ignore it. Many of todays views will someday be looked at how we view the old timers for thinking that the world was flat.
 
I love that dudes hair, LOL, it get bigger and bigger with each episode.

In all seriousness though aliens is as valid an explanation as anything else.

I laughed hysterically when I watched Star Gate and found in the special features there is an interview with Mr Tsouklis. That movie was circa 1994 so this guy has been at it for awhile and his hair was just as big 20 years ago.
 

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
792

Forum statistics

Threads
169,504
Messages
4,835,123
Members
5,981
Latest member
SYRtoBOS

Online statistics

Members online
242
Guests online
941
Total visitors
1,183




...
Top Bottom