What's Harder for you to Believe in: Aliens or God?

[Vic]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Vic
To those claiming the Drake Equation and/or the immense size of the universe (i.e., P = NP), I suggest you educate yourself on these issues. In the former, an equation with no constants is meaningless.

Uh... ok.

a = b + c

Solve for a.

Give me b and c and I can.

a = 2b + c

Now you solve for a.

Exactly my point.

a = 8b + 8c

 

[torpid]

Even if it's god but not necessarily as described by any known religion vs dude in arkansas who claims to have been abducted by aliens, I still find the latter easier to believe.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: Vic
Exactly my point.

a = 8b + 8c

You missed the second half of my post. Or read the other one where I gave a better explanation.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: randay

a - c = 2b + c - c
a - c = 2b
a - c + c = 2b + c
a = 2b + c
a = aliens + exist = 1 = .999...

Fixed

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: torpid
Even if it's god but not necessarily as described by any known religion vs dude in arkansas who claims to have been abducted by aliens, I still find the latter easier to believe.

What if the dude in Arkansas who claims to have been abducted by God instead of aliens? What if he claims God came to him in a flying saucer? If it's not god as described by any known religion, then what is god? And what are aliens? Push the definition of either and you get the same thing: a higher power from beyond the earth.

/hums Somewhere Over the Rainbow

 

[FrustratedUser]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: FrustratedUser
I am 100% convinced there are other life form on other planets. The probability that earth is the only planet in the entire universe with billions of starts and galaxies where life exists is so low it's not funny.

The probability of an existing 'God' can't even be calculated since it's based on belief and not facts.

See my post above. This probability you speak of (i.e. the Drake Equation) is a sham. An equation without a single constant is meaningless and can be solved for any number you fancy. The only scientifically observable solution is 1, our own civilization.

You basically have a solid faith in God and call God "aliens." Your justification for this faith is incredibly similar to the argument that life, the universe, and everything is so perfect and complex that the probability that it could have happened simply by random chance is so low it's not even funny.

Hell no. I don't believe in a God that created everything and I'm not calling other life forms that IMO most likely exists (even if they are bacteria) God.

I'm not talking about an equation or anything. I'm just spending 2 seconds thinking that we (earth) just can't be the only place in universe with conditions to support life.
If there is a God who created billions of stars and galaxies.... did he/she/it just sit back and thought.... 'hmmmm I'm picking this insignificant piece of rock around this burning ball of helium and I'm gonna make some cool sh1t happen there'.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Vic
See my post above. This probability you speak of (i.e. the Drake Equation) is a sham. An equation without a single constant is meaningless and can be solved for any number you fancy. The only scientifically observable solution is 1, our own civilization.

The equation is not a sham. An equation without a single constant is not meaningless. Here's a pretty basic equation with no constants: A = L * H. That's the area of a parallelogram. Not meaningless!

Likewise, if you look at the meanings of the inputs in the Drake Equation, you'll see that the end result you'd get is what it claims it is. The issue you have is that there is no scientific bais for the inputs, so the equation can't give you an accurate result. That's fine - so attack it that way, don't just make stuff up.

I'm not making stuff up. The area of a parallelogram contains observable and definable measurements that, for the same parallelogram, are the same every time. You can't say that for the Drake Equation. You can just change the numbers depending on your mood that day. Hell, you can even solve it for less than 1, which (if the Drake Equation were scientific) would mean that the Earth scientifically doesn't exist!

The Drake Equation is the ultimate in pseudoscience.

There is nothing wrong with the equation itself. Your issue is with the inputs, or the source of the inputs. I agree on that. Just stop saying this nonsense that an equation with no constants is meaningless. The equation is valid, the problem is that when you put garbage in, you get garbage out. If there is no scientific basis for the inputs, there is no scientific basis for the output. IF we had a valid scientific basis for the inputs then the output would be accurate.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: FrustratedUser

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: FrustratedUser
I am 100% convinced there are other life form on other planets. The probability that earth is the only planet in the entire universe with billions of starts and galaxies where life exists is so low it's not funny.

The probability of an existing 'God' can't even be calculated since it's based on belief and not facts.

See my post above. This probability you speak of (i.e. the Drake Equation) is a sham. An equation without a single constant is meaningless and can be solved for any number you fancy. The only scientifically observable solution is 1, our own civilization.

You basically have a solid faith in God and call God "aliens." Your justification for this faith is incredibly similar to the argument that life, the universe, and everything is so perfect and complex that the probability that it could have happened simply by random chance is so low it's not even funny.

Hell no. I don't believe in a God that created everything and I'm not calling other life forms that IMO most likely exists (even if they are bacteria) God.

I'm not talking about an equation or anything. I'm just spending 2 seconds thinking that we (earth) just can't be the only place in universe with conditions to support life.
If there is a God who created billions of stars and galaxies.... did he/she/it just sit back and thought.... 'hmmmm I'm picking this insignificant piece of rock around this burning ball of helium and I'm gonna make some cool sh1t happen there'.

Well, there's your problem. You need to spend more than just 2 seconds thinking about it.

BTW, I am not advocating a belief (or disbelief) in either god(s) or aliens.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Vic
See my post above. This probability you speak of (i.e. the Drake Equation) is a sham. An equation without a single constant is meaningless and can be solved for any number you fancy. The only scientifically observable solution is 1, our own civilization.

The equation is not a sham. An equation without a single constant is not meaningless. Here's a pretty basic equation with no constants: A = L * H. That's the area of a parallelogram. Not meaningless!

Likewise, if you look at the meanings of the inputs in the Drake Equation, you'll see that the end result you'd get is what it claims it is. The issue you have is that there is no scientific bais for the inputs, so the equation can't give you an accurate result. That's fine - so attack it that way, don't just make stuff up.

I'm not making stuff up. The area of a parallelogram contains observable and definable measurements that, for the same parallelogram, are the same every time. You can't say that for the Drake Equation. You can just change the numbers depending on your mood that day. Hell, you can even solve it for less than 1, which (if the Drake Equation were scientific) would mean that the Earth scientifically doesn't exist!

The Drake Equation is the ultimate in pseudoscience.

There is nothing wrong with the equation itself. Your issue is with the inputs, or the source of the inputs. I agree on that. Just stop saying this nonsense that an equation with no constants is meaningless. The equation is valid, the problem is that when you put garbage in, you get garbage out. If there is no scientific basis for the inputs, there is no scientific basis for the output. IF we had a valid scientific basis for the inputs then the output would be accurate.

Pardon me... allow me to rephrase: an equation with no definable or measurable variables is not valid.

Do you feel better now? It doesn't change the issue that the Drake Equation is meaningless sh!t, or that aliens are the gods of pseudoscience.

 

[dmcowen674]

Well, let's see.

I've seen an alien ship and I must be God since that is all I hear, Oh God Oh God.

 

[torpid]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: torpid
Even if it's god but not necessarily as described by any known religion vs dude in arkansas who claims to have been abducted by aliens, I still find the latter easier to believe.

What if the dude in Arkansas who claims to have been abducted by God instead of aliens? What if he claims God came to him in a flying saucer? If it's not god as described by any known religion, then what is god? And what are aliens? Push the definition of either and you get the same thing: a higher power from beyond the earth.

/hums Somewhere Over the Rainbow

I don't believe in flexible definitions like that. At the least you have to remove the plural. If it's god, I don't think it can also be alienS, although I suppose there is some form of plural connected borg existence that could theoretically be god. You know, like, god is nature, worship the mother earth with giant hips, that sort of thing. But then I would call it a single alien. Ultimately, it boils down to grammar.

 

[FrustratedUser]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: FrustratedUser

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: FrustratedUser
I am 100% convinced there are other life form on other planets. The probability that earth is the only planet in the entire universe with billions of starts and galaxies where life exists is so low it's not funny.

The probability of an existing 'God' can't even be calculated since it's based on belief and not facts.

See my post above. This probability you speak of (i.e. the Drake Equation) is a sham. An equation without a single constant is meaningless and can be solved for any number you fancy. The only scientifically observable solution is 1, our own civilization.

You basically have a solid faith in God and call God "aliens." Your justification for this faith is incredibly similar to the argument that life, the universe, and everything is so perfect and complex that the probability that it could have happened simply by random chance is so low it's not even funny.

Hell no. I don't believe in a God that created everything and I'm not calling other life forms that IMO most likely exists (even if they are bacteria) God.

I'm not talking about an equation or anything. I'm just spending 2 seconds thinking that we (earth) just can't be the only place in universe with conditions to support life.
If there is a God who created billions of stars and galaxies.... did he/she/it just sit back and thought.... 'hmmmm I'm picking this insignificant piece of rock around this burning ball of helium and I'm gonna make some cool sh1t happen there'.

Well, there's your problem. You need to spend more than just 2 seconds thinking about it.

BTW, I am not advocating a belief (or disbelief) in either god(s) or aliens.

A figure of speech my friend......

 

[AlienCraft]

Originally posted by: CVSiN
Jesus built my hotrod...

He also works at Adelaberto's on Folsom Blvd.

 

[Dougmeister]

Aliens.

 

[BurnItDwn]

I assume whatever chemical reactions/pressure/coincidence/god/other combination happened here on earth billions over years ago is capable of happening on other world given proper conditions. Conditions may be hard to achieve, but there are trillions upon trillions of galaxies and solar systems out there. To assume that the earth is the only place where life exists in the entire universe seems very ignorant. Since life exists here, I think that life exists elsewhere. Whatever triggered the initial spark of life here probably could have happened across billions of other planets. I do not think there are little green men visiting the earth. I don't think there are beings that travel the galaxy or universe. I do think that there is a VERY high probabillity that there is "intelligent" life of some form on at least one other planet somewhere. It seems like the most logical way to think.

It's much harder to believe in god for me. There is so much infinite vastness. There are laws of physics. Everything seems to "run" on it's own. While we may not factually know much about the start of the universe, etc, most scientific theories don't involve an omnipotent & omniscent being being the source of everything.

I tried to not show bias, however, I do not believe in god, so I am sure I have a bias.

 

[FrustratedUser]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Vic
See my post above. This probability you speak of (i.e. the Drake Equation) is a sham. An equation without a single constant is meaningless and can be solved for any number you fancy. The only scientifically observable solution is 1, our own civilization.

The equation is not a sham. An equation without a single constant is not meaningless. Here's a pretty basic equation with no constants: A = L * H. That's the area of a parallelogram. Not meaningless!

Likewise, if you look at the meanings of the inputs in the Drake Equation, you'll see that the end result you'd get is what it claims it is. The issue you have is that there is no scientific bais for the inputs, so the equation can't give you an accurate result. That's fine - so attack it that way, don't just make stuff up.

I'm not making stuff up. The area of a parallelogram contains observable and definable measurements that, for the same parallelogram, are the same every time. You can't say that for the Drake Equation. You can just change the numbers depending on your mood that day. Hell, you can even solve it for less than 1, which (if the Drake Equation were scientific) would mean that the Earth scientifically doesn't exist!

The Drake Equation is the ultimate in pseudoscience.

Whatever the Drake equation is you will still end up with at least 1 civilization, unless you totally disregard reality.

From Wikipedia:

The Drake equation states that:

N = R x fp x ne x fl x fi x fc xL

where:

N is the number of civilizations in our galaxy with which we might expect to be able to communicate at any given time
and

R* is the rate of star formation in our galaxy
fp is the fraction of those stars that have planets
ne is average number of planets that can potentially support life per star that has planets
fl is the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop life
fi is the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop intelligent life
fc is the fraction of the above that are willing and able to communicate
L is the expected lifetime of such a civilization

fp = 1 because we exist LOL

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: Vic

Pardon me... allow me to rephrase: an equation with no definable or measurable variables is not valid.

Do you feel better now? It doesn't change the issue that the Drake Equation is meaningless sh!t, or that aliens are the gods of pseudoscience.

*sigh*... the equation is valid... Look at the meanings of the inputs and look at the meaning of the output. The left side equals the right side. The Drake Equation doesn't attempt to make any claims about what does or does not exist in the universe. It tells us what is likely given certain probabilities and averages. If those probabilities and averages were accurate, the result would be accurate.

It is no different from the parallelogram - I could put whatever BS I want in for the length and height and get an arbitrary area. Or I can put in actual measured values and get the actual area. Same thing with the Drake Equation. The problem is that we can't yet obtain accurate, measurable values, and in order to obtain them we'd have already had to make contact with other intelligent life. That doesn't make the equation any less valid mathematically though.

 

[torpid]

Originally posted by: mugs
*sigh*... the equation is valid... Look at the meanings of the inputs and look at the meaning of the output. The left side equals the right side. The Drake Equation doesn't attempt to make any claims about what does or does not exist in the universe. It tells us what is likely given certain probabilities and averages. If those probabilities and averages were accurate, the result would be accurate.

It is no different from the parallelogram - I could put whatever BS I want in for the length and height and get an arbitrary area. Or I can put in actual measured values and get the actual area. Same thing with the Drake Equation. The problem is that we can't yet obtain accurate, measurable values, and in order to obtain them we'd have already had to make contact with other intelligent life. That doesn't make the equation any less valid mathematically though.

Math and science are not in agreement about the usefulness of this equation. Science states that the equation is meaningless because none of the information can be accurately measured. Therefore it has no useful purpose in the scientific realm. Sure, the math is fine, but in the realm of science the equation is meaningless.

 

[Sqube]

Who the hell finds it easier to believe in God than in aliens?

As much space as there is out there, it's not that much of a stretch to think that something's out there. God, on the other hand... now that's a reach.

/is Catholic
//still has a hard time believing in El Jefe

 

[thespeakerbox]

I know aliens exist.

I can prove it to you.

Just send a 1 million dollar check or money order.........

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: torpid

Originally posted by: mugs
*sigh*... the equation is valid... Look at the meanings of the inputs and look at the meaning of the output. The left side equals the right side. The Drake Equation doesn't attempt to make any claims about what does or does not exist in the universe. It tells us what is likely given certain probabilities and averages. If those probabilities and averages were accurate, the result would be accurate.

It is no different from the parallelogram - I could put whatever BS I want in for the length and height and get an arbitrary area. Or I can put in actual measured values and get the actual area. Same thing with the Drake Equation. The problem is that we can't yet obtain accurate, measurable values, and in order to obtain them we'd have already had to make contact with other intelligent life. That doesn't make the equation any less valid mathematically though.

Math and science are not in agreement about the usefulness of this equation. Science states that the equation is meaningless because none of the information can be accurately measured. Therefore it has no useful purpose in the scientific realm. Sure, the math is fine, but in the realm of science the equation is meaningless.

That's fine. I agree.

Maybe I'm being anal about this and should just let it slide when someone say something that is completely inaccurate as if it is a fact. But to say that an equation is meaningless because it lacks constants (???) and then try to back that up with a bunch of unlrelated information is as crazy as Drake's inputs to the equation!

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: torpid

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: torpid
Even if it's god but not necessarily as described by any known religion vs dude in arkansas who claims to have been abducted by aliens, I still find the latter easier to believe.

What if the dude in Arkansas who claims to have been abducted by God instead of aliens? What if he claims God came to him in a flying saucer? If it's not god as described by any known religion, then what is god? And what are aliens? Push the definition of either and you get the same thing: a higher power from beyond the earth.

/hums Somewhere Over the Rainbow

I don't believe in flexible definitions like that. At the least you have to remove the plural. If it's god, I don't think it can also be alienS, although I suppose there is some form of plural connected borg existence that could theoretically be god. You know, like, god is nature, worship the mother earth with giant hips, that sort of thing. But then I would call it a single alien. Ultimately, it boils down to grammar.

Actually, the earliest known word for a monotheistic God, the ancient Hebrew Elohim, means "the many that think/act/are as one."
Consider the concept of perfection and then the possibility of perfect beings. As there can only be one form of perfection (although I personally would argue that perfection is an opinion), then all beings who might be perfection would therefore by definition think/act/be as one. You might call that borg-like but then again the Borg were not "perfect."
In the end, it's not an issue of grammar but of being able to understand concepts on a universal scale. My suggestion would be that instead of defining things against this opposites (i.e. light = absence of dark), try defining them against their lack of existence (i.e. light != non-light).

 

[torpid]

Originally posted by: mugs
That's fine. I agree.

Maybe I'm being anal about this and should just let it slide when someone say something that is completely inaccurate as if it is a fact. But to say that an equation is meaningless because it lacks constants (???) and then try to back that up with a bunch of unlrelated information is as crazy as Drake's inputs to the equation!

Is it crazy, or is crazy the new sane on the internet? So many people do just that, it's the norm now, therefore you are crazy if you aren't crazy. Or something.

 

[VIAN]

****** haven't you ever seen Star Trek? We're not alone.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: Vic

Pardon me... allow me to rephrase: an equation with no definable or measurable variables is not valid.

Do you feel better now? It doesn't change the issue that the Drake Equation is meaningless sh!t, or that aliens are the gods of pseudoscience.

*sigh*... the equation is valid... Look at the meanings of the inputs and look at the meaning of the output. The left side equals the right side. The Drake Equation doesn't attempt to make any claims about what does or does not exist in the universe. It tells us what is likely given certain probabilities and averages. If those probabilities and averages were accurate, the result would be accurate.

It is no different from the parallelogram - I could put whatever BS I want in for the length and height and get an arbitrary area. Or I can put in actual measured values and get the actual area. Same thing with the Drake Equation. The problem is that we can't yet obtain accurate, measurable values, and in order to obtain them we'd have already had to make contact with other intelligent life. That doesn't make the equation any less valid mathematically though.

*sigh* I never tried to argue that the equation was mathematically invalid. I clearly said that it was scientifically invalid. In case you haven't noticed, we're not arguing math here, but the claim that the belief in aliens contains some type of scientific validity when it doesn't.
Get over yourself. I'm not interested in your red herring here. This hair you're trying to split has no meaning in this overall discussion.