Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

The Improbability Of Intelligent Life


  • Please log in to reply
28 replies to this topic

#21 Mooky

Mooky

    Self-REbanned

  • Islander
  • 8,673 posts

Posted 25 December 2015 - 12:54 PM

Yer hopeless.  I'm out.

#22 Elara

Elara

    Feel the silence of the moonlight.

  • Watchdog
  • 2,901 posts

Posted 25 December 2015 - 04:35 PM

View Postgsmonks, on 03 December 2015 - 03:56 PM, said:

No, it's more like 1 out of a billion out of a billion. That was the accepted number back in the 50s, and I stand by it today.

And, back in the fifties, they believed that there were no other planets, that our solar system was all alone. If you stand by what science believed in the fifties, then you are way, way behind science.

View Postgsmonks, on 23 December 2015 - 05:23 PM, said:

Instead, we stand stop a precarious pole consisting of one-off's: sexual reproduction was a one-off; the development of written language was a string of one-off's; our ability to speak is a one-off; that we walk upright, which in turn facilitated the development of the human brain, for complex anatomical reasons I won't get into here, was a one-off; that we shifted from brute evolution to decision-making and problem-solving was a one-off; and the hits just keep on coming.

Humans are the only ones with sexual reproduction? Are you suggesting that all other creatures simply come into existence out of thin air? An ability to speak is present in some birds. Some primates can use sign language. Penguins walk upright, also different branches of the family tree that would lead to modern humans walked upright, and there are numbers of bipedal creatures that have walked this earth. Some birds build houses, some animals build homes, and the list goes on. Are they as advanced as humans? More so, in some ways, but that's my opinion. Scientifically advanced, no. The point is, your pyramid is not so pointy as you claim.

As for intelligent life, just in this galaxy alone, I see nothing to prove that it doesn't exist. In a tiny pinpoint section of our galaxy, Kepler has found thousands of candidates, with 1030 confirmed planets. To suggest that we are alone, is denying what science is learning.
El
~ blue crystal glows, the dark side unseen, sparkles in scant light, from sun to planet, to me in between ~


I want a job in HRC's "shadow" cabinet. Good pay, really easy hours, lots of time off. Can't go wrong.

"You have a fair and valid point here. I've pointed out, numerous times, that the Left's or Democrats always cry "Racist" whenever someone disagrees with them. I failed to realize that the Right or Republicans do the same thing with "Liberal"." ~ LotS

#23 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 5,053 posts

Posted 26 December 2015 - 10:21 AM

View PostJohn R. Sellers, on 25 December 2015 - 12:54 PM, said:

Yer hopeless.  I'm out.

In other words, you're out of your depth.
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.

#24 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 5,053 posts

Posted 26 December 2015 - 10:39 AM

View PostElara, on 25 December 2015 - 04:35 PM, said:

View Postgsmonks, on 03 December 2015 - 03:56 PM, said:

No, it's more like 1 out of a billion out of a billion. That was the accepted number back in the 50s, and I stand by it today.

And, back in the fifties, they believed that there were no other planets, that our solar system was all alone. If you stand by what science believed in the fifties, then you are way, way behind science.

View Postgsmonks, on 23 December 2015 - 05:23 PM, said:

Instead, we stand stop a precarious pole consisting of one-off's: sexual reproduction was a one-off; the development of written language was a string of one-off's; our ability to speak is a one-off; that we walk upright, which in turn facilitated the development of the human brain, for complex anatomical reasons I won't get into here, was a one-off; that we shifted from brute evolution to decision-making and problem-solving was a one-off; and the hits just keep on coming.

Humans are the only ones with sexual reproduction? Are you suggesting that all other creatures simply come into existence out of thin air? An ability to speak is present in some birds. Some primates can use sign language. Penguins walk upright, also different branches of the family tree that would lead to modern humans walked upright, and there are numbers of bipedal creatures that have walked this earth. Some birds build houses, some animals build homes, and the list goes on. Are they as advanced as humans? More so, in some ways, but that's my opinion. Scientifically advanced, no. The point is, your pyramid is not so pointy as you claim.

As for intelligent life, just in this galaxy alone, I see nothing to prove that it doesn't exist. In a tiny pinpoint section of our galaxy, Kepler has found thousands of candidates, with 1030 confirmed planets. To suggest that we are alone, is denying what science is learning.

Yeah . . . you'd have to go back to the 1500's to find people who thought our solar system was all alone, and even then there were many theorists who were sure that each point of light was a sun with a solar system.

You should maybe take a course in the history of science. I'm not saying this to be snarky or anything. Most people simply don't know how far back scientific ideas really go. Early forms of what would become television were demonstrated back in the 1800's, for example, and an early television was displayed at the World Exposition in Paris, in a pavilion near to the then brand-new Eiffel Tower. Tesla demonstrated a radio-controlled toy boat back in the 1800's too. The Egyptians made batteries and used them for etching and electroplating. They also made toy steam-engines, and used steam pistons to open and close massive doors. The Romans invented the pipe organ (the instrument Nero was really playing as Rome burned).

You're conflating what scientists could see with telescopes with the state of science in the 1950's. The science back then was far, far more advanced than the available telescopes at the time. You should actually read up on what science was like in the 50's, instead of making out-to-lunch blanket statements that demonstrate how little you know.

Science history. Fascinating stuff.

You need to buy yourself a pair of glasses. I did not say that only humans have sexual differentiation. What I said was that sexual differentiation was a one-off for life on this planet, which includes humans. Without sexual differentiation, we'd still be pond scum.

As I said before, and am saying again for the umpteenth time, yes other animals have language- of sorts. But that does not enable them to convey information that allows them to create the sciences, mathematics, etc.

Yes, there are plenty of bipedal animals. But none of them have/had a combination of a large brain, speech (which is only possible for animals having a hyoid bone- humans and neanderthals), the physical attributes necessary to evolve manipulation of their environment leading to industrial manufacturing (hands with an opposable thumb), and the hits just keep on coming.
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.

#25 Elara

Elara

    Feel the silence of the moonlight.

  • Watchdog
  • 2,901 posts

Posted 26 December 2015 - 03:10 PM

View Postgsmonks, on 26 December 2015 - 10:39 AM, said:

Yeah . . . you'd have to go back to the 1500's to find people who thought our solar system was all alone, and even then there were many theorists who were sure that each point of light was a sun with a solar system.

Ah yes, I forgot that you were alive back then (refer to the Waltz discussion). Now this was me being snarky, I will admit to it.

View Postgsmonks, on 26 December 2015 - 10:39 AM, said:

You should maybe take a course in the history of science. I'm not saying this to be snarky or anything. Most people simply don't know how far back scientific ideas really go. Early forms of what would become television were demonstrated back in the 1800's, for example, and an early television was displayed at the World Exposition in Paris, in a pavilion near to the then brand-new Eiffel Tower. Tesla demonstrated a radio-controlled toy boat back in the 1800's too. The Egyptians made batteries and used them for etching and electroplating. They also made toy steam-engines, and used steam pistons to open and close massive doors. The Romans invented the pipe organ (the instrument Nero was really playing as Rome burned).

Yes, you did mean that to be snarky as you do with almost every post you make, even when someone agrees with you (won't make that mistake again). I suspect some insecurities rising in your thoughts.
I am well aware what the Egyptians, Romans, etc... accomplished.

View Postgsmonks, on 26 December 2015 - 10:39 AM, said:

You're conflating what scientists could see with telescopes with the state of science in the 1950's. The science back then was far, far more advanced than the available telescopes at the time. You should actually read up on what science was like in the 50's, instead of making out-to-lunch blanket statements that demonstrate how little you know.

I believe I could say the same about you. However, you missed my point that you are behind if you believe what was commonly believed in the 1950's. Even scientists would say this to you. So, perhaps it is you that "should maybe take a course in" science.

View Postgsmonks, on 26 December 2015 - 10:39 AM, said:

Science history. Fascinating stuff.

Yes, it is (oops, I agreed with you).

View Postgsmonks, on 26 December 2015 - 10:39 AM, said:

You need to buy yourself a pair of glasses. I did not say that only humans have sexual differentiation. What I said was that sexual differentiation was a one-off for life on this planet, which includes humans. Without sexual differentiation, we'd still be pond scum.

As I said before, and am saying again for the umpteenth time, yes other animals have language- of sorts. But that does not enable them to convey information that allows them to create the sciences, mathematics, etc.

Yes, there are plenty of bipedal animals. But none of them have/had a combination of a large brain, speech (which is only possible for animals having a hyoid bone- humans and neanderthals), the physical attributes necessary to evolve manipulation of their environment leading to industrial manufacturing (hands with an opposable thumb), and the hits just keep on coming.

And you could stand a course in reading/writing comprehension. When you say:

View Postgsmonks, on 23 December 2015 - 05:23 PM, said:

Instead, we stand stop a precarious pole consisting of one-off's: sexual reproduction was a one-off; the development of written language was a string of one-off's; our ability to speak is a one-off; that we walk upright, which in turn facilitated the development of the human brain, for complex anatomical reasons I won't get into here, was a one-off; that we shifted from brute evolution to decision-making and problem-solving was a one-off; and the hits just keep on coming.

Note that you very clearly are talking about humans, not the entirety of life on Earth. Humans are on the top of that pyramid of "one-offs". Say whatever you want, you can't change what is clearly your line of thinking in this quote. Now, I realize you could have misspoke and meant for that one single "one-off" to be all encompassing, but the last time I asked for clarification, you insulted me telling me how stupid I must be. So no, I won't ask you to clarify. I will simply read it as you wrote it, and in this case you were speaking of humans from start to finish.

As for animals and what they know, I am not arguing that they have as much ability, I simply showed you that your criteria was flawed. Even science knows this.

View Postgsmonks, on 26 December 2015 - 10:21 AM, said:

View PostJohn R. Sellers, on 25 December 2015 - 12:54 PM, said:

Yer hopeless.  I'm out.

In other words, you're out of your depth.

No, in other words, there is no discussion with you. There is only reading your posts and saying nothing, or attempting to agree, which doesn't always go well. Any disagreement seems to upset you, which then makes you insult the intelligence of other person, while you boast about your superior intellect. This does not lead to good discussion.
And yes, I am well aware that you will once again accuse me of having nothing better to do than to troll you. When the truth is, I simply tried again, to have an actual discussion with you. One where you see the other person's point and accept that maybe, just maybe they have a point. Even if you don't totally agree, you can admit that you see where they are coming from and it's an interesting thought. Others will then begin to discuss what you have said. And on and on. This is how an actual discussion works. But not you.
El
~ blue crystal glows, the dark side unseen, sparkles in scant light, from sun to planet, to me in between ~


I want a job in HRC's "shadow" cabinet. Good pay, really easy hours, lots of time off. Can't go wrong.

"You have a fair and valid point here. I've pointed out, numerous times, that the Left's or Democrats always cry "Racist" whenever someone disagrees with them. I failed to realize that the Right or Republicans do the same thing with "Liberal"." ~ LotS

#26 Mooky

Mooky

    Self-REbanned

  • Islander
  • 8,673 posts

Posted 28 December 2015 - 04:20 PM

View Postgsmonks, on 26 December 2015 - 10:21 AM, said:

View PostJohn R. Sellers, on 25 December 2015 - 12:54 PM, said:

Yer hopeless.  I'm out.

In other words, you're out of your depth.

Believe what you will.  I'm outta this argument.

#27 gsmonks

gsmonks

    Tree Psychiatrist

  • Islander
  • 5,053 posts

Posted 28 December 2015 - 06:20 PM

View PostElara, on 26 December 2015 - 03:10 PM, said:

View Postgsmonks, on 26 December 2015 - 10:39 AM, said:

Yeah . . . you'd have to go back to the 1500's to find people who thought our solar system was all alone, and even then there were many theorists who were sure that each point of light was a sun with a solar system.

Ah yes, I forgot that you were alive back then (refer to the Waltz discussion). Now this was me being snarky, I will admit to it.

View Postgsmonks, on 26 December 2015 - 10:39 AM, said:

You should maybe take a course in the history of science. I'm not saying this to be snarky or anything. Most people simply don't know how far back scientific ideas really go. Early forms of what would become television were demonstrated back in the 1800's, for example, and an early television was displayed at the World Exposition in Paris, in a pavilion near to the then brand-new Eiffel Tower. Tesla demonstrated a radio-controlled toy boat back in the 1800's too. The Egyptians made batteries and used them for etching and electroplating. They also made toy steam-engines, and used steam pistons to open and close massive doors. The Romans invented the pipe organ (the instrument Nero was really playing as Rome burned).

Yes, you did mean that to be snarky as you do with almost every post you make, even when someone agrees with you (won't make that mistake again). I suspect some insecurities rising in your thoughts.
I am well aware what the Egyptians, Romans, etc... accomplished.

View Postgsmonks, on 26 December 2015 - 10:39 AM, said:

You're conflating what scientists could see with telescopes with the state of science in the 1950's. The science back then was far, far more advanced than the available telescopes at the time. You should actually read up on what science was like in the 50's, instead of making out-to-lunch blanket statements that demonstrate how little you know.

I believe I could say the same about you. However, you missed my point that you are behind if you believe what was commonly believed in the 1950's. Even scientists would say this to you. So, perhaps it is you that "should maybe take a course in" science.

View Postgsmonks, on 26 December 2015 - 10:39 AM, said:

Science history. Fascinating stuff.

Yes, it is (oops, I agreed with you).

View Postgsmonks, on 26 December 2015 - 10:39 AM, said:

You need to buy yourself a pair of glasses. I did not say that only humans have sexual differentiation. What I said was that sexual differentiation was a one-off for life on this planet, which includes humans. Without sexual differentiation, we'd still be pond scum.

As I said before, and am saying again for the umpteenth time, yes other animals have language- of sorts. But that does not enable them to convey information that allows them to create the sciences, mathematics, etc.

Yes, there are plenty of bipedal animals. But none of them have/had a combination of a large brain, speech (which is only possible for animals having a hyoid bone- humans and neanderthals), the physical attributes necessary to evolve manipulation of their environment leading to industrial manufacturing (hands with an opposable thumb), and the hits just keep on coming.

And you could stand a course in reading/writing comprehension. When you say:

View Postgsmonks, on 23 December 2015 - 05:23 PM, said:

Instead, we stand stop a precarious pole consisting of one-off's: sexual reproduction was a one-off; the development of written language was a string of one-off's; our ability to speak is a one-off; that we walk upright, which in turn facilitated the development of the human brain, for complex anatomical reasons I won't get into here, was a one-off; that we shifted from brute evolution to decision-making and problem-solving was a one-off; and the hits just keep on coming.

Note that you very clearly are talking about humans, not the entirety of life on Earth. Humans are on the top of that pyramid of "one-offs". Say whatever you want, you can't change what is clearly your line of thinking in this quote. Now, I realize you could have misspoke and meant for that one single "one-off" to be all encompassing, but the last time I asked for clarification, you insulted me telling me how stupid I must be. So no, I won't ask you to clarify. I will simply read it as you wrote it, and in this case you were speaking of humans from start to finish.

As for animals and what they know, I am not arguing that they have as much ability, I simply showed you that your criteria was flawed. Even science knows this.

View Postgsmonks, on 26 December 2015 - 10:21 AM, said:

View PostJohn R. Sellers, on 25 December 2015 - 12:54 PM, said:

Yer hopeless.  I'm out.

In other words, you're out of your depth.

No, in other words, there is no discussion with you. There is only reading your posts and saying nothing, or attempting to agree, which doesn't always go well. Any disagreement seems to upset you, which then makes you insult the intelligence of other person, while you boast about your superior intellect. This does not lead to good discussion.
And yes, I am well aware that you will once again accuse me of having nothing better to do than to troll you. When the truth is, I simply tried again, to have an actual discussion with you. One where you see the other person's point and accept that maybe, just maybe they have a point. Even if you don't totally agree, you can admit that you see where they are coming from and it's an interesting thought. Others will then begin to discuss what you have said. And on and on. This is how an actual discussion works. But not you.

Funny how when I mention technology and science, I talk about technology and science.

When you talk about technology and science, however, it's only a tool to take a dig at someone.

You've demonstrated many times that you do not have the basic tools necessary in order to participate in a discussion. One of the most basic rules is "attack the argument, not the person".

In other words, you're here out of ego, not to participate in a meaningful discussion.

Same goes for you, John R. Sellers. You've said "I'm out of here" twice now. If you were really "out of here", you simply wouldn't bother with this thread.

Both of you suffer from an absolute lack of respect- something I've seen grow in my own students over the years. The Interweb seems to have contributed to the swelled heads of young know-it-all's (and just as many older ones) who think they're interested in participating in reasoned discussion, but are really present only to shoot their mouths off and to be disruptive.

This type of behaviour is typical in kids when they're out of class. They're full of arrogant presumption and have zero respect for the people who really do know what they're talking about. And in forum situations they behave badly as the two of you are doing, lowering the level of discussion to the kind of stupidity and nastiness you see on YooToob.

I'll tell the two of you what I tell my students- Grow up!
Capitalism is a pyramid scheme run by the 1%.

#28 Elara

Elara

    Feel the silence of the moonlight.

  • Watchdog
  • 2,901 posts

Posted 28 December 2015 - 10:37 PM

View Postgsmonks, on 28 December 2015 - 06:20 PM, said:

Funny how when I mention technology and science, I talk about technology and science.

When you talk about technology and science, however, it's only a tool to take a dig at someone.

You've demonstrated many times that you do not have the basic tools necessary in order to participate in a discussion. One of the most basic rules is "attack the argument, not the person".

In other words, you're here out of ego, not to participate in a meaningful discussion.

Same goes for you, John R. Sellers. You've said "I'm out of here" twice now. If you were really "out of here", you simply wouldn't bother with this thread.

Both of you suffer from an absolute lack of respect- something I've seen grow in my own students over the years. The Interweb seems to have contributed to the swelled heads of young know-it-all's (and just as many older ones) who think they're interested in participating in reasoned discussion, but are really present only to shoot their mouths off and to be disruptive.

This type of behaviour is typical in kids when they're out of class. They're full of arrogant presumption and have zero respect for the people who really do know what they're talking about. And in forum situations they behave badly as the two of you are doing, lowering the level of discussion to the kind of stupidity and nastiness you see on YooToob.

I'll tell the two of you what I tell my students- Grow up!

And when anyone disagrees (or agrees) with you, you insult their intelligence. You don't discuss. If you did this as a teacher, you were the kind that would suppress a child's opinion because it didn't mesh with yours.

I won't be like you and attempt to insult you, I will simply take the high road and leave you to your... opinions.
El
~ blue crystal glows, the dark side unseen, sparkles in scant light, from sun to planet, to me in between ~


I want a job in HRC's "shadow" cabinet. Good pay, really easy hours, lots of time off. Can't go wrong.

"You have a fair and valid point here. I've pointed out, numerous times, that the Left's or Democrats always cry "Racist" whenever someone disagrees with them. I failed to realize that the Right or Republicans do the same thing with "Liberal"." ~ LotS

#29 Mooky

Mooky

    Self-REbanned

  • Islander
  • 8,673 posts

Posted 29 December 2015 - 02:40 AM

View PostElara, on 28 December 2015 - 10:37 PM, said:

I won't be like you and attempt to insult you, I will simply take the high road and leave you to your... opinions.


I guess I should do the same, but I keep wondering what the point of this entire thread was.  gs stated that "we do not stand atop a pyramid". Well, SO WHAT.  We are what we are.  Where  is  it written that humans have to be the only intelligent life in the universe?


0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users