chiplee Posted July 1, 2009 Report Share Posted July 1, 2009 Ditch the argument, man, you can't build a good debate when both sides are using different instruction books. Different instruction books for how to debate, or different instruction books for how life, the Universe and everything in it was formed? There's only one instruction book for "good debate", and you're right, if everyone doesn't agree to use it then we can't get far. But so long as both sides agree to maintain at least a minimum standard of debate etiquette, we can discuss ANYTHING calmly and rationally, and have a VERY GOOD DEBATE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shelby Posted July 1, 2009 Report Share Posted July 1, 2009 when i was younger and smarter my job on these debates was the fire sterier , it actualy was very informative ,seeing what the other half was learning while this half was in the service , most of the time it was disapointing , the vass number of college kids were learning more about partying then educateing them selves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strang3majik Posted July 1, 2009 Report Share Posted July 1, 2009 the answer is 42. Duh. Click Here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mech Posted July 1, 2009 Report Share Posted July 1, 2009 Yeah, Stargate was an awesome movie; own it on bluray in fact. Nice try at anticipating the criticisms of your hypothesis, but those aren't the only questions you have to answer. The size of the Universe makes alien life likely to exist somewhere, and more importantly, some “timeâ€. Ignoring your "anticipated" problem that the distances involved would require some bending of the currently observed laws of physics to traverse in anything less than say half the lifespan of the Universe, the more important issue is this. While the size of the Universe makes alien life likely, it does NOT make it likely for that life to be intelligent. It does not make it likely to exist in close enough proximity to us for a “visit†to also be “likelyâ€. And it most certainly does not make it likely to exist during the same sliver of time as our existence, but essentially the distance problem and the time problem are one in the same. It should have already existed, and should one day exist. That’s all. Your logic is flawed, as usual, because you’ve jumped all the way from “the universe is big, so aliens are probably out there†to “aliens have probably been hereâ€. Too much is being made “probable†by your understanding of the size of the Universe. You’re ignoring our dear brother Ockham, who compels us to discard answers that solve very little, or raise more questions than they answer, or even answer nothing at all. If aliens were here they apparently weren’t trying to hide, and if they’re still visiting then they really aren’t trying to hide. So why do they never stay still for more than a single frame photo? And why is there never a shred of evidence that couldn’t have been faked? Why no convincing video? Why nothing interesting at all? I'm keeping it purposely simple here chip, because really, i neither have the time nor interest to write out long and detailed posts. The 15 billion year old THEORY is based upon VISIBLE light only. Therefore, no matter what evidence is presented, it is flawed. While the size of the Universe makes alien life likely, it does NOT make it likely for that life to be intelligent. That is just flat out wrong. There are so many planets orbiting suns in the universe that we dont even have a number that goes that high.....Billions of galaxies with 100 upon billions billions and of suns. Its Mans EGO that would make the assertion that we are the only or few forms of intelligent life in the Universe! And, if in fact life is rare.....then that would be more of a reason for other intelligent life forms to seek out other intelligence..... Why dont they land on the white house lawn? Because we would react in a violent way, now wouldnt we. Maybe mankind isnt ready to know the truth.....the truth being not that we are not alone in the universe, but that we are not alone on this planet. And for traveling......this is a MULTIVERSE....you have to think outside of the third dimension homie. If you could reduce the matter of your body or a ship to equal that of photons.... explained http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OW78l1tOj14 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eviper21 Posted July 1, 2009 Report Share Posted July 1, 2009 (edited) if the "big bang" happend all at once wouldnt that mean that if there was a planet able to sustain intelligent life, that life would have evolved in about the same time frame as us? meaning if there is another "earth" out there they are as about advanced as we are? we have pretty solid theorys on how the earth was formed and how thing evolved....we know what can live in what environment and its just hard to believe that theres a planet out there (obviously rediculously far from us) that has evolved so quickly, that they have found ways to travels extremely far distances. and even if there were....y hasnt another intelligent lif form make a formal apperance on earth? i dunno, to me theres just to many what ifs and how comes that make it hard to consider it a solid theory...... with billions of believed planets there has to be atleast a few that create perfect environments for life like us......true.....but theres just no solid facts to say that one of those few planets carry life forms way more advanced than us. it is truely unbelievable what past cultures have somehow created with their limited technology....i mean for a culture to carve a giant elegant entrance into the side of a mountain is just crazy.....and for people to shape gold into perfect figures by hand just blows my mind. to me, i beleive when technology starts to improve beyond a certain point, cultural standards decrease in a way......way back when the pyramids and all the other amazing monuments were built, all those cultures were similiar in ways... they had ALLOT of time...nothing was rushed because the art and buildings were all made by hand... now think about now....almost anything can be made with, or with the help of a machine in literally hours or days.....i mean, why would we spend years building a giant building out of rocks and mud, wen we could build a building twice as big and twice as strong in a matter of months. It wouldnt make sense... but now i guess the qustion is, does technology change culture or does culture change technology? One thing i do notice tho is how fast technology advances the more it advances....in the past 50 years technology has advanced to fast its incredible what people come up with now. im getting lost in my own thought so sorry if im jumping around....lol....but im done Edited July 1, 2009 by eviper21 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiplee Posted July 1, 2009 Report Share Posted July 1, 2009 the answer is 42. Duh. Click Here My favorite answer by far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiplee Posted July 1, 2009 Report Share Posted July 1, 2009 (edited) I'm keeping it purposely simple here chip, because really, i neither have the time nor interest to write out long and detailed posts. The 15 billion year old THEORY is based upon VISIBLE light only. Therefore, no matter what evidence is presented, it is flawed. Again, you're right, and scientists who suggest anything different are wrong. I will apologize for them, here and now. I’m sorry you were given the wrong idea about what the Big Bang theory speaks to. That was an error on the part of science and scientists. It is a theory of the currently observable expansion of the Universe. Nothing more. Not a theory of origins or the time before whatever it was that cause this observable expansion. That is just flat out wrong. You must have misunderstood. I said it didn’t make intelligent life “likelyâ€. You’re reacting as if I said it made intelligent life impossible. There are so many planets orbiting suns in the universe that we dont even have a number that goes that high.....Billions of galaxies with 100 upon billions billions and of suns. Mech, please, you know me better than to think you’re telling me something I don’t know here. I will disagree though with the idea that we don’t have a number that goes that high. We can at least get close with the concept we call “infinityâ€, and whether we’ve named the numbers that go “that high†yet or not, if we began to count and arrived at a number higher than any number yet named, we would invent a new name for that number, and keep counting. But with the ability to annotate exponents, I suspect there is NO SUCH THING as a number we are incapable of writing. Its Mans EGO that would make the assertion that we are the only or few forms of intelligent life in the Universe! Again, you know me better than to levy such typical and weak counterpoints at me as if I don't already know them, and as if I'm a victim of such trivial mental weakness. Look at it this way, 99% of the species that have existed on the earth are now extinct. Estimates of the current number of species range between roughly 5 and 30 million. Therefore, 5 to 30 million is 1% of the variety of different species of life that has existed on earth. Of that 1%; of that 5 to 30 million, fully ONE species has developed the intelligence required to build radio antennas and telescopes with which to listen and look into the Universe. Stephen Jay Gould suggested convincingly in “Wonderful Life†that rewound and played through again, life on this planet very well may NEVER have developed the fully articulated speech and introspection required to become “humanâ€, or anything like human. Therefore, it is my humble assertion, that while “life†is most likely abundant in the Universe, “intelligent life†is most likely NOT abundant. 100 years ago our most powerful radios had a 1 mile range. Until VERY recently we have been INVISIBLE from even just the distance to our moon. Think. And, if in fact life is rare.....then that would be more of a reason for other intelligent life forms to seek out other intelligence..... You are all over the place. Life is likely abundant, as I said initially. Intelligent life is probably very very rare. I explained the rare can still be very likely concept on these forums years ago. I follow you. Why dont they land on the white house lawn? Because we would react in a violent way, now wouldnt we. Maybe mankind isnt ready to know the truth.....the truth being not that we are not alone in the universe, but that we are not alone on this planet. Ok big guy. And for traveling......this is a MULTIVERSE....you have to think outside of the third dimension homie. I’ve read more about string theory and multiverse hypotheses than you can possibly imagine. I’m not convinced yet, but I find it very fascinating. Fascinating does not equal true for me, sorry. Edited July 1, 2009 by chiplee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fanta Posted July 1, 2009 Report Share Posted July 1, 2009 Hmm, here's the thing Due to I suppose the religious extremist in this world, along with some countries who's society is really bound to its faith, if intelligent life has been here and made contact with us, governments wouldn't want to admit it - why? Because then the blocks of certain societies would fall into chaos as everything they believed in would all seem to be a farce. Personally I'm waiting for the day when someone steps up to the plate and is just like yeah, we lied, to protect you people, but yup, there are aliens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiniSRT4 Posted July 1, 2009 Report Share Posted July 1, 2009 (edited) this thread gets a thumbs up from me... what about the fact that all of our advancements in the past hundred years are reverse engineered from megatron? Edited July 1, 2009 by MiniSRT4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDX87Starion Posted July 1, 2009 Report Share Posted July 1, 2009 Speaking of the big bang I watched a show and scientist have been working on "M" theory that looks like its gonna be the unifying theory of everything that Einstein was searching for. The math is all working out...they believe there are 11 spacial dimensions and that the big bang was a collision between two dimensional membranes, which is why there are clusters of matter/galaxies instead of evenly distributed matter. Also this means that time did not begin at the big bang...which is huge. I will try and find the show, it was very interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiplee Posted July 1, 2009 Report Share Posted July 1, 2009 (edited) if the "big bang" happend all at once wouldnt that mean that if there was a planet able to sustain intelligent life, that life would have evolved in about the same time frame as us? No meaning if there is another "earth" out there they are as about advanced as we are? No, but suppose for a second that your assumption is logical and likely to be true. It would present a bigger problem than if it were false. Existing simultaneously, but billions of light years apart, is the same as existing at very different times, even times as different as billions of years apart. This is because any life form that exists a billion light years away right this instant will need a billion years to get here, if they have managed to develop light speed travel, which will require some bending of the laws of physics to accomplish, as previously mentioned. we have pretty solid theorys on how the earth was formed and how thing evolved.... You don’t have to say we have “pretty solid†theories. Scientific “theories†are “pretty solid†by definition. Nothing is granted the supreme title, THEORY in science until it has survived close scrutiny and experimentation. A scientific hypothesis is an every day common man’s “theoryâ€. A scientific "theory" is an every day common man's conclusion. we know what can live in what environment and its just hard to believe that theres a planet out there (obviously rediculously far from us) that has evolved so quickly, that they have found ways to travels extremely far distances. Not for me it’s not. And considering that the Universe is stranger than any of us is capable of supposing, it really doesn’t matter what you find it “hard to believeâ€. and even if there were....y hasnt another intelligent lif form make a formal apperance on earth? i dunno, to me theres just to many what ifs and how comes that make it hard to consider it a solid theory...... with billions of believed planets there has to be atleast a few that create perfect environments for life like us......true.....but theres just no solid facts to say that one of those few planets carry life forms way more advanced than us. There are no facts on that subject at all, let alone solid facts. We’re talking about elementary probability theory. The same theory that makes it inevitably true that every time you drink a glass of water, “you imbibe at least one molecule that passed through the bladder of Oliver Cromwellâ€. And the same probability theory that accounts for the cold hard FACT that there are more molecules of water in a single glass than there are glasses of water on the earth. it is truely unbelievable what past cultures have somehow created with their limited technology....i mean for a culture to carve a giant elegant entrance into the side of a mountain is just crazy.....and for people to shape gold into perfect figures by hand just blows my mind. There are more amazing things than most of us have ever been able to consider. Good on you for thinking at all. Many of us don’t bother. Edited July 1, 2009 by chiplee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macrophage Posted July 1, 2009 Report Share Posted July 1, 2009 Were not advanced.we just make make our life easier with new products and services. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiplee Posted July 1, 2009 Report Share Posted July 1, 2009 (edited) Also this means that time did not begin at the big bang...which is huge. I have never understood why ANYONE thought it did. Ultimately, by our definition of the word, the most logical conclusion appears to be that there is no such thing as “timeâ€, just a series of “nows†strung end to end creating the illusion of “passage of timeâ€. We assume things all begin and end, because that has been our experience here in “middle world†where things are all “medium sized†with beginnings and endings. Time, is a human construct with very limited explanatory power or usefulness outside of our experience. Basically, why bother. There appears to me to be one thing. That one thing is the current arrangement of all the matter in the Universe. An infinite number of these arrangements have existed in each of our lives. The molecular arrangement that made up YOU when you were born is very different from the arrangement that makes up you now. So much so that not one single solitary particle that was in you then is still in you now. Not one. Since some of your cells passed on information to their replacements though, you have “memories†of that arrangement, and you perceive a “pastâ€. But it is always just now, momentary, never at rest, always changing, always different. Time therefore, and the Universe, appear to be eternal. Edited July 1, 2009 by chiplee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shelby Posted July 1, 2009 Report Share Posted July 1, 2009 we're advanceing ,,you sure, last time i look'd , it is so bad we have to have auto water fausets in bath rooms and auto flush,, advance'd people should be able to turn water off and flush with out being told or have it done for you and who is this Oliver Cromwell ,to worry about drinking some thing that pass'd thru his blader,, i'm sure theres plenty of drunks out there that you could say the same thing about Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiplee Posted July 1, 2009 Report Share Posted July 1, 2009 we're advanceing ,,you sure, last time i look'd , it is so bad we have to have auto water fausets in bath rooms and auto flush,, advance'd people should be able to turn water off and flush with out being told or have it done for you That's for sanitary reasons, not laziness. and who is this Oliver Cromwell ,to worry about drinking some thing that pass'd thru his blader,, i'm sure theres plenty of drunks out there that you could say the same thing about I'm sure you're joking, but insert any historical figure. When you drink water, it's likely that you will imbibe at least one molecule that has passed through my bladder. Just probability theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shelby Posted July 1, 2009 Report Share Posted July 1, 2009 That's for sanitary reasons, not laziness. ................................................................... sorry Chip but it is because of lazy people that makes it nessarry to be sanitary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDX87Starion Posted July 1, 2009 Report Share Posted July 1, 2009 I have never understood why ANYONE thought it did. Because time and space are interwoven. Hawking calls it timespace. If you effect or warp the fabric of space you also effect or warp time. Time is relative to the observer. The faster you are traveling through space, the slower time is for you, compared to someone who is traveling slower. If there was no space or universe before the big bang, then there would be no time, since time and space are one. Thats what they were thinking. This whole thing about extra dimensions is pretty weird too. The show was called "master of the universe" on the science channel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mech Posted July 1, 2009 Report Share Posted July 1, 2009 (edited) ok...lets say at some point in the near future "aliens" actually do land on white house lawn....what are you going to say then Chip? edit: BTW did you watch the two videos i posted? I dont know why i bother asking...i can see it already....."its just space junk!" Or you will just somehow try to debunk it. Edited July 1, 2009 by Mech Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shelby Posted July 1, 2009 Report Share Posted July 1, 2009 as for this big bang,, what is a black hole , matter gets suck'd into it and where does it go,, and what happens when ahuge amount of matter gets pull'd togather and is sudently release'd into an empty space ,it expands sence we speculateing ,,what if a super black hole suck'd in an entire galaxy , all the matter was press'd togather and transport'd to another area of space and release'd , would it not apear to have materilize'd in a central location and then spread out from there , from a distance it would look like a big bang causeing every thing to move away from a central point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiplee Posted July 1, 2009 Report Share Posted July 1, 2009 That's for sanitary reasons, not laziness. ................................................................... sorry Chip but it is because of lazy people that makes it nessarry to be sanitary Also sorry, shelby, but I completely disagree. Think about what you’re saying. Think about it this way. Without an automatic flusher, how many times do you wash your hands BEFORE you flush? Never, right? Neither do I. I just flush with my dirty hands, or if I’m feeling especially clean and considerate I’ll do it with my elbow at a urinal or my shoe at a crapper. There’s no way to wash your hands between handling your business and flushing, which means every time you touch the flush lever you touch a lever that has also recently been touched by several people who were just holding their junk or worse, got crap on their hand. Trust me, it is a sanitary measure, period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiplee Posted July 1, 2009 Report Share Posted July 1, 2009 Because time and space are interwoven. Hawking calls it timespace. If you effect or warp the fabric of space you also effect or warp time. Time is relative to the observer. The faster you are traveling through space, the slower time is for you, compared to someone who is traveling slower. Gee, thanks for the lesson, lol. J/k, but i'm familiar. Given what you know about me, how could I challenge those theories without first intricately understanding them? What you've explained is part of the reason I think time "in the human context" doesn't exist. If there was no space or universe before the big bang, then there would be no time, since time and space are one. Thats what they were thinking. You should have said then there would be no time "as we know it". Very important distinction they should ALWAYS have made, but they failed. Hawking is a self aggrandizing showman, and a dunce. He completely overstepped his bounds (drew conclusions that were not in the data) in most of what he did as a scientist and for that he has lost my respect. He set back the debate between science and religion by supposing too much to be settled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiplee Posted July 1, 2009 Report Share Posted July 1, 2009 ok...lets say at some point in the near future "aliens" actually do land on white house lawn....what are you going to say then Chip? I'll say "Man that's cool. Hope they're nice and if so I can't wait to learn from them". edit: BTW did you watch the two videos i posted? I dont know why i bother asking...i can see it already....."its just space junk!" Or you will just somehow try to debunk it. can't watch videos from work so no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PDX87Starion Posted July 1, 2009 Report Share Posted July 1, 2009 Gee, thanks for the lesson, lol. J/k, but i'm familiar. Given what you know about me, how could I challenge those theories without first intricately understanding them? What you've explained is part of the reason I think time "in the human context" doesn't exist. You should have said then there would be no time "as we know it". Very important distinction they should ALWAYS have made, but they failed. Hawking is a self aggrandizing showman, and a dunce. He completely overstepped his bounds (drew conclusions that were not in the data) in most of what he did as a scientist and for that he has lost my respect. He set back the debate between science and religion by supposing too much to be settled. LoL, it was more of a "lesson" for the audience. Here is the show that I was talking about... it was a bbc show I guess. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2K_FR_MWMw...feature=related Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patra_is_here Posted July 1, 2009 Report Share Posted July 1, 2009 man o man, i'm glad chip is back, primarily because, unlike myself, he has the patience to argue this topics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiplee Posted July 1, 2009 Report Share Posted July 1, 2009 man o man, i'm glad chip is back, primarily because, unlike myself, he has the patience to argue this topics. :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts