A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

What's wrong with there being ETs (smarter than us none the less)



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old June 20th 07, 07:23 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history,sci.skeptic,sci.astro
Bill Habr
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15
Default What's wrong with there being ETs (smarter than us none the less)


"BradGuth" wrote in message
ups.com...


Which laws of physics forbids other intelligent life?


None


What sort of evolution is strictly terrestrial limited?


Terrestrial evolution


What sort of planet/moon extremes are totally insurmountable for
having accommodated intelligent life?


Unknown



A final thought:
If they are intelligent they are smart enough to avoid humans.


  #12  
Old June 20th 07, 07:27 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history,sci.skeptic,sci.astro,uk.sci.astronomy
Ian Parker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,554
Default What's wrong with there being ETs (smarter than us none the less)

On 20 Jun, 15:46, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Ian Parker wrote:

:
:We are looking at things like Google as a possible version of AI on
:the Web.
:

Not if we're sane we're not.

:
:We know that television appearances in effect selects the President.
:

Nope. We don't know any such thing.


Well every candidate seems to think otherwise.

Google have assembled an impressive array of experts who have written
what to me are marvellous papers. I have just given a critique.

http://www.paperoftheweek.com/2007/0...-intelligence/

The key issue is linguistics. You can make jokes on the lines of
"Quieres dormir con fosforo" but the tackling of language, and speech
which is a branch of linuistic understanding is impressive. "I want a
spring for the clock" = "Quiero una resorte por el reloj" reloj =
resorte is the sort of thing that the diagrams in the speech paper is
talking about. The evaluation of a complex Markov diagram is
complicated but it can be done. Google is on its way. What it has
already delivered is impressive too. Getting everything to work on a
Web scale.
:
:We are replacing analogue
:television at a rate of knots ...
:

2012 for Brtain. BT Vision is doing exactly what I am saying. It is
broadband powered. As soon as a reliable true 8MHz can be delivered
Radio Reloj will be truly dead.


- Ian Parker

  #13  
Old June 20th 07, 07:47 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history,sci.skeptic,sci.astro,uk.sci.astronomy
Ian Parker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,554
Default What's wrong with there being ETs (smarter than us none the less)

On 20 Jun, 15:57, BradGuth wrote:

We are looking at things like Google as a possible version of AI on
the Web. We are looking at the consequences which are quite literally
mind boggling. If I were to land on a planet going roung some distant
star and there was an Internet, the first thing I would do would be
put intelligence onto it and this intelligence would produce a
synopsis of all life for me.


To that I say again; Where is there not evidence?


There is plenty of evidence as to what Google is doing.

I see and/or experience ETs AI crapolla (mostly Zion based) just about
everywhere within this internet/usenet.


Why Zionist? I have never mentioned Isreal. The 2L I have posted has
mostly been Spanish - not Hebrew.

We know that television appearances in effect selects the President.
If ET is embedded deeply into the Web he will be in a position to make
or break presidents. This is going to become more and more true in the
future when RSS feeds replace analogue television (Radio Reloj I
called it in the SETI discussions). We are replacing analogue
television at a rate of knots and if there is any truth in ET it means
that we are not masters of our destiny.


As I've said before; Why would any ET worth their salt need to bother
screwing with us, nor should they dare. Because we're clearly the
assholes, we're not supposed to do business with Cuba or a few other
nations. Go figure what ETs must have on their embargo (aka NO FLY)
list.

Why then come at all? I KNOW that ET is not around on Earth. I don't
know wheher or not there is intelligent life on some distant planet
that has taken the conscious decision not to come. If we do a voyage
at c/2 it will take a moderate investment in resources. ET would have
to consider these resources worth while.

If he did make the trip he would want to maximise his returns. As for
a "no fly list". well I would have thought that if this were the case
ET would take steps to make us less threatening. AI on the Web would
be a very good way of doing this.


I don't know either why someone with a pseudonym of "American" seems
to think we have been visited regularly. This being the case all the
military hardware built up by the US is just so much junk. What will
be decisive for the world is the information we are presented with.
This will come from ET. ET will select what is in and not in our RSS
feeds.


And obviously you think we're as screwed up as we are because of
ourselves, with no off-world assistance whatsoever. When was the last
time we left a given nation alone, especially if there was the likes
of oil, yellowcake or some other spendy element to being had?

Besides, why on Earth would ETs have only the best of intentions?

Well now. If ET wished to destroy us there are quite simple ways of so
doing. A biological weapon for example. ET clearly does not wish
either to destroy us on the one hand, or to make us less threatening
on the other. The disinformation on the Web clearly comes from
military/CIA based sources.


There is no evidence I can discern that the Web does contain AI, so
the above is academic. At least I hope it is! There is no evidence of
disinformation - at least not on the ET side. There is evidence of
disinformation from people who do not want to know the truth. This
does in fact make me cross. The people though are emphatically Terran.


A true naysayer/rusemaster is in denial from the get go. (it's sort of
MIB required)

If MIB Men in Black or Machines in Black.


The phrase I use "?Puerde leer en espagnol?" I think expresses this.
What would you expect from a message from ET? Well perhaps not little
green ET but a Web manifesation of AI. Well it would be multilingual.
It would be expressed in a number of languages in a slightly different
form.


Why would ETs bother to let on that they have existed, as here on
Earth or otherwise upon Venus or anywhere else we might possibly look?

Wouldn't most religions or faith-based morons (especially those fence
jumping Atheists) hunt them down and kill off such ETs without
remorse? (if history counts, of course they would)

Well no we could not track AI down. Dammit we find paedophilia
difficult enough. AI would hide in crevices, you would think a real
mperson had posted, but in fact no one would have done.

Look at what happened to Jesus Christ, and by his own kind none the
less. So, there is no limit as to what we'd do if knowing there was
an ET among us. If I were an ET, there's no freaking way in this
bigotry of hell on Earth that I'd share that knowledge. Besides, to
an interplanetary/interstellar trekking ET, what's so great about our
energy poor and otherwise 98.5% fluid Earth that's getting itself
global warmed and otherwise a little extra radiated by our salty old
anticathode moon anyway? (Earth is a wussy planet with more than it's
fair share of local problems)

BTW, c/2 seems iffy, although c/10 seems rather ET doable, as fast
enough.
-

c/10 would be fast enough for AI that would simply go into
hibernation.. The real question I think is simply this. ET is supposed
to take part in things like alien abduction and to fly around in
flying saucers. In fact you can get all the DNA evidence you want by
just taking a few skin samples. Most of your information is on the
Web.

The other thing is the size of ET spacecraft. They have always been
posulated as man carrying. In fact ET will have developed molecular
information storage. Spacecraft will be the size of dragonflies.


- Ian Parker

  #14  
Old June 20th 07, 08:49 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history,sci.skeptic,sci.astro,uk.sci.astronomy
BradGuth
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21,544
Default What's wrong with there being ETs (smarter than us none the less)

On Jun 20, 11:47 am, Ian Parker wrote:
On 20 Jun, 15:57, BradGuth wrote:

We are looking at things like Google as a possible version of AI on
the Web. We are looking at the consequences which are quite literally
mind boggling. If I were to land on a planet going roung some distant
star and there was an Internet, the first thing I would do would be
put intelligence onto it and this intelligence would produce a
synopsis of all life for me.


To that I say again; Where is there not evidence?


There is plenty of evidence as to what Google is doing.

I see and/or experience ETs AI crapolla (mostly Zion based) just about
everywhere within this internet/usenet.


Why Zionist? I have never mentioned Isreal. The 2L I have posted has
mostly been Spanish - not Hebrew.


Don't try telling the rest of us village idiots that Zionist/Jews as
of before and during WWII were merely dumb and dumber fools, as well
as poor little insignificant heathens, then suddenly became ultra
wealthy, powerful and otherwise smart as all get out once connecting
up with us. The only significant faith-based group on Earth that has
essentially everything to lose and thereby nothing to gain from the
discovery of ETs, are those pesky Zionist/Jews of mostly Old Testament
thumpers, and they clearly have no intentions of going down without
causing a good fight, including an all out WWIII or putting the likes
of Christ back on a stick if need be.

The vast bulk of physics and subsequent science is so freaking Zionist
and thus all controlling, in that other interpretations of anything
doesn't really matter, because whatever's of alternative news, science
of deductive discoveries are simply going to get stalked, bashed and
other wise mainstream media banish in every possible Dirty Harry
"which way but lose". Not that a few other faith-based cults haven't
contributed their fair share of disinformation, and/or having enforced
as much evidence exclusion as possible.


We know that television appearances in effect selects the President.
If ET is embedded deeply into the Web he will be in a position to make
or break presidents. This is going to become more and more true in the
future when RSS feeds replace analogue television (Radio Reloj I
called it in the SETI discussions). We are replacing analogue
television at a rate of knots and if there is any truth in ET it means
that we are not masters of our destiny.


As I've said before; Why would any ET worth their salt need to bother
screwing with us, nor should they dare. Because we're clearly the
assholes, we're not supposed to do business with Cuba or a few other
nations. Go figure what ETs must have on their embargo (aka NO FLY)
list.


Why then come at all? I KNOW that ET is not around on Earth. I don't
know wheher or not there is intelligent life on some distant planet
that has taken the conscious decision not to come. If we do a voyage
at c/2 it will take a moderate investment in resources. ET would have
to consider these resources worth while.


ETs might stop by Earth for their R&R entertainment, as otherwise
Earth hasn't all that much to offer unless you had a death wish.


If he did make the trip he would want to maximise his returns. As for
a "no fly list". well I would have thought that if this were the case
ET would take steps to make us less threatening. AI on the Web would
be a very good way of doing this.


We're not all that much of a threat, as we can't even honestly walk on
our moon, much less upon another planet or of its moons. It would be
most important for keeping those other somewhat iffy ETs from sharing
too much of a good thing, much like us trying to keep nuclear energy
away from folks that could put such technology to good use, also
similar to keeping h2o2 as hocus-pocus rated as possible.


I don't know either why someone with a pseudonym of "American" seems
to think we have been visited regularly. This being the case all the
military hardware built up by the US is just so much junk. What will
be decisive for the world is the information we are presented with.
This will come from ET. ET will select what is in and not in our RSS
feeds.


And obviously you think we're as screwed up as we are because of
ourselves, with no off-world assistance whatsoever. When was the last
time we left a given nation alone, especially if there was the likes
of oil, yellowcake or some other spendy element to being had?


Besides, why on Earth would ETs have only the best of intentions?


Well now. If ET wished to destroy us there are quite simple ways of so
doing. A biological weapon for example. ET clearly does not wish
either to destroy us on the one hand, or to make us less threatening
on the other. The disinformation on the Web clearly comes from
military/CIA based sources.


Why should ETs destroy the best entertainment in town (sort of speak),
and besides, we're not all as freaking dumb and dumber, or as nearly
mindset spastic as our resident LLPOF warlord(GW Bush).


There is no evidence I can discern that the Web does contain AI, so
the above is academic. At least I hope it is! There is no evidence of
disinformation - at least not on the ET side. There is evidence of
disinformation from people who do not want to know the truth. This
does in fact make me cross. The people though are emphatically Terran.


A true naysayer/rusemaster is in denial from the get go. (it's sort of
MIB required)


If MIB Men in Black or Machines in Black.

The phrase I use "?Puerde leer en espagnol?" I think expresses this.
What would you expect from a message from ET? Well perhaps not little
green ET but a Web manifesation of AI. Well it would be multilingual.
It would be expressed in a number of languages in a slightly different
form.


Why would ETs bother to let on that they have existed, as here on
Earth or otherwise upon Venus or anywhere else we might possibly look?


Wouldn't most religions or faith-based morons (especially those fence
jumping Atheists) hunt them down and kill off such ETs without
remorse? (if history counts, of course they would)


Well no we could not track AI down. Dammit we find paedophilia
difficult enough. AI would hide in crevices, you would think a real
mperson had posted, but in fact no one would have done.

Look at what happened to Jesus Christ, and by his own kind none the
less. So, there is no limit as to what we'd do if knowing there was
an ET among us. If I were an ET, there's no freaking way in this
bigotry of hell on Earth that I'd share that knowledge. Besides, to
an interplanetary/interstellar trekking ET, what's so great about our
energy poor and otherwise 98.5% fluid Earth that's getting itself
global warmed and otherwise a little extra radiated by our salty old
anticathode moon anyway? (Earth is a wussy planet with more than it's
fair share of local problems)


BTW, c/2 seems iffy, although c/10 seems rather ET doable, as fast
enough.
-


c/10 would be fast enough for AI that would simply go into
hibernation.. The real question I think is simply this. ET is supposed
to take part in things like alien abduction and to fly around in
flying saucers. In fact you can get all the DNA evidence you want by
just taking a few skin samples. Most of your information is on the
Web.


The likes of Sirius isn't all that far away, and it's not always as
far off as it is right now. Venus is certainly close by, as in 100
fold the distance of our moon every 19 months, and upon Venus there's
no local shortage of renewable energy to burn (sort of speak).
Therefore, space travel need not always be demanding of hibernation or
multi-generation habitats.


The other thing is the size of ET spacecraft. They have always been
posulated as man carrying. In fact ET will have developed molecular
information storage. Spacecraft will be the size of dragonflies.


I tend to agree, that micro spacecrafts plus whatever of "molecular
information storage" is quite doable, especially if such having
arrived via mother craft that's using anti-matter as fusion or simply
driven along by those nifty Ra--LRn--Rn--ion laser cannon thrusters
at c/2, whereas their mother craft could also be fully AI configured,
but also capable of accommodating a few live souls.

Those intelligent ETs capable of terraforming a given planet or moon,
as such may have moved on to wherever the grass is greener, although
mining the likes of Venus for a good many raw elements seems entirely
worth doing, especially if Venus were a billion years less old than
Earth. Unlike our physically dark and rather anticathode naked moon
of gamma and hard-Xrays, at least sustaining the likes of human DNA on
Venus is technically doable.
-
Brad Guth

  #15  
Old June 21st 07, 12:48 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history,sci.skeptic,sci.astro,uk.sci.astronomy
BradGuth
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21,544
Default What's wrong with there being ETs (smarter than us none the less)

On Jun 20, 11:23 am, "Bill Habr" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in message

ups.com...

Which laws of physics forbids other intelligent life?


None


That's exactly what I'd thought, yet our usenet Zions and of their
Athiests friends seem to believe that most all that's off-world is
entirerly inert, and otherwise for the most part of no great value to
our terrestrial way of life. Of course they typically also believe
there's no such global warming going on, and that there's none better
than our resident warlord(GW Bush) for the job.


What sort of evolution is strictly terrestrial limited?


Terrestrial evolution


I'd meant terrestrial like evolution. In other usenet friendly words,
you'd have to agree that weird or possibly similar life to that of
ours could exist/coexist where it might otherwise be somewhat humanly
lethal to our DNA in the buff.

Technically altered and/or via applied physics or perhaps even
evolution assisted if there's sufficient time (using our best
intelligent design if there's insufficient time for the random
happenstance of nature to grasp the idea), whereas it seems all sorts
of viable intelligent other life could have and may yet exist/coexist
on Venus.

The interpreted observation of what looks perfectly ETI worthy about
Venus seems to suggest that for at least the past decade we've either
been kidding ourselves or getting snookered by our own kind. Of
course, those in charge of officially presenting the best available
science haven't been exactly helping, in fact if anything they've been
doing all they can in order to moderate or if at all possible banish
any such notions.


What sort of planet/moon extremes are totally insurmountable for
having accommodated intelligent life?


Unknown


Once again, I totally agree, especially since we haven't an honest
clue as to what's on our moon, much less of some other nearby planet.
However, it seems there are certain technological limitations that
we'd need at our disoposal


A final thought:
If they are intelligent they are smart enough to avoid humans.


That's actually a very important and believable final thought, whereas
most any human contact could seriously erode whatever essential
advantage ETs currently have over us, such as I'd insist upon learning
how the heck they manage to get safely between various planets.
-
Brad Guth

  #16  
Old June 21st 07, 01:00 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history,sci.skeptic,sci.astro,uk.sci.astronomy
BradGuth
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21,544
Default What's wrong with there being ETs (smarter than us none the less)

On Jun 20, 7:55 am, (Bobby Bryant) wrote:

I suspect you'll find that most scientists take the existence of
aliens -- elsewhere -- as the default assumption.


I suspect thst most scientest are more than a bit wussy about sharing
their honest thoughts pertaining to ETs, if not scared to death of
their own shadow.


What's lacking is convincing evidence that any are _here_.


ETs do not have to exist _here_ on Earth, for there to be ETs smart
enough to exist/coexist where we can't manage without taking great
risk within our applied physics of a craft that'll survive the
mission, and then some.
-
Brad Guth

  #17  
Old June 21st 07, 02:58 AM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history,sci.skeptic,sci.astro,uk.sci.astronomy
Fred J. McCall
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5,736
Default What's wrong with there being ETs (smarter than us none the less)

Ian Parker wrote:

:On 20 Jun, 15:46, Fred J. McCall wrote:
: Ian Parker wrote:
:
: :
: :We are looking at things like Google as a possible version of AI on
: :the Web.
: :
:
: Not if we're sane we're not.
:
: :
: :We know that television appearances in effect selects the President.
: :
:
: Nope. We don't know any such thing.
:
:Well every candidate seems to think otherwise.
:

Well, every candidate does NOT seem to think otherwise. If they
thought otherwise they would spend ALL their money on television
appearances.

They don't.

You're wrong.

:
:
:Google have assembled an impressive array of experts who have written
:what to me are marvellous papers. I have just given a critique.
:
:http://www.paperoftheweek.com/2007/0...-intelligence/
:
:The key issue is linguistics. You can make jokes on the lines of
:"Quieres dormir con fosforo" but the tackling of language, and speech
:which is a branch of linuistic understanding is impressive. "I want a
:spring for the clock" = "Quiero una resorte por el reloj" reloj =
:resorte is the sort of thing that the diagrams in the speech paper is
:talking about. The evaluation of a complex Markov diagram is
:complicated but it can be done. Google is on its way. What it has
:already delivered is impressive too. Getting everything to work on a
:Web scale.
:

Which has bugger all to do with Google as AI. You bleat about it so
frequently, surely you must know what AI is.

:
:
: :
: :We are replacing analogue
: :television at a rate of knots ...
: :
:
:
:2012 for Brtain. BT Vision is doing exactly what I am saying. It is
:broadband powered. As soon as a reliable true 8MHz can be delivered
:Radio Reloj will be truly dead.
:

What the hell is "a rate of knots"?

Is English not one of your first three languages?


--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn
  #18  
Old June 21st 07, 12:33 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history,sci.skeptic,sci.astro,uk.sci.astronomy
Ian Parker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,554
Default What's wrong with there being ETs (smarter than us none the less)

On 20 Jun, 20:49, BradGuth wrote:

Don't try telling the rest of us village idiots that Zionist/Jews as
of before and during WWII were merely dumb and dumber fools, as well
as poor little insignificant heathens, then suddenly became ultra
wealthy, powerful and otherwise smart as all get out once connecting
up with us. The only significant faith-based group on Earth that has
essentially everything to lose and thereby nothing to gain from the
discovery of ETs, are those pesky Zionist/Jews of mostly Old Testament
thumpers, and they clearly have no intentions of going down without
causing a good fight, including an all out WWIII or putting the likes
of Christ back on a stick if need be.

The vast bulk of physics and subsequent science is so freaking Zionist
and thus all controlling, in that other interpretations of anything
doesn't really matter, because whatever's of alternative news, science
of deductive discoveries are simply going to get stalked, bashed and
other wise mainstream media banish in every possible Dirty Harry
"which way but lose". Not that a few other faith-based cults haven't
contributed their fair share of disinformation, and/or having enforced
as much evidence exclusion as possible.

Look science is independently checked by lots of people. No scientific
theory is EVER accepted just like that. science is accepted because it
adds up, makes sense.

In Jewish culture there is a great tradition of learring. If gentiles
want to be as well represented the remedy is obvious. They should
discipline themselves. Spend time studying, try to get to their
potential. The Palestinians should do this too. Thir greatest enemy is
their leaders.


Why then come at all? I KNOW that ET is not around on Earth. I don't
know wheher or not there is intelligent life on some distant planet
that has taken the conscious decision not to come. If we do a voyage
at c/2 it will take a moderate investment in resources. ET would have
to consider these resources worth while.


ETs might stop by Earth for their R&R entertainment, as otherwise
Earth hasn't all that much to offer unless you had a death wish.


Earth offers knowledge. This is what they would be after.

Well now. If ET wished to destroy us there are quite simple ways of so
doing. A biological weapon for example. ET clearly does not wish
either to destroy us on the one hand, or to make us less threatening
on the other. The disinformation on the Web clearly comes from
military/CIA based sources.


Why should ETs destroy the best entertainment in town (sort of speak),
and besides, we're not all as freaking dumb and dumber, or as nearly
mindset spastic as our resident LLPOF warlord(GW Bush).

Ave Caesar - Nos qui morituri te salutamus. That is an interesting
one! Earth being a gladitorial show.


c/10 would be fast enough for AI that would simply go into
hibernation.. The real question I think is simply this. ET is supposed
to take part in things like alien abduction and to fly around in
flying saucers. In fact you can get all the DNA evidence you want by
just taking a few skin samples. Most of your information is on the
Web.


The likes of Sirius isn't all that far away, and it's not always as
far off as it is right now. Venus is certainly close by, as in 100
fold the distance of our moon every 19 months, and upon Venus there's
no local shortage of renewable energy to burn (sort of speak).
Therefore, space travel need not always be demanding of hibernation or
multi-generation habitats.



The other thing is the size of ET spacecraft. They have always been
posulated as man carrying. In fact ET will have developed molecular
information storage. Spacecraft will be the size of dragonflies.


I tend to agree, that micro spacecrafts plus whatever of "molecular
information storage" is quite doable, especially if such having
arrived via mother craft that's using anti-matter as fusion or simply
driven along by those nifty Ra--LRn--Rn--ion laser cannon thrusters
at c/2, whereas their mother craft could also be fully AI configured,
but also capable of accommodating a few live souls.

Those intelligent ETs capable of terraforming a given planet or moon,
as such may have moved on to wherever the grass is greener, although
mining the likes of Venus for a good many raw elements seems entirely
worth doing, especially if Venus were a billion years less old than
Earth. Unlike our physically dark and rather anticathode naked moon
of gamma and hard-Xrays, at least sustaining the likes of human DNA on
Venus is technically doable.
-

Quite, buy you seem to be shifting your ground somewhat. If what you
are saying is that ET is aroung but has an independent existence, does
not interfere with what we are doing, it ceases to be a scientific
statement. It is not a scientific statement because it cannot be
verified. This is the problem I have with the whole idea,

Independent evolution of intelligent life - OK I believe it.
Possibility of interstellar travel - I believe it.
Actual visit - I have great difficulty with.

My problem with UFOs is compounded by the fact that the technology
possessed by aliens appears to mirror the preconceptions of the time.
If large spacecraft are impossible, if an obvious presence on the Web
has not been observed, where are we? It seems that there are faries at
the bottom of our garden but they run away whenever we approach them.
If ET travels in micro spacecrft and does not interact with us, this
is how it seems.

As far as sadistic elements are concerned, why does ET not simply
produce a virtual Colosseum, pit Rectarius against Sequtor and have a
few floggings and cruxifictions thrown in?

Is there an ulterior motive? I remember watching a television program
on a UFO over Phoenix. It was clearly a Stealth aircraft at a time
when these did not exist. The Pentagon provided a lifesize dummy of a
little green man to discredit the eyewitnesses.

There have been professional debunkers employed by the military.
Nobody before now has taken alien technology and thought about what it
might actually look like. This to be is the basis of the true debunk.


- Ian Parker

  #19  
Old June 21st 07, 02:12 PM posted to sci.space.policy,sci.space.history,sci.skeptic,sci.astro,uk.sci.astronomy
Bobby Bryant
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 14
Default What's wrong with there being ETs (smarter than us none the less)

In article . com,
BradGuth writes:
On Jun 20, 7:55 am, (Bobby Bryant) wrote:

I suspect you'll find that most scientists take the existence of
aliens -- elsewhere -- as the default assumption.


I suspect thst most scientest are more than a bit wussy about sharing
their honest thoughts pertaining to ETs, if not scared to death of
their own shadow.


What is your reason for supposing that?


What's lacking is convincing evidence that any are _here_.


ETs do not have to exist _here_ on Earth, for there to be ETs smart
enough to exist/coexist where we can't manage without taking great
risk within our applied physics of a craft that'll survive the
mission, and then some.


Huh?

--
Bobby Bryant
Reno, Nevada

Remove your hat to reply by e-mail.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How SMART-1 has made European space exploration smarter (Forwarded) Andrew Yee News 0 February 1st 07 01:01 AM
What am I doing wrong? ELIZABETH KEARNEY Amateur Astronomy 14 May 9th 06 01:44 PM
ARL Leads NASA Effort to Develop Smarter Machines for Space Missions [email protected] News 0 May 19th 05 06:41 PM
Something wrong here Mike Thomas Amateur Astronomy 18 July 1st 04 06:19 AM
Not that there's anything wrong with it.... Rusty Barton History 4 November 23rd 03 08:40 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:35 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.