NationStates Jolt Archive

OK, the title was a bit misleading, but I got your attention.

Father and I were discussing the other day the likelihood of intelligent, sentient life on other planets. We both agreed that the probability of such life evolving was fairly high given the sheer number of opportunities it would have to develop (with as many as 400 billion stars in the Milky Way, the number of potential species that could develop would be huge, even if only a miniscule fraction of a percent of those stars had habitable planets orbiting them). Assuming this was true, we started talking about the likelihood that such life would ever deliberately come in contact with us humans.

I argue this would not happen. If intelligence is the product of evolution, and evolution the product of competition, either with the environment or with other native species, I don't think any species ever locked in competition with its habitat would afford more than token resources to the search for distant life. Put in perspective, I don't think the capable civilizations of earth will ever do more than put a few satellites and deep-space probes out there when they're too committing so many resources fighting with each other over dwindling supplies of space, oil, or whatever other resource they need. If a species ever fully conquers its environment, then it's opposition was probably not sufficient to speed along its evolution to the point where it can communicate with other species.

Discuss.

Even if they did evolve and try to contact us it would serve little purpose apart from causing arguments about the validity of the messages and what to do.

OK, the title was a bit misleading, but I got your attention.

Father and I were discussing the other day the likelihood of intelligent, sentient life on other planets. We both agreed that the probability of such life evolving was fairly high given the sheer number of opportunities it would have to develop (with as many as 400 billion stars in the Milky Way, the number of potential species that could develop would be huge, even if only a miniscule fraction of a percent of those stars had habitable planets orbiting them). Assuming this was true, we started talking about the likelihood that such life would ever deliberately come in contact with us humans.

I argue this would not happen. If intelligence is the product of evolution, and evolution the product of competition, either with the environment or with other native species, I don't think any species ever locked in competition with its habitat would afford more than token resources to the search for distant life. Put in perspective, I don't think the capable civilizations of earth will ever do more than put a few satellites and deep-space probes out there when they're too committing so many resources fighting with each other over dwindling supplies of space, oil, or whatever other resource they need. If a species ever fully conquers its environment, then it's opposition was probably not sufficient to speed along its evolution to the point where it can communicate with other species.

Discuss.

But assuming the earth is not inhabitable forever, then is it not likely that at some point some sort of other planet colonisation will be considered and investigated into, if not attempted. The odds I believe are against any contact being made, but I feel more attempts will be made than you believe.

I think that life is an extremely rare thing, and that even if there were other lifeforms in this universe, they would have to be in other galaxies, forever out of our reach. And even then, they'd have to be ferns or microbes or somesuch. Intelligent, sentient life is almost impossibly rare, IMHO.

We'll need significantly FTL travel if we're ever going to be able to contact alien species in real-time rather than recieving billion-year-old TV transmissions from a long-dead civilization.

I have a feeling intelligent life exists, but it's likely that any civilizations capable of contacting us will wait until we develop similar technology.

Here's my view: I think that life is an extremely rare thing, and that even if there were other lifeforms in this universe, they would have to be in other galaxies, forever out of our reach.

I do not, however, think that this improbability of life means that we are in any way special or designed. This is because the latest cosmological theories suggest that there are an infinite number of parallel universes, each with differing physical laws. If this were true, then that would mean that the vast majority of these universes would be lifeless, and only a tiny fraction would have the right conditions for life to evolve. We happen to live in one of those rare universes in which that has happened. But, because we can only see the universe we are currently in, it looks like we are exceedingly lucky to live in a world seemingly fine-tuned to support us.

Yes, but once you use the multiverse argument you are faced with the challenge of leaving the universe. Also, you have to deal with multiple infinities. If there are an infinite number of planets, then an infinite number are uninhabited, but an infinite number are also habited, but one infinite number is larger, even though both are unlimited. It leads you around in circles until you decide its not worth trying to ponder out, as this cannot be proven anyway.

Not to mention there would be no way to communicate with them. They would be completely "alien" from us. (no pun intended) Our language system and theirs would most likely have no similarity. There would simply be no way to translate it even if they used sound as communication. For all we know, they could communicate via organically generated radio waves, smell, taste, body languages or a whole smorgasbord of other options. It would take decades of intensely close study and interaction to come up with any means of intercommunicaiton.

Not to mention there would be no way to communicate with them. They would be completely "alien" from us. (no pun intended) Our language system and theirs would most likely have no similarity. There would simply be no way to translate it even if they used sound as communication. For all we know, they could communicate via organically generated radio waves, smell, taste, body languages or a whole smorgasbord of other options. It would take decades of intensely close study and interaction to come up with any means of intercommunicaiton.

No, but a system could possibly be designed using numbers, given that they are a truer universal than any language.

Yes, but once you use the multiverse argument you are faced with the challenge of leaving the universe. Also, you have to deal with multiple infinities. If there are an infinite number of planets, then an infinite number are uninhabited, but an infinite number are also habited, but one infinite number is larger, even though both are unlimited. It leads you around in circles until you decide its not worth trying to ponder out, as this cannot be proven anyway.
Aye, the multiverse theory is pretty moot when it comes to discussing alien life, since we could never escape our universe and make our way into others, anyway -- which is why I cut it out, in case anyone was wondering.

Not to mention there would be no way to communicate with them. They would be completely "alien" from us. (no pun intended) Our language system and theirs would most likely have no similarity. There would simply be no way to translate it even if they used sound as communication. For all we know, they could communicate via organically generated radio waves, smell, taste, body languages or a whole smorgasbord of other options. It would take decades of intensely close study and interaction to come up with any means of intercommunicaiton.

I think in order to have a chance of communicating they would have to be carbon-based life. Otherwise, we would have literally nothing in common; at least with that basis for organisms they might have some similar physiological aspects that could be used as a bridge to more complex forms of communication.

Aye, the multiverse theory is pretty moot when it comes to discussing alien life, since we could never escape our universe and make our way into others, anyway -- which is why I cut it out, in case anyone was wondering.

Lets face it, the chances of us leaving our universe are pretty damn slim, and we may have to travel through absolute nothing to get to another. It would be interesting, if probably not good for existance.

Not to mention there would be no way to communicate with them. They would be completely "alien" from us. (no pun intended) Our language system and theirs would most likely have no similarity. There would simply be no way to translate it even if they used sound as communication. For all we know, they could communicate via organically generated radio waves, smell, taste, body languages or a whole smorgasbord of other options. It would take decades of intensely close study and interaction to come up with any means of intercommunicaiton.
Heh... that reminds me of this story I heard: there was a conference of SETI scientists on the subject of first contact, and one of the issues was how to best communicate with aliens at first. One group of scientists had been working on an ingenious system of basic symbols encoded in radio waves, and took it upon themselves to print out and distribute these symbols to the assembled scientists. However, even though the symbols represented the most basic information (the human form, atomic structures, Earth's location, etc.) the scientists were utterly baffled.

So, if we can't figure out our own "universal language", how could an alien civilization do so?

I for one would welcome our new Alien Overlords.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/GermanNightmare/morbo.gif

I for one would welcome our new Alien Overlords.

Bring us McNiel, or we will raise the temperature of your planet by 1,000,000 degrees per day for five days!

Heh... that reminds me of this story I heard: there was a conference of SETI scientists on the subject of first contact, and one of the issues was how to best communicate with aliens at first. One group of scientists had been working on an ingenious system of basic symbols encoded in radio waves, and took it upon themselves to print out and distribute these symbols to the assembled scientists. However, even though the symbols represented the most basic information (the human form, atomic structures, Earth's location, etc.) the scientists were utterly baffled.

So, if we can't figure out our own "universal language", how could an alien civilization do so?

They were coded in binary (or similar) I think, along a certain length line in such a way that they created a basic picture. It requires a lot of working out and any alien civilisation to have technology and a concept of numbers that is similar to ours.

Oh boy! A thread about extraterrestrial life. Since it's bound to come up sooner or later I'll make it sooner and bring out the Drake Equation.

The Drake equation states that:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/c/5/7/c57fe678db3cb8c47ca58c85bd5d41c2.png
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

"The Drake equation cannot be tested and therefore SETI is not science. SETI is unquestionably a religion."
-Michael Crichton

God knows I am all for the exploration of space and it would make my day to learn that there is life elsewhere in the universe. The problem is that we can't fill in the values of the Drake Equation because we don't know them all. If we did find a planet about Earth's size orbiting the habitable zone of a sun with an atmosphere like ours it would likely be a dead world because of all the oxygen in the atmosphere.

And if we did find an alien civilization they would likely be either cavemen or lower or godlike or higher. No middle ground! Why? Sir Arthur C. Clarke made a famous observation about space explorers discovering aliens. If one considers the millions of years of pre-history, and the rapid technological advancement occurring now, if you apply that to a hypothetical alien race, one can figure the probabilities of how advanced the explorers will find them. The conclusion is "we will find apes or angels, but not men."

Why? Consider the history of Planet Earth. Let the height of the Empire State building represent the 5 billion year life of Terra. The height of a one-foot ruler perched on top would represent the million years of Man's existence. The thickness of a dime will represent the ten thousand years of Man's civilization. And the thickness of a postage stamp will represent the 300 years of Man's technological civilization. An unknown portion above represents "pre-Singularity Man", the period up to the point where mankind hits the Singularity/evolves into a higher form/turns into angels. Say another dime. Above that would be another Empire State building, representing the latter 5 billion years of Terra's lifespan.

If you picked a millimeter of this tower at random, what would you most likely hit? One of the Empire State buildings, of course. So, assuming only one civilization develops on a planet, chances are the first-in-scout starship Daniel Boone will discover mostly planets that are currently empty of alien civilizations (but they might have an almost 50% chance to discover valuable Forerunner artifacts or other paleotechnology).

Communication would be next to impossible. The only thing we could do is tap out prime numbers back and forth. Not exactly a stimulating conversation and considering it would likely take at least decades if not centuries for transmissions to go between we'd never be able to do anything except say, "Look, look, look, alien life exists halfway around the galaxy! We know nothing about it and haven't been able to communicate with it but it seems to be there."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/520000/images/_521666_seti150.jpg

Here's the image I mentioned. Try to figure out what each set of symbols is supposed to represent. If you want the answer (as best as I can recall it) highlight the text below.

***

The top row represents the binary number system, IIRC.

I think the second block is the (encoded) chemical symbol for water.

The next three rows are the chemical symbols for the elements fundamental to life.

The big shape in the middle represents the structure of DNA.

The next one is a human body (duh), along with a measure of height and some sort of chemical symbol.

The second-to-last row symbolizes the Sol System. The length of each line represents each planet's relative size, and Earth is raised up above the others.

The last symbol is a schematic of the main dish of the Arecibo radio telescope in Puerto Rico, which broadcast the signal.

***

I saw a very interesting piece on the topic of searching for extra-solar planets and whether they could sustain life - the scientists found out that only yellow suns like ours could "produce" earth-like planets. (About distance/temperature/mass/gas giants to catch planetkillers/etc.)

I saw a very interesting piece on the topic of searching for extra-solar planets and whether they could sustain life - the scientists found out that only yellow suns like ours could "produce" earth-like planets. (About distance/temperature/mass/gas giants to catch planetkillers/etc.)
What?! Where did you hear that garbage? That's not true at all. Every star has a habitable zone around it where a planet like ours could have a climate similar to the one we've got.

You want to avoid class O, B, and A on because they're usually young and K and M because they're usually too old or too small. An M-class dwarf does have a habitable zone but it's so close to the star that an solid planet would be tidally locked so that one side would always face the star. Another problem with these worlds is that M dwarfs are notorious for flaring and can spike their output by few hundred times for brief periods (they're still quite cool, the big jump is because they're so damn cold to begin with).

Class F stars may harbor planets much like our own but just having a big rock with an atmosphere circling a good sun doesn't mean there will be life on it. Especially if there is a lot of oxygen in the planets atmosphere to start with. That stuff, believe it or not, can be very corrosive and damaging to single celled organisms that aren't already adapted to it.

So an F or a G will be the best bet for a planet like ours but nearly any class of star will be able to produce planets and it'd be really frickin' hard to spot Venus if it were 4 or 5 lightyears away and even harder to learn jack shit about it.

Also, the Earth has taken more civilization ending asteroid impacts in its 4.5 billion year lifespan than you've had hot dinners and it's still here so I wouldn't be too worried about rocks smacking an alien world.

And I can say this right now with absolute certainty. If any alien life is ever found it will look totally different than anything we've ever seen on Earth. Hell we may not even recognize it as alive until it starts turning peoples blood to dust and eating through synthetic rubber.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/520000/images/_521666_seti150.jpg

Here's the image I mentioned. Try to figure out what each set of symbols is supposed to represent. If you want the answer (as best as I can recall it) highlight the text below.

***

The top row represents the binary number system, IIRC.

I think the second block is the (encoded) chemical symbol for water.

The next three rows are the chemical symbols for the elements fundamental to life.

The big shape in the middle represents the structure of DNA.

The next one is a human body (duh), along with a measure of height and some sort of chemical symbol.

The second-to-last row symbolizes the Sol System. The length of each line represents each planet's relative size, and Earth is raised up above the others.

The last symbol is a schematic of the main dish of the Arecibo radio telescope in Puerto Rico, which broadcast the signal.

***

Ah, the Arecibo message. According to Wikipedia, it's divided into seven parts, from top to bottom, left to right:

1. the numbers one (1) through ten (10);

2. the atomic numbers of the elements hydrogen, carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, and phosphorus, which make up deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA);

3. the formulas for the sugars and bases in the nucleotides of DNA;

4. the number of nucleotides in DNA, and a graphic of the double helix structure of DNA;

5. a graphic figure of a man, the dimension (physical height) of an average man, and the human population of Earth;

6. a graphic of Earth's solar system; and

7. a graphic of the Arecibo radio telescope and the dimension (the physical diameter) of the transmitting antenna dish.

Obviously since it's not transmitted this clearly, it was meant to be worked out by a civilization that some resources to bring to bear on it, not by a bunch of scientists sitting informally around a dinner table.

Personally, looking at the graphical representation of the message itself, I can't figure out what the hell's what.

And I can say this right now with absolute certainty. If any alien life is ever found it will look totally different than anything we've ever seen on Earth. Hell we may not even recognize it as alive until it starts turning peoples blood to dust and eating through synthetic rubber.

This is also something I've considered since I read Solaris by Stanislaw Lem, which I'm now rereading. Lem scoffed at the notion of aliens as humanoid in nature, and usually wrote about aliens so... well, alien, that they transcended human comprehension. Solaris itself is about a planet covered by an ocean that shows flickers of conscious thought and which apparently acts of its own accord, although not in any recognizable way; the only reason they know it's at least somewhat intelligent is that it corrects its own orbit around a binary star system, which would otherwise be unsustainable.

Of course there's also the classic "They're Made out of Meat (http://www.terrybisson.com/meat.html)" which basically sums up the whole opposition to the notion of humanoid aliens.

One thing I always wonder...seeing how most humans have an aversion to sex with other species...would that aversion be waived if the species were intelligent, on par or exceeding human intelligence?

One thing I always wonder...seeing how most humans have an aversion to sex with other species...would that aversion be waived if the species were intelligent, on par or exceeding human intelligence?


I don't know about aliens, but I for one want a pleasure GELF.

http://www.reddwarf.co.uk/deck03/toaster/camille/camille_1.jpg

:p

One thing I always wonder...seeing how most humans have an aversion to sex with other species...would that aversion be waived if the species were intelligent, on par or exceeding human intelligence?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/26/TPol2003.jpg

Does that answer your question? :p

One thing I always wonder...seeing how most humans have an aversion to sex with other species...would that aversion be waived if the species were intelligent, on par or exceeding human intelligence?

I'd be careful about that...

http://www.pbfcomics.com/archive/0PBF41029BC-Nice_Try_Zarflax.jpg

cutted.

I argue this would not happen. If intelligence is the product of evolution, and evolution the product of competition, either with the environment or with other native species, I don't think any species ever locked in competition with its habitat would afford more than token resources to the search for distant life. Put in perspective, I don't think the capable civilizations of earth will ever do more than put a few satellites and deep-space probes out there when they're too committing so many resources fighting with each other over dwindling supplies of space, oil, or whatever other resource they need. If a species ever fully conquers its environment, then it's opposition was probably not sufficient to speed along its evolution to the point where it can communicate with other species.

Discuss.

Well, the goal of evalution isn't to create intellegence. All it is is to create an animal that won't die before it can reproduce. If an animal is able to do that, then it will survive.
In some instances a large brain isn't a good thing because it takes a lot of food to keep it going.
So even if there is alien life, no matter how long its given to evolve, there is no guarentee that it will eventually become able to use tools, or to communicate with words. Like a hampter, for example, may evolve stronger teeth, a thicker coat, get a little bigger or smaller but there is no guarentee that any of these things will happen neither is there any promise that one day hampsters will become human-like.

OK, the title was a bit misleading, but I got your attention.

Father and I were discussing the other day the likelihood of intelligent, sentient life on other planets. We both agreed that the probability of such life evolving was fairly high given the sheer number of opportunities it would have to develop (with as many as 400 billion stars in the Milky Way, the number of potential species that could develop would be huge, even if only a miniscule fraction of a percent of those stars had habitable planets orbiting them). Assuming this was true, we started talking about the likelihood that such life would ever deliberately come in contact with us humans.

I argue this would not happen. If intelligence is the product of evolution, and evolution the product of competition, either with the environment or with other native species, I don't think any species ever locked in competition with its habitat would afford more than token resources to the search for distant life. Put in perspective, I don't think the capable civilizations of earth will ever do more than put a few satellites and deep-space probes out there when they're too committing so many resources fighting with each other over dwindling supplies of space, oil, or whatever other resource they need. If a species ever fully conquers its environment, then it's opposition was probably not sufficient to speed along its evolution to the point where it can communicate with other species.

Discuss.

There is alien life.

They'll be here soon.

And when they get here, they'll kill us - like God told them.

I believe in the vastness of infinity, where the limit for potential is an impossibility. I believe that within our galaxy it is only a matter of time before we finally confirm that there are indeed other worlds that can support life. The galaxy with it's some 400 billion known stars, is one of billions of other galaxies in this universe, and each of them is probably bursting with life of varieties even our nerdiest science fiction buffs could not concieve of. Life is a force that inhabits everything on our planet; what kind of place is our Earth if it is the only one out there with life on it? If we were so rare, why would our instincts teach us to hunt and kill, destroy and maim, while our bodies are bred for reproduction? We are just another variable in a massive cosmic equation, a little piece of the backdrop that never truly ends. Humanity will have come and gone before the end of existence, and our stain on this planet will be like a single raindrop on an ocean that never reaches shore.

Don't think you're so effing important, because you're just an ant, and your shiny watch, your fancy clothes and your fancy car are just pieces of dirt that you like play with. You will never wake up from the Great Sleep of Death. There is no place for your soul after death, but to be breathed back into the world to wander forever shattered, unaware of your former whole self. Your entire life is a polaroid picture of unique but altogether meaningless mediocrity. Congratulations Human. You are free.

One thing I always wonder...seeing how most humans have an aversion to sex with other species...would that aversion be waived if the species were intelligent, on par or exceeding human intelligence?

Would you hit any of this? I'm feelin' the pointy ears.

http://www.jasonchanart.com/gallery/2005/fanart/nightelf_big.jpg
http://www.jasonchanart.com/gallery/2005/fanart/trolls_big.jpg
http://people.csail.mit.edu/paulfitz/plank/vulcan/spock2.GIF
http://www.wowwiki.com/Image:Draenei_Paladin.jpg
http://www.neopoleon.com/blog/images/aliens/y.jpg

If it is just us in the universe, it seems like an awful waste of space. :)

Thank you, Karl Sagan

I'd be careful about that...


Yay, PBF. :)

Would you hit any of this? I'm feelin' the pointy ears.

http://www.jasonchanart.com/gallery/2005/fanart/nightelf_big.jpg
http://www.jasonchanart.com/gallery/2005/fanart/trolls_big.jpg
http://people.csail.mit.edu/paulfitz/plank/vulcan/spock2.GIF
http://www.wowwiki.com/Image:Draenei_Paladin.jpg
http://www.neopoleon.com/blog/images/aliens/y.jpg
I'd hit the male night elf. Come on, he has long silky hair AND a good body. :p

There is alien life.

They'll be here soon.

And when they get here, they'll kill us - like God told them.
There is no evidence of alien life.

Getting from there to here would be technically next to impossible unless they came from Alpha Centauri.

Yeah, they probably would kill us if they too came from a planet like Earth. But being completely alien they might want to live on Pluto or Titan or Venus.

If it is just us in the universe, it seems like an awful waste of space. :)
Seconded. Unfortunately science demands proof not probability. It really would be cool to meet an alien.

Unfortunately science demands proof not probability.

...apart from the whole scientific-method-being-built-on-probability shebang...

Along with many others apparently, I'm of the thinking that any meaningful contact with living ETs is unlikely because of the sheer distance needed to be traveled. If there was some sort of magic that could eliminate or dampen the mass-getting-exponentially-greater-as-you-approach-lightspeed thing, then maybe.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/26/TPol2003.jpg
Does that answer your question? :p
It's the pointy ears! Mmmh... :p
What?! Where did you hear that garbage? That's not true at all. Every star has a habitable zone around it where a planet like ours could have a climate similar to the one we've got.(...)
It was a BBC special with NASA and ESA scientists working on the subject of earth-like (size and liquid H2O) extra-solar planets that could carry live (in its most basic form know to us - microbes).

And while I have to admit that my astrophysical abilities are more than rusty (close to non-existant) the whole thing made sense. *shrugs*

Not to mention there would be no way to communicate with them. They would be completely "alien" from us. (no pun intended) Our language system and theirs would most likely have no similarity. There would simply be no way to translate it even if they used sound as communication. For all we know, they could communicate via organically generated radio waves, smell, taste, body languages or a whole smorgasbord of other options. It would take decades of intensely close study and interaction to come up with any means of intercommunicaiton.

Well there's alien and then there's alien. If it's relatively common for heavier rarer elements like silicon, oxegen, etc, to form small planets in relatively stable orbits then the organisms that arise are likely to be carbon based creatures with a lot of resemblences to Earth life forms. Maybe it will be crustaceans that become the dominant life form on the planet, but the reason that life took the shapes it did on Earth is that they were best suited to making use of the available resources. That's why bats and birds both have wings, even if they got them differently. Octopi and humans have eyes that evolved independently (not from a common similarly sighted ancestor) but they do pretty much the same job.

Alien life might be a lot more like Earth life than the Carl Sagans of the world (at least the ones that are still alive) are prepared to concede. Though probably not a similar as the Gene Rodenberrys would have it.

Bring us McNiel, or we will raise the temperature of your planet by 1,000,000 degrees per day for five days!

Futurama FTW :D

OK, the title was a bit misleading, but I got your attention.

Father and I were discussing the other day the likelihood of intelligent, sentient life on other planets. We both agreed that the probability of such life evolving was fairly high given the sheer number of opportunities it would have to develop (with as many as 400 billion stars in the Milky Way, the number of potential species that could develop would be huge, even if only a miniscule fraction of a percent of those stars had habitable planets orbiting them). Assuming this was true, we started talking about the likelihood that such life would ever deliberately come in contact with us humans.

I argue this would not happen. If intelligence is the product of evolution, and evolution the product of competition, either with the environment or with other native species, I don't think any species ever locked in competition with its habitat would afford more than token resources to the search for distant life. Put in perspective, I don't think the capable civilizations of earth will ever do more than put a few satellites and deep-space probes out there when they're too committing so many resources fighting with each other over dwindling supplies of space, oil, or whatever other resource they need. If a species ever fully conquers its environment, then it's opposition was probably not sufficient to speed along its evolution to the point where it can communicate with other species.

Discuss.

that would only happen if the competition evolved around violent hostilities and if those violent hostilities endured for a prolonged period of time. If the hostilities ended early... say a clear victor on a global scale, then advances in science could start earlier and progress faster, focuesing the competition more on an intellectual scale than a physical one.

then there is the possiblitiy of a "Hive" or Collective intelligence, where one "Overmind" rules the victorious. say Bees for instance. then a refocusing of resources would be easier.

The question tho, is what manner of contact would an advanced or even parallel species would take. if they are similar in nature to us, observation would be the first step. examining the radio waves and if possible, observing us as a scientist would observe the microbes floating in a drop of water... err... sorry, fininshed re-listening to War of the Worlds again... :p

if you were to observe the Earth, with the same detachment as you would observe several colonies of ants, and seeing our hostile and war like nature, I would say contact in the form of equals would not take place.

I personally believe that intelligent aliens do exist.

However: (and this may be along the same lines as the Drake Equation above)

For there to be alien life that will communicate with us, there must be sentient alien life.

For there to be sentient alien life, there must be alien life.

We do not know, at present, whether life pops up anywhere the conditions are right, or whether it's simply a rare fluke. The easiest ways to determine this would be to be contacted by an alien race or to send someone to Mars (since remotely controlled rovers are constrained by radio signals moving at the speed of light) who can identify the whether life is (or was) there.

Since we can't rely on the Vulcan survey ship to decide to say hi, our best bet is to send humans to Mars.

extraterrestial life-yes absolutely, somewhere, at sometime, in some form

detection of extraterrestial life in our solar system(microbial)-appears likely

detection of life(intelligent)-possibly, but only if they are in our galaxy

face to face contact-never, time and distances are to large to overcome

Join the Society for the Protection of Those from Other Planets!

Doesn't matter what country or even planet you are in, see what we're about at http://www.sptop.wetpaint.com and join us!

This topic remind me of a phrase I readed once...

It say something like:

"If a scientist say that something may become possible in the future he will proven right...
If a scientist say that something is impossible he is wrong..."

This topic remind me of a phrase I readed once...

It say something like:

"If a scientist say that something may become possible in the future he will proven right...
If a scientist say that something is impossible he is wrong..."

In short, scientists are generally cr*p with a few lucky guesses - I mean ffs, they're STILL testing on animals despite the mounting evidence that it's a waste of money and time and potentially very harmful to humans (eg. if a drug is approved but reacts differently (in a bad way) in humans).

with advancements in computer science and genetics I think its not unlikely that the next logical step will be for us to determine the next step in our evolution, and that will more than likely entail increasing our intelligence. Once we have uber intelligent humans theyll figure out how to build warp speed ships and will solve all our economic problems. Obviously they (governemnt+scientists) will want to geneer in niceness for such uber humans as if theyre intelligent and assholes theyll more than likely try and rule over us and I cant see any scientist/government official wanting that. So its all good.

In short, scientists are generally cr*p with a few lucky guesses - I mean ffs, they're STILL testing on animals despite the mounting evidence that it's a waste of money and time and potentially very harmful to humans (eg. if a drug is approved but reacts differently (in a bad way) in humans).

Maybe the word wasn't "scientist" but "studious" (If the last one exist in english...) but the core of that was quite different...

The core was that we aren't able to predict how progress will go and things that for now seems dreams or fantasies, may become daily in the future...

I mean ffs, they're STILL testing on animals despite the mounting evidence that it's a waste of money and time and potentially very harmful to humans (eg. if a drug is approved but reacts differently (in a bad way) in humans).If they weren't forced to by law to test all those things on animals first, they would be much less inclined to.
It's not entirely the scientists' fault.

If they weren't forced to by law to test all those things on animals first, they would be much less inclined to.
It's not entirely the scientists' fault.

Yep. They used to test things on themselves, and still do so when they can get away with it.

Yep. They used to test things on themselves, and still do so when they can get away with it.No, they used to test on prisoners and other people no one cared about; although occasionally themselves, come to think of it.
Now many things can be tested in vitro, and most scientist would prefer that. But ultimately things like medicines still have to be tested on animals before it's allowed to be used on people.

Your sarcasm is rather misplaced..

No, they used to test on prisoners and other people no one cared about; although occasionally themselves, come to think of it.
Now many things can be tested in vitro, and most scientist would prefer that. But ultimately things like medicines still have to be tested on animals before it's allowed to be used on people.

Your sarcasm is rather misplaced..

What sarcasm? I was dead serious.

Testing is highly overrated. If there's something wrong with the product, there'll be a lawsuit soon enough and that will take care of it.