Witnesses For Ufo Congressional Hearing

[j2k4]

It would seem that we must develop a working theory on "relative intelligence" then, yes?

[exeus]

Originally posted by evilbagpuss@17 August 2003 - 11:13
The issue here is not whether aliens exist.. of course they do. How many galaxies are there? How many stars are there in those galaxies? How many planets in orbit around those stars? The chances of none of these planets being able to support life is ridiculous. Its a foregone conclusion based on simple probability.

The real issue is do they have the technology to travel at the necessary speeds to reach us within a reasonable amount of time?

Bear in mind the length of time between the first powered flight by humans and the moon landings and it doesnt require a huge leap of faith to assume that any civilisation which can survive long enough could probably reach the required level of technology.

Assuming they have reached that stage of development and could make it all the way over here its not beyond the realms of possibility that they would treat us as a primitive species or even bacteria in a petri-dish. A mere scientific curiosity to be studied at leisure.

Bacteria in a petri dish doesnt know its being studied by humans but does that mean humans dont exist? If aliens do exist and have made it over here why would they bother communicating with us?

I doubt we have anything in the way of resources or knowledge that they would want or need.

i agree fully! is good to see that there are other non sheep out there

[Pitbul]

Originally posted by exeus+10 September 2003 - 07:51--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (exeus @ 10 September 2003 - 07:51)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-evilbagpuss@17 August 2003 - 11:13
The issue here is not whether aliens exist.. of course they do. How many galaxies are there? How many stars are there in those galaxies? How many planets in orbit around those stars? The chances of none of these planets being able to support life is ridiculous. Its a foregone conclusion based on simple probability.

[/b][/quote]
very good piont cause actually the probability of aliens existing in all those planets are greater then them not existing.

[3rd gen noob]

Originally posted by Pitbul+19 September 2003 - 14:46--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Pitbul @ 19 September 2003 - 14:46)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by exeus@10 September 2003 - 07:51
<!--QuoteBegin-evilbagpuss

@17 August 2003 - 11:13
The issue here is not whether aliens exist.. of course they do. How many galaxies are there? How many stars are there in those galaxies? How many planets in orbit around those stars? The chances of none of these planets being able to support life is ridiculous. Its a foregone conclusion based on simple probability.

very good piont cause actually the probability of aliens existing in all those planets are greater then them not existing. [/b][/quote]
got any proof for that?

[Snee]

Here is some some reading material, which claims to give you the distance to the nearest lifeform sharing your exact composition.

[Pitbul]

Originally posted by 3rd gen noob+19 September 2003 - 09:32--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (3rd gen noob @ 19 September 2003 - 09:32)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by Pitbul@19 September 2003 - 14:46

Originally posted by exeus@10 September 2003 - 07:51
<!--QuoteBegin-evilbagpuss

@17 August 2003 - 11:13
The issue here is not whether aliens exist.. of course they do. How many galaxies are there? How many stars are there in those galaxies? How many planets in orbit around those stars? The chances of none of these planets being able to support life is ridiculous. Its a foregone conclusion based on simple probability.

very good piont cause actually the probability of aliens existing in all those planets are greater then them not existing.

got any proof for that? [/b][/quote]
its a probability moron not proof. its like if you buy 1000 lottery tickets your bound to win at least 1 dollar out of those lottery tickets.

[3rd gen noob]

Originally posted by Pitbul@19 September 2003 - 22:42
its a probability moron not proof. its like if you buy 1000 lottery tickets your bound to win at least 1 dollar out of those lottery tickets.

lmfao

you call me a moron, yet you manage to say something as stupid as this...

[bigboab]

Snny could you translate thar for me?

[Snee]

Originally posted by bigboab@22 September 2003 - 04:34
Snny could you translate thar for me?

The entire thing could take a while to explain, but what I like most about it is the following statement:

One of the many implications of recent cosmological observations is that the concept of parallel universes is no mere metaphor. Space appears to be infinite in size. If so, then somewhere out there, everything that is possible becomes real, no matter how improbable it is.

Meaning that there is a chance for just about everything that could possibly happen to happen somewhere. It goes on to lay out a couple of different models on the structure of the universe or makroverse.

The author would have it that the probability exists for you to have an exact twin either in this universe at a distance of

10 to the 10^28

meters from where you are now, or in a parallel universe.

[Hellie]

The issue here is not whether aliens exist.. of course they do. How many galaxies are there? How many stars are there in those galaxies? How many planets in orbit around those stars? The chances of none of these planets being able to support life is ridiculous. Its a foregone conclusion based on simple probability.





very good piont cause actually the probability of aliens existing in all those planets are greater then them not existing.&nbsp;


got any proof for that?&nbsp;

here´s the proof