(0) No

(1) Yes, but humanity will never encounter it

(2) Yes, but humanity hasn't encountered it yet

(3) Yes, and humanity has already encountered it

Discuss.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5861790&forum_id=2)#49852830)

I'll rephrase so it doesn't sound cryptic: The level of classification is/was itself classified.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5861790&forum_id=2)#49853126)

If the former, I'm 3, if the latter, 2

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5861790&forum_id=2)#49852880)

- interacted with, whether knowingly or unknowingly; or

- witnessed proof positive of their existence, e.g. a crashed vessel with an alien body

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5861790&forum_id=2)#49852898)

So 3 for me then

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5861790&forum_id=2)#49852923)

For one I have always counted you among the sentient

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5861790&forum_id=2)#49852954)

But yeah. There's definitely alien life and we've encountered it even if we didn't know it

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5861790&forum_id=2)#49852989)

The universe is so huge that intelligent life is almost certainly out there. But the universe is so huge that the chances that other intelligent life will ever make it to Earth is almost nil.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5861790&forum_id=2)#49853178)

Also while people often say that just because the universe is near infinitely large than there must be life somewhere even if it was 10 billion light years away cannot be proven. We have no idea how or why life exists. So yes it's theoretically possible but it's also possible that there's not.

And either way we can't even go to the nearest star let alone all the other stars and check up on them all. The moon and Mars is it. All we got. Forever.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5861790&forum_id=2)#49853196)

Also "we don't know how life arises" cuts both ways. It could either be extremely common or relatively rare. I'm guessing it tends more toward being common just based on the sheer numbers, otherwise you'd have to argue that we are pretty special, which cuts against most of what we know about the relative uniformity of physical conditions in the Universe. The idea that Earth is the only instance of life I think isn't something that really is worthy of consideration. It might be logically possible on the face of it, but the chances are just so low given the sheer number of stars that it would require new information about special conditions and fine-tuning on our planet

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5861790&forum_id=2)#49853860)

As for the life ought to be common given the law of large numbers argument it makes too many leaps of faith. Until we can explain abiogenisis there's no point in jumping to the conclusion that the thing that only happened one time in our collective understanding is easily found elsewhere just because the universe is enormous and full of randomness. It's too big a leap of faith. But I enjoy your unscientific magical thinking. It belongs with Bob Lazar and all of the unserious claims of a Roganverse guest.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5861790&forum_id=2)#49854315)

But there has been and is some truly weird shit

I'm talking about just UFOs btw not 'alien abductions' etc. which are completely debunked flame

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5861790&forum_id=2)#49853933)

Also, “the best documented” UFOs are from Iran, when Iran had US puppet regime, and US had consents about its stability

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5861790&forum_id=2)#49854163)

The "quirk in the universe" bit is just the Rare Earth Hypothesis asserted without argument.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5861790&forum_id=2)#49854498)

Von Neumann probes are not a speculative technology. The concept is just kinematic replication, which is a thing that already exists in biology and in principle requires no new physics whatsoever. The 3 million year colonization timeline follows from known physics. Sub-relativistic travel speeds we could plausibly achieve with existing propulsion concepts plus exponential replication.

Life happened once is an extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary evidence. There is no evidence at all that we are in a special privileged corner of the universe, and most physics strongly suggests otherwise. We don't have to know the exact detailed mechanism of "abiogenesis" because the physics/chemistry required shouldn't in principle be locally restricted. The copernican principle has been vindicated every time we have tested it and the burden of proof sits entirely on the person claiming we're the exception, not on me for claiming we are typical.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5861790&forum_id=2)#49855073)

>there is no evidence

There's as much evidence for an all knowing all powerful all loving Creator than that given a large universe all of your highfalutin hypotheses are probable. There actually isn't one piece of evidence for anything you have said. Science fiction is not evidence. Neither is religion. I do not require a leap of faith to defend the probability of my beliefs. We know life happened once for sure, and we have no idea how. We know we cannot detect other life in the universe. We know that living things cannot complete interstellar travel. Sure, anything is possible. It's possible that Sydney Sweeney would let me titty fuck her. But scientists do not deal in hypothetical possibilities. Technology that does not currently exist and the law of large numbers isn't evidence. You're the one making giant leaps of faith. Yeah, hypothetically you could be right. But the fact is there is zero evidence for your claims. Hypothetically a lot of things could happen. I'm still waiting on Syd to return my call.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5861790&forum_id=2)#49855161)

Your god comparison fails immediately, because my claims are grounded in known physics and scale reasoning where theological claims are not constrained by physical law at all. You are defending radical Earth Exceptionalism while accusing me of making leaps of faith.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5861790&forum_id=2)#49855232)

Rare Earth may or may not be true. It could be horribly incorrect. We just don't have any EVIDENCE that it's wrong. And claiming the law of large numbers isn't evidentiary. It's speculative. It's fundamentally speculative. I can't prove beyond all doubt that the Earth is exceptional, but the burden isn't on me to leap up and declare that it's not. You're saying it's so obvious that it's not that I have to go out and prove that it is! I'm not trying to prove it. I'm going by empirical evidence. That there are billions or trillions of rocky planets is not evidence. It's pure speculation. They could all be trash for all we know.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5861790&forum_id=2)#49855242)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5861790&forum_id=2)#49854188)

I highly, highly recommend you read "The Mothman Prophecies" by John Keel if you are interested.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5861790&forum_id=2)#49854410)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5861790&forum_id=2)#49855547)

just do throw a pebble into infinite oceans of space-time and have it land perfectly in the mouth of a little fish coming up to belch

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5861790&forum_id=2)#49856972)

I want some sort of badge.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5861790&forum_id=2)#49859762)

There is no God, only extraterrestrial life far superior to humanity

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5861790&forum_id=2)#49876122)