[Discussion] Do Aliens exist?

[Strawberry]

probalbly are outtehre dont tihnk obama would bring one as security...

 

[Jellal Fernandes]

They should get their asses down here and introduce themselves.

How many licks does it take to get to the center of a Tootsie Pop?
A: The world will never know

Agreed. Lol

 

[Wumbo]

They exist, I see them everyday. One of them lives next to me, his name is Gabriel Valdez.

 

[Voltron]

There's one above me... D:

 

[-God of War-]

No they don't.

 

[RasenUchihaChaos]

Yes they do we call them Reapers


here is the proof


The Reapers, known by the scientists as the Old Machines, are a highly advanced machine race of synthetic-organic starships. The Reapers reside in a dark space, the vast, mostly starless space between galaxies. They hibernate there, dormant for fifty thousand years at a time, before they are given the signal to return.


According to the reports, the Reapers harvest all advanced sentient life in order to preserve a fragile balance. The Reapers believe that without the extinction cycles, synthetic intelligence would completely annihilate all organic life. According to them, this is an inevitable consequence of technological advancement; organics will always create synthetics to improve their own state of existence, and synthetics themselves will evolve by means of surpassing their creators. The Reapers also believe that harvesting advanced civilizations is the only way to allow new civilizations to come into existence. The Reapers leave no evidence of their conquest, nor of their existence – only desolate, barren ruins of those who came before.



However for some reason they have not returned there is speculation that they found a entire new galaxy to "improve"

they can't return for some unknown reason or

they had conflict within their own and wiped each other out or are still currently fighting now.

 

[Hunty]

To say we among all the other planets floating in this vast-universe are the only ones that exist is not only idiotic, but childish...
You have to look at it from a different point of mind.

I would have to say there is a "alien population," but we to all are so called aliens.

 

[cptenn94]

yes aliens exist. To think we are alone in this universe, is just arrogant.

doubt that guy is a alien though..

 

[edo tensai wilmaso]

yeah duhhh but guess what.....they look like us....no little green or grey dudes lmao thats really stupid we live on a carbon based solar system pretty sure the galaxy is carbon based as well therefore any species that lived on a similar planet to our(chemically and elementaly) then they should look similar to us...now if it's a silicone based environment then i would imagine that they do look different. but yeah man how could i know never seen an alien so yeah, plus all this ancient alien stuff is kinda dumb, why can't they just accept the fact that they was a highly advanced species of human that lived here before us.(3-5 million years ago)

Yes they do we call them Reapers


here is the proof


The Reapers, known by the scientists as the Old Machines, are a highly advanced machine race of synthetic-organic starships. The Reapers reside in a dark space, the vast, mostly starless space between galaxies. They hibernate there, dormant for fifty thousand years at a time, before they are given the signal to return.


According to the reports, the Reapers harvest all advanced sentient life in order to preserve a fragile balance. The Reapers believe that without the extinction cycles, synthetic intelligence would completely annihilate all organic life. According to them, this is an inevitable consequence of technological advancement; organics will always create synthetics to improve their own state of existence, and synthetics themselves will evolve by means of surpassing their creators. The Reapers also believe that harvesting advanced civilizations is the only way to allow new civilizations to come into existence. The Reapers leave no evidence of their conquest, nor of their existence – only desolate, barren ruins of those who came before.



However for some reason they have not returned there is speculation that they found a entire new galaxy to "improve"

they can't return for some unknown reason or

they had conflict within their own and wiped each other out or are still currently fighting now.

lmao had to laugh at that ...thats my favorite game right there i'm part of the N7 crew too lmao

 

[shelke]

It would be exceedingly arrogant for us to think that we are the only living entities with a higher form of consciousness or intelligence in the entire universe. The thought is downright idiotic.

 

[Smd]

lol your at the wrong place for a serious real life answer,

this site is full of kids and immature adults.

but that guys head does look akward af.


Aliens are real there is to much proof.

You would have to be a moron to think outa the billions of stars and galaxys that we are the only life forms

 

[GreenTeaChloe]

lol your at the wrong place for a serious real life answer,

this site is full of kids and immature adults.

but that guys head does look akward af.


Aliens are real there is to much proof.

You would have to be a moron to think outa the billions of stars and galaxys that we are the only life forms

Not everyone on this site are full of immature adults. This question isnt based on immaturity, but how far your mind can expand and what you are willing to think out of the box from. Its nice to know the reason why some dont believe in other life forms, rather than answer with a simple "no".

 

[Hexuze]

we are not alone in this universe , what makes us so damn special? ...of course they exist

You must be registered for see images

This. Besides, they did built the pyramids after all. There is no way that the Egyptians built the pyramids during their time, considering how symmetrical/strong the pyramids are, no technology and how much each stone weighs. Even with our technology today, it's still hard/impossible to replicate the pyramids (even stated by physicist).

 

[~Zonta~]

Yes they do and he is one of them

You must be registered for see images

 

[Aim64C]

Not everyone on this site are full of immature adults. This question isnt based on immaturity, but how far your mind can expand and what you are willing to think out of the box from. Its nice to know the reason why some dont believe in other life forms, rather than answer with a simple "no".

I think few rational people will sit there and flat-out exclude the idea that life could be elsewhere (even intelligent life).

The real interesting discussions happen when we start talking about whether or not we are being visited (and to what degree).

The problem is that so much of the subject material is based on witness testimony. That's not to discredit incidents like the Phoenix Lights (which... well - those can be discussed later) - but it's usually someone telling you about something they saw or giving you an interpretation of a picture or video. The fact of the matter is that few people are actually rational when it comes to their own testimony - even 'experts' or people with decades of experience in the field.

We deal with this all the time in various fields - established 'experts' and people of experience telling us that things cannot be done (for some reason or another) and then we turn around and do it. Most people believe they have a far greater understanding of something or have far more reliable information than they actually do. And they make poor decisions off of it (even I'm vulnerable to such things - though I certainly try to emulate other viewpoints through something that is probably borderline multiple personality disorder... but that just means my senior years will be entertaining for other people, and I want them to enjoy my senility).

Even the most credible and rational appearing witnesses can end up interpreting a rather mundane scene into a rather artistic drama - simply because they missed pieces of information or took for gratned various assumptions. Kind of like those moments where you're looking at something... and for a few moments, the pieces in your brain aren't coming together properly (for whatever reason) so you sit in a moment of absolute awe or confusion as you look at a shoe poking out of a pile of clothes, or something.

I would imagine a lot of UFO cases revolving around single witnesses fall into this category (possibly even a few multi-witness cases where it is all instigated by an initial witness). In the cases of experienced individuals - they don't see the "shoe in the clothes" long enough to put all the pieces together and recognize it as mundane - so they remember it as unknown and mysterious (and since our mind doesn't remember -pictures- but -distinctions- it never gets resolved to its mundane conclusion). In the case of most witnesses - they simply lack the knowledge or experience to recognize it as mundane. Movies also complicate this by inserting unrealistic depictions of aircraft behavior (and the like) - so people see real-world maneuvers of aircraft and they look completely out of this world (because they're not in line with what we see in movies or on some video games).

Take some of the drama over 9/11 conspiracies. While a separate thread should be used to discuss the issue in more detail - the point I want to make involves claims that the aircraft that hit the pentagon performed "manevuers that would kill a human." This was flamboyantly backed by several notable personalities holding a variety of degrees and even some people with experience in the aviation field. .... Then the rest of the aviation community did the calculations and ran the maneuvers in simulators and demonstrated that the maneuver was not, in the slightest, a strain on the human body, much less the airframe. Well... spare for the sudden stop at the end.

The more you get into the topics revolving around witness testimony, the more you run into stuff like this. In the cases where you are dealing with known events and quantities - you can often use math and experiments to illustrate one person correct or incorrect. When it comes to "what did you see?" .... you've got nothing to go on. Even videos show very little, as the best HD camera fitted to some of the best telescopic lenses will fail to properly capture an airborne 'target' doing anything other than specifically passing for a photo-op.

Now - stuff like the Phoenix Lights incident raise questions. Obviously - something out of the ordinary was going on, there. The military claiming that it was illumination flares doesn't help, either. Exactly why they claim it was flares is a bit of a head-scratcher, to me. I have no doubt that they were conducting operations and were dropping flares that evening/night. The problem is that I've seen different types of flares and... well... the Phoenix Lights just don't stack up to illumination flares as I understand them to function.

I'm torn on "coverup" and simple 'dogmatic dismissal.' Basically - did the military (specifically the Air Force) have more knowledge of what was going on regarding the lights people were seeing.... or did they just assume that their operations were the source of the public sighting? One implies deceit... the other simply arrogance.

Now - I've not seen every flare system ever developed function... but why they would be deployed at such a high altitude (when they are ground-illumination flares.... you know... to light up the ground for strike aircraft, ground forces, and artillery spotters) and how they would persist for longer than 30-45 seconds is beyond me.

So, in cases like that - it's relatively safe to say that something quite abnormal was going on. Aliens? That, I don't know... but why the hell would the military make a public spectacle of things it was trying to keep secret? Special development projects and tests tend to take place away from human populations because as the number of eyes on your project increase, the effort necessary to keep it secret grows exponentially.

But - just as you have that - you have other mysterious things in our history.

For example, sites like Puma Punku. These stone blocks are cut/ground/formed with precision accurate to the micrometer. You cannot appreciate that with the human eye. Only recently have we been able to confirm the degree of accuracy these stone monuments have... built some couple thousand years ago (or, hell, even if only 500 years ago - that precision is -way- out of the expected capability of that era). Oh - the -granite- for these monuments was mined from something like a hundred kilometers away at an elevation neary a kilometer lower than the construction site.

Archeology has long had a sort of dogmatic principle established to it: "The people of old did all of what you see with rocks tied to sticks, sand, and strings. Since people back then had no economic concerns aside from building monuments - all of the available population toiled ten or more hours a day for decades on end to create these monuments."

Not saying that these things were not built over vast periods of time... but when you look around - even taking a trip to the pyramids, many of these old structures are created with an absolutely amazing amount of precision that seems highly, highly unnecessary (at least if they are merely monuments). We're not even sure how such precision can be obtained (such as the interior walls of the pyramids being ground to, again, a flat surface with less than a micrometer of deviation... we do the same thing with granite when we want to make a very, very flat table for accurate engineering measurements and testing of equipment) - let alone why they would go to the effort of employing it (again - bronze is the pinnacle of metallurgical technology for them, rope made of reeds, sticks, and sand).

In more modern examples of monument building - such as the various Cathedrals around europe - the Catholic Church nearly broke itself building those cathedrals. It was a -huge- economic burden on society and they were limited to the affordable engineering practices of the time.

Why would people two thousand years prior be exempt from these same economic truths?

These monuments weren't built simply by the sweat of everyone's brow. While they were, certainly, a large chunk of economic activity - they could hardly represent all of it, and they wouldn't use methods that required unreasonable expenditure of time and effort. The answer is simple... it -wasn't- a daunting task for them. It may have been an engineering challenge and a demonstration of capability (much like the Cathedrals were) - but it was certainly not a case where hundreds of people sat around grinding stones to a flatness that cannot be appreciated by the unaided human senses (and even though we -can- do this, today - it is still only done when that degree of accuracy is required for function).

Whether or not it stacks up to aliens - it certainly makes the case that we can't simply look at people in the past and assume that they were always of inferior capability to us. Though it is quite mysterious that different populations on opposite sides of the planet devised advanced stone working capabilities without any alleged cultural contact... and the abilities used to work stone in such a way have completely disappeared with little trace.

If how they manufactured these stones was simply raw effort and human exertion - then many people would have been involved and the process very well known... so why would something like that vanish?

If it was kept by small orders of tradesmen... then those few tradesmen were capable of production rates that were higher than what an individual can accomplish with today's technology, and were of a small enough number that the art could become extinct.

I hesitate to jump on the "ancient aliens" bandwagon - but there are certainly some interesting questions about our past that I think far too many have negligently applied the: "if you put enough hard work into it, you can do anything." Some ... 'craft' or 'art' or 'technology' was applied to making those structures. What it was, its origin, and its fate are all things we can only guess at... but there's just no way that some of those ancient structures were built by raw "I'm gonna be Hokage!"

 

[Smd]

I think few rational people will sit there and flat-out exclude the idea that life could be elsewhere (even intelligent life).

The real interesting discussions happen when we start talking about whether or not we are being visited (and to what degree).

The problem is that so much of the subject material is based on witness testimony. That's not to discredit incidents like the Phoenix Lights (which... well - those can be discussed later) - but it's usually someone telling you about something they saw or giving you an interpretation of a picture or video. The fact of the matter is that few people are actually rational when it comes to their own testimony - even 'experts' or people with decades of experience in the field.

We deal with this all the time in various fields - established 'experts' and people of experience telling us that things cannot be done (for some reason or another) and then we turn around and do it. Most people believe they have a far greater understanding of something or have far more reliable information than they actually do. And they make poor decisions off of it (even I'm vulnerable to such things - though I certainly try to emulate other viewpoints through something that is probably borderline multiple personality disorder... but that just means my senior years will be entertaining for other people, and I want them to enjoy my senility).

Even the most credible and rational appearing witnesses can end up interpreting a rather mundane scene into a rather artistic drama - simply because they missed pieces of information or took for gratned various assumptions. Kind of like those moments where you're looking at something... and for a few moments, the pieces in your brain aren't coming together properly (for whatever reason) so you sit in a moment of absolute awe or confusion as you look at a shoe poking out of a pile of clothes, or something.

I would imagine a lot of UFO cases revolving around single witnesses fall into this category (possibly even a few multi-witness cases where it is all instigated by an initial witness). In the cases of experienced individuals - they don't see the "shoe in the clothes" long enough to put all the pieces together and recognize it as mundane - so they remember it as unknown and mysterious (and since our mind doesn't remember -pictures- but -distinctions- it never gets resolved to its mundane conclusion). In the case of most witnesses - they simply lack the knowledge or experience to recognize it as mundane. Movies also complicate this by inserting unrealistic depictions of aircraft behavior (and the like) - so people see real-world maneuvers of aircraft and they look completely out of this world (because they're not in line with what we see in movies or on some video games).

Take some of the drama over 9/11 conspiracies. While a separate thread should be used to discuss the issue in more detail - the point I want to make involves claims that the aircraft that hit the pentagon performed "manevuers that would kill a human." This was flamboyantly backed by several notable personalities holding a variety of degrees and even some people with experience in the aviation field. .... Then the rest of the aviation community did the calculations and ran the maneuvers in simulators and demonstrated that the maneuver was not, in the slightest, a strain on the human body, much less the airframe. Well... spare for the sudden stop at the end.

The more you get into the topics revolving around witness testimony, the more you run into stuff like this. In the cases where you are dealing with known events and quantities - you can often use math and experiments to illustrate one person correct or incorrect. When it comes to "what did you see?" .... you've got nothing to go on. Even videos show very little, as the best HD camera fitted to some of the best telescopic lenses will fail to properly capture an airborne 'target' doing anything other than specifically passing for a photo-op.

Now - stuff like the Phoenix Lights incident raise questions. Obviously - something out of the ordinary was going on, there. The military claiming that it was illumination flares doesn't help, either. Exactly why they claim it was flares is a bit of a head-scratcher, to me. I have no doubt that they were conducting operations and were dropping flares that evening/night. The problem is that I've seen different types of flares and... well... the Phoenix Lights just don't stack up to illumination flares as I understand them to function.

I'm torn on "coverup" and simple 'dogmatic dismissal.' Basically - did the military (specifically the Air Force) have more knowledge of what was going on regarding the lights people were seeing.... or did they just assume that their operations were the source of the public sighting? One implies deceit... the other simply arrogance.

Now - I've not seen every flare system ever developed function... but why they would be deployed at such a high altitude (when they are ground-illumination flares.... you know... to light up the ground for strike aircraft, ground forces, and artillery spotters) and how they would persist for longer than 30-45 seconds is beyond me.

So, in cases like that - it's relatively safe to say that something quite abnormal was going on. Aliens? That, I don't know... but why the hell would the military make a public spectacle of things it was trying to keep secret? Special development projects and tests tend to take place away from human populations because as the number of eyes on your project increase, the effort necessary to keep it secret grows exponentially.

But - just as you have that - you have other mysterious things in our history.

For example, sites like Puma Punku. These stone blocks are cut/ground/formed with precision accurate to the micrometer. You cannot appreciate that with the human eye. Only recently have we been able to confirm the degree of accuracy these stone monuments have... built some couple thousand years ago (or, hell, even if only 500 years ago - that precision is -way- out of the expected capability of that era). Oh - the -granite- for these monuments was mined from something like a hundred kilometers away at an elevation neary a kilometer lower than the construction site.

Archeology has long had a sort of dogmatic principle established to it: "The people of old did all of what you see with rocks tied to sticks, sand, and strings. Since people back then had no economic concerns aside from building monuments - all of the available population toiled ten or more hours a day for decades on end to create these monuments."

Not saying that these things were not built over vast periods of time... but when you look around - even taking a trip to the pyramids, many of these old structures are created with an absolutely amazing amount of precision that seems highly, highly unnecessary (at least if they are merely monuments). We're not even sure how such precision can be obtained (such as the interior walls of the pyramids being ground to, again, a flat surface with less than a micrometer of deviation... we do the same thing with granite when we want to make a very, very flat table for accurate engineering measurements and testing of equipment) - let alone why they would go to the effort of employing it (again - bronze is the pinnacle of metallurgical technology for them, rope made of reeds, sticks, and sand).

In more modern examples of monument building - such as the various Cathedrals around europe - the Catholic Church nearly broke itself building those cathedrals. It was a -huge- economic burden on society and they were limited to the affordable engineering practices of the time.

Why would people two thousand years prior be exempt from these same economic truths?

These monuments weren't built simply by the sweat of everyone's brow. While they were, certainly, a large chunk of economic activity - they could hardly represent all of it, and they wouldn't use methods that required unreasonable expenditure of time and effort. The answer is simple... it -wasn't- a daunting task for them. It may have been an engineering challenge and a demonstration of capability (much like the Cathedrals were) - but it was certainly not a case where hundreds of people sat around grinding stones to a flatness that cannot be appreciated by the unaided human senses (and even though we -can- do this, today - it is still only done when that degree of accuracy is required for function).

Whether or not it stacks up to aliens - it certainly makes the case that we can't simply look at people in the past and assume that they were always of inferior capability to us. Though it is quite mysterious that different populations on opposite sides of the planet devised advanced stone working capabilities without any alleged cultural contact... and the abilities used to work stone in such a way have completely disappeared with little trace.

If how they manufactured these stones was simply raw effort and human exertion - then many people would have been involved and the process very well known... so why would something like that vanish?

If it was kept by small orders of tradesmen... then those few tradesmen were capable of production rates that were higher than what an individual can accomplish with today's technology, and were of a small enough number that the art could become extinct.

I hesitate to jump on the "ancient aliens" bandwagon - but there are certainly some interesting questions about our past that I think far too many have negligently applied the: "if you put enough hard work into it, you can do anything." Some ... 'craft' or 'art' or 'technology' was applied to making those structures. What it was, its origin, and its fate are all things we can only guess at... but there's just no way that some of those ancient structures were built by raw "I'm gonna be Hokage!"

wow you made an essay.

but yeah most ppl who say no

are either uneducated, scared or in denial.

plenty of actual evidence of other beings.

and if anyone cares to see the evidence i can show you

 

[GreenTeaChloe]

Thanks Aim,

Okay guys, state your reasons why you do/do not believe other life besides us exists outside our own galaxy, that out of the billions out there we are the only one that holds life.

To the people who cant control their sensibility, please refrain from posting.

 

[Senju Smash Bros]

Well i believe that ET wanted to phone his mum and dad to tell them he'll be late for dinner as he is having a sleep over at some lil girls house.

 

[Redd]

You must be registered for see images

CALL THE AUTHORITIES!

It's a better way to look at life. Don't know why some people are so small minded that they refuse to think that we're the only living beings in this vast universe. That out of those billions of galaxies, we're the only one to contain life?...

It's not being closed minded :
It's just looking at probabality. Oh amd thats right, the odds are are super low now. A couple billion down and still no.

 

[Aim64C]

It's not being closed minded :
It's just looking at probabality. Oh amd thats right, the odds are are super low now. A couple billion down and still no.

How can one even begin to estimate the probability of life?

If you look at our own existence and look at the known statistical variables leading to the genesis of the first sustainable RNA polymerase - every subatomic particle in the known universe acting as a super-quantum computer that tested different combinations of RNA - that 'computer' would have run since the assumed beginning of the universe, each particle testing one RNA sequence every planck second... and it would still not be anywhere close to having likely odds of producing a successful self-sustaining chain.

Which leads me to believe that life is not up to mere chance - that some process or fundamental principle is responsible for its development (be it "God" or some yet to be discovered principle of physics... or both).

And if that system applies to us... why not elsewhere?