Life

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='notardillacid' date='04 June 2010 - 11:40 AM' timestamp='1275669635' post='2123673']
I think you give it far too much credit by claiming it is even pseudo scientific.
[/quote]
Pseudo science like alchemy is a pseudo science then?

[Mark of the Cross]

[quote name='notardillacid' date='05 June 2010 - 04:31 AM' timestamp='1275669091' post='2123668']
Since you are unaware of the unique connexion between LD and myself, I will endeavor to lift the veil via an oversimplified analysis: LD is the exact opposite of me.
[/quote]

What's the opposite to opposite? notardillacid + L_D = (NAND awesome)!

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='05 June 2010 - 04:20 AM' timestamp='1275668455' post='2123656']
A lot of people think that the Drake equation is pseudo-scientific bull.
[/quote]

Actually the logical conclusion is 'They wouldn't have a clue' !!! I could be postulate 1275668455 2123656 (your post time stamp) &1/4 and be just as likely to be correct.
Scientists can't even make the age of the universe and it's size concur let alone anything requiring an IQ of more than +1

Edited June 4, 2010 by Mark of the Cross

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='04 June 2010 - 02:03 AM' timestamp='1275634997' post='2123545']
P.S. The above post was an untruth, also known as a lie, justified by the desired consequence of amusement. This post might also be thus described.
[/quote]

CONSEQUENTIALIST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111111111oneeleven

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Resurrexi' date='04 June 2010 - 08:06 PM' timestamp='1275696393' post='2123871']
[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='04 June 2010 - 03:03 AM' timestamp='1275634997' post='2123545']
P.S. The above post was an untruth, also known as a lie, justified by the desired consequence of amusement. This post might also be thus described.
[/quote]
CONSEQUENTIALIST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111111111oneeleven


[/quote]
At least I'm honest. An honest liar is better than a dishonest liar. Means and ends, consequences, and intentions. This is all too complicated for me anyway.

Life on other planets, however, is an easy matter of probabilities based upon highly speculative, but plausible, variables.

[Resurrexi]

Laudate Dominum omnes gentes! Laudate eum omnes populi! Quoniam confirmata est super nos misericoria eius! Et veritas Domini manet in aeternum! Gloria Patri, et Filio, et Spiritui Sancto! Sicut erat in principio, et nunc, et semper, et in saecula saeculorum!

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Mark of the Cross' date='04 June 2010 - 05:07 PM' timestamp='1275689224' post='2123813']



Actually the logical conclusion is 'They wouldn't have a clue' !!! I could be postulate 1275668455 2123656 (your post time stamp) &1/4 and be just as likely to be correct.
Scientists can't even make the age of the universe and it's size concur let alone anything requiring an IQ of more than +1
[/quote]
I don't know the inner workings of the Drake equation, but the criticism I've heard lies in the accusation that it makes a variety of logical leaps that are generally non sequiturs or just plain silly.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='04 June 2010 - 08:55 PM' timestamp='1275699315' post='2123887']
I don't know the inner workings of the Drake equation, but the criticism I've heard lies in the accusation that it makes a variety of logical leaps that are generally non sequiturs or just plain silly.[/quote]
As a "what if" type of thing I have no problem with it. Feed in different variables and see what happens, all for fun. People who try to refute it, or approach it as a scientific claim, are missing the point imo. But, not speaking of the Drake equation specifically, I believe that there is nothing in principle which prevents science from investigating the question probabilistically, and theoretically we could make discoveries that increase the accuracy of these predictions to the point where they are seriously compelling. We need more data, more samples, more refinement and confirmation of some theories, etc.. Until then, yeah, it is more of a "what if" and "wouldn't it be neat..." type of thing.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='04 June 2010 - 08:03 PM' timestamp='1275699783' post='2123890']
As a "what if" type of thing I have no problem with it. Feed in different variables and see what happens, all for fun. People who try to refute it, or approach it as a scientific claim, are missing the point imo. That's what I was saying in previous posts. But, not speaking of the Drake equation specifically, I believe that there is nothing in principle which prevents science from investigating the question probabilistically, and theoretically we could make discoveries that increase the accuracy of these predictions to the point where they are seriously compelling. We need more data, more samples, more refinement and confirmation of some theories. Until then, yeah, it is more of a "what if" and "wouldn't it be neat..." type of thing.
[/quote]
Yep, that all works for me. It's a bit of a pet peeve though, that it's treated as a hard scientific equation.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='04 June 2010 - 09:05 PM' timestamp='1275699913' post='2123892']
Yep, that all works for me. It's a bit of a pet peeve though, that it's treated as a hard scientific equation.[/quote]
I'm often alluding to wacky multiverse cosmologies, time travel, and other such things so I figured ppl wouldn't take me too seriously. hehe.

[Resurrexi]

What lies beyond the fifth dimension?

[spoiler][spoiler][spoiler][media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zi6wNGwd84g&feature=related[/media][/spoiler][/spoiler][/spoiler]

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='04 June 2010 - 08:07 PM' timestamp='1275700067' post='2123894']
I'm often alluding to wacky multiverse cosmologies, time travel, and other such things so I figured ppl wouldn't take me too seriously. hehe.
[/quote]
Sorry, didn't mean to imply that you were doing that.

[Ziggamafu]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='20 August 2006 - 02:07 PM' timestamp='1156097263' post='1046708']
I don't consider that to be a valid argument. If human beings were responsible for crafting the cosmos it would be a good point. I imagine that from God's perspective the temporal and spatial differentials that we observe are utterly insignificant. The Bible indicates as much.

Until some concrete phenomenon is observed which conclusively points to the existence of other life forms in our universe I don't believe there is sufficient information to reach a meaningful conclusion.
[/quote]

We are not at the center of the universe and the sun does not revolve around us. I see the point behind the argument as valid, but I certainly would not call it a proof. Whatever the case may be, I really hope that there is life out there, and that we discover some in my lifetime.

[zunshynn]

[quote name='Ziggamafu' date='05 June 2010 - 04:48 AM' timestamp='1275734919' post='2124034']
We are not at the center of the universe and the sun does not revolve around us. I see the point behind the argument as valid, but I certainly would not call it a proof. [b]Whatever the case may be, I really hope that there is life out there, and that we discover some in my lifetime[/b].
[/quote]

To the bolded: why?

[Jesus_lol]

[b]BECAUSE STAR WARS, THATS WHY.[/b]

[zunshynn]

Oh, I'm sorry. Silly me.