Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > rec.arts.sf.written > #459365 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-12-10 11:57 -0800 |
| Last post | 2016-12-26 10:56 -0500 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 138 — 32 participants |
Back to article view | Back to rec.arts.sf.written
Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-12-10 11:57 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2016-12-10 20:37 +0000
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Kevrob <kevrob@my-deja.com> - 2016-12-10 14:08 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Cryptoengineer <treifamily@gmail.com> - 2016-12-10 18:04 -0600
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This mcdowell_ag@sky.com - 2016-12-11 00:18 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Default User <defaultuserbr@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-12 09:27 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> - 2016-12-11 08:01 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2016-12-11 22:41 +0000
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-12-11 18:36 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2016-12-12 03:02 +0000
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2016-12-12 04:38 -0700
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Robert Bannister <robban@clubtelco.com> - 2016-12-12 09:59 +0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2016-12-12 03:02 +0000
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This "a425couple" <a425couple@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-12 15:31 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-12-12 16:00 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-12-12 22:40 -0500
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) - 2016-12-13 04:01 +0000
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> - 2016-12-13 06:55 -0600
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2016-12-13 04:02 +0000
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2016-12-13 08:13 -0700
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2016-12-13 16:26 +0000
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Default User <defaultuserbr@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-13 12:06 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> - 2016-12-13 21:21 -0600
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Cryptoengineer <treifamily@gmail.com> - 2016-12-13 21:53 -0600
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2016-12-13 22:29 -0700
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> - 2016-12-14 15:07 -0600
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2016-12-14 04:10 +0000
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Peter Trei <petertrei@gmail.com> - 2016-12-14 07:09 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-12-14 07:27 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2016-12-14 15:50 +0000
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This goldfarb@ocf.berkeley.edu (David Goldfarb) - 2016-12-15 01:18 +0000
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-12-15 16:42 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This goldfarb@ocf.berkeley.edu (David Goldfarb) - 2016-12-16 05:48 +0000
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> - 2016-12-17 06:47 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2016-12-17 18:58 +0000
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> - 2016-12-17 16:16 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Cryptoengineer <treifamily@gmail.com> - 2016-12-17 19:25 -0600
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> - 2016-12-17 18:38 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2016-12-19 23:11 -0700
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2016-12-20 13:45 +0000
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> - 2016-12-20 13:45 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2016-12-21 00:12 +0000
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-12-20 21:44 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This mcdowell_ag@sky.com - 2016-12-20 23:10 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2016-12-21 14:37 +0000
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> - 2016-12-25 08:22 -0600
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <seawasp@sgeinc.invalid.com> - 2016-12-25 10:18 -0500
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Kevrob <kevrob@my-deja.com> - 2016-12-26 20:43 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> - 2016-12-21 13:17 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This hamish.laws@gmail.com - 2016-12-20 15:11 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> - 2016-12-14 00:33 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Joe Bernstein <joe@sfbooks.com> - 2016-12-14 09:37 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Paul Arthur <junk+usenet@flowerysong.com> - 2016-12-14 18:49 +0000
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2016-12-15 01:36 +0000
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Chrysi Cat <chrysicat@gmail.com> - 2016-12-15 06:00 -0700
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2016-12-15 13:36 +0000
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Joe Bernstein <joe@sfbooks.com> - 2016-12-15 10:09 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Anthony Frost <Vulch@vulch.org> - 2016-12-14 08:04 +0000
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> - 2016-12-14 09:51 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Default User <defaultuserbr@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-14 10:40 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <seawasp@sgeinc.invalid.com> - 2016-12-14 13:46 -0500
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) - 2016-12-14 18:57 +0000
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Default User <defaultuserbr@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-14 11:43 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2016-12-15 01:34 +0000
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> - 2016-12-14 15:09 -0600
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This David Johnston <Davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-14 15:00 -0700
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Don Bruder <dakidd@sonic.net> - 2016-12-14 17:37 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <seawasp@sgeinc.invalid.com> - 2016-12-14 07:23 -0500
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2016-12-24 14:09 -0500
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Cryptoengineer <treifamily@gmail.com> - 2016-12-24 15:05 -0600
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-12-13 09:48 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2016-12-13 03:18 +0000
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2016-12-24 14:07 -0500
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Cryptoengineer <treifamily@gmail.com> - 2016-12-11 22:54 -0600
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This synthius2002@yahoo.com - 2016-12-18 14:07 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This mcdowell_ag@sky.com - 2016-12-19 08:12 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This synthius2002@yahoo.com - 2016-12-20 18:39 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-12-20 22:05 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-12-20 22:22 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-12-20 23:03 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This SteveGG <casagiannoni@optonline.net> - 2016-12-21 14:05 -0500
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2016-12-21 22:25 +0000
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> - 2016-12-21 18:03 -0500
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-12-21 15:37 -0700
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> - 2016-12-25 08:25 -0600
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-12-21 18:33 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This mcdowell_ag@sky.com - 2016-12-21 21:58 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-12-21 19:06 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-12-21 20:37 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-12-21 14:43 -0700
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-12-21 19:05 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Virgil <VIRGIL@VIRGIL.com> - 2016-12-21 20:56 -0700
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-12-21 20:01 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-12-21 20:41 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Virgil <VIRGIL@VIRGIL.com> - 2016-12-21 22:55 -0700
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-12-21 22:01 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Virgil <VIRGIL@VIRGIL.com> - 2016-12-21 23:17 -0700
Re: We're robots, programmed by Nature to play "The Stay Alive Game". Hägar <hsahm@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-24 08:17 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 09:06 -0700
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 09:05 -0700
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Virgil <VIRGIL@VIRGIL.com> - 2016-12-21 22:45 -0700
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-12-21 21:47 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Virgil <VIRGIL@VIRGIL.com> - 2016-12-21 23:05 -0700
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-12-22 06:13 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-12-22 08:42 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 09:09 -0700
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-12-22 09:15 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 09:32 -0700
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-12-22 09:37 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 10:25 -0700
Gutless whining (was Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-12-22 10:29 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-12-22 09:36 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 09:07 -0700
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 09:07 -0700
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 09:05 -0700
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 09:05 -0700
Gutless whining Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> - 2016-12-22 09:12 -0800
Re: Gutless whining Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 09:32 -0700
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-12-22 09:20 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 09:33 -0700
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-12-22 13:43 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> - 2016-12-22 14:04 -0700
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-12-21 18:29 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-12-22 23:08 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-12-23 09:37 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-12-23 20:35 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-12-23 20:59 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-12-24 10:28 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This SteveGG <casagiannoni@optonline.net> - 2016-12-24 07:57 -0500
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Robert Carnegie <rja.carnegie@excite.com> - 2016-12-24 14:46 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Chrysi Cat <chrysicat@gmail.com> - 2016-12-25 15:43 -0700
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-12-26 03:45 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-12-26 22:22 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Chrysi Cat <chrysicat@gmail.com> - 2016-12-28 13:44 -0700
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-12-28 15:35 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-12-30 14:49 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This synthius2002@yahoo.com - 2016-12-25 16:23 -0800
Re: Why We Imagine Aliens Look Like This "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <seawasp@sgeinc.invalid.com> - 2016-12-26 10:56 -0500
Page 5 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 Next page →
| From | SteveGG <casagiannoni@optonline.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-21 14:05 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <3dkl5ctlco4nj0k3011c4fpoksdgj38f01@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #460352 |
Have you looked at the universe lately ? Incredibly big or infinite actually. The supposition that Earth has the only life or even the only intelligent life, is very clearly proposterous. Get real !
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-21 22:25 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <oIK3MF.1G7@kithrup.com> |
| In reply to | #460390 |
In article <3dkl5ctlco4nj0k3011c4fpoksdgj38f01@4ax.com>, SteveGG <casagiannoni@optonline.net> wrote: >Have you looked at the universe lately ? > >Incredibly big or infinite actually. > >The supposition that Earth has the only life or even the only >intelligent life, is very clearly proposterous. > >Get real ! The state of affairs at this time is that *we don't know*. It would be cool if there were life elsewhere, but we haven't found any yet. -- Dorothy J. Heydt Vallejo, California djheydt at gmail dot com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-21 18:03 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.32c4d43a412dabec98a830@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #460431 |
In article <oIK3MF.1G7@kithrup.com>, djheydt@kithrup.com says... > > In article <3dkl5ctlco4nj0k3011c4fpoksdgj38f01@4ax.com>, > SteveGG <casagiannoni@optonline.net> wrote: > >Have you looked at the universe lately ? > > > >Incredibly big or infinite actually. > > > >The supposition that Earth has the only life or even the only > >intelligent life, is very clearly proposterous. > > > >Get real ! > > The state of affairs at this time is that *we don't know*. It > would be cool if there were life elsewhere, but we haven't found > any yet. That the universe is large does not imply that there is life elsewhere, let alone intelligent life. If the digits of Pi contain all possible sequences of numbers (remember, they go on infinitely and don't follow any discernible pattern simpler than that used to calculate Pi) then there should be some sequence that, transcribed to ASCII, produces the complete works of Shakespeare. How deep into Pi do you have to go to find that sequence if it is there at all?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-21 15:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <XnsA6E59F0407A98taustingmail@69.16.179.43> |
| In reply to | #460440 |
"J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote in
news:MPG.32c4d43a412dabec98a830@news.eternal-september.org:
> In article <oIK3MF.1G7@kithrup.com>,
> djheydt@kithrup.com says...
>>
>> In article <3dkl5ctlco4nj0k3011c4fpoksdgj38f01@4ax.com>,
>> SteveGG <casagiannoni@optonline.net> wrote:
>> >Have you looked at the universe lately ?
>> >
>> >Incredibly big or infinite actually.
>> >
>> >The supposition that Earth has the only life or even the only
>> >intelligent life, is very clearly proposterous.
>> >
>> >Get real !
>>
>> The state of affairs at this time is that *we don't know*. It
>> would be cool if there were life elsewhere, but we haven't found
>> any yet.
>
> That the universe is large does not imply that
> there is life elsewhere, let alone intelligent
> life.
>
> If the digits of Pi contain all possible
> sequences of numbers (remember, they go on
> infinitely and don't follow any discernible
> pattern simpler than that used to calculate Pi)
> then there should be some sequence that,
> transcribed to ASCII, produces the complete
> works of Shakespeare. How deep into Pi do you
> have to go to find that sequence if it is there
> at all?
>
Unlike pi, the universe is not, in fact, infinite.
--
Terry Austin
Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek
Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David DeLaney <daviddelaney@earthlink.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-25 08:25 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <3IedneuKX4pAS8LFnZ2dnUU7-KednZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #460443 |
On 2016-12-21, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> wrote: > Unlike pi, the universe is not, in fact, infinite. Actually, we don't know that. What we do know is that we can't see/detect directly anything further away than a certain distance, cuz there hasn't been enough time yet. Dave, and then there's the Big Rip theory for a future time-boundary -- \/David DeLaney posting thru EarthLink - "It's not the pot that grows the flower It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK> gatekeeper.vic.com/~dbd - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-21 18:33 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <585B3B64.41DB@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #460431 |
Dorothy J Heydt wrote: > > In article <3dkl5ctlco4nj0k3011c4fpoksdgj38f01@4ax.com>, > SteveGG <casagiannoni@optonline.net> wrote: > >Have you looked at the universe lately ? > > > >Incredibly big or infinite actually. > > > >The supposition that Earth has the only life or even the only > >intelligent life, is very clearly proposterous. > > > >Get real ! > > The state of affairs at this time is that *we don't know*. Speak for yourself, Honey...I know...yous don't know. > It > would be cool if there were life elsewhere, but we haven't found > any yet. Maybe somewhere over the rainbow... > > -- > Dorothy J. Heydt > Vallejo, California > djheydt at gmail dot com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | mcdowell_ag@sky.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-21 21:58 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <ee7e1197-9b7c-4ea6-a767-8ee31d6b2ca9@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #460457 |
On Thursday, December 22, 2016 at 2:32:24 AM UTC, The Starmaker wrote: > Dorothy J Heydt wrote: > > > > In article <3dkl5ctlco4nj0k3011c4fpoksdgj38f01@4ax.com>, > > SteveGG <casagiannoni@optonline.net> wrote: > > >Have you looked at the universe lately ? > > > > > >Incredibly big or infinite actually. > > > > > >The supposition that Earth has the only life or even the only > > >intelligent life, is very clearly proposterous. > > > > > >Get real ! > > > > The state of affairs at this time is that *we don't know*. > > Speak for yourself, Honey...I know...yous don't know. > > > > > It > > would be cool if there were life elsewhere, but we haven't found > > any yet. > > Maybe somewhere over the rainbow... > > > > > > -- > > Dorothy J. Heydt > > Vallejo, California > > djheydt at gmail dot com There have been a number of attempts to throw Bayes's theorem at this and similar problems. Indeed my first searches revealed a book "Anthropic Bias: Observation effects in Science and Philosophy" by Nick Bostrom. The page I was actually trying to find was probably http://www.pnas.org/content/109/2/395.short where the abstract includes "We find that, given only this very limited empirical information, the choice of Bayesian prior for the abiogenesis probability parameter has a dominant influence on the computed posterior probability" I think this translates to "we don't know either".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-21 19:06 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <o3fg07$9ot$2@news.datemas.de> |
| In reply to | #460431 |
On 2016-12-21 2:25 PM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote: > In article <3dkl5ctlco4nj0k3011c4fpoksdgj38f01@4ax.com>, > SteveGG <casagiannoni@optonline.net> wrote: >> Have you looked at the universe lately ? >> >> Incredibly big or infinite actually. >> >> The supposition that Earth has the only life or even the only >> intelligent life, is very clearly proposterous. >> >> Get real ! > > The state of affairs at this time is that *we don't know*. It > would be cool if there were life elsewhere, but we haven't found > any yet. > No. We don't KNOW... ...but given the 70 billion trillion stars out there, it's a pretty good bet.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-21 20:37 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <585B5891.6DFD@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #460459 |
Alan Baker wrote: > > On 2016-12-21 2:25 PM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote: > > In article <3dkl5ctlco4nj0k3011c4fpoksdgj38f01@4ax.com>, > > SteveGG <casagiannoni@optonline.net> wrote: > >> Have you looked at the universe lately ? > >> > >> Incredibly big or infinite actually. > >> > >> The supposition that Earth has the only life or even the only > >> intelligent life, is very clearly proposterous. > >> > >> Get real ! > > > > The state of affairs at this time is that *we don't know*. It > > would be cool if there were life elsewhere, but we haven't found > > any yet. > > > > No. We don't KNOW... > > ...but given the 70 billion trillion stars out there, it's a pretty good > bet. God does not bet or play dice...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-21 14:43 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <XnsA6E595DB2FC5Btaustingmail@69.16.179.42> |
| In reply to | #460390 |
SteveGG <casagiannoni@optonline.net> wrote in
news:3dkl5ctlco4nj0k3011c4fpoksdgj38f01@4ax.com:
> Have you looked at the universe lately ?
>
> Incredibly big or infinite actually.
>
> The supposition that Earth has the only life or even the only
> intelligent life, is very clearly proposterous.
Indeed. It is exactly as preposterous (which I can actually spell,
troll-boy) as teh supposition that Earth does _not_ have the only
life, since we have zero data on the subject beyond our own solar
system, in which Earth is the only planet suitable for life as we
know it.
>
> Get real !
>
Or not.
--
Terry Austin
Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek
Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-21 19:05 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <o3ffug$9ot$1@news.datemas.de> |
| In reply to | #460438 |
On 2016-12-21 1:43 PM, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy wrote: > SteveGG <casagiannoni@optonline.net> wrote in > news:3dkl5ctlco4nj0k3011c4fpoksdgj38f01@4ax.com: > >> Have you looked at the universe lately ? >> >> Incredibly big or infinite actually. >> >> The supposition that Earth has the only life or even the only >> intelligent life, is very clearly proposterous. > > Indeed. It is exactly as preposterous (which I can actually spell, > troll-boy) as teh supposition that Earth does _not_ have the only > life, since we have zero data on the subject beyond our own solar > system, in which Earth is the only planet suitable for life as we > know it. No. That is just so much nonsense. While we have no data that directly supports the presence of life anywhere in the universe, we have lots and lots of data that there are something the order of 100 billion galaxies in the observable universe. Combining that data with the things we have learned about the formation of stars and planets, and we are left with the observation that somewhere out there among the 70 billion trillion stars (yes: 7 x 10^22) there are almost certainly many others that also support life and indeed, intelligent life. >> >> Get real ! >> > Or not. >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Virgil <VIRGIL@VIRGIL.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-21 20:56 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <VIRGIL-AA4450.20563821122016@news.giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #460458 |
In article <o3ffug$9ot$1@news.datemas.de>, Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote: > > While we have no data that directly supports the presence of life > anywhere in the universe, we have lots and lots of data that there are > something the order of 100 billion galaxies in the observable universe. > > Combining that data with the things we have learned about the formation > of stars and planets, and we are left with the observation that > somewhere out there among the 70 billion trillion stars (yes: 7 x 10^22) > there are almost certainly many others that also support life and > indeed, intelligent life. We do not know either how nor why life came into being on Earth, so we know nothing of its probability of having developed elsewhere. For all we know, Earth may be unique in this respect. -- Virgil "Mit der Dummheit kampfen Gotter selbst vergebens." (Schiller)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-21 20:01 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <o3fj7k$fg7$4@news.datemas.de> |
| In reply to | #460462 |
On 2016-12-21 7:56 PM, Virgil wrote: > In article <o3ffug$9ot$1@news.datemas.de>, > Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote: > >> >> While we have no data that directly supports the presence of life >> anywhere in the universe, we have lots and lots of data that there are >> something the order of 100 billion galaxies in the observable universe. >> >> Combining that data with the things we have learned about the formation >> of stars and planets, and we are left with the observation that >> somewhere out there among the 70 billion trillion stars (yes: 7 x 10^22) >> there are almost certainly many others that also support life and >> indeed, intelligent life. > > We do not know either how nor why life came into being on Earth, > so we know nothing of its probability of having developed elsewhere. > For all we know, Earth may be unique in this respect. > It may be... ...but with a population of 7 x 10^22 stars to choose from... ...is it likely? :-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-21 20:41 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <585B5972.7745@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #460463 |
Alan Baker wrote: > > On 2016-12-21 7:56 PM, Virgil wrote: > > In article <o3ffug$9ot$1@news.datemas.de>, > > Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote: > > > >> > >> While we have no data that directly supports the presence of life > >> anywhere in the universe, we have lots and lots of data that there are > >> something the order of 100 billion galaxies in the observable universe. > >> > >> Combining that data with the things we have learned about the formation > >> of stars and planets, and we are left with the observation that > >> somewhere out there among the 70 billion trillion stars (yes: 7 x 10^22) > >> there are almost certainly many others that also support life and > >> indeed, intelligent life. > > > > We do not know either how nor why life came into being on Earth, > > so we know nothing of its probability of having developed elsewhere. > > For all we know, Earth may be unique in this respect. > > > > It may be... > > ...but with a population of 7 x 10^22 stars to choose from... > > ...is it likely? > > :-) No, not likely...IMPOSSIBLE!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Virgil <VIRGIL@VIRGIL.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-21 22:55 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <VIRGIL-373F4F.22555421122016@news.giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #460467 |
In article <585B5972.7745@ix.netcom.com>, The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > Alan Baker wrote: > > > > On 2016-12-21 7:56 PM, Virgil wrote: > > > In article <o3ffug$9ot$1@news.datemas.de>, > > > Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote: > > > > > >> > > >> While we have no data that directly supports the presence of life > > >> anywhere in the universe, we have lots and lots of data that there are > > >> something the order of 100 billion galaxies in the observable universe. > > >> > > >> Combining that data with the things we have learned about the formation > > >> of stars and planets, and we are left with the observation that > > >> somewhere out there among the 70 billion trillion stars (yes: 7 x 10^22) > > >> there are almost certainly many others that also support life and > > >> indeed, intelligent life. > > > > > > We do not know either how nor why life came into being on Earth, > > > so we know nothing of its probability of having developed elsewhere. > > > For all we know, Earth may be unique in this respect. > > > > > > > It may be... > > > > ...but with a population of 7 x 10^22 stars to choose from... > > > > ...is it likely? > > > > :-) > > No, not likely...IMPOSSIBLE! For all we know, the necessary format for life starting and surviving may require a special type solar system, or even a special type of galaxy, so speculating in such ignorance on the odds of it happening elsewhere or elsewhen is purely a mugs game. of solar system -- Virgil "Mit der Dummheit kampfen Gotter selbst vergebens." (Schiller)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-21 22:01 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <o3fq80$s2o$1@news.datemas.de> |
| In reply to | #460472 |
On 2016-12-21 9:55 PM, Virgil wrote: > In article <585B5972.7745@ix.netcom.com>, > The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > >> Alan Baker wrote: >>> >>> On 2016-12-21 7:56 PM, Virgil wrote: >>>> In article <o3ffug$9ot$1@news.datemas.de>, >>>> Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> While we have no data that directly supports the presence of life >>>>> anywhere in the universe, we have lots and lots of data that there are >>>>> something the order of 100 billion galaxies in the observable universe. >>>>> >>>>> Combining that data with the things we have learned about the formation >>>>> of stars and planets, and we are left with the observation that >>>>> somewhere out there among the 70 billion trillion stars (yes: 7 x 10^22) >>>>> there are almost certainly many others that also support life and >>>>> indeed, intelligent life. >>>> >>>> We do not know either how nor why life came into being on Earth, >>>> so we know nothing of its probability of having developed elsewhere. >>>> For all we know, Earth may be unique in this respect. >>>> >>> >>> It may be... >>> >>> ...but with a population of 7 x 10^22 stars to choose from... >>> >>> ...is it likely? >>> >>> :-) >> >> No, not likely...IMPOSSIBLE! > > For all we know, the necessary format for life starting > and surviving may require a special type solar system, > or even a special type of galaxy, so speculating in such > ignorance on the odds of it happening elsewhere > or elsewhen is purely a mugs game. > of solar system > What we KNOW is that the universe runs by certain physical laws and those laws give rise to the same sorts of galaxies and stars throughout it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Virgil <VIRGIL@VIRGIL.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-21 23:17 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <VIRGIL-3A078E.23172621122016@news.giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #460474 |
In article <o3fq80$s2o$1@news.datemas.de>, Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote: > On 2016-12-21 9:55 PM, Virgil wrote: > > In article <585B5972.7745@ix.netcom.com>, > > The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > > >> Alan Baker wrote: > >>> > >>> On 2016-12-21 7:56 PM, Virgil wrote: > >>>> In article <o3ffug$9ot$1@news.datemas.de>, > >>>> Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> While we have no data that directly supports the presence of life > >>>>> anywhere in the universe, we have lots and lots of data that there are > >>>>> something the order of 100 billion galaxies in the observable universe. > >>>>> > >>>>> Combining that data with the things we have learned about the formation > >>>>> of stars and planets, and we are left with the observation that > >>>>> somewhere out there among the 70 billion trillion stars (yes: 7 x 10^22) > >>>>> there are almost certainly many others that also support life and > >>>>> indeed, intelligent life. > >>>> > >>>> We do not know either how nor why life came into being on Earth, > >>>> so we know nothing of its probability of having developed elsewhere. > >>>> For all we know, Earth may be unique in this respect. > >>>> > >>> > >>> It may be... > >>> > >>> ...but with a population of 7 x 10^22 stars to choose from... > >>> > >>> ...is it likely? > >>> > >>> :-) > >> > >> No, not likely...IMPOSSIBLE! > > > > For all we know, the necessary format for life starting > > and surviving may require a special type solar system, > > or even a special type of galaxy, so speculating in such > > ignorance on the odds of it happening elsewhere > > or elsewhen is purely a mugs game. > > of solar system > > > > What we KNOW is that the universe runs by certain physical laws and > those laws give rise to the same sorts of galaxies and stars throughout it. Until we know a good deal more about how life came into existence, or could have come into existence, than we know now, any such speculaton re its having come into existence elsewhere is purely a mugs game. -- Virgil "Mit der Dummheit kampfen Gotter selbst vergebens." (Schiller)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Hägar <hsahm@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-24 08:17 -0800 |
| Subject | Re: We're robots, programmed by Nature to play "The Stay Alive Game". |
| Message-ID | <ttGdnR8o__U7AsPFnZ2dnUU7-KXNnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #460476 |
"Jeff-Relf.Me" wrote in message news:Jeff-Relf.Me@Dec.22--3.10A.Seattle.2016... Virgil wrote: > Until we know a good deal more about how life came into existence, > or could have come into existence, than we know now, any such speculaton > re its having come into existence elsewhere is purely a mugs game. People want to know where/when "life" can exist in the Cosmos. By "life" they mean themselves and their progeny. We're robots, programmed by Nature to play "The Stay Alive Game"; including: Breathing, Pissing, Shitting, Breeding, etc. "The Stay Alive Game" is our sacred "Religion". We consume "fuel" ( eXergy, energy that can do work ), same as the sun and everything else. "Life Extension" comes at a price; the choice is: 1 - Live FASTER, breathing FASTER. - OR - 2 - Live longer. Horses live 7 times longer than squirrels because, per pound, they consume oxygen 7 times SLOWER. A dormant bee lives many months; once activated, it dies a few weeks later. Why ? Because the active bee consumes oxygen FASTER. *** Good observation, Relfie ... so why don't you try an experiment: See how long you can hold your breath !!! We'll let you know if the experiment fails ...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-22 09:06 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <XnsA6E65C9F929B4taustingmail@69.16.179.43> |
| In reply to | #460474 |
Alan Baker:
Do you agree that riots occured, leading to hundreds of arrests,
during the protests over Trump's election?
*One* answer, not
yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no
/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/n
o/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/
no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/yes/no/
like you're been doing.
We both (and everyone else) know you *can't* answer once, and stick
with it, since the answer is "Yes, Clinton supporters are far more
prone to criminal violence than Trump supporters or Obama haters."
And you *can't* accept that, due to your illness.
Get help, Alan. Seriously. Before you hurt yourself. You're not
interacting with the world around you any more.
--
Terry Austin
Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek
Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taustinca@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-12-22 09:05 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <XnsA6E65C8DB5416taustingmail@69.16.179.43> |
| In reply to | #460467 |
The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
news:585B5972.7745@ix.netcom.com:
> Alan Baker wrote:
>>
>> On 2016-12-21 7:56 PM, Virgil wrote:
>> > In article <o3ffug$9ot$1@news.datemas.de>,
>> > Alan Baker <alangbaker@telus.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> While we have no data that directly supports the presence of
>> >> life anywhere in the universe, we have lots and lots of data
>> >> that there are something the order of 100 billion galaxies
>> >> in the observable universe.
>> >>
>> >> Combining that data with the things we have learned about
>> >> the formation of stars and planets, and we are left with the
>> >> observation that somewhere out there among the 70 billion
>> >> trillion stars (yes: 7 x 10^22) there are almost certainly
>> >> many others that also support life and indeed, intelligent
>> >> life.
>> >
>> > We do not know either how nor why life came into being on
>> > Earth, so we know nothing of its probability of having
>> > developed elsewhere. For all we know, Earth may be unique in
>> > this respect.
>> >
>>
>> It may be...
>>
>> ...but with a population of 7 x 10^22 stars to choose from...
>>
>> ...is it likely?
>>
>> :-)
>
> No, not likely...IMPOSSIBLE!
>
As impossible as you giving up the lotion addiction?
--
Terry Austin
Vacation photos from Iceland:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/collection/QaXQkB
"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek
Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 7 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | rec.arts.sf.written
csiph-web