THE FACTS
The Milky Way Galaxy has 100-400 billion stars (suns) Est. 8 trillion planets (Earth is 1) Galaxies Observable Universe: Est. 200-billion to two-trillion galaxies. The milky Way is just one. Faint, un-observable galaxies: 6 to 20 trillion
Knowing this information… well, only fools and idiots could even entertain an idea the earth and its inhabitants are the only living, intelligent species. It is irrational, insane, an indefensible idea that we are alone. We couldn’t be.
In science, the probability of us NOT being alone is a statistical “absolute”! We aren’t alone.
This leads us to only one question: Who, on earth, is preventing us from full disclosure? What are their names? It is time they all stepped aside. Relieve them of all responsibility, all power, all control mechanisms.
Any human being standing against full disclosure is essentially resigning from their post. Relieved of duty. Politely asked to step aside, take a seat and STFU. It’s just time for this.
Anyone disagree?
Do any of you actually read the Bible? What do you not understand about Creation? Clearly aliens are demons. And what God created (or didn't create) is not "probability". It's concerted. There is no "probability" in the Bible
Thanks johnny because I want2d to say the same. Because weve been set free we can see the spiritual reality of it all. maga updoots
Funny how unidentified turns into alien in peoples minds.
Can I upvote this a thousand times?
Likely not, but I understand the sentiment!
So, is there only one creator? Or two?
Whether or not we are alone in the universe and the question of alien visitation to this planet are two different questions.
Exactly, Ian. Would defy probability to say we're alone. But can they get to us? No. If they did, they'd be all alone because the time it took to get to us means their own civilization would be fundamentally different when they got back. "Millions" of light years, meaning much longer than that since they cannot travel at light speed.
"they cannot travel at light speed."
Only according to our current understanding. Which has been wrong before.
Okay. It leads us to two questions. Result is the same for both. NCSWIC.
No. Highest classification. Consider the vastness of space. Q
u/#q2222
Thanks for the Exclamation point! Indeed.
Of course HP...
Also consider dimensions and perception. We can only hear and see in a small spectrum.
I think the dimensions are key here, and that any aliens are likely spirits invading the material world.
Truth!
Some emerging theories in Physics now are going a step farther and assuming infinity. That no matter where we go. In what direction and how fast we go. That there’s always going to be more. More stars, more planets, more galaxies.
Take your pick. Most of the major corporations have vested financial interests in the current status quo. More than a few Religions or Religious Denominations would also be afraid because it doesn’t fit their Cosmological/Theological models. The Politicos wouldn’t like it because that means relaxing their grasp. It also throws a hefty wrench into our understanding of the Economy and Economics. The entrenched Security/Military apparatus wouldn’t be fond of it. As it means admitting publicly they’re effectively powerless in actually being capable of Defending the country let alone the world. As well as admitting they aren’t all knowing. Which cripples the Mystique they’ve spent decades building around their intelligence and security apparatus.
And full declass bypasses them all. Epstein files is just a trial balloon.
I think it is infinite. Also that there was never a beginning.
Actually there are a couple theories that postulate. That while there was ‘technically’ a beginning. Due to the nature of physics, Quantum Mechanics, and other assorted high-brow concepts.
As far as we’ll be able to tell. The Universe has always existed. Even when it didn’t exist.
Or to phrase it another way. What began as a line with a fixed starting point. Due to powers and concepts magnitudes beyond what we’re able to measure. Shifted into a circle. Leaving little trace of the initial fixed starting point.
Rendering speculation about a ‘Beginning’ as essentially moot. Because as far as we’ll be able to tell. Everything has always existed.
I don't know about the validity of that technicality. Maybe there was a Big Bang, maybe not. The Electric Universe theory has been kicking ass lately with new data fitting its predictions and confounding BB'ers.
I dont disagree persay, but Im of the opinion that NHI is a spiritual classification of entities and not evolutionary driven life originating outside the planet.
A mechanism for abiogenesis has never been demonstrated. No mechanism means a probably of zero. Infinity times zero is still zero. Faith in time and space proves nothing.
"No mechanism means a probably of zero."
Nope. "No mechanism" just means we haven't figured one out yet.
Fairytale mechanism multiplied by fairytale probability equals a huge waste of time. No known mechanism.
Your fallacy is basically "sience of the gaps". We don't know, but we have "faith" that a naturalistic explanation will be found in the future.
Pseudoscience
I'm not sure what your point is??
You say that there is a probability of life due to vastness of space and time, but the development of life from nonlife has no known mechanism. Without a mechanism, it doesnt matter how long or far you search.
The point is that your premise is fundamentally flawed due to a baseless assumption.
Okay dokey, then standing in stark contrast, what is your starting assumption you base your ideas from? Please share.
I've made no assumptions. I have stated the facts. A mechanism must be identified before a probability can be assessed. In the absence of a mechanism, there is baseless postulation.
There are two options. Either life arrived naturally or not. If natural, there is no known mechanism to prove it. If supernatural, there is no way to prove it.
It's too radical to consider life could have always existed along with stars and everything else?
Not radical. It is unscientific. Entropy always increases in a closed system. If there is an infinite past, we would be in a state of entropy death an infinite time in the past. It is illogical and outside of natural law. It is possible if you suspend thermodynamics (supernatural).
How could an infinite universe with no beginning be called closed?
One starting assumption is that there are certain conditions necessary for life on a planet.
Rare Earth is listed in Case For A Creator, by Lee Strobel, written by a geologist, Peter D. Ward and an astronomer, Donald Brownlee
Chapter 7, The Evidence of Astronomy: (Case For A Creator)
There are a variety of constants that need to be present for life:
26 essential elements for humans, about sixteen for most bacteria
Remaining in the Galactic Habitable Zone for enough time for life to develop
Planet in a spiral galaxy, as opposed to the other three types
Between the arms of the galaxy, rather than in the arms
Not too close to the center of the galaxy, where the black holes are.
A stable orbit around a planet's sun.
Thank you for asking, I had quite a bit of fun answering this!
Wow, I didn't expect such a well thought-out response. Thanks. I agree entirely with your response... however, it is confined to earth, earth atomosphere and the homeosapien design.
I think my point was, that other variations of intelligence species are absolutely out there.... designed around completely different environments and atomospheres, yet still intelligent life forms. The physical body is just a suit to house a soul. The soul is eternal. The body is not. Just like we can change clothes, souls can wear many suits.
Humans can't exist near sulfur blow-holes at the bottom of the ocean, fish can't either... yet, there are creatures that do exist there and thrive.
Think like a creator! In the extreme vastness of our universe... would you only give your design one implementation? One and done? Or would you created endless variations and see how they adapt?
You have made a good point , more details on the answer can be found in the two books I suggested.
The Miller-Urey experiment was able to produce amino acids, "the building blocks of life" all the way back in 1952.
This experiment generated both isomers, which doesn't work. It used the wrong atmosphere. The products were removed from the experiment to preserve them artificially.
The experiment was a failure from start to finish. This is well documented. It did not demonstrate a viable mechanism for producing life on earth.
Do you need help moving that goalpost? I thought we were talking about whether there is a known mechanism by which life could arise. Now you want to limit it to life in early Earth conditions only? They made amino acids with inorganic compounds with an infinitesimal simulation of planetary conditions. Pretty compelling reason to continue experimenting I think.
Goog on replication of the experiment:
Yes, the 1952 Miller-Urey experiment has been replicated and updated many times, confirming that organic molecules, including amino acids, can form from inorganic precursors under simulated early Earth conditions. Modern variations using different atmospheric compositions and energy sources have produced a wider variety of organic compounds, including nucleobases, supporting the concept of abiogenesis. Key Findings from Replications:
Although our understanding of the specific composition of the early Earth's atmosphere has changed, the fundamental finding—that organic molecules are easily synthesized from simple inorganic ingredients—remains a cornerstone of prebiotic chemistry.
I didn't move the goalpost. I said no mechanism for abiogenesis is known. You brought up a specific failed experiment, so I discussed the specific failures of that study. You are somehow hinting around that other abiogenic pathways could exist without proving a single one for the biology we know exists. This is baseless.
My goalpost is the same. Infinite time with no probability equals no abiogenisis. No mechanism equals no probability. Fantastical thinking at best.
It's fallacious to say there is no probability or mechanism. How could you know that? It's so easy to make amino acids that a very simple experiment was able to produce them. Don't see how it could be considered a failure.
It is a failure in the sense that it doesn't provide a mechanism for abiogenesis. Proteins are not life. The simplest form of know life is a single called organism. This has never been demonstrated. A non carbon lifeform postulate to exist elsewhere has never been demonstrated. There are ZERO known mechanisms to produce life from non life.
Pretty focking close for a first try! They found more amino acids than they originally thought too. Now they have produced spontaneous chains of aminos similar to proteins. Getting closer to actually creating organisms.
https://www.nsf.gov/news/pre-life-building-blocks-spontaneously-align
In 2021 they found even more including nucleobases using Pyrex instead of regular glass.
"Nucleobases (nitrogenous bases) are the fundamental nitrogen-containing building blocks of genetic code in DNA and RNA, comprising adenine (A), guanine (G), cytosine (C), thymine (T), and uracil (U). They form the core of nucleotides, pairing specifically (A-T/U, C-G) via hydrogen bonds to form the genetic structure."
https://www.nature.com/articles/d43978-021-00144-0
DIsclosure is being kept at arms length because of the deals WE made with these others.
It's not because humanity can't handle the information that we are not alone. It's because humanity can't handle the fact that our government made a trade deal deeming it acceptable to sacrifice, literally, a small percentage for protection of the whole.
Col.1:15
15 [a]He is the image[b] of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. 16 For in him[c] were created all things in heaven and on earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things were created through him and for him. 17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.
Yes, disagree. They could be interdimensionals or time travellers. They could even be magic created by crowd psychology (egregore, tulpa, thoughtform, wisp). Possible they've been here all along on a parallel track in same space.
Aliens prob do exist, using your probability (infinite space/matter/time the chance for other life is inevitable, not possible), but they are likely too far from us to ever meet.
Unless warp drive technology, stargate technology is somehow possible by physics, then these places are much too far away for travel.
Distance is an impenetrable firewall for living beings
Remember, light years is distance light travels in a year. And physically impossible to go speed of light or beyond (why warp is needed, bends the space, not the time, uses or creates wormholes, etc, which I'll remind you are still theoretical). Even if aliens went into say stasis and did travel millions of light years, what would be the point? Their civilzation would not exist when they got back, nor could they communicate unless they have some novel technology that defies everything we know of physics. Even light (xray to radio to heat) from stars we see is millions or billions of years old.
Scientist applied the speed of light as restriction, and it is assumed. It was needed as a constant to make the formulas work. There is indeed a speed of light. But there is no real evidence that speeds well beyond this do not exist. It is an assumption.
"They could be interdimensionals..."
Which, to me, is more logical than assuming extraterrestrials.
Great Point. Current physics doesn't include dimensions in their calculations. Our current formulas must include higher dimensional variables. But we don't know what these dimensions are. Our ignorance, doesn't mean that other species (outside of earth, 3D) have already mastered it.
Interdimensional physics would not be limited by the speed of light. We have already observed this "instant without distance" communications in atoms. We are catching up.
Don't get your hopes up pal, don't be surprised if there's nothing to disclose other than it's dark money government contractors working on black projects.
Or technologies given to use by demons. Or known technologies that have just been kept hidden from us.
Even if there is "full disclosure", who's to say it's not more of the psyop?
I don't care either way if they disclose or not, I don't know what's out there but I do know it's not as we've been told. Nothing is as we've been told, so why would this be?
I don't entirely disagree, but I take issue with this statement: "This leads us to only one question: Who, on earth, is preventing us from full disclosure?"
It actually leads us to several questions, the first of which is "Why is anyone standing in the way of full disclosure?" And no, I don't believe the oft-repeated "panic" excuse.
Well, you nailed the 2nd question. The first question remains, who? Then the 2nd question directly to them, why?
Frankly the more we discover about the extent of the universe the less likely it is that there is a supreme being who made it all but had only one son who lived on our special snowflake planet.
You've just summed up the godless dialectical materialism of the left better than Marx himself. Without God "do what though wilt" becomes the whole of the law.
My reasoning applies to all of us. I think it is weird you need a god to keep you from doing wrong.
And who defines what is 'wrong'?! Each person would define it differently. Subjective morality. How's THAT going? Get real.
I always thought your religious tale was too dumb to be real. Throughout life it has always been natural for me to love my family and friends and the vast majority of human beings.
So because each one of us exist, who are supposed to have unique DNA, and are in an unfathomably large thing, it's reasonable to assume that some where out there, there are multiple 100% identical persons.
In contrast, because of the overwhelming amount of space and objects in it and practically 100% of what has been observable is not supportive of life as on earth or 100% identical to another, shouldn't we be impressed that one example of life as we know it works?
If you have such a great point why put down those you think would disagree with you and then invite discussion? I, btw, am very interested in all they have being released too.
See my comment above.
I may have that book... and have read it... once upon a time ago. I have some books. Anyhow, the conditions necessary for life as we know it to exist here, are Incredible to have at all. This gets immediately over looked looking for just a few of those conditions somewhere else. The more I consider the vastness of space the more I'm convinced our existence here is very intentional by a very capable God.
This video showing the number of Galaxies is mind blowing. https://youtu.be/7J_Ugp8ZB4E
Great counter response... to a point that no one is making. Did you post this in the wrong thread by mistake Sir?