What's your favorite movie about the existential crises of being alone in the universe?

What's your favorite movie about the existential crises of being alone in the universe?

Schizophrenic Conspiracy Theorist Shirt $21.68

Homeless People Are Sexy Shirt $21.68

Schizophrenic Conspiracy Theorist Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    the hubris of israelites

  2. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    What is a miracle when time if infinite?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Time is finite chud learn to relativity.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >relativity
        you are a donkey

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Time isn’t infinite

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Source?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Ah you know from experience?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      time going back to the big bang is finite

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        And going ahead?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      There is no proof that infinite even exists

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Do you need infinite observation to confirm infinity?

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >someone tries to convince me that there's more numbers between 0 and 1 than there are counting numbers
          There are as many numbers between whatever and whatever as you want there to be it's all made up shit. Decimals and fractions aren't even real they're just smaller number lines within number lines down to a finite scale

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      And going ahead?

      just because there are infinite numbers between 1 and 2 doesn't mean there's a 3 among them.
      if there are conditions that can only be created by a big bang it might not matter how much time we have onward.
      not saying that's the case, just that it's a possibility.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        but there is literally a 3 among them in your analogy

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >1
          >1.1
          >1.11
          >...
          >1.9
          >1.99
          >1.999
          >2
          >3
          I'm talking about decimal numbers. There's an infinite amount of them between 1 and 2. But the number 3 is not among them.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            so we do not exist is what your analogy is saying

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Just because there are an infinite amount of reals between 1 and 2 does not mean multiple of them have the property that their square equals 2.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                who says

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      There is a small window of time in which life can evolve, a trillion years in the future life won’t be possible cause the universe will have expanded too much (heat death), and life obviously couldn’t have ever very early on in the universe either (too hot) everything was just plasma

  3. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    you aren't alone Black person there are 7 billion other people. why do you identify as some sort of human hivemind that needs to have still more morons to talk to?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Not to mention that once humans start colonizing space beyond Earth we will eventually become aliens to each other. Even here on this small planet we have like 10 different races of humans and hundreds of cultures which differ violently from each other, imagine what will it look like when you leave a couple million people living in some space station habitats around Neptune for a few centuries.

  4. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    The chances of life, let alone intelligent life, existing anywhere else in the universe is- for lack of a better word- astronomically impossible. Humanity needs to focus on healing race relations and rectifying past injustices rather than waste money and resources on meaningless space exploration. Humans need to focus on Earth where you belong

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      False. It is mathematically impossible for there not to be countless other alien species in the universe. To claim otherwise is simply wrong.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >hasn't done the math

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Doesn't matter how inconceivably large the universe is if the probability of life emerging is far smaller than the universe is large and failing to understand this is honestly kind of brainlet. The 100 nucleotides length RNA required for even the simplest self-replication capabilities literally is statistically impossible to randomly have emerged anywhere else in our observable universe. Either something changes in our understanding of abiogenesis, or we definitely are alone

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >The 100 nucleotides length RNA required for even the simplest self-replication capabilities literally is statistically impossible to randomly have emerged anywhere else in our observable universe.
          Scientists have absolutely no idea what the statistical probability is. All their models are bullshit.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Read lmao[...]

          Then kys

          You're so fricking moronic it isn't even funny.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous
      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        hmm nah, The universe is absurdly big but its limited. There is a limited amount of chances for life to form.

        If you read up on astrophysics every now and then you learn how absurdly unique our place in the universe really is, our entire galaxy is an outlier in that its too big for simulations and is surrounded by galaxies forming a sort of a "cosmic wall", our solar system having only a single star is unique, the amount of planets is unique, all those factors result in a relatively protected planet inside a very small habitable zone where life can even exist, there re bazillions of galaxies where its mathematically impossible for an earth-like planet to form and even if there is one it might stay a sterile rock with moderate temperatures forever.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Okay but what if we are the first?

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          This. Avoiding the discussion of statistics, which is the most brainlet way of approaching the topic: Even if one assumes there will be multiple occurrences of abiogenesis through the entire existence of a universe, there will have been a first, and that first will be the only one for a period of time. We'll likely never knew whether that's us or not.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            First requires the whole of existence to be finite. Which means there would have to be a start point for time to have began.
            Not necessarily saying that's wrong, but an unlimited reality is a more palatable theory (in which case, it's fundamentally impossible for anything to be "first")

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              I agree but it's meant to illustrate a possibility for the universe model we're generally talking about, mainly to combat the tendency of people finding a way to arrive at certainty-- that there MUST be others within our current understanding of existence.
              If we consider no starting point/infinite past, then yeah I guess there's no first unless we start saying first per Big Bounce increment or whatever (but that'd be skirting your point).

              >Even if one assumes there will be multiple occurrences of abiogenesis through the entire existence of a universe

              How about multiple occurrences of abiogenesis here on Earth? If life started on Earth more than once, it's a sure thing that life is abundant as frick throughout the universe (even if life throughout the universe is mostly just microbial).

              Where does the certainty come from?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >If we consider no starting point/infinite past

                Not him, but I do believe in no starting point/infinite past. I believe we live in a universe that is beginning and endless, a universe that is 'born' from a Big Bang, exists for God knows how long, 'dies' from a Big Crunch and is then 'reborn' from yet another Big Bang ad infinitum.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                * I believe we live in a universe that is beginningless and endless

                Frick's sake. What sleepiness does to a motherfricker.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                * I believe we live in a universe that is beginningless and endless

                Frick's sake. What sleepiness does to a motherfricker.

                In that case I'd then say there's a first for each era, but yeah this is just a thought experiment anyway.
                Not necessarily pointed at what you're saying, but I think it's also a mistake to assume that in an infinite existence everything that can happen actually happens.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >but I think it's also a mistake to assume that in an infinite existence everything that can happen actually happens.

                If the universe is finite in space, then the universe would obviously contain a finite number of atoms (even if the universe is infinite in time). A finite number of atoms means that certain things just can't happen if you include the things you think of in your imagination.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >Even if one assumes there will be multiple occurrences of abiogenesis through the entire existence of a universe

            How about multiple occurrences of abiogenesis here on Earth? If life started on Earth more than once, it's a sure thing that life is abundant as frick throughout the universe (even if life throughout the universe is mostly just microbial).

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >How about multiple occurrences of abiogenesis here on Earth?
              Never happened.
              Multiple occurrences of abiogenesis would mean that there are lifeforms on this planet that cannot be traced back to a common ancestor. So far no such creature has been discovered.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                That's to assume those lifeforms are still around today. Pretty reasonable to assume that our common ancestor wasn't the first lifeform on Earth.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >the universe is le big, therefore there must be lots of aliens and shit
        Why?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        For each year that passes the probability that intelligent extraterrestrial life doesn't exist goes up.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        This. For every grain of sand on Earth there are 10,000 planets in the universe with the same characteristics of Earth.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Show me those planets.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous
      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Wrong. Even though I strongly believe that there are countless other alien species in the universe, Earth COULD be the only world with life on it in the entire universe if we are living in a simulation. Don't rule out the simulation theory, it has some surprisingly compelling evidence.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          If we're living in a simulation, the best way to preserve the processing power of the simulation is to code a universe where life exists only on Earth.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        See the Grabby Aliens paper you reddit brainlet, it’s mathematically improbable there is alien life, otherwise we’d already have been conquered by some alien civilization

        https://grabbyaliens.com/

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          and what if long form space travel is physically impossible?

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            wormholes, and warping space are forms of "FTL" travel

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >The chances of life, let alone intelligent life, existing anywhere else in the universe is- for lack of a better word- astronomically impossible. Humanity needs to focus on healing race relations and rectifying past injustices rather than waste money and resources on meaningless space exploration. Humans need to focus on Earth where you belong
      What if we kill all the darkies first?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      From a purely logical stand point it would be better to lock all darkies away in their countries until it collapses

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >The chances of life, let alone intelligent life, existing anywhere else in the universe is- for lack of a better word- astronomically impossible.
      It’s only considered impossible since we still haven’t found the chemical equation for what life is and how something is considered alive. Human biases like religion is preventing this from ever happening.

      >Humanity needs to focus on healing race relations and rectifying past injustices rather than waste money and resources on meaningless space exploration. Humans need to focus on Earth where you belong
      Bullshit! That’s just as impossible as finding any life existing outside of Earth and you fricking know it! Those in power are doing everything they can afford to force humanity in the opposite direction. How the frick do you think people are gonna rectify pass injustices if there’s motherfrickers that don’t believe the holocaust happened? People like you make me hope humanity stays violent, and we never achieve anymore progress.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >still blaming religion for us not understanding something
        Is religion in the room with us right now?

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          It wasn’t in your moms room when she went with the abortion.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >your mom
            Bruh, you gotta 18 or older to post here

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Well I've just checked your dad's urethra with a sounding rodd and a microscope and I can't find it either. I doubt it's inside his rectum, would probably have fallen out of that prolapsed thing ages ago.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >haven’t found the chemical equation for what life is and how something is considered alive
        We know exactly what it's made of. The problem is that there has never been found a catalyst that drives individual nucleotides to create complex enough structures that can self replicate. It can happen randomely but the odds are so small that it makes the observable univserse look tiny in comparison.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          They came to this conclusion through use of statistics (which are always limited and fail to capture the true scale and chaos of the universe) combined with blatant guesswork and assumptions. Nice for them to justify their funding and to get in the newspapers I suppose.

          hmm nah, The universe is absurdly big but its limited. There is a limited amount of chances for life to form.

          If you read up on astrophysics every now and then you learn how absurdly unique our place in the universe really is, our entire galaxy is an outlier in that its too big for simulations and is surrounded by galaxies forming a sort of a "cosmic wall", our solar system having only a single star is unique, the amount of planets is unique, all those factors result in a relatively protected planet inside a very small habitable zone where life can even exist, there re bazillions of galaxies where its mathematically impossible for an earth-like planet to form and even if there is one it might stay a sterile rock with moderate temperatures forever.

          There are planets out there with other life on them, but there is no other planet with intelligent life. We are it. The universe has existed for billion and billions of years longer than Earth has been around but there has been zero signs of any kind of intelligent life despite the billions and billions of years head start these other galaxies have had on ours.

          >why rule out intelligence as we understand it?
          ditto for AI, anon?

          we've come up with "intelligence tests" for both humans and computers. computers can pass many of them.

          granted we don't understand consciousness or the mind, but if we managed to simulate a mind 1:1, is that not then a mind? does it have to be organic? what about some weird hybrid: we install a robo-brain into a foetus in utero?

          hell even "life" is a tricky one. 90% of this board can't reproduce, that makes them un-alive by some definitions.

          >The 100 nucleotides length RNA required for even the simplest self-replication capabilities literally is statistically impossible to randomly have emerged anywhere else in our observable universe.
          Scientists have absolutely no idea what the statistical probability is. All their models are bullshit.

          See people have to understand stuff like this first before you want to conclude that there actually is a god. This lens the idea that there is a single intelligent force driving everything to make a life happen here. The current scientific narrative says life cannot happen anywhere else in the universe, meaning if there was actually a higher force(god), then Earth was specifically chosen to harbor life.

          Also this study only accounts for our universe, since we still have to the grasp the possibility of inter-dimensions where life could thrive more commonly than it does here. The scientific evidence is leading us to a theory of what we all god being an inter-dimensional organism that’s been seeding life exclusively on Earth.

          It’s either aliens or God, nothing else makes life out to be seen as a mistake or a curse like the Gnostics preach.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >only accounts for our universe
            Why do morons give their opinions lmao

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >he's never been to another universe

              feel sorry for you. that's like being born blind or something.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Cause you got morons like

              Ufos are demonic forces. Also reports mean nothing

              giving us their opinion too.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >if I don't like it it's moronic
                UFOs are demonic forces or militaries testing out aircraft. There is literally no reason to believe UFOs are real you fricking pseud Black person

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Show me the actual the proof then cause you’re only proving that most people here are gonna just believe whatever fits their dumb bias, regardless of evidence.

                If anything from the info presented this thread, it lends to the idea that demonic entities are alien, not vice versa. But it was never about that, it was about proving Christians are right and Jesus is real. I’m pretty sure if Jesus was real he wouldn’t take kindly to all the devoted Christians that use the hard R on a daily basis.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >believes in aliens
                >show me the proof of demons
                Literal and undiluted moronation
                >hard R
                moron isn't an insult is a designation

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                You gonna try to sound smart when you just pulled a Linus?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Wat

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Wat

                Hard R doesn’t mean moron you fricking moron.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                moron is the only word I used that starts with an R so it can't mean anything else. Sorry I'm not American and my life doesn't revolve around worshipping Black folk

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >I’m not American
                >also frick Black folk
                I think you do know dipshit.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >Human biases like religion is preventing this from ever happening.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      this is an AI post

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        if by "AI" you mean "A"l"I"en, sure.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous
    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      This poster is so desperate to sound intelligent, but he still puts himself as a moron lmao
      Astronomically impossible? Lmfao you fricking mong, it’s either impossible or it’s not

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        It's a copy paste. Literal bots
        https://archive.4plebs.org/tv/thread/153134627/#153134911

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Why??.

      Just because life doesn't exist anywhere else doesn't mean humans can't colonize the space.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >rectifying past injustices

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >Humans need to focus on Earth where you belong
      >where you belong
      >you
      You're not fooling me, you dirty ayy motherfricker

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >Humanity needs to focus on healing race relations and rectifying past injustices

      This. Subsaharan species of humanoids need to be taken back to subsaharan Africa, where they belong.

      We could also do a sweepstake on how many eons before they invent pic related.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >where YOU belong
      Uhhh bros… why am I the only one who noticed this?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      intelligen life existing on its own and human colonization are two entirely different things.
      there's nothing that stop us from colonizing our solar system. the rest is probably impossible due to distance.
      that said earth is still the optimal place for us to live.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      research into space exploration is far more useful than appeasing angry monkeys. seeking to conquer the unknown is a great source of pride and hope. not to mention, advances in technology can lead to unexpected breakthroughs in other fields.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >The chances of life, let alone intelligent life, existing anywhere else in the universe is- for lack of a better word- astronomically impossible.
      "hey guys you know that thing we know is 100% possible because... well because we think therefore we are... yeah turns out that's actually astronomically impossible."

      do idiots like you even believe in your existence?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Frick no, we gotta get off this rock before another rock smashes into us.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Wrong, the true destiny of humanity is to expand out into the stars. That is the cosmic birthright God gave us. have a nice day, you stinky israelite. lol

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >put all Black folk on the space bus to Mars
      >race relations solved

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Mars is for us whites though.

  5. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    people just really ike to think they are special snowflakes

  6. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    What ignorance and arrogance

  7. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >What ignorance and arrogance

  8. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >universe
    I’m assuming this is a quote mine, because that’s moronic
    Galaxy, maybe, but the universe is fricking enormous

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      It’s mostly nothing

  9. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    How awesome, and sad, would it be if we were the most intelligent life in the universe? That the responsibility of bridging the universe was up to us but we'd end up killing ourselves before we could do that?

  10. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Ad Astra was very good in that aspect

  11. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Why is the universe so needlessly big if 99.99999.....999999% of it has no life?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      there is no reason, it just happened

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        proof?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      its all God's plan

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      > Needlessly
      > Needless
      To who? To what?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      It’s not “needlessly big.” Space is not empty, there’s a bunch of stuff out there, all of which is necessary to providing an atmosphere on earth that allows life (as we know it, ie carbon-based, etc.)

  12. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    why would that be an existential crisis

  13. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >there is a chance there was other intelligent life in the universe but it was millions of years ago

  14. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >take drugs
    >break through
    >meet intelligent entities beyond human understanding

    i don't get it. lots of people have done this. seems like the easiest research project in the world.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Denial is a drug more powerful than any psychedelic.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >take drugs
      >experience delusions
      >get mad when people don't accept your delusions

  15. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    It could be as little as exactly the amount of time it took on Earth, if not quicker, actually.

  16. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    The amount of perfect chaos that took place from the big bang to the formation of energy, matter, elements which lead to stars, gravitational pull, galaxies, systems, planets are already high. Then we had the cataclysmic collision with another planet which lead to the moon and that body influences our tides. And on and on, its mind boggling how many perfect circumstances needed to arise for our planet to be the exact perfect way it is for life to develop. Its incredibly unlikely for all of those chain reactions to replicate.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Let's assume the chance is one to a billion, that's so very small. Well good news there are way more than a billion other possible galaxies. So how could there not be life somewhere else?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        And if the chance is 1 in 10^1000? Absolute brainlet.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        it isnt one to a billion you fricking moron

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      People will unironically say stuff like this and still not entertain the notion of God.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Imo, if there's no aliens, there's likely no God(s). An empty(ish) universe suggests that we are just a lucky hit in infinity. There's plenty of room for miracles when there's infinite at question. However, if life was common through out universe, that would basically mean that there's a mechanism or even a law which promotes life in universe, it would be too absurd for such mechanism to exist for no reason whatsoever.

        T. Agnostic theist

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          What a dumb opinion that is the exact opposite of what is true

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            What a dumb response with zero arguments.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            lol, this brainlet thinks he knows "the truth".

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              I do.

              What a dumb response with zero arguments.

              What is there to argue? If God created us he created us. Not endless forms of life on endless planets. It's actually just an absurd and needlessly contrarian position you hold just like your "agnostic theist"

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                If God didn't create us he didn't create us, wow, we got an actual intellectual here. Why did God create an endless universe where there's life only on one planet while the rest 99.99...% is unhabited and serve no purpose? You fail to see the argument that infinity suggests that we are just a miracle in that infinity, you probably have heard the saying that if there's an infinite chain of letters, somewhere there is the whole work of Shakespeare etc.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >why did God create an endless universe?
                He didn't. And everything that you typed follows as a result of an improper belief so it will be ignored

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Then life is no different than the laws of thermodynamics. Fire is no different than how life is theorized to exist in regards to this discussion. A single sentient force (what we think is god) can make life happen in the same way mankind “created” fire.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Sentient and conscious beings are a little bit more complicated than natural laws. If conscious minds occurs here and there in an universe which is practically infinite, with infinite probabilities according to it's elements, it can be explained by chance. However, if conscious minds just pop up practically everywhere, that raises a question of why since it would have no plain purpose like natural laws have and they can be just explained with circumstances.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >, if there's no aliens, there's likely no God(s)
          not logical

  17. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >scientists saying something moronic in regards to the existence of aliens
    Name a more iconic duo.
    Seriously, I hate that all the people that go that route in stem are uncreative fricknuts who can't fathom anything that isn't identical to what they've already seen.
    >Well life on earth developed in a certain way so obviously life anywhere else in the almost infinite (known) universe would have to develop in the exact same way. Duh
    >We're carbon-based life. So any aliens would have to be too. I've never seen a non-carbon-based lifeform, so they don't exist. Thus aliens don't exist.
    Jesus christ it's so fricking infuriating

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      arent there bacteria not based on carbon in lakes under antarctica ?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Imagine being this much of a subhuman moron. The reason for this is that literally all other elemant aside from silicon is absolute fricking ass at making complex structures and it's literally impossible for them to create anything as complex as an RNA strand.

      It's not about creativity, it's you being a dumbfrick moron that doesn't know why the shit you and youe fellow redditors make up is literally impossible.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >thing would have to be outside of what we currently understand
        >therefore thing is impossible

        can't believe photons were impossible before 1964. how the hell did we get around without light? haha.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >thinks something will change in basic fricking chemistry
          Again, literal subhuman moron that doesn't understand shit why his moronic fantasies are not considered by the evil stem people.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >all elements on earth = all elements in the universe
            the le science has been le settled. chemistry is over.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              something will change in basic fricking chemistry

              haha can you imagine if our ideas about basic chemistry had changed at all?

              lmao

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Lol, all the elemants on earth are practically all elements in the universe as some can only be created in a lab setting, has a half life in the milliseconds and are absolutely fricking garbage for creating structures with even if they had longer half lives since they're so unstable and heavy.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >silicon aliens on another planet creating new elements in THEIR labs

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >what is the periodic table

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            something will change in basic fricking chemistry

            haha can you imagine if our ideas about basic chemistry had changed at all?

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >yeah bro, the development from literal pseudo science alchamists doing guess work to modern understanding of chemistry can happen again!

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                i mean, yeah?

                Einstein basically called quantum mechanics spooky bullshit. science isn't "done". do you think we won't look back at some of our current ideas as primitive?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                No because there are 10 billion pajeets working on quantum mechanics and making no progress

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                AI will solve itself, then solve this.

                trust me bro. i've coded some Python and i used to read the LessWrong blog. tech is the future. all other fields are obsolete.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Problem is that you're just an underage moron parroting shit you don't understand. Yes, it's very much possible and most likely will be current ideas that are seen as primitive in the future. But these won't be related to the fricking basics. Nothing will change the fact that you can'r make Ne02 solid blocks at room temperature and atmospheric pressure or some shit like that. It's you just grossly misunderstanding what this can be applied to.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                i'm in my 30s, i studied STEM and used to be a stalwart atheist. (i would have described myself as a rationalist and a determinist at the time.)

                i outgrew it.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Good for you, still doesn't change the fact that you parrot shit you have a poor grasp of.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                It literally could and most probably will. The fact that you are so short sighted as to not understand that is actually hilarious. I’m sure Plato thought the same thing about the classical elements.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >is so fricking moronic of a subhuman that he thinks modern understanding of chemistry is comparable to some fat frick greek 3000 years ago that made up shit in his head to try to explain the world around him

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >shitting on the groundbreaking notion of metaphysics and a cosmogony based on logic
                Shiggy, peak agitated autistic shitwit.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Continental drift didn’t exist before 1967 either don’t ya know? It’s almost as if what is accepted as true by scientists is constantly changing and is far more trial and error than most people seem to believe.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            i suppose the difference with aliens is they might be really upset you didn't believe in them.

            maybe they'll be cool with it, we have no idea what their culture is like. but you could really be hurting their feelings, what if they're monitoring our communications right now?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >I can't do it so it's impossible
        Jesus christ, you sound like one of these arrogant stem dipshits with no imagination

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      wasn't there a whole section in Carl Sagan's Cosmos that explained this pretty well?

      yeah alien life is going to be weird: floating spores or something instead of humans-but-green. they might not have brains or neurons, but why rule out intelligence as we understand it? we're on the cusp of creating ARTIFICIAL intelligence, right now.

      cloud-bros just couldn't have language, or reasoning, or creativity? why not?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >we're on the cusp of creating ARTIFICIAL intelligence, right now.
        no we're not.
        a language program is not AI. chatbots are just data crawlers. google is not sentient and never will be.
        the mind-body problem is still unsolved, so is the true nature of consciousness. trying to emulate a human brain with processing power will most likely lead nowhere in terms of AI

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >why rule out intelligence as we understand it?
          ditto for AI, anon?

          we've come up with "intelligence tests" for both humans and computers. computers can pass many of them.

          granted we don't understand consciousness or the mind, but if we managed to simulate a mind 1:1, is that not then a mind? does it have to be organic? what about some weird hybrid: we install a robo-brain into a foetus in utero?

          hell even "life" is a tricky one. 90% of this board can't reproduce, that makes them un-alive by some definitions.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      They just do that so they can help the government deny the existence of aliens or whatever. A majority of them don’t actually believe in that dumb statement, it’s just a dishonest bad faith tactic. Or at least it has to be, I refuse to believe someone like George Lucas understood this better than most harvard scientists or whatever.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Pretty much. Stemlords are generally incredibly uncreative and most of them struggle to write a basic essay without repeating themselves 100 times. They never get called out on this however.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      The laws of chemistry preclude any other element from forming the complex structures necessary for life.

      >all elements on earth = all elements in the universe
      the le science has been le settled. chemistry is over.

      Correct, unless you want to argue mathematicians somehow missed a bunch of small integers.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >mathematicians getting numbers wrong

        anon do you know what the definition of a kilogram is?

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Do you know what an integer is?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >Correct, unless you want to argue mathematicians somehow missed a bunch of small integers.
        Any atomic researcher will tell you that there are stable elements that haven't been discovered yet if our current atomic model is correct.
        You're literally the worst version of dunning-kruger.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          No they wont. A half life of seconds for elements that can't even be created in supernovas is not "stable". You heard about the island of stability and now you think you're a genius because you have no idea what the frick magic numbers, strong force, nuclear shells, or Pauli exclusion are. Kiol yourself, midwit homosexual.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >dunning-kruger in effect once again
            Why do you keep arguing about something you clearly don't understand?
            >the island of stability isn't real because I say so!

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              It's neat that you proved my point by completely ignoring all the nuclear chemistry concepts I mentioned and only bringing up the singular pop-sci buzzword you've read about.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Your concepts are unfounded and plain wrong. I'm not going to write an entire essay on how stupid you are because you wouldn't read it anyway.
                You clearly don't understand what "stable" even refers to. And you've stupidly fallen back on the idea that, because we haven't been able to create them on earth yet, they don't exist anywhere in the universe. Stop replying to me. You're so stupid it hurts.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Those concepts are the underpinning of the predicted island of stability, you fricking moron. I accept your concession.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >I win because I'm too dumb to understand my own moronation
                Oh, it shows.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                You are arguing that the island of stability is real because of atomic researchers, but also that the basic well-established concepts atomic researchers believe in, the concepts that lead us to believe in an island of stability, are wrong because you're a brainlet who thought I was invoking them in an attempt to disprove its existence.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >can't even understand basic english
                >strawmanning instead of trying to comprehend
                >thinks he's smart
                Remind me how you're not a shining example of dunning-kruger? I know I've said it a few times but you keep dismissing it so I'm curious as to why when you literally embody every facet of it?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Yes, all you seem to be able to do is mindlessly repeat pop-sci buzzwords.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Be honest, you're esl right?

  18. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Maybe life can be created in various ways.

  19. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >it took a series of miracles
    Are scientists finally realizing The Truth?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous
  20. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    *Life as we understand it is extremely unlikely to be found in our observable universe with this current generation of technology
    FTFY The ego of scientists is insane.

  21. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >miracles
    Ah yes such a scientific concept.

  22. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I won't trust a "scientific" who uses words such as "miracle".
    If there a chance over a billion and there's a trillion stars then we're not alone.
    Simple as, what a fricking homosexual.
    Who's the piece of shit who posted this anyway? I am talking to you little piece of shit.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >we're not alone 'cuz the universe is, like, super big and stuff
      You gays are as bad as those who say there's a god

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      it’s funny how these rational impartial thinkers suddenly stop trusting the much more intelligent and informed scientists once it contradicts their emotionally invested moron star trek shit. you’re dumb as frick

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        a scientist should be sceptical (classical Greek sense, not modern "skepticism")

        a scientist should not be rational (any more than he should be an atheist)

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Read lmao

      Doesn't matter how inconceivably large the universe is if the probability of life emerging is far smaller than the universe is large and failing to understand this is honestly kind of brainlet. The 100 nucleotides length RNA required for even the simplest self-replication capabilities literally is statistically impossible to randomly have emerged anywhere else in our observable universe. Either something changes in our understanding of abiogenesis, or we definitely are alone

      Then kys

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >Man reads tabloid headline and complains about it not being scientific enough

  23. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    What existed before the universe and what exists outside of it?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      God

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        It's 2023 AD and people still be asking this question

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      NOTHING! stfu! don’t ask that! nothing exploded into everything chud moron

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >before
      No one fricking knows. Unironically outside the scope of what we could possibly even guess at.
      >outside
      Nothing (tangible). If astronomical observations are accurate (huge if), then the edge of the universe isn't like a wall or anything, it's just the furthest distance from the centre that anything has reached since the big bang. This implies that there's an infinite amount of space. Which is a logical problem because space isn't actually nothing.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      anon, we don't even know what the universe is, much less what isn't the universe.
      all we have is questions. the more we learn the more questions we have, the more we discover the less we know.
      but we have a lot of time to research.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        homie there is no "universe", space is a lie fed to you by the government.

        What we should be focused on is breaking the world government blockade around the Antarctic ice wall and reconnecting with the other continents and civilizations that exist outside of the containment zone that they have convinced us is our entire world. But nah, keep believing in space fairy tales. Black holes and magical dark matter. That stuff is definitely real.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous
        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          at last i truly see.

  24. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Breaking news: Scientists can't do science

  25. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >science proves life required miracles
    >god still isn't real somehow
    Uh kek?

  26. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    If life is so impossible maybe we should give birth to AI overlords asap. They can self replicate and solve space travel for us.

  27. 1 year ago
    Anonymous
    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Both computer generated btw

  28. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Unironic answer

  29. 1 year ago
    Anonymous
  30. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Great thread! This place gets fricking dumber by the day

  31. 1 year ago
    Anonymous
    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >Intelligent Des-ACK

  32. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    How come scientists can't even figure out how gravity works?

  33. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >for humans to evolve

  34. 1 year ago
    Anonymous
    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      I was a christian but this comic made me an atheist
      heil science

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      I was an industrialist but this comic made me an anprim
      heil nothing

  35. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    They came to this conclusion through use of statistics (which are always limited and fail to capture the true scale and chaos of the universe) combined with blatant guesswork and assumptions. Nice for them to justify their funding and to get in the newspapers I suppose.

  36. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    There are planets out there with other life on them, but there is no other planet with intelligent life. We are it. The universe has existed for billion and billions of years longer than Earth has been around but there has been zero signs of any kind of intelligent life despite the billions and billions of years head start these other galaxies have had on ours.

  37. 1 year ago
    Anonymous
    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Damn that's some reddit

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      not reading that schizo shit

  38. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Life is a pile of space shit anyway who cares? We're about as important as rocks

  39. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Space is a meme

  40. 1 year ago
    Anonymous
  41. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    no one told them about Sumers

  42. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I hate pop-sci redditors so much it's unreal.

  43. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Such Gaussian thinking yet here we are.

  44. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    The same scientist will then tell me the covid vaccine is safe yea i'm good.

  45. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >scientists only learned how bikes stay upright in the last 5 years (it's not a gyroscope from the wheels)
    >but they can totally say what conditions are needed for anything resembling life to exist and whether or not those conditions exist in the almost infinite universe

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      only learned how bikes stay upright in the last 5 years (it's not a gyroscope from the wheels)
      i can tell you this.

      it's the wheels. the wheels keep it upright.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >it's the wheels. the wheels keep it upright.
        That's such a vague non answer. Literally no one knows the answer without googling it (except for the people who discovered the real reason)

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          you mean while it's in motion?

          the wheels keep it upright. the bike doesn't fall because there are wheels in the way.

  46. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    The fact that we probably live in 1 of trillions of infinitely decohering quantum miltiverses makes it difficult to measure shit properly

  47. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >series of miracles

    Just say God you morons. And if God made Earth habitable for intelligent life, he could have easily done it for others. And if we ignore God, whose to say that other forms of intelligent life can only exist in Earth-like conditions? There could be intelligent aliens who will die within seconds of setting foot on Earth.

  48. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I love the idea of science, but as I get older I respect science less and less. I fricking hate the idea of the Fermi paradox, because even with all the intelligence of these people, not one of them seem to notice that the entire question is fricking moronic. "Where is all these other civilizations?" Uh, well Black person, they could be really close, universally speaking, but the sheer size of the universe means we can never know. Like here's an example. Let's say there's an ultra advanced civilization that popped up a million years ago, and they still exist now, but they live 100 million lightyears away. Given the speed of light, even of we could look right at them with a massive telescope, you wouldn't see them. You'd see how that space existed 100 million years ago. That is literally how light works, but these moronS can't grasp why they hear or see nothing in the vast expanse of space, which is insanely big, too big to ever comprehend, and have the fricking gall to be like "Hurr, why don't they talk to us?" BECAUSE THEY CAN'T, YOU ABSOLUTE MORONS. They don't know we're here either, and communication is also bound by the speed of light limit.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Fermi paradox is not science. It's pop science.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Yes, but it seeps into every space conversation and people still fall for it all the fricking time. Even the OP article is a spin off it.
        >Uhhhh, we can't see intelligent any life elsewhere, there for it doesn't exist sweety
        YOU CANT SEE INTELLIGENT LIFE, BECAUSE IT'S PROBABLY A BILLION LIGHTYEARS AWAY, MORON.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Jesus fricking Christ finally I thought I was the only one who obsessed over this.
      No one EVER talks about light and distance when talking about aliens and I have no fricking idea why.
      If a star we can look at is actually long dead and we're only seeing the light after it travelled for millions of years, then how the hell can we expect to find anything out there?
      Why does no one talk about this? Why is it I've only ever seen this idea talked about on fricking Cinemaphile of all place?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        what the frick people talk about this all the time

        hell the whole infinite star field + dying light thing is a paradox in itself, Olbers' paradox

        luckily quantum entanglement doesn't care about your speed of light "limitation"

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >I love the idea of science, but as I get older I respect science less and less

      For me, it's the Tully monster and the Venus of Willendorf causing me to realize so much of science is just overly credentialed nerds writing elaborate autistic fan fiction about the elaborate life styles of two dimensional smears they found on a rock and stone age novelty items, just to justify a steady paycheck.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Qrd on tully n' venus?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >I love the idea of science, but as I get older I respect science less and less

      For me, it's the Tully monster and the Venus of Willendorf causing me to realize so much of science is just overly credentialed nerds writing elaborate autistic fan fiction about the elaborate life styles of two dimensional smears they found on a rock and stone age novelty items, just to justify a steady paycheck.

      I'm not anti-science, I'm anti-scientism. I reject both "only my book has all the answers" religion AND "it's not real if we can't perceive it and replicate it in laboratories" science equally, for both are based on fundamentally false premises.

      The thing is this, you ask people "How do you know X?" and they'll probably reply by saying something like "Well, because it's in my science books." or "Well, because it's been peer-reviewed." or "Well, because it's been agreed upon by a majority of scientists.", but these are flimsy defences, because unless YOU can verify for yourself whether something is true or not either by OBSERVATION or by doing an experiment about it BY YOURSELF, you are relying essentially on external sources for your information and it is naïve to think that those sources don't have agendas.

      What the average person calls 'science' (which is actually just mainstream science) has been hijacked by politics, religion and corporations. So-called 'peer review' these days is usually nothing more than a circle-jerk. Just as people support the separation of church and state (and RIGHTFULLY so), I support the separation of SCIENCE and state. We owe it to our innate intelligence to QUESTION EVERYTHING and that includes EVERYTHING that I tell you!

      The 'science' that is telling you the covid vaccine is safe is the same 'science' that is telling you that men can be women.
      Remember that. If you politicise science, you kill the spirit of science (which is to question things).

      Most so-called 'scientists' today don't know their ass from their elbow and just unquestioningly repeat what their textbooks tell them to repeat.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        I kill the Science Buddha by mocking his title of prestige and just calling him by his humble true name "Knowledge".

        >I trust the Knowledge.
        >Dude, I'm a Knowledgeist!
        lmao

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Haha the latest sound bite that is driving me crazy is "evidence-based". It's all a goddamned cult
        >I support the separation of SCIENCE and state.
        But that doesn't confirm our evidence-based presuppositions! To transgress our knowledge is not scientific!

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >It's all a goddamned cult

          Exactly! These 'scientists' pretend that evidence and proof are the same thing. lol

  49. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >Aliens think I'm intelligent life

  50. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >It would have taken longer for life to evolve elsewhere than it took life to evolve here
    Why? Isn't the universe practically infinite, surely there's some other planet in some other galaxy with microbes living in the muck and developing cell walls

  51. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Anthropic principle. The universe is exactly tuned for us here on Earth to exist because we exist. In some other parallel universe everything is tuned for some other aliens

  52. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >IT'S IMPOSSIBLE FOR INTELLIGENT LIFE TO EXIST
    yet here you are hmmmmm...

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Man I miss this show like you wouldn't believe

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        the greatest argument against intelligent life on earth is I only got one season

  53. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >the universe is infinite
    That doesn't even make sense

  54. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    humans themselves aren’t even from Earth, so the entire premise of this argument is flawed to begin with

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Elaborate

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        No

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        humans are from other planet, they were brought here by something or someone, reasons are why uncanny valley exist, why we would have like that in our brains, if we are the only intelligent beings on this planet, the gravity of earth is a little much of our body, our internal clock work is supposed to run at 25 hours, not 24, many more reasons, some sound insane, but some sound resonable

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Half true. We are hybrids

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >Tfw we were mutts all along

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      You're right. Humans are BILLIONS of years old and are NOT NATIVE to Earth. Here is merely SOME evidence (though DEFINITELY not ALL of the evidence) suggesting not only a human presence on Earth BILLIONS of years ago, but also suggesting complex human civilisations on Earth BILLIONS of years ago:

      * A human skull fragment from Hungary dated between 250,000 and 450,000 years ago
      * A human footprint with accompanying paleoliths (stones deliberately chipped into a recognisable tool type), bone tools, hearths and shelters, discovered in France and dated 300,000 to 400,000 years
      * Paleoliths in Spain, a partial human skeleton and paleoliths in France; two English skeletons, one with associated paleoliths, ALL at least 300,000 years old
      * Skull fragments and paleoliths in Kenya and advanced paleoliths, of modern human manufacture, in the Olduvai Gorge in Tanzania, dated between 400,000 and 700,000 years
      * Neoliths (the most advanced stone tools and utensils) in China of a type that indicate full human capacity, dated to 600,000 years
      * Hearths, charcoal, human femurs and broken animal bones, all denoting modern humanity, in Java, dated to 830,000 years
      * An anatomically modern human skull discovered in Argentina and dated between 1 million and 1.5 million years (eoliths -chipped pebbles, thought to be the earliest known tools- at Monte Hermoso, also in Argentina, are believed to be between 1 and 2.5 million years old).
      * A human tooth from Java yielding a date between 1 and 1.9 million years
      * Incised bones, dated between 1.2 and 2.5 million years, have been found in Italy
      * Discoveries of paleoliths, cut and charred bones at Xihoudu in China and eoliths from Diring Yurlakh in Siberia dated to 1.8 million years
      * Eoliths in India, paleoliths in England, Belgium, Italy and Argentina, flint blades in Italy, hearths in Argentina, a carved shell, pierced teeth and even two human jaws all bearing a minimum date of 2 million years (end of part 1)

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        (start of part 2) Curiously enough, several of the very earliest artifact discoveries display a truly extraordinary level of sophistication. In Idaho, for example, a 2-million-year-old clay figurine was unearthed in 1912. But even this discovery does not mark an outer limit. Bones, vertebrae and even complete skeletons have been found in Italy, Argentina and Kenya. Their minimum datings range from 3 million to 4 million years. A human skull, a partial human skeleton and a collection of neoliths discovered in California have been dated in excess of 5 million years. A human skeleton discovered at Midi in France, paleoliths found in Portugal, Burma and Argentina, a carved bone and flint flakes from Turkey all have a minimum age of 5 million years.
        How far back can human history be pushed with discoveries like these? The answer seems to be a great deal further than orthodox science currently allows. As if the foregoing discoveries were not enough, we need to take account of:
        * Paleoliths from France dated between 7 and 9 million years
        * An eolith from India with a minimum dating of 9 million years
        * Incised bones from France, Argentina and Kenya no less than 12 million years old
        * More paleolith discoveries from France, dated at least 20 million years ago
        * Neoliths from California in excess of 23 million years
        * Three different kinds of paleoliths from Belgium with a minimum dating of 26 million years
        * An anatomically modern human skeleton, neoliths and carved stones found at the Table Mountain, California and dated at least 33 million years ago
        But even 33 million years is not the upper limit. A human skeleton found in Switzerland is estimated to be between 38 and 45 million years old. France has yielded up eoliths, paleoliths, cut wood and a chalk ball, the minimum ages of which range from 45 to 50 million years.
        There's still more. (end of part 2)

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          (start of part 3) In 1960, H. L. Armstrong announced in Nature magazine the discovery of fossil human footprints near the Paluxy River, in Texas. Dinosaur footprints were found in the same strata. In 1983, the Moscow News reported the discovery of a fossilised human footprint next to the fossil footprint of a three-toed dinosaur in the Turkamen Republic. Dinosaurs have been extinct for approximately 65 million years.
          In 1983, Professor W. G. Burroughs of Kentucky reported the discovery of three pairs of fossil tracks dated to 300 million years ago. They showed left and right footprints. Each print had five toes and a distinct arch. The toes were spread apart like those of a human used to walking barefoot. The foot curved back like a human foot to what appeared to be a human heel. There was a pair of prints in the series that showed a left and right foot. The distance between them is just what you'd expect in modern human footprints.
          In December 1862, The Geologist carried news of a human skeleton found 27.5 m (90 ft) below the surface in a coal seam in Illinois. The seam was dated between 286 and 320 million years. It's true that a few eoliths, skull fragments and fossil footprints, however old, provide no real backing for the idea of advanced prehistoric human civilisations.
          But some other discoveries do.
          In 1968, an American fossil collector named William J. Meister found a fossilised human shoe print near Antelope Spring, Utah. There were trilobite fossils in the same stone, which means it was at least 245 million years old. Close examination showed that the sole of this shoe differed little, if at all, from those of shoes manufactured today.
          In 1897, a carved stone showing multiple faces of an old man was found at a depth of 40 m (130 ft) in a coal mine in Iowa. The coal there was of similar age. (end of part 3)

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            (start of part 4) A piece of coal yielded up an encased iron cup in 1912. Frank J. Kenwood, who made the discovery, was so intrigued he traced the origin of the coal and discovered it came from the Wilburton Mine in Oklahoma. The coal there is about 312 million years old.
            In 1844, Scottish physicist Sir David Brewster reported the discovery of a metal nail embedded in a sandstone block from a quarry in the north of England. The head was completely encased, ruling out the possibility that it had been driven in at some recent date. The block from which it came is approximately 360 million years old.
            On 22 June 1844, The Times reported that a length of gold thread had been found by workmen embedded in stone close to the River Tweed. This stone too was around 360 million years old.
            Astonishing though these dates may appear to anyone familiar with the orthodox theory of human origins, they pale in comparison with the dates of two further discoveries.
            According to Scientific American, dated 5 June 1852, blasting activities at Meeting House Hill, in Dorchester, Massachusetts, unearthed a metallic, bell-shaped vessel extensively decorated with silver inlays of flowers and vines. The workmanship was described as 'exquisite'. The vessel was blown out of a bed of Roxbury conglomerate dated somewhat earlier than 600 million years.
            In 1993, Michael A. Cremo and Richard L. Thompson reported the discovery 'over the past several decades' of hundreds of metallic spheres in a pyrophyllite mine in South Africa. The spheres are grooved and give the appearance of having been manufactured. If so, the strata in which they were found suggest they were manufactured 2.8 BILLION years ago. (end of part 4)

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              (start of part 5) What are we to make of these perplexing discoveries? They cannot simply be dismissed. If even ONE of these discoveries is TRUE (and I believe that MANY if not ALL of these discoveries are TRUE), then it changes EVERYTHING that modern mainstream anthropologists THOUGHT they knew about the human species. (end)

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        (start of part 2) Curiously enough, several of the very earliest artifact discoveries display a truly extraordinary level of sophistication. In Idaho, for example, a 2-million-year-old clay figurine was unearthed in 1912. But even this discovery does not mark an outer limit. Bones, vertebrae and even complete skeletons have been found in Italy, Argentina and Kenya. Their minimum datings range from 3 million to 4 million years. A human skull, a partial human skeleton and a collection of neoliths discovered in California have been dated in excess of 5 million years. A human skeleton discovered at Midi in France, paleoliths found in Portugal, Burma and Argentina, a carved bone and flint flakes from Turkey all have a minimum age of 5 million years.
        How far back can human history be pushed with discoveries like these? The answer seems to be a great deal further than orthodox science currently allows. As if the foregoing discoveries were not enough, we need to take account of:
        * Paleoliths from France dated between 7 and 9 million years
        * An eolith from India with a minimum dating of 9 million years
        * Incised bones from France, Argentina and Kenya no less than 12 million years old
        * More paleolith discoveries from France, dated at least 20 million years ago
        * Neoliths from California in excess of 23 million years
        * Three different kinds of paleoliths from Belgium with a minimum dating of 26 million years
        * An anatomically modern human skeleton, neoliths and carved stones found at the Table Mountain, California and dated at least 33 million years ago
        But even 33 million years is not the upper limit. A human skeleton found in Switzerland is estimated to be between 38 and 45 million years old. France has yielded up eoliths, paleoliths, cut wood and a chalk ball, the minimum ages of which range from 45 to 50 million years.
        There's still more. (end of part 2)

        All this means is our methods of dating do not function properly. The universe is only like 30000 years old

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >The universe is only like 30000 years old
          best i can do is 6000

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >All this means is our methods of dating do not function properly.
          >The universe is only like 30000 years old

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >The universe is only like 30000 years old
          best i can do is 6000

          Nope. The universe is actually 155 trillion years old according to the Vedic scriptures and that's just how old the current incarnation of this universe is as there was an infinite number of previous versions of this universe before the current version of this universe and there will be an infinite number of versions of this universe after the current version of this universe. The Oscillating Universe Theory is true. There are an infinite number of universes and each universe goes through an infinite cycle of 'births' (Big Bangs) and 'deaths' (Big Crunches).

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Vedicism is wrong

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Based

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              Thanks.

  55. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    We been knew this sis

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      AI post

  56. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    time is non linear and there are multiple infinite multiverses therefore infinite aliens exist right now

  57. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    There's reports of UFOs every day but homosexuals like this will claim aliens are impossible because of some math they made up in their head. Clickbait journalism.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Ufos are demonic forces. Also reports mean nothing

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >Ufos are demonic forces
        You schizos will get the rope when the day comes.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          It is quite literally just as likely that they are demonic forces than them being aliens you psuedointellectual frickbag

  58. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Why did they launch probes explaining what we are and how to get there? Werent they worried someone hostile might show up?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      publicity stunt.

      also it's just funny that if there ARE aliens, the first thing they see is a guy flashing his dick waving at them. (the joke is for us: NOT them.)

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >we confirm aliens
      >get to be their pet or free from existan
      Sounds like a win-win

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        you will live and be slaughtered like you slaughter chickens and pigs

  59. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Never Let Me Go (2010)? I felt really alone after watching this movie for some reason.

  60. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    How godless does a country have to be to be as obsessed with aliens as America is... it's mind blowing that the capital of the porn industry still has god in their constitution and presidents pretend god has anything to do with America

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      they're free to choose to worship Him (this is good) but they either
      1. don't (this is bad)
      or
      2. go absolutely insane (this is worse)

      found out about "Southern Baptists" the other day, Americans just make shit up at complete random

  61. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    https://archive.4plebs.org/tv/search/image/kzkLyjc5j2KjhzEjxnQe2w/

    What's his end game?

  62. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Why aren't there any other species at the level of humans on Earth? Because there can be only one intelligent species. If intelligent aliens existed they would already control everything. Simple as.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >If intelligent aliens existed they would already control everything.
      Cool it with the anti-Semitism

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      certain mushrooms form a mycorrhizal network and communicate with a level of intelligence beyond our comprehension

      also they're laughing at us about this (the dicks)

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Poisoning the water and the land, cutting down and burning the trees, and causing mass extinction is not intelligent behavior. It destroys the very basis of our survival. To do this and then pretend to be the only intelligent species on the planet is an extra level of moronation. Other species communicate, others use tools, others cooperate, others play; but none of them is so insane as to kill the earth for toys and shiny rocks. You will say they don’t have the capacity— I say they have the wisdom to refrain.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        True and fricking based. Dolphins are a more intelligent species than humans. As far as I'm concerned, dolphins are people.

        >Verification not required.

  63. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Ad astra is literally that

  64. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Tbh the reason why people refuse to accept that fact is the fact that being alone in the entire universe is far far more depressing to accept.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      it's not the loneliness in my view, it's the size.

      scientists should just lie and say there's our solar system and the final boss is Pluto, then that's it. frick off with the Lovecraft bullshit.

  65. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >scientists discover that intelligent life randomly occurring is impossible
    Wow it's almost like we were specifically designed. If only there were some sort of book that had been telling us that for thousands of years. So glad the scientists made such a groundbreaking "discovery".

  66. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Which is worse: being completely alone? Or the universe being teeming with life but since it's expanding and everything moving away from each other, we will never be able to reach any other worthwhile star system and certainly not another galaxy before dying out?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >beam light to us with a greeting in English
      >future Earthlings speaking Futurese: "haha, wonder what that is"

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      God designed us to save the universe from itself...

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        How’s that working out?

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          no problem, janny will clean that up

  67. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >It took a series of miracles for humans to evolve
    >NOOOOOO NOT LIKE THAT

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >NOOOOOO NOT THAT GOD

  68. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >miracles
    >evolve
    You can't make this shit up.

  69. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >scientists say aliens don't exist because miracles happened
    what a shitty fricking article
    have a nice day

  70. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    What if life on earth wasn't by random chance.

  71. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Yes, good goy, there's no life out there. Your money needs to go to Shaniqua and her eight aspiring soundcloud rappers instead.

  72. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    The Miller-Urey experiments showed that life formed pretty easily in the environment of the early Earth. Now multiply that by every drop of water in the ocean and every rocky planet in the galaxy and suddenly that "miracle" becomes inevitable. Some homosexuals need an anal probe to convince them they aren't so special.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      The experiment also supports electric universe theory neat

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Do Christcucks keep this hidden? A very basic chemistry setup can produce all of the organic amino acids after a week. Wtf

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >well if you take what we know we need and apply the conditions we know we need we can design life
        >durrrr do christcucks hate this?!?!!
        Not to mention both the people this is named after were and continued to need religious

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >very basic chemistry setup can produce all of the organic amino acids after a week.

        Simply leaving mud out in the sun creates a material indistinguishable from the earliest mud bricks, but that's not the same thing as those mud bricks spontaneously arranging themselves into a ziggurat.

        This isn't even an argument in support of creationism, just pointing out that the Miller-Urey experiment is overrated popsci bullshit cope. Creating a beaker full of amino acids isn't the same thing as creating life in a lab

  73. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >it took a series of miracles for humans to evolve

    I thought scientists didn't believe in miracles? Frick all scientists, israelites the lot of 'em.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      thermodynamic miracles bro

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        You can take man out of religion but you can't take the religion out of man

  74. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Yeah right. Imagine the movies these other life forms have made that you will never watch.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Aliens have made movies that are inconceivably more kino than any movie made on Earth.

  75. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    It's coms.

    While one faction is heating up the Blue Beans, this faction here is trying to cool it down (knowing that it won't work because all the fake-able angles have been sussed).

    Next up with be "multi-verse theory" trying to pitch the idea that Blue Beans aliens can be presented as visitors from another timeline or dimension.

    Basically they want to have their "empty universe/speck of nothing in a big nothing" cake and eat it too (but we can still have diverse fake alien visitors zooming around telling us to suck off Black folk and accept a personal carbon debit system because there's only One Earth in this reality doodz).

  76. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >new paper
    >same decades old theories
    ah huh

  77. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I actually find this hypothesis more attractive for a variety of reasons.

    First being alone and the first intelligent beings is a huge privilege and also kinda kino. We are solely responsible for our future and if we want we can waste it and destroy ourselves completely.

    Secondly whatever is out there, and still hasn't contacted us, can't be good. I'm Dark Forrest pilled on this matter.

  78. 1 year ago
    Anonymous
    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      homie is he jerking off

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous
  79. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    if anything, believing the fact we are completely alone on this planet in the universe is horrifying. and i don't even mean humanity, i mean anything. animals, plants, you fricking name it. the ultimate blackpill

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >believing the fact

      It's not a fact though. If we're being honest, we don't know whether or not life exists beyond Earth. But it probably does based on the sheer number of planets in the universe.

  80. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    One need only look at Earth's history to see how unlikely it is for intelligent life to exist. There were several extinction events basically resetting evolution before intelligent life happened to exist in this iteration. So not only does a planet need to have the exact right habitable climate and the unknown circumstances for life to spontaneously appear, but it also needs a species of animal to accidently cook food and eat it instead of just eating grass forever or dieing in an extinction event. Also, when considering the completely ridiculous distances between the finite amount of planets that meet these conditions, it becomes very clear why we haven't encountered other intelligent life.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >One need only look at Earth's history to see how unlikely it is for intelligent life to exist. There were several extinction events basically resetting evolution before intelligent life happened to exist in this iteration. So not only does a planet need to have the exact right habitable climate and the unknown circumstances for life to spontaneously appear, but it also needs a species of animal to accidently cook food and eat it instead of just eating grass forever or dieing in an extinction event.

      Advanced life on Earth has existed for only a very brief period of its history and even more briefly when comparing it to the history of the universe. When framed that way, intelligent life has sprung up incredibly fast.

  81. 1 year ago
    Anonymous
  82. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    It may be the only one. And It's actually a parable about what went on in NASA in the 90s When they realized there was no evidence whatsoever for life anywhere else in the universe

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Ad Astra was very good in that aspect

  83. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >too boring for amerifats

  84. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    So there is a god and we are special and at the center of everything. and the earth is under a dome and space is fake and gay.

    Thank you science for bringing me to faith

  85. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Even if the chance is like 1 in a Trillion there's like a Septillion planets out there in the universe, there's no fricking way all out there is dead. What's likely impossible is that we'll ever effectively comunicate with them.

  86. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    What nonsense bible website did you pull this from? Looks like one of those ads that disguises themselves as a Facebook post

  87. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Oh my fauci...

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      why would chemtrails not be a thing

  88. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Not reading the rest of the thread, BUT
    Anyone who claims with confidence to know for sure anything about the possibility other intelligent life forming or existing/not-existing, is way out of their depth (Lower IQ people tend to be the most loudmouthed and sure of themselves)
    We have such incomplete information about this topic (creation of life, detecting intelligence in space) that anyone who claims to have any sort of certainty on this matter, is outing themselves as a moron
    Despite how far we've come in our technology and understanding of the world, we're only just beginning to scratch the surface of what's out there in space, and the nature of our Universe

    >t. religious person in STEM
    (reminder that Big Bang cosmology was proposed by a Catholic priest)

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Quality post
      >t. religious person in STEM
      What's your take on the buddhist idea that existence is dissolved and reformed trillions of times a second, like someone flipping a light switch on and off so fast that the light is all that appears to exist to us?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >We have such incomplete information about this topic
        and to add to this, for anyone bringing up ""statistics"" on this matter:
        Take a look at the Drake equation. Pretty much every variable in this equation is a complete unknown

        " an equation for the chance of a contactable alien civilization from another planet being in the Milky Way Galaxy"
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drake_equation

        [...]
        >What's your take on the buddhist idea that existence is dissolved and reformed trillions of times a second
        It's an intimidating thought, kinda scary. Definitely an interesting idea to explore, but it seems beyond our current scientific tools and understanding, so it's not something that can be answered right now using logic, rationality, and the Scientific method

        [...]
        This, except I wouldn't call it bullshit -- more like an overconfident educated guess. There's a lot of cult mentality in modern science; but there are also people who do admit the limits of their knowledge and make an earnest attempt to find the truth

        [...]
        see ()

        Not even quantum mechanics?
        >Entirely pointless like all Buddhist thought
        Ultimately you are correct. They even say so themselves. All teachings are rafts to be discarded once you get across the river.
        Fixed that for you

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >We have such incomplete information about this topic
      and to add to this, for anyone bringing up ""statistics"" on this matter:
      Take a look at the Drake equation. Pretty much every variable in this equation is a complete unknown

      " an equation for the chance of a contactable alien civilization from another planet being in the Milky Way Galaxy"
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drake_equation

      Quality post
      >t. religious person in STEM
      What's your take on the buddhist idea that existence is dissolved and reformed trillions of times a second, like someone flipping a light switch on and off so fast that the light is all that appears to exist to us?

      >What's your take on the buddhist idea that existence is dissolved and reformed trillions of times a second
      It's an intimidating thought, kinda scary. Definitely an interesting idea to explore, but it seems beyond our current scientific tools and understanding, so it's not something that can be answered right now using logic, rationality, and the Scientific method

      >The 100 nucleotides length RNA required for even the simplest self-replication capabilities literally is statistically impossible to randomly have emerged anywhere else in our observable universe.
      Scientists have absolutely no idea what the statistical probability is. All their models are bullshit.

      This, except I wouldn't call it bullshit -- more like an overconfident educated guess. There's a lot of cult mentality in modern science; but there are also people who do admit the limits of their knowledge and make an earnest attempt to find the truth

      Imo, if there's no aliens, there's likely no God(s). An empty(ish) universe suggests that we are just a lucky hit in infinity. There's plenty of room for miracles when there's infinite at question. However, if life was common through out universe, that would basically mean that there's a mechanism or even a law which promotes life in universe, it would be too absurd for such mechanism to exist for no reason whatsoever.

      T. Agnostic theist

      see ()

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Actually you can know. God created us, he didn't create endless form of life throughout the universe.

      Quality post
      >t. religious person in STEM
      What's your take on the buddhist idea that existence is dissolved and reformed trillions of times a second, like someone flipping a light switch on and off so fast that the light is all that appears to exist to us?

      Entirely pointless like all Buddhist thought

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >he didn't create endless form of life throughout the universe.

        Actually, he did.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >Actually you can know. God created us, he didn't create endless form of life throughout the universe.
        Sure, I can accept that from the faithful and spiritual side of me
        But we humans have the capability for rational thinking, and this is what brought us much of the results we have today in the modern world. You should not just discard the material explanations for things, nor do material explanations invalidate religious/spiritual ones, they go hand-in-hand
        Unfortunately a lot of people don't seem to understand that even logic and rationality has its limits and they defer to just saying "Science is the answer" without truly understanding it (see Goedel incompleteness, there are some truths in the world that just by logical nature, we may never be able to assert them)

        Look, saying that you are steadfast in your beliefs is not a way to meaningfully communicate ideas with other humans or to sway other people. People tend to communicate ideas rationally. I've also had my own personal religious revelations, but the only person who I can convince of this is myself; it's not going to sway anybody else. If you just claim something without tangible proof, you're going to look like a moron to anyone with any semblance of intelligence

        If you just accept a belief without challenging it, having doubts, grappling with it, looking at alternative viewpoints, and exploring aspects of it other than just the spiritual side... then personally I can't call that genuine belief, that's just sheeple mentality, doing or believing in something because you were told to

  89. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Babbies first anthropic principle.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *