What if we met life on mars and we were the intelligent ones...

CSU

ScumLord wrote: »

That's still an assumption. It's likely that only a particular part of a galaxy could produce a habitable zone.

The moon has also been instrumental in the development of life on earth so simply having an earth sized planet the right distance from a sun may not be enough.

Going by the history of this planet the human race is simply bizarre. We were a fluke that almost never happened. It's also likely drug use played a big part in our development from any other animal into a sentient being. If they don't have drugs on their planet any life that forms may never get to our level.

It seems highly likely that there is life out there but sentient life is such a long shot it could be very, very, very rare rather than an inevitable outcome of life.

...so we need to find some stoned Aliens - "The Hunt For The Goldilocks Stoners"


hurhur...


sry :pac:

Jesus Shaves

Whoever finds the other first is the most intelligent

Lyaiera

CSU wrote: »

...so we need to find some stoned Aliens - "The Hunt For The Goldilocks Stoners"


hurhur...


sry :pac:

That was some fine pun'ing.

Bravo!

Colmustard

Nuke them from orbit to be sure.

Teyla Emmagan

Hande hoche! wrote: »

Take off and nuke the entire site from orbit.

Colmustard wrote: »

Nuke them from orbit to be sure.

Seriously, we're not even the most intelligent life in this thread...

KTRIC

Possibly bouncing, followed by rolling, followed by rolling of the third type.

Kirby

Hande hoche! wrote: »

Take off and nuke the entire site from orbit.

johnnysmack wrote: »

Its the only way to be sure!

Teyla Emmagan wrote: »

Seriously, we're not even the most intelligent life in this thread...

:pac:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a88Z7YOh_us

Colmustard

Teyla Emmagan wrote: »

Seriously, we're not even the most intelligent life in this thread...

There is no intelligent life on Mars or this thread.

LoYL

ITS_A_BADGER wrote: »

The media seems to be all about the mars rover at the moment

How did they get there so quickly?

crazy cabbage

Either that or we could find a local to speak on our behalf. We would probably pick the stupidest most intoxicated guy we can find, tell him everything in detail and then fall around laughing as he tries to explain it to the rest of his planet from his cardboard box and tinfoil hat. It's what they did to us those alien bastards!

You are assuming that communication would be possilbe. I highly dout that we would be able to communicate with any ET.

Take the fact that monkeys DNA is 99% the same as ours. Can we communicate in any meangingful way with them? Nope. We might train the really 'smart' monkeys to push coloured buttons but no communication.

If wqe cant communicate with a life form that is 99% the same as us and that we have lived beside for thousands of years, what chance would we have communicating with an compartivly unintelegent ET?
No chance whatsoever.
The same would apply in reverse i would think.

If we cant communicate with them and they are a lot less intelegante than us, would we leave them alone?
I seriesly dout it. I think we should, but if history has anything to go by, we wouldn't

But then if the tables were reversed and a much more integelent life form than us landed on earth would they leave us alone if we didn't do the same to the untelegent beings?

ScumLord

crazy cabbage wrote: »

You are assuming that communication would be possilbe. I highly dout that we would be able to communicate with any ET.

I don't see why we couldn't communicate. There are even techniques for discovering meaning in communications we don't yet understand. It won't be just a case of us trying to understand them but we'd have two intelligent species working to understand each other. It would be much easier than even trying to understand a long dead language.

T

ake the fact that monkeys DNA is 99% the same as ours. Can we communicate in any meangingful way with them? Nope.

Yes we can. We can teach them sign language but even in the wild we know what wild chimps are trying to communicate. They don't have a verbal language which makes it difficult but we can communicate in a two way conversation. We can even do it with dogs.

CSU

crazy cabbage wrote: »

...

If we cant communicate with them and they are a lot less intelegante than us, would we leave them alone?
...

First thing out of their intergalactic mouths wud be G'day MATE!!!

It happens..:pac:

CSU

ScumLord wrote: »

I don't see why we couldn't communicate. There are even techniques for discovering meaning in communications we don't yet understand. It won't be just a case of us trying to understand them but we'd have two intelligent species working to understand each other. It would be much easier than even trying to understand a long dead language.

T Yes we can. We can teach them sign language but even in the wild we know what wild chimps are trying to communicate. They don't have a verbal language which makes it difficult but we can communicate in a two way conversation. We can even do it with dogs.

That hot Irish lady that works for Channel 4 Science (I think) was explaining chimp memory capacity and speed recognition...amazing stuff

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJAH4ZJBiN8

Colmustard

CSU wrote: »

That hot Irish lady that works for Channel 4 Science (I think) was explaining chimp memory capacity and speed recognition...amazing stuff

Liz Bonnin from "Bang goes the theory" good programme that. Chimps are smart they thought me the proper way to peel a banana

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nBJV56WUDng

ScumLord

Colmustard wrote: »

Chimps are smart they thought me the proper way to peel a banana

Lol, I use that method of pealing a banana, learned from that video. It's incredible that I had to find that out from a chimp it's clearly the best way of opening a banana.

crazy cabbage

ScumLord wrote: »

I don't see why we couldn't communicate. There are even techniques for discovering meaning in communications we don't yet understand. It won't be just a case of us trying to understand them but we'd have two intelligent species working to understand each other. It would be much easier than even trying to understand a long dead language.

prehaps. but i though the purpose of the tread was 'what if we met unintelegent things', like mushrooms or insects or spider like things...
Even if we met something intelegent (i am thinking dolphin like) who communicate using clicks and nosies that lie outside the treahold of human hearing, which is likely i would think), then what would we do?

ScumLord wrote: »

Yes we can. We can teach them sign language but even in the wild we know what wild chimps are trying to communicate. They don't have a verbal language which makes it difficult but we can communicate in a two way conversation. We can even do it with dogs.

I wouldn't really consider that communication as such. I would think of that more of conditioning them. when they see a picture of a sheep they hold up 2 fingers and if they do they get a banana. This is kinda spliting hairs but i dont really see that as communication as such. I could be wrong though.

Colmustard

ScumLord wrote: »

Lol, I use that method of pealing a banana, learned from that video. It's incredible that I had to find that out from a chimp it's clearly the best way of opening a banana.

LOL
Ditto.

steamengine

ScumLord wrote: »

Lol, I use that method of pealing a banana, learned from that video. It's incredible that I had to find that out from a chimp it's clearly the best way of opening a banana.

Maybe they got rid of us 'cos we're a bit on the slow side !

coffee_cake

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v--IqqusnNQ

Zoria

1ZRed wrote: »

Exploit them for our own benefit. That seems to be human nature.

I'm sure they'll make their way over to Ireland and laugh their holes off at what they're costing you.

John Doe1

Wouldn't it humorous if they were all shaped like mars bars

Zoria

John Doe1 wrote: »

Wouldn't it humorous if they were all shaped like mars bars

Not really, no.

ITS_A_BADGER

crazy cabbage wrote: »

prehaps. but i though the purpose of the tread was 'what if we met unintelegent things', like mushrooms or insects or spider like things...
Even if we met something intelegent (i am thinking dolphin like) who communicate using clicks and nosies that lie outside the treahold of human hearing, which is likely i would think), then what would we do?.

Im sure if we did come across a lifeform like that that NASA or whoever would have a few tests to see if a lifeform was intelligent or not,
but no i meant like if we came across lifeforms that had its own culture and traditions but werent as technological advanced as earth

KenSwee

Hande hoche! wrote: »

Take off and nuke the entire site from orbit.

Only way to be sure...

Wibbs

CSU wrote: »

That hot Irish lady that works for Channel 4 Science (I think) was explaining chimp memory capacity and speed recognition...amazing stuff

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJAH4ZJBiN8

Indeed it is, yet the average 8 year old(or younger) blows an adult chimp outa the water on cognitive prowess. Hell a 4 year old does. The ability that chimps show in such tests is not as big an indication of intelligence as it first appears. There is an element with humans where they think "oh we can't do that, therefore they must be clevererererer".

NOt necessarily. Look at people with cognitive faults like extreme autism or "idiot" savantism. Good example would be in art. Ask some 4 year old artistic extreme autistics to draw a car and they'll likely knock out a car drawing that looks bang on in perspective and form. It looks like a car. Ask a "normal" kid of the same age to draw a car and you'll likely get a flat 2D blocky looking yoke with all four wheels visible and a round faced mammy in the front. Is the Autistic more advanced? Not really(if impressive). They take a snapshot of "car" and reproduce it on paper. A photocopier can do that. The "normal" kid knows that a car has four wheels and mammy and daddy and bor and sis etc so will seek to reproduce that reality on paper. The latter is actually more accurate. There's more "truth" to it. As Picasso said, he could draw like Raphael when he was 8, but it took until he was in his 60's to draw like an 8 year old. He was always trying to seek the truth in reality that he could put on a canvas. That was much of what him and his mates were up to with Cubism.

The chimp might well recognise a photo of a car, but would be lost with a cubist painting of one. That for me is one of the big diffs in us humans. I suspect that's what made us very different to most humans that came before us. I suspect if we were to meet a Homo Erectus, they'd be much like extreme autistic folks. Very literal in interpretation. Yes they would be smart cookies, but without that extra spark that marks us out as different in the animal kingdom. That ability to know an object, beyond seeing an object.

On the alien front?

1) we have only one example of life and it only happened(as far as we know) the once on this "perfect" planet for it. We have no "aliens" here, never mind "out there". All life on this Earth is related. This may suggest that there is only one form of life possible, at least on planets like ours.

2) Until we find evidence of any life outside this planet any supposition, is well supposition even in the face of the huge numbers involved(surely there has to be??? stuff). While we can suppose that in a near infinte universe life must have gotten started elsewhere, one must also consider that even in a near infinite universe novelty and the one off must also exist. It has to exist by definition.

3) let's imagine life does exist out there. Then we have to question if intelligent life is out there. On this planet, our only example, intelligence in the modern human sense happened once. Just once, in the billions of years of it's existence and it nearly got wiped out a couple of times. Other adaptations? Flight? Insects, reptiles.dinosaurs, mammals, birds all came up with flight. Swimming? Goes triple. A shark looks like a fish, looks like a dolphin, looks like an ichthyosaur etc. Lots of examples of convergent evolution in response to selective pressures. Yet... Human level intelligence that means we become essentially the masters of the earth, certainly the potential to be and the potential to be masters of even more, like actual fiddling with the fabric of the universe? That only happens the once? I suspect at most, one animal/civilisation/intelligence per galaxy and until evidence to the contrary I'll stick by that.

admiralofthefleet

will the women folk have 3 diddys like in total recall

TheBegotten

TeddyTedson wrote: »

I wonder would female aliens make good lovers..

Get back to your ship, Commander!

crazy cabbage

Wibbs wrote: »

1) we have only one example of life and it only happened(as far as we know) the once on this "perfect" planet for it. We have no "aliens" here, never mind "out there". All life on this Earth is related. This may suggest that there is only one form of life possible, at least on planets like ours.

Wat are the most common ingerents in the universe in order? Hydrogen, heliem, oxygen, carbon and nitrogen. (i am excluding dark energy and dark matter)
What are we made of in order? hydrogen and oxygen, carbon and nitrogen.
This matches the universe exatly with the excaption of heliem (which is chemically inearth)

Wibbs wrote: »

2) Until we find evidence of any life outside this planet any supposition, is well supposition even in the face of the huge numbers involved(surely there has to be??? stuff). While we can suppose that in a near infinte universe life must have gotten started elsewhere, one must also consider that even in a near infinite universe novelty and the one off must also exist. It has to exist by definition.

So we are not unique based on what i just said above.. We are made up of the most common stuff that is out there for gods sake. If we were made up of some rare isotope of thulium, then maby you would have a point in saying that we are 'a one off'

Our chemistry is based on carbon. Carbon is the most cheimcally active element. If you were to try and create an element on which to base life you would have to make carbon. This is 4th most common thing out there. You can make more mollecules out of carbon than all the other elements combined.

Yea. Ok. So we haven't found life yet. We are looking though. and we havent exatly looked very far in fairness.
Actully doesn't all evidence suggests that mars was once a wet fertile place? A place that could have had micro organisms at one point a long time ago?

Wibbs wrote: »

3) let's imagine life does exist out there. Then we have to question if intelligent life is out there. On this planet, our only example, intelligence in the modern human sense happened once. Just once, in the billions of years of it's existence and it nearly got wiped out a couple of times. Other adaptations? Flight? Insects, reptiles.dinosaurs, mammals, birds all came up with flight. Swimming? Goes triple. A shark looks like a fish, looks like a dolphin, looks like an ichthyosaur etc. Lots of examples of convergent evolution in response to selective pressures. Yet... Human level intelligence that means we become essentially the masters of the earth, certainly the potential to be and the potential to be masters of even more, like actual fiddling with the fabric of the universe? That only happens the once? I suspect at most, one animal/civilisation/intelligence per galaxy and until evidence to the contrary I'll stick by that.

Basicly what you are asking is how did our brains develope? They doubled in size in aprox 2 million years. This is 10 times the rate of normal evolution and something unheard of. This is something that no scientist has a clue about. No current theorys stand up to scruttny. We were higher primates and had reached the plattoo of our evolution. Something very unique most of happened to set the scene for the unpresenedated (in any animal anywhere, ever) evolution of the brain. We dont have a clue what happened. We were just in the right place at the right time with the right tools and far enough along the evolutionary ladder (we were higher primates) to harnes whatever change happened. There is some 'strange' ideas that fit the picture but not accepted by the scientific community.

Pushtrak

Roadend wrote: »

No, its against the prime directive

Pft, that never stopped anyone.

Wibbs

crazy cabbage wrote: »

So we are not unique based on what i just said above.. We are made up of the most common stuff that is out there for gods sake. If we were made up of some rare isotope of thulium, then maby you would have a point in saying that we are 'a one off'

My point was that of all the life on this planet over 3 billion years we are the only example of... well... us. We're about the rarest adaptation there is on Earth.

Yea. Ok. So we haven't found life yet. We are looking though. and we havent exatly looked very far in fairness.
Actully doesn't all evidence suggests that mars was once a wet fertile place? A place that could have had micro organisms at one point a long time ago?

"suggest/could" and that's about it. If life is discovered on Mars I'll be well chuffed and all ears, but until then...

Basicly what you are asking is how did our brains develope? They doubled in size in aprox 2 million years. This is 10 times the rate of normal evolution and something unheard of. This is something that no scientist has a clue about. No current theorys stand up to scruttny. We were higher primates and had reached the plattoo of our evolution. Something very unique most of happened to set the scene for the unpresenedated (in any animal anywhere, ever) evolution of the brain. We dont have a clue what happened. We were just in the right place at the right time with the right tools and far enough along the evolutionary ladder (we were higher primates) to harnes whatever change happened. There is some 'strange' ideas that fit the picture but not accepted by the scientific community.

Actually we have a pretty good grasp on much of our recent evolution, no odd theories required. The fact of it however is odd.

Like I said some reckon in an infinite universe it's a given lots of creatures like us wll show up, my contention is, that until solid evidence of life beyond here, never mind intelligent life, we're on a hiding to nothing. In an infinite universe there is just as likely the possibiity of the unique the once off. A near infinite universe of possibilities means that there are billions of once offs. We may well yet be one of them.