Envision, Create, Share

Welcome to HBGames, a leading amateur game development forum and Discord server. All are welcome, and amongst our ranks you will find experts in their field from all aspects of video game design and development.

Do You Believe in Higher Lifeforms in the Universe?

I don't know if you noticed but the stars and planets in the universe seem to be moving away from one point. Meaning at one time they could have been together. Random, but opens a lot of doors. Now I do believe God created the universe for our curiosity and not for the absolute answer for our beliefs. And that He did make the universe in an instance. That is why everything is moving away. I can't pinpoint the location from where it is moving because the universe is too vast. But that could be something to think about.

I view the universe as a big box like in a 3d program. Unlimited space, but has only expanded so far. If you focus on the middle of that space and put an explosion of some kind there, an explosion that could produce life from nothing, and let the debris of that explosion go through time, we would create the universe. I kinda base my ideas from this. It may not be logic, but whats faith if you don't believe.
 
That sounds incredibly similar to the Central Star in Guardianism.  However, we're getting off-topic...again.  If you wish to discuss religion, you can always PM me, but I think we've already gone too far in this topic.

It's really easy to get off-topic in this discussion.  It must be caused by the chain that exists for each person linking this subject to religion and/or beliefs.  It may also be caused by the fact that we've pretty much discussed everything there is to discuss so far.
 
well, I believe two separate things, depending on the circumstances in which our universe exists.

assuming the theory that there is no end to the universe is true, and that time will continue forever, and that planets are everywhere in the universe, then i have no doubt that there was, is, or will, be intelligent life somewhere out in the universe, and that it was, is, or will be, more advanced then we are. ever heard an infinite number of monkeys smashing on an infinite number of keyboards for an infinite amount of time will eventually produce the works of Shakespeare? I am basing this on the same principle. infinite amounts of planets exist for an infinite amount of time must eventually produce super intelligent beings.

however, if time, the universe, or the number of planets is limited somehow, then i still believe there is life elsewhere in the universe due to the mind-numbing amount of planets. However, i cannot be 100% certain.
 
I don't want to sound moddy or something, but isn't the topic 'what do you believe' and not 'what is the right answer'?

Either way, I think Xiaxis is right on the fact that we are so not even a needle in an haystack, more like an atom of a needle. Now let's just assume for this paragraph only that their's life out there. Might be higher, might be lower, but let's say their equal. If that's true, they would be like us, and therefor not have found a way yet to detect/reach other plants further then their own and little surroundings. The argument: why haven't they found us is - I believe - pretty lame, for the same reason you could both say because we didn't either or they have, we just don't know, but also they have and out governments are covering it up (now I don't believe that's true, but ok).

The Cambrian Explosion of Life is usually one thing people take on when they try to 'disprove' natural selection. Now even Charles Darwin believed it was one of the main objections to his theory. However, it is already proved that before this so called explosion more simpler life did exist and it is also believed that this explosion is a big exaggeration of what really happened. I think the most simple example is looking at humanity. We evolved in a relatively unfeasible short time, if you compare it with other life forms - but we did evolve, I believe. Also said: The explosion may not have been a significant evolutionary event. It may represent a threshold being crossed; for example a threshold in genetic complexity that allowed a vast range of morphological forms to be employed. [here].

The 1 in a something chance by Diaforetikos is such a stupid nothing. How did you get this number? You just sucked it out of your thumb? Either way, even if, stress the if, it was remotely true what you said - do you need to be able to see to know? What of radio signals? alpha- beta- gamma- delta-radiation... Who says that if we aren't able to see them directly means that they can't see us?
Please, argument with facts and not just pure believes. But going over your believes, I watched the video you posted and researched the guy. This man has a religious background - he isn't even a scientist. Can you find me two non-believers that state the exact same things as he said? It's just like fat people saying that they aren't fat.

Scientifically, the reason that those stars are moving apart of each other is not because god made the universe in such a hurry and didn't got time to lay everything out nicely, but because the universe has been expanding from the beginning of times or let's just say the Big Bang. Yes, live can be created by these explosions, it's even proved that under high voltage the basic elements (our atmosphere before life struck our planet) can be formed to complex molecules like amino acids (DNA is built of these base-blocks as the base-blocks of DNA exist of amino acids). You don't need God to do so, just give me some bad whether...

Now, I still think that it is highly probable that life exists out there.
 

Untra

Sponsor

Astronauts have found bacteria on the moon. Does that count as higher lifeforms?

In all seriousness though, lets assume that right now there is a higher lifeform looking down at us from a telescope. Lets assume they are 20,000 lightyears away. If this was the case then what they would be seeing neanderthals and cave-men, due to that they would be seeing the light from 20,000 years ago. Assuming they are further away, they probably don't want to visit us because there is no inteligent life here at all (or at least it looks that way.)

Assuming they are as smart as us and understand this little cunundrum, they probably are also looking for means to get closer to us, meaning traveling faster then the speed of light just so that the light they see is more "up-to-date", if you will.

Also, to give you an idea on how far away a lightyear is, the sun is 8.5 lightminutes away, and pluto is just about 5 lighthours away.
 
Am I allowed not to choose to believe in the facts of science? I haven't seen any of the things scientists say they have seen. Wouldn't I still be using faith to believe in science? I can go and look through a telescope to find proof, but the proof has only been generated by man's ideas. And, yes, so is Christianity. Science has only been true due to the agreement of a vast majority of people. Now, for me to believe that science is "proof", i would need some form of faith. Why should I be forced to agree with what everyone else agrees upon. Our society is based off of the theories and proofs of science, but only because we have accepted that as a general idea as a society. I would sound ridiculous to say that I don't believe in science, but I do find it hard too. Its such a shaky topic. So much information has yet to be discovered. So am I so wrong to believe in God as you believe in science?

Hell, if there was a small country that had there own version of science and one of you went over there trying to convince them that they were wrong, you would look stupid. They have agreed that what they believe is a form of science.

Scientifically, there are no proofs to God, hell I think one of the closest proofs in Christianity is Jesus' connection with Caesar and Pontius Pilate(didn't spell it right, I know). But even that is a shaky subject. But I have faith in what I believe. So, I'd rather sound dumb and say that there couldn't be any other life forms. Not a proof in your standards, but I think it would have been noted in the Bible if there were any other forms of logical life, based on my standards.
 
Very nicely worded, Diaforetikos.  I see what you're saying, but I also see why science is widely accepted as truth.  Science has evidence behind its claims in most areas, like evolution, and it often has math on its side (and most claim that math cannot be wrong).  For other things, though, such as the discussion of higher lifeforms, other ideas have just as much merit as science does.  In the areas that have evidence to back them up, it's best to trust science.  I really don't see how some ideas are considered science when there is little to nothing to back them up, though.  Sometimes it seems that they're trying to force their beliefs upon us like other religions have done because some of their other ideas have been accepted as proof.  As long as you're actually thinking and not letting someone else think for you, I have no objection to anyone's beliefs.
 
I am in complete agreement with you. I have a love for math. I died off it after I got out of high school but still find it fascinating. If there were any theories that justified that life could exist through mathematical solutions, then I would have a higher chance in believing that something does it exist outside of our world.

I would love to see some of Darwin's Theory proven through math as well.(Very off topic, I know. But hasn't this topic gone off a lot anyways?)
 
There's almost certainly something else out there, that's for sure. We may never find it, but it's there. Whether it's a "higher lifeform" is, of course, completely subjective.

[Quote author=Douglas Adams]
"On the planet Earth, man had always assumed that he was more intelligent than dolphins because he had achieved so much - the wheel, New York, wars and so on - whilst all the dolphins had ever done was muck about in the water having a good time. But conversely, the dolphins had always believed that they were far more intelligent than man - for precisely the same reasons."
[/quote]

;)





P.S. It also... er... "good" to see people discussing the merits of that homogenenous and all-encompassing catagory of "science". For the record, "science" can't be culturally subjective. The Scientific method is about finding objective truths.

You can't have "a small country that had there own version of science and one of you went over there trying to convince them that they were wrong, you would look stupid. beause they have agreed that what they believe is a form of science" - you can only have "good science" and "bad science" (pseudoscience et al).
 
Me(tm)":2fg2mx46 said:
Either way, I think Xaixis is right

:cheers:

FAGGOT":2fg2mx46 said:
In all seriousness though, lets assume that right now there is a higher lifeform looking down at us from a telescope. Lets assume they are 20,000 lightyears away. If this was the case then what they would be seeing neanderthals and cave-men, due to that they would be seeing the light from 20,000 years ago. Assuming they are further away, they probably don't want to visit us because there is no intelligent life here at all (or at least it looks that way.)

Oh my! I have not even thought of that! Good point FAGG!

Also Me(tm) is right (as I think I stated it also). They aren't necessarily overly-evolved than us. Maybe they have a few inventions here and there, but to actually be able to travel the distances of space would require extreme technology only found currently in science fiction.

I hate how people automatically denounce higher lifeforms because they have not seen. Who died and made them king? Seriously, have humans become so arrogant to think that we are the most advanced life form of the universe??!!??


What bullshit...
 
I hate how people automatically denounce higher lifeforms because they have not seen.
"We live by faith, not by sight" -2 Corinthians 5:6-8. Um, how is that quote any different from the quote from the Bible. (Very sorry to turn this into a religious thing, but he had it coming with that quote.) We believe that other life forms exist based on chance, but were to stubborn to believe we will be judged, because too lazy to change and the facts aren't straight. The chance that there are other lifeforms is just as probable as the chance that a "God" does exist.

I am really sorry to turn this back to religion, but I don't hear anyone speaking on behalf of any religion besides the belief in science, and as far as I know thats not a religion. Please excuse my change in topic, but if it isn't posted in a live topic, no one will hear me. I really am sorry.
 
The reason that no one is speaking on behalf of any religion is because that and science should always be separated. I think it's okay to base your view on your religion, but not using religion to tell science. Therefor, let's keep that out, because I just can't seem how I would agree with

"The chance that there are other lifeforms is just as probable as the chance that a "God" does exist."

I guess that's how the Bible is interpreted or something, but scientifically untrue.
 
But isn't it scientifically untrue that there is any proof of life forms besides our ideas and theories. There hasn't been on ounce of evidence saying that there is life outside of Earth. And did you read my comment on my belief in science?
 
Lack of evidence does not denote anything.
We lack the hard evidence for thousands of things.  We have no hard evidence that the center of the Earth isn't filled with maggots and beans.  We can believe that the inner Earth is warmed by decay of potassium-40, uranium-238 and thorium-232 isotopes, but we lack the evidence of it.

Just like at one time we lacked evidence of the platypus.  I've certainly never seen one.  I have seen pictures, even video.  But I could say the same for Big Foot.  The only difference is I believe in the platypus, as opposed to believing in a man in a gorilla costume isn't just pulling my leg.

A cop may have no evidence when looking for a burglar, and may never find any.  That does not mean not one trace of potential evidence exists, merely it was unfound.  I have no proof that anything outside of our scope exists or doesn't, except for theories and ideologies that there has to be something out there, and chances are it's something in our scope to begin with.  I'm not believing the whole alien abduction, secret society, and cures for cancer mumbo jumbo.

Am I believing that some alien dude is sitting somewhere way the fuck far away in west bumblefuck space wondering if life exists out there (here)?  Probably.  Is he in a space ship, a hut, or a house?  Same thing.  Through all the cultures in the world, I can not imagine something in space being so far different from ourselves, outside the realm of fantasy monsters that have acidic blood and burst from stomachs.  There is no higher life form.  No shades of gray.  It's alive, and it's sentient?  Good, it's just like us.
 
I believe in God.

Why? It soothes me in a way. I like the feeling that someone is watching over me, and I like that there is a higher power. You can't prove if he does or doesn't exist. No point in arguing.

But I don't like Religion.

Religion has caused many bad things. People twist the belief in God into horrible things, and use God to "justify" their horrible acts. The Crusades? Remember those? A dark time, it was. Even though the main point in basically all religions is "be a good person", they completely contradict the thing they use to justify their actions. I cannot take part in that.

So I believe in God in my own ways. I ask for God's help when I need it and, I've always come through when I did. I don't care what people say, I believe in him.

:smile:
 
Lucied":behdquq8 said:
I believe in God.

Why? It soothes me in a way. I like the feeling that someone is watching over me, and I like that there is a higher power. You can't prove if he does or doesn't exist. No point in arguing.

That's pretty much the conclusion I came to of the purpose of religion.  It gives us a way to fill up the empty spaces of knowledge and makes us feel safe knowing someone we're protected in some way.

But, we're off-topic.  We need to steer away from religion and back to higher lifeforms.  ^-^;
 
Diaforetikos":3ri9bxm3 said:
Am I allowed not to choose to believe in the facts of science?
You are. Furthermore, those who do choose to listen to reason have just as great a right to titter at you.

As for life anywhere but Earth? Why the Hell not? We only live because of a galactic fluke, and the universe is infinitely huge. Why couldn't a similar fluke happen elsewhere?
 
Now for number..

"In 1961, University of California, Santa Cruz astronomer and astrophysicist Dr. Frank Drake devised the Drake equation, which mathematically simplifies the rate of formation of suitable stars, the fraction of those stars which contain planets, the number of Earth-like worlds per planetary system, the fraction of planets where intelligent life develops, and the fraction of possible communicative planets, and the "lifetime" of possible communicative civilizations which scientifically stated there are an estimated 10,000 planets containing intelligent life with the possible capability of communicating with Earth in the Milky Way galaxy." And more on [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drake_equation]

Diaforetikos":48ye2y3a said:
But isn't it scientifically untrue that there is any proof of life forms besides our ideas and theories. There hasn't been on ounce of evidence saying that there is life outside of Earth. And did you read my comment on my belief in science?

From IndiaNews From CBS News
"The world gets its first unquestionable proof of life far beyond the earth. According to CBS news, the meteorite that crashed in northwest Canada almost seven years ago might have been able to host the very earliest life forms, according to NASA researchers, which opens the door to the possibility that life could be present elsewhere in the universe.
The Tagish Lake meteorite is unique. Tiny bubbles in the rock are organic globules where the universe's earliest life forms could have been able to live. The meteorite is 4.5 billion years old –older than the earth.
This meteorite is unique because it was recovered froze and some of these samples came to scientists still frozen.
No one knows what is the source of the organic material in the meteorite. But one thing is for certain – those who question extraterrestrail life has to keep quiet this time. The proof is real and verifiable."

From education pages
"For decades, debates have been common and fierce as to whether life existed on our closest eighboring planet, Mars. Many believed that other beings, Martians, did indeed exist, and were highly intelligent. Others claimed that there was no proof of this, and that life as we know it was, in fact, not possible due to the extreme conditions of the Martian environment. In 1976, NASA sent two landers, Viking I and Viking II, to the surface of Mars to determine if life did indeed exist. However, when these landers executed their experiments, they showed rather convincingly that there were no organic compounds above the one part per billion level in the upper few centimeters of the surface. The landers also reported on the extreme environment of Mars, with temperatures falling to 120o Fahrenheit (48.9oC) below 0 at night. So, for a while the debate subsided surrounding the existence of life on Mars.

In 1996, a meteor was found in Allan Hills, Antarctica. Upon examination, it was discovered that this meteor, which is 4.5 billion years old, fell to the earth 13,000 years ago, and possibly contained evidence of life on Mars. Inside the meteor, along tiny cracks, scientists found evidence of what many believe to be ancient bacteria.

There are four main clues which bring some scientists to this conclusion. One is that the meteorite is definitely of Martian origin and that it contains carbonate globules. The second is the presence of polycyclic aromatic compounds, which are complex organic molecules. The third piece of evidence is the presence of iron and other compounds which appear to be like those made by bacteria. The last, and perhaps most intriguing , is the pictures of the possible fossilized bacteria themselves. When taken separately, these pieces of evidence probably wouldnt amount to much. But what is compelling is that all of these pieces of evidence occurr within millimeters of each other.

However, skeptics still remain. Some simply arent sure, while others are certain that this meteorite contains no evidence of former life.. However, all agree that convincing evidence would contain proof that the fossils had cell walls, that the cells had been divided, and that chemicals more closely related to living organisms as we know them be found. And so, the debates continue. While these debates over ALH84001 occur, the science community continues its pursuit in finding signs of life, extant or extinct, on Mars..."

So I have no facking Ideaa.
 
Equations.  We're foolish to think we can sum everything up with an equation.  Unless we could look at each planet individually, find the ones that contain intelligent life, and make an approximation based on the ratio, I really don't see how anyone can create an equation of any kind.

And it's very possible that life existed on Mars at one point.  Some scientists say that Mars is what will happen to Earth when the plates stop moving.  Just the fact that there's some sort of ice on Mars gives clues that life can or could exist on the planet.

But, we seriously need to prioritize.  We can barely get people to our moon.  Why are we so concerned about higher lifeforms when we aren't even able to travel to the nearest planet?  Also, we're having problems here.  Start from the center out, not the other way around.
 
Guardian1239":3g9d0665 said:
Equations.  We're foolish to think we can sum everything up with an equation.  Unless we could look at each planet individually, find the ones that contain intelligent life, and make an approximation based on the ratio, I really don't see how anyone can create an equation of any kind.

I don't think you can only equationate something using statistics. We know what it takes to make an inhabitable planet; we can determine how far planets are from their sun; we have statistics on how much suns their are in our galaxy; etc.

I think we can get pretty far with our foolish heads

.
Guardian1239":3g9d0665 said:
But, we seriously need to prioritize.  We can barely get people to our moon.  Why are we so concerned about higher lifeforms when we aren't even able to travel to the nearest planet?  Also, we're having problems here.  Start from the center out, not the other way around.
So true - Unless we find a stargate or something, we have to stay a little closer. Yeah, sure it's nice to know there's someone out there, and perhaps that will give the world a reason to develop in spaceships and such - but I don't think were ready yet as we can't even seem to eliminate minor problems in the rockets we build these days, who says we'll be able to craft an spaceship, without major problems, taking it is much complexer then those things we build these days.
 

Thank you for viewing

HBGames is a leading amateur video game development forum and Discord server open to all ability levels. Feel free to have a nosey around!

Discord

Join our growing and active Discord server to discuss all aspects of game making in a relaxed environment. Join Us

Content

  • Our Games
  • Games in Development
  • Emoji by Twemoji.
    Top