Question for Atheists: Do you believe in ET life?

[Sparko]

Scientists have not found any intelligent life outside of Earth. Not in our solar system, not anywhere. Nada.

So basically you guys are telling me it is OK to believe something with no actual evidence for it at all? Just blind faith?

Then I don't want to hear any more of the argument that one shouldn't believe in God because there is no evidence for God or the supernatural (even though there actually IS evidence, just that you don't accept it as "scientific")

[Sparko]

In a strange quirk of fate, an entry at Panda's Thumb yesturday discusses extra-solar planets.

Based on the Kepler data of 2010, we can say that around 50% of Sun-like stars have planets, and there may be at least one million Earth-like planets in habitable zones in the Milky-Way alone. And that is probably an underestimate. Some good resources are the Exoplanet encyclopaedia, Exoplanet.org (with the exoplanet data plotter) and the Habitable Zone as well as my posts on exoplanets.

http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2011...very-i-11.html

I am sure some Christians will dismiss this just because it is Panda's Thumb, however, it does serve to illustrate that we have have good evidence to support the tentative belief that ET is out there some where.

Isn't that like saying since there are 7 billion people on this planet that the odds are in favor that many of them are exact duplicates of you? You are taking a sample of 1 and extrapolating that to something else with no evidence at all. Just because there MAY BE 1 million "earth-like" planets out there (that just means they are in the right place and the right size, not that they have any life on them) that doesn't equate to there being life on them, especially intelligent life. After all, one one species out of billions in the entire history of earth ever became intelligent/sentient so even that might be an accident that could never happen again, so why would anyone think it could happen anywhere else especially with no evidence for it at all?

I guess I just see your position on this matter as inconsistent with your claims for why you are an atheist. You seem to be at least a hopeful agnostic on ET life with no evidence whatsoever other than faith in statistics, so why are you not at least an agnostic when it comes to God?

[Bob the Builder]

I don't believe in extra terrestrial life, but I do believe that it's statistically inevitable.

[Xru]

Then I don't want to hear any more of the argument that one shouldn't believe in God because there is no evidence for God or the supernatural (even though there actually IS evidence, just that you don't accept it as "scientific")

I agree. There is an incredible double standard here.

Faith based belief in ET.
Reject faith base belief in God.
Interesting.

It destroys any argument against religion purely on grounds that it is by Faith alone.

[Xru]

I don't believe in extra terrestrial life, but I do believe that it's statistically inevitable.

If you believe that then I would hope you have some strong statistics to support that belief.

For example, statistically inevitable might mean that life on another planet is assured, but that statistical event could happen 10,000,000 years from now . . . speaking in statistical generalities and depending on the odds . . . which btw, are virtually incalculable, IMO.

[Xru]

I guess I just see your position on this matter as inconsistent with your claims for why you are an atheist. You seem to be at least a hopeful agnostic on ET life with no evidence whatsoever other than faith in statistics, so why are you not at least an agnostic when it comes to God?

Well . . . .

[The Pixie]

Sparko

Scientists have not found any intelligent life outside of Earth. Not in our solar system, not anywhere. Nada.

So basically you guys are telling me it is OK to believe something with no actual evidence for it at all? Just blind faith?

On the contrary, I explained what the evidence was. You are then pretending that we are telling you that.

Isn't that like saying since there are 7 billion people on this planet that the odds are in favor that many of them are exact duplicates of you?

I think you would have to look at how many possible people there are (something like the number of ways arranging DNA, so you still have a human). If that number is several billion, then yes, there is a fair chance you have a duplicate. If there are only a thousand different people possible, then on a world with 7 billion, it becomes pretty much certain that there are duplicates. On the other hand, if the number of possible people greatly exceeds 7 billion (and I rather suspect it does), then no, there will be no duplicate.

If you play noughts and crosses, there is only a limited number of ways of aranging the noughts and crosses, so you do not have to play that many games to get duplicates. If you play poker or bridge, many more combinations are possible, so you will need to play a far, far larger number of games to start having a reasonable chance of a duplicate.

You are taking a sample of 1 and extrapolating that to something else with no evidence at all.

I addressed this last time.

Just because there MAY BE 1 million "earth-like" planets out there (that just means they are in the right place and the right size, not that they have any life on them) that doesn't equate to there being life on them, especially intelligent life.

There are two parts to the argument. One is about the number of "Earth-like" planets; scientists have fair evidence that there are over a million just in this galaxy, and it looks as though the universe is infinite, so an infinite number in total.

The other part of the argument is about how likely it is that life will appear on such a planet. Although we only know one planet where that happened, we do know that it happened very quickly (in astronomical terms), which is good evidence that it is a likely event.

If an event is likely, and you can try it an infinite number of times, how many times will it happen? Infinity.

After all, one one species out of billions in the entire history of earth ever became intelligent/sentient so even that might be an accident that could never happen again, so why would anyone think it could happen anywhere else especially with no evidence for it at all?

Well I must admit I did not address the probability of intelligent life appearing. My personal feeling is that once you have life, this will inevitably happen (excluding bio-sphere destroying catastrophe). Evolution, by its nature, tries every survival strategy it can; eventually it will hit upon intelligence.

I guess I just see your position on this matter as inconsistent with your claims for why you are an atheist.

I guessed that as soon as I saw the poll.

You seem to be at least a hopeful agnostic on ET life with no evidence whatsoever other than faith in statistics, so why are you not at least an agnostic when it comes to God?

The statistics really does not support it.

Christians get really wound up on ECREE, but really that is what it is about. There really is nothing incredible about abiogenesis and evolution leading to intelligent life; we know it can happen. So really, it is just trivial to suppose that if it happened here, it could happen anywhere else that is like here. I really do not need that much evidence to support the claim that there is probably intelligent life out there. On the other hand, Christianity posits an all-loving, all-powerful, all-knowing God for which I see no evidence, and indeed, plenty of evidence that such a good does not exist. It posits the resurrection of Jesus, an event that is extraordinary by any meaning of the word, but with scant evidence, and some frankly unlikely rationalisations. To me, the gospel accounts can be more reasonably explained (that is, an explanation that is more probable, as it does not invoke the implausible) without recourse to the supernatural.

[Xru]

If an event is likely, and you can try it an infinite number of times, how many times will it happen? Infinity.

Your use of "infinity" is contrary to the facts. Infinity does not correspond to any real number or imaginary number. Therefore your arguments using infinity are fatally flawed. Don't believe me . . . look it up.

[Sparko]

Sparko

On the contrary, I explained what the evidence was. You are then pretending that we are telling you that.

No. you mentioned statistics. Statistics based on only one sample. That isn't science, that's gambling and wishful thinking.

I think you would have to look at how many possible people there are (something like the number of ways arranging DNA, so you still have a human). If that number is several billion, then yes, there is a fair chance you have a duplicate. If there are only a thousand different people possible, then on a world with 7 billion, it becomes pretty much certain that there are duplicates. On the other hand, if the number of possible people greatly exceeds 7 billion (and I rather suspect it does), then no, there will be no duplicate.

Yeah that makes sense, Pixie, and you know why? Because we KNOW how complicated DNA is and the likelyhood that any combination of DNA and environment would yield way too many combinations that out of 7 billion people there should be any duplicates of you. That would be a valid use of statistics and math based on actual science.

However you are basing your belief that ET life exists without knowing any of the parameters. We don't know what the actual conditions are on any of those 1 million planets, we don't know what the actual odds are for abiogenesis to occur (it only happened once that we know of and we don't know how or why) we don't know what the conditions and chances are for sentience to arise. etc, etc, etc,

So your belief that ET life exists elsewhere in the galaxy is nothing but blind faith in numbers without any evidence.

I addressed this last time.

There are two parts to the argument. One is about the number of "Earth-like" planets; scientists have fair evidence that there are over a million just in this galaxy, and it looks as though the universe is infinite, so an infinite number in total.

so? there is still no actual evidence of sentient life anywhere but on earth. My point is not that it can't exist out there, but that without evidence, why do you believe it is so? The argument atheists make regarding atheism is that without evidence in the supernatural they have no belief in the supernatural. Yet here is the same situation and you have a belief about it, based on no actual evidence.

So there are things you believe on blind faith after all.

The other part of the argument is about how likely it is that life will appear on such a planet. Although we only know one planet where that happened, we do know that it happened very quickly (in astronomical terms), which is good evidence that it is a likely event.

It only happened once. That is not something that can be statistically used as evidence. Lots of things only happen once. If life is so prevalent then why aren't the other planets in our solar system covered in it?

If an event is likely, and you can try it an infinite number of times, how many times will it happen? Infinity.

gee, so then it is 100% certain that there is no intelligent life in this universe. After all, out of infinity, that has to be a valid outcome. Therefore we don't exist. Wow that was fun.

an also equally valid "event" is that every planet in the universe is exactly like ours down to atomic level. So in an infinite universe this must be so also. So why are there other planets in our solar system that are not like ours?

You can play games all you want to with "infinity" but unless you have any actual EVIDENCE of life elsewhere, then you are just engaging in wishful thinking and blind faith.

More on this "infinity means anything can happen" below...

Well I must admit I did not address the probability of intelligent life appearing.

Did you actually READ my OP? That is what this thread is about. Intelligent life existing elsewhere in this galaxy.

My personal feeling is that once you have life, this will inevitably happen (excluding bio-sphere destroying catastrophe). Evolution, by its nature, tries every survival strategy it can; eventually it will hit upon intelligence.

again, your personal feeling is not evidence. It is blind faith.

I guessed that as soon as I saw the poll.

Yeah I figured you would.

The statistics really does not support it.

Statistics are apparently just something you make up on the fly. Since you can come up with statistics for a sample size of 1 and declare it is inevitable that what happens here on earth has happened all over the galaxy.

Christians get really wound up on ECREE, but really that is what it is about.
There really is nothing incredible about abiogenesis and evolution leading to intelligent life; we know it can happen.

You don't find it incredible that life exists? and that it could exist elsewhere in the galaxy? I find that incredible. We have something that happened only once and from that you want to extrapolate that it has happened countless times all over the galaxy. based on NO EVIDENCE.

ECREE!!!

So really, it is just trivial to suppose that if it happened here, it could happen anywhere else that is like here.

wow. life is trivial? based on one sample of it happening? you have very strong faith my friend! faith larger than a mustard seed!

I really do not need that much evidence to support the claim that there is probably intelligent life out there. On the other hand, Christianity posits an all-loving, all-powerful, all-knowing God for which I see no evidence, and indeed, plenty of evidence that such a good does not exist.

Apparently not having evidence doesn't stop you from believing in something other than in God.

It posits the resurrection of Jesus, an event that is extraordinary by any meaning of the word, but with scant evidence, and some frankly unlikely rationalisations.

Why is it extraordinary? It happened once! So it is statistically likely that God exists! After all in an infinite universe, any event is likely to happen, right? even resurrection and Gods?

Just using your own argument.

To me, the gospel accounts can be more reasonably explained (that is, an explanation that is more probable, as it does not invoke the implausible) without recourse to the supernatural.

so you have a double standard. You reject the supernatural, not for a lack of evidence, but because you don't want to believe in it. And you accept the idea of ET sentient life not because of any evidence but because you want to believe in it.

got it.

[Xru]

I am sure some Christians will dismiss this just because it is Panda's Thumb, however, it does serve to illustrate that we have have good evidence to support the tentative belief that ET is out there some where.

I just love it when some people post the most equivocal comments possible and then treat the argument as fact.

"Good evidence to support the tentative belief . . . . there somewhere."

How about "A few facts that I think are important, but to few and convincing to list here, that suggest the tentative hypothesis that there is intelligent life out there in the Infinity of Space," and that if it doesn't exist it is a statistical certainty . . . that it might happen 10,000,000 x 10 to the 10,000,000 years from now . . . ABSOLUTELY FOR SURE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This is incredibly lame thinking . . . and if I were to see or read of this type of thinking done by a Biblical Scholar I would say the same thing and ROFL.

[Seasanctuary]

Scenario 1 — The Americas have just been discovered. No one has yet found any gold deposits, but it's two whole unexplored continents and there's nothing about the gold deposits in Europe, Asia, and Africa which indicates they can only exist in the old world.

Scenario 2 — People have long believed in the existence of a philosopher's stone, which can turn lead to gold with a touch. Maybe it will be found in the Americas.

Neither gold nor philosophers stones have yet been found in the new world. There are hopes but no evidence either are even there to be found. The gold-hopers deride the stone-hopers, prompting the stone-hopers to argue they're both in the same epistemological boat.

[Xru]

"So if it's just us... seems like an awful waste of space. Right?"

So is this irrational Faith in alien life forms existing in space the manifestation of a deeper psychological issue? I mean atheists refuse to believe in God, that He that all cultures seem to yearn for. Perhaps, this alien thing is the atheists wish to fulfill the God Delusion they so loudly mock. After all, aliens are usually concieved in a way that makes them almost God like.

[Xru]

Neither gold nor philosophers stones have yet been found in the new world. There are hopes but no evidence either are even there to be found. The gold-hopers deride the stone-hopers, prompting the stone-hopers to argue they're both in the same epistemological boat.

Not quite. There are ancient documents that are textual evidence that cause many to believe the philosophers stone exists.

[The Pixie]

Your use of "infinity" is contrary to the facts. Infinity does not correspond to any real number or imaginary number. Therefore your arguments using infinity are fatally flawed. Don't believe me . . . look it up.

I do not believe you.

Here is a thought - why don't ypu do the work, and support your argument yourself.

[The Pixie]

Sparko

No. you mentioned statistics. Statistics based on only one sample. That isn't science, that's gambling and wishful thinking.

I presented a rational argument, based on evidence. If you want to dispute the logic, fair enough, we can discuss that. If you want to dispute the evidence, fair enough, we can discuss that.

If you all have to offer is your "one sample" mantra, then we have nothing to discuss.

Yeah that makes sense, Pixie, and you know why? Because we KNOW how complicated DNA is and the likelyhood that any combination of DNA and environment would yield way too many combinations that out of 7 billion people there should be any duplicates of you. That would be a valid use of statistics and math based on actual science.

So it was a dumb analogy. You brought it up, Sparko, not me.

You used this in an attempt to show that my reasoning was wrong, and I proved that you were talking nonsense. That does not support my position, as such, I agree, but it does knock down your counter-argument. Please try harder next time.

However you are basing your belief that ET life exists without knowing any of the parameters. We don't know what the actual conditions are on any of those 1 million planets, we don't know what the actual odds are for abiogenesis to occur (it only happened once that we know of and we don't know how or why) we don't know what the conditions and chances are for sentience to arise. etc, etc, etc,

Right.

So my belief is tentative.

However, to me, the evidence suggests ET exists.

So your belief that ET life exists elsewhere in the galaxy is nothing but blind faith in numbers without any evidence.

Why would I do that?

Think about this, Sparko. You started this thread knowing that most atheists believe ET exists. Did you go that one step further and think about why they do? It is not for the sense of community at church, it is not because we were brainwashed as children, it is not because we find it reassuring to thing ET is looking after us, it is not because ET promises eternal life, and it is not because ET gives meaning to life.

We believe ET exists for exactly one reason Sparko: because that is what the evidence suggests.

so? there is still no actual evidence of sentient life anywhere but on earth.

Opinion noted.

I disagree. There is no direct evidence, I would accept, but then, I have never seen an electron, but I still believe they exist.

My point is not that it can't exist out there, but that without evidence, why do you believe it is so? The argument atheists make regarding atheism is that without evidence in the supernatural they have no belief in the supernatural. Yet here is the same situation and you have a belief about it, based on no actual evidence.

There is evidence. This seems to be the bit you are missing.

So there are things you believe on blind faith after all.

No.

It only happened once. That is not something that can be statistically used as evidence. Lots of things only happen once. If life is so prevalent then why aren't the other planets in our solar system covered in it?

They have the wrong conditions (particularly with respect to atmosphere and temperature, I think).

Pix: If an event is likely, and you can try it an infinite number of times, how many times will it happen? Infinity.

Sparko: gee, so then it is 100% certain that there is no intelligent life in this universe. After all, out of infinity, that has to be a valid outcome. Therefore we don't exist. Wow that was fun.

I think you need some help with the maths here, because this is just plain nonsense. Perhaps you can get back to me once you know something about probability calculations.

an also equally valid "event" is that every planet in the universe is exactly like ours down to atomic level. So in an infinite universe this must be so also. So why are there other planets in our solar system that are not like ours?

That is not an equally valid event. We know life happening on a planet is possible because we know it happened once. On the other hand, we know the event you describe has not happened because Mars is not identical to Earth.

Again, the problem here maybe that you do not understand probability.

You can play games all you want to with "infinity" but unless you have any actual EVIDENCE of life elsewhere, then you are just engaging in wishful thinking and blind faith.

Just as I do with regards to electrons!

More on this "infinity means anything can happen" below...

Actually infinity does not mean that. What infinities means is that anything with a finite probability will happen infinitely. There is a huge difference. Again, are you struggling with the maths here?

again, your personal feeling is not evidence. It is blind faith.

Not if it is based on evidence. And not if it is an opinion.

Two big differences for you there, Sparko.

Statistics are apparently just something you make up on the fly.

Not at all. I provided links to support the numbers.

See, this is that "evidence" thing that seems to elude you.

You don't find it incredible that life exists? and that it could exist elsewhere in the galaxy? I find that incredible.

Can you support that position with evidence? Or is this "blind faith"?

We have something that happened only once and from that you want to extrapolate that it has happened countless times all over the galaxy. based on NO EVIDENCE.

Based on the evidence I gave earlier.

Pix: So really, it is just trivial to suppose that if it happened here, it could happen anywhere else that is like here.

wow. life is trivial? based on one sample of it happening? you have very strong faith my friend! faith larger than a mustard seed!

Ah, here we go. I knew it would not be long before you start twisting my words. You got to love the way Christians proclaim their great morality, and yet see how quickly they descend to dishonest misrepresentation like this.

Same old same old, I guess.

Apparently not having evidence doesn't stop you from believing in something other than in God.

It is the evidence that makes me think it is so.

Why is it extraordinary? It happened once! So it is statistically likely that God exists! After all in an infinite universe, any event is likely to happen, right? even resurrection and Gods?

Circular reasoning. You cannot claim the resurrection as a precedent to support your claim that the resurrection happened! In contrast, I am using an event well founded in science as a precedent for another event on another planet. Can you see the difference here, Sparko?

Furthermore, the resurrection contravenes the laws of nature. ET does not. Again, can you see the difference here, Sparko?

Just using your own argument.

No. Nothing like my argument.

so you have a double standard. You reject the supernatural, not for a lack of evidence, but because you don't want to believe in it.

I reject the supernatural because of the lack of evidence, and especially the lack of evidence where it might be expected.

And by the way, why would I not want to believe in it?

And you accept the idea of ET sentient life not because of any evidence but because you want to believe in it.

Again, why would I want to?

Seriously, what is it to me whether ET exists or not? Why do you think atheists want to believe this, Sparko? Your argument seems to be predicated on this belief, I am intigued to know what it is based on.