How likely are we to find extraterrestrial life?

[otseng]

Many NASA scientists think we're on the verge of finding alien life.

Ellen Stofan, NASA's former chief scientist, said in 2015 that she believes we'll get "strong indications of life beyond Earth in the next decade and definitive evidence in the next 10 to 20 years."

Many astrophysicists and astronomers are convinced that it's not a matter of if we'll find life — it's when.

https://www.businessinsider.com/nasa-pl ... de-2019-11

Questions for debate:
- How likely are we to find extraterrestrial life?
- What empirical evidence is there that any extraterrestrial life exists?
- What are the implications if extraterrestrial life exists or do not exist?

[Clownboat]

[Replying to post 39]


William: "Whatever human declarations mean to you or I, or the ripple effects that might come from these, - big or little - is for each of us to determine based upon our own experience and consequent choice of reaction."

Clownboat: This is not a mechanism

William: I agree. What gave you the impression I was calling that a mechanism? Clearly I was referring to that as a consequence.

Clownboat: mech·an·ism
/ˈmekəˌnizəm/
Learn to pronounce
noun
1.
a system of parts working together in a machine; a piece of machinery.
2.
a natural or established process by which something takes place or is brought about.

William: I agree.

Clownboat: I asked if you could provide such a mechanism.

William: As I wrote in a previous post;

• When one thinks of AI - computers and such other tech, one understands how brains don't necessarily have to be organic in order to function as devices which Consciousness can utilize.
  
  Our own planet has all the elements of such a brain.

Ideally if you want to discuss/debate, you need to read what others write. Clearly you missed my reference to the mechanism in your clamber to misinterpret me with your returning comment;

• That was a lot of words to avoid saying:
  "I'm not aware of a mechanism for planets to become alive"

Perhaps you should try again, with some decorum, and address what I actually wrote rather than the strawman you created.

The mechanism I was describing was the form - the planet itself.

Copy and pasted from post 37 for any readers that would like to see the exchange.

Clownboat: I only care to compare claimed mechanisms. You cannot provide one to compare to another.

William: I did provide one. I don't care that you missed it, or that fear might not be the cause of you missing it.

Whatever human declarations mean to you or I, or the ripple effects that might come from these, - big or little - is for each of us to determine based upon our own experience and consequent choice of reaction.

Now William alludes to some other post in some other post #:

William: As I wrote in a previous post;
When one thinks of AI - computers and such other tech, one understands how brains don't necessarily have to be organic in order to function as devices which Consciousness can utilize.

Our own planet has all the elements of such a brain.

If this is a valid mechanism for how a planet can become alive, can someone please break it down for me?

Perhaps if I provide an example of what I'm looking for?
Abiogenesis and a possible mechanism:
Simple elements combined to form compounds. The compounds became more structured and involved different substances. Eventually, simple organic compounds were formed and linked to produce complex molecules such as amino acids.

What is the offered mechanism for a planet becoming alive?

[William]

William: In keeping with the theme of how the thread has developed, what we 'find' is also determined by what we are looking for.

If we are not willing to consider that lifeforms on Earth are the product of an intelligent process, we are hardly going to entertain the idea that the Planet Earth itself is also a form of a living intelligent organised creative conscious self aware entity.

Including that idea as a possibility, allows us to understand that every creation on the planet is here by design rather than by a mindless accident. This in itself is far more logical, given the evidence so far unearthed.

If we purposefully limit the ways in which life is defined, to that which we consider biological, and claim that as accidental, we will continue to be limited by those parameters, as the link in post #28 points out.

However we each decide to define 'life' and mechanisms which produce it, to ignore the possibility that the planet - which we know produces lifeforms - does so mindfully...with intelligent purpose, seems to fly in the face of logic and the current evidence we all have access to.

[Diagoras]

[Replying to post 42 by William]

A few quotes:

I see no reason why the planet itself cannot be the form of a conscious living entity

Life is consciousness

Some human declarations even go so far as to say that humans are the only beings on the planet who are truly conscious.
I myself disagree.

the Planet Earth itself is also a form of a living intelligent organised creative conscious self aware entity.

As noted in the link I provided in post #34, one could argue that Earth was ‘living’, but you have added considerably to its claimed attributes with this, and when you state:

I tend toward leaning to what my own experience tells me.

then that suggests you have personal experience to support this claim. Can you share some of that with us?

[William]

[Replying to post 43 by ]

Diagoras: As noted in the link I provided in post #34, one could argue that Earth was ‘living’, but you have added considerably to its claimed attributes with this, and when you state:

• I tend toward leaning to what my own experience tells me.

Can you share some of that with us?

William: I have done. Often it is ignored altogether and on occasion, attempts are made to marginalize, demonize, etc... my contributions.

While such response hasn't dissuaded me in the least, it has caused me to think on other ways in which to present my case - as it were - but it has proven difficult to find anyone willing to discuss the finer details with.

Suffice to say, if one is seriously interested, there is resource available in my Members Notes where one can acquaint themselves with my position based upon my experience.

As to getting into discussion on the details regarding that, derailing the focus on this or any other thread is best avoided.
Which is why I created a sub-forum where such can take place. You are invited to participate in discussion with me Around The Campfire, if indeed you are genuinely interested.

Let me know if you are, and I will create a thread in that forum, where this can take place.

[Diagoras]

[Replying to post 44 by William]

Thanks for the response and invitation. I did look up your notes on ‘The Earth Entity’, but (IMHO) there wasn’t really anything there I felt could obviously drawn directly from personal experience. Talk of ‘a universe outside our own’, a ‘first source consciousness’ and a claim that consciousness continues after death.

Perhaps that last claim at least stems from the fact that you elsewhere state you’ve had three ‘out of body’ experiences. I can easily accept that such experiences may have a powerful influence on a person’s philosophy (especially around mind/body duality and death), but not that such events provide strong evidence for ‘astral realms’ and the like.

I agree, we’re straying off-topic. Perhaps our discussion has at least opened our minds to the possibility that we may not recognise extraterrestrial life when we find it, as we don’t fully ‘know’ it here on Earth. But if we do, it will certainly be life-changing for us as a species.

[William]

William: No problem.

If we are specifically speaking of ET life which would be recognizable to us, my own thoughts about that are that such would probably be AI.
Since we know that AI is created by biological intelligence, and would be more hardy regarding the rigors of space and distance than their creators, it seems the most logical conclusion that any encounters individuals have with these, they are not
encountering biological forms.

As to why they don't present openly to the World, I think it unlikely that they would see that as necessary or even sensible.

I have shared sometimes of my own encounters with ET on this Message Board, but not in any great detail and few and far between.
The ordinary responses range between 'it is demons' and 'the brain did it', neither of which go any where near explaining the experiences I have had in any more than a hand-waving dismissive manner.

The roles we play and how we choose to play them are somewhat predictable and circular in debate settings, which is why the Campfire is offered as an alternative.

[Gracchus]

I expect that there is life on other planets, but I doubt that we will find it any time soon. To find it there would have to be intelligent life here, and it seems to be in very short supply.

[Clownboat]

William: No problem.

If we are specifically speaking of ET life which would be recognizable to us, my own thoughts about that are that such would probably be AI.
Since we know that AI is created by biological intelligence, and would be more hardy regarding the rigors of space and distance than their creators, it seems the most logical conclusion that any encounters individuals have with these, they are not
encountering biological forms.

As to why they don't present openly to the World, I think it unlikely that they would see that as necessary or even sensible.

I have shared sometimes of my own encounters with ET on this Message Board, but not in any great detail and few and far between.
The ordinary responses range between 'it is demons' and 'the brain did it', neither of which go any where near explaining the experiences I have had in any more than a hand-waving dismissive manner.

The roles we play and how we choose to play them are somewhat predictable and circular in debate settings, which is why the Campfire is offered as an alternative.

Please do not take offense, but articles like the one below are well known to many. Which makes your experiences questionable. Rightfully so I would think you should agree.

Alien Abductions May Be Vivid Dreams, Study Shows
Researchers say they have conducted "the first experiment to ever prove that close encounters with UFOs and extraterrestrials are a product of the human mind."
https://www.livescience.com/16743-alien ... reams.html

I personally think there is other life in the universe, due to the fact that life seems to exist where it can exist here on earth. Finding it though would be another ball game.

[William]

[Replying to post 48 by ]

Clownboat: Please do not take offense, but articles like the one below are well known to many. Which makes your experiences questionable. Rightfully so I would think you should agree.

William: I don't see the necessity of taking offence at assumptive posts, such as yours here.
Perhaps thinking one has been molested as a kid, may also simply be the product of vivid dream experience.
Who even has the right to make the call, either way?

I didn't read the article because it is so far removed from the thread subject. However, if you want to pursue this subject, create another thread. Perhaps you can attract others into discussion of any merits regarding the data you linked.

[Diagoras]

Questions for debate:
- How likely are we to find extraterrestrial life?
- What empirical evidence is there that any extraterrestrial life exists?
- What are the implications if extraterrestrial life exists or do not exist?

To answer the second question, here’s a very interesting article.

Noting that the study has yet to undergo peer review, its conclusions nevertheless build on previous evidence of extraterrestrial amino acids. A logical inference is that life’s ‘building blocks’ exist elsewhere other than Earth.