Home » Extraterrestrial life, News » Space aliens: The reason they avoid us is that we exist and they don’t – mathematician

Space aliens: The reason they avoid us is that we exist and they don’t – mathematician

File:A small cup of coffee.JPG

That’ll do it every time.

In “If E.T. exists, he’s avoiding us, cosmic number-crunchers say” (MSNBC.com, (1/30, 2012), Irene Klotz reports, “Math suggests there’s no way advanced civilizations wouldn’t know about us by now”:

“We’re either alone, or they’re out there and leave us alone,” mathematician Thomas Hair, with Florida Gulf Coast University in Fort Myers, told Discovery News.

Hair, who presented his research at the Mathematical Association of America in Boston earlier this month, based his approximation of what he considered to be extremely conservative estimates for how long it would take a society to muster up the resources and technological know-how to leave its home world and travel to another star.

He suggests that they may not be biological and we may not have anything they need. Another theorist, University of Minnesota physicist Woods Halley, author of a book about the prospects of extraterrestrial life, says

… we don’t know enough about how life got started on Earth to be able to recognize alien life, even if it were staring us in the face.

“I think there are three options,” Halley told Discovery News. “Life is rare, which I think has a reasonable probability of being correct. Life is weird — every time you run into it, it’s extremely different from the last time you saw it. Life is dull, meaning you will find something that looks a lot like life on Earth and our problems (in detecting life) are technical.

He thinks the first option – that we are rare – is most likely.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

  • Delicious
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feed

28 Responses to Space aliens: The reason they avoid us is that we exist and they don’t – mathematician

  1. On one hand, ID folks (like “News” here) seem intent on showing that there are probably no extra-terrestrial intelligent beings in the universe. Articles describing the failure of SETI are often posted here as evidence that space aliens probably don’t exist.

    But doesn’t ID require us to believe that some sort of extra-terrestrial intelligent being does exist? Why would the failure of SETI be something ID enthusiasts would be happy about? It seems to be strong evidence against ID theory.

  2. They never write. They never phone. They never send flowers. We are currently treating them as if they don’t exist. If that doesn’t work, what will?

  3. Math people know nothing but math unless they prove otherwise.
    Math does not predict invention and acheivement here or elsewhere.
    There are no other folks in space because space was made for eternal mankind to occupy.
    It didn’t work and so eternity is elsewhere but one sees in spacr a shadow of it.

  4. Well, seriously, if the Intelligent Designer that ID posits existed, one would think we would have found some evidence by now of extra-terrestrial intelligent beings. How much longer can we be expected to test this hypothesis?

  5. Newly released UFO files from the UK government

    -
    -

    read on

    And yes, in a design scenario we should expect more habitable and inhabited planets

  6. “Well, seriously, if the Intelligent Designer that ID posits existed, one would think we would have found some evidence by now of extra-terrestrial intelligent beings.”

    Why?

    One COULD think that. Why WOULD one?

  7. Why would one not? Or do you think there is something special about little old earth?

  8. Actually, in a “design scenario” (i.e. that an intelligent being designed life on Earth) we should expect the Designer to respond to our SETI search. After all, ID has been touting SETI for years as the bona-fide scientific search for extra-terrestrial intelligence… why would we expect ET life forms to respond, but not the Designer of Life?

    Of course, ID proponents might respond “Why should the Intelligent Designer of Life respond to our attempts to contact Him?” But this just illustrates that ID can rationalize any evidence – or lack of same – because nothing follows from calling something “intelligent”.

  9. There is something special about our planet. That doesn’t mean it has to be unique.

  10. “Why would one not? Or do you think there is something special about little old earth?”

    Seeing as its currently home for my species, sure.

    That doesn’t answer my question though. “If the designer that ID posits exists, why would we think there are intellegent extra-terrestrial beings?”

    I’m not saying I do or don’t. I’m agnostic on aliens. I want to know why AIG seems to think its a requirement.

    If I’m misreading you dude than I retract right now.

    If not: Why WOULD one?

  11. aiguy:

    Actually, in a “design scenario” (i.e. that an intelligent being designed life on Earth) we should expect the Designer to respond to our SETI search.

    We should? How do we know said designer(s) still exist? How do you know a response has not been made?

    After all, ID has been touting SETI for years as the bona-fide scientific search for extra-terrestrial intelligence…

    No, just as an example on how to detect design from unknown designers.

    Look, I am sick of your strawmen and your substance-free rhetoric.

    If you ever have some evidence to discuss I may oblige but I am not getting into a battle of wits with an obvioulsy unarmed person.

  12. I thought SETI was just looking and listening for stuff. How much have they sent out exactly?

  13. From “The Privileged Planet” Chapter 16

    14) You haven’t shown that ETs don’t exist.

    “This is true, but we did not intend to. In fact, ironically, design might even improve the possibility of ETs.”

    Well, yeah…

  14. I think it’s funny that ID people (like Denyse and Klinghoffer) love to talk about how SETI has come up empty, because they want humans to be God’s exceptional creatures in the universe, and they take SETI’s failure to find anything as an indication that there is no life except on our special planet Earth. (For just one example, see here).

    But they don’t realize that the failure to find extra-terrestrial intelligence plays both ways. Yes Earthlings would be special, but the same lack of evidence would suggest there are no intelligent beings that could be candidate Designers.

  15. “Yes Earthlings would be special, but the same lack of evidence would suggest there are no intelligent beings that could be candidate Designers.”

    Anymore.

    Or that Denyse and Klinghoffer are right and the ID is really God/god/gods

    At best, SETI not finding anything closes one door.

    How many doors have been closed on OOL now? They’re still going with their reaserch aren’t they?

    While I’m still here: “If the designer that ID posits exists, why would we think there are intellegent extra-terrestrial beings?”

    I see why/how we could. Why should that automatically be our position though?

  16. Hi Sonfaro,

    Or that Denyse and Klinghoffer are right and the ID is really God/god/gods

    I don’t really know what those are, but why would looking for gods be any different from looking for extra-terrestrial life forms? Because they don’t have to live on planets with liquid water?

    How many doors have been closed on OOL now? They’re still going with their reaserch aren’t they?

    Lots of doors, and yes they are.

    The thing I don’t understand is if there are (were) intelligent beings out there, why wouldn’t we hypothesize that we are their descendants rather than their inventions? It would seem to be a simpler hypothesis. (remember, we don’t ask “Who designed the designer” here, right?)

  17. - “I don’t really know what those are, but why would looking for gods be any different from looking for extra-terrestrial life forms? Because they don’t have to live on planets with liquid water?”

    If it’s a God/god/gods that exist outside our universe… or even if it’s the anchor of our universe, then I doubt heavily that any natural apperatus is ever going to locate it/him/her/them – no matter how hard we try. Our best bet would be to see if they left any traces of their effects on the Universe.

    -”The thing I don’t understand is if there are (were) intelligent beings out there, why wouldn’t we hypothesize that we are their descendants rather than their inventions? It would seem to be a simpler hypothesis.”

    It wouldn’t be intellegent design then would it? It would be Intellegent Conception.

    This sounds close to Pantheism, as I understand it: That God birthed the universe into himself and that we’re all a remnant of him and one day (death) we’ll return to the whole… at least I think that’s how it goes. You’d have to ask one of our resident Pantheists, but that does sound close to their position… to me at least. Might be wrong.

    Anyway, as far as I know – while ladies and gents like Denyse and Klinghoffer doubt – ID itself is pretty neutral on ET’s.

    Also: I don’t think yours a simpler hypothesis either. Certainly different, with a different set of questions. But not easier.

  18. Hi Sonfaro,

    If it’s a God/god/gods that exist outside our universe… or even if it’s the anchor of our universe, then I doubt heavily that any natural apperatus is ever going to locate it/him/her/them – no matter how hard we try. Our best bet would be to see if they left any traces of their effects on the Universe.

    It’s hard for me to imagine what it means to exist outside the universe. In a way, I don’t really think it means anything at all.

    It wouldn’t be intellegent design then would it? It would be Intellegent Conception.

    It would be good old-fashioned biological reproduction. And honestly it doesn’t take all that much intelligence to accomplish it :-)

    I don’t think yours a simpler hypothesis either. Certainly different, with a different set of questions. But not easier.

    Well, both ET-ancestor theory and ET-engineer theory must posit that ET life forms exist.
    Neither theory explain how the ETs came to exist in the first place, so that’s a tie.
    But ET-ancestor theory requires only that these life forms can reproduce, which all life forms can do.
    ET-engineer theory requires that they have advanced bio-engineering capabilities, which is an additional hypothesis for which we have no specific evidence.

    That’s why I think ET-ancestor theory is better than ET-engineer theory. Neither of these theories are very good, though, since we don’t have any evidence that ETs exist.

  19. Hey AIG
    -”It’s hard for me to imagine what it means to exist outside the universe. In a way, I don’t really think it means anything at all.”

    Shigeru Miyamoto created Super Mario World. Super Mario world exists in its own realm, with it’s own physics and it’s own definition of time. Miyamoto exists outside the Mario universe. Miyamoto is Marios god.

    :)

    -”Well, both ET-ancestor theory and ET-engineer theory must posit that ET life forms exist.”

    Right.

    -”Neither theory explain how the ETs came to exist in the first place, so that’s a tie.”

    So far so good.

    -”But ET-ancestor theory requires only that these life forms can reproduce, which all life forms can do.”

    And here we disagree.

    We’d have to ask a whole bunch of new, hard to answer questions, like: how did the ET got to this planet? (Because if the ET came from/evolved from this planet then it wouldn’t be an ET). Were they advanced enough for spaceships? If so, is there any trace left? Was it a Noah’s ark situation? If so, how many of the current earth creatures are really earth creatures. How many got here. When did they get here. Is it possible they were responsible for the Dino’s extinction…; ect.

    “ET-engineer theory requires that they have advanced bio-engineering capabilities, which is an additional hypothesis for which we have no specific evidence.”

    Ventors bio-engineering stuff isn’t he? Can’t make life yet, but he’s on track I think. I doubt he’s the only one. If it were ET’s and they were far more advanced then we are, I don’t see how it would be that much of a problem.

    Provided of course that they exist.

    -”That’s why I think ET-ancestor theory is better than ET-engineer theory. Neither of these theories are very good, though, since we don’t have any evidence that ETs exist.”

    Again, I disagree. Certainly would be interesting, but not a whole lot simpler and leads to different questions that would be great for a Sci-Fi novel.

    IDists don’t require their Intellegence be ETs. They just require it to be intellegent.

  20. aiguy:

    The thing I don’t understand is if there are (were) intelligent beings out there, why wouldn’t we hypothesize that we are their descendants rather than their inventions? It would seem to be a simpler hypothesis. (remember, we don’t ask “Who designed the designer” here, right?)

    The concept you aren’t getting is that the existence of an intelligent agent is the conclusion, not the hypothesis. The presence of massive amounts of complex, functionally specified information (CFSI) in all living organisms is evidence that they were designed by an intelligent agent or agents that must have existed at (or possibly prior to) the time that they came into being. There is no scientific evidence to support any conclusion that we are the descendants of such a being or beings any more than the technology that we produce is our own biological offspring.

  21. Hi Sonfaro

    Shigeru Miyamoto created Super Mario World. Super Mario world exists in its own realm, with it’s own physics and it’s own definition of time. Miyamoto exists outside the Mario universe. Miyamoto is Marios god.

    Ok, that’s a pretty good way to conceive of it, actually.

    We’d have to ask a whole bunch of new, hard to answer questions, like: how did the ET got to this planet? (Because if the ET came from/evolved from this planet then it wouldn’t be an ET). Were they advanced enough for spaceships? If so, is there any trace left? Was it a Noah’s ark situation? If so, how many of the current earth creatures are really earth creatures. How many got here. When did they get here. Is it possible they were responsible for the Dino’s extinction…; ect.

    Right, all these questions arise… for BOTH ET-engineer and ET-ancestor theories!

    Ventors bio-engineering stuff isn’t he? Can’t make life yet, but he’s on track I think. I doubt he’s the only one. If it were ET’s and they were far more advanced then we are, I don’t see how it would be that much of a problem.

    I agree that it isn’t a huge leap once you posit an advanced race of beings, but it still is another assumption and tips the scale (of Occam’s razor) a bit in favor of ET-ancestor theory.

    Provided of course that they exist.

    Aye, there’s the rub.

    IDists don’t require their Intellegence be ETs. They just require it to be intellegent.

    Right, but ID claims to offer a solution that is “known to our uniform and repeated experience”. The only thing that is actually known are intelligent life forms – us – and we need our big, complex, CSI-filled brains to design things. If you go and suggest that something could have the same mental and physical abilities that humans have (and then some) but without highly complex physical mechanisms, then you are positing a solution that is most definitely not known to our uniform and repeated experience.

  22. Strange that in a thread about space aliens no one wants to talk about the evidence for UFOs.

  23. Hey AIG,

    Sorry for the delay… Sleep. Meh.

    -”Right, but ID claims to offer a solution that is “known to our uniform and repeated experience”. The only thing that is actually known are intelligent life forms – us – and we need our big, complex, CSI-filled brains to design things. If you go and suggest that something could have the same mental and physical abilities that humans have (and then some) but without highly complex physical mechanisms, then you are positing a solution that is most definitely not known to our uniform and repeated experience.”

    Thus ‘we can not identify the designer’.

    I mean even if we were birthed by ET’s we’d still be asking ‘how’ (notice, not who). It would just be harder to reach the answers seeing as how the answers are off world (how did the original ET come into being). If the ET’s created us, at least we could investigate into the ‘how’… for us at least.

  24. Or the substantial evidence that the vast majority of the more than 10,000 crop circles reported since the ’80s could not have been produced by any known human technology.

  25. Never seen a crop circle but I have been to Coral Castle….

  26. Joe,

    Go here.

  27. Is there anything to connect UFOs with crop circles? Is one the product of the other? Or are two or more different extraterrestrial intelligences operating?

  28. My apologies- I meant “in person”

    It is one thing to see something on TV or in pictures, but actually being there, so you can actually investigate, is quite different.

Leave a Reply