You believe in aliens?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#151 Posted by ShadowsDemon (9540 posts) -
[QUOTE="Matthew-first"]

[QUOTE="mingmao3046"]you honestly must be pretty stupid to believe we are the only intelligent beings in this infinitely large universethemajormayor



VERY MUCH THIS... You took it out of my mouth...

You are pretty stupid though

How is he stupid? :|
#152 Posted by BatCrazedJoker (1611 posts) -
I believe that aliens do exist and they have probably visited the earth a few times. How else can you explain things like the pyramids or stonehenge?
#153 Posted by br0kenrabbit (13595 posts) -

How am I closing off logical thought when that thought never had anything of substance to grasp on to? The average persons knowledge on space is only hearsay. Invite me on a cruz around the outter atmosphere and I'll happily reconsisder my stance on the issue. If not, then you're basically telling me to trust in something I can't possibly prove, trust in vague ideaologies that have been made popular by a secret institution. bnarmz

You're just not smart enough to understand how to make those observations.

The parallax of stars, the retrograde motion of the planets in the night sky at very specific points in our respective orbits, the arc of the elliptic, etc., are all observations you can make that will pretty much mathematically describe our solar system pretty much as science teaches it.

For deep space objects and stars, there's methods such as spectral analysis, variance of luminosity, standard candles, etc.

You understand too little of the methodology behind the science to even possibly be considered qualified to comment.

#154 Posted by br0kenrabbit (13595 posts) -


Otherwise you would have to look to string theory for further dimensions
And even then, I am fairly sure you can only see other beings in your dimension, everything else is theorised

chaoscougar1

String Theory says those extra dimensions are too small to even observe.

#155 Posted by bnarmz (1370 posts) -

[QUOTE="bnarmz"] How am I closing off logical thought when that thought never had anything of substance to grasp on to? The average persons knowledge on space is only hearsay. Invite me on a cruz around the outter atmosphere and I'll happily reconsisder my stance on the issue. If not, then you're basically telling me to trust in something I can't possibly prove, trust in vague ideaologies that have been made popular by a secret institution. br0kenrabbit

You're just not smart enough to understand how to make those observations.

The parallax of stars, the retrograde motion of the planets in the night sky at very specific points in our respective orbits, the arc of the elliptic, etc., are all observations you can make that will pretty much mathematically describe our solar system pretty much as science teaches it.

For deep space objects and stars, there's methods such as spectral analysis, variance of luminosity, standard candles, etc.

You understand too little of the methodology behind the science to even possibly be considered qualified to comment.

let's see what you know? Trust me when I say I know how all this sounds, but I like to put out interesting stuff hoping the many bright minds here will shed some of their light. This is not about being intelligent enough. Regurgitating what you were trained to believe isnt helping, and like many, you seem to not mind believing in something that you cant prove for yourself? I'll give just a few more examples without derailing this topic, (pardon me TC). -- Its been said that these illumination in the skies are distant stars, and that the light we see coming from them are minutes to thousands of years old. In short, we are actually looking into the past. So if this is true how are we able to calculate anything in the cosmos when we use these lights as a reference point? in fact the reference points doesn't even exist. For all we know these lights, stars, etc are not even in existence anymorein the least they are totally out of the positions we're measuring them from. How can we find out if they still exist, or where is their current locations? you see what i'm saying? There is plenty of room for flaws. How can we arrogantly base facts on something we havent even touched, or even know still exist, just speculations from confinement of our own planet, seriously? Theres no real way we can be accurate with this because science has also claim that they are still new to the finds of Dark Matter and Dark Energy. They dont even know why/how D.M. distorts light, further leaving potential for flaws in the theories of distances/celestial objects, and especially aliens. Without actual experiences we know nothing about the cosmos, we just trust in a enigmatic institution with very vague intentions. We cant even prove/discredit anything they tell us because theres nothing from space they can offer as proof. This could all be made up science; it wouldnt be the first time paradigms were created for the people to blindly follow. -- Furthermore, they stay the Earth spends 1670 kilometers/hour (1070 miles/hr), yet when you look up into the sky these distant stars are not seen as a blur in the sky. Why is it hotter when the sun is further away but gets colder when it gets closer? Ive heard about the theories on seasons and how the 23 angle tilt of the planet diverts sunlight at different times of the yearbut observing the position of the sun (thru the seasons) the sun is clearly larger in the winter. Some even say the sun is a stargate, Egyptians worshipped the sun and many of their hieroglyphs show the sun as God and/or a portal. Some say the sun is nowhere near as hot as they mainstream science says it is, and that most of our heat comes from the Earth poles and is distributed around the globe (supposedly there are holes at the poles going straight through the planet and that theres an internal sun and world), idk, do you? -- In the movie "Wonder Of It All" where they interviewed the astronauts who walked on the moon. Neil Armstrong, Edwin Aldrin, Harrison Schmitt all said they could not see stars from the Moon. How is that, especially when there is no atmosphere on the moon to create light pollution? There is a lot to be consider before believing whole heartedly what N.ever,A,S.traight A.nswer (nasa) tells us. It's just way too many discrepancies and these are just a few examples to help you understand why I find much of science about the cosmos to be a bit disconcerting.
#156 Posted by bnarmz (1370 posts) -

[QUOTE="bnarmz"][QUOTE="Human-after-all"] Your mind isn't expanding at all...you've closed off logical thought for made up junk science and conspiracy. chaoscougar1

How am I closing off logical thought when that thought never had anything of substance to grasp on to? The average persons knowledge on space is only hearsay. Invite me on a cruz around the outter atmosphere and I'll happily reconsisder my stance on the issue. If not, then you're basically telling me to trust in something I can't possibly prove, trust in vague ideaologies that have been made popular by a secret institution. How is this different then what you're saying? There are just as many great minds within the alternative sciences as there are in the mainstream and neither has the means and/or the will to assist in authenticating their claims. I'm just not a blind follower, that excise has hampered society for way too long. I rather base all of my decisions on actual undeniable hands on facts. Until then, I don't consider anything that NASA claims to be of importance. How is it junk science when there are well educated people making these claims, what is the difference? I can get deeper with this stuff but this is not the place for it. That's why I suggested to those who are interested in the matter to do the research for themselves. I'm not going to tell anyone what to believe in because thats their choice, nor will I disrespect them for having the courage to quench their own curiousity by doing so,...thats what agents and those looking to create a mind set will do.

In common point particle quantum mechanics there are only 4 dimensions (as my understanding), the 4th dimension being time, so am I not sure what beings would live IN time
Otherwise you would have to look to string theory for further dimensions
And even then, I am fairly sure you can only see other beings in your dimension, everything else is theorised
So how you came to think that extra dimensional beings are more plausable than beings that live in the 3D part of our universe is beyond me

When you understand that our senses can only detect a slither of the spectrum of light youll start to ponder and consider many things too. Especially with the amount of material out there on the matter.
#157 Posted by chaoscougar1 (37159 posts) -

[QUOTE="chaoscougar1"]

[QUOTE="bnarmz"] How am I closing off logical thought when that thought never had anything of substance to grasp on to? The average persons knowledge on space is only hearsay. Invite me on a cruz around the outter atmosphere and I'll happily reconsisder my stance on the issue. If not, then you're basically telling me to trust in something I can't possibly prove, trust in vague ideaologies that have been made popular by a secret institution. How is this different then what you're saying? There are just as many great minds within the alternative sciences as there are in the mainstream and neither has the means and/or the will to assist in authenticating their claims. I'm just not a blind follower, that excise has hampered society for way too long. I rather base all of my decisions on actual undeniable hands on facts. Until then, I don't consider anything that NASA claims to be of importance. How is it junk science when there are well educated people making these claims, what is the difference? I can get deeper with this stuff but this is not the place for it. That's why I suggested to those who are interested in the matter to do the research for themselves. I'm not going to tell anyone what to believe in because thats their choice, nor will I disrespect them for having the courage to quench their own curiousity by doing so,...thats what agents and those looking to create a mind set will do. bnarmz

In common point particle quantum mechanics there are only 4 dimensions (as my understanding), the 4th dimension being time, so am I not sure what beings would live IN time
Otherwise you would have to look to string theory for further dimensions
And even then, I am fairly sure you can only see other beings in your dimension, everything else is theorised
So how you came to think that extra dimensional beings are more plausable than beings that live in the 3D part of our universe is beyond me

When you understand that our senses can only detect a slither of the spectrum of light youll start to ponder and consider many things too. Especially with the amount of material out there on the matter.

You mean this thing?
EM Spectrum

We know quite a lot about photons

#158 Posted by bnarmz (1370 posts) -
What we can't see/experience with our actual eyes/senses is done thru instrumentation, yet we are still learning to decipher this obscure knowledge and its properties. Further more, we have only gotten (understand) as far as the Gamma and radio.
#159 Posted by br0kenrabbit (13595 posts) -

let's see what you know? Trust me when I say I know how all this sounds, but I like to put out interesting stuff hoping the many bright minds here will shed some of their light. This is not about being intelligent enough. Regurgitating what you were trained to believe isnt helping, and like many, you seem to not mind believing in something that you cant prove for yourself? I'll give just a few more examples without derailing this topic, (pardon me TC). -- Its been said that these illumination in the skies are distant stars, and that the light we see coming from them are minutes to thousands of years old. In short, we are actually looking into the past. So if this is true how are we able to calculate anything in the cosmos when we use these lights as a reference point? in fact the reference points doesn't even exist. For all we know these lights, stars, etc are not even in existence anymorein the least they are totally out of the positions we're measuring them from. How can we find out if they still exist, or where is their current locations? you see what i'm saying? bnarmz

I see that you still don't understand what you're talking about.

Stars don't just explode randomly; they have a predictable life cycle that through observation has borne out time and again. Stars also do not just fly off from their present orbit about the galaxy without some outside influence altering their path. By observing a stars velocity and distance, we can determine where the star actually is at this point in our reference of time regardless of where it appears in the sky.

But you're forgetting a very important point about relativity: time is local and relative. It does not matter if the stars some light years away has shifted so many degrees this way or that as any influence it would have on us, gravitational or otherwise, would only arrive at the speed of light. So what we see in in fact the current influental state from our perspective, regardless of how outdated that state may actually be to the star in question.

#160 Posted by chaoscougar1 (37159 posts) -
What we can't see/experience with our actual eyes/senses is done thru instrumentation, yet we are still learning to decipher this obscure knowledge and its properties. Further more, we have only gotten (understand) as far as the Gamma and radio.bnarmz
Not really We know that all light is made up of photons, which is the messenger particle for the electromagnetic force There are no natural phenomena that emit radiation that is beyond gamma rays, thus gamma radiation has no limit on the spectrum Think its the same thing with radio waves
#161 Posted by br0kenrabbit (13595 posts) -

[QUOTE="bnarmz"]What we can't see/experience with our actual eyes/senses is done thru instrumentation, yet we are still learning to decipher this obscure knowledge and its properties. Further more, we have only gotten (understand) as far as the Gamma and radio.chaoscougar1
Not really We know that all light is made up of photons, which is the messenger particle for the electromagnetic force There are no natural phenomena that emit radiation that is beyond gamma rays, thus gamma radiation has no limit on the spectrum Think its the same thing with radio waves

Radio waves stretch infinately to zero frequency. I don't think I've ever heard of anything beyond femtometer wavelength which would be cosmic rays, but I wonder how compressed a wavelength can be...I stopped following the discussion of how much information can fit into a planck area a long time ago.

#162 Posted by bnarmz (1370 posts) -

[QUOTE="bnarmz"]let's see what you know? Trust me when I say I know how all this sounds, but I like to put out interesting stuff hoping the many bright minds here will shed some of their light. This is not about being intelligent enough. Regurgitating what you were trained to believe isnt helping, and like many, you seem to not mind believing in something that you cant prove for yourself? I'll give just a few more examples without derailing this topic, (pardon me TC). -- Its been said that these illumination in the skies are distant stars, and that the light we see coming from them are minutes to thousands of years old. In short, we are actually looking into the past. So if this is true how are we able to calculate anything in the cosmos when we use these lights as a reference point? in fact the reference points doesn't even exist. For all we know these lights, stars, etc are not even in existence anymorein the least they are totally out of the positions we're measuring them from. How can we find out if they still exist, or where is their current locations? you see what i'm saying? br0kenrabbit

I see that you still don't understand what you're talking about.

Stars don't just explode randomly; they have a predictable life cycle that through observation has borne out time and again. Stars also do not just fly off from their present orbit about the galaxy without some outside influence altering their path. By observing a stars velocity and distance, we can determine where the star actually is at this point in our reference of time regardless of where it appears in the sky.

But you're forgetting a very important point about relativity: time is local and relative. It does not matter if the stars some light years away has shifted so many degrees this way or that as any influence it would have on us, gravitational or otherwise, would only arrive at the speed of light. So what we see in in fact the current influental state from our perspective, regardless of how outdated that state may actually be to the star in question.

I knew that was coming soon. But Im not going to get into the relativity debate that has been going on since Einstein mentioned it; apparently, there may be some flaws and a cause to reconsider what he says. http://uweb.superlink.net/~dialect/theory.html -- I dont think you really understand the gist of my posts. My posts are basically saying neither of us can actually verify whats in space, we only use what was giving to us by a cryptic establishment. I try not to hold beliefs in something that cant be proven by my own means. This is regarding authentication through personal experiences, not relying on data that you and I cant actually confirm. Consider it? Yes, believe it? No.
#163 Posted by bnarmz (1370 posts) -
[QUOTE="bnarmz"]What we can't see/experience with our actual eyes/senses is done thru instrumentation, yet we are still learning to decipher this obscure knowledge and its properties. Further more, we have only gotten (understand) as far as the Gamma and radio.chaoscougar1
Not really We know that all light is made up of photons, which is the messenger particle for the electromagnetic force There are no natural phenomena that emit radiation that is beyond gamma rays, thus gamma radiation has no limit on the spectrum Think its the same thing with radio waves

Understandable, However, Ive heard other wise, and the reason the claims arent made public is because they know little about it (which makes sense to a stint). Within the last few centuries humanity has made great strides in knowledge and Im sure there is much more to be learned. As of now many scientist in the field will tell you that the more they know the more they dont know.
#164 Posted by br0kenrabbit (13595 posts) -

I knew that was coming soon. But Im not going to get into the relativity debate that has been going on since Einstein mentioned it; apparently, there may be some flaws and a cause to reconsider what he says. http://uweb.superlink.net/~dialect/theory.html -- I dont think you really understand the gist of my posts. My posts are basically saying neither of us can actually verify whats in space, we only use what was giving to us by a cryptic establishment. I try not to hold beliefs in something that cant be proven by my own means. This is regarding authentication through personal experiences, not relying on data that you and I cant actually confirm. Consider it? Yes, believe it? No. bnarmz

Actually, I've made quite a few of my own observations: from the perturbations in the orbital motions of the planets in the sky to recording the dimming and brightening of variables.

All you need is a telescope, some knowledge of math, and enough brains to know what to do with the two.

It really isn't rocket science.

#165 Posted by MannyDelgado (1187 posts) -
My posts are basically saying neither of us can actually verify whats in space, we only use what was giving to us by a cryptic establishment.bnarmz
lmao
#166 Posted by bnarmz (1370 posts) -

[QUOTE="bnarmz"]I knew that was coming soon. But Im not going to get into the relativity debate that has been going on since Einstein mentioned it; apparently, there may be some flaws and a cause to reconsider what he says. http://uweb.superlink.net/~dialect/theory.html -- I dont think you really understand the gist of my posts. My posts are basically saying neither of us can actually verify whats in space, we only use what was giving to us by a cryptic establishment. I try not to hold beliefs in something that cant be proven by my own means. This is regarding authentication through personal experiences, not relying on data that you and I cant actually confirm. Consider it? Yes, believe it? No. br0kenrabbit

Actually, I've made quite a few of my own observations: from the perturbations in the orbital motions of the planets in the sky to recording the dimming and brightening of variables.

All you need is a telescope, some knowledge of math, and enough brains to know what to do with the two.

It really isn't rocket science.

So you know for sure that these are planets, how so?
#167 Posted by br0kenrabbit (13595 posts) -

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

[QUOTE="bnarmz"]I knew that was coming soon. But Im not going to get into the relativity debate that has been going on since Einstein mentioned it; apparently, there may be some flaws and a cause to reconsider what he says. http://uweb.superlink.net/~dialect/theory.html -- I dont think you really understand the gist of my posts. My posts are basically saying neither of us can actually verify whats in space, we only use what was giving to us by a cryptic establishment. I try not to hold beliefs in something that cant be proven by my own means. This is regarding authentication through personal experiences, not relying on data that you and I cant actually confirm. Consider it? Yes, believe it? No. bnarmz

Actually, I've made quite a few of my own observations: from the perturbations in the orbital motions of the planets in the sky to recording the dimming and brightening of variables.

All you need is a telescope, some knowledge of math, and enough brains to know what to do with the two.

It really isn't rocket science.

So you know for sure that these are planets, how so?

Because I can watch seasons change on Mars as its polar ice cap grows and diminishes. I can watch most of the planets go from cresents, to fully lit orbs, and then to opposing cresents as they and we move about the sun. I can watch the cloud formations on Jupiter rotate (Jupiter rotates very fast), and I've watched the shadow of Saturn move across its rings as it passes through its seasons.

Have you seriously never used a telescope? I know, I know..."BURN THIS BLASPHEMER WHO WOULD SUGGEST MATH AND OBSERVATION TRUMP WHAT I WANT REALITY TO BE!"

#168 Posted by bnarmz (1370 posts) -

[QUOTE="bnarmz"][QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

Actually, I've made quite a few of my own observations: from the perturbations in the orbital motions of the planets in the sky to recording the dimming and brightening of variables.

All you need is a telescope, some knowledge of math, and enough brains to know what to do with the two.

It really isn't rocket science.

br0kenrabbit

So you know for sure that these are planets, how so?

Because I can watch seasons change on Mars as its polar ice cap grows and diminishes. I can watch most of the planets go from cresents, to fully lit orbs, and then to opposing cresents as they and we move about the sun. I can watch the cloud formations on Jupiter rotate (Jupiter rotates very fast), and I've watched the shadow of Saturn move across its rings as it passes through its seasons.

Have you seriously never used a telescope? I know, I know..."BURN THIS BLASPHEMER WHO WOULD SUGGEST MATH AND OBSERVATION TRUMP WHAT I WANT REALITY TO BE!"

you're only talking about our solar system not deeper space (which is what my posts are mainly about), and this still doesn't prove aliens exist.
#169 Posted by br0kenrabbit (13595 posts) -

you're only talking about our solar system not deeper space (which is what my posts are mainly about), and this still doesn't prove aliens exist. bnarmz

I could talk all day about some Cepheids I watched over several years, or my numerous observations of M41 and the massive red giants at its center. There's also SN1987A that I spent several years observing immediately after the star exploded. I'm waiting for Betelgeuse to pop any time now (I hope).

Seriously, you have no idea what you're talking about. Lay off the conspiracy websites and put your nose in some schoolbooks, you've a long way to go.

#170 Posted by bnarmz (1370 posts) -

[QUOTE="bnarmz"]you're only talking about our solar system not deeper space (which is what my posts are mainly about), and this still doesn't prove aliens exist. br0kenrabbit

I could talk all day about some Cepheids I watched over several years, or my numerous observations of M41 and the massive red giants at its center. There's also SN1987A that I spent several years observing immediately after the star exploded. I'm waiting for Betelgeuse to pop any time now (I hope).

Seriously, you have no idea what you're talking about. Lay off the conspiracy websites and put your nose in some schoolbooks, you've a long way to go.

you say i don't know what I'm talking about, yet you can't even prove what you're saying? Then you have the gual to tell me to read more schoolbooks from an organised learning institution (which i clearly already done), lol. So, tell me what's your thoughts on subquantum kinetics...
#171 Posted by TehFuneral (8088 posts) -

I wish I was an alien.

#172 Posted by wis3boi (32078 posts) -

[QUOTE="bnarmz"]you're only talking about our solar system not deeper space (which is what my posts are mainly about), and this still doesn't prove aliens exist. br0kenrabbit

I could talk all day about some Cepheids I watched over several years, or my numerous observations of M41 and the massive red giants at its center. There's also SN1987A that I spent several years observing immediately after the star exploded. I'm waiting for Betelgeuse to pop any time now (I hope).

Seriously, you have no idea what you're talking about. Lay off the conspiracy websites and put your nose in some schoolbooks, you've a long way to go.

I think I'd stop feeding the troll :P

#173 Posted by bnarmz (1370 posts) -
[QUOTE="wis3boi"]

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

you're only talking about our solar system not deeper space (which is what my posts are mainly about), and this still doesn't prove aliens exist. bnarmz

I could talk all day about some Cepheids I watched over several years, or my numerous observations of M41 and the massive red giants at its center. There's also SN1987A that I spent several years observing immediately after the star exploded. I'm waiting for Betelgeuse to pop any time now (I hope).

Seriously, you have no idea what you're talking about. Lay off the conspiracy websites and put your nose in some schoolbooks, you've a long way to go.

I think I'd stop feeding the troll :P

do you know the definition of a troll, if you (and others) see this as trolling then it's no problem for me to stop posting in this topic. I would like nothing more then to be enlightened. I only want to be in the presense of absolute truth. It's nothing for me to stop posting here, and you can trust that. I'm not that dude to be acting ass in most of my post, sometimes I like to discuss serious matters. If the world had more serious people we would not be in the situtions we're currently in.
#174 Posted by br0kenrabbit (13595 posts) -

you say i don't know what I'm talking about, yet you can't even prove what you're saying? Then you have the gual to tell me to read more schoolbooks from an organised learning institution (which i clearly already done), lol. So, tell me what's your thoughts on subquantum kinetics...bnarmz

You can easily prove what I'm saying by grabbing a telescope, an accurate timepiece, a pencil and a pad of paper.

You've said time and again you don't believe things just because you are told, but only things that you can prove to yourself. Tell me, speaking of subquantum kinetics, have you ever observed the proposed "primordial transmuting ether composed of subtle 'etheron' particles"?

I didn't think so.

I could just as easily say "varied quasi-wavelengths in a time-equivalent retardation pony device" and make just as much sense.

Also:

Then you have thegualto tell me to read more schoolbooks from anorganisedlearning institution (which i clearly already done)bnarmz

It's 'gall', and 'which I clearly already done' is about as bad English as you can get.

Back to the schoolbooks, boy!

#175 Posted by br0kenrabbit (13595 posts) -

I wish I was an alien.

TehFuneral

...at home behind the sun.

#176 Posted by bnarmz (1370 posts) -

[QUOTE="bnarmz"]you say i don't know what I'm talking about, yet you can't even prove what you're saying? Then you have the gual to tell me to read more schoolbooks from an organised learning institution (which i clearly already done), lol. So, tell me what's your thoughts on subquantum kinetics...br0kenrabbit

You can easily prove what I'm saying by grabbing a telescope, an accurate timepiece, a pencil and a pad of paper.

You've said time and again you don't believe things just because you are told, but only things that you can prove to yourself. Tell me, speaking of subquantum kinetics, have you ever observed the proposed "primordial transmuting ether composed of subtle 'etheron' particles"?

I didn't think so.

I could just as easily say "varied quasi-wavelengths in a time-equivalent retardation pony device" and make just as much sense.

Also:

Then you have thegualto tell me to read more schoolbooks from anorganisedlearning institution (which i clearly already done)bnarmz

It's 'gall', and 'which I clearly already done' is about as bad English as you can get.

Back to the schoolbooks, boy!

Typical response from those that cant verify their claims. Dude, you totally disregarded the point of my posts and tried to stir the discussion to what you see through your own home telescope,lol. Then you go off laying insults about a mis spelled words and school? Wth. If you cant stick to the topic, or what Ive posted (since you did comment on it) then our chat here is done.
#177 Posted by br0kenrabbit (13595 posts) -

Typical response from those that cant verify their claims. Dude, you totally disregarded the point of my posts and tried to stir the discussion to what you see through your own home telescope,lol. Then you go off laying insults about a mis spelled words and school? Wth. If you cant stick to the topic, or what Ive posted (since you did comment on it) then our chat here is done. bnarmz

You haven't verified any one of your claims, my claims are verified by a few centuries of modern science. Do you understand what the word 'hypocritical' means?

#178 Posted by bnarmz (1370 posts) -

[QUOTE="bnarmz"]Typical response from those that cant verify their claims. Dude, you totally disregarded the point of my posts and tried to stir the discussion to what you see through your own home telescope,lol. Then you go off laying insults about a mis spelled words and school? Wth. If you cant stick to the topic, or what Ive posted (since you did comment on it) then our chat here is done. br0kenrabbit

You haven't verified any one of your claims, my claims are verified by a few centuries of modern science. Do you understand what the word 'hypocritical' means?

I've made no claims, you did. I've already said that I'm reserving my beliefs because the science on the matter is not only inconclusive but experts from all over the field has varying opinions and facts. Perhaps you should re look up the definition to hypocritical, and stop trying to take this into an irrelevant discussion.
#179 Posted by br0kenrabbit (13595 posts) -

I've made no claims, you did. I've already said that I'm reserving my beliefs because the science on the matter is not only inconclusive but experts from all over the field has varying opinions and facts. Perhaps you should re look up the definition to hypocritical, and stop trying to take this into an irrelevant discussion. bnarmz

You've made many claims. Here's just one:

My posts are basically saying neither of us can actually verify whats in space, we only use what was giving to us by a cryptic establishment.


Yes, I can verify those are planets. Yes, I can verify if a star is fusing hydrogen or heavier elements. Yes, I can verify the orbital period and orbital path of the planets. Yes, I can verify what's in space. It's no more difficult than observing.

Here's another of your claims:

Nasa is a very cryptic institution and for no legitimate reason should they be like this.


NASA is probably the most open government institution ever. Hell, you can even get their White Papers (do you even know what those are?) at no charge.

Just because you wish things were different doesn't mean they are, no matter how tightly you close your eyes and click your heels together.

#180 Posted by wis3boi (32078 posts) -

[QUOTE="wis3boi"]

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

I could talk all day about some Cepheids I watched over several years, or my numerous observations of M41 and the massive red giants at its center. There's also SN1987A that I spent several years observing immediately after the star exploded. I'm waiting for Betelgeuse to pop any time now (I hope).

Seriously, you have no idea what you're talking about. Lay off the conspiracy websites and put your nose in some schoolbooks, you've a long way to go.

bnarmz

I think I'd stop feeding the troll :P

do you know the definition of a troll, if you (and others) see this as trolling then it's no problem for me to stop posting in this topic. I would like nothing more then to be enlightened. I only want to be in the presense of absolute truth. It's nothing for me to stop posting here, and you can trust that. I'm not that dude to be acting ass in most of my post, sometimes I like to discuss serious matters. If the world had more serious people we would not be in the situtions we're currently in.

Yeah, I do know what a troll is, and around here, they usually like to talk about things of which they know zero about and persist on it and assume everyone else in the forums here are just as clueless as they are.

#181 Posted by bnarmz (1370 posts) -

[QUOTE="bnarmz"]I've made no claims, you did. I've already said that I'm reserving my beliefs because the science on the matter is not only inconclusive but experts from all over the field has varying opinions and facts. Perhaps you should re look up the definition to hypocritical, and stop trying to take this into an irrelevant discussion. br0kenrabbit

You've made many claims. Here's just one:

My posts are basically saying neither of us can actually verify whats in space, we only use what was giving to us by a cryptic establishment.


Yes, I can verify those are planets. Yes, I can verify if a star is fusing hydrogen or heavier elements. Yes, I can verify the orbital period and orbital path of the planets. Yes, I can verify what's in space. It's no more difficult than observing.

Here's another of your claims:

Nasa is a very cryptic institution and for no legitimate reason should they be like this.


NASA is probably the most open government institution ever. Hell, you can even get their White Papers (do you even know what those are?) at no charge.

Just because you wish things were different doesn't mean they are, no matter how tightly you close your eyes and click your heels together.

you can confirm exactly what you see from the comforts of your home. If nasa never told you what they were you would have no idea what you were looking at. Agaim, my post are about verification...which hasn't been done yet. You want to believe what nasa says fine by me. You won't be the only one. I'll continue to wait for the spaceship ride. I see our chat has now come to an end.
#182 Posted by bnarmz (1370 posts) -

[QUOTE="bnarmz"][QUOTE="wis3boi"]

I think I'd stop feeding the troll :P

wis3boi

do you know the definition of a troll, if you (and others) see this as trolling then it's no problem for me to stop posting in this topic. I would like nothing more then to be enlightened. I only want to be in the presense of absolute truth. It's nothing for me to stop posting here, and you can trust that. I'm not that dude to be acting ass in most of my post, sometimes I like to discuss serious matters. If the world had more serious people we would not be in the situtions we're currently in.

Yeah, I do know what a troll is, and around here, they usually like to talk about things of which they know zero about and persist on it and assume everyone else in the forums here are just as clueless as they are.

good lawd the irony here is rich. Trolling is a form of instigation. When someone makes posts that have nothing to do with the topic or discussion. Something you've been doing in this topic. Haha wow.
#183 Posted by RageQuitter69 (1366 posts) -

Yeah I do, people think it is stupid to believe in alients, I think it is stupid that people believe that there are 9 planets and only life on one of them.

#184 Posted by Darksonic666 (3482 posts) -

The universe is too vast for us to be the only ones in it so yes I do believe in aliens.

#185 Posted by l0ve (3175 posts) -

No I don't believe in aliens. Earth is the only planet in the univerese with life. The chance of a planet having the conditions for and then initiating spontaneous generation of life are one in infinity. I won't believe otherwise until I see solid evidence of actual life from another planet, moon, or asteroid.

#186 Posted by muller39 (14944 posts) -

I think aliens are out there.

#187 Posted by wis3boi (32078 posts) -

[QUOTE="wis3boi"]

[QUOTE="bnarmz"] do you know the definition of a troll, if you (and others) see this as trolling then it's no problem for me to stop posting in this topic. I would like nothing more then to be enlightened. I only want to be in the presense of absolute truth. It's nothing for me to stop posting here, and you can trust that. I'm not that dude to be acting ass in most of my post, sometimes I like to discuss serious matters. If the world had more serious people we would not be in the situtions we're currently in. bnarmz

Yeah, I do know what a troll is, and around here, they usually like to talk about things of which they know zero about and persist on it and assume everyone else in the forums here are just as clueless as they are.

good lawd the irony here is rich. Trolling is a form of instigation. When someone makes posts that have nothing to do with the topic or discussion. Something you've been doing in this topic. Haha wow.

No, that isn't irony because that isn't what I'm doing. Whatever helps you sleep at night though

#188 Posted by chaoscougar1 (37159 posts) -

[QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

[QUOTE="bnarmz"]I've made no claims, you did. I've already said that I'm reserving my beliefs because the science on the matter is not only inconclusive but experts from all over the field has varying opinions and facts. Perhaps you should re look up the definition to hypocritical, and stop trying to take this into an irrelevant discussion. bnarmz

You've made many claims. Here's just one:

My posts are basically saying neither of us can actually verify whats in space, we only use what was giving to us by a cryptic establishment.


Yes, I can verify those are planets. Yes, I can verify if a star is fusing hydrogen or heavier elements. Yes, I can verify the orbital period and orbital path of the planets. Yes, I can verify what's in space. It's no more difficult than observing.

Here's another of your claims:

Nasa is a very cryptic institution and for no legitimate reason should they be like this.


NASA is probably the most open government institution ever. Hell, you can even get their White Papers (do you even know what those are?) at no charge.

Just because you wish things were different doesn't mean they are, no matter how tightly you close your eyes and click your heels together.

you can confirm exactly what you see from the comforts of your home. If nasa never told you what they were you would have no idea what you were looking at. Agaim, my post are about verification...which hasn't been done yet. You want to believe what nasa says fine by me. You won't be the only one. I'll continue to wait for the spaceship ride. I see our chat has now come to an end.

lololol
So you believe you will see more from the window of a spaceship than some of the worlds most advanced telescopes WHICH are not all owned by NASA
You go ahead and still believe in "extra dimensional beings" and let me know when you see one :P

#189 Posted by JLCrogue (6042 posts) -

I believe, and hope there is some sort of microscopic life on Europa!Chicken453

Yeah, Europa has oceans under its icy surface so there are most likely life in its oceans. Heck, Mars might even have some microscopic life on it since it has ice too!

There are many aliens in this universe, there are the typical grey aliens with big black eyes from Zeta Reticuli, there are the reptilians from the Alpha Draconis system, and there are the tall, blonde haired human-like aliens from the Pleiades just to name a few. :P

#190 Posted by JLCrogue (6042 posts) -

[QUOTE="bnarmz"][QUOTE="br0kenrabbit"]

You've made many claims. Here's just one:

My posts are basically saying neither of us can actually verify whats in space, we only use what was giving to us by a cryptic establishment.


Yes, I can verify those are planets. Yes, I can verify if a star is fusing hydrogen or heavier elements. Yes, I can verify the orbital period and orbital path of the planets. Yes, I can verify what's in space. It's no more difficult than observing.

Here's another of your claims:

Nasa is a very cryptic institution and for no legitimate reason should they be like this.


NASA is probably the most open government institution ever. Hell, you can even get their White Papers (do you even know what those are?) at no charge.

Just because you wish things were different doesn't mean they are, no matter how tightly you close your eyes and click your heels together.

chaoscougar1

you can confirm exactly what you see from the comforts of your home. If nasa never told you what they were you would have no idea what you were looking at. Agaim, my post are about verification...which hasn't been done yet. You want to believe what nasa says fine by me. You won't be the only one. I'll continue to wait for the spaceship ride. I see our chat has now come to an end.

lololol
So you believe you will see more from the window of a spaceship than some of the worlds most advanced telescopes WHICH are not all owned by NASA
You go ahead and still believe in "extra dimensional beings" and let me know when you see one :P

And don't forget to wear your tin foil hat or else the aliens are gonna read your mind! :lol:

BTW, did you know that Hitler and the Nazis were helped by a rogue group of Pleiadians called the Gizeh Intelligence?

#191 Posted by leviathan91 (7763 posts) -

Yes but I think it would be extremely rare for an alien civilization to exist and be just like us or greater than us considering how our solar system was lucky to be in the right place of the galaxy.

But it's possible. I mean, our galaxy is quite huge afterall.

#192 Posted by chaoscougar1 (37159 posts) -

Yes but I think it would be extremely rare for an alien civilization to exist and be just like us or greater than us considering how our solar system was lucky to be in the right place of the galaxy.

But it's possible. I mean, our galaxy is quite huge afterall.

leviathan91
Compared to some other galaxies Its kinda small