zapatos

This thread is not about time travel. If you wish to discuss time travel you should open your own thread on that topic.

I wasn't griping and I like the internet just fine. I was just having a fond memory from my youth that was triggered by the picture of some books. I would have had the same reaction by smelling my aunt's home made cinnamon coffee cake! Who would have thought that having access to all the knowledge in the world through a small device you can carry around in your pocket would lead to so many people spending hours a day looking at pictures of cute cats!

Okay. So we assume that is true. What does that prove to you? What is the point you are making with that?

Sure. Does that mean both are not stalagmites? I'm not sure why that matters. I didn't say an exact replica of a stalagmite can exist elsewhere, I only said a stalagmite can exist elsewhere. Is you overall position simply that an exact set of humans do not exist elsewhere in the universe?

We had that very set from Time-Life and I read through every one as a kid. What an eye opener it was for me!

Life exist in the universe, as I'm sure you'll agree. That tells me life is possible. Not really a big stretch of the imagination. Similarly stalagmites exist on Earth and while I have no evidence of them anywhere else in the universe, I'm convinced it is possible stalagmites exist elsewhere. I'm not sure why that seems so outlandish to you.

That's kind of a wide open question. Which beliefs and assumptions of mine would you like to discuss?

This is like watching the Hindenburg Disaster.

When Dawkins writes a scientific paper it is reasonable to expect scientific language. When he writes a book for the masses the expectations are different. I'm glad you are not critiquing Keats or Shakespeare.

If you meant something different than what you said in the OP, just correct yourself. Don't dig the hole deeper.

Who put you in charge of what can and cannot be done? My daughter-in-law had a miscarriage. You will never convince her, or me, that we didn't lose a person. What magical transformation happens while passing through the birth canal? You need to expand your thinking a bit. It is not unreasonable to include all eggs as the upper limit of people who could be born. In which case, it is true that most people will never be born. Don't get bogged down by the words and miss the meaning.

Bugs and fish have little to do with why one activity is acceptable and the other is condemned. It is the human activity that is condemned or accepted. Switch the animals around and you find it is the person's actions that are judged. Stepping on insects is condemned; catching and releasing fish is accepted. Stepping on fish is condemned; catching and releasing insects is accepted.

Hate to break it to you, but... "If any extraterestial life is in the solar system and yet they did not connect Us, it is because they do think we are not ready." ...is not an 'analogy'. It is an assertion that you cannot support. Then quit telling us what they are thinking, which is what you did when you said "...they do think we are not ready." I do understand your analogies. That is why I was able to call out your use of a straw man. You have to try harder if you want to succeed here. Digging in your heels when it is obvious to all that you cannot support your claims makes you look childish. Bullshit. Einstein could communicate with children, he just didn't try to teach them Relativity.

Why couldn't it be because THEY are not ready? Claiming to know the mind of aliens is risky business.

Can you say "Strawman"?

We are currently all on a ship traveling through space and eventually something is bound to go wrong. What we are talking about is developing an escape from our current ship and moving on.

I think you are missing the point of the slow ark. Great speed is not necessary. It is not as if the people who depart Earth will arrive at the destination no matter how fast you go. It is the future generations who will arrive. Not everyone is completely lacking in curiosity or would consider finding new life to be beneath one's dignity. I'm guessing you don't bother to interact with many people who have cognitive disabilities.

Electromagnetic radiation is ubiquitous, and has the advantage of traveling at c. I think it is safe to assume that an advanced civilization will have discovered it and figured out how to use it. While it is certainly not the only communication medium, someone interested in talking to us will likely attempt multiple channels. We don't have to wait until we know everything to do something.

Yes, it does. My government can't even efficiently fix potholes on my street.

Moon is not suggesting we leave tomorrow, and therefore is not dependent on current technology. If the proposed future technology seems feasible, or it at least does not violate accepted physics, I'm unsure why he cannot reference it to discuss the future. The technology to colonize Mars does not exist but that doesn't keep reputable scientists from discussing it as a possible future endeavor. Discussions about the future are, almost by definition, required to speculate about future technologies.

I'll vote for another planetary system, although I am guessing the "little grey guys" are inflatable autopilots, as in "Airplane!" circa 1980. Robotic exploratory craft could have been sent to promising planetary systems a long time ago in the hunt for alien (us) life. Aliens probably were no more successful with their version of SETI than we are, and decided to take an active rather than passive approach to finding life.

Which of my posts was frustrating for you and why?

Thank you. Gets very frustrating some times.

Then why are you asking me which costs more?

Hmm. Not sure how that relates. I actually thought I was supporting your position on rape vs prostitution. As I've never gone to a prostitute I can't say I know what the price structure is. As I've never thrown money at a rape victim I'll have to plead ignorance on that one too. Perhaps you know which costs more?