Interesting question here...

OmNomNom · **Posted:** Tue Nov 03, 2009 4:28 am

Steve wrote:

I think it is funny that we send out signals giving our address to intelligent life. With cosmic distances, the problem I see with it is that once the signal is received we would no doubt be extinct or morphed into something different entirely.

Why would you consider that a problem? It's not like we are likely to stop doing that into the future, so the other intelligent life would be getting a real-time history lesson, albeit at a significant delay.

There are some scientists that are currently arguing that, since the age of the universe has been calculated, that other life forms are not likely to have existed for much longer than us. Therefore it is unlikely that if other life forms have started developing technology, that it would be significantly advanced from our own.

OmNomNom · **Posted:** Tue Nov 03, 2009 4:32 am

claire wrote:

OmNomNom wrote:

It's not that they can't, it's that they don't want to. Humans are attracted to likenesses of themselves.

I have no idea of their wants. I can only see what is produced and make judgements of their creativity based on that. Have you ever seen/read Sphere? Now, there was an interesting sentient ET.

Well perhaps then you should stray further from reading fiction for while. I saw Sphere when it came out in ~1996? Not since though. I might grab it again from the videostore since I'd be more likely to appreciate it now anyway.

Sir_Centrism · **Joined:** Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:13 pm **Posts:** 425

I bet there is life on other planets, but most likely it's in forms that we wouldn't even recognize as being life. I don't think that life is necessarily carbon-based. Who's to say that there isn't Radon-based life on other planets that breathe gasseous lead, look like brick walls and require 5 different sexes to procreate?

clear · **Posted:** Tue Nov 03, 2009 4:36 am

OmNomNom · **Posted:** Tue Nov 03, 2009 11:33 am

claire wrote:

OmNomNom wrote:

Well perhaps then you should stray further from reading fiction for while.

I have not read fiction since my early twenties, but am not sure how that relates to this conversation.

You mentioned the best creative minds of science fiction earlier and then asked me if I have read or watched sphere. You also made comments about these creative people's apparent lack of imagination and that you can only judge them based on their work. Surely then this requires you to be familiar with at least some of it in the form of a book. If you have not read fiction in a long time then perhaps you would have come across an explanation for why you don't come across completely outlandish yet sentient creatures in sci-fi generally.

claire wrote:

"I have no idea of their wants. I can only see what is produced and make judgements of their creativity based on that."

My thinking was that a person making a statement such as this, is not curious about the reality of things and therefore not likely to read non-fiction exclusively unless dealing mostly with softer topics and/or narrow interests. Perhaps I have made a logical leap in assuming that you still read fiction for the most part, but it was the best I could deduce from you have said. I hope that is clearer now.

buttcoffee · **Posted:** Tue Nov 03, 2009 5:54 pm

OmNomNom wrote:

Steve wrote:

I think it is funny that we send out signals giving our address to intelligent life. With cosmic distances, the problem I see with it is that once the signal is received we would no doubt be extinct or morphed into something different entirely.

Why would you consider that a problem? It's not like we are likely to stop doing that into the future, so the other intelligent life would be getting a real-time history lesson, albeit at a significant delay.

There are some scientists that are currently arguing that, since the age of the universe has been calculated, that other life forms are not likely to have existed for much longer than us. Therefore it is unlikely that if other life forms have started developing technology, that it would be significantly advanced from our own.

puny

scientists and their puny calculations.

clear · **Posted:** Tue Nov 03, 2009 10:44 pm

clear · **Posted:** Tue Nov 03, 2009 10:52 pm

SleepyDragon · **Joined:** Mon Jun 30, 2008 2:25 am **Posts:** 2601

Quote:

Horatio:
O day and night, but this is wondrous strange!

Hamlet:
And therefore as a stranger give it welcome.
There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

Back when I was still reading every SF compilation I could lay hands on, I came across a beautiful short story about a sun creature, composed only of energetic particles, which was torn from its home and marooned on Earth. It survived the impossible cold and pressure, and the unimaginable hardness of the ocean's surface, only to perish when the crew on a nearby airplane scanned it with radar to try to find out what it was.

OmNomNom · **Posted:** Wed Nov 04, 2009 11:50 am

claire wrote:

OmNomNom wrote:

My thinking was that a person making a statement such as this, is not curious about the reality of things and therefore not likely to read non-fiction exclusively unless dealing mostly with softer topics and/or narrow interests. Perhaps I have made a logical leap in assuming that you still read fiction for the most part, but it was the best I could deduce from you have said. I hope that is clearer now.

Yes. Much clearer. I thought you might be getting lippy for a moment, my mistake. When it comes to intelligent extraterrestial life, I cannot help but associate the topic as fictional as this is the only foundation I have to reference.

My statement did not mean to give the impression I am not curious about reality, but rather I am not the type to claim to know the thought processes of others. I really have no clue of the wants of sci-fi creators. I see nothing wrong with my observation they seldom think outside of the humanoid box. The ET from Alien was spectacular, but the humanoid body structure is still there, even Jaba the Hutt had eyes and a mouth, arms and fingers. I could go on, but do not wish to bore.

My reference to Sphere was just to point to a good example of an advanced and sentient ET outside of the typical deformed human type ET, which is seldom seen in my opinon.

Edit: Oh yeah, I forgot to say hello and welcome, and lol username...

I try to be overt when having a go. Less cowardly that way. I also keep it 'specially for the deserving. I doubt you have much to fear from me.

I do share some of your criticism of humanoid like creatures in sci-fi. The point is though, that film makers and writers realise that audiences empathise more easily and willingly with likenesses of humans, not to mention they do too. It is also the case to some degree that their imaginations are limited by what they have seen and know of on Earth. The truth of reality is far stranger and more interesting than the wildest human imagination. It requires a certain degree of mental 'noise' combined with high intellect and experience to come up with great visions of alternate realities. Unfortunately since this mental 'noise' has it's origins in schizophrenia and related conditions, the creativity and vision can cancel out the meaningful expression thereof.

Thanks for the welcome by the way.

Interesting question here...

Who is online