Who here believes in UFO'S?

No I don't believe that other life has visited the earth.
From a statistical point of view, other life most likely exists in the universe, however this does not make me hold the claim that other life does exist. If there was measurable evidence of their existence then I would hold the claim that they do exist.

If I say that I am most likely to wake up tomorrow morning, it does not mean that I will and anyone who believes that other alien life exists is a fool.
 
Castiel said:
Maybe when you are next arguing about the veracity of God in whatever form, you will construct a more coherent basis for your opinion, rather than "show me empirical proof"....maybe....:)
Click to expand...

Stop trolling the god stuff in here and go back to SC where you belong peddling your theological claptrap. :p:D
 
bhavv said:
If your talking to me, Im not the one who hijacked this thread with talk about religion, that was pretty obviously Castiel.
Click to expand...

I'm not discussing religion, I'm discussing your acceptance and dismissal of concepts using the same argument.

The OP actually brings up the subject of God and Religion in respect to UFO's and Aliens visitation anyway.


However, you are now aware no doubt just how darned annoying it can be to have someone misrepresent and push an agenda when you are trying to discuss something in a sensible and open-minded way.

I would hope that you bare this in mind when you next construct your contentions and debates in philosophical and Religious threads in future.:)

Ok on with the Alien, UFO stuff.
 
Last edited:
Castiel said:
Maybe when you are next arguing about the veracity of God in whatever form, you will construct a more coherent basis for your opinion, rather than "show me empirical proof"....maybe....:)
Click to expand...

The proof doesnt need to be empirical tbh.

Yet you cant even show any logical or rational support to the idea of any theological God existing, whereas Science definitely can and does provide plenty of valid reasons to support the idea of organic life on other habitable planets.

You are going completely overboard in this thread tbh, your arguments are severely weak and very flawed, and as many others have already stated, they can believe in the possibility of life on other planets, but they do no believe in religion or Gods.

There is logical scientific evidence for one idea (alien lifeforms), yet there is no evidence within Science for God, which you clearly know with how often you constantly post Eugenie Scott's Science is Agnostic video.
 
I believe there is something else out there(would be naive to think otherwise),but i do not believe we have been visted by anyone except the debt collecters lol:(
 
There wAs a time when scientists said the human body couldn't travel faster then 10mph in a vehicle as our bodies couldn't take the strain. . .

On this matter of saying you cant go faster then light is rubbish. The speed of light is just a speed, just like sound it can be broken.

On aliens i belive they exist but i dont belive theyre among us.

Me personally dont belive in ghosts demons big foot but if it doesnt hurt me or my family i dont have anything against people who do belive and i wont mock anyone for their views
 
Yes I believe in life on other planets somewhere. I also imagine if they can make it here they don't need to show any evidence that they are doing a recon flight.

We would be pretty insignificant to anyone/thing that could get here. They probably do a flyby for a laugh to look at us bombing each other and fapping to internet porn.
 
If we had the technology to travel through deep space at the speed of light, why would we poke our nose in to random worlds? To study the habbitants? If we had that kind of technology im sure a primitive world wouldnt intrest us
 
Philz0r said:
If we had the technology to travel through deep space at the speed of light, why would we poke our nose in to random worlds? To study the habbitants? If we had that kind of technology im sure a primitive world wouldnt intrest us
Click to expand...

Yet we are so deeply fascinated by other lifeforms and species on our own planet are we not? Why wouldnt we be interested in lifeforms on other planets if we ha the capability to find them?
 
Philz0r said:
On this matter of saying you cant go faster then light is rubbish. The speed of light is just a speed, just like sound it can be broken.
Click to expand...

Wrong light of speed can't be broken, because your mass increases and so you need more and more energy and when you hit speed of light you need an infinite amount of energy. However There is a purposed way around it, which at the moment fits the theories. Alcubierre drive similar to warp drive from star trek.

Dead worlds interest us, let alone primitive worlds with hole new set of life and potential uses.
 
Last edited:
bhavv said:
I always have used that in every debate. Feel free to read and comprehend the rest of my post rather than just reading the first line.
Click to expand...

Frankly you have not, and the contention I made is not about what you believe or don't believe but how you justify those beliefs. Including the umpteen times you have dismissed evidence for a philosophical position because it has no empirical or scientific basis, yet now you have effectively said the opposite.

Anyway I have made my point and illustrated that although you accept that we have minimal knowledge about the Universe and little or no empirical knowledge that there are Space-faring races and you also believe that the basis laws of the Universe may indeed be wrong, the latter going against any scientific consensus whatsoever, you will still argue the diametric opposite with regard to philosophical positions which really should be given the same latitude.
 
AcidHell2 said:
Wrong light of speed can't be broken, because your weight increase and so you need more and more energy and when you hit speed of light you need an infinite amount of energy. however. There is a purposes way around it which at the moment fits the theories. Alcubierre drive similar to warp drive from star trek.
Click to expand...



So ur saying light cant be broken but it could be broken?
 
Castiel said:
Frankly you have not, and the contention I made is not about what you believe or don't believe but how you justify those beliefs. Including the umpteen times you have dismissed evidence for a philosophical position because it has no empirical or scientific basis, yet now you have effectively said the opposite.
Click to expand...

Both philosophical and theological evidence are complete hogwash, I only go by Scientific evidence and understanding.

Lifeforms on other planets definitely has a very strong scientific basis, which is why I can believe in it as a possibility.

I dismiss ALL ideas and claims that are not supportable by Science. Philosophy and Theology are obsolete ways of thinking to me.
 
Last edited:
Philz0r said:
If we had the technology to travel through deep space at the speed of light, why would we poke our nose in to random worlds? To study the habbitants? If we had that kind of technology im sure a primitive world wouldnt intrest us
Click to expand...

Unless the planet had oil ;)

AcidHell2 said:
Wrong light of speed can't be broken, because your weight. Increase and so you need more and more energy and when you hit speed of light you need an infinite amount of energy. however. There is a purposes way around it which at the moment fits the theories. Alcubierre drive similar to warp drive from star trek.
Click to expand...

Laws of Physics on earth are not the same in another universe. Some astronomers are saying that fundamental constants of nature may not be so constant.
 
Let's deal with our universe first before we try hopping between them. We don't even know if there are multiple universes yet. I also assume as soon as you enter a new universe you would be constrained to their physics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom