Do Space Aliens really exist?

I wish we actually knew if they did exist or they don't. There is no proof in the public eye that they do, but there is no proof they don't either I guess. Me personally I don't think they exist simply because there is no evidence to show that, you would think if they really did exist everyone would know by now so I do doubt it.
 
Last edited:
AdamScott85 said:
I wish we actually knew if they did exist or they don't. There is no proof in the public eye that they do, but there is no proof they don't either I guess. Me personally I don't think they exist simply because there is no evidence to show that, you would think if they really did exist everyone would know by now so I do doubt it.
Click to expand...

Are you just using Earth for that observation?
So you don't think that somewhere in the Universe there may be other life?
 
Science cannot prove something like a deity doesnt exist, so you have to take the practical view that unless it does exist then there must be a provable explamation for any phenomina.

Science doesnt have all the answer, and beleiving in a god is one way to settle those unanswered questions, but the true scientific way is to seek out truths and answers wherever they may be found, and to only accept that which can be proven.

As for wether or not we exist has as much to do with the meaning of the word existence as ourselves.
 
Trusty said:
The universe is a beautifully strange place, we can agree on that.
Click to expand...

Yes it sure is and I wish I knew all the answers. ;)

I looked into it on and off for about 15 years and everything boils down to the quantum level then you get lost, or I should phrase humans get lost.

Examples of what we don't know...

How water works.
How quantum physics works.
How a photon can be a particle or a wave.
How is gravity linked to mass and what is gravity.
What is dark matter if it exists.

The is loads of stuff we don't know and it only takes one alien race to get on it all who are only a couple of thousand years a head of us and its plain to see.
 
Last edited:
adolf hamster said:
Science cannot prove something like a deity doesnt exist, so you have to take the practical view that unless it does exist then there must be a provable explamation for any phenomina.

Science doesnt have all the answer, and beleiving in a god is one way to settle those unanswered questions, but the true scientific way is to seek out truths and answers wherever they may be found, and to only accept that which can be proven.

As for wether or not we exist has as much to do with the meaning of the word existence as ourselves.
Click to expand...

Potentially science could maybe one day - but right now at our current level of progress not so much - it seems to be a common fallacy that the more "hard science" there is the more it disproves religion just because :S
 
Rroff said:
Potentially science could maybe one day - but right now at our current level of progress not so much - it seems to be a common fallacy that the more "hard science" there is the more it disproves religion just because :S
Click to expand...

its not just because at all, and it seems I do understand what you are trying to say. you just don't accept reality.
science cant disprove god, it can disprove many many aspects of all religions.
 
Rroff said:
Potentially science could maybe one day - but right now at our current level of progress not so much - it seems to be a common fallacy that the more "hard science" there is the more it disproves religion just because :S
Click to expand...

Everyone has a god I know for a fact, would you like to know his name? :confused:

The universe!:eek: As we are all made from star dust. ;)
 
itchy said:
Everyone has a god I know for a fact, would you like to know his name? :confused:

The universe!:eek: As we are all made from star dust. ;)
Click to expand...

I am actually slightly spiritual inclined but IMO religion is most likely made up garbage (not based on casual observation).
 
Rroff said:
Potentially science could maybe one day - but right now at our current level of progress not so much - it seems to be a common fallacy that the more "hard science" there is the more it disproves religion just because :S
Click to expand...

Depends, some things have been disproved, others reinforced (for example there is a theory relating to the origins of the story of noah's ark and a great flood).

Many aspects of a religion are less about beleif in a diety and more like a set of rules on how to live well with other people, with the deity being present mainly as an answer to mysteries and a judge to answer.

We may one day know everything, including possibly that there really is a god, but thats a scary prospect.

Someone posted a while back a good asimov story about this, theorising that "god" is a relic of a previous mankinds attempts to reverse entropy with a computer (which didnt find the answer until the end of the universe), made a good read.

The thing is, if there is a god do we really want to know, or worse meet them?
 
Rroff said:
I am actually slightly spiritual inclined but IMO religion is most likely made up garbage (not based on casual observation).
Click to expand...

Pretty much nailed it! ;) But it was also manipulated to control the masses by the powers that be at the time. ;)

Life is very complicated and so is the universe to the point I think, we become ignorant to the world/universe around us.

We focus too much on the future and the past and not live for the now, which is what reality actually is. :eek:

How is this alien related???

If we this screwed up on time and space, imagine how they think??? :D
 
Avenged7Fold said:
I believe that we cannot know or find out about the existence of a god, nor can we disprove it. What i firmly believe is that whether god exists or not, it is irrelevant to our actions on earth.

I don't deny his existence.

That makes me agnostic. This form of agnosticism overlaps with aspects of being an atheist but it does not share the core value of being an atheist, which is refuting the existence of a higher being.
Click to expand...

The core value of being an atheist is not believing in the existence of gods. That isn't the same as believing in the non-existence of gods. It's possible to not believe either way.

(a)gnosticism and (a)theism aren't different positions on the same thing. They are positions on different things. One is about knowledge, the other is about belief.

Here is a definition of agnosticism by the person who invented the word:

That it is wrong for a man to say he is certain of the objective truth of a proposition unless he can provide evidence which logically justifies that certainty. This is what agnosticism asserts and in my opinion, is all that is essential to agnosticism.
Click to expand...

Since he wrote that in 1889, i.e. long before the modern change in the meaning of the word "man", it's not sex-specific.

So there are 4 basic positions:

Agnostic theist: Agrees with the above definition and thinks that there isn't sufficient evidence to declare the existence or non-existence of gods an objective truth. Believes in a god or gods as an act of faith.

Agnostic atheist: Agrees with the above definition and thinks that there isn't sufficient evidence to declare the existence or non-existence of gods an objective truth. Does not have believe in a god or gods.

Gnostic theist: Rejects the principle of agnosticism and considers the existence of the god or gods they believe in to be objective truth.

Gnostic atheist: Rejects the principle of agnosticism and considers the non-existence of gods to be objective truth.

If you accept the original meaning of the word "agnostic" as defined by the person who created the word, you position is agnostic atheism. You might define the words differently, but some people don't. What's the point of completely changing what the word "agnostic" means and thus removing the only word that describes that position?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom