Classy! =D> (as it was written prior to your edit)

Kind of reminds me of the end of a debate I had with a Southern Baptist minister about his literal interpretation of The Bible.

The world is comic to those who think and tragic to those who feel.

I really don't know what you are angry about.

You should read the rules for using this BBS.

Since kids browse these forums, I am pretty sure Dr. Plat is going to ban you(rs) if you swear.

I'm of the opinion that we still do not know.
Within the last year we've seen articles such as this highlighting the possibility that Life may yet be found on Venus.
And then, of course, there's The New Hunt For Life On Mars with some tantalizing evidences.

So, in my mind, to state matter-of-factly a negative in either case is erroneous.

__________________
"Where the telescope ends, the microscope begins. Which of the two has the greater view?" - Hugo

"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." - Churchill

You should read those sites.
In addition to all this, Schulze-Makuch's ideas don't mesh very well with the findings from the Magellian mission. I need to get the details of this and post it here soon.

As for the posting about Mars. I was under the impression that all this is about past life on Mars, not current life on Mars. It is strange how these links about life on Mars slowly and slowly leave this out over time when they continue to report on this subject.

The link you gave me about Mars also points to this interesting tidbit of information:

Life? Microcystis aeruginosa is a type of cyanobacteria found on Earth. It is an algae known to cloud the Chesapeake Bay when it blooms and forms thick mats. Life on other planets might never have evolved beyond such simplicity.
This supports what I have been saying, for all practical purposes.

I am jumping into this a discussion a bit late, but I’ll put in my two cents.

If we are lucky and we do not blow ourselves up and if we are smart enough to face the challenges of nature, then we most likely will encounter other sentient beings.

As our sun dies, we will need to find new places to live.

Other sentient beings in our galaxy will also face the same challenge.

The densest region of a galaxy is in the core, which is the most likely place for new stars to be formed from the remains of older stars.

Thus, all sentient beings will eventually migrate to the cores of galaxies.
Snowflake.

ROFLMAO

__________________
"We need to get back into that Saturn V world mentality."
Gene Cernan -- Commander Apollo 17

Why is it so impossible to think that there is no other intelligent life out there comparable to ours in our galaxy. Even if the conditions that created life here only exist in 0.01% in the rest of the galaxy isn't that number still fairly high? Just a thought.

Did you mean to say "Why is it so impossible to think that there is other intelligent life out there comparable to ours in our galaxy"?

If so, I'd just like say that I am sure that it is not impossible, from my personal experience. I think it often.

Yeah that's what I meant, thanks for catching that... =D>

Hey, all,

Mainstream science presents all sorts of reasons why the odds are not in our favor for finding ETI.

But this belief in ETI seems to be almost like a religion to some people

I have got some private emails form people who have visited this forum and yet they have put a block on their email account so that I cannot reply. So, they ignore me.

There is a word for someone who ignores information. Can you tell me what that word is? How would you call someone who ignores?

from

__________________
Home of the Illumi-Llama:
The Illuminati-R-Us Forums

Content deleted on the suggestion of a friend.

And my apologies for posting the content of private email.

__________________
Home of the Illumi-Llama:
The Illuminati-R-Us Forums

I really do!

This posting supports my belief.

You know, I did not mention Lance by name.

Legit question.!

I don't think he answered.

Taking things out of context is a juvenile tactic.

This is in response to a poll Lance started that is the logic equivalant of "does it matter if we ever see faries as long is we believe that they are really there".

This was in response to him accusing me of believing everything I see on TV. It is a joke. I am talking about Gilligans Island, of course.

You know, posting emails is a violation of this web site. But since, I doubt you would mind, I will do so.

Lance thinks PBS and The Discovery Channel and Fox are in the same boat as far as credibility is concerned.

I will post that email exchange here soon.

An honest question.

He did not answer.

But once again, he takes things out of context.

I responded to his email about a newspaper article about some interview that someone made with an Apollo Astronaut. This astronaut believes that the government is hiding alien bodies.

When Lance asked if I believe it, the only answer I gave was, "sure, I believe that maybe an astronaut might believe that the government is hiding alien bodies."

But Lance thought that I was agreeing with the astronaut.

So, naturally I would have to ask Lance about his reading comprehension skills.

It is only logical and natural that I would wonder about that.

I gotta tell you that both of you are walking on thin ice here. You're both being rude, and overly emotional about this topic. Why can't you just agree to disagree? Why take it to the level of harassment?

I can tell you that the BA won't side with either of you if you both continue to violate board policy just because "he started it."

__________________
"The oxen are slow, but the earth is patient."

The fact that the people who disagree with me have digressed to being little crying children do not add any credibility to their views.

No one said it did. It doesn't add any credibility to your views either.

__________________
"The oxen are slow, but the earth is patient."

Maybe you are right.

OK OK

Still, I am leaving my response to his attack intact.