Most Americans Believe Alien Life Is Possible Study Shows.

Since we don't watch much tv in my household, I didn't see the show which prompted this poll. Was it any good?

And of course I'm pleased this is not so ATM anymore.

__________________
"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

Sound reasonable to me "somewhere in the universe" includes quite a lot!

They will likely not look too like little green people with big eyes however.

1/3 of Americans might not understand how immense the universe really is, though. The media probably helped them along.

with regards

I think ATM is about the mainstream scientific theory, not the mainstream of what the masses believe to be true. Otherwise soon Creationism may become mainstream as well, but I have a feeling it will be ATM here for a long time to come.

Apart from that: why not? If there may be or have been life on Mars, and since we think evolution is a good theory, then why wouldn't there be life anywhere else? I would be surprised if life on Earth was unique to the universe, but I would also be surprised if we found evidence of life outside the solar system anytime soon. It's a bit of a moot discussion (albeit fascinating because of the almost unlimited speculation one can have).

__________________
Knowledge is a curse, but ignorance is worse

The idea that there are alien intelligences living elsewhere in our Galaxy is not really ATM. It "becomes" ATM when the assumption is made (without any evidence) that those alien intelligences are here.

I concur.
And on that note, the idea of "alien life" is rather mainstream within the scientific community since asumptions that it is likely underlie countless scientific endeavors.

I don't know, Creationism has been mainstream for a long time running, no? So much so that earthlings have yet to agree on what it means to be human.

I don't find it to be a moot discussion at all, Fram. We ourselves are now ETs. That reality alone, IMHO, lends validity to ongoing speculation.

But let me ask you this: If you allow the ETH and consider it likely, do you consider earthlings as the "apex" of evolutionary advancement?

Whatever the case, I agree with you in that I'd be surprised, too, if life on earth was unique to the universe.

__________________
"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

As we determined long ago, RAF, what you consider evidence differs from what I think. From the time there was Writing, and even before, earthlings have been telling of "those who from heaven to earth came" and how they've assisted, intervened in, or interrupted the affairs of Mankind. In my mind, this is textual evidence.

No matter, what confounds me most about your thinking on the ETH, is that you'll allow for them "elsewhere" but not here, not now, not in the past, not ever.

__________________
"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

Hmm, I think many earthlings (at least of the human kind) agree on what it means to be human, certainly in a biological sense. I think you mix this up with the discussion about what it means to be intelligent, and if we can be called the only intelligent life on Earth.

I wouldn't call ourselves ET's because twelve men have stood on the Moon. No one is born yet outside the Earth, and noone has really lived there (in a selfsustaining, durable sense). And I don't think that it changes anything in this discussion.
I don't see how your question about evolution follows from the premisse. First of all; i consider it likely that there is extra terrestrial life. I consider it extremely unlikely that there's is seriously developed life in the rest of the solar system though. And I have absolutely no idea if there is any intelligent life apart from us anywhere in our galaxy or in the universe.
But if there is extraterrestrial life, then there is not just 'evolutionary advancement' (which in itself is a misnomer, as evolution isn't necessarily advancing), but there are many independent 'evolutions', each on their own planet or so. So while you can discuss if we are the best animals to have evolved yet on Earth (and I don't think you can make that judgment on all accounts at the same time: some animals live longer, some have better capacities for reproducing, running, seeing, ..., some are better build to survive catastrophies, etcetera), you cannot say anything about us in light of the ETH (which I assume you mean to be the hypothesis that there is extraterrestrial life somewhere).
Anyway, I certainly don't consider us the apex of evolution on earth, as apex implies a finality, a conclusion, and evolution isn't finished.

__________________
Knowledge is a curse, but ignorance is worse

Not really, because half the world's population think Mankind was created in "god's image," whether it is Allah, JHVH, or whomever. The other half think we evolved purely from primates and are merely biological machines.

Well, the mere fact that either earthlings or their robots have and are visiting other planets qualifies us as ETs. Sure, a fledgling space faring species, but ETs nonetheless.

Yes, the ETH is the "extraterrestrial hypothesis."

But what you appear to missing is the notion of intelligence behind the ETH. You know, the "are we alone" question?
Whether you'll admit it or not, homo sapiens sapiens, or "thinkg man," is an evolutionary anomolie. You yourself point out some solid examples of "better" evolutionary progress in other animals. So again, it is the "intelligence factor" within the ETH we're considering and "thinking man" is the only observation of a space faring, aka. ET, species we have.

I agree, and because of this, I have difficulty restricting the ETH with modern understanding and/or technology, like so many others do.

Case in point: "Skeptics" can agree the ETH is possible or even likely, but because we earthlings haven't figured out interstellar travel, they restrict the hypothetical ETs' ability to visit earth. They impose our limitiations on the ETH and dismiss the ancient textual evidence and carvings/depictions, the eyewitness accounts (both ancient and modern), the pics and vids, and more, as absolutely mundane imaginings, misidentifications or what have you.

Befuddling, to say the least.

__________________
"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

It is called critical thinking.

If you claim something as extra-ordinary as aliens meddling in human
affairs I want evidence. REAL, tactile evidence, like an artifact, or
better still, the mummified corps of one.

__________________
Join the Illuminati

This is true...what you consider "evidence" is not in any way convincing.

...and that simply isn't good enough. Your "belief" is irrelevent..."old stories" are not evidence unless they can be corroborated.

Why should that "confound" you? You know my position. I see no reason why there can't be intelligent life "out there". I just don't see any evidence that they are/were here.

You assume that we will figure out interstellar travel...do you base that assumption on the science involved?...or do you base it on "wishing" it were so??

This is again the mix of mainstream science and what the masses believe. I'm talking about mainstream science.

Then you and I have a different definition of an ET.

Why are we an evolutionary anomaly? All I see is a normal evolutionary line from some primates over early homo until sapiens sapiens.
If the notion of intelligence is necessary for the ETH, then this is not the same thing as I was talking about. The original question was if there is ET life, not if there is ET intelligence. Space faring and ET are not the same in my view, and in the normally used definition.
Finally, about the skeptics. The dismissals, as you call them, are detailed descriptions of what happened in reality, in many cases. Can you show any modern pic, vid or eyewitness account that you think is believable?
And what do you mean by ancient eye witness accounts? The Enuma Elish? I would be surprised if there were eye witnesses of the battle that pulled the moon loose from the Earth, as you suppose is described in it.

__________________
Knowledge is a curse, but ignorance is worse

Given examples like the following...:

(Source)

... I place painfully little credence in what most Americans believe.

I understand; I'd like "REAL" evidence too to end this debate.
But I don't see it as an extraordinary claim since "those from heaven to earth came" have been attested to since time immemorial.

__________________
"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

Hey, y'all, we know what is scientific mainstream and what isn't.

The part that isn't belongs in the appropriately named:

Against the Mainstream

__________________
0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0....