Total posts: 4,833
-->
@Greyparrot
Guns are fun, when you make murder illegal it's not like they're dangerous. It's like turning friendly fire off in a video game.
Also, why not fix the prices at $0?
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
100% genius.
I also had an idea. All of this people killing people, people raping people. It's got to stop you know?
So why don't we make it against the law to do that? Also natural disasters kill people. They should also be illegal.
Created:
There is that misogyny again. I guess I have no choice but to declare IWRA a hate group. I would warn you all to be very careful as he tries to recruit you into his hateful ways.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
<50s gangster voice>Alright GP *chews cigar*, let em have the AI wall of text!</50s gangster voice>
Created:
Posted in:
Just finished the first season of The Apothecary Diaries, pretty good.
Created:
but as many charter schools do not or cannot serve their entire communities
You can't possibly believe that is a legitimate objection. They can be bigger or there can be more of them.
aren't public schools in some form necessary?
No.
Let's expand on that.
Notice how you shift from "what policies" to "don't delete all public schools", what a leap. See my name? I dream of liberty. How about you let people decide what school would serve their children best. If you think nobody would pick public schools what does that mean?
That tells me something: that you, I, and parents all know public schools are worse for children either through lack of education or mal-education. There is nothing inherently broken in "public" it just so happens that all the "public schools" are instances of the category "institutions funded by stolen wealth with no oversight or objective and immovable standards of success with significant consequences for failure". Socialists have a false understanding of human society and so they constantly created instances of that category and then act like their ideas not to blame for the absolute failure.
How is eliminating them, or making them less effective / even lower educational value "pro child"?
That is a false dichotomy, the false dichotomy those left-tribers I specifically identified with the links imply. It is eliminating competitors to state education that is anti-child, anti-family, and given that everybody grows up to be eligible voters, workers, and consumers: anti-civilization.
What do you find kids are being "indoctrinated" with, or "corrupted" by?
Corruption referred to financial corruption. Teachers unions, endless layers of bureaucratic waste, even something as simple as repairing a school's air conditioning unit will eventually become an avenue of corruption given that nobody gives a shit and nobody gives a shit because the money is stolen and they get paid the same (or more) if they fail.
As for the indoctrination: What I would describe the maleducation as is teaching kids dangerous (false) philosophy by implication and thereby making them cruel, shallow, vain, whiny, fragile, overly trusting of the wrong things [the state] and ignorant of those things you can trust [logic, repeatable experiment, math]. What many parents perceive is probably far less precise but none the less still accurate: Kids go in, useless bratish zombies come out (and they still can't read).
No philosophy is better than bad philosophy. True philosophy is better than no philosophy. I don't think charter schools are teaching good philosophy, but because they must succeed at educating the children to financially succeed means they are teaching real subjects far more effectively.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
Anything else?
No, I think that about covers it.
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
So nobody has any actual examples of this / these policies, or their supposed effects on children or families, we just have feelings about them?
Ms. Wilkins quote Senator Sanders as having said that if he gets elected, he intends to stifle the growth of charter schools.
I am not a charter-school fan because it takes away the options available and money for public schools, - Joe Biden
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
corruption and indoctrination.Unlike all the parents who practice corruption and indoctrination.
Parents aren't legally entitled to steal by the virtue of being parents. Governments are.
Of course parents indoctrinate, but they are on average more trustworthy than governments; especially subverted governments.
You cannot indoctrinate smart people, and stupid people are going to be indoctrinated by someone anyway. Stupid people cant even think in premises.
Evidence and logic say stupid people are made more than they are born. As far as I can tell the student culture and staff incompetence of state run schools in the USA have been the largest manufacturer of stupid people in history.
I think peasant children picking vegetables in a 12th century field probably had more useful ideas and less corrosive musings than what most young Americans experience in public school.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
His alternate hypothesis would be that the CIA was too incompetent to decide what "Russian propaganda" is.
Even if that hypothesis was true, it doesn't change the fact that the linked document alleges misinformation, a conspiracy to misinform in fact. I'm afraid there is no excuse for Double R.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Don't forget kids, in 1776 1/3 of the American colonies were the original gangsters of raging against the machine.The modern left now rages at the behest of the machine.
Yep, sad to watch the self-identified rebels become pawns.
Created:
-->
@ludofl3x
It's well known that the left-tribe has spearheaded every attempt to limit or criminalize homeschooling, charter schools, and are vehemently against school vouchers or anything that would divert children away from state schools. The purpose for this is rather obvious: corruption and indoctrination.For example since the goal is for the break up of the nuclear family they will often oppose things like homeschoolWhere do you see the goal of "the left" as "the breakup of the nuclear family" in any policy or law? WHo on the left says "No home school for anyone", I've never heard that before.
No, it doesn't list anything like policies. It lists your complaints and a study from some institute. I'm asking for the specific POLICY from the candidate, that's what the Trump campaign has accused her of.
It would be profoundly irrational and naive to make the choice to vote based on specifics in a policy document. What will happen is what matters and not what they claim to care about and what will happen is that if the left-tribe seizes power their general agenda will disseminate through the true center of power in this nation: the unelected bureaucracies of the three letter agencies which makes rules without consulting congress and often without any mechanism for popular opposition besides these very federal elections that are the context.
If this was not a valid analysis then it would follow that nobody could vote against Donald Trump on the issue of abortion since he has promised not to sign a national ban.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Anyone who questions the CIA is considered a progressive.
Well then call me progressive. I want to progress, backwards, to return to a healthy mistrust of any concentration of military or legal power, especially if they're secretive, especially especially when they've been caught lying.
Don't forget kids, in 1776 1/3 of the American colonies were the original gangsters of raging against the machine. Fearing government is peak patriotism.
"oh! euro dollars were worse hur-durr!"
They do that a lot.
"Well if X is so bad how come we're doing better than that other country" [That other country is even more X]
The euro isn't exactly lacking in currency manipulation.
Created:
No economist would ever say any inflation is the result of anything but currency devaluation. There is no overlap between what you are calling economists and actual economists.Gee, no economists are saying the inflation of 2021 was caused by currency devaluation
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
That linked document clearly alleges...
You don't really think Double R is so stupid that he doesn't know this already. He made a conscious choice to ignore it and gaslight this forum. There is no point engaging with such a person unless there is an audience, and any reasonable observer would click on the link and see he's lying. Save your keystrokes my dear parrot.
as it buried serious allegations of malfeasance within the Biden family, thereby preventing voters from having access to a full set of facts before casting their ballots and therefore, was a threat to democracy.
Yes, one might even call it a conspiracy to defraud the voter... if you want to know what evil things the deep state are doing, just look at what they are accusing other people of doing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
@Discipulus_Didicit
I tell women my dick is 8 inches when it is really only 7.5 inches. Does that count as stolen valor?
Thank you for your service.
7.5" is enough service for a "thank you". This is why the 'penis length' tag is important to add to all threads, just in case.
Created:
IWRA thinks women are naturally confused and frustrated.... how misogynistic of him?
Created:
Want to stop the civil war? Stop doing things that half the country are perceiving as enslavement and attack. Can we do that? No, no we can't because that's how morals work.
The left-tribe won't stop trying to save the youth of the midwest from heteronormativity and the right tribe won't stop trying to save the city centers from abortion.
It should go without saying that when you steal 30% of people's stuff they're going to get very angry if you spend it in ways they don't like, so if the federal government could stop doing that it would also do a great deal to re-harmonize the nation.
Look familiar? That's right it's the federal compromise which is the moderate position in the right-tribe. People like IWRA have backed themselves into an ideological corner in which not controlling other people in distant lands is tantamount to surrender. To even suggest removing the cause of the conflict is itself something only the enemy would say (which means you are the aggressor).
To quote the song from Vikings season 1: This will never end because I want more, more, give me more, give me more.
Created:
-->
@Savant
Second, we have to rehumanize our adversaries."MAGA MORONS"Yeah, it was good while it lasted.
We're probably just players in a fantasy where he reached out to the depraved barbarians but they tried to bite his hand off.
"All you had to do was REPENT MAGA MORON, AND THOU WOULD HATH BEEN SAVED?!!!!"
Created:
IWRA saying to humanize adversaries, hilarious.
So is it now kosher for left-tribers to talk about the impending civil war because when a right-triber gives warnings there is all this pearl clutching and "you're threatening WHAHT?"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IlDiavolo
You're kind of equivocating here.No I agree I would crap my pants if that happened. That's why people call ahead.Say park in LEO and do zoom calls for a few years before beaming into the bedroom in the middle of the night. Actually there are a few more steps between the two.Whatever the way these aliens show up, any human being would get shocked by it because it's literally something out of this world. Even with an invitation anyone can get shocked.
You said "crap your pants" if they were suddenly in my room, to which I agreed. I would not crap my pants if they were in low Earth orbit. It would be exciting and frightening and maybe a lot of people would have very bad reactions to it but that changes nothing about any of the inferences and statements I've made.
The hypothetical aliens have a choice and they are choosing non-contact. You can't blame human governments (and you know I would if there was any way). If they choose to contact people by randomly appearing in their room I think that's a very very bad sign and it would take extraordinary evidence to make me believe that EVEN given the premise that there are aliens in the system.
That is if it was proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that an interstellar starship was in orbit of Mars I would still strongly doubt aliens are appearing in people's room in the dead of night (or abductions with memory wiping that can be defeated by hypnosis). It just doesn't make sense. The alien mind would have to work so differently from ours or their goals would have to be so bizarre that neither you nor I can imagine or predict them.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Well there is one problem with your base having no critical thinking skills...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Savant
Vinland saga was great. Truly told the story of the Norse which is the story of Christianity gentling a bloodthirsty people by shifting the focus of philosophy. (whoops spoilers :p)
Of course it isn't what I would call "cute"
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Contrary to belief I'm not actually a rockstar.
Say it ain't so!
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
My guess is you will backpedal when it is pointed out a lot of these things are just libtards disagreeing with his conclusions or nit picking about hyperbole or lying and exaggerating what he said.
Well, you were wrong IWRA just kept lying.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IlDiavolo
I don't think that's fair. It doesn't make sense, just as it doesn't make sense for god to contact humanity through prophets.If that is what they're truly doing then the only logical conclusion is that their goals are malicious as the only thing that strategy accomplishes is creating a loyal following of people with too much faith and too little critical thinking. People who would be easily manipulated into acting against the best interests of Earth and humanity.Are you assuming most people are able to have an alien encounter hands down? Hahaha. C'mon, man. You say those things only because you can write it. You're totally unaware that you would crap in your pants if an alien showed up in your room all of a sudden.
No I agree I would crap my pants if that happened. That's why people call ahead.
Say park in LEO and do zoom calls for a few years before beaming into the bedroom in the middle of the night. Actually there are a few more steps between the two.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IlDiavolo
From what I can make out, these aliens want us to know about their existance through the testimony of selected people. I think that's fair enough.
I don't think that's fair. It doesn't make sense, just as it doesn't make sense for god to contact humanity through prophets.
If that is what they're truly doing then the only logical conclusion is that their goals are malicious as the only thing that strategy accomplishes is creating a loyal following of people with too much faith and too little critical thinking. People who would be easily manipulated into acting against the best interests of Earth and humanity.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Swagnarok
It was more like the "pretending everything was fine even though no one was working by printing vast amounts of currency and thereby stealing from the, in reality, rapidly shrinking pool of wealth"Inflation is the result of the aftermath of COVID, which didn't begin till 2021 when vaccines became readily available and people went back to work. It didn't happen under Trump because he was already booted out of office by then.I fail to see what "people going back to work" has to do with inflation.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IlDiavolo
"Getting yourself noticed" does not mean abducting people and sneaking around. This is a lot like the ninja god (the god of the bible) who changes the fates of nations (in the deep past believe us) but won't answer a text message.Yes, unless the military is threatening to kill us all if the aliens go public.There is no way for governments to block communication by physical means.Aliens have always been getting themselves noticed, that's why there are many stories of abduction. And the stories of demons in the past are probably stories of aliens.
And I think this is part of the aliens' plan to get the human beings conscious about their existence. Thanks to these abduction stories, there have been so many movies, series and cartoons about it. The military should have done their part to speed up the arrival of these aliens and get known by all of us. Anyway, I think people are enough ready to know the truth, the time is close.
If they're hiding till we're "ready" that means they were (and are) hiding.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@IlDiavolo
2.) They're already here, "alien zoo" and sure there are a hundred variants but they all answer the question of "where are they" with "they don't want you to know". Of course by "they" I mean the artificial or rebuilt natural intelligence of the consensus that dominated this system.Are you sure it's the aliens that don't want us to know or it's the military and political power that don't want so?
Yes, unless the military is threatening to kill us all if the aliens go public.
There is no way for governments to block communication by physical means.
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
They may be confused about the definition of criminal: Those who do the same thing the deep state does but are not the deep state.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@WyIted
I don't feel represented by any of the names.
It said I was Ambivalent Right but that's bullshit as are the questions themselves which have many absurd and obtuse concepts baked in as if they were basis vectors. I say that about most political tests I take and it's not getting better.
These people don't know what they're talking about. I don't think they have identified any statistically significant categories whatsoever. They started with a premise, they designed loaded questions that presumed there were 8 categories and then they acted like they confirmed something.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
It's really spinning his trolling gears as you can't Ad-hom an AI.
I would love to see him try though. Oh wait he just did and it was as hilarious as one might expect.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
I never thought I would approve of someone spamming chat GPT at a poster, but IWRA is a rare breed of person that is getting exactly the amount of response effort he deserves.AI owns u bro.
Created:
-->
@Moozer325
Go straight for those good reasons, it saves time.Well in that hypothetical, it would be beneficial to find out for yourself, but when it comes to complex issues like evolution, you can't just walk into the room and see what color the cube is.
If you can't see what color the cube is, you shouldn't tell others what color the cube is.
That kind of behavior is how you get millions of people saying the same false thing.
To really be an expert you have to dedicate your whole life to biology
No, they just happen to use the word "expert" for someone who does. In many fields profound truth is available after a few days of focus, while for other subjects a human lifetime is far from sufficient to understand (that's why we specialize).
The essence of genius is finding the concept which explains the complex phenomenon while being simple enough to understand. That is what the experts should be doing and that is why a true expert can justify themselves to any rational intelligent questioner.
That's why we go out and find studies that other scientists did, because it's their job to do those studies.
In the abstract an appeal to authority will remain pointless. If you were to pick something specific it would be obvious that evidence is not the issue.
Has anyone denied a particular fossil exists? Of course it would be pointless to try and debate that, the doubter should go ask to see the fossil. That is not the issue and to pretend a particular piece of evidence or a particular kind of experiment has to be taken on faith and then everything else would follow is dishonest.
Now if it isn't a particular piece of evidence or a particular kind of experiment, then what remains? What is the content of these studies that you expect others to take on faith even though you profess ignorance?
and yet if you applied that premise to religion suddenly "it's different". A rule with exceptions is no rule.Once again, religion isn't science.
Once again, if they are different in a way that matters then your rule is still wrong.
If you think there are double blind controls in paleontology you don't know what you're talking about.This isn't an experiment, it's all analysis (logic).Fine, I misused the word experiment
You didn't use that word. You said "study" and that's obscuring your error. Studies present data and analysis. If you doubt the data reproduce it. If you doubt the analysis use logic.
I accept that average people can't reproduce the data. I do not accept that people who cannot check the logic should be making assertions about the analysis and that is precisely what appealing to authority is. "I heard it here, so I'm repeating it; you should believe it too".
but if all the analysis comes back and says that evolution is proven
"Comes back"
Comes back from where? The magical truth factory?
Analysis is inference. It happens in your brain. If it hasn't happened in your brain then you have nothing to debate.
Created:
-->
@Double_R
"The election has all the hallmarks of being stolen, nothing like it has ever been seen before; so the hallmarks say"
Created:
-->
@Moozer325
No, when people say evolution (and you dig into it) they mean simultaneously refinement of existing function through natural selection and the generation of novel functional structures through a coincidental scaffolding, which is then preserved and refined by natural selection.The former contains only the assumption of a continuous gradient of changes towards a local maximum of fitness.Well then by that definition I don’t believe in the theory of evolution. Natural selection preferred animals that survive and reproduce, not thrive. There is a threshold that and animal must cross, and if it does, there is no need for more improvement until environments change.Evolution doesn’t tend towards perfection, it tends towards a bear minimum.
I don't believe there is any merit in this framing.
If the mutation causes a shift in gene frequencies then it will be selected and become dominant given enough trials (population * generation).
"fitness" in this context is defined as the positive effect on gene frequency in the population and "perfection" must then be defined as the peak of fitness, the genetic sequence for which any change causes deselection. If a changing environment causes rapid changes it is only because the finesses landscape has changed and thus the definition of perfection changed.
I don't know what "thrive" vs "reproduce" is supposed to mean in this context.
If you want to define "perfection" as that which is more useful as seen by an intelligent analysis, then of course evolution doesn't aim towards perfection because it can't select for non-functioning systems. If novel function appears it is by definition a coincidence. That is irreducible complexity in a nutshell.
it makes it so there is about a 99.99% my argument is correct
Assuming 99.99% trust in your authority.
It’s possible that they have some sort of secret science cabal, but most of these studies are independent of each other, and there are literally millions of biologists. I think they know what they’re talking about.
If you think there are double blind controls in paleontology you don't know what you're talking about.
This isn't an experiment, it's all analysis (logic).
Biologists are successfully proving the theory of evolution, not just blindly accepting it.
Then respect those who emulate them, and do not expect (or condone) blind acceptance.
I’m just saying to makes it very probable that if they all agree to the same thing, that thing is the truth.
and yet if you applied that premise to religion suddenly "it's different". A rule with exceptions is no rule.
Or I suppose you could say that Islam is very probably true, just happens to not be true; or maybe you are Muslim.
It makes so much more sense to trust the million people who said it was red than to just go against all of them for no good reason.
Go straight for those good reasons, it saves time.
Obviously, some research of your own would be good too, but if you don’t have that time, or you take into account the research you did plus what the other people say, it’s okay to trust the one million people who said it was red.
I'll see you at morning prayers then.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
If you get bored with the anime you might want to ask yourself why the steel from China is cheaper. Or you could keep trolling, follow your heart.
Created:
If the price of steel is inflated due to tariffs
There is no such thing.
Inflation doesn't mean a price goes up, it means all the prices go up because the currency is devalued as a whole.
Created:
-->
@thett3
I am at heart an engineer and my view of life is heavily materialistic. The fact that we are on average growing poorer and that is accelerating has no counterbalance.
There can be no counterbalance because the economy is life. Our purpose and happiness cannot be generally separated from our production and consumption and when you are left without grand children because your children don't feel prosperous enough to have them you'll see that I was right about the foundation of life.
If it weren't for the issue of economic liberty (and the ceaseless dishonesty) I might be a left-triber.
Created:
-->
@Double_R
A nice idea in theory, until you have segments of our society actively spreading disinformation.
Created:
Anyone who claims tariffs can cause inflation are not (true) economists. One and only one thing causes inflation: printing money
Created:
-->
@thett3
What are you going to do about these citizens
Birth might mean citizenship, but executive orders relating to amnesty do not.
ethnic cleansing?
If "criminal" was an ethnicity then law and order is all about ethnically cleansing that ethnicity.
The whiny attitude of “it’s over” is counter productive.
Oh I don't think that was the tone of the OP.
More of an animal backed into a corner giving one last warning before it strikes.
There’s work to be done that can be done
Hard to stay motivated when 50%+ of the product of that work will be stolen.
Created:
-->
@thett3
lol, well if republicans have to deal with the law being brazenly broken and then the lawbreakers being rewarded with political power then maybe democrats will just have to get used to the same thing.Republicans are going to have to learn to adapt to an increasingly diverse electorate no matter what.
Created:
-->
@Best.Korea
How did Trump destroy the economy. Be specific. Was is something along the lines of "2 weeks (years) to slow the spread"?Trump destroyed economy and printed 2 trillion dollars just few months before Biden took office. You cannot print 2 trillion dollars and expect no inflation.
Created:
-->
@WyIted
With a population of 8 billion, you think we would be able to multitask.
Created:
-->
@DavidAZZ
@Moozer325
No, when people say evolution (and you dig into it) they mean simultaneously refinement of existing function through natural selection and the generation of novel functional structures through a coincidental scaffolding, which is then preserved and refined by natural selection.I would agree with this analogy if this were the only tenant of evolution, but what you have described is merely "natural selection". This is the ability for a species to survive through the certain slight changes of a creatures already existing DNA.I think you’re confused. Natural selection is the theory of evolution. They’re just the same thing with different words.
The former contains only the assumption of a continuous gradient of changes towards a local maximum of fitness.
The second involves the concept of irreducible complexity and I have found many people who think they understand "evolution" do not understand this distinction nor its implications.
BTW:
[Moozer325] These people have dedicated their lives to science, so if they all 100% agree on something, it’s probably true.[David] Islamic people have dedicated their lives to Allah, but that doesn't mean what they conjure is good. (See 9/11 for reference) Just because a group agrees, it doesn't mean its a sure thing.
This is an excellent rebuttal.
[Moozer325] Well Islam isn’t science.
The difference being reason. If the only difference is logic, then the only way to prove the difference is to know the logic is correct. There is no substitute, so appealing to authority is a waste of time in a debate.
[Moozer325] If every single person trying to see if evolution is real comes to the conclusion that it is, well then it probably is.
Everyone who dedicates themselves to finding a personal connection with Jesus eventually succeeds. The real is not defined as that which you can convince yourself of, but that which reason forces you to believe whether you want to believe it or not.
[Moozer325] This is like if I showed 1,000 people a colored block, they all came back honestly saying that block was red, and then you said, no, it’s blue.Okay, it’s a little different, but I couldn’t think of a better analogy. The point remains the same.
If that is the analogy then what happens when evolution is saying the block was blue? That is closer to the situation when Darwin published and even now if you actually polled the entire planet most would profess to believe that evolution doesn't work without god (or that the fossil record was a trick god made or something).
Like you said, that's not science because science is rational and reason is not a democracy.
Created:
-->
@Swagnarok
Reason and existence are axioms. That is where the chain ends and that is the only place the chain can end because outside of those axioms there are no arguments (chains).Physical science cannot prove that said correspondence is 100% because it has no standard outside of itself.
You basically said "but you can't prove math because even if you put two things in a basket by adding one at a time that is still using math"
Math is defined as the concept which relates adding two things and the total being two. Reason is the concept which is defined as the best argument and the truth in that system is the system of non-contradictory beliefs with the most direct (sensory) evidence in support of it.
Science is nothing more or less than reason applied to physical phenomenon, although people who don't know what philosophy and speculative thought experiments aare sometimes try to usurp those domains with the word since for them rational and scientific are synonyms.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DavidAZZ
SETI has got to be the biggest waste of money. They have not found any proof for intelligent life yet but they want to boost it's abilities.
SETI is the perfect example of how empiricism can be irrational.
In the blind need for data they set out on a mission which had they thought it through (as we have now through the medium of sci-fi as much as anything else) was predictably pointless.
It is obvious that it costs far less energy to send out a pulse of self-replicating probes than to send radio signals to random star systems at levels that would be detectable by unknown and possibly non-existent antennas.
In fact if you were an advanced civilization you would of course master your own production chain before you seriously invested resources in interstellar contact projects and in that context enormously powerful detectors are far more efficient than enormously powerful transmitters.
SETI was a whisper in the storm begging for a much much more powerful civilization to bridge the enormous gap. In order to detect a SETI signal from another system they would have to build (ignoring made up technology) detectors bigger than our largest cities in deep space. In order for us to detect a contact signal from another system they would need transmitters that are "louder"(brighter) than a 100 of our largest fusion bombs (per bit).
That's crazy. What makes sense (again) is to send out probes carrying the information that they want... or if possible (and it does seem possible) the agenda they want. If a back and forth communication is necessary after first contact from a probe it could be accomplished infinitely more efficiently by targeting the specific planet with a coherent beam (think laser communications).
The thought that aliens exist is always a fun topic, but there is just no proof. UFO's exist, but it not proven that they are flown by aliens.
Given that humanity has been around for a million years it's actually more likely that humans colonized alpha centauri and came back than for genuine aliens to have visited. Not that I think that scenario is likely, but it is the only thing that would explain a humanoid appearance which many report even if you take all these encounters seriously.
If it came down to absolute proof that humanoids genuinely originated from a planet other than Earth that pretty much confirms an intelligent creator. A common cause is necessary and if it's not common origin it's common design.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
The lack of actual physical or definitive sensory evidence is not a reason to not examine a probability based possibility.
Yet in examining the possibility one is confronted by the debilitating lack of data.
It is when the given information is sparse that careful inference is most important, hence the solutions to the fermi paradox are the best effort to limiting the range of uncertainty.
It's not immediately obvious why we should believe there are no aliens (anywhere near here) but when armed with the known laws of physics one can carefully game out the possible solution to the paradox and find that rather than "are we alone" we should shift our focus to another dichotomy that aligns better with how we can act in the different scenarios:
1.) We're alone, or we're first (which means alone), or we're so far from another civilization that we may as well be alone for the life of the universe (which means alone)
2.) They're already here, "alien zoo" and sure there are a hundred variants but they all answer the question of "where are they" with "they don't want you to know". Of course by "they" I mean the artificial or rebuilt natural intelligence of the consensus that dominated this system.
Note the lack of "they're coming for our resources, it's an arms race; yada yada" on geologic and galactic scales (time and matter) those scenarios don't make sense.
Note that (1) doesn't mean life is rare, it means civilization is rare. We could find some form of life in half the systems but for civilization to be rare that almost implies intelligence is almost as rare which means that life will be boring.
(2) means the ball is not in our court and there is no clue as to how we should behave to change any potential outcome. You can't plan to please a god with no idea what it values. I suppose at the very least you could infer that they don't subscribe to the dark forest theory (which was never very plausible) or else they would have deleted life on Earth as soon as they got here. Therefore I guess you could constrain the outer edge how we ought to behave to please them by excluding irrational xenophobia.
Created: