Slashdot Mirror
60% Of U.S. Believe Life Exists On Other Planets
jangobongo writes "Does intelligent life exist anywhere besides Earth? Are regular churchgoers less likely to believe life has evolved on other planets? Do more Democrats or Republicans believe in extraterrestrials? And if alien life makes contact, what should we do? These questions were asked on a poll released last week that shows that two-thirds of Americans do believe that life exists on other planets, and of that group, 90% say if we receive a message from another planet we should reply. The poll was commissioned by the SETI Institute and the National Geographic Channel."
Q. Do you believe UFOs exist?
A. Yes. (Well duh, anything we see in the sky but can't immediately identify is a UFO. Was I supposed to answer 'No'?)
Q. Do you believe aliens exist?
A. Yes. (With billions of galaxies each containing billions of stars, it's a pretty safe guess that somewhere out there is another planet with life.)
As a result, I'm recorded as just one more nut-job who believes that little green men are abducting our sheep. That particular survey was merely incompetent. Much more entertaining results can be obtained from surveys which are actively rigged.
In this SETI-National Geographic poll they appeared to have asked people if they thought that life exists somewhere out there. They got a 60% yes. It would have been interesting to ask half of those people if they thought that we are the only life in the universe. My guess is that those opposite questions when added up wouldn't even come close to 100%.
Slashdot monitor for your Mozilla sidebar or Active Desktop.
the vast majority of people also believe in Astrology. A large percentage of people believe that earth has already been visited by aliens (in particular to help build the pyramids) and some people believe that aliens are studying earth right now.
How we know is more important than what we know.
Why should be be astonished about finding life elsewhere?
I mean, seriously, why would anyone believe that the only planet in the universe that supports life is this one?
The only reason I can imagine is religiously encouraged ignorance and America has that by the bushel. Metric fuckton. Imperial assload.
Yeah yeah, troll, flamebait, whatever. Its true.
In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
...so I am not necessarily impressed by majority rule.
Theory and practice are the same in theory, but different in practice.
They've also been subjected to 40 years of soap operas. We've already seen the brain damage they can inflict on native species here on earth - it would be ironic if aliens find our trash entertainment so offensive they decide to remove the whole damn planet to make room for a hyperspatial autoroute. \Hey, maybe that's why marvin is so depressed - no more soaps.
That's only 60% of those that responded.
That 80% think it would be life like us is mind-boggling. I suppose it is the taint of science-fiction. It's hard to enjoy characters that are hard to fathom.
But really, intelligent I could see. But like us? That just demonstrates a lack of imagination.
A relevant and interesting quote:
Sometimes I think we're alone in the universe, and sometimes I think we're not. In either case the idea is quite staggering. -Arthur C. Clarke
Which is better Emacs or Vi?
...And if they answer, "There's no way you'll get me started on that debate," you'll know they're truly intelligent.
Seriously though, 8 out of 10 believe that they would be more advanced than us? Yet...only 7 of 10 thought they would be able to communicate across deep space (something we can already do, to an extent). Those figures don't make any sense.
Chances are we're just going to find living martian bacteria in the near future, not just the fossilized remains. I highly doubt we'll find a super-advanced civilization.
"People who are regular churchgoers are less-likely to believe in life on other planets compared to non-churchgoers, 46% vs. 70%"
Yet they apparently believe in an invisible monster who loves them, but sends them to hell for eternity if they don't play by rules they don't understand.
What is a more likely "Intelligent Designer": a mythical spirit which used to do miracles all the time, before recording could corroborate it, or an alien intelligence, different from us in that it is adapted to live outside the Earth's environment?
When the aliens land, all those churchgoers are going to bow down before the "angels", with their "miraculous" technology. And they're going to hand over the science-believers, who think these aliens are just the competition, for burning as witches. Just as they always have, when their priests have had control, and were threatened by independent thinkers.
--
make install -not war
Personally, I think it is extremely likely that intelligent life would be in other parts of the universe, but there are a few qualifications that should be made:
1) The chances of it being near us or even in our galaxy is not so good.
2) The chance of it existing concurrently with our little blip of time is even smaller.
-matthew
"THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
just my $.01
"Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature."
Cohen
I choose to base my beliefs on evidence. Theories about the origin of life are theories based upon a single data set -- that of planet Earth. Until we have a broader set of data, I will not believe in alien intelligence. I will also not believe in the absence of alien intelligence.
Beliefs get in the way of science. At least when those beliefs are not grounded in facts.
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
I worry that the alien visiting Earth will give us the "convert or die" choice we are so famous for giving our fellow humans.
Drake's equation calculates just that. And with the most conservative values assigned it is almost certain that there are other intelligent life forms out there somewhere.
Now as to the question of if they have visited us or even know we are here. The answer is almost certainly no. People have used alien visitation to try to explain things they don't understand. And it is a handy insurance write off for the cattle ranchers when one of their cows dies.
Of course I'm not convinced that there is intelligent life here on Earth. Just watch the nightly news for evidence that there is no intelligent life here.
That doesn't really make any sense, even as a joke.
Thinkin' Lincoln - a web comic of presidential proportions
There are lots of non-Christian Republicans out there, just like there are lots of Christian Democrats. In other words, that was a pretty stupid joke that revealed the unenlightened and bigoted attitude of the writer.
I tend to believe that any intelligent alien life would likely be similar to us. There is a reason man evolved the way they did. 2 eyes and ears to see and hear in stereo. Hands to manipulate tools. Legs to move around. I believe there was a show on Discovery channel a long time ago where well known scientists explain why aliens would likely have a humanoid form.
100% of Slashdot moderators automatically mod up pedantic Christianity-related jokes.
Now there's arrogance for you. Where most cult leaders claim to be the second coming of Christ, this one claims to be the Almighty himself.
Belief leads to argument, argument leads to research, research leads to discovery, discovery leads to peer review, peer review leads to ideas, ideas lead to beliefs. That's what we call "science."
I don't get it.
Hello, just thought I'd answer 2 questions and help clarify some bits..
"I'm confused why only 46% of christians believe that aliens exist. Is it because then they might have to consider that a god might have more to think about than their petty affairs, and that the bible might just be pretty limited in galatic terms?"
- Mr. Bendy, above
The bible never claimed to be, or was claimed by bible-readers to be a know-it-all book. You cannot find the proof or counter-proof to evolution in it. You cannot find the laws or gravity or electro-magnetism in it. BTW, the bible is *not* against evolution. (But that's another huge story.)
What the bible claims to be however, is that it is complete and sufficient for our salvation. All we need to know to be right with God is in it. Seen in this context, it can be said the bible contains the truth.
The whole of the Old Testament is a story about creation, the fall of man, the flood, the history of Israel (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and how they got to Egypt), escape from Egypt with Moses, etc. One has to bear in mind when reading the OT that it is not a scientific account of the history of the world. You won't find anti-evolution in it.
The OT is written in a "poetic" form which contains many allegories. So creation in 6 days may or may not be 6 actual days as we know it. The main point is that God formed the world out of nothingness and lots of water.
Therefore, the bible says nothing about the presence of aliens. This question is best left to scientists who have the expertise and equipment to answer. The existence of aliens does not change anything about the bible, God, our relationship with God or make me any less sinful. Either I believe Jesus, repent and by God's grace obtain eternal life; or continue to rule my own sinful life and have eternal punishment.
"What is a more likely "Intelligent Designer": a mythical spirit which used to do miracles all the time, before recording could corroborate it, or an alien intelligence, different from us in that it is adapted to live outside the Earth's environment?"
-Doc Ruby, above
The miracles performed by Jesus were and indeed recorded in the New Testament by people who followed Jesus during his ministry on Earth. The ancient Jews treated their scriptures (The OT) with such reverence it was taken very well care of and preserved to a good degree.
You may say that was 2000 years ago, but Julius Caesar existed slightly before Jesus yet we take Julius as a given, as simple truth? What about Alexander the Great, Hannibal, Scipio Africanus etc? These guys were from the time before Jesus came. We know of these people via recordings made long ago. Therefore it is not true to say that there is a lack of corroborating evidence.
In fact, if you would check the numbers yourself, there are many more manuscripts about Jesus (numbering thousands) than there are about the generals of old (probably tens). Also, the first manuscripts on Jesus were written just a few years after his death, leaving less time for "legend" to kick in, compared to maybe a hundred years for the said generals.
You may say that the New Testament synoptic (meaning same time and by vision i.e. witness) gospels are lies. All but one of the apostles were martyred, i.e. killed for their faith. It is very unlikely that anyone would die for something they know to be not true, if you think about it. This is also another big issue which can't be covered in detail here, but can easily be resolved by books and the like.
Thanks for taking the time to read through this relatively long post; I hope it helped.
Well, there are two pretty compelling bits of evidence.
1) Intelligence, such as it is, has evolved at least once.
2) The Universe is unimaginably huge. Just our own galaxy is vast beyond the ability of humans to even imagine. One of the early Hubble Deep Field studies, looking at one of the darkest places in the sky, saw 40,000 GALAXIES in an area of the sky equivalent to a grain of sand held at arm's length.
Given those two facts, doubting alien intelligence strikes me as profoundly stupid. However, unless it is extremely common (which I doubt), the chances of any of that intelligence being within a distance we could detect is pretty darn small.
The probability of alien intelligence, in other words, is essentially indistinguishable from 1. Given the constraints of lightspeed, however, the chance that we could ever meet and TALK TO such aliens is probably very close to 0.
Sir Humphrey: "You know what happens: nice young lady comes up to you. Obviously you want to create a good impression, you don't want to look a fool, do you? So she starts asking you some questions: Mr. Woolley, are you worried about the number of young people without jobs?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Are you worried about the rise in crime among teenagers?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Do you think there is a lack of discipline in our Comprehensive schools?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Do you think young people welcome some authority and leadership in their lives?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Do you think they respond to a challenge?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Would you be in favour of reintroducing National Service?"
Bernard Woolley: "Oh...well, I suppose I might be."
Sir Humphrey: "Yes or no?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Of course you would, Bernard. After all you told you can't say no to that. So they don't mention the first five questions and they publish the last one."
Bernard Woolley: "Is that really what they do?"
Sir Humphrey: "Well, not the reputable ones no, but there aren't many of those. So alternatively the young lady can get the opposite result."
Bernard Woolley: "How?"
Sir Humphrey: "Mr. Woolley, are you worried about the danger of war?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Are you worried about the growth of armaments?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Do you think there is a danger in giving young people guns and teaching them how to kill?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Do you think it is wrong to force people to take up arms against their will?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "Would you oppose the reintroduction of National Service?"
Bernard Woolley: "Yes"
Sir Humphrey: "There you are, you see Bernard. The perfect balanced sample."
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.
I dunno what you're seeing, but that video looked nothing like an irdium flare. For one thing, it lasted slightly too long, and they were suggesting (although you really could tell) that it moved in the sky in a directional manner.
No idea what it was. Looked like a balloon from a distance, really. But I'd say not an orbiting satellite of any kind. Looks entirely wrong for that.
- Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
Well, I thank you for taking the honor this time around. By that I mean, every time a story about aliens comes up, someone makes a post like this. Unfortunately the history of ufology is an obscure one, long since rejected by science and subjected to incessant ridicule, very few people are willing to take the statements of people like this at face value, because they believe they are being made in a vacuum.
The problem is compounded when you still have a few kooks mixed in with the credible people. Anytime one of them is exposed the baby is once again thrown out with the bathwater. Only those who invest significant hours in doing reading/research by themselves can get at a reasonable picture of what is currently known. Without any serious motivation to do so or the promise that anything is there to make it worth it, few people choose to do so.
I would say there is progress being made though. For those who want a respectable quick assessment, check out INFLATION-THEORY IMPLICATIONS FOR EXTRATERRESTRIAL VISITATION by DEARDORFF/HAISCH/MACCABEE/PUTHOFF (JBIS, Vol. 58, pp. 43-50) A very compelling argument about why close minded rejection of this phenomenon needs to end (and the first paper on this topic to be published in a mainstream refereed journal in a very long time).
Outside the realm of science, I don't think the general public will catch onto this in any greater magnitude until someone makes it a serious national political issue.
Or at the very least that it should be, and will be as soon as they find oil there.
I hope that's Funny, but I fear it's more Insightful.
Beliefs do not get in the way of science. Arrogance, the inability to reflect, learn and tolerate do.
The problem with declaring SETI to be a religion, on these grounds, is that Drakes Equation *CAN* be tested, only not with our current technology and data set. This is hugely different than being completely unable to be tested, i.e. creationism or a belief in god.
A blog about stuff.
You're anthropomorphizing. Big mistake.
While it's correct to say that a belief in aliens is not absolutely falsifiable, it is incorrect to call it a religion. It can be a part of a religion's doctrine, but it is also possible for it to be part of a secular belief system. The real question is whether the appearance of new evidence could possibly change your mind.
Keep in mind that the difference between a religious belief and a secular belief is the ardor with which the belief is held. Religion requires faith.
For example, suppose that Alice analyzes the Drake Equation, makes a few assuptions that seem reasonable to her, and comes up with an approximate evaluation. This number leads her to believe that the existence of aliens is a certainty. Bob, on the other hand, actively participates in a religion that teaches him that aliens exist. Now, new evidence appears that casts considerable doubt on the possibility that aliens exist. (Suppose that the number of planets in the universe turns out to be much lower than previously thought.) Alice is likely to doubt her original assertion, perhaps modifying it from a certainty to an unlikelihood. Bob, on the other hand, will not doubt his belief in aliens because, as long as he maintains his religion, the doctrine is not subject to new evidence.
Totally political post
Only because people like you politicize it. Anybody who is capable of math and looks closely at it knows that Social Security is a Ponzi scheme.
which is false
Even the most optimistic and pie-in-the-sky Social Security cheerleaders insist that it will take massive tax hikes and/or draconian cuts to keep Social Security in the black beyond 2040, and God help us all if there's even one more recession during that 35-year interval.
and uses an argument from the Bush administration's bag.
Nice ad hominem. "Look, a polarizing political leader is saying the same thing! It must be extremist dogma!!!"
Rational people on both sides have been pointing out the gaping maw of the coming Social Security collapse for decades now. Hell, half the justification for Clinton's largest tax hike was to "save social security for another 20 years."
I say castration is in order.
I can understand if you don't want to bring kids into the world. It would be nice to know for sure that your bitter rage to die with you... but they can do vascectomies these days. No need to go to such extremes.
I expect you to support a comment like that, with a WWW.GNAA.US link under your username
I don't know what GNAA is, but this sounds like another worthless ad hominem. Do you happen to have any evidence to support your point (such as it is)?
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.