Former astronaut: Man not alone in universe

poser765 said:
To assume we know all there is to know about any subject, however limited or exposed we may be, is in fact arrogance.
Click to expand...

The thing is real scientists dont assume they know everything. I think there is an unfortunate stereotype running around about those "arrogant scientists"...
 
charlie1017 said:
The thing is real scientists dont assume they know everything. I think there is an unfortunate stereotype running around about those "arrogant scientists"...
Click to expand...
Not singling out scientists. Mainly aimed toward the "you can't exceed the speed of light so there is no way aliens could ever reach Earth" crowd. They were the recipient of my first post.

And darren. You say potatoe, I say potato. ;)
 
There was a formula that we learned in theoretical physics, that this guy made, that calculates the number of planets in the universe that have intelligent life. It's based on a number of factors that you must determine. It's called the Drake Equation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drake_equation

I'm a firm believer that we are not alone in the universe, but weather or not the government is trying to cover up a UFO here i doubt it. Thats just me. Call me crazy if you want.

Personally i can't stand the conspiracy theorists. We had a girl in our class who was dead serious when she said that "911 was planned by Bush for an excuse to go to war with Iraq for the oil."
Such an insult to the memories of those lost on that tragic day.


Any way i don't need to start a debate about what happened on 911.

The Drake Equation is kind of fun to mess around if you have a calculator on hand.
 
flyboywbl said:
There was a formula that we learned in theoretical physics, that this guy made, that calculates the number of planets in the universe that have intelligent life. It's based on a number of factors that you must determine. It's called the Drake Equation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drake_equation

I'm a firm believer that we are not alone in the universe, but weather or not the government is trying to cover up a UFO here i doubt it. Thats just me. Call me crazy if you want.

Personally i can't stand the conspiracy theorists. We had a girl in our class who was dead serious when she said that "911 was planned by Bush for an excuse to go to war with Iraq for the oil."
Such an insult to the memories of those lost on that tragic day.


Any way i don't need to start a debate about what happened on 911.

The Drake Equation is kind of fun to mess around if you have a calculator on hand.
Click to expand...
Really not to be "that guy" but only because I NEVER post anything first and i want to bask in my success...

I guess the only real points I have is that

1. it's very arrogant to assume we know everything about the universe and that our "laws" can't be wrong or limited, and

2. Dealing with a galactic scale or bigger, improbable is still a very big number. see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drake_equation
Click to expand...
 
tgrayson said:
That depends on what sort of future you want to believe in or hope for.
Click to expand...

I'm sure your kidding, but I don't look at ANY of these shows as a crystal ball. But, now you are really making me rethink what future I prefer??

250px-Amidala.png

nine-024.jpg


star_trek_voyager_ver1.jpg


caprica6.jpg


How does one choose?????:D
 
Darren, the day is yours sir...the day is yours.

Only thing that bugs me about BSG is the whole "fracking" thing. Drop the f-bomb or don't...but don't pretend. It's like people who say gosh damn it. Go big or go home.
 
poser765 said:
Darren, the day is yours sir...the day is yours.

Only thing that bugs me about BSG is the whole "fracking" thing. Drop the f-bomb or don't...but don't pretend. It's like people who say gosh damn it. Go big or go home.
Click to expand...


I don't think going big would have gotten them anywhere in the 70's when you only had 3 channels. In fact, I am surprised they got away with Frak.
 
darrenf said:
I'm sure your kidding, but I don't look at ANY of these shows as a crystal ball.
Click to expand...

Not kidding at all. The Star Trek future had all of mankind's earthly problems solved and humanity was united behind the idea of doing good throughout the universe.

Is that the future I expect? 25 years ago, yes, I did. Now I know better, because there are huge segments of the population who are no more culturally advanced than our medieval ancestors. This isn't likely to change.
 
The future I want to imagine is of Peer F Hamilton's Night's Dawn Trilogy. Space ships, cybernetically enhanced humans, possession by dead souls, psychics, and gratuitous zero g sex. Peter for the win!
 
tgrayson said:
Not kidding at all. The Star Trek future had all of mankind's earthly problems solved and humanity was united behind the idea of doing good throughout the universe.
Click to expand...

[sidebar]

As a Trek fan, what's your take on the upcoming Star Trek movie?

Me? I'm still trying to get into it.....

[/sidebar]
 
tgrayson said:
Argh, that was awful. I quit after the first one. Depressing.
Click to expand...
Haha I loved it...Space opera at it's finest. Most of his stuff is pretty damn good for the genre assuming you can make it past the page after page of gratuitous zero g sex.

Oh well...different strokes for different folks
 
darrenf said:
I didn't know you act? :laff:
Click to expand...

LOL....It's tough to see that it doesn't really "fit" with the others..

...like the part where young Kirk is watching the Enterprise being built...on earth. I thought it was built in space?

...or that Kirk somehow took over the Enterprise in an emergency promotion. I thought he had worked his way up the ranks?
 
MikeD said:
[sidebar]

As a Trek fan, what's your take on the upcoming Star Trek movie?

Me? I'm still trying to get into it.....

[/sidebar]
Click to expand...
Meh, probably going to be just as bad as the rest of the drivel they call movies these days. It has space ships, aliens, and miniskirts so wtf i'll watch it. The last couple of ST movies haven't been TO bad so it might make the cut.
 
MikeD said:
As a Trek fan, what's your take on the upcoming Star Trek movie?
Click to expand...

The buzz seems positive, but it seems likely the new crew will resemble the classic crew in name only, much like the new Mission Impossible co-opted the reputation of the old series while being nothing like it.

I gather it also involves time travel, which I really don't care for, since it presents too many problems to make it believable.

I grew a bit fed up with the ST universe in the DS9/Voyager time frame because humanity was represented as weak and ineffectual. The roots of that started in STNG, where the characters were so noble/moral/altruistic that they only defended themselves with great reluctance. The main redeeming feature of STNG was that there were some very thought-provoking, clever episodes.
 
MikeD said:
...or that Kirk somehow took over the Enterprise in an emergency promotion. I thought he had worked his way up the ranks?
Click to expand...

There is some discontinuity. Spock served with Christopher Pike, without any of the other characters present. This was shown in sort of a flashback in a classic episode; originally the Spock character wasn't the logical one, but instead there was a "Number 1" character, who was Majel Barret, Roddenberry's wife. She was later moved to the Nurse Chapel role.

Kirk did move up through the ranks and served on other ships, an item which came up a number of times in the classic episodes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top