Is Anyone Out There?

spendius wrote:

Brandon wrote-

Quote:
No, he said that the thread is too far along for him to easily jump in as a guest celebrity poster. On the contrary, it's you who have consistently failed to even try to address my points:

What! ?? 18 pages. Most of it fantasy.

I don't think you have made any points. That one about Daytona made me laugh.

Quote:
Do you actually believe that it's impossible to address the issue of detecting large objects in a ship's path and shielding a it against small objects?

Yes-in this context. Mr Landis could address that one couldn't he?

Quote:
What is your beef with Galileo and why do you make up these lies about him?

I have no beef. He was a great guy from what I've read. What lies?

Quote:
You can't see any reason to study physics other than money? It's beyond your ken that someone might just find it fascinating?

That's right. I've taught the subject. I had to use "special effects" to maintain my own interest.

Quote:
How was this thread "derailed from the start?"

I've answered that. You might as well discuss whether fairies exist or not.
Or ghosts.

Quote:
What is this great sin that the world's scientists have committed? Tell us plainly. What is the great sin in speculating about life elsewhere in the universe?

No sin. Just a scam. I don't mind scams. If you want a reason it is that it distracts some scientists from doing useful work in more useful areas. It's entertainment.

Quote:
How does the large number of stars in the galaxy make it difficult to go from one particular star to another?

I didn't say that. I said it is impossible. Is that heresy?

Quote:
I have consistently responded to your points, why do you fear responding to mine? In my opinion, you use such oblique language simply because you fear stating your opinions clearly.

You have responded to nothing yet. I don't fear anything. You have the assertion disease I'm afraid. Respond to the Eco quote. He's much more famous than Mr Landis. And miles more intelligent.

Here's another answer of convenience which means nothing.

fm wrote-

Quote:
Do not even engage Spendi-hes not worth your effort.

Although besides being another facile assertion in fm's usual mode it criticises you for responding and it criticises fm himself as he has responded to loads of my posts in the past in another place.

He doesn't like one of his pet areas of the strut stage to be rubbished.

There are so many points to address here that I'm going to pick one and address it first, so as to be able to focus attention on one thing at a time. Let's start here:

spendius wrote:

Brandon wrote-

Quote:
How was this thread "derailed from the start?"

I've answered that. You might as well discuss whether fairies exist or not.
Or ghosts.

You appear to be saying that the likelihood of intelligent life anywhere else in the cosmos is at about the same level as the likelihood of fairies or ghosts. Why do you think this? And if you make a non-responsive post, I will simply repeat the question until it is clear to one and all that you fear to actually discuss your viewpoint.

0 Replies

Where are you getting this obsession with fear from?

It's an assertion and meaningless.

I used the word "puny" in that bit about Flaubert. Was that one word not enough to signal the insignificance and powerlessness of mankind.

I did not say " that the likelihood of intelligent life anywhere else in the cosmos is at about the same level as the likelihood of fairies or ghosts."

I simply said that discussions of both are equally meaningless in any intellectual sense. Not in an economic sense or a psychology sense or even a sociological sense.

You seem to have the Derrida problem. That you can read your own meaning into something somebody has said and then proceed to deal with it from there.

I recognise the convenience of this technique from your own point of view but that has nothing to do with me.

I have been making the position I take, which many writers have taken, that this industry based on the idea of other life forms in the universe whilst it may have practical use (there are other goods besides money) is, at bottom, pissing in the wind.

I see it either as a con or some sort of replacement to fill the void created by Godforsakedness. The priesthood work the con and the punters are the congregation having a need catered for.

Take a notepad and go through my posts and jot down the points I have made in support of my contention.

I think I have covered a number of salient points and none of them have even had an attempt at a proper answer made about them.

Why is the idea of fairies so comprehensively catered for by literary history and why has a branch of this industry now gone over to aliens and alien intelligence with equal success.

Could it be that the "known" is so boring that a substitute had to be found.

I find both areas equally interesting from the allegorical point of view ( the subtext) and the psychology in it. I find the "known" very interesting and thus can stand back a little. I'm reading biographies of Andrew Lang and Sir Henry Rider Haggard over the hols, and some of their works.

Why do you want aliens so much?

I don't give a phewk whether there's aliens of not or whether they have visited your back garden. When I see someone expressing this want, which I'm quite satisfied is bullshit, I wonder what the buggers are up to.

And I don't mind doing a bit in the hope that some young and impressionable reader here is not taken in by the aforesaid pile of sloppy
goo and thus saves his money for buying girls drinks and presents with, which is what his hard earned money is for. And if he does that I hope they will be very happy together and have 2 or 3 lovely children and will live happily ever after and maybe one day he will be sat here on a day such as this looking forward to tonight's episode in the theatre of the Melbourne cricket ground when Shane Warne walks out to resume his innings in a wonderful microcosm of human reality brought to within touching and feeling distance of my couch by the wonders of science which has nothing to do with all this alien crap.

It was sloppy of Mr Landis to say what he said just as it was sloppy for fm to say what he said.

They made their excuses and left. That's a phrase made famous by Mr Duncan Edwards who investigated vice girls in London for a large newspaper many years ago. When prostitution was illegal. It was really quite funny. Nobody believed him I gather except the ladies at the choir practice and a few Mummy's boys. They say his millions of readers spent winter Sunday afternoons drooling over his lurid copy.

Perhaps aliens are a replacement for sex now all the mystery and danger has gone out of it. The "known" being boring. I saw an article by a psychologist about that. The "Old Devil" having been airbrushed out.

Do you allow for the possibility that there might be somethings you are better off not knowing about? Artists are not crazy for nothing.

0 Replies

spendius wrote:

...I did not say " that the likelihood of intelligent life anywhere else in the cosmos is at about the same level as the likelihood of fairies or ghosts."

I simply said that discussions of both are equally meaningless in any intellectual sense. Not in an economic sense or a psychology sense or even a sociological sense....I have been making the position I take, which many writers have taken, that this industry based on the idea of other life forms in the universe whilst it may have practical use (there are other goods besides money) is, at bottom, pissing in the wind.

I see it either as a con or some sort of replacement to fill the void created by Godforsakedness. The priesthood work the con and the punters are the congregation having a need catered for.
...Why do you want aliens so much?... I don't give a phewk whether there's aliens of not or whether they have visited your back garden. When I see someone expressing this want, which I'm quite satisfied is bullshit, I wonder what the buggers are up to....

It seems to me very natural for a person living in a universe with trillions of stars to wonder whether life has occurred somewhere else, and whether we are alone or not. In fact, it seemse bizarre to me not to wonder. Why is the discussion "meaningless in any intellectual sense?"

0 Replies

It isn't if you think the idea is capable of being verified which I don't.

It is similar, as I have said, to the idea that gods, fairies, elves, ghosts, sprites and witches are hidden companions to humanity. Many people have believed in all of those and many still do. They are beliefs and, as such, not amenable to intellectual foray except, of course, in dealing with the effects of such beliefs on the believers, both individually and collectively,and that makes those who do believe uncomfortable.

You obviously don't believe in fm's guidance. He did say-"Do not even engage Spendi-hes not worth your effort.[/quote]

That's preaching I think. The fact that it serves his interest in attempting to stop me reducing the audience for inter-galactic fantasy might be the motive. I wouldn't mind betting that he believes intelligence can be created by computers or some other mechanical device.

That's why he keeps clear of the ladies. No mechanical device will ever understand ladies.

0 Replies

spendius wrote:

No mechanical device will ever understand ladies.

Well, given the number of men asking advice about how to deal with ladies in these fora (and the weirdness of their questions), I assume lots of men are mechanical devices.

Or should I assume that the ladies are alien species?

0 Replies

He who shall not be named said "It isn't if you think the idea is capable of being verified which I don't".

Thats the cosmological equivalent of:
"If we had bacon, we could have bacon and eggs, if we had eggs"

If hes certain that this discussion is folly, beneath him, and low class diversion, why does he join in? .

0 Replies

farmerman wrote:

If hes certain that this discussion is folly, beneath him, and low class diversion, why does he join in? .

He doesn't really "join in" to any topically substantive sense - he pops by from time to time in order to plump his ego through diverting focus from the matter at discussion to himself. He's very good at that - or, at least, quite successful at it ... functionally the same thing, I s'pose.

0 Replies

he is entertaining though. I like when he argues with hisself

0 Replies

Well-

I don't think the discussion is folly. It is quite entertaining. Like a magician.

We all know that he doesn't saw a lady in half but his conjuring the image for us allows us to speculate on the benefits of only having the feet end to deal with. Which is entertaining.

As an allegory I mean.

I tend to think that an entertaining A2K will gain from being so.

Not that I claim to be entertaining myself. But I try to be. I think real egomania is when you don't try to be and when you hide behind periodicals and experts which we can all consult anytime we wish.

And what is more entertaining that human behaviour.

0 Replies

Shifting to aliens is kinky in my opinion.

It seems to suggest surfiet and jadedness.

Galaxies are just not funny. Compared to Laurel and Hardy's wives in that episode when they were going to a convention. Say.

Or even Col.Hall's wife. Or the ones WC Fields got together in Bank Dick.

0 Replies

farmerman wrote:

he is entertaining though. I like when he argues with hisself

Entertainment is all well and good, but I also come to A2K hoping to learn things from active intelligent discussion.

Mr. Landis was nice enough to visit this thread at my invitation. But after reviewing the last few pages which he had to wade through to get to any of the salient points of the thread, and finding those pages mostly full of Spendi's usual childishness and venom, I don't think I'll be asking any more of my friends or associates to join any A2K threads.

Everyone has a right to their opinion, but when any participant dismisses the validity of the subject they are involved in, insults the participants, changes the subject, and repeatedly diverts discussion to themselves, they are doing a dis-service to all of us.

0 Replies

sorry ros. I hope I didnt "feed the troll" but its hard not to stand idely by when "He who..." is engaged in his masturbatory fantasies and using these fora for his "money shots"

0 Replies

I have to admit, my last post was crude even by my lower standards

0 Replies

I like you being crude and insulting fm. It goes with the territory.

ros-

Any TV expert will tell you that learning is much more efficient during entertainment.

I'm trying to learn how to stock the larder up on one of these inter-galactic ships and how to deal with specks of dust at half the speed of light over distances to vast to think about. And what to do with the ****.

At least I'm practical. I'm not weaving the winds.

fm wrote-

Quote:

I like when he argues with hisself

Example please. It's another empty assertion without an example. If you give one I will, of course, try to wriggle out of it but if I can't I'll hold my hands up.

So example please or else stop blurting. Blurting is entirely self.

0 Replies

farmerman wrote:

sorry ros. I hope I didnt "feed the troll" but its hard not to stand idely by when "He who..." is engaged in his masturbatory fantasies and using these fora for his "money shots"

I know. And I didn't mean to blame you by any means.

It's just unfortunate I guess, that threads like this which could have entertained those who were interested in its subject matter, instead fall prey to the childish jealousy and self-serving rambling of an anti-social troll.

0 Replies

spendius wrote:

I'm trying to learn how to stock the larder up on one of these inter-galactic ships and how to deal with specks of dust at half the speed of light over distances to vast to think about.

1. I imagine the people launching the ship would stock the larder with some kind of food. Recycling of waste would probably be helpful.
2. No one is talking about intergalactic travel. We are talking about interstellar travel.
3. If your point is that the technical problem of collision with matter in the path of the ship cannot be solved, a look at the history of science and technology strongly suggests that you are wrong.

0 Replies

I suspect that in the future we will find traveling from point A to point B the traditional way to be remarkably ineffective. I think there are aspects of physics and interstellar travel that we haven't -- or can't -- even dream about. 200 years ago the thought of traveling from New York to Japan in 14 hours was totally unthinkable. Picking up a phone and instantly speaking with someone in another country was beyond even the minds of science fiction writers. HG Wells once wrote a book that was never published that described all homes being wired for electricity. Publishers dismissed the idea as "too far fetched".

0 Replies

Yeah, right Nickfun. Next you'll be saying we're all going to be wearing personal communication units.

0 Replies

The main disk of the Milky Way Galaxy is about 80,000 to 100,000 light-years in diameter, about 250,000 to 300,000 light-years in circumference.

That is the field of interstellar travel.

One light year is 186000x60x60x24x365 miles.

Exploring that seems to me to be impossible. We are puny.

I have raised a very few logistical problems none of which have been remotely addressed. I don't see how anybody is to be educated on this subject with a few facile generalisations which rely on magical solutions and fatuous assertions.

If readers here can't see that then one hardly knows what to think about the American educational system.

Take this for example-

Quote:

1. I imagine the people launching the ship would stock the larder with some kind of food. Recycling of waste would probably be helpful.
2. No one is talking about intergalactic travel. We are talking about interstellar travel.
3. If your point is that the technical problem of collision with matter in the path of the ship cannot be solved, a look at the history of science and technology strongly suggests that you are wrong.

or this-

Quote:

I think there are aspects of physics and interstellar travel that we haven't -- or can't -- even dream about.

or this-

Quote:

sorry ros. I hope I didnt "feed the troll" but its hard not to stand idely by when "He who..." is engaged in his masturbatory fantasies and using these fora for his "money shots"

or this-

Quote:

It's just unfortunate I guess, that threads like this which could have entertained those who were interested in its subject matter, instead fall prey to the childish jealousy and self-serving rambling of an anti-social troll.

or this-

Quote:

Mr. Landis was nice enough to visit this thread at my invitation. But after reviewing the last few pages which he had to wade through to get to any of the salient points of the thread, and finding those pages mostly full of Spendi's usual childishness and venom, I don't think I'll be asking any more of my friends or associates to join any A2K threads.

Those quotes constitute babbling in English higher education.

And I haven't even raised the idea of whether political stability will last long enough to even allow us to dip our toe into interstellar travel or whether voters will agree to provide the taxes for it when millions of Americans are on the bread line and many more millions elsewhere are starving.

According to an American programme of some length that I saw New Orleans is proving a difficult nut to crack.

I am,of course, aware that it may be necessary to waste large amounts of money,to burn it on a fire, in order to maintain the status quo in which case blowing it on the strength of some infantile platitudes may well make sense.

Imagine all of America as two car families. All of China. All of India. Etc.

But we are not debating reality are we? All logistical problems are being dealt with by a flick of the wrist. Hopeless.

Posts are being written off the cuff without any reference to the thread as a whole.

0 Replies

Alpha Centauri, at 4.5 light years, exists as a part of a sphere,viewed from here, of surface area 4/3 x 3.142 x (4.5x186,000x60x60x24x365) cubed.

Training a telescope on it doesn't have the slightest effect on its size in relation to that surface area. And that is our next door neighbour.

0 Replies

Is Anyone Out There?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know