60% Of U.S. Believe Life Exists On Other Planets 943
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."
Survey says, (Score:5, Insightful)
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%.
Yes, but.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Based on past experience (Score:5, Insightful)
Why should be be astonished about finding life elsewhere?
Says something about education? (Score:1, Insightful)
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.
And 70% believe in angels... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:In other galactic news.. (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
60% of US? (Score:2, Insightful)
Just like us? (Score:5, Insightful)
But really, intelligent I could see. But like us? That just demonstrates a lack of imagination.
Re:Yes, but.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure, life is certainly a lot more interesting thinking that magic, esp, ufos, auras, etc are real..
that doesn't make it so though, sorry.
On topic BTW, if anyone has vivid evidence of aliens, that does not involve hypnosis therapy, and other hocus pocus, please forward the info.
Re:Says something about education? (Score:5, Insightful)
The same reason a lot of people don't believe there is a god. No proof.
Re:Yes, but.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Kinda makes you wonder the benefits of democracy, now doesn't it?
Re:Only 60%? (Score:1, Insightful)
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
Re:First question for alien intelligence . . . (Score:5, Insightful)
Americans watch too much Sci-Fi (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Intelligent Designs (Score:2, Insightful)
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.
Requires qualification... (Score:5, Insightful)
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
Homocidal Xenophobes Welcome Extraterrestrials (Score:5, Insightful)
just my $.01
Re:Only 60%? (Score:5, Insightful)
Beliefs get in the way of science. At least when those beliefs are not grounded in facts.
Re:Why do Christians not want to believe in aliens (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Of course life exists on other planets (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Re:Survey says, (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:More polls (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:More polls (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Yes, but.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Bugger Off!
The purpose of democracy is not to be infallible, omniscient or omnipotent. No one ever envisioned that it would usher in a utopia or paradise or terrestrial heaven. But what it was meant to do it does very well. Democracy has given humans the greatest amount of self-rule and self-determination ever in history.
Those of you who want to take away democracy just because your candidate lost an election can kiss my hairy ass!
Why not? (Score:3, Insightful)
This just in (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Oh Yea? (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Re:Survey says, (Score:2, Insightful)
It was a brilliant move, whoever came up with it: Get all the people who are prone to buying into psycho cult nonsense to cut their own nards off, thus reducing the number of nut-jobs (sorry, couldn't resist the pun) in future generations.
Brilliant!
Re:Homocidal Xenophobes Welcome Extraterrestrials (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, or some day our technology will advance to the point that we can see in great detail across billions and billions of light years and we'll realize that we're sitting in a vast wasteland, a graveyard, of dead civilizations. All imploding on themselves.
Why is it that we alwasy assume that more "advanced" extraterrestrial life has anything even close to our moral structure? What if other life had Hitlers who won? Or came from environments which were so sparsely populated with resources that elimination of weaker memebers of the society is considered to be the right choice?
Maybe only when a planet truly realizes the power of hate is it ready to join the Dark Side.
Re:Yes, but.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Just because someone's reason for believing something isn't enough to convince you, doesn't mean it isn't enough to convince them. Whether their reason for believing it is a book they read or a personal experience they've had or mountains of scientific data, it's still a reason that they have for believing it. "Believe" is a distinct word, separate from "know" for a reason.
Re:Yes, but.. (Score:3, Insightful)
In order to have intelligent life on a planet, the conditions needed for life to develop must be met. One of these is the right temperature range. Because the laws of physics appear to operate uniformly throughout the Universe as far as we have observed until now, the only physical life allowed must be based on carbon, just like life on Earth. It is no accident that the internal temperature of warm blooded creatures is in the narrow range it is within.
One of the critical parameters to keep the temperature stable enough for life is the spacing of stars from one another. If the distance is closer than about 3.8 light years, the orbits of any possible planets of both stars becomes too irregular to keep the temperatures within the required bounds. About half of all stars in the known Universe fail this test by being too close. The sun's nearest neighbor, Alpha Centauri, is about 4.2 light years distant.
Another important star parameter is the color temperature of the parent star. It must be keyed to the physics of photosynthesis which requires specific wavelengths of light. In addition, stars significantly larger or smaller than our sun cause other stability problems for long term temperature control.
The parameters of the planet itself and its location relative to its star must also be kept in narrow bounds. A too small a star makes it neccessary to place the planet so close, it can no longer rotate independently, but one side will always face the star, making it extremely hot and the other side way too cold for life. The giant stars output their energy too unsteadily for long term stable temperature.
The planet also has to have sufficient quantities of water in liquid form and enough but not too much oxygen in its atmosphere. The atmosphere also has to have a mechanism to shield life forms from the intense harmful radiation components from the parent star, such as UV, (such as our ozone layer) and from other space radiation harmful to long term life survival. There are many other parameters that must be exactly right in order for a planet to support intelligent life. All of these, when taken together, make it extrmemly unlikely that there would be another planet like ours in our galaxy. We are simply too far away from other galaxies to receive any kind of electromagnetic signal or an answer to our signaling. The first radio waves generated by humans are still less than 100 light years away from here.
Re:Only 60%? (Score:2, Insightful)
From a christian's perspective.. (Score:1, Insightful)
"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.
Re:Only 60%? (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Survey says, (Score:4, Insightful)
there is life on earth outside of America.
--
Have a Pheasant Plucking day!
Re:Yes, but.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Democracy lets majority take advantage of the minority. It lets large, organized groups plunder smaller, less organized groups through theft and redistribution. My views have never been represented by my "democratic representatives", so I fail to see how it has given me any self-rule or self-determination.
Rather, what little self-rule and determination I have left exists in spite of what politicans 1000 kilometres away have stolen from me. And with every session of their democratic body, they take a little more away from me. All because some well-connected lobby has a say, and I don't.
You can keep your wonderful democracy.
Here's an appropriate scene (Score:5, Insightful)
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."
Re:Looks like an Iridium Flare (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Re:Yes, but.. (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm confused about how people seem to believe that "the conditions for life have to be equal to the conditions we've had here that might've lead to springing earths' life" as if there is just one magic mix for life which earth coïncidentally had. You just gave a definition of planet earth.
It's a bit of a limited observation in my view; what if life could have another "life form"? We cannot perceive that cause our brains aren't able to visualize that; all we know is our planet and how things work around here. Everything is based on the influence and have evolved to the conditions in our solarsystem/planet.
eg. our eyes pick up light; their use and evolution depends on a sun providing the ability to pick up a certain range of the spectrum of light which we use as orientation. Why would that be equal across the universe -if there would be another lifeform? (even on our puny planet we already have differences in the way creatures 'see'.) Without our type of gravity, why would one evolve into having legs or needing to walk? Earth is made for 75% out of water, no wonder our life has 'sprung from water'. Does that mean that life only can come forth out of water? Noone knows, but I think it's very likely there's life somewhere in our universe in a form we cannot comprehend.
Only more open minds will change things (Score:3, Insightful)
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 [ufoskeptic.org] (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.
Re:More polls (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Re:Yes, but.. (Score:3, Insightful)
You should be careful with the word "prove" in all its conjugations. You can only ever prove something in an abstract system, given a set of initial, abstract premises. I can invent plenty of premises in which "the Earth is millions of years old" is untrue. Likewise, I can disagree with any of your premises and honestly not be convinced by your argument.
Like it or not, any "proof" of the Earth's age is built using an abstract representation of reality and based on premises that every convinced person has to accept.
"Overwhelming evidence," though, I can accept. I do. (And I'm devoutly religious! Wow!) Just be careful with the word "proof." It gets abused.
(This post has been an Anal Retentive Word Usage post. Feel free to consider it over-the-top.)
Re:Yes, but.. (Score:3, Insightful)
It's well-known that democracy is the worst form of government (apart from all the other kinds)
Re:Only 60%? (Score:2, Insightful)
Beliefs do not get in the way of science. Arrogance, the inability to reflect, learn and tolerate do.
Re:frank drake (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Survey says, (Score:3, Insightful)
And where
And where
Not to mention thmany many Americans who still believe Iraq had WMDs and was aiding Osama bin Laden, who believe Abu Ghraib was solely the fault of low-level rankers, while simultaneously believing the latest justication for the war, that its aim was to "give Iraq the 'Gift of Democracy'".
Oh hell, I'll mention that too. Verbatim from the Harris Poll [harrisinteractive.com], February of this year:
I guess if you believe in angels and witches you can also believe that teaching creationism and limiting stem cell won't undermine the very science you count on to keep you healthy into your nineties, because you can just count on your benificent god to save you with miracles.
Re:Why do Christians not want to believe in aliens (Score:5, Insightful)
You're anthropomorphizing. Big mistake.
Re:Survey says, (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:frank drake (Score:2, Insightful)
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.
Re:Survey says, (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Survey says, (Score:1, Insightful)
If said creator created itself, then it undermines the whole antecedent that a thing needs a self-removed creator.
If said creator was created by another then where does the stack end? Is the God we actually worship the creator of this infinite recursion, or is He some order along the way (and if so, why don't we worship His creator?).
The Upanishads deal with this in a way that does not lead to these questions, in my interpretation anyhow. It is possibly a better metaphorical myth for the Big Bang. I'm not saying your faith is wrong, just that there was thought about 'what created the Creator' long before the conception of Christianity and its adoption of the Jew's one God.
Your argument for the Cambrian seems entirely fallacious though, so I won't waste our time addressing it.
Re:Survey says, (Score:2, Insightful)
Raid my IRA?
You don't actually know what an IRA is, do you? I'll be a nice guy and fill you in.
IRA stands for "Independant Retirement Account."
Basically, it's money that you personally set asside in special accounts which avoid certain taxes, so long as you don't touch them before you retire (or, in the case of a Roth IRA, so long as you don't touch the interest/dividends until then.)
Could the tax laws change? Sure, but even if you could not make tax-free investments, saving for retirement would still be a good idea, and the sooner in your life you start, the better off you will be. Set up a retirement account, and let it ride (in other words, roll all interest and/or dividends you get from it back into the account.)
Like Albert Einstein said, there is no force in the universe more powerful than compound interest. Letting it work for you could be the difference between spending your retirement in the Bahamas or North Dakota.
Re:funny? mod parent POLITICAL!!! (Score:1, Insightful)
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)?