Yet another possibility for Fermi's Paradox

[Moontanman]

This is not the end, it is the beginning of the beginning of the end... Fermi's paradox starts with the whimpering of stupid people who just can't figure out why combining religion and politics will not work. 

Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely...

When you are so delusional and ignorant you don't understand why god's people are lying sacks of steaming monkey shit that doesn't taste like chocolate the way religious conservatives said it would if you only had enough faith and too stupid to stop eating the monkey shit because faith and belief is the most powerful things in the universe because the people feeding you the monkey shit said they were... 

That's Amore'

[dimreepr]

Is there something you want to discuss, or is it just a rant? 

[StringJunky]

22 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Is there something you want to discuss, or is it just a rant? 

You and I live in a secular society, so we can't appreciate what Moon''s moaning about. 

[dimreepr]

Perhaps, but this is a discussion site. 

[DrP]

9 hours ago, Moontanman said:

When you are so delusional and ignorant you don't understand why god's people are lying sacks of steaming monkey shit

I've been there - I am not sure I would call them deliberate liars - they tend to believe what they are saying...  I think it is the book that lies and that the people are merely deluded. I was imo.

Although - to play advocate to myself here - it has just dawned on me that a leap of faith is required to believe the book...  so I guess that could be construed as a lie to one's self....  and then by extrapolation a lie to others when sharing your faith.   

[Raider5678]

9 hours ago, Moontanman said:

1. This is not the end, it is the beginning of the beginning of the end...

2. Fermi's paradox starts with the whimpering of stupid people who just can't figure out why combining religion and politics will not work. 

3. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely...

4. When you are so delusional and ignorant you don't understand why god's people are lying sacks of steaming monkey shit that doesn't taste like chocolate the way religious conservatives said it would if you only had enough faith and too stupid to stop eating the monkey shit because faith and belief is the most powerful things in the universe because the people feeding you the monkey shit said they were... 

5. That's Amore'

1

1. "This is not the end, it is the beginning of the beginning of the end" ~Every generation for the last 2000 years.

2.  Perhaps. But Fermi's paradox is an exercise in futility. We do not, and I suspect ever will, know all the variables in the equation. Therefore, the whimpering of stupid people who just can't figure out why combining religion and politics will not work does not play a factor that I can understand.

3. True in some cases.

4. Very depressing view. Also, that is a very long sentence, I  had to read it like 15 times.

5. A broken heart cause this rant or something? Amore' is love in Italian. So if the 4 things proceeding this are love, then I'm assuming something very sad may have happened to someone you loved. Well. Not sad. Horrifically and terribly heartbreaking.  Is this the case?

[DrP]

1 minute ago, Raider5678 said:

5. A broken heart cause this rant or something?

... probably the frustration of dealing with people that cover their ears when you bring facts to the conversation. It is frustrating - I used to be one of those people....  although I would argue/discuss trying to be as logical as possible...  and being fair - one of the logical steps required a leap of faith to just believe something based on no evidence at all. (well - evidences are presented....  but they always fall way short with the slightest bit of scrutiny).

....  but I can't speak for him - I don't even know the fella.

[dimreepr]

13 minutes ago, DrP said:

I've been there - I am not sure I would call them deliberate liars - they tend to believe what they are saying...  I think it is the book that lies and that the people are merely deluded. I was imo.

Although - to play advocate to myself here - it has just dawned on me that a leap of faith is required to believe the book...  so I guess that could be construed as a lie to one's self....  and then by extrapolation a lie to others when sharing your faith.   

Intollerence has many faces and logic is rarely involved, I realise the following example is a pale imitation of extreme religious intolerance; my local facebook group has a major bee in its bonnet with regards to dogshit not being picked up, the result of which is my being accused, angrily, by several random people, of being a disgusting, dangerous person simply because I have dogs. 

[Silvestru]

10 hours ago, Moontanman said:

you don't understand why god's people are lying sacks of steaming monkey shit

I met people like this and it's more depressing that that Mootanman. These people would pass a lie detector...

I would prefer to live in a world full of liars. The problem is that we live in one full of imbeciles. 

 

[DrP]

8 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Intollerence has many faces and logic is rarely involved,

with regard to religion - what I meant by 'logic' was that the god of the bible either exists or it does not. There is no in between there. I would have argued in the past that if he DID exist...  then a lot of un explainable things become explainable. My line of argument used to be that we had one of 3 cases....  1 - god exists (biblical here or other) 2 - it doesn't exist. 3 - some other unknown thing is real and neither 1 or 2 are. I would then defend Christianity vs other religions ASSUMING case 1. That was the leap of faith - assuming case 1 and the bible to be true....   which it clearly isn't.

 

13 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

I realise the following example is a pale imitation of extreme religious intolerance; my local facebook group has a major bee in its bonnet with regards to dogshit not being picked up, the result of which is my being accused, angrily, by several random people, of being a disgusting, dangerous person simply because I have dogs. 

You should pick your shit up. ;-) But if they have no evidence of you not picking it up then it sounds like an agglomeration of morons getting angry because of the group hate flying about. Nothing wrong with owning a dog.

ASIDE: When I was about 16 I walked my dog on the way to the park. He stopped and started to poo on someone's gate post. I was a little worried about this but couldn't really do anything about it as the dog had started...  and er, I can't think of anyway still to this day of stopping a dog mid shit. The owner of the house came running out shouting at me to stop him and to move on to the park...  I had to drag the dog away because the guy was going to thump me if I did not immediately fuck off.   I dragged the dog away...  and this made things MUCH worse as it dragged his business across the gateway and entrance to the guy's garden. Seeing this made the guy even more angry - which I can understand - but I did think the guy was an idiot to think I had control over the bowel movements of my dog. I laugh about it now.  

 

[dimreepr]

8 minutes ago, DrP said:

with regard to religion - what I meant by 'logic' was that the god of the bible either exists or it does not. There is no in between there.

 

There is a third choice - it exists as an abstract, much like karma; I can forgive, that bastard because he/she will get there comeuppance despite my inability to get revenge.

26 minutes ago, DrP said:

But if they have no evidence of you not picking it up then it sounds like an agglomeration of morons getting angry because of the group hate flying about. Nothing wrong with owning a dog.

1

Indeed, much like there's nothing wrong with having a god.

[DrP]

48 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

There is a third choice - it exists as an abstract, much like karma; I can forgive, that bastard because he/she will get there comeuppance despite my inability to get revenge.

That would come under option 3 on my list.

 

48 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Indeed, much like there's nothing wrong with having a god.

Of course...  except Dogs are real things and gods are imaginary.

[dimreepr]

9 minutes ago, DrP said:

Of course...  except Dogs are real things and gods are imaginary.

 

Was your teddy bear real or imaginary?

Mine was both...

[DrP]

17 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Was your teddy bear real or imaginary?

Mine was both...

ha ha - bit of both... The real parts were the threads and stuffing and it's clothes my nan made for it.  The imaginary part was the love it had for me and the relationship I had with it... the relationship was real but the thought that the feelings were reciprocated were obviously imaginary and not 'real'.

Dogs are real - for the most part - the relationship I had with my dog was real...  some of it might have been imagined, but the dog was real....  in reality...  in the solid world.

Gods are mad made imaginations and always have been. There is nothing real about them apart from the imagined interaction people have with them. It might seem real to them....  but it clearly ain't. I am pretty certain you believe this too from past conversations we've had and from posts of yours I've read.

[MigL]

Hope is imaginary.
So is love, and many other feelings and emotions.
They are constructs of our brain with no physical evidence. Some of these constructs can give us comfort and well-being in times of need, while some, like despair or hate, can drive us to end our life or the lives of others.

Religion, or more exactly religiosity, is exactly the same; the need to believe in a higher power ( that has a purpose for us we may not know ), gives religious people comfort and purpose in life.
I don't have a grudge against them.

Only those who seek to take advantage of them.

Edited December 12, 2017 by MigL

[Moontanman]

Not a rant, just an observation that religion and dishonesty it requires with others or with one's self coupled with denying reality is a possible solution to the Fermi Paradox. If all or even most intelligent beings embrace fantasy over reality what chance is there for civilization? 

It is true that many of them really believe, to me that is worse. Denying reality in favor of belief is simply stupid. 

I am 62 years old, things are not getting better and lying to further your religion, a religion that makes the claim that lying is wrong, is stunningly selfish and short sighted. 

People do not naturally need to believe in a higher power, people are indoctrinated into needing a higher power. In recent months here in the US we have seen what the unholy union of religion and conservative politics brings. The scum of the earth take advantage of the religious belief that everyone who claims to be on their side is and you get criminals in office being defended by religious believers... 

[Airbrush]

1 hour ago, Moontanman said:

Not a rant, just an observation that religion and dishonesty it requires with others or with one's self coupled with denying reality is a possible solution to the Fermi Paradox. If all or even most intelligent beings embrace fantasy over reality what chance is there for civilization? 

Could you please explain what the Fermi Paradox has to do with religion?  I don't yet see the connection.

In my mind the Fermi Paradox is explained by the possibility that interstellar travel is much more difficult than we think, and intelligent life is scarcer than we think.

"...The second aspect of the Fermi paradox is the argument of probability: given intelligent life's ability to overcome scarcity, and its tendency to colonize new habitats, it seems possible that at least some civilizations would be technologically advanced, seek out new resources in space, and colonize their own star system and, subsequently, surrounding star systems. Since there is no significant evidence on Earth, or elsewhere in the known universe of other intelligent life after 13.8 billion years of the universe's history, there is a conflict requiring a resolution. Some examples of possible resolutions are that intelligent life is rarer than we think, that our assumptions about the general development or behavior of intelligent species are flawed, or, more radically, that our current scientific understanding of the nature of the universe itself is quite incomplete."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox

I don't believe there is a paradox.

Edited December 13, 2017 by Airbrush

[tuco]

Indeed, there is no paradox:

Quote

The "Fermi Paradox," an argument that extraterrestrial intelligence cannot exist because it has not yet been observed, is a logical fallacy. This "paradox" is a formally invalid inference. both because it requires modal operators lying outside the first-order propositional calculus and because it is unsupported by the observational record.

There Is No Fermi Paradox -  http://www.rfreitas.com/Astro/ThereIsNoFermiParadox1985.htm

or 

The Fermi Paradox is Neither Fermi’s Nor a Paradox - https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1605/1605.09187.pdf

"Where is everyone?" is a cool party question, but that is about it. 

[Moontanman]

17 hours ago, Airbrush said:

Could you please explain what the Fermi Paradox has to do with religion?  I don't yet see the connection.

I would be glad to. 

17 hours ago, Airbrush said:

In my mind the Fermi Paradox is explained by the possibility that interstellar travel is much more difficult than we think, and intelligent life is scarcer than we think.

Those are some possibilities but the possibilities are not limited to those few. 

17 hours ago, Airbrush said:

"...The second aspect of the Fermi paradox is the argument of probability: given intelligent life's ability to overcome scarcity, and its tendency to colonize new habitats, it seems possible that at least some civilizations would be technologically advanced, seek out new resources in space, and colonize their own star system and, subsequently, surrounding star systems. Since there is no significant evidence on Earth, or elsewhere in the known universe of other intelligent life after 13.8 billion years of the universe's history, there is a conflict requiring a resolution. Some examples of possible resolutions are that intelligent life is rarer than we think, that our assumptions about the general development or behavior of intelligent species are flawed, or, more radically, that our current scientific understanding of the nature of the universe itself is quite incomplete."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox

I don't believe there is a paradox.

I'm not sure how you could say there is not a paradox, possibly we have a different usage for the word paradox. 

The fact there is no evidence of intelligent life other than our own is the paradox. We have no reason to think we are somehow special, we have less and less reason to think this every year yet no other species has been detected. That is the paradox. 

The connection with religion is easily explained. 

Religion denies reality and postulates that  this life is nothing but a test for the real thing after death. By approaching reality in this manner religion tends to and can be shown to stifle progress, education, and technology. Religion causes huge amounts of conflict between believers in different imaginary beings that often result in conflict and war. thousands of people die everyday for no reason other than someone believing they worship the wrong god or in the wrong way. 

The possibility that all or most thinking beings use religion to control the masses seems high and this could be the answer to why no one is there. They all eventually destroy themselves over whose imaginary friend has the most power.   

16 hours ago, tuco said:

Indeed, there is no paradox:

There Is No Fermi Paradox -  http://www.rfreitas.com/Astro/ThereIsNoFermiParadox1985.htm

Quote

The "Fermi Paradox," an argument that extraterrestrial intelligence cannot exist because it has not yet been observed, is a logical fallacy. This "paradox" is a formally invalid inference. both because it requires modal operators lying outside the first-order propositional calculus and because it is unsupported by the observational record. © 1985 Academic Press. Inc.

The Fermi Paradox does not state that intelligent life cannot exist because it has not been detected. The Fermi Paradox asks the question "If life is common in the universe why can we not see them"

 

16 hours ago, tuco said:

or 

The Fermi Paradox is Neither Fermi’s Nor a Paradox - https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1605/1605.09187.pdf

"Where is everyone?" is a cool party question, but that is about it. 

So your criticism directs back to the top paper? Please see my first answer.... 

[dimreepr]

19 hours ago, Moontanman said:

Not a rant, just an observation that religion and dishonesty it requires with others or with one's self coupled with denying reality is a possible solution to the Fermi Paradox. If all or even most intelligent beings embrace fantasy over reality what chance is there for civilization? 

1

That doesn't follow for me, go back 500 years and almost everyone would fall within your description and yet here we are a civilisation that actively seeks for extra-planetary life/intelligence.

19 hours ago, Moontanman said:

It is true that many of them really believe, to me that is worse. Denying reality in favor of belief is simply stupid. 

I am 62 years old, things are not getting better and lying to further your religion, a religion that makes the claim that lying is wrong, is stunningly selfish and short sighted. 

1

It kinda does seem like a rant...

19 hours ago, Moontanman said:

People do not naturally need to believe in a higher power, people are indoctrinated into needing a higher power. In recent months here in the US we have seen what the unholy union of religion and conservative politics brings. The scum of the earth take advantage of the religious belief that everyone who claims to be on their side is and you get criminals in office being defended by religious believers... 

Evidence, please. 

The ghost of Christmas yet to come:

Quote

From the foldings of its robe, it brought two children;
wretched, abject, frightful, hideous, miserable. They knelt
down at its feet, and clung upon the outside of its garment.

Quote

'Spirit. are they yours.' Scrooge could say no more.
 'They are Man's,' said the Spirit, looking down upon
them. 'And they cling to me, appealing from their fathers.
This boy is Ignorance. This girl is Want. Beware them both,
and all of their degree, but most of all beware this boy,
for on his brow I see that written which is Doom, unless the
writing be erased. Deny it.' cried the Spirit, stretching out
its hand towards the city. 'Slander those who tell it ye.
Admit it for your factious purposes, and make it worse.
And abide the end.' 

 

[Moontanman]

51 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

That doesn't follow for me, go back 500 years and almost everyone would fall within your description and yet here we are a civilisation that actively seeks for extra-planetary life/intelligence.

Very true, but forces of religious domination continue to strive for rule. 500 years ago it was more difficult to completely control the population now with modern technology the possibility of a religious 1984 is a real threat. Between religious violence and rule of law being challenged by religion as well as theistic pressure to give religion equal standing with science in schools could be a return to the religious dominance of 500 years ago and a far worse out look to throw off the yoke of religion. 

 

Quote

It kinda does seem like a rant...

A rant by any other name... 

Quote

Evidence, please. 

The ghost of Christmas yet to come:

 

Evidence of what exactly? This part?

Quote

People do not naturally need to believe in a higher power, people are indoctrinated into needing a higher power. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirahã

Quote

According to Everett, the Pirahã have no concept of a supreme spirit or god,[8] and they lost interest in Jesus when they discovered that Everett had never seen him. They require evidence based on personal experience for every claim made.

http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/disbelieve-it-or-not-ancient-history-suggests-that-atheism-is-as-natural-to-humans-as-religion

Quote

People in the ancient world did not always believe in the gods, a new study suggests – casting doubt on the idea that religious belief is a “default setting” for humans.

Early societies were far more capable than many since of containing atheism within the spectrum of what they considered normal

Tim Whitmarsh

Despite being written out of large parts of history, atheists thrived in the polytheistic societies of the ancient world – raising considerable doubts about whether humans really are “wired” for religion – a new study suggests.

The claim is the central proposition of a new book by Tim Whitmarsh, Professor of Greek Culture and a Fellow of St John’s College, University of Cambridge. In it, he suggests that atheism – which is typically seen as a modern phenomenon – was not just common in ancient Greece and pre-Christian Rome, but probably flourished more in those societies than in most civilisations since.

 

Or this part? 

 

Quote

In recent months here in the US we have seen what the unholy union of religion and conservative politics brings. The scum of the earth take advantage of the religious belief that everyone who claims to be on their side is and you get criminals in office being defended by religious believers... 

The only part I can see a contest with is "in recent months" this unholy union of conservative politics and religion really started with Reagan if not before. As for the last sentence I give you Our Current PPGOTUS... not to mention his cronies... 

Edited December 14, 2017 by Moontanman

[tuco]

Well, alright thanks for correction Moontanman. Still, where is the paradox, because I do not see it. 

[Moontanman]

2 minutes ago, tuco said:

Well, alright thanks for correction Moontanman. Still, where is the paradox, because I do not see it. 

Well, by my usage of the word paradox the fact that we know stars and planets are common and that earth like planets are common the paradox lies in why were don't see other civilizations. Of course this is based on the idea that aliens would be as detectable as we think we would be. Recent studies have suggested that we would not be be detectable even to the nearest star due to interference of interstellar gas and dust. The idea that we could detect aliens anyplace in the universe is based on the idea that aliens want to be detected... 

[DrP]

15 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

Well, by my usage of the word paradox the fact that we know stars and planets are common and that earth like planets are common the paradox lies in why were don't see other civilizations. Of course this is based on the idea that aliens would be as detectable as we think we would be. Recent studies have suggested that we would not be be detectable even to the nearest star due to interference of interstellar gas and dust. The idea that we could detect aliens anyplace in the universe is based on the idea that aliens want to be detected... 

Also, being fair to us  -  we've only just started looking...  what, in the last 50 years or so at a guess?  That's the last 50 years in 4.5 billion years of the earth forming and 14.5 billion years of our universe as we know it forming...  Maybe we are the first civilisation to pop up, maybe we the latest in many that have already been and already gone extinct, maybe we will get a state visit from our nearest neighbours once we unify the planet....  maybe we will get a visit from the Borg sometime in the next few centuries and all be assimilated. Who knows...  lol - Maybe a school of space sharks will invade one day...   I know that is what Moontanman will probably think is the most likely.  ;-) 

[dimreepr]

16 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirahã

http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/disbelieve-it-or-not-ancient-history-suggests-that-atheism-is-as-natural-to-humans-as-religion

 

Thank you, very interesting but it seems to confirm my Dickens quote, to which I'll add:

https://dickens.ucsc.edu/resources/faq/religion.html

Quote

It was in these years too that Dickens first felt the need to impart some religious instruction to his children and, significantly, undertook to do this himself by writing a simplified version of the gospels designed for reading aloud (not published until 1934, when it was dubbed The Life of Our Lord).

IOW it's not religion or belief that's at fault, it's want and ignorance.

2 hours ago, Moontanman said:

The fact there is no evidence of intelligent life other than our own is the paradox. We have no reason to think we are somehow special, we have less and less reason to think this every year yet no other species has been detected. That is the paradox. 

The Fermi Paradox does not state that intelligent life cannot exist because it has not been detected. The Fermi Paradox asks the question "If life is common in the universe why can we not see them"

 

If I can't see it, it doesn't exist; isn't a paradox it's just a lack of information.