5 ms·
"could be a sign", how about "most likely not be a sign." Interesting, how the Alien fantasy has permeated so much of our society without the slidest bit of pr
by WheelsAtLarge 2y ago
"could be a sign", how about "most likely not be a sign." Interesting, how the Alien fantasy has permeated so much of our society without the slidest bit of proof. It's even part of a website that professes to be reporting on science.
- Mistletoe 2y agoI get what you are saying, but I would find it even more amazing if we are alone. It and we would be the most miraculous thing in the universe. Maybe we are, but the odds surely favor the opposite no?
- giantrobot 2y ago> I get what you are saying, but I would find it even more amazing if we are alone. Alien life in the universe is extremely likely. That does not mean however that every odd phenomenon is evidence of that alien life. It's unlikely (possible but unlikely) some alien civilization has a pet black hole in orbit of their planet. Just a random comet getting grabbed by its gravity could generate dangerous x-ray bursts for the planet's inhabitants. Jumping to the conclusion of "it's aliens!" is unscientific and really a bit tiring.
- cthalupa 2y agoWell, this is all positioned as "possible technosignature," there's not some black hole orbiting around a planet that we've seen that has us going "that's weird must be aliens." Though, a black hole of the size we're talking about is in and of itself potentially evidence of aliens - as noted in the article, they would evaporate within a year and a half without a constant influx of mass. Most places where you would find a black hole that is accreting matter is going to be a place where there is enough matter for it to become significantly larger, and once it's away from places rich with matter, space is emptying enough there's basically no chance it's having that much fall in.
- The_Colonel 2y ago> Jumping to the conclusion of "it's aliens!" is unscientific and really a bit tiring. It kinda seems your jumping to conclusions, "sign" is not the same thing as "evidence". Sign is basically increasing the perceived likelihood, but it may mean an increase from e. g. 0.000001% (baseline) to e. g. 0.001%. Add some other signs like presence of water, radio activity etc. (each of which alone is no proof of aliens) and you can get interesting candidates.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- michaelmrose 2y agoDo you consider this specific bit of speculation on what we perhaps might look for as evidence of alien life is a fantasy or the entire idea of alien life?
- WheelsAtLarge 2y agoLife took a hold here so why can't it be somewhere else? My problem is that there's a never-ending implication that if we can't explain something right away then it must be created by an alien civilization. It's a lazy way to look at how the universe functions. For most of our history, the default creator was God. Lately, in the last 100 or so years, it has been switched to aliens in many cases. We have Science which gives us a method to come up with a possible solution without defaulting to a super being. What bugs me is that there is 0 evidence of there being advanced civilizations. We have been brainwashed by sci-fi. Believing in aliens because we saw them at the movies or read a book about them helps no one. To me, it's a form of misinformation that's in the same realm as the moon being made of cheese.