Jump to content
Science Forums

What kind of life is there in the universe, and have they visited?  

3 members have voted

  1. 1. What kind of life is there in the universe, and have they visited?

    • Humans are the only intelligent life, and there is no life beyond Earth.
      4
    • Humans, dolphins, gorillas and a few others are the only intelligent life.
      2
    • There's life beyond earth but its only bacteria and simple organisms.
      5
    • There's complex life beyond earth but its not intelligent.
      7
    • There's intelligent life in the universe but they've never visited Earth.
      96
    • There's intelligent life in the universe and they've visited.
      43
    • There's intelligent life and they regularly abduct humans for experiments.
      9


Recommended Posts

Posted

Whenever I hear of "UFO's" and Rosewell I am reminded of the Futurama Episode "A Rosewell That Ends Well".

 

Can't proof of other intellegent life in the universe be taken from the fact that we have never been visited by aliens?

 

If there is intellegent life out there that has achived space travel does that mean that they are more advanced then us? I once read a short story where aliens visited earth and when our scientists went aboard to figure out the secrets of space flight, they found that instead of advanced microcircuits, there were vacuum tubes.

just something to think about,

Theory

  • 4 months later...
Posted

This thread hasn't been added to since January, but there's another race of "aliens" right here in our solar system:

 

Speaking about a type of "aliens" that are non-breathers, The Urantia Book says:

 

49:3.6 You would be more than interested in the planetary conduct of this type of mortal because such a race of beings inhabits a sphere in close proximity to [Earth].

 

Norm.

Posted
This thread hasn't been added to since January, but there's another race of "aliens" right here in our solar system:

 

Speaking about a type of "aliens" that are non-breathers, The Urantia Book says:

 

49:3.6 You would be more than interested in the planetary conduct of this type of mortal because such a race of beings inhabits a sphere in close proximity to [Earth].

 

Norm.

 

I am tempted to point out the UB cannot be used a source since it is a religious text and cannot be verified but since I am very interested in Aliens I'll bite. Does your book give any indication as to which planet these non breathing complex creatures live on?

Posted
I am tempted to point out the UB cannot be used a source since it is a religious text

 

Well, I'll succumb to temptation and point out that the Urantia Book falls into the "too dumb even for a religious text" category. Kinda like Timecube. I rank it slightly below Dianetics in reliability. Which is to say, if I found a revelation scrawled in feces on the bathroom wall of a Metro station, I'd go with that over the UB.

 

So - do you have any revelatory information from scatological sources?

 

TFS

  • 1 month later...
Posted
I am tempted to point out the UB cannot be used a source since it is a religious text and cannot be verified but since I am very interested in Aliens I'll bite. Does your book give any indication as to which planet these non breathing complex creatures live on?

 

I almost feel like I've wandered into a snipe hunt, but, uh, Uranus?

 

--lemit

Posted

So those people on Uranus, if they want to support their home planet against perceived oppression by a neighbor, do they use the same kind of slogan the Irish have used against the English, you know,

 

UP URANUS!

 

Just wondering.

 

--lemit

Posted

:Alien: not uranus, at least according to the tome everyone is sniping at. :) possibly one of uranus' moons man. :D nothing like some specific examples of a whole lot of general dooky, hey? :rotfl: to whit!:

The Inhabited Worlds; The Urantia Book: Paper 49

49:0.4 Not all planets are suited to harbor mortal life. Small ones having a high rate of axial revolution are wholly unsuited for life habitats. In several of the physical systems of Satania the planets revolving around the central sun are too large for habitation, their great mass occasioning oppressive gravity. Many of these enormous spheres have satellites, sometimes a half dozen or more, and these moons are often in size very near that of Urantia, so that they are almost ideal for habitation.

...

49:2.1 There is a standard and basic pattern of vegetable and animal life in each system. But the Life Carriers are oftentimes confronted with the necessity of modifying these basic patterns to conform to the varying physical conditions which confront them on numerous worlds of space. They foster a generalized system type of mortal creature, but there are seven distinct physical types as well as thousands upon thousands of minor variants of these seven outstanding differentiations:

1.Atmospheric types.

2.Elemental types.

3.Gravity types.

4.Temperature types.

5.Electric types.

6.Energizing types.

7.Unnamed types ...

 

there is no such thing as gravity; Urantia sucks. :earth: :hihi:

Posted
I am tempted to point out the UB cannot be used a source since it is a religious text and cannot be verified but since I am very interested in Aliens I'll bite. Does your book give any indication as to which planet these non breathing complex creatures live on?

IMHO the UB is, most charitably, an odd king of science fiction, but despite its often oblique style, this question’s easy to answer: “non-breathers” live on airless bodies, such as asteroids and moons.

 

Source: The Inhabited Worlds; The Urantia Book: Paper 49

 

Turtle’s got the basic gist of it, I think, except (from the little I read) the UB’s not specific about which airless body. It goes into some detail about number and percentages of such bodies, but using terms I don’t recognize.

Posted

Seriously why would non breathing imply an airless world? On a planet with a high pressure hydrogen atmosphere with hydrogen metabolizing creatures breathing would seem to be unnecessary since hydrogen is so penetrating any life form should be saturated by hydrogen be default. I think of breathing in this context as actively pulling air in and out of your body. Even large insects have to pull air in and out of their body's, especially the most active insects like wasps.

Posted
Seriously why would non breathing imply an airless world?

 

it needn't necessarily make the implication, however allowing for non-breathers allows for the possibility of life on 'airless' planets.

 

if you want the Urantia's take on it, i recommend you read it. it is, if nothing else, an interesting insight into what people were speculating about in regards to extraterrestrial life in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.:photos:

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...