:mad::mad: Angrier White Man :mad::mad:


:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

not 1 single fuck given if that's what you think, ask yourself why the fuck would dyna mo give 1 single fuck.

and i have a question for you also, serious- have you and i crossed paths before? have i done something to you that caused you to need to come in here and call me names for starting a fun thread?

STFU, you asked me if I realized that 0 was a real number and you thought you'd get a really nice reply?

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

STFU,you left out how you first yapped "scientific proof that nothing exists? :1orglaugh:1orglaugh" and you thought you'd not get asked if you know that nothing is a natural occurence in science and math?

that's when you- not being a racist or nothing, started referring to me as the angry white man.


chill out man. you can't do that though. ********** ish. no biggie here, as per usual not 1... blah blah.





::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::





anyhoo, it's not a foregone conclusion we are not alone in the Universe. The original study didn't approach the equation assuming we are alone. they plugged in their theory and the results came out.

sure i used the word "proof", i chose that word because this sort of science proves the opposite is not proof either, that we are not alone.

It's a hard subject for me to wrap my pea brain around, as the universe is mind boggling large.
IMHO, it is certainly plausible that there could be intelligent life somewhere in the universe.

However me thinks the human race will be long gone before any visit our planet.

Mathmeticians have zero real life experience. They just go on probabilities based on the skimpiest of "evidence". It's like mental masturbation to them. Like they KNOW (yeah right) how big the Universe is, when it will "die", when it was "born", blah blah blah.

I would LOVE to be a theoretical physicist because then no one could ever prove me "wrong". What a joke.

The aliens are directly opposite us, behind our sun, that's why we can't find them. Duh.

that's basically the same results this study concluded. before life can get to the level of intelligence/technology/space travel, which obviously requires billions of years, it's usually long gone.

that's what's so cool about these astrobiologists! instead of crunching the math and determining based on Drake's equation that the probability of intelligent life is out there, these guys mix a variety of science disciplines and apply that to Fermi's equation. pretty cool.

Well, If we land on another planet.... bam! intelligent life on another planet.
But you did say universe OP, So I'll not use my statement as a response but rather a simple fact.

blah blah...astrophysics... smug.... hipster... coffee... blah

Yo mama!


:1orglaugh

nice thinking!

as long as it's not Matt Damon!

:1orglaugh


i was just thinking about that. you and i don't have a prob.

so gofuckyourself. :1orglaugh

It depends on what one calls intelligent. Homo erectus, Neanderthals, Australopithecus, were all intelligent. They used tools. Like chimps to today.

To reach where we are now from the beginning of life with a brain took 600 million years. It's only been in the last 110 years that we developed flight, 55 years ago we first went into space. And if we carry on destroying the planet at this rate, we'll be gone in a few hundred years.

Lots of archeologists spend decades searching for signs of early hominids and the sum total of their discoveries wouldn't fill the average dustbin. Dinosaurs, who lived for millions of years, bones can be bought on Ebay because they're so plentiful.

Maybe we would find buildings of our level intelligent life. More likely we would find their equivalent of a dinosaur. A creature not intelligent enough to destroy itself.

As for visiting Earth, think about the cost of putting a man on Mars and the profitable return. The money required to put a man or spacecraft into the next solar system puts it all into perspective. It's on par with a Neanderthal building a car.

Ummmm. Noooo that's just you.