Stephen Hawking warns over making contact with aliens

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
Regardless of scientific etiquette there are some things Joseph that are far beyond the realm of mere theory. Evolution is a good example. With the fossil record and the happenings in places like the Galapagos Islands, evolution is pretty much accepted as fact. by most reasonable people.
General relativity has been encountered and confirmed dozen times by NASA.

Is it also a theory that water will boil if it is heated to the point where the vapour pressure exceeds the ambient pressure plus the bit of pressure induced by surface tension?

A big negative to both specious claims to established fact Juan. General relativity has never been confirmed by anyone at any time and it never will be and evolution takes no account of the obvious and numerous instances of engineering, particularly in the vegetable world, the history of maize alone suffices nicely to cast doubt on Darwins masonic BS.




The Black Hole, the Big Bang, and Modern Physics




General Relativity.
Stephen J. Crothers

~ home ~ challenge ~ papers ~ PhD ~ ICTP fraud ~ Ric = 0 ~ Letters from a Black Hole ~
~ Something about Sky & Telescope ~ Astronomers admit: No Black Holes Found ~ Something about Tom Bridgman ~ ~ American Mathematical Society Suppresses Science ~

There has been a deliberate suppression of important scientific papers by the community of physicists and astronomers concerning the black hole, beginning with the original paper by Karl Schwarzschild of 1916, evidently for vainglory, money and self-aggrandisement. I bring you free access to those papers, and others of relevance, in the hope that this fraud can be exposed and physics restored to a rational search for knowledge. The black hole has no foundation in theory whatsoever. Neither Newton's theory nor Einstein's theory predict it. In fact, both theories preclude it, contrary to what the orthodox relativists claim.
The so-called "Schwarzschild" solution is not due to Karl Schwarzschild at all. The experts have either not read Schwarzschild's 1916 memoir or have otherwise ignored it. Go here to get Schwarzschild's original paper, in English. The so-called "Schwarzschild" solution is due to David Hilbert, itself a corruption of a solution first derived by Johannes Droste in May 1916, whose paper has also been buried or ignored at the convenience of the experts. It appears that the experts have not read Hilbert either. Go here to get a copy of Hilbert's erroneous derivation, in English. Hilbert's mistake spawned the black hole and the community of theoretical physicists continues to elaborate on this falsehood, with a hostile shouting down of any and all voices challenging them. Schwarzschild's solution has no black hole, and neither does Droste's solution. Schwarzschild's paper is a piece of flawless mathematical physics, but Hilbert's is a poor show. And while you're at it you might as well go here to get a copy of Marcel Brillouin's 1923 paper, in English, in which he gives another valid solution and also simply and dramatically demonstrates that the black hole is nonsense. Brillouin's paper has also been ignored.
The experts are always quick to conveniently brand anyone who questions the black hole as a crackpot. Unfortunately for the experts that does not alter the facts. The experts must also include Schwarzschild himself as a crank since his paper invalidates the black hole outright, as does Brillouin's, and Droste's. They must also label Einstein a crackpot, because Einstein always rejected the idea of the black hole, claiming in his research papers and other writings that it is not physical, and that singularities in the field nullify the theory of General Relativity.
 

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton
Are you telling us that there are no aliens, that we few humans are the only inhabitants of this universe. As Carl Sagan used to say, "With billions and billions of planets, surely there are other beings looking hopefully at the universe for possible neighbors".

I'm with Enrico Fermi on this. He stated what is called the Fermi Paradox, which basically asks if alien life exists then where are all the aliens? He posed this question when confronted by others who maintained that given the sheer numbers of galaxies and stars that it was a mathematical certainty that extraterrestial life exists.

Only an alien would deny the presence of aliens to throw doubt into a numb and placated public.

Umm - forget what I just said to Juan.

Hawking did make a good point in the show. Life being present on our planet shows that the improbable does occur. So why not aliens in other parts of the universe?

Why not indeed? Mr. Hawking certainly knows far more than me about astrophysics, but I am going to wait until the aliens actually show up before I take them seriously.
 

Cliffy

Standing Member
Nov 19, 2008
44,850
192
63
Nakusp, BC
Well, I came to the conclusion a long time ago that particularly the "white" people must be alien to this planet because of their complete disregard for all other life forms that share it with us. No other bunch of people are so disconnected from the processes of life and the realization that all life is interconnected and interdependent. We are either aliens, mutants or genetically engineered by aliens.
 

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
Are you telling us that there are no aliens, that we few humans are the only inhabitants of this universe. As Carl Sagan used to say, "With billions and billions of planets, surely there are other beings looking hopefully at the universe for possible neighbors".

Sagan used to believe that there are 100,000 intelligent civilizations in our galaxy.
 

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
At present, science can only show us a part of the overall picture, we can only predict a certain distance ahead in the future, but the bigger the equation, the bigger we try and expand out perspective, the more factors one has to calculate, most of the time, many of the factors aren't even known, thus can not be calculated.... and even if one tries, it now just falls under Educated Guess, Probabilities, Limited Statistics, and nothing absolute.

Quite so. That is why a scientific theory remains a theory forever. It can never be proved beyond any doubt, but it can be disproved. Scientific research is essentially like groping in the dark.

Either way, their scientific process didn't give them the whole picture, everybody relied on them to be telling people the truth and doing things safely, and ended up using all of us as lab subjects for a mass study of the effects of their theories, on us.

Lead, Asbestos, Hydrogenated Oils, PVC Plastics, Insecticides/DDT, that Delousing powder crap people had tossed onto them, including children..... the list just keeps going.

The point being is that Science and those who follow science told everybody these things can benefit our society in some fashion or another, never explained any of the dangers or side effects.... probably didn't even know they existed (or just didn't care) and tested it on a mass scale of humanity to see what the results are.
Now here I don’t think science or scientists are to blame. All scientists can do is come up with the knowledge, how that knowledge is applied is up to non scientists. Scientists rarely wield any power in the world, in decision making, in policy formulation etc.

Thus, scientists studied the Uranium fission. It took technologists to use that to make a workable atom bomb, and a president to drop it on civilians and cause untold amounts of death.

You know, with all the wrongs everybody sees churches doing and all the lawsuits and compensation demanded from religious organizations, you'd think people would start to sue and hang scientists by the toes for the damage they have done to people's lives through their arrogance & ignorance.... but very few do.

Why?

Because it's never the science community's fault for all of these things they threw on us to try/use before ensuring they're indeed safe..... They didn't know.
Exactly. Scientists only study scientific principles, it is up to entrepreneurs, governments etc. to take those principles and put them to use. If you want to sue anybody, sue the people who used asbestos to build homes, business buildings etc. Or sue the people who used DDT to eradicate malaria, not the scientist who studied DDT or who studied asbestos.

Funny thing is that I thought it was their job to know these things.... I thought these people in our society to study and learn all the pros and cons about something.... to inform us....
Job of scientists is to study and to gather information. It is up to decision makers what they do with that information. As you have said before, science gets things wrong sometimes (science is like groping in the dark). It is up to decision makers to be cautious in making use of he information.
 

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
Except for near the bottom of his posted link, where even they, once again, say:

Quote:
....Nothing in the real world has ever been rigorously proved, or ever will be. Proof, in the mathematical sense, is possible only if you have the luxury of defining the universe you're operating in. In the real world, we must deal with levels of certainty based on observed evidence. The more and better evidence we have for something, the more certainty we assign to it; when there is enough evidence, we label the something a fact, even though it still isn't 100% certain.

Quite so, exactly what I have been saying all along. A scientific theory can never be proved, it can only be disproved. All this follows from deductive logic, as I have demonstrated.
 

Praxius

Mass'Debater
Dec 18, 2007
10,609
99
48
Halifax, NS & Melbourne, VIC
Well, I came to the conclusion a long time ago that particularly the "white" people must be alien to this planet because of their complete disregard for all other life forms that share it with us. No other bunch of people are so disconnected from the processes of life and the realization that all life is interconnected and interdependent. We are either aliens, mutants or genetically engineered by aliens.

Speak for yourself and thank you for that racial generalization of making me and everyone of my race out to being complete monsters even if some/most of us had nothing to do with what you speak of.

Don't forget that the scientists who concluded our interconnected ways with the planet you so believe in, were probably the same white alien monsters you hate so much.

But hey, if it makes you feel good about your miserable life to blame all the world's woes and problems on one particular race, go right ahead..... you'd be no better then those you blame.
 

GreenFish66

House Member
Apr 16, 2008
2,717
10
38
www.myspace.com
In peace or pieces? ... Advanced /intelligent Aliens would be peaceful ..If not, they would not make it ...Would blow themselves up long before becoming intelligent..
Takes alot of control /balance to harness the energy /power needed for space travel...
If they detected any of our signals and decided to pay us a visit ...They would more than likely send their probes first...If they found we were peaceful/approachable/intelligent/worth the time ..Perhaps then they would make contact...

" They " would come in Peace ...("They" always do ... At first anyway 8O;):smile: ...)


Peace or pieces?

Peace.. It's the only way ..
 
Last edited:

Cliffy

Standing Member
Nov 19, 2008
44,850
192
63
Nakusp, BC
Speak for yourself and thank you for that racial generalization of making me and everyone of my race out to being complete monsters even if some/most of us had nothing to do with what you speak of.

Don't forget that the scientists who concluded our interconnected ways with the planet you so believe in, were probably the same white alien monsters you hate so much.

But hey, if it makes you feel good about your miserable life to blame all the world's woes and problems on one particular race, go right ahead..... you'd be no better then those you blame.
Woe Prax! I was being facetious for the sake of the argument. Don't take stuff so seriously, man. You'll give yourself a hernia.

Most people I have talked to have thought at one point or other in their lives, that they were aliens on this planet, that they were dropped off here by mistake.
 

Cliffy

Standing Member
Nov 19, 2008
44,850
192
63
Nakusp, BC
In peace or pieces? ... Advanced /intelligent Aliens would be peaceful ..If not, they would not make it ...Would blow themselves up long before becoming intelligent..
Takes alot of control /balance to harness the energy /power needed for space travel...
If they detected any of our signals and decided to pay us a visit ...They would more than likely send their probes first...If they found we were peaceful/approachable/intelligent/worth the time ..Perhaps then they would make contact...

" They " would come in Peace ...("They" always do ... At first anyway 8O;):smile: ...)


Peace or pieces?

Peace.. It's the only way ..

Then it might be a while before they approach or make themselves known.
 

SirJosephPorter

Time Out
Nov 7, 2008
11,956
56
48
Ontario
Mr. Hawking certainly knows far more than me about astrophysics, but I am going to wait until the aliens actually show up before I take them seriously.

Quite so, Hawking is one of the greatest (if not the greatest) authority on theoretical physics or theoretical astronomy. But he is not a Chemist. While he is the ultimate authority on subjects like subatomic particles, galaxies quasars, Big Bang etc., he is not qualified to speak on subjects like alien intelligence.
 

AnnaG

Hall of Fame Member
Jul 5, 2009
17,507
117
63
Oh really? Then tell me a few other things people "Practice" every day. I can think of a number of things humans practice every day.... one is religion.
Yes, really. Growing things to produce a change in genetics within those things is forcing evolution. I do it frequently with my roses by cross pollinating different types. Why would I bring up off-topic instances of what people practise.

Just because someone practices or believes in something, doesn't make it fact. except maybe in the eyes of the individual.
Oh really? Because people practise sex with each other and mix breeds is not an example of evolution? :roll: Here, read this:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=evolution-in-the-everday-world
Because a process is repeatable, doesn't make it absolute either.
So? Evolution happens. It is a fact and it does repeat.

Evolution is a Fact and a Theory

If you go to the bottom of this site it has a list of references you can read as to evolution being fact.

Here are more:

http://atheism.about.com/od/evolutionexplained/a/fact_theory.htm

http://www.vertpaleo.org/education/paleoprofiles.cfm



At present, science can only show us a part of the overall picture, we can only predict a certain distance ahead in the future, but the bigger the equation, the bigger we try and expand out perspective, the more factors one has to calculate, most of the time, many of the factors aren't even known, thus can not be calculated.... and even if one tries, it now just falls under Educated Guess, Probabilities, Limited Statistics, and nothing absolute.
Irrelevant. We do not have to understand exactly 100% of something to determine whether it is a fact or not.

If you rely yourself to be unquestionably attached to the theories of the scientific process, just as religious people unquestionably attach themselves to their God(s) and commandments, then there is no difference between the two in many aspects, and this seems to be where you fail to understand my position...... most likely because you're offended that someone would tie your thought process with science, to the thought processes of religion.
Irrelevant.



Telling me I'm wrong without any counter argument or reasons why and expressing such a level of bias to not even entertain the possibility, is proof enough that I'm right.
rofflmfao I've provided plenty of stuff showing that theories can also be factual. Get a grip. Your "proof" is only in your head and is a delusion.



Thanks for not specifying any one particular part of that poorly designed web site,
You want me to read it for you, too? Are you helpless?
but looking through and reading it, it doesn't explain much more then what I already knew. Many of the processes described, in particular "Trial and Error" (the car stopping example) isn't originally a scientific process of thinking.... that's just common sense, something we've all done to solve problems since probably the dawn of humanity and long before Science ever became a reality.
Yes, science uses reason rather than superstition to discover the whys and wherefores of our universe. If you don't like that, then come up with a better method for explaining our universe. :roll:
All Science is, is a leech religion, where it finds something that most believe to be true, runs it through a few tests, and if it fits their quota of testing, they claim it's scientifically proven/true/fact and stamp it as Kosher..... yet all these people already knew through using general common sense and their own ability to understand, that this was the case.
That's your opinion. Big deal. Call it whatever you like, science does a much better job of explaining our universe and its activities than anything else.

Science has been wrong on a number of occasions in our history, and most times, Science was wrong and we as a society paid the price.
So? Science also has the ability to amend its comments as new evidence is discovered. It can grow. Did you understand how to tie shoelaces properly right away? Did you understand how to drive a car right away? Or did you discover how to tie or drive bettter by practising it?
Many times in our past, have we been told something was better or far safer to use, only to find out after 20-30 years of doing something a certain way, or using a product for so long, that the mass population that was used as guinea pigs for so long, now have various illnesses or complications..... and then and only then, does science admit its mistakes.... but only by saying that they either didn't know something at the time, or didn't factor something in that they should have.
Life's a bitch, get used to it.

Either way, their scientific process didn't give them the whole picture, everybody relied on them to be telling people the truth and doing things safely, and ended up using all of us as lab subjects for a mass study of the effects of their theories, on us.
That's not science doing that, it is people using technology doing that. Science discovered how to split atoms but it didn't drop the bombs on two cities in Japan. Science is just a tool for discovery, technology is a tool for using discoveries, and it's up to people what to do with both.

Lead, Asbestos, Hydrogenated Oils, PVC Plastics, Insecticides/DDT, that Delousing powder crap people had tossed onto them, including children..... the list just keeps going.

The point being is that Science and those who follow science told everybody these things can benefit our society in some fashion or another, never explained any of the dangers or side effects.... probably didn't even know they existed (or just didn't care) and tested it on a mass scale of humanity to see what the results are.

In my opinion that's almost as bad, if not, worse then what many religions have done in the past to various societies.
*shrugs* Then come up with a better method of investigation.

You know, with all the wrongs everybody sees churches doing and all the lawsuits and compensation demanded from religious organizations, you'd think people would start to sue and hang scientists by the toes for the damage they have done to people's lives through their arrogance & ignorance.... but very few do.
So? People go after the people who abuse the science and they do that frequently. Why hammer on someone because they explore and investigate? Why not hammer on someone for abusing what was discovered?

Why?

Because it's never the science community's fault for all of these things they threw on us to try/use before ensuring they're indeed safe..... They didn't know.

Funny thing is that I thought it was their job to know these things.... I thought these people in our society to study and learn all the pros and cons about something.... to inform us.... to seek out the truth, yet we have so many scientists either too concerned about making a name for themselves, or to pander to special interest groups with loads of money.... they don't even know how to look at anything objectively anymore, let alone think out side of the box to look at the bigger picture of what they're doing, and in my opinion, that's just as corrupt and just as bad as the corrupt priests in a church who take for granted the trust people put on to them in their positions.
So you don't like science, quit using things science and tech have discovered and developed. *shrugs*
 
Last edited:

AnnaG

Hall of Fame Member
Jul 5, 2009
17,507
117
63
Except for near the bottom of his posted link, where even they, once again, say:



Which is exactly what I and others in here have already said countless times in this thread.... and while they can attempt to twist their words and their meanings as much as they can, in the end, they say themselves "we label the something a fact, even though it still isn't 100% certain."
:roll: Then you aren't a fact. There is nothing certain about you being a human being. You will not be burned to ash each and every time an atomic bomb goes off in your pocket. A piece of your fingernail will not separate from the rest every time you sever it from your fingernail.
 

AnnaG

Hall of Fame Member
Jul 5, 2009
17,507
117
63
Quite so, Hawking is one of the greatest (if not the greatest) authority on theoretical physics or theoretical astronomy. But he is not a Chemist. While he is the ultimate authority on subjects like subatomic particles, galaxies quasars, Big Bang etc., he is not qualified to speak on subjects like alien intelligence.
So what makes you an authority on judging whether Hawking is the greatest or among the greatest physicists? Are you qualified? You stated unequivocally that the speed of light cannot change, which is absolute BS, it changes according to which medium it is in. High school physics students know that, yet you didn't and you can authoritatively assert what Hawking is? :roll:
 

GreenFish66

House Member
Apr 16, 2008
2,717
10
38
www.myspace.com
Quite so, Hawking is one of the greatest (if not the greatest) authority on theoretical physics or theoretical astronomy. But he is not a Chemist. While he is the ultimate authority on subjects like subatomic particles, galaxies quasars, Big Bang etc., he is not qualified to speak on subjects like alien intelligence.

Well said Sir Joseph Porter ... I have Great respect for Stephen Hawkings (He's even on my twitter list lol) But with Astro Biology being a great past time/Passion for me , I would tend to disagree with him on this subject ... 1 and zero's still have a problem explaining or simulating life/existence...

" Although Odds are Evolution. It leaves open some room for surprise " .....
"It's amazing that we're he at all ..Keeps us asking why ... It's an absolute truth that we're here and we're all gonna die.." Song Absolute Truth ..By 0dds R Evolution ..

Over and out there ..from here...Peace
 

Praxius

Mass'Debater
Dec 18, 2007
10,609
99
48
Halifax, NS & Melbourne, VIC
Woe Prax! I was being facetious for the sake of the argument. Don't take stuff so seriously, man. You'll give yourself a hernia.

Most people I have talked to have thought at one point or other in their lives, that they were aliens on this planet, that they were dropped off here by mistake.

Just keeping ya on your toes ;-)

In reality, we're all aliens, everything living on this planet is alien.... apparently we all grew from micro-organisms from comets that crashed on the planet eons ago, which explains why things don't quite seem right at times.

At least that's on theory of how we got here.... but I don't consider myself anymore alien then any other living thing on this planet.... plants, insects, animals, etc....
 

AnnaG

Hall of Fame Member
Jul 5, 2009
17,507
117
63
Just keeping ya on your toes ;-)

In reality, we're all aliens, everything living on this planet is alien.... apparently we all grew from micro-organisms from comets that crashed on the planet eons ago, which explains why things don't quite seem right at times.
Not actually. Excluding alien life forms that may have landed here, everything living is native. It wasn't micro-organisms that landed here, it was simply the necessary parts to start micro-organisms living here. Your mum and dad could have been born in Tasmania but if their sperm and egg mix in Canada and you are born here, you are a native Canuck.

At least that's on theory of how we got here.... but I don't consider myself anymore alien then any other living thing on this planet.... plants, insects, animals, etc....
Most of us don't think we are alien either. There's the odd wingnut around that does, though. lol