(Just because someone can imagine something rationally based on limited current knowledge and project it as being possibly true does not make it a “rational fact” just waiting to be proven, as some are presumptuous enough to claim.)
Klax
(The only thing that matters is faith expressed in love.)
24
As soon as it rained, there was life. The universe is insanely, meaninglessly large, practically infinite. There are easily ten to the twenty five worlds. Life is normal. Why wouldn’t it be? And we’re average. Common as muck. It’s not plausible for intelligent life not to be everywhere. Not plausible at all. Not in the slightest. Utterly impossible. Unless you have to believe in nonrational stories. And luckily for you, if you do, we’ll never be able to scientifically prove the rational fact of universal intelligent life. In the eternity of universes.
Rational stories don’t have to be true. They can still be pure fiction and merely imagination.
Klax
(The only thing that matters is faith expressed in love.)
27
Please rationally adduce an exception to uniformitarianism in all that we rationally know. No one here is imagining the fact of eternity of course. Denying it is a work of fantasy. Delusion.
Yes, those are called novels, even though they will tell truths about the human condition. Whereas rational thinking based on empirical observation cannot be.
In the summer of 2017, around the time of the total eclipse of the sun, I read where one secular astronomer called the fact that the disc of the moon in the sky so closely matches the disc of the sun “magic”. That would be particularity.
The universe was designed to be discovered – from here, with our special moon. Huge amounts of knowledge about how stars and the universe work has been discovered – and more is still being discovered – during total solar eclipses. And that is not to mention all of the other details about why so much of the cosmos is visable, unobstructed, from here, and during mankind’s occupancy of the planet.
It’s funny, but the expression ‘fine-tuning’ comes to mind.
The interesting thing about the moon size relating to the sun, it that it has changed and continues to change, getting further away. And, it varies as to its relative size depending on where it is in its orbit. So, it is only a approximate equal, and only for the present time.
There does not seem to be good explanations for many UFO sightings, other than extraterrestrial life.
Klax
(The only thing that matters is faith expressed in love.)
37
Why’s that? Not those orbiting worlds with sapient squid analogues? They don’t get a lollipop moon? Although evolution - what works - is pretty conservative and the same optimal features will emerge, so many sapient species will be humanoid. Is that enough? So they all get a lollipop moon? And what about on inhabited moons? Or moonless inhabited planets? You know obviously.
Klax
(The only thing that matters is faith expressed in love.)
38
That’s not a good explanation. There are no unnatural UFO sightings. And no, just because ET is natural and therefore technology is, we’re not talking that kind of second and third order natural. We’re just talking first order natural. Physics, chemistry and the psychology of perception and cognition of the same.
It has been pointed out that UFO sightings (and Bigfoot sightings) have gone way down since the widespread availability of high resolution cameras in phones.
2 Likes
Klax
(The only thing that matters is faith expressed in love.)
40
Not many sightings of Springheel Jack for a century or so neiver…
Yet the opposite side of that statement is that the quality of evidence for the sightings has increased, like the cell phone shot I saw earlier the week by the aviator in the back seat of a Navy jet.