Aliens Are Almost Definitely Out There, SETI Astronomers Tell Congress

[babylonsister]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/22/aliens-congress-seti-astronomers_n_5370315.html

Aliens Are Almost Definitely Out There, SETI Astronomers Tell Congress
The Huffington Post | by Dominique Mosbergen

Posted: 05/22/2014 4:04 am EDT Updated: 05/22/2014 10:59 am EDT


Aliens almost definitely exist.

At least, that's what two astronomers told Congress this week, as they appealed for continued funding to research life beyond Earth.

According to ABC News, Dan Werthimer, director of the SETI {search for extraterrestrial intelligence} Research Center at the University of California, Berkeley, told the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology Wednesday that the possibility of extraterrestrial microbial life is "close to 100 percent."

"In the last 50 years, evidence has steadily mounted that the components and conditions we believe necessary for life are common and perhaps ubiquitous in our galaxy," said Werthimer in his written testimony, adding: "The possibility that life has arisen elsewhere, and perhaps evolved intelligence, is plausible and warrants scientific inquiry."

Werthimer's colleague Seth Shostak, a senior astronomer at the SETI Institute, also told Congress that he believes our chances of finding extraterrestrial life are high.

“The chances of finding it I think are good and if that happens it will happen in the next 20 years depending on the financing,” Shostak told the committee. (Watch the full hearing here.)

This isn't the first time in recent months that Congress has held a hearing on aliens. In December, the Science House Committee held a two-hour hearing about the ongoing search for extraterrestrial life. The Wire said at the time that the hearing was the "best thing Congress {had} done in months."

[BillZBubb]

1. That is a very unscientific claim

We don't even know how life came to be here at this time. It may be the result of a series of highly improbable events, leading to something unique to Earth.

As a scientist, before you can honestly speculate about life elsewhere in the universe, you need to know exactly how life can begin from an inanimate array of chemicals. Simply observing that the chemicals here have given rise to life is not remotely sufficient to say the same group of chemicals will lead to life elsewhere.

If the process is relatively simple, then yes, the universe if probably teeming with life. If not, we might just be alone or too distant from any fellow animate objects to ever detect them. I am skeptical that the process is simple.

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. Watch Cosmos, it will catch you up on where we are on that one

but yes, life, and the elements of life, are quite prevalent. In fact, Tyson went through the latest on this last Sunday.

[neverforget]

3. Lol! are you a scientist?

[BillZBubb]

18. As a matter of fact, yes

[tinrobot]

11. So, because we don't know how life began, we can't search for new forms of life?

That's a pretty bold statement.

We don't even know how life began here on Earth, but you can certainly see it and search for new forms of it here. We've found life in all sorts of unlikely places, including 2 miles below the surface inside rocks from a gold mine and 10,000+ feet under the sea in geothermal vents. We found that life without knowing how it began.

And if we can search for new forms of life here, why not on Mars or a moon of Jupiter or Saturn? And if we can search in those places, why not around other stars?

We don't have to know how life began to search for it now. All we need is good technology and a budget with which to conduct the search (which is what he was asking for.)

[BillZBubb]

19. I never said what you imply.

I was objecting to the original post quotation that life is definitely out there. I said nothing about searching.

[Gravitycollapse]

22. The vastness of the Universe all but dictates that life exists beyond Earth.

The Earth is not a unique environment.

[BillZBubb]

24. Nonsense.

The vastness of the universe only suggests that life is possible beyond earth. We don't know enough yet to declare it is highly likely. That may change in the future, but at this time probabilities are just a guessing game.

[Gravitycollapse]

42. It isn't nonsense at all, actually.

We have probabilities of hospitable planets existing in a given system. We have an understanding of the mechanisms in which life generates from chemical mixtures. So we have an understanding, at least under a certain degree of confidence, of the probability of life being generated in a system.

That isn't a blind guess.

[Puzzledtraveller]

12. Great read

http://www.think-downloads.com/download/Space/Universe/rare_earth_why_complex_life_is_uncommon_in_the_universe.pdf

As of late I have been believing more that Earth may be it, and that is okay with me. It is why it is imperative that we do all we can to honor and preserve our home such as it is.

[Vattel]

13. You are exactly right.

These scientists are pulling those probabilities out of thin air.

[Whisp]

14. Earth is not unique - but bible thumpers think so.

In all the vast vast expanse of limitless possibilities... oiy.

I just have to smirk and laugh!

[BillZBubb]

20. Got any proof otherwise? Show me where the extraterrestrial life is.

It has nothing to do with the Bible. It has everything to do with claiming life definitely exists at other locations in our galaxy without one shred of proof. That isn't science.

When limitless possibilities meet infinitesimal probabilities, you might just get nothing.

[Whisp]

21. Galaxy? Our galaxy is as tiny as a speck of an atom in a drop of water

in a million oceans.

[BillZBubb]

25. Read before you comment: the claim from SETI was that other life existed in our galaxy.

"In the last 50 years, evidence has steadily mounted that the components and conditions we believe necessary for life are common and perhaps ubiquitous in our galaxy," said Werthimer

[Scootaloo]

28. No, it says that the chemicals and conditions we associate with life are perhaps ubiquitous

I mean, come on that's what your quoted bit says.

[Gravitycollapse]

23. "...you might just get nothing."

Yes, but you probably will get something beside nothing. That's how statistics work. They are predictive tools, not crystal balls.

[BillZBubb]

26. Nonsense.

Of course statistics and probabilities are by their very nature only providers of the likelihood of possible outcomes.

But, if the probability of life arising is an unknown, scientifically one cannot claim that the galaxy is full of life outside of Earth. There is no basis to claim "probably you will get something". It might be possible you could get something, but far more likely you get nothing even given the large number of potential candidates.

[Gravitycollapse]

41. Who says the probability of life arising is unknown? You?

[Reter]

38. Roswell

[Scootaloo]

27. Hardly

"Almost definitely" and "close to 100%" still leave plenty of room for "no." it's just stressing that "yes" is more likely than "no"

The Universe isn't infinite, but it's large enough that for humans, it might as well be - it certainly extends well beyond our ability to perceive.

Looking out at all that and claiming that we're the only world (or whatever) with life, is a lot like looking at a beach and believing that none of the grains are iron oxide.

[Reter]

36. Yes, but there are likely trillions upon trillions of planets

When you times an highly improbable event by trillions, the chances greatly increase. Look at it like this. A royal flush is extremely rare. But with trillions of hands played, you will see millions of them.

[Gravitycollapse]

43. That actually is not correct...

When you increase the number or samples, the accuracy of the predicted likelihood increases. The likelihood of the event occurring does not increase.

What you are claiming is a statistical fallacy. Increasing the sample size or the number of samples does not increase a probability because each chance of a planet being hospitable is independent of the former or the latter.

[Reter]

44. I think you missed the point

With trillions of chances, the possibilities are great. If there were only 100 planets, I'd say that Earth was the only planet with life. But with potentially trillions or more, then chances are very high for life.

[BrotherIvan]

4. I vote we nix some useless military toy and fund the shit out of it

This world needs something to think about besides money. Maybe they can help us unfuck ourselves.

[LongTomH]

30. +1000 Dr. Jill Tarter has said that: "Finding other life could tell us that, at least one.....

.....civilization survived its technological adolescence!"

The jury is still out on our civilization!

[BrotherIvan]

32. Very interesting

Will definitely watch later!

[Demeter]

5. Hell, I married one

and believe me, getting him a green card was a really big mistake...

[LisaLynne]

7. I lol'ed.

[DireStrike]

6. I'm not tremendously interested in microbes at this point

It would settle one question that is all but settled.

We need to build some small exoplanet detectors, and then generation ships to check those out.

[nadinbrzezinski]

9. We have the exoplanet detectors

I get a new list of discoveries almost daily now. And some of them are in habitable zones.

I doubt though, anybody will volunteer to go on an Ark, for their children's children to reach a system not truly compatible with...

It will take the next generation, soon to be launched, for us to be able to detect atmospheres in these worlds. This is where Shostak, I suspect, is coming from.

[FSogol]

8. Unfortunately, Earth is in the unfashionable part of the Milky Way.

A toast to Douglas Adams.

[Puzzledtraveller]

10. I'm not so sure anymore.

I am willing to accept that we are it, not that it matters anyway.

[creeksneakers2]

15. Another question

If microbial life exists elsewhere, how would SETI find it? Is there any chance SETI will find life of any kind? If not, its a waste of money.

[exboyfil]

16. Perhaps how SETI goes about its mission should be reconsidered

Right now it is hoping to find intentional EM signals. Would looking for evidence of massive engineering structures or processes be a better approach? How would a Dyson sphere or an interstellar drive show up for example. For all intents and purposes only technological civilizations within 5,000 light years really matter anyway. That still is a lot of stars (600,000,000).

[Enthusiast]

17. This is an interesting discussion.

If we accept the likelihood that there are technological civilizations out there somewhere, when should we start to wonder why we have not picked up their radio waves?

I'm just curious about this. You know, considering they are being entertained by our reruns of the Beverly Hillbillies but they don't have the courtesy to give us a shout back. Maybe they are pondering the meaning of cement pond.

[arcane1]

29. Technological civilizations are pretty damn rare, in my opinion

The only reason Earth has one is because of an asteroid impact killing off the dinosaurs. Even then, technological civilizations wasn't inevitable. Neanderthals were around for hundreds of thousands of years with little to no innovation.

"Intelligence" is one thing, but no dolphin will ever build a telescope. Technology as such is limited to one very unique and unlikely species, one which is in the process of rendering itself extinct thanks to that technology.

I expect there to be life out there, but I'm not so sure of the likelihood of space-faring civilizations.

[exboyfil]

35. I tend to agree

Dinosaurs had a long run with no evidence of tool making or use. Once you get past some birds fashioning and using sticks, then mammals and specifically primates are the only game in town for complex tool use. We simply cannot answer whether cognitive ability combined with manual dexterity on a land environment is something which is common. Elephants have shown some cognitive ability as well and they certainly could evolve the dexterity to fashion tools (like the aliens in Niven and Pournelle's Footfall).

Interesting speculation about the Troodon. I would hope we find more fossil evidence of this dinosaur. It got wiped out in the K-T extinction event.

http://dinosaurs.about.com/od/typesofdinosaurs/a/Troodon-Facts.htm

[Arthur_Frain]

33. My favorite explanation

Is on one of Peter Mulvey's CD's (not sure which one), where he tells a story about meeting a Russian scientist in a bar, and asking him if there is other life out there, and if so, why haven't they been in contact with us.

Mind you, this is a STORY a singer/songwriter tells on one of his CD's, I do not present this as scientific fact. What I love so much about it is how it is an elegantly simple explanation that provides answers in an easy to grasp description.

The scientist says "Imagine that all of space, and all of time are represented by this space" and draws out an eight foot high by ten foot wide and maybe 3 foot deep space in front of him. "Now, take everything than man is, has done, or ever will do, from the beginning to the end of our civilization", and the scientist takes a finger and quickly "zaps" one tiny spot somewhere inside the space. "So to answer your question is there other life out there? Of course", said the scientist, "so many planets, so vast a space, but (while zapping different random locations in the rectangle) all separated by so much time, or even if at the same time, impossible distances."

I happen to believe this explanation.

I grew up living eating and breathing Star Trek, and wished mightily for the day when we could become a spacefaring race and travel throughout he stars, hoping I might get to visit some other planets in my solar system in my lifetime. Obviously it's not going to happen, and I have reached a point where I begin to wonder if biologically we are at all suited to space travel. We can't with stand the G's or the zero gravity very well. I think we might just be stuck on this rock.

Better take care of it!

[Enthusiast]

34. "Better take care of it!"

Ain't that the damned truth!

[flamingdem]

31. Give them the dough!

I wanna meet an alien asap

[ProdigalJunkMail]

37. perhaps the best sign of truly advanced civilizations

is no sign at all...

sP

[exboyfil]

39. You know smart enough

to not be chirping like a baby bird. We really don't have a clue as to what is out there.

In 1974 we intentionally beamed a powerful radio signal into space. I wonder how much support we would have for a systematic program of beaming in a repeated pattern signals into space. I for one would not be in favor of such a program. Would we shut down a rogue country or individual doing it though????

http://earthsky.org/space/this-date-in-science-first-radio-signal-beamed-to-space

[ProdigalJunkMail]

40. i remember that program...

and not sure what i think of it either. there is a good line in the movie Contact (though I am not sure if the same line was in the book) : "Why is it the default position of the egghead set that aliens would always be benign?"

i am not sure aliens, if they exist, would be good for us or bad.

i do think, though, that a truly advanced civilization would leave no trace... they would be so in harmony with their environment that they would just seem to be like a part of the landscape... WE are by no means advanced except by comparison to what we can see.

sP