Until we actually reach this limit or find some way to hypothesize it, there's absolutely no reason to believe that it exists

We have hypothesized it, thats exactly why we think nobody can ever leave their local group.

That's not a reason, it's psuedo-science.

And you have yet to give me a good reason why it isn`t possible for a more advanced lifeform to exist. Because sorry to say this, but I've looked literally everywhere for aliens, I really have. I haven't found any evidence to counter my belief is not a correct reason either. That doesn`t proof you are right, it just proof that there is no proof you are wrong.

Strange how you cannot close your discussion by saying: "We do not know. Nice talking to you."

I`ve already said we don`t know. He just keeps on saying my reasoning is wrong and then continues to reason in the same way. Thats what I`m trying to make him aware of.

And you have yet to give me a good reason why it isn`t possible for a more advanced lifeform to exist. Because sorry to say this, but I've looked literally everywhere for aliens, I really have. I haven't found any evidence to counter my belief is not a correct reason either. That doesn`t proof you are right, it just proof that there is no proof you are wrong.

Yes, it is a perfectly valid justification. If your theory is based on a solid reason, say that we have absolutely no evidence for the existence of aliens, and you literally cannot disprove your theory in any way, then there's a very good chance that it is true.

Whereas if your belief is based on a remote possibility that something exists in a part of the universe that even you admit we literally have no information on, and it is easily disprovable.. Well, The former is obviously a better belief to hold.

We have hypothesized it, thats exactly why we think nobody can ever leave their local group.

Until this hypothesis is tested, which it isn't yet, we'll just have to see. However as of now this isn't an official limit of technology, and it's definitely not a universally held idea.

I`ve already said we don`t know. He just keeps on saying my reasoning is wrong and then continues to reason in the same way. Thats what I`m trying to make him aware of.

I've already acknowledged that we don't know as well, and In fact I've also acknowledged that there is a possibility that you are right. However, your reasoning is less valuable than mine, since it's based on the possibility that something may exist in a part of the universe that we have literally no information about.

To put it more simply, it's not that "we know that aliens exist" or that "we know that aliens don't exist", or even that "we don't know if they exist". The current state of affairs is that "we don't know of any that exist, and there is a possibility that there are some that we don't know about which do exist".

Edited 5/14/2016 16:37:36

If your theory is based on a solid reason, say that we have absolutely no evidence for the existence of aliens, and you literally cannot disprove your theory in any way, then there's a very good chance that it is true.

Problem is that your theory isn`t based on a solid reason.
"We have never met an alien civilization, so there aren`t any in the universe" Says the human who has discovered less than 0.0000000000000000001% of the universe.

Problem is that your theory isn`t based on a solid reason.
"We have never met an alien civilization, so there aren`t any in the universe" Says the human who has discovered less than 0.0000000000000000001% of the universe.

It's a much more solid reasoning than "We haven't gathered any information on this part of the universe, so therefore this alien I think exists must exist in that part of the universe".

The simple fact is, there is a part of the universe that we know does not have aliens in it, and there is absolutely no part that we know does have aliens in it. Therefore, saying "I believe that there are no aliens" is much more correct than "I believe that there are aliens", since at least a small part of the universe has been verified as alien-free, whereas absolutely no part of it has been verified as having aliens in it.

We haven't gathered any information on this part of the universe, so therefore this alien I think exists must exist in that part of the universe".

Well, it can`t be in the other part of the universe can it now. I already explained, there are enough possibilities for a scenario like earth, so it is likely that it will happen (even if it happens only once every sixtillionth time, then there would still be a lot of aliens. Its simple calculation.)

If you think that that isn`t logical thinking then that is your problem not mine. It would seem that we would never come to an agreement then. So lets just agree to disagree.

Edited 5/14/2016 17:23:55

When you're speculating about possibilities, as we are here, you can't really say anything for certain. You're technically just saying that there is a possibility that you're right, not actually claiming to be right. That being said, We are technically both correct in that there is a possibility that there are aliens, and that there is also a possibility that there are no aliens.

So, Let's not agree to disagree, but rather acknowledge that both of us are actually correct.

Sure, sounds good as well ;)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNhhvQGsMEc

If there really are aliens that are more technologically advanced than us, then to be honest I really have to rethink my philosophy.

The point is, just if we can build Shanghai, develop medicines, and illnesses to kill all, should we kill all who aren't us, just since we're the only ones who can? This is what you're grounding. Rethinking your philosophy just seems like you're going to beg not to be eaten if you can be eaten, but if you are at the top of the food chain, you're not going to listen to anyone's beggings.

In a way I am very opposed to the idea of aliens, as it's very problematic from a theological standpoint.

I mean, the Book never says that there're no aliens. In truth, there are some who believe that aliens came to us many years ago, and brought us various faiths and characterisms of Gods. Angels and folk who live in heaven (the sky) are various aliens.

Anyhow, but I don't see why it would be problematic.

I'd argue that if aliens more intelligent than humans are found, this will be a very strong argument against christianity.

Well, so would evolution, the Big Bang, and many other scientific findings since the Book was written.

Basically imperator, your interpretation of why the Fermi Paradox exists, and your values for the Drake Equation are this: Fermi Paradox due to non-existence of Extraterrestrial life due to extremely low values for the Drake Equation. Where as most of the other people in this thread believe in some explanation for the Fermi Paradox, and higher values for the Drake equation. I personally believe in the cost argument, as that is the current argument that is impeding modern space travel.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drake_equation#Current_estimates https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox