Talk:Extraterrestrial life

Wiki Education assignment: EEB 4611-Biogeochemical Processes-Spring 2024

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 16 January 2024 and 11 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Naomistow31 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: VishalliAlagappan, Bryanhuynh8, Coll1397, Backhand03, LynSchwendy.

— Assignment last updated by LynSchwendy (talk) 07:07, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

UFOs

UFOs are mentioned in a paragraph at the "Recent history" section. Is that enough, or should the UFO phenomenon have a section of its own? Cambalachero (talk) 17:46, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

WP:ONEWAY. This: serious article. UFOs: connection to aliens is wacko. --Hob Gadling (talk) 06:27, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Other universes and Fermi

I don't see how the paper [1] arguing (I think) that life might be possible in a variety of random universes gives "a potential explanation to the Fermi paradox" Justin the Just (talk) 19:34, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

lede consideration

the last two sentences in the first paragraph might be important as a main definitional thing, similar to the redirect Algebraic form, but its inclusion is abrupt and doesn't really connect with anything  AltoStev (talk) 00:03, 27 July 2024 (UTC)

Short description

I don't think "life not on earth" is an appropriate description. I think it should be changed to "hypothetical life not originating on earth" or something of that sort, for 2 reasons:

1. The concept of extraterrestrial life is purely hypothetical. There is no definitive proof of them as of this time.

2. Just because life is not on earth does not make it extraterrestrial life. The astronauts of Apollo 11 went to the moon, and that doesn't make them extraterrestrials.

I saw a user who made this change in the edit history but it was reverted. Feel free to share your thoughts below. FriendlyNeighborhoodAspie (talk) 01:06, 4 August 2024 (UTC)

Where did the concept of the alien come from?

when did the concept of extraterrestrial life come from, was it curiosity? 2600:1700:4805:8820:F07C:8A4B:8060:9EA5 (talk) 00:02, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

There's an article about that, history of the extraterrestrial life debate Cambalachero (talk) 01:35, 15 August 2024 (UTC)

Can we statistically, rule out other subtypes of genetic expression.

If our genes have been found on meteorites, etc, & ancient paganism speaks of stardust, & residual planetary particles, being, all over the earth, early in her life. If we, evolved as hominims, & out of the oceans we emerged, to live in trees, to walk upright. This is not an accident. Although a serendipitous event, it would seem, evolution on earth, equals the same evolution of the known Universe too. So how can we, in all good rigorous academic thoroughness, not assume, for argument, that other evolved types of hominims, would emerge like we did? Of course, this is conjecture, but upon this basis, its highly feasible, & soon becomes impossible to dissuade oneself away from not only the very real possiblity, it becomes worthwhile to examine this point. I think, if evolution is a law, rather than scientific fact, this means, yes. Possible if not undeniable. If we built ant-nest towns civilizations, went to war, brought food back to the nest. Humans are the same on a macroscopic level. These 'others', if they indeed exist, & if hominims, as gestured, then upright & mobile, would be expected of any 200 million to 5 million year old tribal groupings. Assuming, they build nests too, their Suns/Star, must be as powerful as ours. There is one within the Pliades, as this has historical significance for many reasons. The other is Andromeda. Which we already study. These would be likely candidates to veiw possible earth like gravitational fields, climatology, & gases. With an equal sun. If this potent real place-kick upon resident fact, over challenge to reason has any validity, its examination, could still yield great data on planetary research into our closer celestial neighbours. Statistically, its near impossible for us to be totally alone, on one planet, just like this, so suitable, & pleasant. So, there must be another. In fact, if this is anything, there must be millions. If life is present, & TheUefore, that Universe over there, has like for like energy production, with such numbers, it becomes seriously ludicrous to argue we are alone in the whole galaxy, including its known about expansion. An unknown number of quanta. With an impossible choice of arguement. We can never know. We are too far away, & while spaceflight isnt that difficult, being put into stasis is. So we'll never be able to check our work.0 Then the Singularity also expands, & then contracts. Much like the body of humans breathing in, & out. Many older cultures rely on breath. The earth breathes. The sun breathes. The Universe breathes. They all breathe, sound, body, & a law of apparent purpose. The evolutionary principle that drives all Universal expansion, evolution, growth, inherantness of organic life, & that it cannot be any other way. We came from stars, the sun, the darkness of space, meteors, asteroids, in fact, we had become the high ideal that evolved as an emotive structure. Then on the earth, we were in water, as it was all then. Eons pass. We emerge as⁹ 'bivalve molluscs', & that is now, 200 million years later, ours, & all mammals hearts. The electric pulse was in the mollusc. Thats how they sense prey, & threat. Early electro-aquatics. Like moray eels, & stone fish. Ancient fishes. Now conducing all the previous data, info, & imagery to speculation to assert one point. Statistically, I believe it is impossible that we are alone on one earth, + one sun, moon, gravity, etc etc. Regardless of other academically minded persons, I think this opinion, certainly controversial. Is right as opinion, & with sustainable theory. You dont get that much. In fact. Find me another. 49.195.34.49 (talk) 14:03, 20 November 2024 (UTC)