Jon,
Maybe a bit of both;
Theological:
Not sure if I would know how to deal with ETL, for the reasons often cited:
would these creatures be with or without sin? If intelligent, but without
sin, how would we interact with them? If sinful, did Christ die for them
and, if so, why did He pick this earth? If not, was His atonement not
universal? How does one define "universal?"
Scientific:
The odds are (to me) overwhelming both in time and space. How would we
recognize a signal? So it comes down to sort of looking for a needle in a
haystack except that we don't know what the needle looks like. How do we
know that we have seen or heard the signal already but cannot recognize it?
How strong would the signal have to have been at the source for us to detect
it? For all we know, dolphins can hear and interpret the signals emitted by
ETI and ETLs and have been trying to convey their messages to us for
hundreds of years. The list goes on and on and on.
Chuck (sceptic in Manitoba)
-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Clarke [mailto:jdac@alphalink.com.au]
Sent: Thursday January 18, 2001 4:08 PM
To: vandergraaft@aecl.ca
Cc: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: Is this a signal from aliens?
What is the basis of this scepticism? Theological? Scientific? Given how
little we know on the subject, is scepticism too strong a position?
Respectfully
Jon
"Vandergraaf, Chuck" wrote:
> Jon,
>
> I agree that the argument can cut both ways. I am sceptical that ETL or
ET
> exists and would not advocate that we spend much effort on looking for
> something (I wonder how we would recognize it if we came across it).
>
> ETI and ETL raise all sorts of interesting theological questions, some of
> which have been aired in this forum. But, without evidence of ETI and
ETL,
> it all seems to me awfully speculative.
>
> Chuck
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan Clarke [mailto:jdac@alphalink.com.au]
> Sent: Thursday January 18, 2001 2:42 PM
> To: vandergraaft@aecl.ca
> Cc: asa@calvin.edu
> Subject: Re: Is this a signal from aliens?
>
> Hi Chuck
>
> I think we need to be careful of the argument that some people are
> supporters of
> ETI because of a deep fear that humanity. It cuts both ways. One could
> equally
> argue that people argue against ETI because of a deep fear that we might
not
> be
> alone.
>
> As to the probability, we don't have the foggiest idea. We are only
> beginning
> to get an outline of the simplest component of the Drake equation, the
> number of
> extra-solar planetary systems. There was also an article in Scientific
> American
> in the last year or so that showed the distances which out to which
> particular
> types of technological civilizations had been excluded. But that is all.
>
> I have noticed a tendency in some Christian circles to poo-poo the idea of
> ET
> life in general and ETI in particular. This would be a risky course of
> action.
> It could create the impression that Christianity and ETL or ETI are
> incompatible, thereby creating a problem for ourselves should they ever be
> encountered. I think we should avoid creating this rod for our backs,
even
> if
> some of us belief the probability is low.
>
> Respectfully
>
> Jon
>
> "Vandergraaf, Chuck" wrote:
>
> > Moorad,
> >
> > Considering the low probability of detecting anything remotely
intelligent
> > from outer space, one wonders why society spends the time and effort on
> > this. Could it be that, deep down, some are afraid that mankind is
"home
> > alone"?
> >
> > Chuck Vandergraaf
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Moorad Alexanian [mailto:alexanian@uncwil.edu]
> > Sent: Thursday January 18, 2001 7:51 AM
> > To: asa@calvin.edu
> > Subject: Is this a signal from aliens?
> >
> > Wednesday, 17 January, 2001, 16:51 GMT
> >
> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1122000/1122413.stm
> >
> > Still no sense in signal
> >
> > Is this a signal from aliens?
> >
> > By BBC News Online science editor Dr David Whitehouse
> >
> > A detailed look at the point in space from where an intelligent signal
> might
> > have come has revealed nothing unusual.
> >
> > The Ohio Big Ear detected the Wow signal
> >
> > The observations, using the multiple radio dishes of the Very Large
Array
> > (VLA) in New Mexico, US, add to the mystery of what has been called the
> > "Wow" event.
> >
> > In August 1977, radio astronomers detected what could have been a signal
> > from intelligent life in space. But it happened only once.
> >
> > Now, two researchers, Robert Grey and Kevin Marvel, have used the VLA to
> > look at the source location with unprecedented sensitivity. They saw
> nothing
> > strange or anything that could explain the signal.
> >
> > Narrow band
> >
> > The Wow signal as it has become known is often described as our best
> > candidate for a signal from an alien intelligence in space.
> >
> > On 15 August, 1977, a burst of radio waves was detected by the now
> > dismantled Big Ear radio telescope of Ohio State University. The person
> who
> > spotted it, astronomer Jerry Ehman, was so surprised that he scribbled
> "Wow"
> > on the print-out.
> >
> > The event had all the properties that astronomers expected in a signal
> from
> > an alien intelligence. It was confined to a narrow band of frequencies
and
> > it was very close to the "hydrogen line", a natural signpost in the
> > spectrum.
> >
> > Because the Ohio telescope cannot move, it was only possible to see the
> > signal as it passed across the telescope's field of view. From the way
the
> > signal was detected, astronomers were certain it was coming from a point
> on
> > the sky.
> >
> > Mystery remains
> >
> > It only lasted 72 seconds and although researchers later looked at that
> same
> > patch of sky over a hundred times, they saw nothing. The signal, if it
was
> a
> > signal, was a one-off event.
> >
> > The VLA was used for a more sensitive search
> >
> > Some researchers have said it was man-made interference but others
pointed
> > to the signal's characteristics and said it definitely came from the
sky.
> >
> > Since 1977, other radio astronomers have looked at that spot on the sky
in
> > the hope of a repeat performance, but to no avail.
> >
> > The latest series of observations, described in the current issue of the
> > Astrophysical Journal, are more than a 100 times more sensitive than the
> > original Ohio observations.
> >
> > Grey and Marvel see two faint radio sources at the position that Wow
came
> > from but both are nothing unusual.
> >
> > So, the mystery of the Wow signal remains.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jan 18 2001 - 17:58:52 EST