Mars

[jamesstew]

His films and photos were analyzed at various labs and government institutions, and were found to be genuine.

Please paste some links to some peer-reviewed journals or it didn't happen.

[devilock76]

I dont see why life couldnt have evolved, but that begs the question of how evolution works. It is not linear, and intelligence may not be the outcome of evolution every time. I mean look at earth, it's only happened once so far.

I think mars MAY have had life, I mean all the right ingredients were there, and it had plenty of time. And life bein as resilient as it is, I imagine it may have found a way. But all that is so long gone that I doubt even a fossil record exists. I doubt any evidence would exist, though it may. I suspect we will find something eventually, maybe extraordinary, maybe not.


As far as themcoming to earth, a civilization capable of colonizing a new planet like earth would leave a giant footprint to say the least. I doubt it. Though, I guess nothing is impossible. I think it is possible that microbes may have traveled here in the early days, but back then earth was not in a position to support much life. I mean humans certainly could not have lived here. But who knows, these are all assumptions about something that happened so long ago there would be no way top prove it either way. A microchip, if burried in the earth (or anywhere for that matter) would be nothing but sand after 1 billion years. We'd never find it.

I would imagine if there are fossils there they would be well preserved due to there being such a lack of oxygen in the atmosphere. One day we will excavate there and find out.

Ken

[jamesstew]

Are we really still talking about aliens on Mars? Jesus Christ. Give up the pipe dreams. Why don't we talk about something plausible like life forms on planets that aren't barren rocks right next door? What is so hard to believe about a cold, desolate rock flying through space with no sign of life, past or present? Shit, there are probably billions of them, only a few of which we have detected. It's unbelievable that someone is unwilling to accept that NASA went to the moon, yet the ****ing Nazis had no problem getting there in flying saucers and setting up a secret base?? You have got to be shitting me.

I agree, there's so many incredible marvels in our solar system and we're talking about absolute bulls*!t.

[sgreger1]

There actually are very few all new technologies that were invented specifically for the space program but a fair number had their developments greatly accelerated by NASA's spending spree in the 1960s. Unfortunately current space related technologies are somewhat like Formula 1 racing technologies in that they are so extremely specific to their intended uses that little finds its way into our general technological infrastructure. For instance space exploration is not a driver at all of computer hardware, the Shuttle's antiquated units are a good example, but software may be another matter. The introduction of GPS has been a major driver of earthly applications but that can hardly be thought of as space exploration plus NASA has had little to do with the project.

I personally think the best use of NASA's research funds should be in the pursuit of powerful non-chemical rocket propulsion technologies. We simply are not going to be able to afford to explore the solar system with the severe limitations of conventionally fueled propulsion systems. They are just too expensive and too slow for planetary exploration to be anything more than a very occasional hyper expensive stunt. High thrust high specific impulse drives via nuclear or nuclear-electric means should be the focus of a major part of NASA's research budget rather than throwing vast sums of money at keeping the space station afloat or chasing the dream of trillion dollar manned Mars missions using conventionally fueled rockets. To establish a permanent presence on Mars will require spacecraft drives that are at least an order of magnitude more cost effective than what we can field now so why throw hundreds of billions at technologies that are already obsolete? Cynic that I am I predict that this is exactly what will happen.

Yah so I looked it up and you are right. A lot of technologies were helped to be brought into the consumer market as part of the apollo program, but it seems that was mainly propaganda and most of those things would be there anyways even without the apollo programs. Still they had some contributions, but no big ones.


I agree that the space station is useless and that we can't really afford doing anything cool in space mainly because it is not cost effective. Propulsion technology is still pretty weak. But this is why I say we should invest in it. The more that goes into that industry, the quicker they will develope better propulsion systems and the cheaper it will cost, per lb, to send things into space.

Personally I think privte enterprise will do most of the heavy lifting, and then gov will get back in when there is money to be made or when they decide to start claiming real estate in space. Virgin galactic and such have moved further in the past few years than nasa has in the last decade. They are focusing on low orbit space tourism, but I mean they can send a man to space for only $200,000 which is actually remarkably low. Their craft could never get any further than that, as they are just glorified gliders, but still the point stands: Where there is money there is innovation. Once space proves profitable to someone, we will see things moving along much faster. I mean we went from horses to the moon in less than 100 years, I hope we can make a significant leap over the next century as well.



Edit: Also, a lot of the technology used is still 80's stuff for a reason. Microchips and small parts like we use in todays electronics don't work in space, too easy for radiation and other environmental things to mess them up. The big bulky electronics can weather a trip through space much better.

[Anthony85]

You're too anchored in the status quo. You don't need any of that for religion, in fact the majotity of religions don't have most of that. It's mostly the Jewish derived religions that do.

Just don't tell that to the majority of world religions that DO have these features. For instance...

1.) Buddhism. Its authorities are the monks, its core sacred text the Tripitaka, its creed the Dharma as taught by Siddhartha Gautama. Its shrines are plentiful.
2.) Hinduism. Its authorities are the Brahmin, its core sacred texts are the Vedas and Upanishads. Its creed is the Dharma as explained by the Vedas and spiritual teachers. It has numerous temples and shrines.
3.) Jainism. Its authorities are the Tirthankaras, deified humans who have shed their kharma and have been liberated. Mahavira is its central teacher. The monks are also highly revered. Its texts are the Kalpasutra, Agama, and a few others. Its creed is well developed, and is a unique Dharma, which is similar to Buddhism but much more severe. Again, it has temples, shrines, and monasteries.
4.) Sikhism. Its authorities are the Sikh gurus, particularly Guru Nanak Dev Ji. Its text is the Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Its creed is a fusion of Hindu Dharma and Islam. Numerous places of worship all around the world.
5. Shinto. It is an animist religion of Japan, and has a priestly class who intercedes/communicates with the Kami, nature spirits. It has a collection of literature, among which is the Kojiki. It has a set of detailed, elaborate rituals for every phase of life. It has numerous natural shrines.
6. Santeria. This is an adaptation of African religion. It has a priestly class known as babalorishas for men, and iyalorishas for women. They worship the spirits or orishas. It has no official written texts because it has a highly developed oral tradition that is transmitted directly. It is still a fundamental mythos, its being unwritten is of no consequence since Judaism's traditions were also unwritten for most of its history. There are also numerous places of worship.
7. Voodoo. They worship the Loa, and its priests are Houngans for men, and Mambos for women. They have a concrete liturgical structure called Sèvis Lwa, and its central mythology is, like most African religions, passed on orally. It is still codified.
8. Asatru/Forn Sedr/Norse religion. A revival of native European religion, they worship the Aesir and Vanir, and their priests are called Godhi. Their holy texts are the Lore, composed of the Eddas and Sagas. Their main liturgical structure centers around the Blot and the Sumbel, which includes ritualized sacrifice/offering, either of an animal to be eaten at the feast, or of mead/ale.

And the list goes on and on. Most religions in the world are formalized, do have a sacerdotal structure, liturgical function, core mythology, and some sense of Orthodoxy. The current Western phenomena of bland, artificial spirituality with no coherent form is nothing but an expression of the current trend of nihilistic apathy that has taken hold of our culture, and is not much more than a sign of stagnant decay.

[lxskllr]

And the list goes on and on. Most religions in the world are formalized, do have a sacerdotal structure, liturgical function, core mythology, and some sense of Orthodoxy. The current Western phenomena of bland, artificial spirituality with no coherent form is nothing but an expression of the current trend of nihilistic apathy that has taken hold of our culture, and is not much more than a sign of stagnant decay.

Doesn't make it any less bullshit. Bullshit is bullshit, whether it's written down or not ;^)

[Darwin]

[QUOTEThe current Western phenomena of bland, artificial spirituality with no coherent form is nothing but an expression of the current trend of nihilistic apathy that has taken hold of our culture, and is not much more than a sign of stagnant decay.[/QUOTE]

Too true and the proximate reason for the settled complacency that makes the west such a soft target for the hyper-energized and aggressive missionary zeal of Islam. Minus the armor of our own historical cultural certitude we are sitting ducks but there is simply no way to go back and few would want to try. We are currently the nervous objects of the old oriental curse: "May you live in interesting times."

[sgreger1]

Yah, just because someone wrote it down a few thousand years ago, doesn't make it any more reputable or formal than something written down today.

[Roo]

Excellent post there good Darwin. I like where this thread is going now. Religion is way more interesting than alien speculation and laughably falsified flying saucer photos.

[jamesstew]

Excellent post there good Darwin. I like where this thread is going now. Religion is way more interesting than alien speculation and laughably falsified flying saucer photos.

Sometimes you get both:

[justintempler]

And the list goes on and on. Most religions in the world are formalized, do have a sacerdotal structure, liturgical function, core mythology, and some sense of Orthodoxy. The current Western phenomena of bland, artificial spirituality with no coherent form is nothing but an expression of the current trend of nihilistic apathy that has taken hold of our culture, and is not much more than a sign of stagnant decay.

sacerdotal -> priestly
liturgical -> formal public worship
core mythology -> myth
orthodoxy -> orthos (correct) + doxa (beliefs)
artificial spirituality -> as opposed to real spirituality?
nihilistic (nothingism) apathy (unfeeling)

Anthony with all due respect that last paragraph was full of contradictory woo woo.

We need men to guide us in formal public worship based on myths which are based on correct beliefs otherwise we will fall into some imitation spritituality and have no reason to live?

[tom502]

Scientology is not much different than the various world religions, though it's organized more as a OTO, or Golden Dawn type initiatory group. It has it's founder, L. Ron, who is like a Buddha figure, and his works are their scriptures. And just because it's not 1000's of years old, it's just as valid, and less "wacky" than the established religions.

[jamesstew]

[QUOTE=tom502;343834And just because it's not 1000's of years old, it's just as valid, and less "wacky" than the established religions.[/QUOTE]

You're right, it's exactly as stupid as the more established ones and since it's new we can see exactly how nihilistic and pathetic it's founder was.\

[tom502]

I was referring to the outlandish cliams made against it, in terms of their so-called theology, in relation to the popular established religions. Personally, I don't think it is wacky at all, and makes logical sense.

[sgreger1]

I love Tom, he is the only guy I know who has all the boxes checked:

Support for Nazi Ufo's: Check
Support for Scientology: Check
Forests on Mars: Check
Hollow Earth: Check
Holocaust denial: Check
Apollo mission denier: Check
UFO religion: check


I mean ive met people who fall into these various catagories, but Tom is like the royal flush of conspiracy theorists, he leaves no base uncovered. Bravo Tom!