IMO there would be "aliens" what they look like, there Intellegence and attributes i wouldn't know but i am sure there is more life in the universe besides ours.
Printable View
IMO there would be "aliens" what they look like, there Intellegence and attributes i wouldn't know but i am sure there is more life in the universe besides ours.
I believe there are aliens in other planets and some aliens live on earth...they are known as EMOs
For those thinking aliens exist... Don't take it in a wrong way, but... you watch too much tv... There's no aliens (taking the word as something related with some cretures living outside our planet)
Aliens... pure myth... the most popular one... Is the best myth because you will never stop wondering if aliens really exists, and you will die curious about it, and so generations will be...
Is almost a religion... too bad
:hippi:
How can you make such an assumption Hikaru_K? It is POSSIBLE, we just don't know yet as we don't have the technology to find out.
Almost a religion? no, religion was most likely made up by some guy who thought people might believe if he wrote a book about it and hide it, most likely what he wrote was based on his experience whilst smoking weed and got a kick out of the fact that people might believe in the future might believe it it because they need something to rely on and are weak.
RELIGION is for the weak....
Aliens could POSSIBLY exist.....
there may be aliens on another planets...
but i won´t believe in them as long as i haven´t seen them myself ;)
Aliens,aliens,aliens... I think aliens exist. But I don think they have to be inteligent or better then us, and I don think it's neccesarry for us to understand/see somthing like that. When people say "alien" they think at a nice white thing that has legs and hands heads, but I think aliens can be even microscopic creatures. So yea, I think they exist...
Aliens perharps exists on Earth. I think most of you heard of Bermuda Triangle, there is no prove or reason why things that go above or under it dissapear. It would properly take a human experiencement to find things out.
Ah dude. If something is on erth, then how can it be alien? dosent alien mean extratherestre?Quote:
Originally Posted by Reborn
Quote:
Originally Posted by FireFlyboy
Ohh my... you that claim so loud that religion is for weaks, then, it's even weaker to think that aliens exist... The world doesn't have the technology of course and never will, that's why I said before that we all are going to die not knowing such a thing.
Those researching on that alien-UFO topic are wasting time (that's what I call a waste)...
You can say... people have seen spaceships and sightings and stuff, I can say that some people have seen saints, virgin sightings... and many nonsence stuff...
Be real... it's better to believe in GOD (not religion) cause GOD's story is not as kiddie like as alien's one... believing in a bunch of non basis "assumptions" ... again... TV is TV!! The only real thing on TV is the news hour, and sometimes you cannot say this is completly real.
Try searching on the web about aliens and you will find a lot of non official sites, because no one will think about running a serious site about such a childish story. There's only the National UFO Reporting center, in where all the geeks get together to spread they assumptions...
You know what Folklore is? According to the people (the thinking side) Aliens are in this Folklore category... fits well. And God by no means belong to this category. And now try searching about GOD on the internet and then tell me what is weaker...
god should be in folklore section
are you a stoned hippy or something?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hikaru_K
there are around 50 ziljoin galaxies if there only was change of 1 procent that planets like the ours evolve then how much galaxies would that leave?, now you make the calculations
Well, it is not! that's the thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by vinzone
Quote:
Originally Posted by pietertje
In fact, my job is to do research, that's why I post answering this... I talk about completly proved things, realities! there's no evolution... as you can see the only "evolving" things in this world are: more deads, more sick people, disease, anger, conspiracy, assumptions, so this leads to pure evil in equal rate that science. A very strange proportion.
You won't believe in truth even if you hear it, or worst even if you see it...
The people borns wit this curiosity thing embeded...
Nah Aliens dont exist -_-
how about if you seen 1? would you belieave then?
I dont believe that there are aliens but I do believe that there are organisms on other planets that we have not discovered yet.
Let me see one :hippi:Quote:
Originally Posted by ringmaup
:lol: You had to ask that
Hikaru_K god is fake.... we all know that. Aliens until we have seen them i guess are fake as well... but i just wanted to point out mainly god is fake.
You must to be 10 years old Fire...Quote:
Originally Posted by FireFlyboy
if you're saying that the evolution theory is fake. i will shoot youQuote:
Originally Posted by Hikaru_K
Simple awnser:Where the fuck shoud i know?
Edit/Mack (or who ever he was/is) is Godlike for me.
im 40% sure theres aliens out there im 99.9% sure that they have advanced technology like U.F.O's and such
Of course is a fake... SO PROVEN!!! Give your best shot with some sniper riffle!! XD :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by pietertje
I won't post it... cause may probably be erased... :hippi:
actually there are aliens in this planet his name :George W. Bush
ALIENS EXIST!!!
have u guys never seen MIB?! they walk among us!! aaarggghhh!!
*takes medication*
/Piasa aka TehSex
might allines are existing but we might need more million of ages to discover....
milions?? m/b 1-2k u'll see :P ( or maybe u'll be dead in that time :P _Quote:
Originally Posted by DeXtEr_gr
course aliens exist. we cant be here alone can we!!
i cant ague with dumb people so,sure the evoluton theory is wrong, in your little insane crazy headQuote:
Originally Posted by Hikaru_K
Sorry... but, I study that... as I said before, my JOB is to do research. I read an study recent science to fulfill many jobs I'm asked to. I have it written on paper, and most of the people are agree with this, I mean people with some renown. so... dumb is that guy who calls dumb the other one...Quote:
Originally Posted by pietertje
sure in your head thats all trueQuote:
Originally Posted by Hikaru_K
Wow i am surprised how many people care about aliens.... -_-
"It's life Jim, but not as we know it."
Alright then, explain to me how the changes of the Micraster species over time isn't evolution. Try and tell me that Echinoids, Zooids, Graptolites, Gastropods, Ammonoids, Nautiloids, Brachiopods and Trilobites didn't evolve. Just try it. Let's see your 'so-called' research. Explain to me why there are thousands of variants found throughout soft silts and several miles of crust.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hikaru_K
I study Geology my friend, so it'll take one hell of an arguement to persuade me into disbelieving Darwin's theory of Evolution. I have a folder sat next to me right now with hundreds of pages supporting evolution, try and beat it.
Dipshit.Quote:
Originally Posted by gizzmo
Smo Vs Hikaru_K
FIGHT!
*ding ding*
Anyways why is everyone so interested... i mean even if there are aliens then why aren't we worried about what they might DO.
maybe they like to talk about aliens
I havn't seen them so they dont exist
I bet you haven't seen the Earth's core, so that doesn't exist either?Quote:
Originally Posted by Nefilim
Owned.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smo
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smo
There's more attached... too long. And so much more, but I guess I'm not allowed to destroy the topic title :hippi:Quote:
Darwin’s real message: have you missed it?
by Carl Wieland
Harvard’s renowned Professor Stephen Jay Gould is a vigorous anticreationist (and Marxist), and perhaps the most knowledgeable student of the history of evolutionary thought and all things Darwinian.
I’m glad he and I are on the same side about one thing at least — the real meaning of ‘Darwin’s revolution’. And we both agree that it’s a meaning that the vast majority of people in the world today, nearly a century and a half after Darwin, don’t really want to face up to. Gould argues that Darwin’s theory is inherently anti-plan, anti-purpose, anti-meaning (in other words, is pure philosophical materialism). Also, that Darwin himself knew this very well and meant it to be so.
By ‘materialism’ he does not mean the drive to possess more and more material things, but the philosophical belief that matter is the only reality. In this belief system, matter, left to itself, produced all things, including the human brain. This brain then invented the idea of the supernatural, of God, of eternal life, and so forth.
It seems obvious why Christians who wish to compromise with evolution, and especially those who encourage others to do this, would not want to face this as the true meaning of Darwinism. Such ‘theistic evolutionists’ believe they can accept the ‘baby’ of evolution (thus saving face with the world) while throwing out the ‘bathwater’ of materialism. I will not here go into the many reasons why the evolution/long geological ages idea is so corrosive to the biblical Gospel (even if evolution could be seen as the plan and purpose of some ‘god’).
My purpose is (like Gould’s, but with a different motive) to make people aware of this very common philosophical blind spot, this refusal to wake up to what Darwin was really on about. Why is it true, as Gould also points out, that even among non-Christians who believe in evolution the vast majority don’t wish to face the utter planlessness of Darwin’s theory? Because they would then no longer be able to console themselves with the feeling that there is some sort of plan or purpose to our existence.
The usual thing vaguely believed in by this majority of people (at the same time as they accept evolution) is some sort of fuzzy, ethereal, oozing god-essence — more like the Star Wars ‘force be with you’ than the personal God of Scripture. They usually obtain some comfort from a vague belief in at least the possibility of some sort of afterlife, which helps explain the success of recent movies like Flatliners and Ghost.
Gould appears to deplore these popular notions as unfortunate, illogical and unnecessary cultural hangups. He, of course, starts from the proposition that evolution is true. He knows the real message of Darwin to be that ‘there’s nothing else going on out there — just organisms struggling to pass their genes on to the next generation. That’s it.’ In which case it is time for people to abandon comforting fairytales and wake up to this materialistic implication of evolution.
I also regard such notions (of cosmic purpose in a Darwinian world, of life-after-death without belief in the existence of the holy God of the Bible) as tragic fables, for different reasons. They lead people away from the vital revealed truths of Scripture, the propositional facts communicated by the Creator of the universe. It is also tragic that professing Christians can be deluded into embracing a philosophy (evolution) which is so inherently opposed to the very core of Christianity, and has done so much damage to the church and society.
Climbing the ladder
As evidence for this widespread desire to see purpose and plan in the planlessness of evolution, Professor Gould points to the overwhelming tendency among evolution-believers of all levels of education to see the message of Darwin as progress. Evolution is usually illustrated (even on the cover of some foreign translations of Stephen Gould’s books, much to his chagrin) as a 'ladder of progress' or similar.
Why is this?
Think of this. If the evolutionary scenario is true, then man’s arrival on the scene has come only at the end of an unspeakably long chain of events. For example, it would have taken 99.999% of the history of the universe to get to man. After life appears, two-thirds of its history on earth doesn’t get past bacteria, and for half of the remainder it stays at the one-celled stage! In order to escape the obvious (which is that in such an evolutionary universe, man has no possible significance, and just happened to come along), our culture, he argues, has had to view these vast ages as some sort of preparation period for the eventual appearance of man. This works if the idea of progress is clung to. The universe, then organisms, just got ‘better and better’, till finally we came along.
Puncturing myths
However, there is no hint of this popular mythology of ‘evolution-as-progress’ in Darwin’s ‘grand idea’. Variations happen by chance. Those organisms which happen, by chance, to suit their local environment more effectively and thus have a better chance to pass their genes on to the next generation, are favoured by natural selection. That’s all. In the theory, the giraffe that develops a longer neck is not a better giraffe — just one with a longer neck. Given a certain change in the environment, that long neck can just as easily be a disadvantage.
There is therefore nothing 'inevitable' about the appearance of man, or intelligent self-aware beings, for that matter. I would add to Gould’s comments my opinion that it is this belief in evolution as having been an 'onwards and upwards' force leading to us, and then to greater intelligence as a historical inevitability, which makes many dedicated evolutionists so sure that there must be intelligent aliens out there somewhere.
Radical
But isn’t Gould going a bit far to suggest that Darwin knew how radically anti-God his philosophy was? After all, wasn’t he a kindly, doddery naturalist who just happened to be in the right place at the right time, who was persuaded by what he saw in the Galápagos?
Wrong on all counts. If what follows sounds too revisionist, remember that Gould (an undisputed intellectual giant who has made a very careful study) is not alone in his conclusions, and has had access to unpublished notebooks of Darwin from when Darwin was a young man. It appears that:
1.The myth of the ‘kindly slow-witted naturalist stumbling across evolution’ was fostered by an autobiography Darwin wrote as a deliberately self-effacing moral homily for his children, not intending it to be published. It was a common Victorian thing to do. His notebooks tell a different story, of an ambitious young man who knew he had one of the most radical ideas in the history of thought.
2.Darwin did not get his idea from Galápagos finches — Gould even says ‘he clearly did not know that they were finches’. About the Galápagos tortoises, he says Darwin ‘missed that story also and only reconstructed it later.’ Did he get it from observing the results of animal breeding? Peter Bowler, writing in Nature (vol. 353, October 24, 1991, p. 713) says that ‘many now accept that Darwin’s analogy between artificial and natural selection was a product of hindsight’. So where did the ideas come from?
Just prior to his famous ‘insight’, Darwin spent months studying the economic theories of Adam Smith. In Smith’s extreme free-market view, the struggle of individuals competing for personal gain in an unfettered marketplace (by eliminating inefficient participants, for instance) is supposed to give an ordered, efficient economy. Although nothing is guiding it, it is as if there is an 'invisible guiding hand'. The ‘benefits come as an incidental side-effect of this selfish struggle.’
Of course, it is not hard to see where Darwin applied this idea to nature. The apparent design and order in nature is an incidental side-effect of the selfish struggle to leave more offspring.
3. Why did Darwin wait 20 years before publishing? It was not because of his modesty (another common myth which Gould debunks), so it is clear that he was afraid to reveal something.
Was it his belief in evolution itself? No. Evolution was quite a common concept in Darwin’s day. It was because of the bombshell he knew lay behind his theory, namely its rank, radical materialism. He knew as a young man that he had ‘the key to one of the great reforming ideas of history and systematically [went] out to reformulate every discipline from psychology to history.’5 To explain apparent design without a designer — that was the key to Darwin’s theory, not the idea of 'evolution' (common descent) itself.
4. It is likely that this assault on design had a lot to do with a reaction against Captain Fitzroy6 on the Beagle. The captain’s views on almost all political subjects were diametrically opposite to Darwin’s. For instance, Darwin was an ardent abolitionist, whereas Fitzroy believed that slavery was benevolent. Apparently, the good captain would wax long and eloquent on Paley’s argument from design7, which was used to justify many of his ideas. Nothing could possibly have taken deadlier aim at Paley’s argument than Darwin’s persuasive concept that design is an incidental side-effect of otherwise random change.
5. Darwin knew that his notion, being utter planlessness, could not possibly involve any sort of purposive progress, which is the romanticized notion of evolution held by so many of its believers today (especially theists). In fact, it is likely that this is why he did not, himself, use the word ‘evolution’ until his last book in 1881, when he gave in to the by then popular term applied to his concept. The common meaning of ‘evolution’ at that time implied progress. In a letter to the paleontologist Hyatt, Darwin wrote:
‘… I cannot avoid the conclusion that no inherent tendency to progressive development exists.’
6. Darwin’s casual aside about a ‘creator’ in earlier editions of The Origin of Species seems to have been a ploy to soften the implications of his materialistic theory. Ernst Mayr’s recent book on Darwin, One Long Argument: Charles Darwin and the Genesis of Evolutionary Thought, Harvard, 1991, also acknowledges that Darwin’s references to purpose were to appease both the public and his wife. His early, private notebooks show his materialism well established. For instance, in one of them he addresses himself as, ‘O, you materialist!’ and says, ‘Why is thought, being a secretion of brain, more wonderful than gravity as a property of matter?’ He clearly already believed that the idea of a separate realm of the spirit was nonsense, as is further shown when he warns himself not to reveal his beliefs, as follows:
‘to avoid saying how far I believe in materialism, say only that emotions, instincts, degrees of talent which are hereditary are so because brain of child resembles parent stock.’
In 1837, when Darwin was only 28 years old, he wrote in a private notebook, responding to Plato’s belief that the ideas of our imagination arise from preexistence of the soul, ‘read monkeys for preexistence’. He seems to have violently opposed Alfred Wallace’s suggestion of a ‘divine will’ behind the evolution of man, at least.9
In summary, then, Darwin was fully aware that his idea was a frontal assault on the very notion of an intelligent Designer behind the world. In fact, he might very well have formulated it precisely for that purpose. The idea of a spiritual realm apart from matter seems to have been anathema to him as a young man already. The primary inspiration for his theory of natural selection did not come from observation of nature. Perhaps not incidentally, his writings also reveal glimpses of specific antipathy to the God of the Bible, especially concerning His right to judge unbelievers in eternity.
Darwin knew, and virtually all the world’s foremost students of his idea know, that belief in his concept quite simply spells materialism with a capital ‘M’. The idea of no designer, no purpose, no guiding intelligence, no progressive plan — these are not afterthoughts to Darwin’s evolution, but form the very core of it. Accept Darwin’s ‘baby’, and this ‘bathwater’ has a nasty habit of coming along, as the drastic decline in belief among evolution-compromising churches attests.
One can only pray that more and more of the evolution-compromisers in the church begin to see the poisonous core of the fruit they not only swallow, but encourage others to accept. And that many of those outside of Christ will realize that there is no purpose in an evolutionary world. In any case, there is so much evidence stacked against evolution nowadays. True meaning to life can be found only through Jesus Christ, the non-evolutionary, miracle-working Genesis Creator, whose eternal Word is ‘true from the beginning’.
References and notes
1. Much of the information (and all unreferenced quotes) in this article come from the transcript of a talk given by Dr Gould on June 6, 1990, at Victoria University, Wellington, New Zealand, titled ‘The Darwinian Revolution in Thought’. Return to text.
2. See Ken Ham’s book, The Lie: Evolution, Master Books, El Cajon CA, 1987. Return to text. See also Some questions for theistic evolutionists.
3. In my experience, among those who would really be called unbelievers by any common definition, the true atheist is nevertheless very rare. Most people are of course very quick to reject the holy God who is Creator and Judge (see Romans 1) and they readily seize upon evolution as an excuse to do so. It lets them be their own judge, do their ‘own thing’. However, they are very reluctant to take evolution to its logical conclusion which would mean rejecting all belief in any purpose to their existence, as this article contends. Return to text.
4. Where the suggestion of some sort of afterlife judgment is allowed to come into the popular culture, it is a distortion of the biblical teaching that all are born sinful, and that repentance and faith in Jesus Christ is the only way to avoid the future judgment. Thus in the film Ghost, for example, we are given the strong impression that the hero is going to some heaven (despite blasphemy, fornication, and no hint of any Christian rebirth), whereas the one dragged off in post-mortem terror by ominous shadowy beings has already been revealed as an arch-villain. The message is that you have to be a really, really bad guy, commit murder even, to pay any penalty. Return to text.
5. This description of Gould’s could easily lead to a caricature of Darwin as an extrovert, which overlooks other sides of his character. That he was timid as well as ambitious is shown by this 20-year delay (which might have been longer if not for Wallace’s impending publication of the same idea). His mysterious illness (long believed to be some form of anxiety neurosis) might have been contributed to by the conflict between these sides to his nature. In addition, of course, there was the psychological enormity of unleashing an idea upon the world which, as is clear from this article, he must have known would wipe out the whole concept of the biblical God from the minds of millions. Return to text.
6. Contrary to another common misconception, Darwin was not the ship’s naturalist — that was the ship’s surgeon, called McCormack. Darwin was employed as the gentleman companion to the captain (with scientific work as an accepted sideline) because he was of sufficient social standing for the aristocratic Fitzroy, who would otherwise have had to eat alone and suffer great solitude, according to the conventions of the time. The price Darwin would have had to pay was to be continually regaled by the opinions of the overbearing Fitzroy for all those years. It was not the done thing to contradict the captain openly, either. Return to text.
7. William Paley was a most influential thinker in that time, famous for his classic Natural Theology. His most renowned argument involved a comparison between the machinelike precision of living things and machines made by man. Thus, if a watch demands an intelligent watchmaker, how much more must nature demand an intelligent Creator? Unfortunately, such arguments were also used to justify deistic views of the universe which in turn justified all manner of social repression as having divine inevitability. Paley was not defending Genesis or the Bible as such. Return to text.
8. This scenario is generally admitted in the theistic evolutionary opus Portraits of Creation, by Van Till, Snow, Stek, and Young, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1990, p. 22. Return to text.
9. William Fix, The Bone Peddlers, Macmillan Publishing Company, New York, 1984, p. 213. Fix states that Darwin wrote to Wallace, ‘I differ grievously from you … I hope you have not murdered too completely your own and my child.’ (Wallace was the co-proposer of natural selection as a mechanism for evolution.) Return to text.
As I said before, anything I havn't seen isnt there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smo
sure in your head thats all trueQuote:
Originally Posted by Hikaru_K
btw if thats your job then how much do you get payed 2 bucks per hour?
Quote:
Originally Posted by pietertje
Hey man!! you answers are too childish... What do u think you doing?... You probably don't even know what you're reading and then you dare to reply this with such a non-sense. Please stop kidding
sure i do, now did you take all your pills for today?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hikaru_K
I stopped reading that shit when I noticed they tried to back everything up by using religion. Basically, they're speaking bollocks and trying to make it sound credible by mentioning God and the bible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hikaru_K
So I guess air isn't there either. Ain't that a bitch.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nefilim
we should have a debate bored :) that would be awesome
Your spelling is appalling.
Sorry but that...DAMN XDDDDDDDDDDDaahahahahahahaa lol sorryQuote:
Originally Posted by Smo
Air is so over rated these daysQuote:
Originally Posted by Smo
So I this makes me think.... if you don't believe in God, then you are hopeless. Aliens don't exist. Religion you say... there's no religion... There's a GOD, if you don't believe him, then you're gonna die the same way Friedrich Nietzsche did. Not knowing anything and insaneQuote:
Originally Posted by Smo
question the bible says on the first day god created something dunt know what
but anyways how couldve they know if there wasnt anyone there to write it down
btw take stronger medication
What the hell are you talking about? Evolution has nothing to do with religion. Fact.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hikaru_K
I agree smo, i don't know what Hikaru_k was smoking when he submitted that crap.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smo
i think he just wanted attention
Back in the day of the cave men, prehistoric times, the cave men made paintings on their caves walls. Do you know what they painted? Space crafts.
But the thing is, they didn't have the ability of speech, so they couldn't physically tell their offspring how they came to be on the planet Earth. And so, the great mystery of how humans came to live on Planet Earth is forever in shadow.
No it isn't. Evolution.Quote:
Originally Posted by Youngy
Can this be backed up? -.-Quote:
Originally Posted by Youngy
[QUOTE-Youngy]
Back in the day of the cave men, prehistoric times, the cave men made paintings on their caves walls. Do you know what they painted? Space crafts.
But the thing is, they didn't have the ability of speech, so they couldn't physically tell their offspring how they came to be on the planet Earth. And so, the great mystery of how humans came to live on Planet Earth is forever in shadow.[/QUOTE]
so were aliens?
No. we are creatures who have evolved from a single molecule in to what we are now
lol, yes they do.
I'm an alien :p a legal alien in the US, that is...
Fear my crazy yellow skin!! *O*
Hmm, that seems like a childrens story to me. Show me some pictures of that. Btw, humans comming to this planet could go several different ways, so lets try to stay on topic. Now, the probibility of organisms the size of humans living somewhere out in space is possible..but its a small chance. However, the question would be, "are they advanced"? Also, aliens could be classified as bacteria too, so that is a VERY real possibility. Also, if aliens put humans on this planet - wouldn't we have been contacted by now?Quote:
Originally Posted by Youngy
There's no way to tell. To be fair if I owned a race of Human Beings I would quite happily dump the cancerous bastards somewhere and forget about them. All we do self-harm and destroy our homes, why would any Aliens want to keep us?Quote:
Originally Posted by MarleVVLL
To humor themselves.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smo
lol, I like that.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarleVVLL
i hate being thinking they exists, they look pretty scary... :s
humm aliens might exist....but i don´t think they are here on earth....
[QUOTE=Le Bastardo]humm aliens might exist....but i don
1. An unnaturalized foreign resident of a country. Also called noncitizen.
2. A person from another and very different family, people, or place.
3. A person who is not included in a group; an outsider.
4. A creature from outer space: science fiction about an invasion of aliens.
5. Ecology. An organism, especially a plant or animal, that occurs in or is naturalized in a region to which it is not native.
Thanks an alien (thanks to dictionary.com). Okay, from these guidlines we can note that aliens COULD be even bacteria from a foreign planet. Hey, there might be millions of "aliens" on earth as we speak. However, another key aspect is "are they more advanced then us"?
Aliens? Too much movies...
Life in other planets, it can be. Why not?
i believed.. they exist in other solar systems.. ^^
I belive in aliens, I've always believed in them.
Yeah i belive that Aliens are real.
Aliens could be bacteria, or even fully developed life forms. The probability that they are taller then five feet and can comprehend mathmatics, even to a basic form, is VERY small. Its uncomprehensiable that humans are even here..so to think about anyother race being present..eh.
If The Aliens Wasn't Existing So How Do I Exist??????
this thread is still going on lol
i was watching a documentory about baby dragons still existing lol
Well personally i don't believe in Aliens, But we'll have to wait and see in 2012 when the robot goes to Mars and scans Mars for other life forms! Then we will see if they really do exist!
Yes they exist, example. americans and mexicans
Who knows, our Universe is infinite there could be hundreds or even more planets out there
By 2050 we will be able to travel to Pluto and back in 1 day.
yeah of course life would be boring if they didn't no story's like "OMFG A UFO FLEW PAST MY HOUSE!! "
o rly?
and iam infected with alienism
hahahahahaha xD :lol: niceQuote:
Originally Posted by MentaL
Lmao, That just had to be quotedQuote:
Originally Posted by MentaL
lol stop being funny your cracking me :PQuote:
Originally Posted by MentaL