Some scientists assert it's highly unlikely that it doesn't exist because of the enormous number of unexplored planets, solar systems, and galaxies.

I find that hard to buy. First of all, it seems to me that the accidental development of a livable Earth was an extremely unlikely, near-impossible occurrence. Throw in the extremely unlikely, near-impossible occurrence of the development of humans (see
below) and I think what we see here is the most remote of 'black swan' events.

If there is life at all on other planets it's most likely something not even close to being human and, even if highly evolved, could be something like the dinosaur age.

Then there is always the fundamental question of whether it's smart to contact more advanced beings that may covet our water-covered planet and would consider it desirable to possess .. minus the icky humans.

'What the human genome is lacking compared with the genomes of other primates might have been as crucial to the development of humankind as what has been added during our evolutionary history, according to a new study led by researchers at Yale and the
Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard.

The new findings, published April 28 in the journal Science, fill an important gap in what is known about historical changes to the human genome. While a revolution in the capacity to collect data from genomes of different species has allowed scientists
to identify additions that are specific to the human genome -- such as a gene that was critical for humans to develop the ability to speak -- less attention has been paid to what's missing in the human genome.

For the new study researchers used an even deeper genomic dive into primate DNA to show that the loss of about 10,000 bits of genetic information -- most as small as a few base pairs of DNA -- over the course of our evolutionary history differentiate
humans from chimpanzees, our closest primate relative. Some of those "deleted" pieces of genetic information are closely related to genes involved in neuronal and cognitive functions, including one associated with the formation of cells in the developing
brain.

These 10,000 missing pieces of DNA -- which are present in the genomes of other mammals -- are common to all humans, the Yale team found.

The fact that these genetic deletions became conserved in all humans, the authors say, attests to their evolutionary importance, suggesting that they conferred some biological advantage.

"Often we think new biological functions must require new pieces of DNA, but this work shows us that deleting genetic code can result in profound consequences for traits make us unique as a species," said Steven Reilly, an assistant professor of genetics
at Yale School of Medicine and senior author of the paper.' https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2023/04/230427173438.htm

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, May 5, 2023 at 4:48:01 PM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:

Some scientists assert it's highly unlikely that it doesn't exist because of the enormous number of unexplored planets, solar systems, and galaxies.

I find that hard to buy. First of all, it seems to me that the accidental development of a livable Earth was an extremely unlikely, near-impossible occurrence. Throw in the extremely unlikely, near-impossible occurrence of the development of humans (

see below) and I think what we see here is the most remote of 'black swan' events.

I totally disagree. First, we don't know enough about other solar systems to say any of that. Second, the more we're learning, the more we see a lot of similarities between us and other solar systems the way their planets are spaced out. Seems like
that many of them are in the habitable zone. Third, we can assume life finds a way in habitable conditions because it finds a way on this earth in every single place including the atmosphere, deepest parts of the ocean...inside rock...in darkness, cold,
and heat....it's everywhere. 4. Humans live in every climate on this earth and they are still similar. Seems possible to me that the way life evolves, there may be differences, but the process is still more or less the same. Life may never repeat
the same, but I bet it sure as hell rhymes a lot....just like they say about history.

If there is life at all on other planets it's most likely something not even close to being human and, even if highly evolved, could be something like the dinosaur age.

My guess is the closer in age and location in the galaxy a solar system is to us, the greater the chance of them having life of the same age since those solar systems went through similar processes as us. But, yat, it could easily have happened that an
alien species came by here 20000 years ago and find an ice age....or maybe 200,000 years ago when almost every human died and figured there was no intelligent life....and in the scheme of the planets history that difference in time is just a blink of an
eye. Could also be some intelligent aliens happen along while we are in world war and decides to quarantine this planet from advanced civilsations elsewhere.

Then there is always the fundamental question of whether it's smart to contact more advanced beings that may covet our water-covered planet and would consider it desirable to possess .. minus the icky humans.

I think that's a stupid argument mostly. There are ridiculous amounts of water out there in the galaxy to be had without bothering with us. If they have the technology to get here and collect our water...which would take a stupid amount of energy to
remove from this earth into space, then they possess the same technology to more cheaper harvest it from gaseous clouds elsewhere.


--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, May 5, 2023 at 4:48:01 PM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:

For the new study researchers used an even deeper genomic dive into primate DNA to show that the loss of about 10,000 bits of genetic information -- most as small as a few base pairs of DNA -- over the course of our evolutionary history differentiate

humans from chimpanzees, our closest primate relative. Some of those "deleted" pieces of genetic information are closely related to genes involved in neuronal and cognitive functions, including one associated with the formation of cells in the developing
brain.

These 10,000 missing pieces of DNA -- which are present in the genomes of other mammals -- are common to all humans, the Yale team found.

The fact that these genetic deletions became conserved in all humans, the authors say, attests to their evolutionary importance, suggesting that they conferred some biological advantage.

"Often we think new biological functions must require new pieces of DNA, but this work shows us that deleting genetic code can result in profound consequences for traits make us unique as a species," said Steven Reilly, an assistant professor of

genetics at Yale School of Medicine and senior author of the paper.'

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2023/04/230427173438.htm

It's funny how you talk of only 10,000 dna genes causing a unique species because there are more than 30,000 different genes between races in humans and it's also demonstrated that the brainsize is noticably smaller in certain races. Seems like this
group of Yale researchers were making the case that perhaps one race of humans may be a different species than others. Furthermore, it's also been shown that different races have different abilities in brains, not unlike different races have different
physical abilities. For example, Chinese have a brain with a higher aptitude for math. Jews have a brain with a higher aptitude for using language and making arguments...which is theorized to account for why a high percentage of them are lawyers.
Some ethnicities have very low IQs as a group, too. And, Jerry the dumbfuck who likes to argue, your lazy ass can look all this up yourself. You aren't worth shit to me and I'm not going to bother doing your research for you.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, May 5, 2023 at 4:48:01 PM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:

Some scientists assert it's highly unlikely that it doesn't exist because of the enormous number of unexplored planets, solar systems, and galaxies.

I find that hard to buy. First of all, it seems to me that the accidental development of a livable Earth was an extremely unlikely, near-impossible occurrence. Throw in the extremely unlikely, near-impossible occurrence of the development of humans (

see below) and I think what we see here is the most remote of 'black swan' events.

If there is life at all on other planets it's most likely something not even close to being human and, even if highly evolved, could be something like the dinosaur age.

Then there is always the fundamental question of whether it's smart to contact more advanced beings that may covet our water-covered planet and would consider it desirable to possess .. minus the icky humans.

'What the human genome is lacking compared with the genomes of other primates might have been as crucial to the development of humankind as what has been added during our evolutionary history, according to a new study led by researchers at Yale and the

Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard.

The new findings, published April 28 in the journal Science, fill an important gap in what is known about historical changes to the human genome. While a revolution in the capacity to collect data from genomes of different species has allowed

scientists to identify additions that are specific to the human genome -- such as a gene that was critical for humans to develop the ability to speak -- less attention has been paid to what's missing in the human genome.

For the new study researchers used an even deeper genomic dive into primate DNA to show that the loss of about 10,000 bits of genetic information -- most as small as a few base pairs of DNA -- over the course of our evolutionary history differentiate

humans from chimpanzees, our closest primate relative. Some of those "deleted" pieces of genetic information are closely related to genes involved in neuronal and cognitive functions, including one associated with the formation of cells in the developing
brain.

These 10,000 missing pieces of DNA -- which are present in the genomes of other mammals -- are common to all humans, the Yale team found.

The fact that these genetic deletions became conserved in all humans, the authors say, attests to their evolutionary importance, suggesting that they conferred some biological advantage.

"Often we think new biological functions must require new pieces of DNA, but this work shows us that deleting genetic code can result in profound consequences for traits make us unique as a species," said Steven Reilly, an assistant professor of

genetics at Yale School of Medicine and senior author of the paper.'

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2023/04/230427173438.htm

I just saw this:

'But where advanced life can arise is only part of it. Garofalo wanted to find out when it was most likely. It all goes back to the initial black hole mergers that produce counter-rotating accreting black holes. "Counterrotating accreting black holes are
the product of mergers, and the merger function experiences its peak at a redshift of 2," he writes. A redshift of 2 was about 11 billion years ago when the universe was 2.8 billion years old.

"This, therefore, is the redshift corresponding to when the greatest number of isolated field galaxies experienced a merger that led to cold gas flowing into the nucleus of the newly formed galaxy and settling into counterrotation around the newly formed
black hole," Garofalo concludes.

That's the age when AGN and their jets appear. They triggered star formation and planet formation. Earth formed 4.5 billion years ago, and we, the advanced life capable of interstellar communication, only just appeared. So using us as a benchmark, it's
about 4.5 billion years after the right black holes in the right galaxies that advanced life can appear. Garofalo rounds it off to 5 billion years. "Thus, we assume a fiducial value of 5 billion years, which brings us to 7.8 billion years after the Big
Bang, or 6 billion years ago."

'According to Garofalo's work, humanity is indeed late to the party. "To the extent that we may someday speak of a peak era for the emergence of technologically advanced life in the universe, our simplified exploration of the emergence of life in the
context of AGN feedback indicates that such a time is in the past," he concludes. "We on planet Earth are, therefore, latecomers."
https://phys.org/news/2023-05-advanced-life-peaked-billions-years.html

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On May 7, jack roth wrote:

I never suggested that they would want to remove the water.

So you think they'd want a planet where we've already used up all the easy resources, polluted much
of what's left, and expose themselves to every new disease imaginable?

Already demonstrated:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7uGlMV-JFQ

--
Rich

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)