>tfw we are monkeys on a rock spinning around a star and our

File: sad pepe.jpg (47KB, 800x522px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 800x522px

>tfw humans have difficulty dealing with the notion of eternal nothingness after death and so we forge religions to give us solace in our inevitable doom

>>66268028
Stop appropriating my culture

Yes, we are monkeys

>>66268028
one day you'll be too old for existential angst

Apes. APES.

>>66268136
I hope that by that point I'd have sense enough to get the fuck off this site

File: 1438064857962.jpg (75KB, 394x480px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 394x480px

>>66268028
no it doesn't
I hate this way of thinking, and its promoted by popular culture as a way to keep people feeling small, helpless, and powerlessness to great dynamic changes in the universe (and consequentially within our own lives)

people are told this or that is "too big" and that we should just passively observe and try not to get in the way or take risks.

File: image.jpg (131KB, 900x600px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 900x600px

>>66268028
a fucking leaf

>>66268136

not sure you can ever get over it fully.

nietzsche went crazy because of it

File: 1474850932460.png (175KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

175KB, 900x900px

>tfw even if the whole earth explodes and dies it will be literally nothing relevant to the whole fucking gigantic universe, which has already billions and billions of more planets way more advanced than ours

>>66268154
>enough to get the fuck off this site
lol nope

remember it's actually a time thing not a maturity thing. realizing the objective truth of life itself always hurts

>>66268216
it doesn't work like that
maybe a few dozen if even

>>66268416

how would you know? there are more planets in the universe than there are grains of sand on earth.

>>66268451
that's not right
it is inconceivable how much "grain of sand" there are but we can make good guesses on the types of planets per sun on average in the temperate zone that can support life versus local star cluster multiplied by range of galaxy etc
we can ignore the ones too far away (over half million light years) and arrived at a very finite number

>>66268516

literally what? we can analyze the density of sand in a small area (say a meter square) and then extrapolate from there.

but regardless, your 12 number is totally arbitrary. you even say yourself its just based on planetary systems relatively close to us. there's a lot more out there

>>66268599
i assumed he must have been thinking about the chance of interacting with any of them or something

which i don't think we'll ever do so it's water off a duck's back

>>66268451
>>66268599
>canadian educatiom

>>66268416
>it doesn't work like that
>proceeds to extend his own unfounded prediction
Just last week we found out that there are presumably ten times more galaxies in the universe than previously though. You can't even justify a ballpark figure at this point.
>>66268516
>we can make good guesses on the types of planets per sun on average in the temperate zone that can support life
no we can't
>estimate for that factor in the Drake equation is currently 1-5 per system that has planets
lmao

>>66268516
what's that number then?

File: 1471594002129.jpg (66KB, 500x660px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 500x660px

I thought you had to be 18 or older to post here

>>66268648
yes we can
some suns cannot support life naturally
some part of the universe may not even have the same physical laws
plus a planet's natural tendency to change over time as well, considering how earth looked a a billion years ago

the chances are stacked against us, just as regions of the star system cannot support life the same maybe true for the galaxy and universe as well

>>66268676
2