Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

It doesn't matter if they exist or not since we'll never find nor reach them.

>>9055452
They could reach us.

And the fact that there is no evidence is not evidence that they exist, what is your point?

>>9055445
sadly this logic can be applied to LITERALLY any random nonsense
all hail the not-disproven flying teapot deity

>>9055485
I'm glad you can understand the limitations of the /sci/entific method.

>>9055445
This statement is generally used as an escape hatch when arguing with a kook

>J-just because I have no real evidence for my claim doesn't mean I'm wrong!!

They're not wrong and they know it so the argument ends

>>9055491
the scientific method is limited yes but not in the context of this quote

>>9055495
How is that not a limitation? The /sci/entific method can't produce conclusions without evidence.

>>9055499
We shouldn't reach conclusions without evidence for them. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make

>>9055509
>I'm not sure what point you're trying to make
That in the context of that quote the scientific method is limited.

>>9055512
Carl Sagan isn't saying we can affirmatively say something without evidence, just that because we can't prove something directly doesn't mean it's not true. Did you just take some intro philosophy course and think you're an expert or something? You're not making a useful point

>>9055485
You're LITERALLY just agreeing with the OP.

>>9055445
Let X be some proposition and let E be evidence for that proposition such that

P(X|E) > P(X)

P(~X|~E) = P(~X) P(~E|~X) / P(~E)

P(~X|~E) > P(~X) when

P(~E|~X) / P(~E) > 1

P(~E|~X) > P(~E)

P(~E|~X) > P(~E|X)

P(E|~X) < P(E|X)

So if aliens existing implies that evidence for their existence is more likely to exist, the absence of evidence is evidence of absence. QED.

>>9055499
What is claimed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. The scientific method draws conclusions without evidence everyday, otherwise it could not function.

>>9055445

you clearly don't understand the scientific method if you are willing to substitute it for simplified statements like this.

>>9055522
interesting.

>>9055522
>So if aliens existing implies that evidence for their existence is more likely to exist
that's a big "if"

>>9055445
It's not that people don't get that the absence of evidence isn't the evidence of absence.

It's that people try to force an absence of counterevidence as evidence of PRESENCE and shit up threads.

I don't mind people that say "We don't have proof of x but I believe it's out there somewhere", I dislike when people are like X IS REAL DISPROVE ME FAGGOTS.

File: 1499468006009.gif (4MB, 700x488px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 700x488px

>>9055445
>you cant disprove the existence of my imaginary magic cloud father therefore I choose to believe he is real

do you also choose to believe in the existence of literally every possible thing that might exist? its literally an infinite list of possible things and its irrational to pick one over any other.

https://youtu.be/fZpJ7yUPwdU?t=2m38s

File: StrawMan2.jpg (91KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 600x450px

>>9055609
>>you cant disprove the existence of my imaginary magic cloud father therefore I choose to believe he is real
Nice strawman, try learning to read brainlet.

File: 1492365436575.gif (872KB, 500x216px) Image search: [Google]

872KB, 500x216px

>>9055619
as if you weren't? laughable! you're not fooling anyone.

>>9055572

take a (you)

File: win butler.jpg (124KB, 620x349px) Image search: [Google]

124KB, 620x349px

>>9055623
As if I wasn't what? Your point would only be relevant if the picture said 'Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, so you should believe in what we lack evidence for.'

File: 1500352304085.jpg (133KB, 669x960px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 669x960px

>>9055624
>>9055624
>take a (you)

>>9055452
If they're within the galactic cluster, we can reach them

>>9055499
But if a hypothesis predicts that certain evidence would be available if it were true, you can look for said evidence -- and, not finding it, begin to suspect the hypothesis is false. A hypothesis that repeatedly predicts evidence that never is detected can be put on the back shelf.

Note: This is not specifically speaking to the Aliums case OP posts about, since there is no real agreement whether the "There are aliums" hypothesis would result in evidence we can detect. Perhaps we would expect a likelihood of no evidence whether the hypothesis is true or not.

>>9055572
How is that a big if? It's essentially saying that aliens are empirically discoverable.

>>9055850
Theoretically yes, but if aliens are far enough away it's incredibly unlikely we'll ever have the technology to detect them

>>9055848
>But if a hypothesis predicts that certain evidence would be available if it were true, you can look for said evidence -- and, not finding it, begin to suspect the hypothesis is false.
Results of an experiment are evidence, whether you find something to contradict the null hypothesis or not.

>>9055854
That's irrelevant since aliens being far away would not made evidence less likely than if they did not exist at all. If they didn't exist at all it's like they are infinitely far away.

Basically, aliens would have to be actively destroying evidence of their existence in order for the absence of evidence to not be evidence of their absence.

>>9055870
>>9055870
>That's irrelevant since aliens being far away would not made evidence less likely than if they did not exist at all.
Evidence existing != evidence being practically obtainable

>>9055871
Again that's irrelevant to what we're discussing. Aliens being far away dies not make evidence less obtainable than if they did not exist at all.

>>9055890
>Aliens being far away dies not make evidence less obtainable than if they did not exist at all.
Did I say that?

>>9055445
>/sci/entists who don't understand the /sci/entific method
Is that a jab at yourself? Because absence of evidence IS evidence of absence. Sometimes it it strong evidence and sometimes it is weak evidence, but it's always nonzero evidence.

>>9055891
>Theoretically yes, but if aliens are far enough away it's incredibly unlikely we'll ever have the technology to detect them

>>9055897
What does that have to do with evidence of far away aliens being less obtainable than if they did not exist at all?

>>9055893
>Because absence of evidence IS evidence of absence.
[citation needed]

>>9055902
Did you even read the post you originally replied to?

>>9055910
Yes, empirically discoverable in practice != empirically discoverable in theory.

>>9055917
Again, what does that have to with the fact that absence of evidence is evidence of absence if aliens existing implies that evidence for their existence is more likely to exist. Realize that evidence existing and evidence being found are interchangeable in this context, since it's a conditional probability.

>>9055934
>Realize that evidence existing and evidence being found are interchangeable in this context
Evidence can't be found without humans to find it, regardless of existence.

>>9055944
OK when you want to reply to what I'm saying and not just made random points, tell me.

>>9055949
>OK when you want to reply to what I'm saying and not just made random points, tell me.
see
>>9055572

>>9055466
>2017
>still no alien contact
Keep dreaming.

>>9055445
>mistakenly certain that aliens don't exist.

Who even claims this? It's the opposite that is by far the most prevalent view, that alien life is essentially guaranteed when there is absolutely no reason to believe that is the case.

>>9056021
>Who even claims this?
Glass-half-empty "scientists" who don't understand the scientific method

>>9055859
Which I guess is the point I was trying to make in a more colloquial manner. Negative results, under some circumstances, may in fact BE evidence to help confirm a hypothesis.

>>9056005
"it hasn't happened yet so it'll never happen"
Great argument.

>>9056036
>Negative results, under some circumstances, may in fact BE evidence to help confirm a hypothesis.
I agree.

>>9056035
To be fair, it is possible to come to conclusions through processes other then applying the scientific method.

>>9056041
.>Best day on 4chan ever!

>>9056042
>To be fair, it is possible to come to conclusions through processes other then applying the scientific method.
Sure, but which of these processes are relevant to aliens?

>>9055445
Yes but neither is absence of evidence indicative or evidence of something. I could claim some wild shit and just state this, it doesn't make it valid or worth discussion.