Talk:外星人
The best supporting arguments are based on statistics. * -- :-) Hillgentleman | 書 | 二零零七年十一月二十號（星期二）格林尼治 03點14分08秒。
- What statistics? it is wild guess based on unsubstantiated assumptions. The only life we know is our own until proved otherwise. --WikiCantona 2007年11月21號 (三) 14:40 (UTC)
- As I remember, the crucial assumptions are about how life on Earth came to be, and that, in a planet with a similarly favourable environment and history as our own, life would have evolved. Statistics says that there should be more than just one Earth which satisfies these conditions. * -- :-) Hillgentleman | 書 | 二零零七年十一月二十一號（星期三）格林尼治 23點29分50秒。
- "Life would have evolved" is the biggest assumption. As we know for sure, life evolved once. --WikiCantona 2007年11月22號 (四) 00:09 (UTC)
- How do we know that for sure? Life could have evolved more than once.* -- :-) Hillgentleman | 書 | 二零零七年十一月二十二號（星期四）格林尼治 00點32分53秒。
- For that matter, you're right. But, Life could have never evolved (created by... ;-). For sure, the only life in existence is on our Earth. --WikiCantona 2007年11月22號 (四) 01:06 (UTC)
- It does not matter how you call it, or how it happened - divine guidence or natural selection. Our DNAs give us compelling evidence that omplex lives grew out of simple lives.* -- :-) Hillgentleman | 書 | 二零零七年十一月二十二號（星期四）格林尼治 01點50分46秒。
- Life evolved from simple to complex, is quite evident. But the start non-life to life is called en:Abiogenesis, rather interesting but is more speculation with less science. --WikiCantona 2007年11月22號 (四) 02:36 (UTC)
- Life appearing from dead is of course a much bigger step. And it is much harder. Speculation is part of science. The key is the attitute (objectivity).* -- :-) Hillgentleman | 書 | 二零零七年十一月二十二號（星期四）格林尼治 04點12分09秒。
- Life evolved from simple to complex, is quite evident. But the start non-life to life is called en:Abiogenesis, rather interesting but is more speculation with less science. --WikiCantona 2007年11月22號 (四) 02:36 (UTC)
- It does not matter how you call it, or how it happened - divine guidence or natural selection. Our DNAs give us compelling evidence that omplex lives grew out of simple lives.* -- :-) Hillgentleman | 書 | 二零零七年十一月二十二號（星期四）格林尼治 01點50分46秒。
- For that matter, you're right. But, Life could have never evolved (created by... ;-). For sure, the only life in existence is on our Earth. --WikiCantona 2007年11月22號 (四) 01:06 (UTC)
- How do we know that for sure? Life could have evolved more than once.* -- :-) Hillgentleman | 書 | 二零零七年十一月二十二號（星期四）格林尼治 00點32分53秒。
- "Life would have evolved" is the biggest assumption. As we know for sure, life evolved once. --WikiCantona 2007年11月22號 (四) 00:09 (UTC)
- As I remember, the crucial assumptions are about how life on Earth came to be, and that, in a planet with a similarly favourable environment and history as our own, life would have evolved. Statistics says that there should be more than just one Earth which satisfies these conditions. * -- :-) Hillgentleman | 書 | 二零零七年十一月二十一號（星期三）格林尼治 23點29分50秒。