Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 46: Line 46:  
::Why not remove that segment, then caveat it with another sentence saying "no definite proof of their existance" or something along those lines. That will make it read better and be more official. [[User:Jrssr5|Jrssr5]] 15:15, 16 April 2007 (EDT)
 
::Why not remove that segment, then caveat it with another sentence saying "no definite proof of their existance" or something along those lines. That will make it read better and be more official. [[User:Jrssr5|Jrssr5]] 15:15, 16 April 2007 (EDT)
 
:::Because I could as easily have described the whole thing as a "fanciful concept." Or maybe an adjective like "impossible." I am being very generous by using a simple "if" statement, which in English stands for any condition, whether contrary to fact or very likely to be fact, instead of stating flat-out that ET life, in the sense of a civilizing species, is impossible.--[[User:TerryH|TerryH]]<sup>[[User talk:TerryH|Talk]]</sup> 15:23, 16 April 2007 (EDT)
 
:::Because I could as easily have described the whole thing as a "fanciful concept." Or maybe an adjective like "impossible." I am being very generous by using a simple "if" statement, which in English stands for any condition, whether contrary to fact or very likely to be fact, instead of stating flat-out that ET life, in the sense of a civilizing species, is impossible.--[[User:TerryH|TerryH]]<sup>[[User talk:TerryH|Talk]]</sup> 15:23, 16 April 2007 (EDT)
 +
::::I have to disagree.  The sentence currently reads "if such a thing existed", implying that it doesn't.  Except for the biblical perspective section, the article should be neutral, as at this time, we can't prove that ET does or does not exist. [[User:Brewer13210|Brewer13210]] 15:38, 16 April 2007 (EDT)
162

edits

Navigation menu