Image: Illustration by Invisible Creature
-
The Best Science Writing Online 2012
Showcasing more than fifty of the most provocative, original, and significant online essays from 2011, The Best Science Writing Online 2012 will change the way...
Read More »
With the Allen Telescope Array run by the SETI Institute in northern California, the time is coming when we will encounter an extraterrestrial intelligence (ETI). Contact will probably come sooner rather than later because of Moore’s Law (proposed by Intel’s co-founder Gordon E. Moore), which posits a doubling of computing power every one to two years. It turns out that this exponential growth curve applies to most technologies, including the search for ETI (SETI): according to astronomer and SETI founder Frank Drake, our searches today are 100 trillion times more powerful than 50 years ago, with no end to the improvements in sight. If E.T. is out there, we will make contact. What will happen when we do, and how should we respond?
Such questions, once the province of science fiction, are now being seriously considered in the oldest and one of the most prestigious scientific journals in the world—Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A—which devoted 17 scholarly articles to “The Detection of Extra-Terrestrial Life and the Consequences for Science and Society” in its February issue. The myth, for example, that society will collapse into fear or break out in pandemonium—or that scientists and politicians will engage in a conspiratorial cover-up—is belied by numerous responses. Two such examples were witnessed in December 2010, when NASA held a very public press conference to announce a possible new life-form based on arsenic, and in 1996, when scientists proclaimed that a Martian rock contained fossil evidence of ancient life on the Red Planet and President Bill Clinton made a statement on the topic. Budget-hungry space agencies such as NASA and private fund-raising organizations such as the SETI Institute will shout to the high heavens about anything extraterrestrial they find, from microbes to Martians. But should we shout back to the aliens?
According to Stephen Hawking, we should keep our mouths shut. “We only have to look at ourselves to see how intelligent life might develop into something we wouldn’t want to meet,” he explained in his 2010 Discovery Channel documentary series. “I imagine they might exist in massive ships, having used up all the resources from their home planet. Such advanced aliens would perhaps become nomads, looking to conquer and colonize whatever planets they can reach.” Given the history of encounters between earthly civilizations in which the more advanced enslave or destroy the less developed, Hawking concluded: “If aliens ever visit us, I think the outcome would be much as when Christopher Columbus first landed in America, which didn’t turn out very well for the Native Americans.”
I am skeptical. Although we can only represent the subject of an N of 1 trial, and our species does have an unenviable track record of first contact between civilizations, the data trends for the past half millennium are encouraging: colonialism is dead, slavery is dying, the percentage of populations that perish in wars has decreased, crime and violence are down, civil liberties are up, and, as we are witnessing in Egypt and other Arab countries, the desire for representative democracies is spreading, along with education, science and technology. These trends have made our civilization more inclusive and less exploitative. If we extrapolate that 500-year trend out for 5,000 or 500,000 years, we get a sense of what an ETI might be like.
In fact, any civilization capable of extensive space travel will have moved far beyond exploitative colonialism and unsustainable energy sources. Enslaving the natives and harvesting their resources may be profitable in the short term for terrestrial civilizations, but such a strategy would be unsustainable for the tens of thousands of years needed for interstellar space travel.
In this sense, thinking about extraterrestrial civilizations forces us to consider the nature and progress of our terrestrial civilization and offers hope that, when we do make contact, it will mean that at least one other intelligence managed to reach the level where harnessing new technologies displaces controlling fellow beings and where exploring space trumps conquering land. Ad astra!
Already a Digital subscriber? Sign-in Now
If your institution has site license access, enter here.
See what we're tweeting about
72 Comments
Add CommentWhat if the alien ship was controlled by a planet where their Hitler types had won the war...or a planet where Bin Laden rules the world! :)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe Myth of Stephen Hawking having the last word.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHard to theorize on what hasn't and may never occur- but we can draw some good guesses.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOne check for "good aliens". In order to reach "civilization" status any alien intelligence will most likely be social.
Here on earth- most intelligent animals are predators of some kind. It takes more brains to hunt than to run and hide. So, if the earth model works on other worlds- there is a good chance any species we encounter is a predator of some type- and thus a certain level of aggression can be expected. So chalk one up for the "bad alien".
It is highly unlikely the biology of our planet is suitable for any species we encounter- as likely their biology would be bad for us. So any "colonization" of our world is highly unplausible. I think the whole hunt for planets in a goldilocks zone is a big red-herring and very human-centric. Some people here on earth think life formed (or could have formed) initially within ice- yet we search the skies for planets with liquid water assuming any alien we see would use the same biochemistry as us... which is kind of naive.
They wouldn't need our planet for resources either- if they're capable of travel through space- there are plenty of places to get almost any resource you like without traveling great distances to attack another species.
As for "slave labour"- why would any species capable of space flight and conquering our planet need manual labour? Sounds like that would be a contradiction because they would be more significantly advanced than that.
The biggest threat we would have is if another species feared us- or feared what we could become. They might not be sentimental like us.
If they saw us as an aggressive species- perhaps our insistance on contact could be seen by another civilization as just that.
Any fear that we could surpass them or attack them could lead them to attack us.
I think a lot of that might be due to the fact there are far less physical resources to exploit. You wouldn't want to conquer a country that has been stripped clean of the majority of its natural resources knowing the only thing you would gain is population (and a population that would now hold a grudge).
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe absolute bottom line comes down to resources; natural, physical, and the like. Even if you exist simply only to exist you use up resources. So if you want to continue your existence, you need to seek out new resources. This is seen in every aspect of life for every living creature on this planet. We consider ourselves the "intelligent" species when we are the worst (or best you could say) at exploiting everything we touch. Why do we want to expand into the universe? Call it education, a greater knowledge, whatever... we want to find more resources plain and simple. Even the universe itself exists to use up whatever resources it can before fading out. Perhaps this is nature's way of keeping the peace? Make it physically impossible for extra-planetary species from getting together and duking it out.
This is most definitely a one sided theory but that is true for both arguments.
I think Michael is correct. Hawking is wrong. Civilization goes through various levels of advancement as outlined in Michio Kaku`s writings. Once you have reached a level of sophisticated technology this type of behaviour is non existant. Only a type 0 civilization like ourselves behaves like what Hawking outlines. To quote Kaku " there are plenty of uninhabited planets in the galaxy with more natural resources than Earth, so why would they need to plunder inhabited real estate?" Hawking is brilliant in his own field and M Theory (a theory devised with Edward Whitten) as an extension of String Theory, is beginning to look like the Theory of Everything. Rolf-Dieter Heuer, director general of the European Organisation for Nuclear Research said that the discovery of Higgs Boson will go to support a unified theory like M Theory and hopefully it will be found in 2012 . However, this is what happens when experts like Hawkings strays from their level of expertise. This article by Kaku, on levels of civilizations, outlines the thoughts of Freeman Dyson and Russian astrophysicist Nicolai Kardashev who created these levels. http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/1683
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAmerica is the only known "civilised" society in the universe to have used atomic weapons against civilian populations.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"Stranger from another planet welcome to our home, just strap on your guitar and we'll play some rock'n'roll" - The Stranglers.
They must be evil! They skulk around at night, are into cattle rustling and get all the po white trash teenagers pregnant with babies that look suspiciously like the football coach.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs fine a vintage of Michael Shermer moonshine as I have ever sampled.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFor one thing, we need to fact-check all his rah-rah Liberal propaganda that every day, in every way, everything is getting better and better. The Twentieth Century was a bloodbath, thanks almost entirely to the romping and stomping of evil atheist lefty communists whose plan for bringing about paradise happened to involve eliminating hundreds of millions of their fellow countrymen. For another thing, the slight downtick in crime statistics over the past decade or so (usually not statistically significant) pales in comparison to the deplorable outpouring of evil begun fifty years ago.
More importantly, I am appalled by a so-called skeptic writing so gushingly about our little green friends. Praying to the aliens, Mr. Shermer?
But perhaps Mr. Shermer has decided to hang up his "Skeptic's Skeptic" spurs and instead declare for scientism and the hope of UFO deliverance. A little Heaven's Gate, anyone?
Now, where did I leave those nickels?
Just one depressing point to add: It's sadly not true that slavery is dying. In fact, there are more slaves on the planet now than ever before. One thing that's changed is the price. So in today's dollars, a healthy African could be sold for about $40,000 before the US civil war. In contrast, slaves today are traded for less than a twentieth of that price.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thislump1:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_the_United_States#Modern_instances: "In 2002, the U.S. Department of State repeated an earlier CIA estimate that each year, about 50,000 women and children are brought against their will to the United States for sexual exploitation. Former Secretary of State Colin Powell said that 'Here and abroad, the victims of trafficking toil under inhuman conditions – in brothels, sweatshops, fields and even in private homes.'"
I write with total candor and honesty that I weep with you over the plight of these poor and wretched modern-day victims of slavery. I wish that we could get our government interested in this aspect of the "immigration" debate!
Ever hear of the long rumored Project Blue Beam plan? Advanced Tesla Technology creates 3-D holographic imagery, projecting alien ships and/or the "return" of religious deities onto the sky, all as part of a plan to establish a New World Order. Wonder how many people would fall for that?!?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAt least its safe to say we are in no danger of any alien invasion. Even if we eventually find any, i dont think they would be as inteligent as we are.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisLife, by its nature, reproduces and spreads. In fact, we call a species successful by how widely it has spread. So it seems inevitable that there would be life somewhere that is so "successful" that it attempts to take over other planets' most important resource: real estate.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAre you thinking aliens will be human like? With all the different species on our rock and all those past who didn't make it, I give it a long shot at aliens being insect-like, long before being humanoid. Also, the first question I would ask them is what they eat! If ants can improvise rafts, tools, air conditioning, storage facilities, weather control, and other goodies, will the space invaders be red or black? SMILE, YOUR FANGS ARE SHOWING.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhile you might argue that it's inevitable for an entire technologically advanced civilization to evolve beyond our own petty and vicious behaviors, you can make no such generalizations about individuals or small groups.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAny alien civilization that is capable of interstellar travel will of necessity have a level of technology that would give "throwbacks" enough power to enslave or destroy mankind, given our relatively primitive state of development.
For example, we would be completely at the mercy of a group of individuals who had enough technology only slightly more advanced than our own, who could build a mass drivers on the moon that lobbed big rocks at our cities with devastating force.
So, yeah, I'll agree that we don't need to hide from the United Federation of Planets. But we should be careful not to come to the attention of interstellar muggers and pirates until such time as we are able to defend ourselves.
Hawking and Shermer - two complete and utter idiots always trying to reinvent existance to their own liking. They would be better off to just give it up and join the "science by consensus" band of fools.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNo need for any debate, current immigration laws are both sound and fair. They need only be enforced.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMoot.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAstronomical bodies are separated by such unimaginably vast distances that separately evolving life forms are effectively proscribed from ever coming into contact - speed of light and all that stuff.
Just sayin'...
I wouldn't worry about it because If we do detect an alien civilization, we will probably never meet them due to the great distances between transmitter and receiver. They will wonder about us as we wonder about them.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAre all humans good? Are all humans bad? There is the theory of uneven development that states that not all things evolve at the same pace and under the same historic and material conditions. I believe that not "alien" species are space capable civilizations. To an "alien" looking at our galaxy from a distant galaxy, would we not be alien? We are all aliens. We wage war against each other for the things 20,000 years ago we shared communally, breaking bread from the common table. Where will humanity be 20.000 years from now? We use our sordid history as the template for the "resource hungry" aliens looking to super exploit the galaxy for its own narrow minded needs. But! How much natural resources are there in the average asteroid belt, a place we have yet to send a human or probe to. Is the majority of metals, and other resources only found on planets? Do we not learn from our mistakes? Are we not now learning that mismanagement of our natural resources has dire consequences for us as a species? Should we go forth shrouded in fear, or should we go boldly into the night?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWho can we be a threat to? Let me get on my tricycle and head out to meet our nearest neighbor. It will take me thirty years to get out of the solar system, and at this rate it will be the next 500 years till we have the technological where-with-all to travel to the nearest star. So who are we a threat to? OURSELVES.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisJP Morgan said: "a child of twelve should word twelve hours a day". I feel the plight of the super oppressed around the world, but he is also helping to keep many countries around the world impoverished by taking the brightest minds from these countries, they are not able to develop creating a higher level of poverty; just to enhance the development of us. Is the question really about immigration, or is it really about world development? Why are we not getting those bright minds that are already here to fill that vacuum of innovation in math, science and technology.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWe rise as a species, or we fall as a species. Then we can truely go forth into the frontier as one. One giant step for mankind. Then we can be that advanced alien civilization.
I agree that a sufficiently advanced civilization will be pro-life and be far more interested in information, than infestation. High intelligence itself, minimizes criminal tendencies as evidenced by louis Termans longitudinal studies of Gifted Children that covered a 60 year period. They had less suicides, less jail sentences and even better physical attributes than the norm..destroying stereotypes. Hawking was stereotyping aliens, based on our limited view. I believe that we will find that they have already been here.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWith all respect it is time to stand up not to shut up.Before labeling aliens as evil we should take a closer deeper look in the mirror at us.After this short close encounter with a mirror we might shut up and start thinking again.Many alien civilization might be already here waiting for as to wake up and see them.We cannot burn again in the flames of ignorance Giordano Bruno for his immortal message about life in universe.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThank you.
What if interstellar space travel didn't take so long?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs noted, a sampling of 1 is not much to base speculations on and I think that Shermer's assumptions are just as shaky as Hawking's.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHawking's model is based on our experiences with cultural invasion. Shermer's is predicated on how much progress we've made to date.
Neither considers the possibility that whom-or-whatever shows up on our doorstep might not be representatives of their society. Perhaps what we encounter will be renegades, stopping by to fill up their larder.
Or maybe it's a day trip by residents of a galactic insane asylum who've taken over the bus. Or an interstellar con-being running a scam on us.
Or, ironically, maybe they will be as altruistic and benevolent as we'd like to believe and it will be our own suspicious nature that derails the relationship.
I think the only proper course of action is to continue looking and to advance cautiously, understanding that the real possibilities remain wide open.
It certainly is reasonable to assume that an advanced space-faring civilization has long since left colonialism and slavery behind but human-style democracy (collective self-determination, if you will) may not be the rule. Humans have long sought communal living as decribed by Karl Marx - Marxism (as opposed to communism). A concept which has not been successful on a large scale.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhile capitalism has been the driving force for human technological success for the last two centuries, that is not a long period of time - and capitalism leaves many people behind to the benefit of the few.
Lastly, the article's assumption that interstellar travel for an advanced civilization will always be governed by sub-light-speed technologies is naive, at best.
100 years ago, the speed of sound was thought to be insurmountable for human survival. Human ingenuity has made "the impossible" a reality for thousands of years and there is no reasn the think that will change.
Of course, human ingenuity is only a piece of the puzzle:
Without opposable thumbs, none of this would have ever been possible. Had forests not given way to savannahs, there would have been no grazing animals for humans to hunt. Without high protein food sources, the human brain would not have had the opportunity to develop that ingenuity.
All that said, we cannot assume that ETI is necessarily technological, or even necessarily taking on a humanoid form. If they are not technological, we may never know they exist.
If drake is right though - and space-faring is an inevitable outcome of evolution, then the Fermi Paradox comes into play and we have to ask ourselves "If we are not alone in the Milky Way, where in the hell are they?" After all, human civilization is 5,000 years old and human space-faring is in its infancy.
If it takes every civilization 5,000 years to become space-faring, it would take a mere 50 million years for the first such civilization to populate the Milky Way.
Seeing as how the galaxy is 10 billion years old, and knowing that that universe is full of organic compounds and knowing that once life takes hold, it persists, the Milky Way should be chock full of civilizations far in advance of ourselves.
Considering the lack of evidence for ETI, we should be considering the possiblity that we are the first space-faring civilization to arise in the Milky Way - but not necessarily the last!
While it might be naive to assume a similar biochiemstry for ET, organic compounds (as we know them) have been detected throughout the Milky Way, suggesting that the underlying dependence upon liquid water - as a univeral solvent - is not an unreasonable place to place to start our search for (not necessarily intelligent) ET.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAs for the goldilocks zone itself - we may have to re-examine what that means. Some of the moons of Jupiter and Saturn are suspected to have sub-surface oceans and tidal forces in those systems may introduce enough energy into those moons for ET to have developed - perhaps even non-technological intelligence.
One more point - regarding taking natural resources from a conquered planet (inhabited by intelligence or not).
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIn the end, the more mineral rich planets will be those where life (some kind of life) has arisen.
Most likely though, for a truly advanced civilization, the most valuable resource will be solar energy. The star itself will prove to be the most valuable natural resource in any system.
An Asturias based excentric says that there are four races of aliens living among us. Some people caliming having contact with aliens affirm that some of them warn that others have no good intentions. Speaking about the horror of a Hitler or a Ben Laden ruling the world sounds good, but these fellows didn't act just by the pleasure of violence. Some features of the world they lived in, features they felt were oppressive were among the causes of their acts, and they had and continue having some supporters. What about if the unknown power that killed the Kennedys and caused several economical crisis leading to generalized poverty ruled the world ? Be wise, request the impossible.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf you follow the logic of development of sentient intelligent beings proposed here, if there are any ET's out there, they most likely have known we are here for millions of years.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSo why haven't they contacted us? Do you really have to ask?
Also Hawking is a joke as far as I'm concerned so it doesn't take alot to convince me he is wrong about something.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSince today is "Judgement day" (missed that one Dr. Shermer?), I'll try to be nice. Hawking is very smart, at least this time. He knows that, whether they are evil or good, we only get one chance to be wrong! Ridiculing this position as a "Myth" is a logical fallacy called "argument from ignorance: what we don't know, must be true.". For example, Shermer implies "They must be good because we have no reason to believe otherwise." He gets only one chance to be wrong. If it's true that there are lots of advanced races out there, should we believe that none of them are malevolent? That requires Shermer to be 100% correct for all cases. Hawking only needs one case to prove his point and bye-bye humanity. What happened to Dr. Shermer's baloney detector?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEven well-intentioned alien influence can harm us. Suppose they merely tell us how to communicate instantly via entanglement physics, or some such technology. Then they need not even visit us to do damage. We can't even control nuke technology! How do they know that we'll use their knowledge properly? We could just evaporate ourselves, as the aliens utter a quiet "Oops.". If you give a caveman a gun, who's to stop him from accidentally pointing it at himself? In fact, an alien race that's xenophobic might actually give us the wrong design on purpose. They might consider our demise a case of "cleaning up the neighborhood for a better universe and their continued survival."
Well, since today is the end of the world, I tried to play nice. But why are we wasting time with Shermer's nonsense when we have lots of other perfectly good nonsense to humor us right up to the last second?
The author makes the fatal assumption that space travel is a result of advanced intelligence. However, the insect world is filled with classic examples of advanced technologies (radar) and super-structures (beehives) to show the possibility that "organic" lifeforms formed with a host of materials we now consider inorganic (silicon) or do not even know exist, could traverse space like extra-terrestrial insect colonies. Just as soldier ants are invasive, resource consuming lifeforms could be attracted to our SETI signals like insects are attracted to a bonfire on a hill over a dense jungle. Underwater species of aquatic life are perhaps analogous as well, as all species traversing the ocean of spacetime are not likely invasive (although they could inadvertently cause damage to our planet as they move through our space).
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBack to the species, there is no point for inteligent species to meet other species, at most its enough to
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisbe aware that there is other inteligent species but no need of contact.
Whats the point for you to go to new york to see if theres a person there when u know for sure from tv...
And if u go to new york to meet a person what you will find? you will find a persont that is smarter than
you or not, richer than you or not, phisicaly stronger than you or not, full nanotechonologized person
that can fly or teleport? or read your mind or predict your toughts than you or not... Whats the point it
will still be a person or entity... Inteligence is a universal thing thats goes one way to do only one
thing, i am not telling u thats secret!
Take another cool example... Intelgence does not love traveling at least not by foot, stupidity is the
only one that travels, think primates why people build farms and cultivate, to stop wasting energy on
travelings... The thing is to build a source not runing for a source or to go search for it....
Oh i forghot that guy from new york, yea it may kill you or love you depends on how beautyful it sees
you... or ignore u, or teach you his teachings for you to become the same thing as he is and to go in to
the same place or direction...
Humans should colonyse space not planets or not only planets, just for fun and safety!
Humans should have big guns and big ships and infinite big numbers just in case...
;)
The concept of "resources gatherer" for a species that can travel vast distances in short or even long
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thistime is (stupid?)!!
The inteligence, inteligence as we know it and perceive may be one thing but inteligence is in fact a
field just like mathematics, very precise, acurate, and the same for everyone and everything, like 2+2=4,
inteligence will be the same for any species, basic rules requierd for inteligence will aplly to any
species, ex: lets put 2 computers on a table, one old and one new, the only problem between them will be
the comunnication and synchronization cuz of the software and hardwire limitations but the basic functions
and rulles will be the same, in the end computers will still be computers, like inteligent species will
remain in the end inteligent species, some more evolved than others but still a species at the end of the
day, the inteligence has its own limitations in my opinion... my own for sure ;p, I tink something that is
above inteligence must be and must act in all ways of time in past present and future in the same time,
must be in the same places must exeed time and space and distance, transcedental systems... must go in to
some crazye stuff for us at the moment, like quantum mekanics and others...
First of all lets go from the scenario of the actual reality that we know and are aware if it, i mean from the things that we know or tink we know... Cuz may be we miss something important in the proccess and something doesn't add up, in phisycs or in some other fields of science or reality...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe concept of "resources gatherer" for a species that can travel vast distances in short or even long time is (stupid?)!!
The inteligence, inteligence as we know it and perceive may be one thing but inteligence is in fact a field just like mathematics, very precise, acurate, and the same for everyone and everything, like 2+2=4, inteligence will be the same for any species, basic rules requierd for inteligence will aplly to any species, ex: lets put 2 computers on a table, one old and one new, the only problem between them will be the comunnication and synchronization cuz of the software and hardwire limitations but the basic functions and rulles will be the same, in the end computers will still be computers, like inteligent species will remain in the end inteligent species, some more evolved than others but still a species at the end of the day, the inteligence has its own limitations in my opinion... my own for sure ;p, I tink something that is above inteligence must be and must act in all ways of time in past present and future in the same time, must be in the same places must exeed time and space and distance, transcedental systems... must go in to some crazye stuff for us at the moment, like quantum mekanics and others...
Back to the species, there is no point for inteligent species to meet other species, at most its enough to be aware that there is other inteligent species but no need of contact.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhats the point for you to go to new york to see if theres a person there when u know for sure from tv... And if u go to new york to meet a person what you will find? you will find a persont that is smarter than you or not, richer than you or not, phisicaly stronger than you or not, full nanotechonologized person that can fly or teleport? or read your mind or predict your toughts than you or not... Whats the point it will still be a person or entity... Inteligence is a universal thing thats goes one way to do only one thing, i am not telling u thats secret!
Take another cool example... Intelgence does not love traveling at least not by foot, stupidity is the only one that travels, think primates why people build farms and cultivate, to stop wasting energy on travelings... The thing is to build a source not runing for a source or to go search for it....
Oh i forghot that guy from new york, yea it may kill you or love you depends on how beautyful it sees you... or ignore u, or teach you his teachings for you to become the same thing as he is and to go in to the same place or direction...
Humans should colonyse space not planets or not only planets, just for fun and safety!
Humans should have big guns and big ships and infinite big numbers just in case...
;)
sry for double posting but i found no edit option :))
and btw i hope SETI its not only a bussines or a ethernal well of money for someone... i hope they are realy searching for ET cuz when and if they will ever found ET we will be than in a armsrace that i personaly love, probably we will run for research, technology, weapons and all of our efforts will more concentrate :)) we must find them before they fund us at least we must know as soon as possible... so SETI should run a full capacity :))
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOf course any civilization with the wherewithal to haul its ass across interstellar distances would have found us a very long time ago, so worrying about whether or not to answer a message (which we would be highly unlikely to get in the first place unless it was deliberately aimed at us in a way that we could receive and understand) is a bit silly. I do like Michio Kaku's article on the subject.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEXISTENCE OF HUMAN SPECIES ON THE EARTH FOR FEW THOUSAND YEARS HAVE LED US TO KNOW SO MUCH ABOUT THE GALAXY AND THE UNIVERSE SO TO QUESTION THE CO-EXITENCE OF ANOTHER BEING BEYOND THE EARTH'S ATMOSPHERE WOULD BE AMBIGUOUS.BUT AS RIGHTLY SAID BY MR. HAWKING OUR QUEST MAY LEAD US SOMETHING WE ARE NOT CAPABLE OF FACING SO SHOULD WE STOP OUR RESEARCH WOULD VARY FROM INDIVISUAL TO INDIVISUAL BUT ONE THING IS SURE THIS POSSIBILITY THOUGH MEAGRE CANNOT BE BE DENIED AND ITS QUITE PLAUSIBLE THAT WE MAY END UP FINDING SOMETHING THAT MAY END THIS DEBATE.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf I were an alien, I'll simply don't show or leave evidence of my existence. In connection with this, there are many funny things, for example www.stopabductions.com .
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe subject has no more value than any other flirting conversation theme.
It is my understanding that all creatures are a product of nature and nurture. We can barely understand the nature of the world we live. Anyone have a decent explanation for dark matter or dark energy? So how can we hope to know, let alone understand, the nature of the nurturing these creatures have gone through? I say we heed Mr. Hawking's words, until we can pull our pants up by ourselves, and avoid getting rammed by whatever creature may lurk out there. The best we have to hope for is they may consider us too insignificant to bother with---until we begin venturing beyond our solar system. Then, we may find the true nature of the beast and whether it was properly suckled, when it was young. Also, you must consider the distruption something like that would have on humanity. Whether they be good or evil, something so foreign would have a highly disruptive influence on our development as a species.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDear Mr. Shermer;
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI somewhat agree with you about the interaction we would have with ET, should they ever visit us:
First of all, I doubt they would even bother with us. The maturity of our civilization is the main issue.
We still are a bunch of TRIBES, who settle our differences with war or other violent means. Only a cohesive and
mature civilization would be worth talking to.
Secondly, if they wanted to observe us, it would be simple to send an AI in the form of sophisticated sensors
in orbit, or for more direct interaction, a replicant of a large animal or even a human being, Or course now that
we have the Internet, they could Google us to their hearts content. So there is no need for them to flit about
in flying saucers.
Third, if they wanted to settle in a remote star system, they would probably send DNA Information to a remote station that
could reconstruct fertilized eggs. This would of course require an artificial placenta on the receiving end,
and "trainer" replicants to nurture and educate the newborn infants. It is highly doubtful they would send a mature being
over a trip lasting tens of thousands of years.
It's possible that they could have developed a stasis field that would allow a mature being to survive such a long trip, but that would also
require protection from radiation. Even within our own solar system, a trip to the outer planets would involve a fatal dose of
radiation to humans. We now use AI and robotics for planetary exploration, since it is much cheaper and more practical. 25-30 years in the future, our probes would
have AI that exceeds human decision-making capacity, so why wouldn't an ET civilization?
Regarding mr. Poppa's reply (item #44):
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIn previous centuries, we tried to "educate" primitive civilizations by using missionaries, and ended up destroying their culture. Nowadays we hopefully observe them and leave them alone. I assume that a superior interstellar civilization would treat us in a likewise manner.
This is called the "zoo" hypotheses.
When we listen for their signals, we are assuming that they will use the same transmission syatem that we have. However, consider that we are rapidly replacing on-the-air radio and TV with Internet and cable transmissions. The military uses "spread spectrum" communication which is impossible to distinguish from background noise.
An advanced civilization would likey use highly sophisticated forms of communication which we have not learned to detect.
Folks:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhatever the virtues or vices of supposed aliens, it is remarkably unlikely that we will find them through SETI. Mr. Shermer does a disservice to the title of his column by accepting uncritically the ridiculous idea that, because we are looking really hard, there must be someone using the same radio technology we use trying to talk to us.
Even if we believe that the technology we've used for less than two centuries will have a lifetime of millions of years (remember there's absolutely no reason why an alien society would have started at exactly the same time we did), there's no reason to assume its use will be comprehensible to us. Claude Shannon showed that the most efficient communications in any channel is noise-like. Efficient interstellar communications would be indistinguishable from the background if you don't know what to look for, and we don't.
And that's making the assumption, spectacularly unwarranted from our own experience, that this technology will be used for a substantial time in a long-lived technological society. All of our wireless communications systems would be completely invisible to the most sophisticated scientists of our ancestor societies from only a couple of centuries ago. It is ludicrous to think that progress must magically stop with what we know how today. The fact that we don't know what the next approach will be simply expresses our ignorance.
Since we don't know that there are any other societies, and we don't know anything about them, it can't be excluded that there might be one sending us comprehensible radio signals that you have to look for, but it is absurd to pretend any confidence in the success of such an enterprise. SETI is a silly product of limited imagination, like the joke about looking for your missing keys under a lamp post because the light is better there. This doesn't mean that the technology developed in the pursuit is useless -- it may very well find earthbound applications no one today envisions, but it ain't gonna' find aliens, good or ill.
Hi Daniel and others;
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWell, first of all, there are about:
300,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 star systems in the known universe, according to the latest estimates. We also think there are about 400,000,000,000 in our galaxy. So thinking we are the ONLY civilization is a really stupid assumption. Let's assume that only one in a million star systems has a civilization. Drop 6 zeros from those numbers above, and what do you get?
The real question is: Are they close enough to us to have
a conversation?
As far as detecting them, they still might use something like radar, which is not a form of communication, but would still be detectable. So if we did detect that, it would at least confirm that we're not alone.
They might even have FTL communication. Einstein did NOT prove that you can't transmit information faster than light, only matter. Unfortunately, we don't yet know how to do that.
Xingo writes that the USA was the only country to use Atomic weapon against civilians.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhen Truman found out that the Japanese exploded a small German supplied Atom bomb in January or February 1945 in Korea killing many people there, he did not want to take a chance.
After capturing the eight German Atom Bombs at Remagen. he decided to use them before Japan might explode another one.
Our country is not even free, corporations control our supreme court, we cannot even list food as Genetically Engineered, jobs are sent to other lands to make the workers powerless, for instance Hoover sent factories to China when wages were twenty dollars an hour at the factory here, brought back the Jobs for minimum wages who can live on minimum wages now, they are lower than when Nixon froze the wages and let the prices go, corporations have full control of West Virginia, destroying the streams by destroying Mountain Tops to get coal with workers imported from other parts of the nation, the valuing of the environment and labor as less important than profit is the Evil, if the Aliens are as Evil expect more of the same!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIn the Myth of Evil Aliens, Michael Shermer claimed that:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this" Contact will probably come sooner rather than later because of Moore's Law (proposed by Intel's co-founder Gordon E. Moore), which posits a doubling of computing power every one to two years. It turns out that this exponential growth curve applies to most HUMAN technologies, including the search for ETI (SETI):"
Stripped of Shemer's irrelevant and unbased assumptions, this Shermer skeptic is sure that we and our feeble arttempts at contact will determine when contact will occure because the Aliens will wait unaware of us and our situation until our "laws" relating to the speed of development of our technologies enables us to contact the evil and/or benign aliens.
Included in Shermer's myopic vision is the assumption that there has been no contact as yet.
Such an assumption chooses to be certain that 6o some years of reported human observations did not really happen, all the way rom Betty and BarnEY Hill to any number of observations of posibly non-human spacecraft or visual manifestations (possibly projected images to let us know we are not alone and are invading already ocupied space!
Of course it is easy to make such assumptions on principle (the principle of being a skeptik of all claims for which one has not had personal perceptions, insead of rational investigations! That certainly is easier than empirical investigations and estimates of probabilities.
On the other hand: if the aliens have survived and developed technologies for unknown eons, an infinity of possibilities, those might suggest themselves to investigation! Those of us who choose investigation and study of all aspect of possible interaction of our "civilization" with a supposibly extraterrestrial one, have a lot of explINING TODO!
asked: "What if the alien ship was controlled by a planet where their Hitler types had won the war...or a planet where Bin Laden rules the world! :)" Sadly: both conjectures are true. There are many ways to conquor a culture, mainly, to make them like the victor just to fightn the force that becomes victorious. The alien victors have been on this earth practicing to make us intowhat they want us to b for 80,000 years in salt dome cavern left over fromthe past.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHumans in even the most advanced and progressive countries do not think twice about sacrificing any and every kind of living creature for food and other uses, or to move creatures out of the way for human settlement, and this is not a trend likely to change anytime soon.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThus, Mr. Shermer's logic that because humans are becoming less exploitative so that aliens will also not be aggressive is not internally consistent with facts about humans. He also has no facts about aliens so that making deductive remarks about hypothetical and unknown aliens is not valid at this time.
Even if we give him the benefit of the doubt that most aliens will come in peace, I think it makes sense that if there are many other alien races out there, not every intelligent alien can possibly have the same kind and well-mannered behavior.
Didn't he watch Star Trek?
David N'Gog imagines: "most intelligent animals are predators of some kind.": David, do you mean like porpoises as oppossed to sharks? David clarifie3d: "It takes more brains to hunt than to run and hide. So, if the earth model works on other worlds- there is a good chance any species we encounter is a predator of some type- and thus a certain level of aggression can be expected." Oh, that is comforting?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI think not. There is no direct correlation between any abstract form of behavior (like "intelligent" and character (like "cooperative or helpful. "Intelligence does not dictate" peaceful any more than it does helpful or mean!
David M'Gog elucidated:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"In order to reach 'civilization' status any alien intelligence will most likely be social."
Oh David,you mean like STAR Trek's mythical "Bork"(or whatever it was) who go through the galaxies destroying other self-atyled "civilizations?
I am assuming that since our planet has been supporting life as we know it for more than 2 billion years, it is very likely that we have been visited before, probably dozens or even hundreds of times.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSo if they wanted to exploit us, they would have already DONE so, rather than waiting around until we have a developed technology.
A star-faring civilization would have long ago learned to solve their problems by peaceful means, rather than using force. Interstellar "bad guys" like on Star Trek is good fodder for TV viewing, but it doesn't fit the real world.
Unfortunately, until we talk to them, we don't really know their motivations. And as I said before, they may not even WANT to talk to us.
When you are walking through the park, do you stop and say: "Hello Mr. Ant, how's your nest?" Or, "Hello Mr. Squirrel - Gee, you look SO cute with that nut in your mouth!"
Reply to #49 (Ennui)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this1) The Germans never HAD an atomic weapon. There was a commando raid in Sweden during WW II where we destroyed a research facility where they were making "heavy water" or deteurium oxide. That was portrayed in a movie starring Richard Widmark, but I can't think of its title - "Heroes of Telemark" perhaps?
2) They certainly would never have given anything to the Japanese. They hated the Japs as much as we did.
David N'Gog: said:In order to reach "civilization" status any alien intelligence will most likely be social"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSavid, Do you mean like ants?
David N' Gog said:"It takes more brains to hunt than to run and hide." May I remind you David that it takes fr more brains to learn the cooperate either in hunting or any other complex endeavor!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDavid N' og said: The biggest threat we would have is if another species feared us- or feared what we could become.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhich is what happened: 11 millennia ago an early industrial civilizaton in the Berring Valey had developed around the Farting Sea that bordered the gaseous fisures around the volcanoes of the ring of fire. That human civilization started to industrialize with ceramic turbines run by that gas. But once they had learned to industrialize on the basis of turbine generated power, they turned to hydro power by daming up spaces to raise what has become the Bering Sea ubtil it was capable of creating hydro power. Finally people started daming up the Bering landbridge to raise the sea level of the Arctic Ocean a mile higher than it had been during the ice ages.
However, the aliens' colonies at the two ends of St. Lawrence and the Faroe Islands (between Iceland and the (now) British Isles, in the valley of Middle Earth, in the and several places in theAtlantic and Pacific Oceans were endangered by potential flooding all over the northern hemisphere. So they had warned the humans to stop raising that Arctic Sea level a millennia before they spotted the comet that was to explode right over the Arctic Ocean, creating earth quAKES AND TSUNAMI FLOODS OVER MOST OF THE NORTHERN HEMISPHERES (EASTERN AND WESTERN)CREATING MANY GIANT LAKES (MOSTLY TEMPORARY) INSIDE aEIA AND nORTH America plus the Bering and Mediterranian Seas.
So the aliens tried hard to provide a moral education (in the guise of what we call "ANGELS" GETTING PEOPLE TO BELIEVE in their God and not be so self-destructive,
Finally, soon after humans deleveloped nuclear power, between July1947 and July1952, they grabbed our attention (at Roswell and Waashington DC to lay down the law that we must stay out of space and stop developing nuclear weapons, etc:
Michael Shirmer said: Hawking concluded: “If aliens ever visit us, I think the outcome would be much as when Christopher Columbus first landed in America, which didn’t turn out very well for the Native Americans.”
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHAWKINGS HAS APPARENTLY BEEN TOLD OF THE SIX White Sands medics who died within 24 hours of exposure to toxins from the crashed and killed aliens' bodies or spaCECRAFT ENVIROMENT. On the other hand, the live alien we kept for over five years never seems to have infected our captors befor it find a way to take apart a radio and "phoned home"
Michael Shermer:This would not post my last comment because it claimed I was not a human! Since when does half-breed not suffice? Michael Shermer also claimed:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"Here on earth- most intelligent animals are predators of some kind. I serioudly doubt that on the basis of experience with many genus and species!
Dhermer tries to explain his unobservable conclsion by saying:
"It takes more brains to hunt than to run and hide."
But we know that inteligent cooperation works far better in most situations than predation. Still, Shermer believes that: "if the earth model works on other worlds- there is a good chance any species we encounter is a predator of some type- and thus a certain level of aggression can be expected.
But since it doesn't even seem to work on our old "Terra Firma" we have no reason to think it would work among aliens! Here is hoping Scientific America wont discriminate against this Scientific half AQmerican! and posts it!
Michael Shermer thinks "It is highly unlikely the biology of our planet is suitable for any species we encounter- So any "colonization" of our world is highly unplausible.":
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI suspect that any species existing in space has learned to provide its own adequate living conditions
Michael Shermer claimed:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"our species does have an unenviable track record of first contact between civilizations,
Au conTrAR:the data trends for the past half millennium are encouraging:wHEN WE ACCIDENTALLY SHOT THE LIVE ALIEN DOWN BY OUR MAGNETIC LAZER AS WE WERE TRYING TO DISRUPT A TEST BOMBER'S NAVIGATION AND OTHER ELECTRONICS, WE SAVED IT FROM sUCCORO'S HEAT FIRST AT WHITE sANDS AND THEN IN aIRCONDITIONED COMFORT AT wRIGHT pATTERSON AFTER BRINGING bISHOP sHEEN TO nEW mEXICO TO DEBRIEF THE BEING FROM THE POINT OF OUR RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY(KNOWING IT WAS ONE OF WHAT WERE CALLED "angels" in Biblical times. After HST took the ETs advice to change his opposition to letting the Jews displace the Palestinians, We provided good care of the e.t. until we let it "escape" with the message that we could be cooperative, which led the EBEs to trust us enough to beam down minto the Oval Office in early July of 1952 to negotiate the cessation of nuclear testing and stock piling to stop them from destroying us!
ianlib quotes Kaku that: " there are plenty of uninhabited planets in the galaxy with more natural resources than Earth, so why would they need to plunder inhabited real estate?"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWe have no way to know what resources another genus and species may require; maybe arsenic" or lithium? Besides, not only have we proceeded to inhabit a world where the EBEs have existed for 80,000 years and proceeded to wipe out their primary original habitations in the Valley of Middle eARTH and Atlantis as well as the Faroes, the Bahamas, BY Japan and the Bering Valley because we didn't know what was and was not inhabited by which beings. Even in the early 1950 our nuclear testing was greatly endangering the habitations of EBEs in the Salt domes under the seas. Things are not obvious expecially to uninquisitive species whose fear makes them not to really learn what we are really doing!
Why bother? It would be the last time I or anyone else would see my comment. I can't find ones I posted.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf the ETs wanted mineral resources, it would be much easier to mine the asteroid belt, or the Oort cloud.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe reason: A low-G environment. You don't have to deal with a gravitational field when transporting raw materials.
Look what it costs us to move anything just from Earth to low earth orbit.
Another reason: They can take whatever they want, and we'd never know about it.
I think back to Carl Sagan's Cosmos series, where he discusses the idea of aliens coming to our planet. As I recall, his opinion was something like this: Why would a highly evolved civilzation from light years away, with billions of target planets to choose from, select Earth to visit?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhether we are visited or not, it seems highly unlikely to happen anytime soon if you accept Sagan's opinion.
OK. You got us all wrong!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this1) Having been here for quite sometime, lets review the findings shall we?
2) Upon previous visits, we were elevated to pseudo- gods. So try again in a few hundred years.
3) Now we are burned at the stake for being hieritics when we tried to enlighten you to basic sciences. yet even further study reveals a penchant toward your own extinction (and those around as well). Our few scientist left here were begging to come home or were commiting suicide so as not to "spill the beans".
4) Since so many previous expeditions led to disaster, it was deemed that ONLY a few courageous well prepared souls would be allowed to monitor things around here for awhile. You are after all an interesting species of constantly suprising duality.
5) You pose no threat to us as an intelligent lifeform, yet.. we seem to always "get it wrong" when it comes to peaceful pursuits when interacting with you. Perplexing.
6) Try as we may to learn when the best time might be to announce ourselves, you ponder with fear, indignation, ignorance, hostility and that Spielburg guy.
7) Relax.. for much like the childern that you are,.. we understand "s*** happens". So we adopted the protocol that a hands off approach is best. But just in case you do destroy yourselves, we've taken the protective measure of collecting a few of your citizenry to re-populate the place after a massive clean up. Educating them has proven just as difficult as our long term explorations.
In closing, They are coming along just fine and are doing a great job helping us to understand you. Many are those very teams here now of their own free will.
Just quit taking yourselves so seriously. Can't we all just get along?
This is awful and lazy analysis by Michael Shermer, who is supposed to be a leader in the effort to counteract the negative impacts this type of pseudoscience, instead of perpetrating it for cheap page views.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSimply holding up an opinion of someone famous and saying, "I am skeptical" does not make for good skepticism. Especially when Hawking's original point was to be skeptical of so many others' doe-eyed view of aliens likely being super-advanced and friendly.
The reality of life as we know it is nearly every species on our planet is in a constant struggle for resources. Violent conflict is a huge part of our culture right now.
Why it is probable or even reasonable to think that once we develop space travel and start to colonize other planets that we will stop struggling with each other for resources? Or that a few technological breakthroughs that enable great speeds will suddenly turn us into pacifists?
As we spread through the galaxy it is entirely reasonable to think that we would head out with good intentions. What happens when we learn that billions of humans on a future colony are in mortal danger unless we harvest the core of a nearby planet?
In the jungles of Earth, many animals hide or camouflage themselves for a reason -- doing otherwise means a quick death. It is entirely reasonable to wonder whether the same holds true in the jungle of space, where things may seem quiet because hugely advanced species have a policy of extinguishing potential competition the moment they find it.
All in all, given the stakes at risk, and the lack of data, I'm disappointed that Shermer would make such an argument.
There are a huge number of scenarios in which
i think Stephen hawking is wrong too,in what way will they(advanced aliens) raid earth off it's resources??
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisi don't think they would have run their huge spaceships with fossil fuels or bio-fuels or other primitive fuels we use ,if they were able travel such distances.
For a species to exist entirely on a spaceship then they would be perfectly self sustaining,when it comes to resources,they may depend on other stars for energy.
There are stars bigger and more massive than our sun for them to fill there batteries,or they may have their own artificial star to power their spaceships.
I like most of Shermer's stuff, but this is one of his dumbest!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHe refers to less exploitative trends among humans. Surely a thinking person would realize that the last century and this one have brought us two world wars,Korea,Vietnam,the Gulf War,Iraq, and Afghanistan.
We are not less violent, we are getting better at it (which may be the way of evolution).
The he states:"In fact any civilization capable of extensive space travel will have moved far beyond exploitative colonialism and unsustainable energy sources...that such a stratagem would be unsustainable for the tens of thousands of years needed for interstellar space travel.
On the later statement, I think the guy has gone off his meds. We don't know in the slightest what might drive alien cultures. And the real laughing point here is the statement about tens of thousands of years. Aliens so advanced might arive in the blink of an eye, harvest what they want and move on, or back in the blink of an eye.
Floyd H.
I think as we have grown intelligent and started searching for ETI then Hawkins-like thought should not be given much importance! The question that I am asking is, why are we searching for ETI ? Answer to this question will indicate one of the options that forced the ETI people starting a search for us ! Civilization grows up in all the ways... and stability is reached through many chaotic paths, but the one will be chosen which has the capability to survive long.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWe fought for food with each other within our species.
We failed then we realized organization is necessary.
Organizations failed because of mistrusts, we grew trust. We wanted happiness but to sustain that we needed sacrifices! With time everyone grows aware and prepared and barbarian Govts breaks down!
Along this long journey we have learnt that civilization can grow wealthy through violence and forced slavery and all those things but can't be sustained for long time, so we have learnt partly and still learning "how to become more civilized" because upon this does depend our survival and its not the question of ethics that I am talking about here. So what I think is, a civilization that is million year ahead of us is "most likely" to be truly "civilized" !
The last thing and the first thing also, is that we had to and have to know what and who are out there, because the meaning of our existence and survival depends on their "existence", whether they are advanced or primitive doesn't matter, Earth won't survive and we have to know how to survive humanity.