U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-16-2019, 11:54 PM
 
28,134 posts, read 9,955,368 times
Reputation: 15209

Advertisements

Look at it like this...fish and other aquatic life that lives its life under the water, whether it be in the small lakes or huge oceans, underwater is their ENTIRE WORLD to them, (its all they know), they have no clue of the complex and expansive world literally right above the surface of the water!


They are not able to comprehend that are there are large land masses, full of small and large cities and everything in between, and going even further, they would not be able to grasp that there are other planets BEYOND this one!


Imo, we are like the fish in many ways, we generally only know our own little world, that we are able to see with our eyes, telescopes, etc. we are just not able to comprehend 'the world' that exists right above the surface.


Id really go as far to say its almost pointless for us to speculate about this kind of thing, because, just like the fish, if they were to sit around and try to discuss what our world may be like, they would be completely wrong on everything, they would not come close to getting anything right, again, i think this describes us to a 'T', we have NO idea if there are ways to get around the time/distance of space, or if its even necessary for that matter, much less trying to theorize on what more advanced civilizations may be capable of, how in the world can we even begin to guess what they are capable of?!!!



If I had to guess, I believe the universe is like Star Wars/ Star Trek, in that there are 10s of 1000s of different systems, all sorts of life forms, in all shapes sizes and colors, some systems are aware of each other, and likely have trade and commerce with others, Im sure there are 'governing bodies' that exist (like the Empire), we are just not yet old enough to be part of this, or we are in the extreme 'outer rim'.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-17-2019, 01:35 AM
 
Location: Missouri, USA
5,671 posts, read 3,954,912 times
Reputation: 2610
Quote:
Originally Posted by rstevens62 View Post
Id really go as far to say its almost pointless for us to speculate about this kind of thing, because, just like the fish, if they were to sit around and try to discuss what our world may be like, they would be completely wrong on everything, they would not come close to getting anything right, again, i think this describes us to a 'T', we have NO idea if there are ways to get around the time/distance of space, or if its even necessary for that matter, much less trying to theorize on what more advanced civilizations may be capable of, how in the world can we even begin to guess what they are capable of?!!!



If I had to guess, I believe the universe is like Star Wars/ Star Trek, in that there are 10s of 1000s of different systems, all sorts of life forms, in all shapes sizes and colors, some systems are aware of each other, and likely have trade and commerce with others, Im sure there are 'governing bodies' that exist (like the Empire), we are just not yet old enough to be part of this, or we are in the extreme 'outer rim'.
I think that's a stretch to say we have no idea if there are ways to get around the time/distance of space. It's only a few light years to the nearest star. They're talking about experimenting with building sails on ships that can be pushed by lasers now, and people say these devices might be pushed up to a few percentages of light speed. The main problem is just slowing them down again and keeping a laser focused on the sail accurately enough:
https://www.space.com/20169-interste...olar-sail.html

The long term idea, something that probably won't happen for another few centuries but which really wouldn't require many new ideas, would be to build a ship with a reflective sail the size of Texas and push it towards some other star with a powerful laser.

Regarding the idea of aliens being common...I'd assume they'd be building megastructures everywhere, especially Dyson swarms - enormous swarms of solar-energy collecting satellites encircling stars. I'd also assume in a galaxy with many diverse civilizations one of them would have contacted us by now...but maybe the Dyson Swarms are farther away than we can detect right now, or maybe there's some powerful authoritarian civilization mandating that Earth is supposed to be treated as a kind of nature preserve until we develop advanced space exploration capabilities, or maybe it's something like...there's a wide sphere of solar systems around the Earth that have all been strip-mined by ancient civlizations, and so there's just not much of a reason for aliens to come here...or something like that.

You could be right. Like you said, this stuff is not something we can predict very well. I think we can begin to guess what aliens are capable of though. I think we can determine a lot about them just from the knowledge we have about self-aware life in general. Some things will just apply to life universally. For instance...empathy. Empathy stems partially from emotion and instinct, but it's also just a logical concept...the concept that certain things harm me, which are bad because of that, and you are a fellow intelligence who also experiences harm, and harm to you is therefore a bad thing too, because you are a fellow life form.

I think I can also assume those sorts of more universal, philosophical rules will slowly grow to become more influential over civilizations with time, steadily replacing more and more of their instincts and emotions.

I'm thinking therefore, there will be a lot of alien civilizations that are brutally logical, empathetic, and heavily genetically engineered and cybernetically augmented, if they're not fully mechanical. I think I can also assume that as they develop better and better technology that removes more and more struggles from their lives, they'll have mostly moved up to the top of the pyramid of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs which basically says that life forms focus on obtaining security and safety and shelter and food and water and their basic needs, then move up to the top of the pyramid that consists of things like self-esteem, achieving a sense of belonging, and the self-actualization involving morality and creativity and that kind of stuff. I therefore think behaving empathetically would be very high on their list of priorities...so I doubt there'd be many raiders or aliens trying to conquer us for selfish reasons...but we might see a few of them who engage in well-meaning, but harmful, attempts to control us for what they perceive as reasons of kindness that don't work out too well, and things like that.

I think there's a ton we can figure out about aliens, just based off the knowledge that they're almost undoubtedly sentient beings from ancient civilizations.

Last edited by Clintone; 07-17-2019 at 01:58 AM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-17-2019, 06:41 AM
 
Location: Missouri, USA
5,671 posts, read 3,954,912 times
Reputation: 2610
All my ideas about aliens could be wrong...but I strongly suspect they'll be more rational than us, and rational people tend to be easier to predict than irrational people so I figure, whatever the most sensible behaviors are, aliens will tend to go that route. Now, I could be wrong about what the most sensible behaviors are. My view of sensible behaviors for an advanced civilization would be trying to control more primitive life forms to a great degree. Others will disagree. I could be wrong, but I figure all we have to do is figure out the most rational way of behaving and bingo...we can predict a lot of what aliens will do, regardless of their ancestry, if we only know enough about their technology.

I'm thinking anything around for millions of years, or hundreds of thousands of years, will have developed a pretty sophisticated culture and filtered out most of its negative aspects, whether through teachings or genetic modification. I don't know why alien societies wouldn't be around for that long, if they exist while we exist, at least. They won't have nearly as much to do as humans, due to their technology solving so many problems, presumably, so I figure improving their culture...which would include teaching themselves to be more rational...would be a major focus of theirs.

There would be exceptions as always, but I'd suspect the above would describe the dominant cultures of aliens we meet.

I don't think there is just one way of behaving rationally though. That'll add some diversity to any multiple species of aliens out there. Perhaps, if we have one species evolved from octopi-like organisms that die after procreating and another species that's more like humans, that live to raise their offspring...the octopi-like organisms and the human-like organisms might get along well, but just have different views on death, for example. Perhaps to the octopi death is not even anything negative, if it seems like it might enhance the future for life, whereas humans might retain some of their instinctive wariness of death and continue to be saddened by the loss of their kin. Perhaps some species would be much more comfortable with genetic engineering and others much more comfortable with cybernetic augmentation. There are advantages to both...stuff like that.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2019, 12:47 AM
 
Location: Haiku
7,132 posts, read 4,230,884 times
Reputation: 10324
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clintone View Post
All my ideas about aliens could be wrong...but I strongly suspect they'll be more rational than us, and rational people tend to be easier to predict than irrational people so I figure, whatever the most sensible behaviors are, aliens will tend to go that route. Now, I could be wrong about what the most sensible behaviors are. My view of sensible behaviors for an advanced civilization would be trying to control more primitive life forms to a great degree. Others will disagree. I could be wrong, but I figure all we have to do is figure out the most rational way of behaving and bingo...we can predict a lot of what aliens will do, regardless of their ancestry, if we only know enough about their technology.
That is an incredibly biased and naive view. All of your terms - rationality, control, predict, civilization.... are all distinctly human concepts that are relative to our planet, our biology, our level of cognition, our culture, etc. We have no idea what sort of life forms might exist. They could be non-carbon based, they could use parts of the electromagnetic spectrum for communication, "they" might not even be appropriate - perhaps the alien is like a honey fungus that is a single organism with many distinct nodes so is actually an it, not a they. Aliens might be so foreign to our way of looking at things that we do not even recognize it as being a life form. For instance, what if its biological clock is 100,000 times slower than ours - it would look inert or dead to us. Perhaps they do not use linear single threaded logic for problem solving but use distributed multi-threaded logic. Perhaps they don't use logic at all, they just "know" instantly. We have no idea what may be out there.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2019, 02:18 AM
 
Location: Missouri, USA
5,671 posts, read 3,954,912 times
Reputation: 2610
Quote:
Originally Posted by TwoByFour View Post
That is an incredibly biased and naive view. All of your terms - rationality, control, predict, civilization.... are all distinctly human concepts that are relative to our planet, our biology, our level of cognition, our culture, etc. We have no idea what sort of life forms might exist. They could be non-carbon based, they could use parts of the electromagnetic spectrum for communication, "they" might not even be appropriate - perhaps the alien is like a honey fungus that is a single organism with many distinct nodes so is actually an it, not a they. Aliens might be so foreign to our way of looking at things that we do not even recognize it as being a life form. For instance, what if its biological clock is 100,000 times slower than ours - it would look inert or dead to us. Perhaps they do not use linear single threaded logic for problem solving but use distributed multi-threaded logic. Perhaps they don't use logic at all, they just "know" instantly. We have no idea what may be out there.
First of all, I want to emphasize that I'm talking about spacefaring aliens. Those organisms will have much more specific characteristics than aliens in general. If we're talking about aliens in general, I totally agree.

I disagree that rationality, control, predict, and civilization are all distinctly human concepts.

*We're talking about tool users, therefore they have to have societies or they wouldn't make it to space. Think about the difference between octopi and humans. Octopi are brilliant, ambidextrous beings but they're not social organisms so they have no way of transmitting knowledge down the generations. Heck, think about the difference between humans and ancient humans - tens of thousands of years as Homo sapiens with relatively similar levels of technology followed by an explosion of it once they start shifting from life in small groups to life in large groups that are better capable of storing knowledge.

*Regarding "rationality" what other system might an organism use? If they just "know" things, given that we're talking about organisms who invent things, some part of their brain, even if it's a non-conscious part, would have had to have used reason to figure out how to build a spaceship, and I don't know what advantage there would be to that part of their brain being totally unconscious.

I think you're making the mistake of being overwhelmed by this, and while there's a lot we can't know about aliens, there's no reason to be that overwhelmed.

*If they're non-carbon based they'd presumably still have language in some form (keeping in mind that language doesn't necessarily have to be verbal). Otherwise they couldn't be social organisms in many cases. We could get a few species that, instead of using language directly link their brains together, but I don't know why language wouldn't be more common.

*If their biological clock is 100,000 times slower than ours or if they communicate exclusively through electrical signals, they'd still need societies, logic, and tool-building capacity.

*If they don't use linear logic, if they solve complex problems through communication they're still seemingly using some kind of logic.

*Regarding the idea of aliens not being "they" but rather an "it" with many sensory nodes, I could understand how someone could even think of humans that way, but I would think it would still go a similar route to achieving technological innovation as humans do. I don't see why it wouldn't.

*Regarding ethics...ethics are universal, in a way, or maybe it would be morality. I'm not sure what the proper term is. Whenever something experiences harm, that's a negative thing. Whenever something experiences pleasure, that's a positive thing. That's the case because there's no inherent difference between my pleasure and yours and my suffering and yours that's really very relevant. I could say you're not me...but that doesn't mean much that's worthwhile because you, like me, are another sentient being and really, it might even be described as mostly an illusion to say you're not me. We both call ourselves "I" and the main thing dividing us is our memories and relationships and those things fade with time. It might be more accurate to perceive humans as one organism with over 7 billion sensory appendages called individuals. It might arguably be more accurate than that to describe all life in the universe as one organism with countless sensory appendages. Regardless of how we perceive the universe, when we cause one of our fellow organisms to suffer, that suffering is basically the same as our suffering, just without us knowing about it in as detailed of a way as if it were happening to ourselves. I would think all advanced societies would figure this out at some point and start pushing their cultures to act accordingly, particularly if they're around for millions of years and one of their primary goals is finding fulfilling, sensible goals. That's a kind of endless option as a goal they can strive for. That's going to mean we can predict a lot of their behaviors.

That mentality could result in aliens destroying lots of simpler civilizations for what the aliens perceive as their benefit. It could result in them helping lots primitive civilizations in more traditional ways - giving technology and guiding their development and such. I do have major disagreements with people who think that game theory is the proper way to anticipate the behavior of aliens though. I don't see the drive to compete as nearly as much of an influence of aliens as many people who think about this stuff seem to.

__________________________________________________ _______________________________

*I figure there's a pretty good chance we're going to see a lot of aliens that evolved from conditions similar to humans and are therefore evolved as bipedal, former tree-dwelling, omnivores with two arms, two legs, two eyes facing forward who raise their young as family groups. I think that for the following reasons:

1. Carnivores tend to need to be more intelligent than herbivores, but it's very difficult for large groups of carnivores to survive for long so they'll probably often be omnivores with two eyes facing forwards so as to better judge distance.

2. A great way to form arms and hands is to evolve them as appendages used to hold onto trees...but there are other reasons to form arms too. Maybe on some low gravity world there are floating beings evolved from squid-like creatures with gasbags attached to their backs or something.

3. You can't invent fire underwater, which would hinder a lot of technological innovation of undersea intelligent species.

4. If they evolved underground, there's a limit to how large they can get, which probably means there's a limit to how intelligent they can get.
__________________________________________________ _________________________________

To summarize my perspective...I can't predict what life forms with the intelligence of raccoons are going to do. They're driven by instinct and emotion and what behaviors that's going to result in depend on the environment in which they were evolved.

Life with the intelligence of humans, though, can understand that kind of universal empathy I mentioned earlier, and that'll limit their likely behaviors. They'll almost certainly use some form of genetic engineering or robotic enhancements to limit their behaviors because they'll retain some destructive instincts they'll want to be rid of. That'll shift their societies into something more rational and likely predictable, I'd think. They'll probably have been around for long enough to make those changes, or it would be very unlikely that both they and humans would exist at the same time in such an ancient universe...unless we just see alien societies frequently popping up then swiftly going extinct from their own technology. But if that's the case that spacefaring species are constantly evolving and destroying themselves, unless FTL travel or cheating through wormhole technology is possible, I would doubt they'd be able to meet us anyway.

Last edited by Clintone; 07-18-2019 at 02:54 AM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2019, 04:13 AM
 
Location: Tricity
51,537 posts, read 73,121,977 times
Reputation: 115767
Quote:
Originally Posted by rstevens62 View Post
If these things were from some far off place, another planet or system, we would have seen an official contact long ago.


If you look at our history, when civilizations first see other, they meet and engage the other civilization, they DO NOT hide, and pop in and out and then vanish again, and continue this behavior for centuries!
.
Just for a sake of argument - there could be other reasons why they didn't contact us again:

- they stumbled upon us while exploring this part of Universe
- they noticed our civilization but are not interested to contact/meet/live here because we are (or were at that time) so underdeveloped so they didn't know how to communicate with us (like we don't know how to communicate with primitive live organisms like bacteria or microbes)
- they decided that Earth isn't a place they could colonize because isn't sustainable to meet their own needs
- they are so far away. It takes them so long to come here again, or perhaps we are in a very far corner of the Universe, just too far away from other forms of civilizations, and there might be some civilizations that live close by each other and they communicate.
- we are just too unimportant to visit us again
- they found other places in the Space that are more interesting to explore
- they are a part of another civilization that we have not even a clue what to look for (they do not travel in spaceships known to manhood, they don't build space stations or towns like humans, they don't communicate in any way known to humans)
etc...etc...

All the time we look for some sort of life out there that resembles humans and human intelligence, or looks like anything we know living here on Earth. We could be completely wrong - there is something we might even passed by while exploring, but are absolutely unaware of their existence.

We think that we are so intelligent and superior, but maybe we are like an ameba compared to other civilizations.

There are many "maybes" we can't even try to answer.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2019, 09:16 AM
 
Location: Missouri, USA
5,671 posts, read 3,954,912 times
Reputation: 2610
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jorge ChemE View Post

The Dark Forest: A terrifying explanation of why we haven't heard from aliens yet.

While Fermi Paradox asks where are the aliens? the Dark Forest solution says we should pray we never find them. This solution is a bit darker than the others. The Dark Forest solution explains why we haven't heard from aliens by positing that they are purposefully keeping quiet. The reasoning is laid out best in the science fiction novel The Dark Forest, by Liu Cixin. In the novel is laid out the following principles:

1- All life desires to stay alive.
2- There is no way to know if other lifeforms can or will destroy you if given a chance.
3- Lacking assurances, the safest option for any species is to annihilate other life forms before they have a chance to do the same.

This can be a fictional solution but... Stephen Hawking and a roster of dozens of other scientists have warned against searching so boldly for extraterrestrial life. A petition has been signed to prevent humans from actively sending signals into space, disclosing information about us and our location.
I've never been a big fan the Dark Forest Theory. It's not foolish...I just see some flaws with it. I like that because I get to disagree with many brilliant people

pseudo Flaw #1.: Not all life desires to stay alive. Now, life certainly has an instinctive drive to procreate...but that drive can be removed through genetic modification or even just taking on a new perspective. I am not an anti-natalist (someone who believes no new life should be created) but many humans are. Our creative thinking abilities let us overcome our instincts. All a species need is a rational ethical reason not to procreate, and then I'd assume over time they'd alter their society to not procreate. We can say the same thing about living. If a species finds a rational, ethical reason not to live they could very plausibly just end their lives. Perhaps a society suddenly finds themselves running out of resources and two-thirds of them volunteer to euthanize themselves so that the survivors can prosper.

I really don't think Game Theory applies well to species that can genetically modify their brains to be different, and their instincts and emotions. I'm not convinced aliens would have any desire to survive if it means they must continuously act as predators of the universe, destroying other life for their own survival.

pseudo flaw#2: Isaac Arthur made a good video about this. I'll post it here. I've been wanting to have an excuse to post one of his videos because he has a great series on aliens and plausible future technology dealing with plausible answers to the Fermi Paradox, and I agree with most of his views. My main disagreement is he thinks Game Theory is a good way to anticipate how aliens might behave, and I don't, but he makes good arguments and supports them with data:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmCTmgavkrQ

The video expresses the idea that if aliens wanted to destroy life everywhere for reasons of self-preservation...why stop at spacefaring life? They could send machines bent on destruction to every solar system in the galaxy without too much trouble, destroying any large, multicellular life they find just to be sure nothing will evolve to become a future threat. Given how old the universe is, if a species like that exists, it would quite likely have destroyed us by now. They wouldn't need to search for anything. They just carpet bomb the whole galaxy.

pseudo flaw #3: If they're a hivemind, this might not be an issue...but for most types of aliens, their primary threat would seem to be themselves, more so than outsiders. Political dissent will make enemies Expansion will create new societies. Eliminating other life in the galaxy really won't end their security issues unless they have some pretty specific types of psychologies that lead to a weird type of internal contentment.

pseudo flaw #4: Unless they start off very close to the civilization they want to destroy, or they have faster than light travel technology or wormhole technology, it's going to take a very long time to reach the civilizations they detect and want to destroy. By the time they reach it, that civilization will probably have developed quite a bit, and it might be able to trace the ships that tried unsuccessfully to destroy them back to their home civilization, and it might inspire them to be a lot more paranoid and hostile to other civilizations.

However, if we tweak that view a bit to make it so that aliens are not out to destroy all other life, but generally only want certain types of life destroyed and want to make that judgement themselves rather than trust artificial intelligence to do it, maybe they've scourged the galaxy of much of life but were impressed by certain habits they found in ancient humans enough to leave us alone or something. Maybe most intelligent life is more violent and reckless and destructive than humans and they saw ancient human societies caring for grandparents or something and were impressed.

I figure trying to contact aliens is just a high risk high reward idea. They might dramatically assist our civilization. They might destroy it. They might try to dramatically assist our civilization. They might accidentally destroy it or cause great harm.

Personally, I'm in favor of trying to contact aliens. I've expressed my views for why I think they'd likely be benevolent, at least in a sense. Note that I've also suggested that they might destroy us, for what they see as benevolent reasons.

My main concern would be contacting curious tourists who have no real idea what they're doing, as opposed to representatives of the main civilization who would presumably be far more professional. I'd rather not have alien versions of drunken tourists touching all the paintings in a museum be their representatives, any more than I'd like Bob the trucker firing a shotgun at a flying saucer be our representative.

For that reason, I might understand the government covering up alien contact, to a degree. I'm open to that possibility...not that I've seen convincing evidence of that so far.

Last edited by Clintone; 07-18-2019 at 10:06 AM..
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-19-2019, 09:11 AM
 
28,134 posts, read 9,955,368 times
Reputation: 15209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clintone View Post
I've never been a big fan the Dark Forest Theory. It's not foolish...I just see some flaws with it. I like that because I get to disagree with many brilliant people

pseudo Flaw #1.: Not all life desires to stay alive. Now, life certainly has an instinctive drive to procreate...but that drive can be removed through genetic modification or even just taking on a new perspective. I am not an anti-natalist (someone who believes no new life should be created) but many humans are. Our creative thinking abilities let us overcome our instincts. All a species need is a rational ethical reason not to procreate, and then I'd assume over time they'd alter their society to not procreate. We can say the same thing about living. If a species finds a rational, ethical reason not to live they could very plausibly just end their lives. Perhaps a society suddenly finds themselves running out of resources and two-thirds of them volunteer to euthanize themselves so that the survivors can prosper.

I really don't think Game Theory applies well to species that can genetically modify their brains to be different, and their instincts and emotions. I'm not convinced aliens would have any desire to survive if it means they must continuously act as predators of the universe, destroying other life for their own survival.

pseudo flaw#2: Isaac Arthur made a good video about this. I'll post it here. I've been wanting to have an excuse to post one of his videos because he has a great series on aliens and plausible future technology dealing with plausible answers to the Fermi Paradox, and I agree with most of his views. My main disagreement is he thinks Game Theory is a good way to anticipate how aliens might behave, and I don't, but he makes good arguments and supports them with data:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmCTmgavkrQ

The video expresses the idea that if aliens wanted to destroy life everywhere for reasons of self-preservation...why stop at spacefaring life? They could send machines bent on destruction to every solar system in the galaxy without too much trouble, destroying any large, multicellular life they find just to be sure nothing will evolve to become a future threat. Given how old the universe is, if a species like that exists, it would quite likely have destroyed us by now. They wouldn't need to search for anything. They just carpet bomb the whole galaxy.

pseudo flaw #3: If they're a hivemind, this might not be an issue...but for most types of aliens, their primary threat would seem to be themselves, more so than outsiders. Political dissent will make enemies Expansion will create new societies. Eliminating other life in the galaxy really won't end their security issues unless they have some pretty specific types of psychologies that lead to a weird type of internal contentment.

pseudo flaw #4: Unless they start off very close to the civilization they want to destroy, or they have faster than light travel technology or wormhole technology, it's going to take a very long time to reach the civilizations they detect and want to destroy. By the time they reach it, that civilization will probably have developed quite a bit, and it might be able to trace the ships that tried unsuccessfully to destroy them back to their home civilization, and it might inspire them to be a lot more paranoid and hostile to other civilizations.

However, if we tweak that view a bit to make it so that aliens are not out to destroy all other life, but generally only want certain types of life destroyed and want to make that judgement themselves rather than trust artificial intelligence to do it, maybe they've scourged the galaxy of much of life but were impressed by certain habits they found in ancient humans enough to leave us alone or something. Maybe most intelligent life is more violent and reckless and destructive than humans and they saw ancient human societies caring for grandparents or something and were impressed.

I figure trying to contact aliens is just a high risk high reward idea. They might dramatically assist our civilization. They might destroy it. They might try to dramatically assist our civilization. They might accidentally destroy it or cause great harm.

Personally, I'm in favor of trying to contact aliens. I've expressed my views for why I think they'd likely be benevolent, at least in a sense. Note that I've also suggested that they might destroy us, for what they see as benevolent reasons.

My main concern would be contacting curious tourists who have no real idea what they're doing, as opposed to representatives of the main civilization who would presumably be far more professional. I'd rather not have alien versions of drunken tourists touching all the paintings in a museum be their representatives, any more than I'd like Bob the trucker firing a shotgun at a flying saucer be our representative.

For that reason, I might understand the government covering up alien contact, to a degree. I'm open to that possibility...not that I've seen convincing evidence of that so far.
Really? I wonder why they lied to us so many times,when the question of whether the Govt was involved in investigations of these things? (I can recall numerous times when reporters have asked about this, and the official response has always been, " after project Blue Book, the US govt has not had any projects to investigate, nor to collect data"...WE NOW KNOW THIS WAS A LIE).


So why try to conceal a project or investigation?


I can understand if they trying to conceal or hide results or findings of a study or investigation...but to try to conceal the ENTIRE investigation as a whole? there can only be a couple reasons for that.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2019, 04:09 AM
 
Location: Missouri, USA
5,671 posts, read 3,954,912 times
Reputation: 2610
Quote:
Originally Posted by rstevens62 View Post
Really? I wonder why they lied to us so many times,when the question of whether the Govt was involved in investigations of these things? (I can recall numerous times when reporters have asked about this, and the official response has always been, " after project Blue Book, the US govt has not had any projects to investigate, nor to collect data"...WE NOW KNOW THIS WAS A LIE).


So why try to conceal a project or investigation?


I can understand if they trying to conceal or hide results or findings of a study or investigation...but to try to conceal the ENTIRE investigation as a whole? there can only be a couple reasons for that.
I'm not going to comment on any of that...because I haven't even looked into whether or not government organizations may be hiding existence of aliens. I just could understand why they might be, if they are...presumably wanting to prevent the average Joe or news reporters from insisting they have the right to talk to them.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2019, 12:19 AM
 
28,134 posts, read 9,955,368 times
Reputation: 15209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clintone View Post
I'm not going to comment on any of that...because I haven't even looked into whether or not government organizations may be hiding existence of aliens. I just could understand why they might be, if they are...presumably wanting to prevent the average Joe or news reporters from insisting they have the right to talk to them.
I doubt that is the reason.


I have been looking into whether Govt organizations/agencies, may be hiding the existence of 'aliens' (generally off and on for the past couple years).


Im in the process of searching newspaper articles now, (going back to the time period when newspapers first came about!), Ive looked at hundreds of articles so far, and from what I can tell, there is definitely something going on and its been going on for a LONG time.


I will say, the older articles (before WW2) are definitely the most informative, (its a night and day difference too!), officials were a lot more willing to comment and speak openly about the subject. Something happened to change this in the 1940s though, its very easy to see the difference in the articles from the 2 time periods.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology

All times are GMT -6.

¬© 2005-2022, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top