Total Posts:65|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Do you Agree with Hawking on this?

Saint_of_Me
Posts: 2,402
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/27/2015 8:25:52 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I am of the belief that the Universe it absolutely teeming with life. Including Intelligent Life. Probably millions of Intel ET Civilizations.

So does Stephen Hawking. But he believes something I am not really sure or, and in fact tend to sort of lean away from. As...I am all for trying to contact ET's, Dr. Hawking has always made his opinion on this well-known. And that is that it is in fact a dangerous idea to attract their attention.

He has said, "I believe if we attracted the attention of an Intelligent Alien Civilization that it could turn out be be for us like it was for the Natives when Columbus visited America 500 years ago. And it did not turn out well for them."


What say you?

(And..please. I would humbly ask that we do not engage in an "Is their ET life or not?" debate. That has been done to death. Instead: let us just say there ARE Intel ET Civs out there. Should we try as much as we can to attract them? Or leave them be as you agree with Dr. Hawking?

Thanks!
Science Flies Us to the Moon. Religion Flies us Into Skyscrapers.
dee-em
Posts: 6,447
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2015 12:46:54 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/27/2015 8:25:52 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:
I am of the belief that the Universe it absolutely teeming with life. Including Intelligent Life. Probably millions of Intel ET Civilizations.

So does Stephen Hawking. But he believes something I am not really sure or, and in fact tend to sort of lean away from. As...I am all for trying to contact ET's, Dr. Hawking has always made his opinion on this well-known. And that is that it is in fact a dangerous idea to attract their attention.

He has said, "I believe if we attracted the attention of an Intelligent Alien Civilization that it could turn out be be for us like it was for the Natives when Columbus visited America 500 years ago. And it did not turn out well for them."


What say you?

(And..please. I would humbly ask that we do not engage in an "Is their ET life or not?" debate. That has been done to death. Instead: let us just say there ARE Intel ET Civs out there. Should we try as much as we can to attract them? Or leave them be as you agree with Dr. Hawking?

Thanks!

I don't agree. What do we have that aliens could possibly want badly enough which would recoup the immense costs and hardship of interstellar travel? (I don't believe in FTL travel). In the case of the Americas (and Australia) it was all about land to expand population growth into. That and plundering resources such as gold. There is no shortage of unused real estate and resources in the galaxy if our own solar system is anything to go by. Why expend all that cost of waging a long-distance (long, long distance) war when you can just colonize and mine uninhabited planets? Alien invasion makes no sense to me, just from a commercial viability standpoint.

http://smokeandstir.org...
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2015 12:59:15 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/27/2015 8:25:52 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:
I am of the belief that the Universe it absolutely teeming with life. Including Intelligent Life. Probably millions of Intel ET Civilizations.

So does Stephen Hawking. But he believes something I am not really sure or, and in fact tend to sort of lean away from. As...I am all for trying to contact ET's, Dr. Hawking has always made his opinion on this well-known. And that is that it is in fact a dangerous idea to attract their attention.

He has said, "I believe if we attracted the attention of an Intelligent Alien Civilization that it could turn out be be for us like it was for the Natives when Columbus visited America 500 years ago. And it did not turn out well for them."


What say you?

(And..please. I would humbly ask that we do not engage in an "Is their ET life or not?" debate. That has been done to death. Instead: let us just say there ARE Intel ET Civs out there. Should we try as much as we can to attract them? Or leave them be as you agree with Dr. Hawking?

Thanks!

It seems to me that scientists love getting lost in science fiction.
This should be in the entertainment forum.
Next thing you know we will have an ET theory.
The ET's must have caused the Big Bang?
What other explanation is there?
When science cannot find an explanation they will make up a convincing one which will satisfy all science fiction fans.

The science gods are crazy.
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2015 8:31:08 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/27/2015 8:25:52 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:
I am of the belief that the Universe it absolutely teeming with life. Including Intelligent Life. Probably millions of Intel ET Civilizations.

So does Stephen Hawking. But he believes something I am not really sure or, and in fact tend to sort of lean away from. As...I am all for trying to contact ET's, Dr. Hawking has always made his opinion on this well-known. And that is that it is in fact a dangerous idea to attract their attention.

He has said, "I believe if we attracted the attention of an Intelligent Alien Civilization that it could turn out be be for us like it was for the Natives when Columbus visited America 500 years ago. And it did not turn out well for them."


What say you?

(And..please. I would humbly ask that we do not engage in an "Is their ET life or not?" debate. That has been done to death. Instead: let us just say there ARE Intel ET Civs out there. Should we try as much as we can to attract them? Or leave them be as you agree with Dr. Hawking?

Thanks!

The counter argument is that Hawking is determining what he think will happen with non humans based on human history

I would would find some dark humor if some advanced life (compared to us) finds us. They are all super friendly and helpful but.....................highly religious.

As such they demand all humans convert to their religion and hersey/heretics will not be tolerated.

All hail Xenu !!!
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
MrVan
Posts: 82
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2015 12:59:58 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Humanity should keep as low a profile as possible, maintain a Passive SETI rather than an Active SETI, and stick to slow moving, non-nuclear methods of space travel. We're better safe than sorry, since we can only assume a few things about ETs which may be near us:

1. They will either be very primitive or they'll be gods compared to us. And if they are capable of getting to us, they're likely to be gods.

2. They're likely to be predators if they evolved to be the dominant species of their planet. There is no reason to believe they won't have the propensity for violence when they feel it is necessary.

3. Their own survival will be more important to them than ours.

4. They will assume the same of us.

There's also the potential that they have an R-Bomb in their arsenal - this could be nearly any object propelled to near-light (relitivistic) speeds. It doesn't even have to be that big to reduce a planet like Earth into a smoldering hellscape. The scary thing about the R-Bomb is that there's no stopping it, and no way to see where it actually is because of the speeds it's being propelled at. It will literally hit you before you can see it hit you.

This is why we should stick to slower methods of space travel. The moment we launch spacecraft which can travel at relativistic speeds, there's no hiding it from our neighbors. The engine exhaust from such drives will be visible to everybody, and may lead back to us. If ETs saw that we have acquired our own R-Bombs, our spacecraft, we could be a potential threat. At that point it's only a matter of getting us before we get us.

I'm assuming there is a lot of life in the universe for this thread, and I won't argue otherwise. However, I think it's necessary to bring up the Fermi Paradox - but only because it's absolutely relevant to this topic. If intelligence flourishes in the universe they're being awfully quiet - perhaps they have a good reason for this? If so, we should follow suit.
MrVan
Posts: 82
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2015 1:06:29 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
In short, I agree with Hawking. I think his reasoning is flawed though. We shouldn't assume intelligent ETs will be anything like us - aside from being predators.
MrVan
Posts: 82
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2015 1:07:40 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/28/2015 12:59:58 PM, MrVan wrote:
Humanity should keep as low a profile as possible, maintain a Passive SETI rather than an Active SETI, and stick to slow moving, non-nuclear methods of space travel. We're better safe than sorry, since we can only assume a few things about ETs which may be near us:

1. They will either be very primitive or they'll be gods compared to us. And if they are capable of getting to us, they're likely to be gods.

2. They're likely to be predators if they evolved to be the dominant species of their planet. There is no reason to believe they won't have the propensity for violence when they feel it is necessary.

3. Their own survival will be more important to them than ours.

4. They will assume the same of us.

There's also the potential that they have an R-Bomb in their arsenal - this could be nearly any object propelled to near-light (relitivistic) speeds. It doesn't even have to be that big to reduce a planet like Earth into a smoldering hellscape. The scary thing about the R-Bomb is that there's no stopping it, and no way to see where it actually is because of the speeds it's being propelled at. It will literally hit you before you can see it hit you.

This is why we should stick to slower methods of space travel. The moment we launch spacecraft which can travel at relativistic speeds, there's no hiding it from our neighbors. The engine exhaust from such drives will be visible to everybody, and may lead back to us. If ETs saw that we have acquired our own R-Bombs, our spacecraft, we could be a potential threat. At that point it's only a matter of getting us before we get us.

I'm assuming there is a lot of life in the universe for this thread, and I won't argue otherwise. However, I think it's necessary to bring up the Fermi Paradox - but only because it's absolutely relevant to this topic. If intelligence flourishes in the universe they're being awfully quiet - perhaps they have a good reason for this? If so, we should follow suit.

Getting us before we get them* blegh.
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2015 2:38:06 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/28/2015 12:59:58 PM, MrVan wrote:
Humanity should keep as low a profile as possible, maintain a Passive SETI rather than an Active SETI, and stick to slow moving, non-nuclear methods of space travel. We're better safe than sorry, since we can only assume a few things about ETs which may be near us:

1. They will either be very primitive or they'll be gods compared to us. And if they are capable of getting to us, they're likely to be gods.

2. They're likely to be predators if they evolved to be the dominant species of their planet. There is no reason to believe they won't have the propensity for violence when they feel it is necessary.

3. Their own survival will be more important to them than ours.

4. They will assume the same of us.

There's also the potential that they have an R-Bomb in their arsenal - this could be nearly any object propelled to near-light (relitivistic) speeds. It doesn't even have to be that big to reduce a planet like Earth into a smoldering hellscape. The scary thing about the R-Bomb is that there's no stopping it, and no way to see where it actually is because of the speeds it's being propelled at. It will literally hit you before you can see it hit you.

Technically incorrect. Traveling at nearly the speed of light, this object would not reach Earth before light from it did, which would be picked up by NASA and the likes. Thus, unless the aliens in question cloaked their weapon, humans would have at least something of an early warning. The nearest stellar system (and thus the nearest place where the aliens could launch their weapon from) is over 4 light years away. Thus, an object traveling at 90% of the speed of light would be detected at least 4.8 months before it hit, giving humans time to come up with a countermeasure.

This is why we should stick to slower methods of space travel. The moment we launch spacecraft which can travel at relativistic speeds, there's no hiding it from our neighbors. The engine exhaust from such drives will be visible to everybody, and may lead back to us. If ETs saw that we have acquired our own R-Bombs, our spacecraft, we could be a potential threat. At that point it's only a matter of getting us before we get us.

I'm assuming there is a lot of life in the universe for this thread, and I won't argue otherwise. However, I think it's necessary to bring up the Fermi Paradox - but only because it's absolutely relevant to this topic. If intelligence flourishes in the universe they're being awfully quiet - perhaps they have a good reason for this? If so, we should follow suit.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Saint_of_Me
Posts: 2,402
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2015 3:20:22 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/28/2015 12:46:54 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 6/27/2015 8:25:52 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:
I am of the belief that the Universe it absolutely teeming with life. Including Intelligent Life. Probably millions of Intel ET Civilizations.

So does Stephen Hawking. But he believes something I am not really sure or, and in fact tend to sort of lean away from. As...I am all for trying to contact ET's, Dr. Hawking has always made his opinion on this well-known. And that is that it is in fact a dangerous idea to attract their attention.

He has said, "I believe if we attracted the attention of an Intelligent Alien Civilization that it could turn out be be for us like it was for the Natives when Columbus visited America 500 years ago. And it did not turn out well for them."


What say you?

(And..please. I would humbly ask that we do not engage in an "Is their ET life or not?" debate. That has been done to death. Instead: let us just say there ARE Intel ET Civs out there. Should we try as much as we can to attract them? Or leave them be as you agree with Dr. Hawking?

Thanks!

I don't agree. What do we have that aliens could possibly want badly enough which would recoup the immense costs and hardship of interstellar travel? (I don't believe in FTL travel). In the case of the Americas (and Australia) it was all about land to expand population growth into. That and plundering resources such as gold. There is no shortage of unused real estate and resources in the galaxy if our own solar system is anything to go by. Why expend all that cost of waging a long-distance (long, long distance) war when you can just colonize and mine uninhabited planets? Alien invasion makes no sense to me, just from a commercial viability standpoint.

http://smokeandstir.org...

Well, granted, of you do not believe in FTL travel than ET visitation would indeed by very far-fetched, as the distances are crazily vast. (four ly's to the nearest star-and with our current fastest propulsion technology it would take us over 12,000 years to get there). ET's would have to be far more advanced than us in that regard. perhaps doing something like Quantum Teleportation, or folding Space-time.
Science Flies Us to the Moon. Religion Flies us Into Skyscrapers.
MrVan
Posts: 82
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2015 3:25:52 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Technically incorrect. Traveling at nearly the speed of light, this object would not reach Earth before light from it did, which would be picked up by NASA and the likes. Thus, unless the aliens in question cloaked their weapon, humans would have at least something of an early warning. The nearest stellar system (and thus the nearest place where the aliens could launch their weapon from) is over 4 light years away. Thus, an object traveling at 90% of the speed of light would be detected at least 4.8 months before it hit, giving humans time to come up with a countermeasure.


Good point. And stealth is hard to pull off in space.

Still, running might be one of the few options we'd have in that scenario - and even then there would be little chance of getting a majority of Earth's population off the planet in such a short amount of time. There's also a matter of detecting the R-Bomb in time if the object heading towards us is smaller and less conspicuous.

The fact that there could be a third party watching the skies might disuade any blue cat people from throwing an R-Bomb at us. It would be pretty funny if our genocidal neighbors ended up getting destroyed by another, even more advanced civilization because they failed to cover their tracks.
Saint_of_Me
Posts: 2,402
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2015 3:27:13 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/28/2015 12:59:15 AM, Skyangel wrote:
At 6/27/2015 8:25:52 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:
I am of the belief that the Universe it absolutely teeming with life. Including Intelligent Life. Probably millions of Intel ET Civilizations.

So does Stephen Hawking. But he believes something I am not really sure or, and in fact tend to sort of lean away from. As...I am all for trying to contact ET's, Dr. Hawking has always made his opinion on this well-known. And that is that it is in fact a dangerous idea to attract their attention.

He has said, "I believe if we attracted the attention of an Intelligent Alien Civilization that it could turn out be be for us like it was for the Natives when Columbus visited America 500 years ago. And it did not turn out well for them."


What say you?

(And..please. I would humbly ask that we do not engage in an "Is their ET life or not?" debate. That has been done to death. Instead: let us just say there ARE Intel ET Civs out there. Should we try as much as we can to attract them? Or leave them be as you agree with Dr. Hawking?

Thanks!

It seems to me that scientists love getting lost in science fiction.
This should be in the entertainment forum.
Next thing you know we will have an ET theory.
The ET's must have caused the Big Bang?
What other explanation is there?
When science cannot find an explanation they will make up a convincing one which will satisfy all science fiction fans.

The science gods are crazy.

Really?

You honestly think that the possibility of Intel Life out there is Sci Fi? Given the fact that we are only one out of probably trillions of planets? And that if even one out of a billion planets had Intel Life that would still leave billions and billions of candidates?

I am curious: what do you think makes our 3rd Rock so special?
Science Flies Us to the Moon. Religion Flies us Into Skyscrapers.
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,068
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2015 3:38:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/28/2015 3:25:52 PM, MrVan wrote:
Technically incorrect. Traveling at nearly the speed of light, this object would not reach Earth before light from it did, which would be picked up by NASA and the likes. Thus, unless the aliens in question cloaked their weapon, humans would have at least something of an early warning. The nearest stellar system (and thus the nearest place where the aliens could launch their weapon from) is over 4 light years away. Thus, an object traveling at 90% of the speed of light would be detected at least 4.8 months before it hit, giving humans time to come up with a countermeasure.


Good point. And stealth is hard to pull off in space.

Still, running might be one of the few options we'd have in that scenario - and even then there would be little chance of getting a majority of Earth's population off the planet in such a short amount of time. There's also a matter of detecting the R-Bomb in time if the object heading towards us is smaller and less conspicuous.

With our current technological capabilities and with the whole planet working together, we could perhaps get a few thousand people off Earth in 4-5 months...and then they'd have nowhere to go.

The fact that there could be a third party watching the skies might disuade any blue cat people from throwing an R-Bomb at us. It would be pretty funny if our genocidal neighbors ended up getting destroyed by another, even more advanced civilization because they failed to cover their tracks.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2015 5:04:49 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/28/2015 3:27:13 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:
At 6/28/2015 12:59:15 AM, Skyangel wrote:

It seems to me that scientists love getting lost in science fiction.
This should be in the entertainment forum.
Next thing you know we will have an ET theory.
The ET's must have caused the Big Bang?
What other explanation is there?
When science cannot find an explanation they will make up a convincing one which will satisfy all science fiction fans.

The science gods are crazy.

Really?

You honestly think that the possibility of Intel Life out there is Sci Fi? Given the fact that we are only one out of probably trillions of planets? And that if even one out of a billion planets had Intel Life that would still leave billions and billions of candidates?

Science fiction, speculation, imagination, creative thinking, fantasy, call it what you like. All those words fit the bill.

In my perception, possibility and impossibility are simply opposite sides of the same coin. Anything is possible and at the same time anything is also impossible.
I think some humans are intelligent and others are not.
I think humans are creative beings which speculate a lot and create imaginary characters with all kinds of super powers which the humans wish they had themselves.
Maybe those who lack intelligence and dream of gaining it one day hope that some intelligent super beings will endow them with super intelligence and other super powers one day.
Maybe some humans feel all alone and wish they had some friends who were more faithful than other humans so they create imaginary beings who will never leave or forsake them but also remain invisible figments of the imagination and speculation.

Why search for life on other planets when humans can't even get along with humans? When people war, argue and fight with each other, do you really think that attitude would change if they met other life forms? Humans would most likely kill and dissect them to see what they are made of. The science community seems to love dissecting things and putting all the bits in boxes in the name of scientific research.

I am curious: what do you think makes our 3rd Rock so special?

Special compared to what?
Earth is Earth. We live on it. It sustains Earthly life.

Whether other life forms exist on other planets depends on how you define the word Life.
Apparently science does not have a clear definition of Life. Science is not very clear about many things. It is an area of smoke and mirrors where a word means whatever they decide it means at the time.
https://en.wikipedia.org...

"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean " neither more nor less."

"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."

"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master " that"s all."

Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass.
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2015 6:23:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/27/2015 8:25:52 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:
I am of the belief that the Universe it absolutely teeming with life. Including Intelligent Life. Probably millions of Intel ET Civilizations.

So does Stephen Hawking. But he believes something I am not really sure or, and in fact tend to sort of lean away from. As...I am all for trying to contact ET's, Dr. Hawking has always made his opinion on this well-known. And that is that it is in fact a dangerous idea to attract their attention.

He has said, "I believe if we attracted the attention of an Intelligent Alien Civilization that it could turn out be be for us like it was for the Natives when Columbus visited America 500 years ago. And it did not turn out well for them."


What say you?

(And..please. I would humbly ask that we do not engage in an "Is their ET life or not?" debate. That has been done to death. Instead: let us just say there ARE Intel ET Civs out there. Should we try as much as we can to attract them? Or leave them be as you agree with Dr. Hawking?

Thanks!

I disagree with Hawking, if we are going to be visited they are going to be a very intelligent and they will come a very long way, I think they will have to be peaceful to become sufficiently advanced. I can't imagine devoting that much time and resources to visit and then kill us off, that would be pointless.
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
Saint_of_Me
Posts: 2,402
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2015 7:53:40 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/28/2015 6:23:05 PM, Sidewalker wrote:
At 6/27/2015 8:25:52 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:
I am of the belief that the Universe it absolutely teeming with life. Including Intelligent Life. Probably millions of Intel ET Civilizations.

So does Stephen Hawking. But he believes something I am not really sure or, and in fact tend to sort of lean away from. As...I am all for trying to contact ET's, Dr. Hawking has always made his opinion on this well-known. And that is that it is in fact a dangerous idea to attract their attention.

He has said, "I believe if we attracted the attention of an Intelligent Alien Civilization that it could turn out be be for us like it was for the Natives when Columbus visited America 500 years ago. And it did not turn out well for them."


What say you?

(And..please. I would humbly ask that we do not engage in an "Is their ET life or not?" debate. That has been done to death. Instead: let us just say there ARE Intel ET Civs out there. Should we try as much as we can to attract them? Or leave them be as you agree with Dr. Hawking?

Thanks!

I disagree with Hawking, if we are going to be visited they are going to be a very intelligent and they will come a very long way, I think they will have to be peaceful to become sufficiently advanced. I can't imagine devoting that much time and resources to visit and then kill us off, that would be pointless.

This is the viewpoint I tend to agree with.

Oh, I suppose it is possible we might have something they want, or need. (Again, to use the Columbus metaphor: like how he enslaved and forced the Natives to bring him gold. But this is probably unlikely, since any civilization advanced enough to span those vast distances to get here would likely not need what we have; as they would have most likely already figured-out how to get it, or make it, or find other means.

Also, they would be probably more on a "spiritual" level. No, I hate to use that term: let us say more of an "energy level" so as to not necessitate a need for mere material or natural commodities that we might have.
Science Flies Us to the Moon. Religion Flies us Into Skyscrapers.
Saint_of_Me
Posts: 2,402
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2015 8:05:01 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/28/2015 12:59:58 PM, MrVan wrote:
Humanity should keep as low a profile as possible, maintain a Passive SETI rather than an Active SETI, and stick to slow moving, non-nuclear methods of space travel. We're better safe than sorry, since we can only assume a few things about ETs which may be near us:

1. They will either be very primitive or they'll be gods compared to us. And if they are capable of getting to us, they're likely to be gods.

2. They're likely to be predators if they evolved to be the dominant species of their planet. There is no reason to believe they won't have the propensity for violence when they feel it is necessary.

3. Their own survival will be more important to them than ours.

4. They will assume the same of us.

There's also the potential that they have an R-Bomb in their arsenal - this could be nearly any object propelled to near-light (relitivistic) speeds. It doesn't even have to be that big to reduce a planet like Earth into a smoldering hellscape. The scary thing about the R-Bomb is that there's no stopping it, and no way to see where it actually is because of the speeds it's being propelled at. It will literally hit you before you can see it hit you.

This is why we should stick to slower methods of space travel. The moment we launch spacecraft which can travel at relativistic speeds, there's no hiding it from our neighbors. The engine exhaust from such drives will be visible to everybody, and may lead back to us. If ETs saw that we have acquired our own R-Bombs, our spacecraft, we could be a potential threat. At that point it's only a matter of getting us before we get us.

I'm assuming there is a lot of life in the universe for this thread, and I won't argue otherwise. However, I think it's necessary to bring up the Fermi Paradox - but only because it's absolutely relevant to this topic. If intelligence flourishes in the universe they're being awfully quiet - perhaps they have a good reason for this? If so, we should follow suit.

All excellent points that you make, sir.

But I have a question: could you explain to me about the "R-Bomb?"

Thanks!
Science Flies Us to the Moon. Religion Flies us Into Skyscrapers.
dee-em
Posts: 6,447
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2015 8:40:29 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/28/2015 8:05:01 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:

But I have a question: could you explain to me about the "R-Bomb?"

Thanks!

Think about the dinosaur killer asteroid but travelling close to light-speed. That is, stick a mass-conversion engine on the back of a large piece of rock/ice and point it.
Saint_of_Me
Posts: 2,402
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2015 8:42:44 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/28/2015 5:04:49 PM, Skyangel wrote:
At 6/28/2015 3:27:13 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:
At 6/28/2015 12:59:15 AM, Skyangel wrote:

It seems to me that scientists love getting lost in science fiction.
This should be in the entertainment forum.
Next thing you know we will have an ET theory.
The ET's must have caused the Big Bang?
What other explanation is there?
When science cannot find an explanation they will make up a convincing one which will satisfy all science fiction fans.

The science gods are crazy.

Really?

You honestly think that the possibility of Intel Life out there is Sci Fi? Given the fact that we are only one out of probably trillions of planets? And that if even one out of a billion planets had Intel Life that would still leave billions and billions of candidates?

Science fiction, speculation, imagination, creative thinking, fantasy, call it what you like. All those words fit the bill.

In my perception, possibility and impossibility are simply opposite sides of the same coin. Anything is possible and at the same time anything is also impossible.
I think some humans are intelligent and others are not.
I think humans are creative beings which speculate a lot and create imaginary characters with all kinds of super powers which the humans wish they had themselves.
Maybe those who lack intelligence and dream of gaining it one day hope that some intelligent super beings will endow them with super intelligence and other super powers one day.
Maybe some humans feel all alone and wish they had some friends who were more faithful than other humans so they create imaginary beings who will never leave or forsake them but also remain invisible figments of the imagination and speculation.

Why search for life on other planets when humans can't even get along with humans? When people war, argue and fight with each other, do you really think that attitude would change if they met other life forms? Humans would most likely kill and dissect them to see what they are made of. The science community seems to love dissecting things and putting all the bits in boxes in the name of scientific research.

I am curious: what do you think makes our 3rd Rock so special?

Special compared to what?
Earth is Earth. We live on it. It sustains Earthly life.

Whether other life forms exist on other planets depends on how you define the word Life.
Apparently science does not have a clear definition of Life. Science is not very clear about many things. It is an area of smoke and mirrors where a word means whatever they decide it means at the time.
https://en.wikipedia.org...


"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean " neither more nor less."

"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."

"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master " that"s all."

Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass.

But you dodged my primary question. Instead you went off the rez with your philosophy on Epistemology.

Again..please! What makes you think we would be in any way special? Our planet? The 3rd Rock from an average star in an average Galaxy--of which there are hundreds of billions? Or do you not believe that there are that many stars and galaxies and planets out there?

Because I find it difficult for somebody to believe on those numbers, but yet also think there is anything special about this rock we call Earth.
Science Flies Us to the Moon. Religion Flies us Into Skyscrapers.
Saint_of_Me
Posts: 2,402
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2015 8:44:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/28/2015 8:40:29 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 6/28/2015 8:05:01 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:

But I have a question: could you explain to me about the "R-Bomb?"

Thanks!

Think about the dinosaur killer asteroid but travelling close to light-speed. That is, stick a mass-conversion engine on the back of a large piece of rock/ice and point it.

Wow! That is crazy-powerful. As I recall--the Asteroid that slammed into the Yucatan 65M y.a. was only about six miles in diameter!

Thanks. What does the "R" stand for in "R-Bomb?"
Science Flies Us to the Moon. Religion Flies us Into Skyscrapers.
dee-em
Posts: 6,447
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2015 8:48:00 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/28/2015 8:44:57 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:
At 6/28/2015 8:40:29 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 6/28/2015 8:05:01 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:

But I have a question: could you explain to me about the "R-Bomb?"

Thanks!

Think about the dinosaur killer asteroid but travelling close to light-speed. That is, stick a mass-conversion engine on the back of a large piece of rock/ice and point it.

Wow! That is crazy-powerful. As I recall--the Asteroid that slammed into the Yucatan 65M y.a. was only about six miles in diameter!

Thanks. What does the "R" stand for in "R-Bomb?"

Relativity, I think. As in relativistic speeds.
Saint_of_Me
Posts: 2,402
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2015 8:48:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/28/2015 8:48:00 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 6/28/2015 8:44:57 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:
At 6/28/2015 8:40:29 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 6/28/2015 8:05:01 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:

But I have a question: could you explain to me about the "R-Bomb?"

Thanks!

Think about the dinosaur killer asteroid but travelling close to light-speed. That is, stick a mass-conversion engine on the back of a large piece of rock/ice and point it.

Wow! That is crazy-powerful. As I recall--the Asteroid that slammed into the Yucatan 65M y.a. was only about six miles in diameter!

Thanks. What does the "R" stand for in "R-Bomb?"

Relativity, I think. As in relativistic speeds.

Ahhh.

I probably shoulda figured that one out! LOL. thanks again.
Science Flies Us to the Moon. Religion Flies us Into Skyscrapers.
dee-em
Posts: 6,447
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2015 9:05:40 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/28/2015 1:06:29 PM, MrVan wrote:
In short, I agree with Hawking. I think his reasoning is flawed though. We shouldn't assume intelligent ETs will be anything like us - aside from being predators.

We aren't predators. We are omnivores. Human civilization came on the back of agriculture. We don't predate on animals on any large scale, we farm them.
Saint_of_Me
Posts: 2,402
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2015 9:52:19 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/28/2015 9:05:40 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 6/28/2015 1:06:29 PM, MrVan wrote:
In short, I agree with Hawking. I think his reasoning is flawed though. We shouldn't assume intelligent ETs will be anything like us - aside from being predators.

We aren't predators. We are omnivores. Human civilization came on the back of agriculture. We don't predate on animals on any large scale, we farm them.

How can you say that homo sapien sapiens are not predators?

Yeah..we are omnivores. But last time I checked, this included meat eaters. And how do you think we get that meat? I think there is another step before you see it in the supermarket all wrapped up. LOL>

Also..pleae explain the wildly popular sport of hunting? Fishing?

What about murderers? All the violence from those who prey on the weak?

What about our Hunter/Gatherer days? Back before we farmed? We hunted! Homo was around for millions of years before he began farming in his homo habilis (handyman) days.

How do you think we prevailed over Neanderthal man when we encountered him in Europe after exiting Africa some 40,000 years ago? By being passive? LOL

There have been some 27 sub-species of the genus homo. We are the Last Apes Standing, amigo. We did not get here without keen skills of predation.
Science Flies Us to the Moon. Religion Flies us Into Skyscrapers.
dee-em
Posts: 6,447
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2015 11:48:11 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/28/2015 9:52:19 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:
At 6/28/2015 9:05:40 PM, dee-em wrote:
At 6/28/2015 1:06:29 PM, MrVan wrote:
In short, I agree with Hawking. I think his reasoning is flawed though. We shouldn't assume intelligent ETs will be anything like us - aside from being predators.

We aren't predators. We are omnivores. Human civilization came on the back of agriculture. We don't predate on animals on any large scale, we farm them.


How can you say that homo sapien sapiens are not predators?

Sorry, I meant we are not solely predators. We don't get all our food by predation. In fact, very little of it today. Homo sapiens evolved as hunter gatherers. Too little attention is paid to the gathering part.

Yeah..we are omnivores. But last time I checked, this included meat eaters. And how do you think we get that meat? I think there is another step before you see it in the supermarket all wrapped up. LOL>

When was the last time you hunted and killed a cow, skinned it, bled it, butchered it and then put it in the fridge for your family? Yes, we eat meat but the vast majority of that meat is farmed and most of us are completely divorced from the process by which it arrives in our supermarkets. I don't classify farming of animals as predation in the sense that lions and tigers are predators on zebras, wildebeest, and so on. In fact you could make a case that for a large portion of human history we were both predators and predated upon.

Also..pleae explain the wildly popular sport of hunting? Fishing?

Hunting is wildly popular? Not so much where I come from. Both activities are more recreational than true predation. In some types of fishing they don't even keep the catch.

What about murderers? All the violence from those who prey on the weak?

Um, they don't do it for food. I think that's what we are discussing.

What about our Hunter/Gatherer days? Back before we farmed? We hunted! Homo was around for millions of years before he began farming in his homo habilis (handyman) days.

True. Then why are you downplaying the gathering part? Women's work? Obviously we weren't solely reliant on predation.

The point is that civilization didn't start until agriculture began. I have no reason to suppose that this would not be true for an alien species. It always makes me laugh when I see sci-fi movies with scary aliens (claws on their hands, for example) who have a technological civilization. The Klingons are such a case in point. A species that warlike could never have produced the Galileos, Da Vincis, Newtons, Edisons, Bells, Maxwells, Einsteins and Hawkings to underpin a technological space-faring civilization. You need warriors to survive initially but to get into space you need nerds, basically.

How do you think we prevailed over Neanderthal man when we encountered him in Europe after exiting Africa some 40,000 years ago? By being passive? LOL

Are you calling that predation? Besides, do you have some evidence that Homo Sapiens were directly responsible (via genocide) for their demise? I don't believe that is the case from my reading. It was more competition for similar resources as far as I am aware.

There have been some 27 sub-species of the genus homo. We are the Last Apes Standing, amigo. We did not get here without keen skills of predation.

I'm not denying it's part of our make-up. I don't see it as all-important though. Also, I haven't seen the case made that a herbivore species could not achieve sentience. Perhaps it has been made, but that would be news to me.
Skyangel
Posts: 8,234
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/28/2015 11:56:40 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/28/2015 8:42:44 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:
At 6/28/2015 5:04:49 PM, Skyangel wrote:
At 6/28/2015 3:27:13 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:

I am curious: what do you think makes our 3rd Rock so special?

Special compared to what?
Earth is Earth. We live on it. It sustains Earthly life.

Whether other life forms exist on other planets depends on how you define the word Life.
Apparently science does not have a clear definition of Life. Science is not very clear about many things. It is an area of smoke and mirrors where a word means whatever they decide it means at the time.
https://en.wikipedia.org...


"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean " neither more nor less."

"The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."

"The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master " that"s all."

Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass.

But you dodged my primary question. Instead you went off the rez with your philosophy on Epistemology.

Again..please! What makes you think we would be in any way special? Our planet? The 3rd Rock from an average star in an average Galaxy--of which there are hundreds of billions? Or do you not believe that there are that many stars and galaxies and planets out there?

Again, Special compared to what?
What makes you presume that I think we humans or the Earth are special?
Every single thing in existence is "special" in the sense that it is unique. No two things are exactly the same. Not even identical twins are exactly the same.
Name one thing that is not special or unique.
"Special" is the normal unique state of all things.

Because I find it difficult for somebody to believe on those numbers, but yet also think there is anything special about this rock we call Earth.

The Earth is as "special" as any other object floating around in space.
Feel free to imagine it to be as "special" as you want it to be compared to the "specialness" of all other things.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2015 2:10:33 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/28/2015 12:46:54 AM, dee-em wrote:
What do we have that aliens could possibly want badly enough which would recoup the immense costs and hardship of interstellar travel?

It's hard to see that a civilisation that had worked out FTL travel could not also work out resource-harvesting from gas giants and asteroids -- bodies that put the resources of our meagre planet to shame. And I agree that sub-FTL travel to earthlike planets makes little economic sense.

On the other hand, trade with a vastly more advanced civilisation could do untold damage to human cultural development. A culture needs time to assimilate change, to develop the wisdom needed to secure its own destiny. I think humanity could quite easily lose (or fail to develop) its own values if immersed in a vastly more powerful non-human civilisation.
dee-em
Posts: 6,447
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2015 7:05:18 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/29/2015 2:10:33 AM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 6/28/2015 12:46:54 AM, dee-em wrote:
What do we have that aliens could possibly want badly enough which would recoup the immense costs and hardship of interstellar travel?

It's hard to see that a civilisation that had worked out FTL travel could not also work out resource-harvesting from gas giants and asteroids -- bodies that put the resources of our meagre planet to shame. And I agree that sub-FTL travel to earthlike planets makes little economic sense.

Especially since we have exploited most of our natural mineral resources already. We're going after the less accessible stuff now. Biological resources? I would have thought there wouldn't be much compatibility and/or the bio-hazard risks would be too great.

On the other hand, trade with a vastly more advanced civilisation could do untold damage to human cultural development. A culture needs time to assimilate change, to develop the wisdom needed to secure its own destiny. I think humanity could quite easily lose (or fail to develop) its own values if immersed in a vastly more powerful non-human civilisation.

Perhaps that's why we don't hear from them. They understand the risks. :-)

(I keep thinking of the Star Trek prime directive for some reason).
slo1
Posts: 4,314
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2015 7:27:14 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/28/2015 3:25:52 PM, MrVan wrote:
Technically incorrect. Traveling at nearly the speed of light, this object would not reach Earth before light from it did, which would be picked up by NASA and the likes. Thus, unless the aliens in question cloaked their weapon, humans would have at least something of an early warning. The nearest stellar system (and thus the nearest place where the aliens could launch their weapon from) is over 4 light years away. Thus, an object traveling at 90% of the speed of light would be detected at least 4.8 months before it hit, giving humans time to come up with a countermeasure.


Good point. And stealth is hard to pull off in space.

Still, running might be one of the few options we'd have in that scenario - and even then there would be little chance of getting a majority of Earth's population off the planet in such a short amount of time. There's also a matter of detecting the R-Bomb in time if the object heading towards us is smaller and less conspicuous.

The fact that there could be a third party watching the skies might disuade any blue cat people from throwing an R-Bomb at us. It would be pretty funny if our genocidal neighbors ended up getting destroyed by another, even more advanced civilization because they failed to cover their tracks.

It is not so hard if one can absorb 100% of electromagnetic radiation and use it for something else or shoot it off in a direction that would not hit earth thus be detectable. Think of a stealth bomber flying straight at you light years away. Good luck detecting that.
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2015 8:57:31 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/27/2015 8:25:52 PM, Saint_of_Me wrote:
I am of the belief that the Universe it absolutely teeming with life. Including Intelligent Life. Probably millions of Intel ET Civilizations.

So does Stephen Hawking. But he believes something I am not really sure or, and in fact tend to sort of lean away from. As...I am all for trying to contact ET's, Dr. Hawking has always made his opinion on this well-known. And that is that it is in fact a dangerous idea to attract their attention.

He has said, "I believe if we attracted the attention of an Intelligent Alien Civilization that it could turn out be be for us like it was for the Natives when Columbus visited America 500 years ago. And it did not turn out well for them."


What say you?

(And..please. I would humbly ask that we do not engage in an "Is their ET life or not?" debate. That has been done to death. Instead: let us just say there ARE Intel ET Civs out there. Should we try as much as we can to attract them? Or leave them be as you agree with Dr. Hawking?

Thanks!

District 9 is a good movie that points out what would really happen If another alien race arrived on earth, needing help from us.

If they are advanced enough to travel to our planet, and they were not in a position to need our help, chances are we will be the one on the end of the stick. After all, most humans have no qualms about eating and slaughtering other animals, even if they are intelligent/feel pain. Why would an alien race feel the same about us?
JMcKinley
Posts: 314
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/29/2015 10:31:20 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I disagree with Hawking.

Any society capable of interstellar travel will not have need of our meager resources here on earth. If they are after resources then there are a number of other planets, asteroids and comets in our solar system that they could utilize.

I would think that any society with enough scientific background to achieve interstellar travel would be much more interested in us than our resources. Of course as I type this I realize that we may not like the implications of that either.

But at least if they have a scientific interest in us they will be far less likely to destroy us outright.