Any Intelligent Life on Earth?

[Airbrush]

There was an excellent interview of Neil Tyson by Fareed Zakaria on CNN recently. Anyone see it? He suggested a reason ETs may have not made contact with us is because humans are not intelligent enough for ETs to WANT to communicate with us. This would explain the Fermi Paradox. We don't interview the Queen of a termite mound. If they are so much more advanced than we are, then they should be able to covertly figure us out. They could tap into TV and learn all the languages on Earth. What they would learn about humans is how politically divided we are. To make contact with some humans may cause problems with other humans. They are politically savvy enough to NOT open a "can of humans".

 

This makes sense to me. It doesn't make any sense at all that UFOs would have lights on the OUTSIDE of their spacecraft, as if to call attention to them. Even humans know about stealth. If ETs are here, or have been here for a long time, they certainly are avoiding direct contact with most people, and they must have better stealth than we do. All I can think of is that they are so far beyond us, that they know we will never be able to verify their existence. They are good at picking up after themselves, unlike us humans. They know they are occasionally seen by people, but they know people well enough to know most people will not believe them. This may be sent to Speculations, but how can you talk about ETs on Earth without speculating?

Edited August 21, 2014 by Airbrush

[Carrock]

Your post explains everything except why they bothered to come.

Perhaps they are much like juveniles throwing stones at a hornets nest.

If we succeed in stinging them their parents will come along and humanely destroy the nest.

[Ophiolite]

I understand they have been talking to the dolphins for years.

[Strange]

This may be sent to Speculations, but how can you talk about ETs on Earth without speculating?

 

By providing evidence?

[Airbrush]

 

By providing evidence?

 

ETs are good at "picking up" after themselves. That is why evidence is always inconclusive. If ETs have conspired with governments, they could use law enforcement and the military to collect evidence to be taken away by the ETs.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Airbrush

[Strange]

 

ETs are good at "picking up" after themselves. That is why evidence is always inconclusive. If ETs have conspired with governments, they could use law enforcement and the military to collect evidence to be taken away by the ETs.

 

So are you saying that the absence of evidence is evidence for ET visitors?

 

Or are you just speculating?

Edited August 21, 2014 by Strange

[Phi for All]

This may be sent to Speculations, but how can you talk about ETs on Earth without speculating?

 

You can talk about anything you want to in Speculations. The special rules were created so those discussions don't end up circling the toilet. IOW, think of Speculations as being on life support, and if you can't provide enough the plug gets pulled.

[Ophiolite]

 

ETs are good at "picking up" after themselves.

Is this an assertion or did you mean to place a perhaps at the start of the sentence? If you meant it as written, what is your evidence that they pick up after themselves? Remember you cannot use the absence of evidence as evidence. If you insist on this I have some elephant repellant I can sell you. Thirty years of use and not a single elephant has appeared in Aberdeen.

 

 

That is why evidence is always inconclusive.

I am not aware of any evidence that is robust enough to be called inconclusive. Can you give specific examples?

 

 

If ETs have conspired with governments, they could use law enforcement and the military to collect evidence to be taken away by the ETs.

And we know how good governments are at keeping secrets, don't we?

[Moontanman]

I am not aware of any evidence that is robust enough to be called inconclusive. Can you give specific examples?

This one might not be the smoking gun but it does raise questions that cannot be answered reasonably

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1952_Washington,_D.C._UFO_incident

 

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/18/ufo-nearcollision-with-army-helicopter-40-years-ago_n_4119987.html

And we know how good governments are at keeping secrets, don't we?

So many government people have come out with reports of sightings to say they don't exist is simply wrong, doesn't make them true of course but if it's a secrete it's not being well kept.

Edited August 22, 2014 by Moontanman

[Ophiolite]

So many government people have come out with reports of sightings to say they don't exist is simply wrong, doesn't make them true of course but if it's a secrete it's not being well kept.

Do you mean "so many people who just happen to have government jobs have reported sightings", or "so many people with responsible government jobs such that they posses the professional skills that would allow them to recognise a bona fide inconclusive sighting"?

 

Big difference between the two.

[Moontanman]

Do you mean "so many people who just happen to have government jobs have reported sightings", or "so many people with responsible government jobs such that they posses the professional skills that would allow them to recognise a bona fide inconclusive sighting"?

 

Big difference between the two.

Many are of the later, astronauts and air force pilots come to mind....

[Airbrush]

Is this an assertion or did you mean to place a perhaps at the start of the sentence? If you meant it as written, what is your evidence that they pick up after themselves? Remember you cannot use the absence of evidence as evidence. If you insist on this I have some elephant repellant I can sell you. Thirty years of use and not a single elephant has appeared in Aberdeen.

 

I am not aware of any evidence that is robust enough to be called inconclusive. Can you give specific examples?

 

And we know how good governments are at keeping secrets, don't we?

 

You are right. Certainly I meant a perhaps and need to be more careful how I say things.

 

Grainy photos of lights in the sky.

 

It would be a compartment within government that is not accountable to anyone but some old timer and the president.

 

I am not speculating that there are ETs here on Earth covertly studying us. I'm only proposing a "what if" senario. Neil Tyson got it right. Probability is that an ET that can reach us is far more advanced technically beyond us than we are advanced beyond a chimp. They wouldn't talk to us because we would bore them. They would already know what we think. They could learn more about us in a short while than we will know about ourselves in a thousand years. Fermi Paradox solved.

Edited August 22, 2014 by Airbrush

[StringJunky]

I think one has to first ask oneself: "What is the probability of life, that is much more technologically-advanced than us, being within 100LYRs of Earth?". This is roughly how far the first radio-transmissions will have reached now to indicate our presence. Also, one has to think about the physics of travelling up to that distance within that time. To put this in perspective I found this:

http://www.planetary.org/multimedia/space-images/universe/extent-of-human-radio-broadcasts.html

 

The little blue dot is the transmission-radius relative to our galaxy if we are in the middle of it.

Edited August 22, 2014 by StringJunky

[Carrock]

And we know how good governments are at keeping secrets, don't we?

Indeed. There is no evidence that any government has ever succeeded in keeping anything completely secret.

[CaptainPanic]

We have only been intelligent enough to broadcast anything for a very little while on a cosmic scale. I don't think that our species even raised an alien eyebrow (if they have any) 300 years ago, when we were will sailing around and fighting with swords on horseback.

Assuming that alien technology is still limited by the light speed, they may be on their way, but just haven't arrived yet.

I think it is a typical human thing to get impatient: where are those damned aliens? We're capable of space flight already for almost 5 orbits of the solar system's largest planet around the sun! That's like an eternity for us puny humans!

A little comment to people demanding evidence in this thread: the OP stated already in the 1st post that this is indeed pure speculations. There is no evidence, and we all know that. If there was, this would have been announced with huge letters on the front page of every newspaper, and not by Airbrush in a thread in the Speculations forum on SFN. Since we all know evidence will not be provided, let's just endulge in speculations until we get bored, shall we? (I consider people asking for evidence in this particular thread just party poopers. Note that this comment is made as a member, not as moderator).

[Carrock]

Indeed. There is no evidence that any government has ever succeeded in keeping anything completely secret.

 

 

A little comment to people demanding evidence in this thread: the OP stated already in the 1st post that this is indeed pure speculations. There is no evidence, and we all know that. If there was, this would have been announced with huge letters on the front page of every newspaper, and not by Airbrush in a thread in the Speculations forum on SFN. Since we all know evidence will not be provided, let's just endulge in speculations until we get bored, shall we? (I consider people asking for evidence in this particular thread just party poopers. Note that this comment is made as a member, not as moderator).

 

I wasn't really demanding evidence, just trying to make a point about the limitations of knowledge without getting too serious.

I've thought better of claiming that there is no evidence that anyone in government has ever committed an undetected crime.

[Phi for All]

I think it is a typical human thing to get impatient: where are those damned aliens? We're capable of space flight already for almost 5 orbits of the solar system's largest planet around the sun! That's like an eternity for us puny humans!

 

So true. And we've been imagining things we can't see but suspect are out there ever since we formed tribes around a campfire. When gods got squeezed out of the gaps in our knowledge, I think we substituted a more rational type of being to be curious about.

 

Earth is the only planet we know that abounds with life, yet only one species is capable of intentionally going offworld. We're highly intelligent, probably because we had a very unique combination of agile hands, a cooperative nature, and extraordinary communication skills (among others).

 

I realize the OP is more aimed at aliens on Earth, but it always intrigued me to think about how another intelligent life form, capable of offworld travel, might evolve on another planet. Would it require the same amount of biodiversity we have?

 

Motivations for space travel are also interesting. In broad strokes, I see two main factors, Necessity and Exploration. I think there would be a big difference in aliens who came to visit depending on whether they need something they can't get at home or they're just out cruising around to see what's out there.

[Moontanman]

You are right. Certainly I meant a perhaps and need to be more careful how I say things.

 

Grainy photos of lights in the sky.

 

It would be a compartment within government that is not accountable to anyone but some old timer and the president.

 

I am not speculating that there are ETs here on Earth covertly studying us. I'm only proposing a "what if" senario. Neil Tyson got it right. Probability is that an ET that can reach us is far more advanced technically beyond us than we are advanced beyond a chimp. They wouldn't talk to us because we would bore them. They would already know what we think. They could learn more about us in a short while than we will know about ourselves in a thousand years. Fermi Paradox solved.

Do you really think the only evidence for UFOs is grainy photos of lights in the sky? Come on, read the links I gave for blowing that idea out of the water. I don't want to argue UFOs here, there are other threads for that but to suggest that there is no evidence for UFOs is quite easily shown not to be true. I can't prove alien space craft but I can give some really good evidence of something very odd going on in many instances... and even one is a real alien space craft then it's importance is out of this world...

 

If you are interested go here:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Sign

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimate_of_the_Situation

Edited August 22, 2014 by Moontanman

[Airbrush]

Do you really think the only evidence for UFOs is grainy photos of lights in the sky? Come on, read the links I gave for blowing that idea out of the water. I don't want to argue UFOs here, there are other threads for that but to suggest that there is no evidence for UFOs is quite easily shown not to be true. I can't prove alien space craft but I can give some really good evidence of something very odd going on in many instances... and even one is a real alien space craft then it's importance is out of this world...

 

If you are interested go here:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Sign

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimate_of_the_Situation

 

That is interesting info Moontanman. I've seen some documentaries about UFOs and there exists a lot more than merely "grainy photos", just nothing that is undeniably of extraterrestrial intelligence. IF they had enough time to study us, they could become "human experts" and understand human politics, and they could become adept at keeping solid evidence of their operations out of our reach. They could even create "fake visitations" that can be easily discredited, to support the assumption that ETs are not here simply because their is no undeniable evidence for them.

I think one has to first ask oneself: "What is the probability of life, that is much more technologically-advanced than us, being within 100LYRs of Earth?". This is roughly how far the first radio-transmissions will have reached now to indicate our presence.

 

Nice graphic and good point. It is unlikely a much more techno-advanced ET is within 100 LY. They would need to be closer to us than 100 light years to detect industrial gases in our atmosphere. If they are beyond 100 LY away, they would see Earth's atmosphere as it was over 100 years ago, before there were any techno-gases. But even from thousands of LY away, they could see our atmosphere shows life exists here. How could they tell if the life they detect was even "semi-intelligent" on the galactic scale of intelligence?

 

It is possible they have a much more advanced method for scanning stars for planets with at least semi-intelligent life, than detecting radio waves or looking for techno-gases in planet atmospheres. They could be advanced thousands, or millions, of years beyond us.

Edited August 23, 2014 by Airbrush

[hoola]

I don't think an advanced species would need to physically travel anywhere, let alone earth...informationally, they could observe us and be aware of us. I think that if they exist, and were aware of us, they would be pulling for our survival, as we are a new species of thinking beings. They would know that they evolved from the same primitive beginning all life forms are forced to endure. They would hope for us as we would hope for a deer trying to run through a busy hiway would make it. I suspect they have seen many attempts fail, more so than succeed to "get across", if indeed any species has ever made it across the busy hiway of evolution...which is a component of the fermi paradox I presume...

[Airbrush]

For a much more advanced ET observing what goes on here on planet Earth, think Three Stooges. ETs may observe us make great technological advances, then see us shoot ourselves in the foot.

[MigL]

All species that we know of, have populations that rise and fall, sometimes yearly. Why are we so arrogant to believe that our civiliation will last for thousands if not millions of years ?

 

Say global warming or nuclear war or even an asteroid, reduces our population back to stone age levels,how much of our knowledge and technology will we be able to preserve?

 

If our technological window for detecting alien transmissions only lasts a couple of hundred years before we 'lose' that capability, how does that affect the contact equation ?

 

Now if the world law that I spoke of in the first paragraph turns out to be universal, i.e. all universal species succumb to cheap energy, destructive weapons or bad luck, such that EVERYONE's ( extra-terrestrials too ) contact window lasts a few hundred years, how does that reduce the chances of contact with aliens ?

 

The universe isn't just very big, it has also existed a long time.

[Airbrush]

Agreed that very intelligent ETs are probably very scarce. But within a radius of 10,000 light years, there is a good possibility for such a civilization to have survived extinction. We could be reduced to the stone ages during the next few hundred years by a supervolcano. How can we defend against a supervolcano?

[MigL]

The point I was trying to make is that if we are reduced to the stone age in the next 200 yrs, we will only have sent out EM signals into space for 300 yrs, no longer. Thats a very small window compared to the ageof the universe.

[Airbrush]

The point I was trying to make is that if we are reduced to the stone age in the next 200 yrs, we will only have sent out EM signals into space for 300 yrs, no longer. Thats a very small window compared to the ageof the universe.

 

That only goes for EM signals sent into space. A much more advanced ET can detect the gases of life in our atmosphere from a much longer distance than we can. Forget about EM signals and spectroanalysis of our atmosphere, they could have other means for finding planets that are very favorable to life over a long period of time. Our solar system is extraordinarily orderly compared to most we can detect. ETs will recognize that. Our planet is gifted with outstanding, and rare conditions for life to evolve. That would certainly be of interest to them, but they wouldn't want to chat with us.

Edited August 24, 2014 by Airbrush