UFO's... What do you think?

[turnkey4099]

Scientist say that both mass and energy are interchangeable (E= MC squared) People argue with that?
String theory is a case of trying to make a theory fit with disharmonius facts. I do not buy this, nor do most credible physicists. Good night nurse. Back to work on the super collider. Read all about it.

well, it is his theory trying to mersge facts and science with religion and we all know how that works.

Harry K

 

[dave1949]

Actually Sagan said "In the long run, the aggressive civilizations destroy themselves, almost always. It痴 their nature. They can稚 help it."
Contact Chapter 20 (p. 359)

Note the qualifying word "aggressive".

We will have to survive our aggressive tendencies long enough for peaceful aliens to reach us--if perhaps only peaceful species would survive long enough to achieve interstellar travel.

 

[k0ua]

We will have to survive our aggressive tendencies long enough for peaceful aliens to reach us--if perhaps only peaceful species would survive long enough to achieve interstellar travel.

I would not count on any one able to get here as likely to be peaceful. Explorers tend to be aggressive, and have aggressive goals. Peaceful people tend to sit at home and tend the sheep and goats, and raise vegetables. So I am thinking more like Klingon's and Romulan's as UFO pilots.. I could be wrong, but that is what I think. Reminds me of a line from a B grade sci-fi film. "I come in Peace".. "yeah, and you're going to leave in pieces!"

 

[dave1949]

I would not count on any one able to get here as likely to be peaceful. Explorers tend to be aggressive, and have aggressive goals. Peaceful people tend to sit at home and tend the sheep and goats, and raise vegetables. So I am thinking more like Klingon's and Romulan's as UFO pilots.. I could be wrong, but that is what I think. Reminds me of a line from a B grade sci-fi film. "I come in Peace".. "yeah, and you're going to leave in pieces!"

We're are pretty aggressive as a species, definitely the most aggressive of all earth species, yet we are still earth bound. Some our close cousins in the Great Ape family come close such as chimpanzees, but I think we 'win.' Plus we may be aggressive by nature, our DNA. Aliens would not share our DNA--presumably.

There are societal dividends from peace. Think about all the money, talents and willpower we spend on aggression being redirected. Our science not related to aggression may have been further along if it had access to those resources.

Since at least 1000 CE there have been developed societies with a good grasp of astronomy. Actually, much earlier than that, but lets say 1000 CE. Suppose rather than conquest, they had directed their energies to furthering and exploiting that knowledge for the past 1000 years. If a "religion" were to have been reaching what is seen in the night sky, things could be different.

 

[rekees4300]

There are societal dividends from peace. Think about all the money, talents and willpower we spend on aggression being redirected. Our science not related to aggression may have been further along if it had access to those resources.

No doubt about it, we could already be on our way to other stars had not past resources been squandered on war. Our only hope of avoiding extinction is to get off this planet. Not good to have all our eggs in one basket. Only a matter of time before we're wiped out by any one of many natural or man made scenarios.

 

[ovrszd]

I rest my case.

Heheheheh. Point taken Dave. I'll pray for you.

 

[ovrszd]

No doubt about it, we could already be on our way to other stars had not past resources been squandered on war.

But when looked at from the other side, look how much technology we have developed in wartime. During peacetime we become complacent and barely advance to the bathroom. As mentioned by someone earlier. Peaceful species hardly ever advance.

 

[rekees4300]

But when looked at from the other side, look how much technology we have developed in wartime. During peacetime we become complacent and barely advance to the bathroom. As mentioned by someone earlier. Peaceful species hardly ever advance.

Yes there have been some indirect benefits such as rockets but imagine how much better the technology could have been if directly designed for space travel instead of killing.

 

[ovrszd]

Yes there have been some indirect benefits such as rockets but imagine how much better the technology could have been if directly designed for space travel instead of killing.

You gotta stretch your thinking a bit. The warfare technology that has been developed for killing has created space travel technology that can be used for guidance systems For example, our government will never admit it, but I'm sure we have laser technology that can be used to destroy inter-continental missiles from satellite based lasers. Wouldn't that technology, albeit it used for other things, be useful in space travel?? We would have never perfected it without having the need for it during wartime. Again, peaceful creatures tend to be lazy creatures.

 

[/pine]

well, it is his theory trying to mersge facts and science with religion and we all know how that works.

Harry K

Sorry Harry...but you're wrong...I was/am not trying to merge anything...just looking for explanations...

as for 'jix's' quote:

String theory is a case of trying to make a theory fit with disharmonius facts. I do not buy this, nor do most credible physicists.

he is also wrong...entirely wrong about "credible physicists"...he would be less wrong if he said "credible bible thumpers"...

 

[ovrszd]

Oh great. First the "late last night" thread gets locked because it took a wrong turn. Now here goes this thread.......

I was enjoying both. :ashamed:

 

[bumperm]

As dave1949 notes, as a species we tend toward aggression, yet at the same time we are social beings. When you think about it, there are survival benefits in both traits that would bring them to the fore in natural selection. Where two tribes lived in enough close proximity so as to compete for resources, the more aggressive and/or intelligent group would "displace" the meeker one. We see this in much of nature where strength and aggressiveness is rewarded in breeding opportunities.

Being social has obvious advantages too, while living in groups offers protection, diversification of talents, a multiplication of knowledge and more, living in groups can conflict with aggressive behavior. And so, society has leaders, rules, etc.

It seems unlikely any successful, advanced civilization would be all that much different.

 

[ovrszd]

It seems unlikely any successful, advanced civilization would be all that much different.

I agree.

 

[dave1949]

You gotta stretch your thinking a bit. The warfare technology that has been developed for killing has created space travel technology that can be used for guidance systems For example, our government will never admit it, but I'm sure we have laser technology that can be used to destroy inter-continental missiles from satellite based lasers. Wouldn't that technology, albeit it used for other things, be useful in space travel?? We would have never perfected it without having the need for it during wartime. Again, peaceful creatures tend to be lazy creatures.

I think this is worth fighting over. :laughing:

That's a pretty broad conclusion. It's true that we are most energized by threats to our well being, but then so is every other creature on earth that has nervous system. When you pick up an earthworm, it wriggles vigorously. When we are threatened we cock a fist, a hammer, build a bomb, etc. There is a biological response by the worm and by us, we are just more capable and psychologically prepared to be deadly.

If you look at a science time-line of significant achievements and over-lay that with a significant war and conquest time-line, what do you think it would look like? How much time in the past thousand years has been free of war, conquest, political and religious upheavals and power struggles, etc.? Even if you constrained the data to only a eurocentric view, ignoring the other members of our species, there aren't many periods of time in history that are free of strife.

 

[rekees4300]

You gotta stretch your thinking a bit.

I don't disagree that some war technology can be applied to space travel. My only point is that the resources used for war could have been better used for space travel. Imagine how far we could have come by now if NASA had been around for a few thousand years. Likely we could have been beyond the solar system.

 

[bumperm]

I don't disagree that some war technology can be applied to space travel. My only point is that the resources used for war could have been better used for space travel. Imagine how far we could have come by now if NASA had been around for a few thousand years. Likely we could have been beyond the solar system.

But without aggression and war, would we all not be picking berries and sitting around a campfire singing kum ba yah? The drive to survive is interwoven with aggression and protection. It has been a prime mover in the growth of knowledge and technology.

I'm not defending aggression, in fact I am more interested in defending myself and family *from* aggression. It's interesting that the technology and knowledge to do both is basically the same.

 

[MossRoad]

But without aggression and war, would we all not be picking berries and sitting around a campfire singing kum ba yah? ....

Hey, that guy has better berries and more fire than me.....

 

[Egon]

Hey, that guy has better berries and more fire than me.....

I'll let you use my Firehill Moss. It's a great spot from which to observe the night heavens. And then the Owl Hoots!

 

[dave1949]

But without aggression and war, would we all not be picking berries and sitting around a campfire singing kum ba yah? The drive to survive is interwoven with aggression and protection. It has been a prime mover in the growth of knowledge and technology.

I'm not defending aggression, in fact I am more interested in defending myself and family *from* aggression. It's interesting that the technology and knowledge to do both is basically the same.

What's wrong with eating berries and singing by the campfire? You say that almost as if there is something fundamentally wrong with that. Maybe that's who we are but I hate to think our lives are not complete without some bloodshed.

I don't think we are as advanced as we may think we are. A truly intelligent and developed species which holds near absolute mastery over the planets resources would transcend the basic biological imperatives that less capable species are slaves to. We've been around in various **** iterations (sapiens, neanderthal, denisova, habilis, etc.) for over two million years and we are still stealing women and fighting over food, natural resources and territory. Yeah, we be real smart. :laughing:

If we led a truly peaceful existence and our collective actions were directed toward maintaining that existence:
1) Our planet would be safe from us. Our extinction would be due to natural cataclysmic events that will occur no matter how peaceful or warlike we live. Being safe from "us" would preclude the misery of over population, always looking for more or better resources as if they are infinite.
2) We would have less need to expand to other planets because we need not flee the mess we are making of this one. Fleeing this planet is basically running away from yourself, good luck. You cannot jump over your own shadow.

 

[/pine]

I don't think we are as advanced as we may think we are.

We still cook meat on open flames and chew it off the bone...