From: J. Maynard Gelinas <j.maynard.gelinas.nul> Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 04:12:13 +0800 Archived: Thu, 01 Mar 2012 08:18:24 -0500 Subject: Re: Sampling Earth's Biodiversity >From: Stanton T. Friedman <fsphys.nul> >To: <post.nul> >Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 12:23:13 -0400 >Subject: Re: Sampling Earth's Biodiversity >>From: J. Maynard Gelinas <j.maynard.gelinas.nul> >>To: post.nul >>Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 22:19:56 +0800 >>Subject: Re: Sampling Earth's Biodiversity >>>From: Gerald O'Connell <goc.nul> >>>To: <post.nul> >>>Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 21:50:34 -0000 >>>Subject: Re: Sampling Earth's Biodiversity >>>>From: J. Maynard Gelinas <j.maynard.gelinas.nul> >>>>To: post.nul >>>>Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 07:37:25 +0800 >>>>Subject: Sampling Earth's Biodiversity >>><snip> >>>>The next question to ask: >>>>- What is special about Earth? >>>Answer: Absolutely nothing. All we get to see is the ET >>>equivalent of a procession of high school kids performing the >>>same dumb-ass 'experiments' over and over again. We are the >>>slime in the school pond and that is why we can't understand the >>>phenomena with which we confronted. >>>Where did this 'Earth is special' guff com from? The Bible? 50's >>>SF movies (where I suppose 'Earth' is an analogue for 'America' >>>which is, of course extra special)? Well, wherever it comes from >>>I'd recommend dumping it double-quick if you want to get an >>>objective handle on this stuff. >>Something about Earth must be special to whoever might come here >>because the energy output required to travel interstellar >>distances would require significant resources to achieve. >>Perhaps you mean 'humans are special'. Actually, my point was >>the humans are not special, not at all interesting, and in the >>thought experiment wanted to step outside anthropomorphic EDIT: I meant 'anthropocentric'. My apologies for the word choice error. >>explanations for UFO phenomena. >In addition to the three items I noted earlier about Earth, >which might well make it of interest to aliens, I should have >added that it is inhabited by a primitive society whose major >activity is tribal warfare. This society which killed 50 million >of its own kind in WW 2 and destroyed 1700 cities, has learned >to tap nuclear energy, not only for fission >propulsion-submarines which can circle the globe underwater, >aircraft carriers that can operate for 18 years without >refueling, fission rockets than can operate at 4400 Megawatts >(twice Grand Coulee dam) in a system less than 8' in diameter, >but has controlled nuclear fusion to the extent that one bomb >has released the energy of 57 million tons of TNT. Chimpanzees also engage in tribal warfare. How many scientific expeditions are sent by humans to study them? How long have we done so? Consider the relative costs of sending expeditions to remote areas to engage in anthropological studies, and how many such projects are funded as a result, in contrast to expeditions sent to remote areas in search of a valuable resource. We'll send vast armadas out to nowheresville if we think some valuable resource is there. Not so much to answer some question of scientific curiosity without practical purpose. Further, as noted in the original post, UFO activity has been recorded in both the written word and through paintings since antiquity, which suggests that investigating the advent of post- Enlightenment industrialization would not be the primary purpose of visitation (assuming the at least some percentage of the various ranges of UFO activity represent a single cause, and that Extraterrestrials are responsible) since such activity predates that shift in human civilization. It instead suggests that such activity may well predate the written word. Might it also predate the advent of man? If so, how could man have been a primary motivator for traveling here? I also note that your counter-argument is almost entirely focused on an anthropocentric perspective. That is, aliens would bother to spend the energy coming here because of us. Were it the case that they are primarily concerned about potential risks by human activity, why haven't they simply wiped us out as a species and been done with the problem altogether? Nipped our threat in the bud while we're weak, so to speak? If fighter jets against a UFO is a pathetic military asymmetry, imagine broadswords and chariots against a UFO held by a Roman age army. Your perspective suggests that hypothetical aliens consider human military activities a potential competitor. Yet beyond rare individual accounts - say the 1975 Iranian incident of an F-4 destroyed while giving chase - such incidents are not widespread. Why is that? Well, do scientists interfere with unexpected changes in a controlled experiment? No. Because if they did, they'd shift initial conditions and break controls. From this perspective, we're an afterthought in a larger purpose, and our relevance only became of interest once we engaged in activities (built nuclear weapons, for example) suitable to interfere with the operation (collecting novel molecular compounds and reactive agents) at hand. (let's be clear, this is a thought experiment - I'm not arguing that I know the intent of any hypothetical aliens, I'm simply looking for a new perspective on the question of 'why') >Fusion rocket systems can eject particles having 10 million >times as much energy per particle as in a chemical rocket. I >should think the "galactic federation" would want to make sure >no representatives from here went out there. Do note also that >mankind has exploded 2000 nuclear weapons. A fusion rocket might let us toot around the solar system, but it isn't an interstellar drive. >Robert Hastings has provided strong evidence that the aliens are >interested in our nuclear weapons. Yes! But how does an interest in human made nuclear weapons contradict my initial suggestion? In the original post I noted that nuclear war would represent a serious threat to a program of intended harvest and directed evolution in search for novel molecular agents. If you had spent vast sums of money building a farm in the outer reaches of nowhere and faced a pest problem with rabbits or somesuch, wouldn't their activity refocus your attention? But that doesn't suggest the pest represents a primary interest or goal of farming operations. Thanks again, Maynard Listen to 'Strange Days... Indeed' - The PodCast At: http://www.virtuallystrange.net/ufo/sdi/program/ These contents above are copyright of the author and UFO UpDates - Toronto. They may not be reproduced without the express permission of both parties and are intended for educational use only.
[ Next Message | Previous Message | This Day's Messages ]
This Month's Index |
UFO UpDates - Toronto - Operated by Errol Bruce-Knapp