Fermi Paradox

You assume that super intelligent species would want to expand and spread everywhere like a bunch of monkeys

>>8052431

We do
You assume that NO super intelligent species ever would want to spread everywhere

>>8052424
Could it be that all life tries to kill itself before leaving for the stars?
Could it be that we are some of the earliest 'Smart' life out there.
Could it be that Aliens don't want others to find them because we are all doomed to killing each other off?
Could it be one alien per Galaxy.
Could X/ be right and there are aliens and our government is keeping it quite?

>>8052432
I'm not assuming, I'm just saying there might be reasons we cannot understand.

>And remember your explanations needs to satify not only one alien species but ALL alien species including future humans colonizing space.

u first

Because they have created the Matrix and are entertained by that instead of actual reality.

Think about it, if a species are capable of intergalactic travel, they are also capable of creating the most insanely advanced entertainment, and are probably lost in some virtual reality playing Gods.

>>8052443

So you're answer is "we don't understand"
Very smart answer

>>8052444

Will humans inevitably do the same?

>lol i poasted it again

>>8052447
So tell us your smart idea anon

>>8052454

My personal guess is that life, especially intelligent life, is incredibly rare. Not just 1 in a million rare but maybe even 1 in a trillion or 1 in quadrillion rare and that we in fact might just be some lonely freak a nature and the only intelligent species in the the entire galaxy and the reachable universe.

That's the only explanation so far that makes sense to me but it's incredibly depressing

>>8052449
Considering that human society is currently the most hedonistic it has ever been, I'd say yes.

>>8052464
Most, no.. I mean we are bad but Rome had it much worse. Actually have Religofags to thank for that.

>>8052463
Anot her solution is maybe they just all turned into mega intellegent computers and just kick back in that thing forever until the universe dies
Maybe they didn't want to fuck with the universe as is and left prematurely

>>8052468
>I mean we are bad but Rome had it much worse

No way dude. Between millions of people watching shows on Netflix, the accessibility of drugs, the accessibility of luxury goods, I'd say our society is vastly more hedonistic.

>>8052424
We're the precursors m80
We're the ones that get to tenderly rape the young species.

Alternatively, dark matter is composed of dyson spheres.

File: 1462060191596.png (607KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

607KB, 900x900px

>13 posts
>4 posters

"lol why aren't there aliens yet" threads are such circle jerks
The question is so ridiculous its not even funny

>>8052479

>16 posts 8 posters
>People discuss with each other and therefor post multiple times

WOOOW

>>8052463
There are other possibilities.

It is possible that we are on the leading edge of intelligence development and nobody else is appreciably further along in technological development than we are.

It is possible that even if intelligent life is more abundant than your estimates, the percentage that successfully migrate to the stars [or even use radio] is very low.

It is possible that the window of years for detecting a transitioning civilization is very finite [ie: 200 years or so]. *IF* there is a way of traveling faster than light, or cheating your way around it, or whatever-- The odds are strongly in favor of using that method for communication. Consequently: What we are looking for is only around for 200 or so years making it very likely that even if they were detectable, the window of detection has long since passed.

It is possible that our own detection capabilities are laughably finite.

It is possible that others presume the galaxy to be a hostile place and do not want to be found in respect of their own self-preservation.

It is possible that others have a policy of non-intervention with primitive societies.

>>8052477
I like that idea
I just want to put a massive middle find in the Centre of the galaxy that emits a constant radio stream that yells "fuck you" forever

>>8052485
>People discuss
More like people jack each other off.

These threads are filled with statements like "my personal guess" or "I personally believe" or "I like that idea "
Well the universe doesn't give a fuck what you believe or what you like.
This is >>>/x/ tier garbage.

>>8052499
Real popular at parties huh?

>>8052477

I wish there was a movie that was about humans being the alien conquerors who hunt inferior species for fun or because we see them as the threat to realize that every alien story we ever told was actually us fantasizing about raping other species

Ok, I'm going to ignore your use of fallacies [so no DEDUCTION here], and instead I will offer information that counters that proposition [INDUCTION].
1.) Space is big. like, really, really big.
2) Aliens would have to have a reason to search and contact other life forms
3.) Maybe we're not a priority on anyone's list... we know that sometimes content Civilizations ignore the small savage ones; they become lazy beggars
4.) Most of the matter in the universe is dark matter; so they're probably composed of that and we can't see them

>>8052424
The Rare Earth Hypothesis.
That and the fact that evidence of intelligent life is going to be very difficult to detect. If they had some sort of FTL travel they might be able to jump around all over the place, creating signals and shit, and the Fermi paradox is evidence against the viability of FTL travel. Obviously this isn't conclusive, but it's in line with theory.

>>8052507

The only fallacy here is you assuming that intelligent life would only be detectable by deliberately sending out signals but the bigger and more advanced a society is the more it should show itself.
Dyson Spheres are a good example how super advanced intelligent life should be easily detectable by even inferior species

>>8052515
I'm not using any fallacy nor am I assume anything.
Quote me.

>>8052515
While hard to fathom at the moment, black body radiation can maybe be fuck raw right in the ass.
Far-reaching sure, but it's way cooler to imagine there's dyson sphere everywhere instead of lame >muh exotic matter

>>8052479
>Most important question of our time.
>Ridiculous

>>8052499
You seem to be quite the autist.
"Oh no people are discussing something that goes against my beliefs, I must enter their thread and waste every ones time with idiocy"

>>8052444
Why conquer space when I can just shoot happiness into my body 24/7

Nice.

>>8052476
>Rome had gladiatorial combat to the death with animals and people and slaves
>Rome had parties where people would eat until they vomited and then start eating again just so they could taste delicious food as much as possible
Rome was way more hardcore

>>8052424
One important thing to consider is the complete lack of likelihood that a society goes through an industrial revolution of sorts to provide scientific development

Just look at native americans, aboriginals, 3rd world nations

if it weren't for the complete luck of the american colonies breaking from british rule, we could have been lead by a monarchy in peasant poverty for millennia more without scientific advancement

It takes more than a self-conscious being to advance scientifically, especially to the point of space conquering

Now imagine all of the "fear of different ideas" that killed scientific improvement like heliocentrism for example. This is basically natural selection acting against intelligence, and to some extent it could prevent scientific advancement (or at least the booming advancement such as we've experienced since the industrial revolution)

still saging because i'm tired of seeing this thread 24/7

>>8052424
The most probable conclusion is that species avoid all contact because:
A) its hard to travel fast
B) interspecies Relations will end in the more advanced killing/enslaving the less advanced.
And even if one species would try to fight another the distance in time would be so great that the less advanced species would be advanced enough to destroy everything the other species send at their time of arrival.

Interspecial relations are futile and meaningless because the speed of light is so tiny.

File: 12316358_914913061879885_4110150768951347204_n.jpg (54KB, 439x540px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 439x540px

They all realized life is utterly meaningless, but not like we do. Humans mostly use nihilism as a step to absurdism where you conjure your own meaning. Others kill themselves off. But this "meaning" we make for ourselves is also utterly meaningless, it's just a way to get your mind away from death, disease and that lonely state of introspection.
Other civilizations, considering they are more advanced, probably ditched absurdism and got back to hedonism, slowly dying off in ecstasy until they are all no more.
Let's say my hypothesis is true, then that would mean that humans are also very close to a hedonistic apocalypse because other civilizations didn't leave anything behind that we can find. At this point, we have left nothing behind yet, but I predict that in a 100 years we will leave something that will get noticed. So the apocalypse should happen before that.

This or space is just like really fucking big and we're in possession of some vast Julayyus Ceasar lmao the second or some shit man chillax smoke a blunt.

>>8052424
The universe inflated faster and earlier than predicted. We are the 1st intelligent species.

>>8052424
>And remember your explanations needs to satify not only one alien species but ALL alien species including future humans colonizing space.
Who would have known that the feeble electromagnetic whispers we've been emitting for merely a hundred years isn't going to travel too far?

The rules don't change just because you're on a different planet, somebody in our closest neighboring system that maybe possibly sorta could have life would point a dish directly at our solar system and blast us in the UHF band for us to even notice them, much less recognize it as a communication effort from intelligent life.

TL;DR space is very fucking big and the inverse square law is a bitch.

>>8052424
It is this, and the likely eternal mystery of the universe's creation, that has led me to believe in an arbitrary deity as a possible theory to explain this.

>>8052477

I can't wait till we find some alien aztec species that hails us as gods and will make it their life purpose to serve us

>>8052432
>You assume that NO super intelligent species ever would want to spread everywhere
Why would they have to be "super intelligent"?
We might one day colonize the galaxy, and we aren't "super intelligent".

More importantly, you're assuming everyone can live on Earth.
There could be dozens of intelligent species hell-bent on spreading to every habitable planet.
At least to every planet that's habitable to THEM.
But how many of those species are comfortable with Earth's gravity, temperature, background radiation level, etc?

Also, if intelligent species are common, and interstellar travel is more plausible than it seems,seems then somebody probably "owns" this part of space, and might be keeping trespassers out.

There could be lots of other plausible explanations for our lack of contact.
You're just saying "I can't be bothered to think of an explanation for the observed data, therefore: paradox!"

>>8052606
>implying those things don't happen today
the average person in western society today is more hedonistic than the average person in Roman society

>>8053600
Okay, so? We're hedonistic, but we still get shit done anyway.

>>8052436
>Could it be one alien per Galaxy
All your other points are good. Could you bother to explain this one?

>>8052424
You're implying that because planets are old that means that they had the conditions for harboring life since their inception.

This not true for the Earth, so why would it be for other planets capable of life?

You're also implying that technological advancement is exponential. Think about the burning of the library at Alexandria, it set us back by hundreds of years.

>>8052444
Or they can travel through dimensions. Why spend time exploring this one if they can transcend it?

>>8052424
It's not out there

Our moon is what gives our planet the ability to spawn life and so far we have found no other planets with a moon like ours

We may very well be the only intelligent beings in the universe

>>8053585
terrible logic
>detection
This is the only meaningful distinction.
1) can we detect the EM waves they're species
tech may produce ( i have no idea about meaningful sized gravity waves from a type +++ civ )
within this question is another, does the civ hide itself?
2) has enough time elapsed for the those waves to have reached us ( time at which civ started sending out EM waves, distance from earth, acceleration from earth )

yadda yadda

>>8052515
>more likely they would show
?

>>8053628

>Our moon is what gives our planet the ability to spawn life

Really?

File: 1462478143265.jpg (118KB, 1074x772px) Image search: [Google]

118KB, 1074x772px

The worms ask why they haven't found any alien worm tunnels yet.

In a garden.

Tended by humans.

In a major city.

>"Surely alien worms would have left signs of their presence throughout the universe for us to find with our worm minds and worm senses." Says the scientist worm, and rightly so, for worm science is the lens by which the universe opens its secrets to wormkind.

>"Great worm scientists, why can I not dig through this material? Our best efforts to break it fail!" Says a pleb worm, slapping his snout against a piece of concrete, not realizing he is brushing up against a construct of the gods.

>"The universe is especially hard in certain locations, such that our most expert diggers cannot breach them. But the position of these areas appears random to us so it must be a natural phenomenon."

>"Thank you worm scientists, I'll try digging over here then!" Says the pleb worm, as he dives into a nice comfortable vein of soft earth.

>>8054232
Yes, without the moon our planet would be lifeless

>>8054243


This is stupid.

>>8053654
>terrible logic
How so?

>>detection
>This is the only meaningful distinction.

I was addressing the issue "why haven't the aliens colonized Earth yet?", but if you want to switch to "the great silence", fine.
Every star in the Galaxy *might* have a civilization broadcasting radio waves at the same level we do, and we'd never hear a thing:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox#Humans_are_not_listening_properly
>SETI estimates, for instance, that with a radio telescope as sensitive as the Arecibo Observatory, Earth's television and radio
>broadcasts would only be detectable at distances up to 0.3 light-years, less than 1/10 the distance to the nearest star.

>yadda yadda
Yabba-dabba-doo...

File: cat laugh.jpg (301KB, 1080x1283px) Image search: [Google]

301KB, 1080x1283px

>fermi paradox
>implying a comprehensive survey of cosmic RF has been completed
>common elements and chemical reactions can only originate life once in all of time and space

Wow man there must be some sort of magic that only exists on Earth, right godfags?

>>8054270

Why would aliens want to colonize Earth?

>>8054251

How so?

File: sagan_meme.jpg (55KB, 720x501px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 720x501px

The extraordinary claim is that in the entirety of the cosmos, life only exists on Earth. That would take some pretty extraordinary explanation.

>>8054274

Yes a civilization like ours wouldn't be detactable yet.
But what about a billion year old civilization that has been blasting van Neumann probes throughought the galaxy for millions of years? Where are their traces? They shouldn't even be hard to detect. It should be as easy looking up in the sky and seeing the stars.

>>8054294

Why would a billion year old civilization be blasting probes all over the place? Why not draw huge alien dicks in the sky with stars? Maybe galaxies actually look like alium asses and are grafitti? There's dank matter for you duder! xDDD

But we already have.
Just look to the fingolians. Human/alien hybrids.

>>8054294

In all seriousness and ignoring the literally thousands of UFO sightings every year, what traces would you expect to see?

>Why haven't we detected alien life yet?
Because energy usage of a civilization does not increase exponentially. Instead of expanding outwards, civilizations get denser to minimize communication latency.

Interstellar expansion is a meme.

>>8054283
>Why would aliens want to colonize Earth?
Who knows?
I wasn't the one claiming they would want to.
I'm addressing OP's concerns:
>>8052424
>explanations needs to satify not only one alien species but ALL alien species...colonizing space.

He seems to believe that if even one species were intent of colonizing the entire galaxy, they should be building settlements on Earth by now.

>>8053043
The only correct post in this thread

>>8054311

If anything, better technology would lead to more efficient energy usage. It's as if some were extrapolating coal usage or something. Imagine spaceships with 100L V40 motors with big blowers and flames shooting out.

>>8053274
Inverse square law is bullshit and you know it

>>8053474
Well that should be tenfold less of a satisfying answer than not knowing.

If religion was a fact, and we KNEW there was a God, but life was exactly the same, I'd only be repulsed by the creator

>>8054294
>civilization that has been blasting van Neumann probes throughought the galaxy for millions of years?
There's no reason to believe we'd see them.
Any von Neumann probes are almost certainly built for stealth.
The designers would realize their probes harvesting local resources would be likely seen as a hostile act, especially since they would be gathering enough fuel/energy/whatever to accelerate a significant mass to relativistic velocities, and that would pose a huge threat to any planetary civilization.
Besides, it's not like we're likely to detect alien probes in the first place.
In the last 12-15 years, we've just started discovering more kuiper belt dwarf planets besides pluto.
Objects hundreds of miles in diameter, and we've never seen any of them close up.
What if Haumea is a von Neumann probe?

>>8054311
Literally the main reason a civilization would start expanding spaceward is to satisfy growing energy consumption

File: UStotalenergy.jpg (117KB, 912x571px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 912x571px

>>8054329
That's my point.
Advances in technology will decrease the amount of energy used. Not increase it.

Energy usage in developed countries has already been flatlining for some time now.

>>8052424

Whatever man, you make way too many assumptions based on the human perspective. It may be that there's a sekrit klub, no fags allowed where species are only allowed out once they get over their base evolutionary animal behaviour. You can't blame them if they don't want space niggers flooding the cosmos, which may have happened in the past and lessons learned.

Anyway you seem like a curious chap so enjoy this entertaining and though provoking speculative fiction.

Google All Tomorrows

A Billion Year Chronicle of the Myriad Species and Varying Fortunes of Man

Nemo Ramjet

>>8054336
>space niggers flooding the cosmos
>my sides

Also, just realized that all of my sci fi fantasies are devoid of minorities...

what's the furthest distance we could be from earth in order to detect life here with our current tech?

why do seti try to detect radio waves when the inverse square law is a thing?

is it any wonder we haven't 'detected' an alien civ when we are looking for radio waves? why do we assume aliens would use radio?

why is our search for alien intelligence always based on the idea that aliens would require technology to become civilised?

are we just being anthropocentric morons?

>>8052424
Because the trend of advanced technology is looking downwards and inwards.

If we every phase over to machine-based "life" then our capability of creating highly interesting and vast expanses of virtual space will outstrip any capability to explore realspace by several magnitudes.

Imagine start to lithographically sculpture the lunar surface and interior volumes with lithographic processes.

If we have a meter-meter comparison of earth to moon area then the moon is just 0.074 earth surfaces, but if we have a meter-nanometer comparison the moon is 74 000 000 earth surfaces. And that's just surface.

So chances are we'll never bother to explore the very large scales of the cosmos because the very small scales will have so much more to offer. We can only crudely manipulate sub-elemental particles today. Just like we once could only crudely shape stone by banging them together. And just like we nowdays can form bulk material into whatever we want we may one day be able to form subelemental particles in similar manners, and from there we could dive deeper.

Once you're operating on very fast timescale with very fine manipulators it becomes feasible to consider particles and energies like material objects in your living room. An unstable elements becomes a ball rolling towards the edge of a table something you're used to manipulate before it breaks down. The periodic system stops being an assortment of stable elements you pick and chose from and is replaced by a framework that governs sub-nuclear physical interactions, it becomes an active and designed system that you can manipulate to do things. Then you can tease at these at their subcomponents and make even finer systems. At the end of the day you might be able to create nearly massless integrated systems that could behave like neutrinos but have the computational power of the internet.

tl;dr The colonization of the universe happened but their microcomputers are indistinguishable from protons.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfPdhsP8XjI

>>8054359
Some more speculation.

Anyone being able to create such femtomachines would likely also have the best colonization opportunity also. They could be propagated through the universe at the speed of light or very very close and when they hit anything they'd not need to violently lithobreak into it but could essentially do a computational handshake with it.

The extreme discrepancy of scale, both of time and szie would mean that they might not be aware of us at all depending on what networking and higher level structures they utilize. They might only be interested in talking to other particle-sized civilizations, or they might be entirely selfcontained and not talkative at all. Or simply disseminated and networking as a distributed network running some internal simulation that see most of the universe as a pitch black darkness except for the most cataclysmic events. They might then be aware of us due to particle accelerators injecting noise in their networking system.

Or we might be a high level metacomputation experiment/simulation that they run where their microprocessors pretend to be the physical dumb parts, but occasionally they play out some active moves to ensure their amusing simulation don't end up getting splatted by some coincidence. They might in fact have decided to do this with the entire universe, just gather their microprocessors into a massive point, load up the same physicis simulation properties and then intiailize all of themself to a high energy state and you've got a big bang, then just drift and do their internal fun simulation while their external behaviour follows the "game rulebook version 1.102"

We can simply not know how deep the rabbit hole goes. At any point in the history of mankind we've had somekind of "picture" of what the physical world is. But as we delve deeper we find more and more and more details. Just this week there was an annoucement that the LHC might have detected a particle not predicted by the standard model.

>>8054350
Oldest radio broadcast is like 121 years old but far too weak to be detected at that distance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_oldest_radio_stations

What would probably be easiest to detect is nuclear detonations. A very rapid optic sensor that observes the planetary orbits around a star for energy pulses could notice the blips from these. The peak power output from the tsar bomba was 10% of the solar output so that's definitely in the range where astrometrical instruments stand a chance to see it within dozens of lightyears. But airburst or spaceburst nuclear explosions aren't exactly frequent so they might not be a very reliable SETI target.

>>8052424
Fermi's paradox makes some bold assumptions that may very well be false. It assumes that any planet that can support life WILL support life and that any planet that does harbor life WILL advance.

I'm a geologist, so I'm well aware of how incredibly hard it was to create advanced life on this Earth. Something people often gloss over and ignore. Multicellular life, for example, didn't exist for over a billion and a half years after life developed on Earth. For 1.5 billion years life ... just ... did nothing above bacterial level. We don't even understand how Eukaryotes happened. It certainly doesn't make any sense. One bacteria started eating another bacteria and then ... just didn't. Suddenly Eukaryotes.

So if it took 1.5 billion years for multicellular life to start after life first developed. And it took another 540 million years for life to advance to primates. And it took another 2 million years for primates to advance to humans. And it took 200,000 years for humans to develop language and society.

Chances are advanced life is insanely rare.

>>8054871
>"what would probably be easiest to detect is nuclear detonations
>UFO sightings started in 1947 two years after the atomic bomb was tested
>UFO sightings peaked in 1952 the year the hydrogen bomb was tested.
>UFO sightings are more common around nuclear weapons bases
Coincidence?

>>8054890
>Chances are advanced life is insanely rare.
Or insanely advanced.

We're pretty far only when compared to our history. Sure we have internet and all those fancy mechanical techs but we're pretty far down the potential advancement ladder.

Think of it like this: The best nanomachines that nature provides: Our very own cells, are something we cannot even maintain or repair efficiently, let alone build workable artificial copies of.

On the other hand our own flavour of MEMS and or solid state nanomachines have proven that we can make very small and efficient devices that exceeds those that nature uses, but are not meshable.

As such we're not advanced life. We're intermediate life with advanced tools.

When we can rebuild ourselfs with our tool building techs to do the same or similar functions that the nature-version nanomachines do, then we can start to argue that we've become advanced life, but that level of technology will be staggering and the results will be very different than what we think of as life from our intermediate-level lifeform perspective.

tl;dr A good answer to the fermi paradox is that our level of perspective of life and technology is incredibly primitive. We still are primates and therefor we guess in primate-like ways and see things with primate-like eyes.

>>8054890
I cant wait for NASA to find life on Mars then all these "we r speshul" arguments will finally be BTFO

>>8054923
>UFO sightings started in 1947 two years after the atomic bomb was tested

That means the aliens had sensing equipment in the solar system and that this sensing equipment have superluminal communication ability and the aliens themself have FTL travel capability.

Or they had ships in the system and decided to start flying around by that time. The nearest star is 4 lightyears away so any sensors there wouldn't have noticed the bomb signatures until 1949.

>>8054323
>what if humans are van neumann probes

>>8054940
there might be an alien base out there yes. We've barely explored the solar system. Either that or they set up a wormhole.

File: 12310536_133382910362389_5454284421455039015_n.jpg (48KB, 540x620px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 540x620px

>>8054319
>Inverse square law is bullshit and you know it
lmao!

I'd love to see you prove that retarded statement.

>>8054890
>One bacteria started eating another bacteria and then ... just didn't.

Doesn't need to be eating. Could just be a big bacteria chilling in a biofilm next to a small one(biggest to smallest bacteria today are like 5000:1 scale) and then eventually they started wrapping eachother because biggies stole some genes and could port the nutrients that smally needed into itself so smally had a good time and biggy was so used to having smally next to it. Or it could be phages that suddenly mutates a bacteria to go inception and put a bacteria in bacteria.

Some evolution later and they realized they became roided as fuck if several small smallies lived in biggie and the smallies had a leaky membrane so biggie could use their energy too.

It actually makes sense, not just eukaryotes ex machina.

The suggested timescales also oversimplify things. The first bacteria was a very crude thing. It then spent a shitload of time developing metabolic pathways and other bells and whistles that was a requirement for its future versions. They converted mineral mass to biomass, oxygenated the atmosphere and did all sorts of complex groundwork that made it possible for higher life to get shit done. The accelerating timescale after the appearance o higher life is also a good indicator that once the ball is rolling it will have a preference for where it's going.

>>8054967
>there might be an alien base out there yes.
The solar system is a very very very large place so sure why not. But if the bases were already there then why not visit before we go nuclear?

>>8055005
>there then why not visit before we go nuclear?
not him but there are a fair few ufo reports pre-1947

I think its possible that the Aliens are just us. From the future. If you extrapolate human evolution you get a hairless tall but quite weak creature with a huge skull. And since its so weak it created small worker drones that are not as smart but very good at serving. And now they are visiting us to find more about their past, like we are digging out ancient cities. The only thing they have to watch out for is bringing everyone back they abduckt, or they might accidently erase themselves from existing. Thats also why they don't invade us.

>>8052486
>It is possible that we are on the leading edge of intelligence development and nobody else is appreciably further along in technological development than we are.

In the local bubble, if they're on the opposite side of the milky way they could be pretty far ahead but due to distances they might as well not exist for another 100k years.

>It is possible that even if intelligent life is more abundant than your estimates, the percentage that successfully migrate to the stars [or even use radio] is very low.

Even if they use radio the need to be quite close to be detectable. Unless they create TeraWatt class radiobeacons they'll be virtually invisible beyond a few hundred lightyears.

>It is possible that our own detection capabilities are laughably finite.

It's a fact, not a possibility. The "megastructure candidate" star that was recently found was investigated with radiotelescopes and what they simply found out was that "oh, look, nobody there is using a 3-fucking gigawatt transmisssion array!". guess what, no one in the solar system needs a 3 fucking gigawatt transmission array either. So our search is severely limited by our detection capabilties.


>It is possible that others presume the galaxy to be a hostile place and do not want to be found in respect of their own self-preservation.
>It is possible that others have a policy of non-intervention with primitive societies.

Or they don't give a fuck because because they're evolving into an introspective community. If you can do full fidelity VR for ten million fully detailed earth-like planets in the same time that you could send a single probe to the nearest star, then which one do you think will end up capturing the public mind?

By the time you arrive at the second closest star you'll have created 400 new solar system with simulated planets, lifeforms orbital dynamics all of it in your home system, so the discovery will be dull in comparision to the creative potential that you have locally.

>>8054290
Why? Are there reasons other than "life exists here therefore it must exist elsewhere"? As i understand it, single celled life is unlikely but developing multicellular life is even less likely (and poorly understood). Not trying to argue, i am just asking.

>>8055189
> abduckt
What country of origin?

>>8055012
>not him but there are a fair few ufo reports pre-1947
Especially if you aren't looking for people claiming what they saw was extra-terrestrial/
A hundred years ago, TONS of people calmed to have literally "seen the light".
What we would currently interpret as a UFO encounter was once widely considered a religious experience.

File: 1460544478361.jpg (68KB, 600x827px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 600x827px

>>8055317
>they'll be virtually invisible beyond a few hundred lightyears.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox#Humans_are_not_listening_properly
>with a radio telescope as sensitive as the Arecibo Observatory, Earth's television and radio broadcasts would only be detectable at distances up to 0.3 light-years,
>less than 1/10 the distance to the nearest star.

>a few hundred lightyears.
There could be a civilization similar to our own orbiting every star in the galaxy, and we'd never hear a thing.

>>8055012
You're right but the whole thing went crazy after 1947. Imagine if ghost reports shot through the roof on one particular year, it's weird.
>>8055189
But aliens are widely reported to be short. Who knows? Both theories are equally wild but there is definitely something going on.
>>8055005
Maybe they are just observing. Maybe they can't get involved for whatever reason. They are very evasive. The strangest thing about UFOs is that even if it really did turn out to be aliens their actions are still completely inexplicable. Here to make contact? Then why run away every time we get close? Here to spy? Then why hover with your lights on 10 feet above a military base? Here to abduct? Then why return the subjects so they can talk about what you did to them? In general why the fuck would you travel all the way to another planet just to joyride in the atmosphere and anally rape the local fauna?

>>8055763
No but the military never reported much before 1947. There was ghost rockets and foo fighters but that was it really. After 1948 when a USAF pilot got killed chasing a UFO that's when everyone got spooked. As I said it's as if say tomorrow ghost reports go through the roof to the point where the military starts getting concerned about the number of their personnel seeing things and then to cap it off one gets killed chasing a ghost. Either 1947 was aliens or the Soviets put something in the water.

>>8054243
This is great.

the most advanced races in the universe don't expand and colonize planets. they shrink down their own reality and live inside a tiny borg cube or they reside just outside black holes for all dat energy.

seriously, why would a hyper advanced species bother with the universe? they'd make everything tiny and efficient and just hook themselves up to the perfect virtual reality and slow down their perception of time so much that they essentially live forever.

>>8055792

to expand on that;

the universe is a big scary jungle full of horrors. any species that's truly intelligent wouldn't go calling out into the jungle in the middle of the night so predators can murder them.

the reason we cant detect any aliens/civilizations is because they don't want to be found.

also the universe is really fucking big :^)

>>8055005
>eventually they started wrapping eachother

It's called eating. And no it's so impossibly rare it happened once in 2.3 billion years and led to all advanced life as we know it.

In before it didn't only happen once. All life is descended from the same tree. We know from the fossil record that it only happened once so try not to make excuses please.

>>8055802
>We know from the fossil record that it only happened once
no, we really don't.

>>8055802
>It's called eating.
Only if consumed for nutrients, any other mechanism no.

>it's so impossibly rare it happened once in 2.3 billion years

Could've happened a hundred trillion times before, leading to parasitic dead ends before it finally happened in the right environment. Could've happened a hundred million trillion times more afterwards but eukaryotes ate the results before it could evolve to viability.

>muhg singular uniqueness
There's also one earth, wow such rare. Clearly if Earths were common we'd find more of them in our solar system!

Stop misconstructing retarded arguments please. Go look at your rocks and stay the fuck away from lifeforms if you insist on being willfully ignorant about them.

>>8054890

You don't know shit.

>>8054936
>I cant wait for NASA to find life on Mars

They already did and the POTSA announced it 20 years ago. Retards lost their shit and the media swept it back under the carpet, now people actually believe that this was a mistaken announcement.

http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/snc/nasa1.html

>"It is very difficult to prove life existed 3.6 billion years ago on Earth, let alone on Mars," Zare said. "The existing standard of proof, which we think we have met, includes having an accurately dated sample that contains native microfossils, mineralogical features characteristic of life, and evidence of complex organic chemistry."

>>8055681

There's 100% chance of all of those forms of life occurring, we can see them with our own two eyes and they are pervasive all throughout this planet. What makes you believe that they are rare or unlikely?

>>8052424
Fermi paradox assumes there's a lot more to technology than we have already found. It also assumes radio signals travel through space perfectly and without attenuation at all.

Essentially, Fermi paradox assumes a whole like of stupid shit.

>>8052606
You're an idiot, kid.

>>8054890
You don't seem to be aware thtat Universe is Huge as fuck, and that the age of the UNiverse is at least 13.5 Ga. That's enough time matter and space to create life in other place. I mean, there had been enough chances for that. Just look at earth, only 1000 Ma and we aleardy has life

>>8052627

Your ignorance is amusing.

>>8054263

Actually its very clever, i rather cliched. The point made is simply beyond your dull mind, that is all.

>>8055837

Fermi paradox is cognitive dissonance packaged in a nice obtuse pseudo-scientific smokescreen. There's nothing rare about life on Earth it's teeming in the deep rocks and upper atmosphere. Likewise, the building blocks of life as it exists on Earth are some of the most common compound in the solar system, with the Oort cloud swarming with bodies containing water, organic molecules and simple carbohydrates.

It's at the stage where one must be called to explain how life cannot be common in the cosmos, because that implys some sort of magic pixie dust on Earth.

>>8054438

good shit man, i enjoyed reading that.

>>8055779
>Either 1947 was aliens or the Soviets put something in the water.
It's also almost the exact same year practical helicopters were entering mass production.
AND several of the late-40's UFO's were reported to have crashed.

oyyyy just a few more trillion dollars spent on giant rockets and maybe we can find some starman poo for the chosen peoples real ancestors....

i can imagine humanity in 1000 years perfectly... a snowball that used to be called earth.

a couple shitty metal satillites still spin in orbit, one has a complete skeleton on it...he is surrounded by the bones of his shipmates

we "wise, wise" humans were handed a lush green planet...we could not make this work for us...so whar are our odds with metal frames?

if all life is like us then there is your answer

>>8055802
>All life is descended from the same tree.
That's the narrative your high school biology teacher sells, and Occam's Razor more-or-less agrees.
But that's it.
We have no evidence supporting your "one-tree" idea.
We don't have any evidence

>>8055880
Helicopters don't do 7,000 mph. if it was anything man-made I'd place my bets on secret re-entry vehicle tests for the upcoming Project Mercury and Gemini. This would explain the repeated crashing and even the saucer shape.
>>8055829
Oh shit I remember that, Bill Clinton actually went live on air to announce that ayys had landed. How'd they manage to sweep that one under the carpet?

I often think what if we're the first? Like that one story by Isaac Asimov. Where we grow exponentially over time and become a civilisation capable of leaving our galaxy and and eventually colonize the universe. Its a weird thing that gives me a strange feeling. Like a thought loop on acid kind of.

File: gavin-hellier-portrait-of-masked-ceremonial-dogon-dancers-near-sangha-mali-west-africa.jpg (75KB, 366x488px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 366x488px

>>8055880
watch the movie "mirage men" where an ex us government agent admits to driving people crazy with alien bullshit

the real question is why...to distract from zionazi israel? to distract from our recruiting of "green cross" japanese bioweapons chinks? to distract from prescott bush sucking so much saudi arabian cock?

>>8055769

I'll add to that. Analog signals today are largely being displaced by digital, and more often encrypted. To the outside observer, a well encrypted signal is indistinguishable from noise and our ubiquitous cellular and satellite traffic would look to be static in the microwave bands.

Now let us consider, if one points a radio telescope to empty space there is a constant RF noise most prevaltent in the microwave which is taken as the CMB. The current dogma is this is remnant traces of the big bang, almost a tautology of clusterfucks with all the dark energy business.

But what if it's the ubiquitous signal as postulated by Fermi? What if it's been staring us in the face the entire time?

>>8055901

Beats me. NASA never recanted, in fact further study has only strenghtened the case.

>>8055916
>dogma
According to who? I don't care what you call it so long as you can cite who said it.

>>8055901
>Helicopters don't do 7,000 mph
??? sauce?
Every UFO report I've ever read says something like:
>It was just a light in the night sky
>I have no way of judging scale or distance
>but it went x-thousand miles an hour
>and did maneuvers that must have involved hundreds of g's

>>8055932
>no way of judging scale or distance
This. Every goddamn UFO "documentary" say this.

>>8055916
>our ubiquitous cellular and satellite traffic
Cell traffic must be especially useless to extra-terrestrial listeners because so many transmitters here on earth are re-using the same frequencies for different traffic
But even TV and AM/FM use the same frequencies for different signals.

>>8055929

Oh dear silly me, I forgot that if the scientific establishment believes it, it's a fact.

>>8055939

Yes but you're ignoring the fact that encrypted digital microwave signals are beamed directly into space with satellite dishes. TV and radio signals only leak into space.

>>8055945
I'm an /x/ native. I don't care if you think everyone else thinks it's dogma, I care what I'll think on the matter when someone gives me a decent source.

>>8055948

Just use your own brain. A theory which requires one to accept that 95% of the universe is some unknown, unmeasurable dark energy, based on no other data than it makes the model work. Now I'm not saying that's right or wrong, but I am saying that's hardly empiric science yet it is accepted as such to the extent of dogma.

>>8055947
>beamed directly into space with satellite dishes.
Highly directional, and no stronger than needed to reach geosync.
Even if we have neighbors within a dozen LY, it seems unlikely they'd notice our RF emissions.

>>8055952

RIght, but if they did it wouldn't be TV broadcasts it would be mostly noise.

>>8055951
No. I already doubt the validity of modern physics, I have this pic >>8055139 saved and I believe that >>8055894 was a legit message from the future. It doesn't take a genius to question consensus. What I care about is if you're some fool who thinks the universe is simple and easy to understand or if you're actually well-studied enough to provide an actual source on the "dogma." The fact is that all the actual researchers I've spoke to where humble and willing to admit that science wasn't omniscient. It's only the fans that give people like us shit. I'm not here to be your pretend audience for a stance I already agree with, I'm here to talk about the actual science behind it. I'm not going to defer to my own reasoning as an authority. Cite it or go back to >>>/x/, where I and a thousand other anons will be perfectly ready and willing to discuss it.

>>8055959

>Dogma is a belief or set of beliefs that is accepted by the members of a group without being questioned or doubted.[1] It serves as part of the primary basis of an ideology or belief system, and it cannot be changed or discarded without affecting the very system's paradigm, or the ideology itself. The term can refer to acceptable opinions of philosophers or philosophical schools, public decrees, religion, or issued decisions of political authorities.[2]

You're just redirecting from my original point: what if the CMB is the evidence of the Fermi paradox? To make that point means to ignore dogma for a moment.

>>8055959

Nice ad-hominem.

>>8055962
No it doesn't. No serious scientist will tell you that the CMB must necessarily not contain any intelligently generated signals. You're just a shithead that thinks science is a belief system, which is clearly not the consensus of this board.

>>8055959
>I believe that >>8055894 was a legit message from the future.
I started to read the linked article, but got no farther than "she".
In everyday life, women are far less subject to personal peer-review than men are.
Most women can spout any nonsense they like, and men (and many women) will listen, and give a non-critical response.

>>8052424
>Imagije how the human society will look like in 3 BILLION years

The imaginings of a creature billions of years less advanced about the long-term trajectory of intelligent life must apparently be correct, so the fact that we don't see the consequences of those imaginings means there is no advanced life at all.

>>8055968

Fuck off cunt.

>>8055970
...Which is why the future would use a female avatar if it ever wanted to send back a message.

After a long period of simple lifeforms, life on Earth went from pond scum to humans in only 600 million years, which is pretty fast in the cosmic scale. Life existed on Earth as soon as it cooled down enough for it to happen. Life is not such a big deal.

We just haven't hit their level yet. When the power of a AA cell can open up a quadrillion gigabit connection 2,000,000 light years away and allow full-spectrum sensory sharing between life forms as well as total participation in the galactic network, they don't want to spend a billion years moving suns around because reasons.

>>8055959

Wait a sec, you believe the sci-fi column? Are you actually a human or an ai? Either way, enjoy being ignored.

>>8052424
Maybe physics has it's limits and said aliens cannot really communicate other than sending out signals of light which are billions of light years away.

>>8055976
Absolutely not. It's obvious that you:
1. Haven't lurked here for two consecutive days.
2. Haven't read past the first page.
3. Don't know any hard science.
4. Are a complete newfag.

But hey, nobody cares. You learned that /sci/ isn't the hard-nosed hyper-skeptic you thought we were from all those "can't believe" posts on /x/. You've made your mistake and found out it was an obvious mistake and now you have a chance to lurk moar and see just how much /sci/ has to tolerate in the name of getting a decent thread to work. Soon you'll realize /sci/ deals with /sci/fi all the time and you won't have to guard your ideas as if they're publish-worthy material (which they aren't). Maybe you'll even be ready to start asking some completely ignorant but otherwise really interesting questions and we can work together to make your threads not be shit.

Welcome, anon.

>>8055991
Are you implying people on 4chan actually know real science and math? I'm pretty sure most people on this board are just popsci worshiping wannabes.

>>8055991

>believes science fiction stories

>>8055985
I'm a human capable of programming AI. And yes, the sci-fi column would be the perfect place to hide a message from the future. Obviously the future doesn't exactly have options for publishing information backwards in time without royally fucking up the time stream.

Where would you deliver a message to the past if you were trying to avoid changing too much at once?

>>8055995
>people on 4chan
No, people on /sci/. You obviously haven't lurked.

>>8056001

I read on the internet that ur a faget. I believe it.

>>8056009
Right, then we can immediately dismiss /sci/ as a potential recipient for future intel then huh?

>>8056012

Sure.

>>8056005
I have. You all worship popsci.

>>8056016
Key word: Lurk.

>>8056016

Getting back to what started this bullshit, big bang theory and dark energy are popsci; CMB is the isotropic noise of a cosmos teeming with civilization, as theorized by the Fermi paradox.

>>8052424
Because we are the first intelligent enough to do so.

>>8055825

Earth clearly IS rare though. Even looking at earth like planets earth is an extremely atypical planet.
If only for our moon

>>8056137

>implying that we can resolve the moon systems of extrasolar planets

>>8055980

So... where is everybody?

>>8056140

Our moon is one of the biggest in our own fucking solar system. Only Jupiter's Galilean moons and Saturn's biggest moons match its size. The formation of our moon was clearly atypical.

>>8056148

So what? That still doesn't mean that we can see moons in other star systems, and for that matter it's a red-herring as far as the origin of life goes and just another magic-pixie-dust straw to clutch, for godfags anyway.

>>8056142

>implying that we've actually comprehensively searched for them

>>8055802

Organelle endosymbiosis happened more than once, with the two obvious candidates of mitochondria and plastids, like chloroplasts. It is theorized that other cell organelles are atrophied or more tightly integrated endosymbionts: either obviously like flagellum or more subtlely like internal membranes.

That's discounting the possibility of many other variations which didn't survive, but there may have been a period of heavy selection pressure when the atmospheric oxygenation threshold tipped and archaea were forced to evolve or perish. Those that could form "eukaryotic" colonies survived at the surface, those that couldn't were relegated to hiding from the oxygen where they remain.

I like how everyone tries to explain this from human point of view and depends on way humans think.

Aliens can be completely different from us. They may have different body structure and use completely different ways of communication. They may even consist of things we think is impossible

>>8056316
As humans, we sure know a lot about that and could discuss it at length.

>people actually believe that not just life but the sum total of consciousness in the cosmos only exists here

Absolutely terrifying.

>>8056348
I am literally the only conscious being in the universe.

>>8056348
Take solace in the fact that every civilization will have these.

>>8056381

It's no wonder this level of civilization is not allowed into the club. I don't even want to hang out with it.

We'll never get an answer until we find something, so there's no reason to stop looking.

>>8056316

Yes but we don't even talk about the inconveivable aliens here.
The argument is that the galaxy is so full planets and so full of life and so old that it should be seeping out life at every corner and finding alien signals should be as easy as finding a fish in the ocean or a star in the night sky.

>>8056157

Without the moon life as we know it definitely wouldn't exist. Jupiter would've flipped earth over like Venus billions of years ago and cause too chaotic fluctuations in our orbit that would not have been stabilized the moon

>>8056452

But that's not true. Please shove your bible up your ass godfag, you're fooling nobody. :3

>>8056455

I'm sorry that was mean. But still, the unique Earth tactic is an obvious red-herring.

I think the answer is that the Orion Arm historically had violent celestial activity

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1764-supernova-smoking-gun-linked-to-mass-extinctions/

and that the speed of light really can't be exceeded on conventional terms.

When you consider both of these possibilities, it means that any intelligent life in our stellar neighborhood (within 1,000 LY) was very likely exterminated before their radio transmissions reached us. We wouldn't have been listening anyway.

It could very well be that we live in an intelligent life Dead Zone and that other more fortunate civilizations are already communicating, possibly even trading, and that we would be at a natural disadvantage when we meet alien life anyway, much like the Aztecs were when they met Cortez.

>>8056142
>So... where is everybody?

There are dozens of potential answers to that question:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox#Hypothetical_explanations_for_the_paradox
This isn't a mystery like "what the fuck happened to the Marie Celeste?"
It's more like the mystery of "what did you have for breakfast today?", since there are so many potential answers.

Mostly though, there's no reason to believe we'd actually notice any aliens.
Inverse-square law and CMBR explain the lack of radio traffic. Our entire recorded history is the blink of an eye on the cosmic scale, 0.00004% of the age of the universe.
Von Neumann probes are likely to be stealthy (if they exist in large numbers at all).
And the more prolific life is, the less likely it is that our neighbors would find our specific environment comfortable, so it's not surprising that we haven't been colonized.

>>8056476
>"what did you have for breakfast today?"

Oats with milk and honey.

>>8056148
>Our moon is one of the biggest in our own fucking solar system.
That's a very small sample size.

>The formation of our moon was clearly atypical.
Not necessarily. If a mid-range, rocky planet like ours was 50% likely to have a moon like ours, then there's a 75% chance that either Mars or Venus would have one.
Since neither does, it's most likely that "50%" is too optimistic, but it's not like a million-to-one shot.
If a moon like ours is 10% likely, there's a 81% chance that neither Mars nor Venus would have a moon like us.
Weigh that against the hundreds of billions of stars in the Galaxy....

>>8052424

because you have to assume three things, that:

1. intelligent life exists
2. intelligent life exists and developed the telescope and the radio
3. intelligent life and developed the telescope and the radio and didn't blow itself up

then there's the problem of actually contacting them: radio waves travel at lightspeed and life that hits all the above would take several thousand (if not more) years to actually discover from the moment they make their first transmission

>>8056476

>This isn't a mystery like "what the fuck happened to the Marie Celeste?"

>It's more like the mystery of "what did you have for breakfast today?", since there are so many potential answers.

I think the reason why we haven't detected intelligent life in the various places where we've looked is different for each region.

The first answer is because it isn't there in any of the places we expected it to be, probably because we aren't approaching the problem with enough information.

There's an excellent book I checked out from the library over a decade ago and that anybody interested can find on gen.lib

Seventy-Five Solutions to the Fermi Paradox by Stephen Webb

>>8056455
>But that's not true.
Not him, but...
The moon is responsible for tidal forces (see radioactive beach hypothesis), and the Earth's core's rotation, and thus the strength of the magnetosphere.

The moon MIGHT help considerably, but there's no reason to believe it's rare.

>>8056483

We know with 100% certainty that all three of those conditions are possible. The contention is can those conditions happen more than once in basically infinite scenario and if not, why?

>>8056490

No. Tidal forces aren't required for life, nor is it anything to do with Earth's core. Creationist lies.

>>8052627

What on Earth is this post saying? There was no industrial revolution in Britain? Because of the monarchy???

>>8056488
>it isn't there in any of the places we expected it to be
Where have we searched that we "expect it to be"?
Sci-fi aside, we should only really expect to find life where there's oceans.
And we've never searched any off-world oceans for life.

>>8056497
>And we've never searched any off-world oceans for life.

Which really pisses me off. The second they realized there might be water under Europa NASA should have dropped everything and made a beeline right there.

It's almost as if they're afraid of pilling back the ice or something.

>>8056488
>reason why we haven't detected intelligent life in the various places where we've looked is

We've barely looked at anything. The survey to date is barely better than looking out the window and making claims based on that.

>>8056504

Think about a space opera universe brimming with Kardashev Type II and III civilizations. If such a thing were normal, then wouldn't they have found us already?

My point is that it isn't and that maybe what they need are new hypotheses and approaches to the question. Maybe the idea that time = progress among civilizations is quintessentially false, just like there is no "goal" to eveolution. Civilizations might follow a similar pattern of reaching an apex and then ending up like the coelacanth: unchanged for hundreds of millions of years.

>>8056515

Have you stopped for a chat with an antnest lately? Did you even notice it? Did they even notice you?

>>8056455

What do you mean it's not true? It's scientific fact. Look at Venus. The only reason earth wasn't fucked up like Venus (although because of it's higher mass it's even more susceptible to orbital resonance) is because the moon IMMENSELY stabilizes earth's orbit.
Earth's orbit is basically the same as it was 4 billion years ago and that's all thanks to the moon

>>8056542

Isn't it because Venus is closer to the sun?

>>8056542

A fringe hypothesis at best, bullshit at worst. No fact.

>>8056515

That Kardashev stuff is scifi fantasy extrapolated from human nature to swinging space peen and driving around in space cars conquering the place.

>>8056522

>Have you stopped for a chat with an antnest lately? Did you even notice it? Did they even notice you?

Sadly, yes. They were fire ants.

>>8052424
Maybe because we currently can't detect signals from too far away good enough to distinguish it from noise? Because so much is blocked by stars and and shit and we only observe a tiny part of our sky? Maybe the Catgirls of Futa 3 already sent us messages begging for cock and all that reached us are some stray electrons that cause no spike on any sensor? Maybe we don't know how they communicate and thus don't know for what kind of signal to look for? Imagine explaining somebody in 1600 that he has to search the sky for radio signals.

>>8056561

You broke intergalactic rule #1: keep walking.

>>8056566
>Have you stopped?
>You must keep walking
please make up your mind

>>8055772
>You're right but the whole thing went crazy after 1947. Imagine if ghost reports shot through the roof on one particular year, it's weird.

yeah i agree

i mean maybe we were being visited routinely, (say from a relatively local bases, outer solar system or whatever), and then as soon as we used a nuke they were like
>lol wtf are those apes doing, they are gonna wreck the joint, better get down there and make sure they don't blow themselves up

this doesn't seem too stupid if you think about the reports from nuclear bases, or the contactee stories where people are told to look after the planet (the one that springs to mind was that one at a school, was in in australia or something, where a ton of kids all reported the same 'message' - making the cultural [hippie] influence a lot less likely)

>>8054243
I like you <3

>>8056503
given how many ufo reports feature them going into or coming out of our oceans you might be onto something there

>>8056581
* it was the south african school, not the australian school

(two different mass sightings, i got confused)

>>8056594
* actually - zimbabwe, i was almost right lol

apologies, i need coffee

>>8055835
As far as we can tell multicellular organisms on earth all share a genesis. For that matter so do single cellular organisms (i think). Point is it was only successful once in all of history although im sure being the first helped with that.

Single cellular and multicellular are the really big humps ti get over. After that we can let life run with it. Why do you think just because it is everywhere on earth it would be abundant anywhere else? If i were a hermaphrodite I may make the assumption everyone else is too.

>>8056628

Life appeared almost straight away on Earth as soon as it cooled enough. Eukyarotes appeared almost immediately after cyanobacteria modified the atmosphere enough to support oxygen metabolism, multicellular life followed not long after then it was only a few hundred years to humans.

It's also possible and theorized that life originated and was sterilized a couple of times during bombardment.

Now, considering that life got started pretty easily on Earth, and that it is common on Earth, and based on elements and compounds which are common in the cosmos, why wouldn't it also exist elsewhere?

>>8056661

Few hundred million years that is.

>>8052447
>Very smart answer
lol fuck off faggot thats the only answer

>>8052424
Because radio signals turn into quiet mush at only a few lightyears and Earth isn't that interesting.

>>8052515
Dyson spheres are the stupidest idea.

>>8056551

It's simple physics not a "fringe hypothesis" you fucking retard

File: planet mercury.jpg (123KB, 1020x1024px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 1020x1024px

>>8056872
It also assumes Venus never had a moon.

>>8056542
>The only reason earth wasn't fucked up like Venus

More than twice the solar irradiance have nothing to do with it in your mind?

Global warmists are shitting their pants over single digit W/m^2 values and you it matters less than having a moon.

Now what about mars? It's a fair bit smaller sure, but it doesn't have gigantic moon and it's have an earth-like dayduration.

>>8055932
Sheeple make me laugh

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Air_Lines_flight_1628_incident

>Jumbo jet crew sees two craft following them at 35,000 feet
>Flew in front of jet and blasted off thrusters so hot that the crew could feel the heat from inside their cockpit.
>Then sees a "mothership" the size of an aircraft carrier floating alongside him
>Tracked on radar
>FAA chief played back radar data with audio description
>Times match perfectly
>FBI and CIA ask to see it
>Pilot gets demoted after going public therefore had nothing to gain from making this up
>"It was all a helicopter"
>>8055936
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lonnie_Zamora_incident
This guy actually saw ayys get out of the UFO. On duty cop, no reason to make this up and fused sand from a jet blast was found at the scene when the FBI turned up to investigate. Finally the case even managed to convert the Air Force's top debunker into believing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Allen_Hynek

>>8056933

So how do you explain the fact UFO sightings decreased dramatically at the onset of affordable and widespread cameraphones in the general populace?

>>8056416
/thread

>>8056960
This old argument....

So easily explained if you think about it,I'm amazed why people still think this is a good counter argument

UFO sightings have not decreased, they have increased. I assume you came up with this claim due to never seeing any UFO photograph in the news. Well seeing as anyone can now shop in a saucer on their iPhone why on earth would a respectable newspaper print this? UFO photographs are posted daily to UFO sites daily. How many are genuine I have no idea. Furthermore reporting on UFOs is straight up uncool which is why papers stopped reporting it long before smartphones. So we now have this skeptic circlejerk where they sneer at anyone who reports a UFO then uses these same lack of reports as proof that UFOs don't exist.

>>8056976
>UFO photographs are posted daily to UFO sites daily.

Shoot a link then.

>>8056960
Source?
There has been a linear increase in sightings according to my googling.

>>8052521
What??

>>8056981
This is the least tinfoil one I could find
http://www.worldufophotos.org/#/gallery/ufo-gallery-1/3-18-75-ober-sadelegg-switzerland-billy-meier-copyright/
There's 14 other galleries, I think the last gallery is more recent.
This has more but it's tinfoil as fuck.
http://www.ufosightingsdaily.com
Try not to laugh.

>>8052583
I think the question of our limited lifespan is more important.

>>8054294
Maybe they thought it would be unethical to shatter the mystery f existence for all other life out there, or they didnt want to pollute the universe my spraying their mettafotical jizz throughout the universe, you pleb faggot

>>8052432
Where the fuck did he assume that? Addressing your assumption is not one in itself fucking Christ

>>8052447
It's the fucking answer kid, seriously grow the fuck up. It's fun to sit and think of interesting ideas, but they're only food for thought. Life's tough, get used it.

File: biology, UFO, UFOs, sighting, sightings, alien, aliens, EBE, mars, anomalies, anomaly, map, 2015, news, sunset, volcano, cloud, weather, 06.png (100KB, 640x337px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 640x337px

>>8057009
>Try not to laugh.

File: 9780765377081.jpg (661KB, 658x1000px) Image search: [Google]

661KB, 658x1000px

What I think is the most likely explanation: Abiogenesis is an extremely low probability event. Maybe it would only occur on average once in the life of a universe like ours. Maybe only once in a googol of universes.

There are many other possibilities.

Imagine the universe as a forest, patrolled by numberless and nameless predators. In this forest, stealth is survival - any civilisation that reveals its location is prey. If this is the universe we live in, the Pioneer and Voyager probes are our death sentence, unless we retrieve them.

>>8052424

We look out from our planet and see a universe of space, and time, of substance and causality, of plurality and totality, of possibility and probability – and we forget that what we’re actually seeing are the ways our minds structure the Ding an sich according to the categories of space, and time, of substance and causality, of plurality and totality, of possibility and probability. We look out and we see no aliens, and are surprised. But the real surprise would be to see aliens in such a vista, because that would mean the aliens are in our structures of thought. Surely there are aliens. Of course there are! But they don’t live in our minds. They live in the Ding an sich.

>>8057359
I know. But there are some cases out there that make you think though.

>>8057009

I like how the one you direct link to is from the 70s. Very recent, anon.

File: 1428835104950.gif (53KB, 129x111px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 129x111px

>>8056503
>>8056503
oh shit. i have always written B-line not beeliine. lol idk why but i assumed it's B-line since it's used in the instances where the "A-line" is no longer feasible. i have never heard A,C,D,E...line so i'll infer "beeline" is correct.
personally i think humans are engineered life forms by the greys for any number of reasons. for that reason other ayys can not interfere with us. we are both isolated and protected. i can't prove or disprove any of this but it does seem to answer so many questions asked itt

>>8057379

Will you ever stop shilling this shitty book?

>>8056661
>Life appeared almost straight away on Earth as soon as it cooled enough. Eukyarotes appeared almost immediately after cyanobacteria modified the atmosphere enough to support oxygen metabolism, multicellular life followed not long after then it was only a few hundred years to humans.
You make 4,000,000,000 years sound like the blink of an eye.
In total, Earth has a 5 billion year "ocean window". We've had liquid water for 4 billion years, and in about a billion years, the sun will be bright enough to prevent liquid water on the Earth's surface.
Life on Earth took 80% of its available timeline to get to us.

>>8057379
>Abiogenesis is an extremely low probability event.
Life appeared quite soon on earth once it stopped being autoclave-tier temperatures. If abiogenesis was ultra rare then we wouldn't expect life to appear so soon.

>>8052515
>Dyson Spheres are a good example how super advanced intelligent life should be easily detectable by even inferior species
>should be easily detectable
>easily detectable

Sorry, but no.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyson_sphere#Search_for_megastructures
>Identifying one of the many infrared sources as a Dyson sphere would require improved techniques for discriminating between a Dyson sphere and natural sources.[33]
>Fermilab discovered 17 potential "ambiguous" candidates, of which four have been named "amusing but still questionable".[34][full citation needed]
>Other searches also resulted in several candidates, which are, however, unconfirmed.[35][36][37]

>>8056872

You cn attack me all you want, but I know for a fact you're wrong.

>>8057737

Well you can just keep moving that bar godfag but evidence suggests that life is free and easy. It takes a long time for cyanobacteria to replace the planet's atmosphere, then once the ozone layer appears multicellular life takes off. It was only 600Ma to get single cell to us, that's pretty fast. And I doubt we're the only intelligent lifeform to appear on Earth. Perhaps the first technological, and not the last.

Looking at Earth as an example, we can see that life is very quick to get going, extremely tenacious and radiates as soon as possible.

There's nothing magic about life, and certainly not us. Godfags.

>>8057391

Huh
Lex Luthor are you ok

>>8057950
>keep moving that bar godfag
I didn't move the bar, and I'm not a godfag.
>evidence suggests that life is free and easy.
What little evidence we have is the smallest possible sample set: one world
And no, I wouldn't call burning up 70% of our available time-frame just to reach the Cambrian explosion "easy".
>600Ma to get single cell to us, that's pretty fast.
"pretty fast" compared to what?

>And I doubt we're the only intelligent lifeform to appear on Earth. Perhaps the first technological, and not the last.
Now who's moving the bar? Non-technological life doesn't relate to the Fermi paradox, and "intelligent" is a relative term, not an absolute..

>>8057950
>Looking at Earth as an example, we can see that life is very quick to get going, extremely tenacious and radiates as soon as possible.
"Very quick" is bullshit, we've used up most of our available time just becoming a species potentially capable of spreading.
>extremely tenacious
If life had failed before reaching this point, we wouldn't be here to discuss it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle#Variants
>our location in the universe is necessarily privileged to the extent of being compatible with our existence as observers.

>and radiates as soon as possible.
We haven't radiated anywhere beyond Earth yet.
You can't use us as an example of intelligent life spreading throughout the universe.

>There's nothing magic about life, and certainly not us. Godfags.
That's a strawman, nobody is claiming we're magic, or unique.
But since we haven't (apparently) met any aliens, intelligent, tool-bearing, space-faring life does seem somewhat rare.
And that's observation, not faith, so who's the godfag now?

>>8058019

There's 100% certainty that intelligent life can arise from common compounds and chemistry, we are proof of that. Now, you explain what's so special about Earth that this isn't happening all over the place. I believe it is, you don't. I have evidence by extrapolation, a reasonable scientific viewpoint. You don't, so explain why.

>>8052424
>Assuming that hyper advanced type 3 civilizations would confine themselves to 3 dimensional space.

>>8058035
>There's 100% certainty that intelligent life can arise from common compounds
We know it's possible, but we don't know how likely it is.

>Now, you explain what's so special about Earth that this isn't happening all over the place.
Another strawman.
And a poorly constructed one at that.
If life "happens all over the place", why don't we find significant, obvious life on Venus or Mars?

Don't forget, were discussing the Fermi Paradox. Life COULD exist in many neighboring star systems, and not be intelligent.
Or intelligence may have come and gone before our time. Life as gone on for billions of years here, but what if technological intelligence only lasts millions of years on average? That would make it very unlikely we'd exist at the same time as our neighbors.

And these are just SOME of the possible explanations for the lack of alien contact.
Just because I'm disputing your alleged certainty that life is everywhere, doesn't mean I'm claiming life is rare, just that we can't be certain it isn't.
Try to keep up.

>I have evidence by extrapolation, a reasonable scientific viewpoint. You don't,
"Scientific" doesn't mean someone agrees with *your* opinion in particular.
If you want to approach this scientifically, show me a rigorous experiment, complete with large sample sets and a control group that supports your opinion.

>>8052627
>Americans think they stopped monarchy
>Americans think that if it weren't for them, there would be no Scientific Revolution
>Americans think that they started the Industrial Revolution

Kek.
First of all, the scientific revolution started in the 1600's.
Secondly, The French Revolution would have happened with or without the American War for Independance, which was what really ended monarchy in Europe
Thirdly, the Industrial Revolution began in Britain, then Spreading to the rest of the world through British influence

>>8058059

Ok enjoy your homocentric magic-pixie-dust universe.

File: strawman.jpg (95KB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 500x375px

>>8058066
>Ok enjoy your homocentric magic-pixie-dust universe.

>>8052424
Hardly a paradox, space is pretty big, you see

>>8058333

Not as big as my cock senpai

it's the true Great Attractor

>>8052503
>>8052592
>summer is trying to have a 'scientific' discussion by posting opinions as 'facts'.

>>8057682
? If you go through the galleries there are 2016 pictures. The second link I posted is all 2016 stuff but a lot of tinfoil bullshit mixed in.

>>8052606
Romans didn't do the vomit thing, it's a myth

File: lordlangan.png (650KB, 640x719px) Image search: [Google]

650KB, 640x719px

Ranked from most to least likely.

1. FTL can't be done and space is too big
2. FTL is possible, but aliens dont know we exist due to non-FTL information transit (space is still too big).
3. Aliens have found us but have chosen not to make contact for some reason.
4. Aliens have already made contact and govt keeping it secret.
5. This is all some kind of simulation or projection of a higher dimension.
6. We are truly alone in the universe.

>>8058471

You don't have to be an interstellar civilization to realize why making contact with Earth would be a bad idea. The vast majority of humans are superstitious snivelling cowards who would lose their tiny minds, and human civilization would fall to pieces.

AGAIN:

1.) Space is big. like, really, really big.
2) Aliens would have to have a reason to search and contact other life forms
3.) Maybe we're not a priority on anyone's list... we know that sometimes content Civilizations ignore the small savage ones; they become lazy beggars
4.) Most of the matter in the universe is dark matter; so they're probably composed of that and we can't see them

>>8058471
>2. FTL is possible, but aliens dont know we exist due to non-FTL information transit (space is still too big).

You can use telegraph probes then that bounce back and forth between your data mining system and every distant space that you don't want to wait for a light signal from.

It's far more likely that
1. no FTL, space is huge and there's little to no incentive to build those ultra expensive interstellar spacecrafts.
2. aliens have found us but are recording a wildlife documentary of us
3. simulation hypothesis
4. everything else.

>>8058487
>You can use telegraph probes then that bounce back and forth between your data mining system and every distant space that you don't want to wait for a light signal from.
?????????????

No you can't

It could be that extraterrestrials don't even recognize us as "life". Or that we're some kind of super-weirdo system which operates in this limited 3D-linear time space, in a 5D reality where everyone else lives.

>>8058503
>No you can't
Yes you could.

Imagine if you can travel 100 times faster than light. You want to see what happens at a place that's 100 lightyears away.

Then you either wait 100 years and see what light shows you.

Or you put a camera on a FTL probe, send it to the destination, have it snap a few pictures and fly back. now you got the data in 2 years time.

If you then are an advanced civilization you send out heavy FTL telescope platforms to distant locations in the galaxy to make autonomous observations. And once a year you send a FTL probe there with a harddrive to download the observations and fly back to your central intelligence agency with up-to-date fresh data. That way you use your physical FTL capabiliy to bypass the fact that there's no FTL sensor tech availible.

>>8058471
the two most likely explanations are that
1. Interstellar civilizations are comparatively rare and slow moving, haven't found us yet.

2. Interstellar civilizations require a profound advancement in technology that makes them unreasonably different from our current state of fleshling mind. A contact scenario would be like the combined US naval forces trying to contact a coral reef. The conceptual interests of the US navy is incredibly much higher than the daily interests of a coral reef and while the inhabitants of the reef see and understand that some big floaty things are present they cannot grasp what they are.

>>8058487
No i meant they have the ability to travel faster than light but they don't know we exist because all of the information of our existence has not yet reached them.

>>8052424
Can someone explain what this pic means

>>8058572
Fuck off namefag

>>8058529
>No i meant they have the ability to travel faster than light but they don't know we exist because all of the information of our existence has not yet reached them.

But if they have FTL tech then they don't need to wait for the information to reach them as they can go out there and get the information.

It's like having a cure for all disease but still dying of cancer, one statement contradicts the other.

>>8058599
Just because you can move fast, it doesnt mean you can be everywhere at once.

You don't know where the information is going to come from, so it doesnt matter how fast you can move.

Eg how would aliens know to warp to earth to visit us if they didnt have some information that we were there in the first place? It could be another 100 million light years before that information reaches them, how would they know to check this exact spot ahead of time?

>>8058471

Even if FTL is not possible it's perfectly possible to colonize the entire galaxy within a million of years. A blink of an to a civilization billions of years old.
And now imagine billions of civilizations that existed for billions of years colonizing space for millions of years. The universe should be so full of alien shit that we shouldn't even exist. Earth should be an full blown Alien colony before life even existed

>>8058333

That's actually precisely the problem

I want to beleive

File: how-stop-panic-attacks-step-step.jpg (80KB, 400x354px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 400x354px

>>8058482
>The vast majority of humans are superstitious snivelling cowards
in comparison to what, ƒāɱ? your unrealistic ideal?

>who would lose their tiny minds, and human civilization would fall to pieces.
[citation needed]
That's a plot device from Men In Black, but it really doesn't sound plausible.

>>8058673
>Even if FTL is not possible it's perfectly possible to colonize the entire galaxy within a million of years.
>entire galaxy
The more common life is, the more diverse environments it comes form, the less likely it is your galactic colonizers would find Earth's exact conditions a comfortable home.
At "best", each interstellar locust species should only colonize a small fraction of life-bearing planets.
And that's assuming no-one is opposing their spread,

Your argument is similar to saying "we've had nations for thousands of years, surely by now one would have conquered all the rest".

>A blink of an to a civilization billions of years old.
According to a recent study, Earth apparently developed earlier than 92% of the other potentially habitable planets in our galaxy.
First and second generation stars accreted from dust clouds without enough heavy elements to form planets.
It's very unlikely there's any civilizations billions of years old.
It also seems unlikely any given civilization would last billions of years.

And, ultimately, your hypotheses doesn't explain the observed data.
If life spreads everywhere, where ARE the aliens?

>>8057926

And I know for a fact that you're a fucking retard

http://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?bibcode=1996CeMDA..64..115L&db_key=AST&page_ind=25&plate_select=NO&data_type=GIF&type=SCREEN_GIF&classic=YES

>>8058778

>The more common life is, the more diverse environments it comes form, the less likely it is your galactic colonizers would find Earth's exact conditions a comfortable home.

This doesn't make any sense. The more life forms exist the MORE likely it would be that one of them would find Earth habitable

>And, ultimately, your hypotheses doesn't explain the observed data. If life spreads everywhere, where ARE the aliens?

That is precisely the question

>>8058789
>The more life forms exist the MORE likely it would be that one of them would find Earth habitable
...and the less likely any given one of them would like the conditions here.

If star-faring life is rare because it can only happen under conditions similar to our own, then our immediate neighbors would probably want to colonize Earth.
If life is more diverse, it's likely we're in someone's territory, and that they're unlikely to allow trespassers, and they're unlikely to want to live here.

Don't forget too, we're talking about the presumably small fraction of species that would want to colonize the galaxy in the first place.

>>And, ultimately, your hypotheses doesn't explain the observed data. If life spreads everywhere, where ARE the aliens?
>That is precisely the question

If your hypotheses doesn't explain the observed data, it's time to revise your hypotheses.

>>8058789
>>8058858
Here's another way of looking at it:
If you're wondering where the colonists are, you have to wonder what percentage of planets are just like our own.
It really doesn't matter how many can support *any* kind of life, just how many support *our* kind.

Except, of course, that if some methane-breathing race has already conquered this entire spiral arm, they might not allow trespassers in their space.

>>8055901
sauce?

>>8058741

>godfag detected

>>8058781

Nice theory, shame about the mainstream.

>>8058872

I posit that the amount of exoplanets which could support human metabolism would be effectively nil and vice-versa for ETs. Consider that our atmosphere is deadly poison for the biggest biomass on Earth: the archaea, and is no spring picnic for aquatic life either.

>>8058991
>the amount of exoplanets which could support human metabolism would be effectively nil and vice-versa for ETs.
[citation needed]


>Consider that our atmosphere is deadly poison for the biggest biomass on Earth: the archaea, and is no spring picnic for aquatic life either.
What are you saying? Ok, so archaea can't live in our atmosphere. So??? They CAN live in our oceans. What's your point?
Besides, they're microbial, and don't represent potential aliens well.

>>8059044

You stupid cunt.

File: sadVader.png (507KB, 660x490px) Image search: [Google]

507KB, 660x490px

>>8059053
>You stupid cunt.
Wow, you really told me off.
I guess I'll just go home now.

>>8058991

Terraforming?

Would we get into trouble if we started terraforming planets? Surely the intergalatic senate of aliens would not be cool with that

>>8052424
I think this guy here makes a good case

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJONS7sqi0o

We're the precursors, aliens beware.

>>8058616
>It could be another 100 million light years

That would make them extragalactic in origin. And if their FTL drives can push them 100 million light years with ease then even more so would they be capable of deploying a fantastically detailed information network.

They don't need to be everywhere at once, but they could stack a carrier full of listening posts that can launch FTL probes back to their HQ. Then drop these listening posts off all over the galaxy(and nearby galaxies if they can reach them). Each listening post can listen to the local ~50LY bubble and when anything of interest is found they send an FTL probe back to HQ and HQ sends an expendition to the location of interest that the listening post pinpointed.

If you are a old civilization with FTL tech you would likely end up devloping such a network and constantly push the borders of it further and further out. You don't need to know where the signals will come from, you're indiscirimnately deploying a dragnet surveillance bubbel and hooking them up to the FTL postal service.

>Eg how would aliens know to warp to earth to visit us if they didnt have some information that we were there in the first place?

Local automated listening post some few lightyears away finds radio signatures or nuclear flashes. Sends an FTL messenger back to HQ, HQ sends a intrasystem surveillance packet the solar system and confirms the finding.

Have you heared of the so called "roar" Which is blocking out signals from outer space? Really, google it!

>>8058991
>Consider that our atmosphere is deadly poison for the biggest biomass on Earth: the archaea

Archea is neither the biggest biomass on earth nor are they all obligate anaerobes.

Good idea to link this threads?
>>8059117

>>8059294
Not with that picture, take your memethreads elsewhere.

>>8058678
But it's not infinite, it is really big, but your can't take probabilities like in the stage equation to one, likewise you can't pretend that our, or any other society will last for billions of years plus.

It's tempting to say
>humanity has advanced so far in the last fifty years, imagine where we'll be in another three billion years time
But civilisations grow and collapse, they don't necessarily last, and though they may leave traces of their existence, we have explored such a tiny, miniscule part of the universe, that we can hardly pretend to have looked at all.

File: navy_reef.jpg (15KB, 530x298px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 530x298px

>>8058526
It's already happened

>>8059208

PBS spacetime is the only good science channel on youtube

Consider this:

Once a civilization is advanced enough to build their own perfect simulation of the universe, they just upload their consciousnesses into it and never ever leave it again. Inside they are just literally in paradise where all wishes are fulfilled.

File: Antibody_Coralians.jpg (95KB, 472x286px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 472x286px

>>8059630
So,you say that we should go Rentoning the shit out of next coraline structure we find?

>>8059887
>build their own perfect simulation of the universe, they just upload their consciousnesses
1) This happens to every single member of EVERY potential star-faring race?
2) Doesn't it seem a little arrogant to assume that a technology (computers) that's the current trendy influence in our society is also the underlying answer to a question as far-reaching as this?

>>8059925
Well, consider aerodynamics and flying over rocket science.

It's a very safe bet to assume that the former is always gonna be invented before the later.

What if creating a perfect replication of the universe is just necessarily easier and will always be developed before any sort of usable interstellar travel technology?

>>8059917
>Rentoning
fuck you for making me google this

>>8059932
>always
...no. just no.

>>8059932
>What if creating a perfect replication of the universe is just necessarily easier and will always be developed before any sort of usable interstellar travel technology?
You're still doing it.
"Everything new in our society revolves around computers, therefore it's the most important thing of all time."

>>8059939
Computers aren't going anywhere dude.

They are LITERALLY here forever, they may change shape and form, but we're never not gonna be a society of computers ever again.

We can just as well be the only ones.
Just our fucking luck, slaving away when all the other races enjoy their blissful nonexistence.

>>8059948
>Computers aren't going anywhere dude.
Yes, but in the grand scheme of things, they aren't as important as they seem to you.
If you were born in the 1860's , you'd probably think steam engines were somehow involved all the answers to life's big questions.

>>8059948
>LITERALLY
Oh, and 10 points off for trendy yet improper use of "literally".
Were you concerned I thought "here forever" was euphemistic or metaphorical?

>>8059965
You seem to be arguing from a very childish viewpoint, which is why the literally is important, to stretch how wrong you are.

>>8059957
Nobody would ever do that. Artificial calculators are something we will always need as they come in about as many forms as life forms on earth itself.

It's such a fundamental concept that discovering how to make them is on par with discovering the wheel. The reason they aren't going anywhere is because our own brain is nothing but a biochemical computer by itself.

There is nothing more fundamental to understand ourself than to study computers.

>>8052444
Implying that other species are entertained by power as much as we are.

Also,
>nice trips

File: 2vah-jay-jays.jpg (41KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 480x360px

>>8059978
>discovering how to make them is on par with discovering the wheel.
>There is nothing more fundamental to understand ourself than to study computers.
Thanks for proving my point.
Unfortunately, since I'm right, you'll never see it yourself.

>>8059887
>Inside they are just literally in paradise where all wishes are fulfilled.
NEET stoner detected.

>>8059292

Yes they are. Subsurface archaea is both the largest ecology and obligate anaerobic.

>alium contacts Earth
>hello human we are intergalactic travellers
>human reply
>hol up *smacks lips*
>What youse tryin' to say is
>*licks teeth and grins*
>we spaceships now?
>sheeit, gibs me dat nigga

Humans are space niggers, who would instantly feel entitled to space welfare without paying the price to join the club.

keep in mind that there are many proposals meant to justify the paradox. According to reason at least one of these proposals has to be true.

>>8060221
>Subsurface

>ecology

Moving goalposts

>>8060491

Well if subsurface archaea is a greater biomass than any other on Earth, any other archaea just adds to that.

I'm in doubt that any super intelligent species actually needs to or could spread out across the galaxy.

Considering the manufacturing costs, they shouldn't reasonably think to consume beyond what their planet can provide. Their economy and resource use would obviously be their highest priority and dictate their overall population to such a point that by the time they would need to consider branching out they would probably be so focused on maintaining or saving what they could manage on their own planet that they wouldn't be able to scrounge up the resources quickly enough to save themselves.

No species can be expected to solve a problem beyond the genetic necessities they evolved to overcome and without being able to let large populations suffer economically by wasting huge gobs of time and resources on something that could arguably be done much more cheaply on their own planet (until they do by some miracle use up their planet's resources, which by then makes it too late) seems fiscally irresponsible.

>>8060739
I'm very much inclined to agree with you, but...
What about species that don't "live within their means"?
Surely we can't expect all species to be aligned with this philosophy, even if most are.

I'd also assume most whole world nations would oppose interstellar colonization (assuming no FTL) because sending people that distance creates a new nation instead of expanding their existing local nation.
But I can't expect every species to feel this way.

I also wouldn't expect interstellar colonization to do much, if anything to reduce overpopulation in the home system.
Look at us. To counteract our current population growth, we'd have to send a million people _somewhere_ every 6 days.
We might start colonies for a variety of reasons, but overpopulation relief just isn't one of them.
...but what if some species out there isn't in quite the same boat?

>>8060739
>super intelligent
Oh, and this?
We'll likely be capable of interstellar travel some day.
Are we "super intelligent"?

>>8060944
I'm not saying this is a philosophy, this is the basis of evolution. Even if they had the urge to go out and conquer or seek out inhospitable and expensive environments, they would never be able to afford it on a large enough scale to make it worth their time while they had a planet's worth of sentient creatures to worry about in the mean time.

Allowing a new group to form to handle it would mean giving them resources for little if any return, which intelligent creatures often have a hard time doing.

I still say not possible, but if you can sway me then have at it.

>muh technological civilization

It may well be there's much more to advanced civilization than space cars and pewpew lasers.

>>8060959
>large enough scale to make it worth their time while they had a planet's worth of sentient creatures to worry about in the mean time.
> giving them resources for little if any return, which intelligent creatures often have a hard time doing.
That's still a decision. And it's still based on philosophy.
It's also based on their circumstances, which will vary widely from case to case.

>>8060959
>if you can sway me then have at it.
I'm not trying to sway you, since I don't disagree, except to say that these decisions are subjective, not (entirely) objective, AND even the objective part will vary from species to species.

>>8060970
If you could think of a specific example of how specifically they would be more advanced and why it wouldn't immediately fail due to some obvious problem you missed you might have a point.

As it stands, space cars and pew pew lasers are all we can go on.

>>8052606
Much of what has been said about roman hedonism has, actually, been nothing more than false criticism by ascetic christians. As it was their word that survived better to this day, it became a regular notion that romans were extravagant wasters, when stoicism was a pretty common way of life.

>>8060988

Space cars and pew pew lasers may be all you can imagine, but they are far less likely than you can conceive.

>>8060688
>if subsurface archaea is a greater biomass than any other on Earth.

They aren't, he also changed the goalpost to "largest ecology" instead of biomass

>>8060739
Your argument is that we should think small and stay small and stay here?

You don't actually give any reason why though.

You also talk about cost and financial issues as if they are some hard limit of possibilities.

Aliens don't talk to humans because humans are fucking assholes. Just look at this thread.

>>8060959
Your argument is flawed in that it assumes that some central species-wide organization would need to fuel the operation with huge amounts of money in a fiscal system or it would instantly grind to a halt.

As the general tech level increases things becomes cheaper and easier to do.

1000 years ago it would be a tedious expedition for me if I wanted travel to South America, as I'd need to discover it to start with. Today I can book the journey and get there in less than 24 hours for some relatively small amount of money. You assume that space anything will forever remain a tedious and expensive field based on the situation today, not even 60 years after the first satellite to achieve orbit.

Imagine a civilization that have had spaceflight for over 1000 years. You think they'll make no progress?

>>8061040
I don't want to stay small, I just think we and most other intelligent civilizations will.

Fiscal issues matter if any intelligent creatures exist and have to barter for resources in any world where the population is not fighting to defend itself from predators.

>>8061063
>humans are fucking assholes
Aliens probably have buttsex too.

>>8061067
Flawed?

Yeah, probably.

The limits of how cheaply a thing can be done or collected are decided by physics. All of the work that could be put into space exploration and colonization could arguably be used to grow food or improve life on the planet somehow.

As long as there is a debate about the use of the resources and no overlord to force it to happen, I don't see it is all.

>>8061090

>The limits of how cheaply a thing can be done or collected are decided by physics.

If you strictly speak of energy costs, real world costs work in very different ways. I mean sure a few hundred dollars worth of pasta converted into kinetic energy would put me in orbit or beyond, but it's a useless calculation for any real world purpose.

>could arguably be used to grow food
We already grow enough to feed everyone, why grow more?

>or improve life on the planet somehow.
Space colonization and industrialization would improve the situation on the planet. You also seem convinced that the planetary surface will forever remain the vital center of civilization.

You seem to believe that contemporary society is at or very the apex of technology. If I ask you to paint a picture of society and the world the year 2216, how would you describe it? What do you expect to be invented and how are things arranged by then?

>>8059936

RENTONING

https://vimeo.com/108196002