Are we alone?

[sailingabe41ds]

Originally Posted by boatman61

And Spain and the Catholic Church amongst others was busy torturing and burning thousands alive at the stake in Europe, Jews, Protestants, Muslims, Lutherans etc.

As Spain expanded into the Americas, so did the Inquisition, established in Mexico in 1570. In 1574, Lutherans were burned at the stake there, and the Inquisition came to Peru, where Protestants were likewise tortured and burned alive.

In 1580 Spain conquered Portugal and began rounding up and slaughtering Jews that had fled Spain. Philip II also renewed hostilities against the Moors, who revolted and found themselves either killed or sold into slavery.

It was the Muslims who invaded Jerusalem, Eastern Europe, and Spain. The Moors devastated the previous Christian countries of Northern Africa...ever wonder what happened to the native population of Northern Africa, nobody ever talks about that, and intended to do the same thing in Europe.
500 years of Moorish invasion was enough for Spain to fight back. Same with the Crusades....the radical non tolerant Muslims of the time are the one who invaded Holy Christian lands. Everyone seems to forget that part of history....that it is was a reaction to what the Jihadist Muslims were doing. Just like today.
Oh....it is okay to bash Catholics, but heavens for bid we mention what the Jihadist Muslims are doing.

[Lake-Effect]

...And this is why we are likely to remain alone. Who'd want to be friends with us??

[er9]

Originally Posted by hpeer

Above posts bring up an interesting point.

On the one hand we recognize that our emotional behavior makes it unlikely for humanity to survive our advanced technology. In out case we are stuck with genes programmed for small tribal group hunter gatherer existence. It is likely that most developed species would have passed through some similar development and have had similar challenges.

So for a species to have achieved deep space travel probably means they evolved beyond that primal thinking, somehow gained better control.

So then this hypothetical species comes across Earth and see us struggling as they once did. Why would they want to interact with us? If they did how would we interpret their motives? How can we foretell their motives if their motivations and emotional intelligence are beyond ours?

The irony is, we already have the ability to evolve beyond our primal thinking/acting. Its not a genetic or biological advancement its an introspective one. If men could simply come to terms with their ego's, understand it for what it is and makes us do, we could solve 95% of our current day problems.

I guess that still falls into the category of an sort of evolution but i see it as more of an education.

if aliens exist and watch us, i suspect their opinion of us is more of a #FacePalm.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by sailingabe41ds

It was the Muslims who invaded Jerusalem, Eastern Europe, and Spain. The Moors devastated the previous Christian countries of Northern Africa...ever wonder what happened to the native population of Northern Africa, nobody ever talks about that, and intended to do the same thing in Europe.
500 years of Moorish invasion was enough for Spain to fight back. Same with the Crusades....the radical non tolerant Muslims of the time are the one who invaded Holy Christian lands. Everyone seems to forget that part of history....that it is was a reaction to what the Jihadist Muslims were doing. Just like today.
Oh....it is okay to bash Catholics, but heavens for bid we mention what the Jihadist Muslims are doing.

Methinks using Jerusalem as an example is dodgy as that's how the Israelites got hold of it under David.. sacking it and repopulating it..
As for N Africa.. the Roman's razed Carthage before Christ and conquered the Eastern half of N Africa.. before that N Africa was Phonecian and indigenous Berber tribes which took up Islam around 800AD..

[psjanker]

Originally Posted by chrisr

can't help but wonder if you are in the right forum. this is sailing related : how ?

cheers,

Something I wrote a few years ago regarding why one sails that might apply to this topic.

I sail because unfortunally I do not live in a time when I could own a starship. Thus when sailing "I am master of my fate: I am the Captain of my soul". The timeless allure that links us to our past as well as the future. We have more in common with sailors 1000 years ago and those who will one day walk on distant planets than perhaps some that live and work beside us every day.

Peter Janker
Sailor
9 March 2017

[hpeer]

Originally Posted by er9

The irony is, we already have the ability to evolve beyond our primal thinking/acting. Its not a genetic or biological advancement its an introspective one. If men could simply come to terms with their ego's, understand it for what it is and makes us do, we could solve 95% of our current day problems.

I guess that still falls into the category of an sort of evolution but i see it as more of an education.

if aliens exist and watch us, i suspect their opinion of us is more of a #FacePalm.

Actually, no.

There is a tremendous research showing why this is so.


There is a great book written by a Canadian researcher (Dan Riskin) who covers this pretty painlessly.

https://www.amazon.com/Mother-Nature...ag=googhydr-20

It is true we like to think so, but we delude ourselves.

That is covered pretty well here.

Thinking Fast and Slow Dan Kahneman

He, as a psychologist, got a Nobel prize in Economics for his work showing how we evaluate stocks is not what is taught (yet it is still taught!)

https://www.amazon.com/Thinking-Fast.../dp/0374533555

[GordMay]

Considering that the universe is so vast, it seems probable that there would be more civilizations like ours out there. So where are the other space-faring civilizations? There are several running arguments, on why we haven’t met our interstellar neighbors, yet.
One possibility is that there might be a bottleneck event, such as a doomsday, that all K1* civilizations reach, that prevents them from growing, and being detected.
Whether humanity could surpass this bottleneck would depend on our actions.

“Population Growth, Energy Use, and the Implications for the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence” ~ by Brendan Mullan & Jacob Haqq-Misra
➥ https://arxiv.org/abs/1806.06474

* The Kardashev scale is a theoretical/speculative method of measuring a civilization's level of technological advancement based on the amount of energy they are able to use. The measure was proposed by Soviet astronomer Nikolai Kardashev in 1964.[1] The scale has three designated categories: K1, K2, & K3.
A Type I civilization, also called a planetary civilization—can use and store all of the energy available on its planet.
A Type II civilization, also called a stellar civilization—can use and control energy at the scale of its planetary system.
A Type III civilization, also called a galactic civilization—can control energy at the scale of its entire host galaxy.
➥ https://luf.org/t/kardashev.php
➥ https://www.centauri-dreams.org/2014...v-really-said/

[CaptTom]

Originally Posted by GordMay

* The Kardashev scale is a theoretical/speculative method of measuring a civilization's level of technological advancement based on the amount of energy they are able to use.

Interesting. Makes a lot of sense. When it comes right down to it, our ability to use energy is what defines our civilization, and what distinguishes different levels of civilizations here on Earth.

As we reach some practical limits on our ability to extract energy from fossil fuels, we look forward to other options. Not just wind and solar. Imagine all we could do, both good and bad, with what to us would seem like an unlimited energy source like fusion. Of course, I'm sure we'll hit other limits there eventually.

All of this begs the bigger moral question about whether or not our energy-hungry civilization is a "good" thing or a "bad" thing. Or maybe it just "is."

We needed to cut down trees to learn to control fire, and dig up buried hydrocarbons to fuel the industrial revolution. Maybe this is just a natural progression which ultimately leads to better things.

I don't know if we have some higher purpose. But it seems to me we exist to advance in knowledge and - yes - energy use. I'm willing to go along for the ride.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by CaptTom

Interesting. Makes a lot of sense. When it comes right down to it, our ability to use energy is what defines our civilization, and what distinguishes different levels of civilizations here on Earth.

As we reach some practical limits on our ability to extract energy from fossil fuels, we look forward to other options. Not just wind and solar. Imagine all we could do, both good and bad, with what to us would seem like an unlimited energy source like fusion. Of course, I'm sure we'll hit other limits there eventually.

All of this begs the bigger moral question about whether or not our energy-hungry civilization is a "good" thing or a "bad" thing. Or maybe it just "is."

We needed to cut down trees to learn to control fire, and dig up buried hydrocarbons to fuel the industrial revolution. Maybe this is just a natural progression which ultimately leads to better things.

I don't know if we have some higher purpose. But it seems to me we exist to advance in knowledge and - yes - energy use. I'm willing to go along for the ride.

I think Humanities basic problem is it's obsession with Growth..
First it was the bigger your tribe the safer the individual during Stone Age times..
Then it was religion with the message "Go forth and Multiply".. mainly to increase revenue and power for the respective religious leaders..
Today its Corporate led for the sake of wealth and power which is creating instability as the Oligarchs play Monopoly with countries and peoples.
We have a Disposable Culture from Products to People..

[Yellowtulip]

Originally Posted by boatman61

I think Humanities basic problem is it's obsession with Growth..

First it was the bigger your tribe the safer the individual during Stone Age times..

Then it was religion with the message "Go forth and Multiply".. mainly to increase revenue and power for the respective religious leaders..

Today its Corporate led for the sake of wealth and power which is creating instability as the Oligarchs play Monopoly with countries and peoples.

We have a Disposable Culture from Products to People..

Very true. But on the other hand the thought of a stagnant civilisation isn’t great either. I suppose we need the ‘right sort of growth’.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Yellowtulip

Very true. But on the other hand the thought of a stagnant civilisation isn’t great either. I suppose we need the ‘right sort of growth’.

Agreed. We don't need growth in 'stuff'. There is endless growth in knowledge and beauty, in learning and expressing. We don't always need more things.

All philosophies teach these truths, but the dominate religion of our day, that equates growth with buying more crap, has blinded most people to the fact that real growth comes from within.

[Yellowtulip]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Agreed. We don't need growth in 'stuff'. There is endless growth in knowledge and beauty, in learning and expressing. We don't always need more things.

All philosophies teach these truths, but the dominate religion of our day, that equates growth with buying more crap, has blinded most people to the fact that real growth comes from within.

Perhaps it’s about values. As a society we value things assymetrically. We put huge values on fancy extra bits on our cars when a very simple vehicle fulfils our needs, for instance, and are prepared to bust a gut to get those extra cup-holders or chrome strips. Yet we devalue many of our fellow humans on irrational grounds. If we re-arranged our values perhaps we might grow in the right directions.
But these thoughts are far from original and we haven’t learnt a lot in 50,000 years or so.

[skenn_ie]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Agreed. We don't need growth in 'stuff'. There is endless growth in knowledge and beauty, in learning and expressing. We don't always need more things.

All philosophies teach these truths, but the dominate religion of our day, that equates growth with buying more crap, has blinded most people to the fact that real growth comes from within.

Unfortunately, our current economic system depends on growth to work. We need some academics to design a system that DOESN'T depend on growth or debt, and works for the majority rather than the minority. Humanity has outgrown the system that has evolved, over millennia, to serve the wealthy at the expense of the rest. All the empires collapsed when they reached the limit of their ability to plunder beyond their borders.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by skenn_ie

Unfortunately, our current economic system depends on growth to work. We need some academics to design a system that DOESN'T depend on growth or debt, and works for the majority rather than the minority. Humanity has outgrown the system that has evolved, over millennia, to serve the wealthy at the expense of the rest. All the empires collapsed when they reached the limit of their ability to plunder beyond their borders.

Completely agree.

There is quite an extensive literature on zero or low growth economics. Unfortunately, most of it challenges the status quo by removing notions of profit and wealth accumulation, so it is hard to move those currently in power towards it. But it is coming.

One promising development are the various forms of UBI: Universal Basic Income. I don't want to take this too far off the topic, but as robotics and AI continually take over all the "work" in our societies, people still need to eat. UBI is a good interim step towards a whole new economics.

[hpeer]

Originally Posted by skenn_ie

Unfortunately, our current economic system depends on growth to work. We need some academics to design a system that DOESN'T depend on growth or debt, and works for the majority rather than the minority. Humanity has outgrown the system that has evolved, over millennia, to serve the wealthy at the expense of the rest. All the empires collapsed when they reached the limit of their ability to plunder beyond their borders.

I hqve done a little bit of reading on this very important topic.

Unfortunately I am not seeing any one who can imagine such a world in any kind of concrete reality. Doubly unfortunate is that neither can I.

I begin to suspect that such a degrowth to sustainability scenario is simply beyond human imagination, like infinity. On an interesting side note: the dictionary does not recognize “degrowth” as a word. That kind of sums up my point. Degrowth is outside our comprehension.