• Canada's ex-Defense Minister who ultimately shaped Canada's armed forces during the Cold War: Aliens
    240 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;43436223]That's because they're all specifically vague statements that leave a lot of information to be filled in by the listener and contain a lot of very basic concepts. Plenty of people like to assume aliens must be peaceful egalitarians who would be simply horrified by how we act. When in reality, they're probably just as bad as us. And its proves literally nothing at all.[/QUOTE] I disagree that aliens would be 'just as bad'. I don't disagree that there wouldn't be some nutters in there and small bad factions, but on the whole I think they'd be MUCH more peaceful. In recent times the most capable spacefaring nations of the world have been shown to be unable to adequately split our time, money and resources between sending people into space and killing brown people with different religious beliefs in the middle East. As long as we're too introspective and angry at one another to coexist peacefully I don't think we'll reasonable get anywhere in space. I think it's going to take large scale unity and a serious worldwide effort (or at least a serious multination effort) to do any serious space exploration and expansion, and I imagine that the same would apply to any other species in the universe. They'd probably have to be a lot less hotheaded than us to have even gotten into space in the first place, because if they weren't they'd be too focused on killing each other to bother doing it.
Why are you stick up for a guy you don't know against someone else you don't know? Also, thinly veiled "lolgetalife".
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;43436291]Why are you stick up for a guy you don't know against someone else you don't know? Also, thinly veiled "lolgetalife".[/QUOTE] Because, why wouldn't I? Have you ever gone to school and saw a kid getting bullied for no reason? Ever have the calling to stick up for them even though you don't know them. You people are really what the heck is wrong with this planet. You guys just act like little girls gossiping behind someones back, when it's done to your face you can't stand it.
[QUOTE=sltungle;43436281]I disagree that aliens would be 'just as bad'. I don't disagree that there wouldn't be some nutters in there and small bad factions, but on the whole I think they'd be MUCH more peaceful. In recent times the most capable spacefaring nations of the world have been shown to be unable to adequately split our time, money and resources between sending people into space and killing brown people with different religious beliefs in the middle East. As long as we're too introspective and angry at one another to coexist peacefully I don't think we'll reasonable get anywhere in space. I think it's going to take large scale unity and a serious worldwide effort (or at least a serious multination effort) to do any serious space exploration and expansion, and I imagine that the same would apply to any other species in the universe. They'd probably have to be a lot less hotheaded than us to have even gotten into space in the first place, because if they weren't they'd be too focused on killing each other to bother doing it.[/QUOTE]We got in to space because we had an international pissing contest where we wanted to launch bigger phallic imagery in to space and shoot it farther than anyone else and while trying to figure out quicker, more efficient ways to make them stop being alive if they pissed us off too much. Why couldn't they have gone through similar experiences?
[QUOTE=DarthVivic;43436279]Here's the real question, why does it matter that this guy even has this opinion? Right? What gives this guy the right to say he's a nutjob, when he himself is into furry which by the way guess what... most people would think he was the nutjob. None the less, you guys seem very butt hurt by me sticking up for some guy none of you guys even know. So before you start saying stuff, think about your life first. EDIT: I really dislike people like you guys, quick to judge but if someone judges you... GOD FORBID![/QUOTE] Are you the canadian ex-defense minister? [editline]a[/editline] [QUOTE=DarthVivic;43436304]Because, why wouldn't I? Have you ever gone to school and saw a kid getting bullied for no reason? Ever have the calling to stick up for them even though you don't know them. You people are really what the heck is wrong with this planet. You guys just act like little girls gossiping behind someones back, when it's done to your face you can't stand it.[/QUOTE] no seriously paul is that you?
[QUOTE=mchapra;43436307]Are you the canadian ex-defense minister?[/QUOTE] No, but I am a Military Veteran from Canada. [editline]6th January 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=mchapra;43436307]Are you the canadian ex-defense minister? [editline]a[/editline] no seriously paul is that you?[/QUOTE] Good one bud!
[QUOTE=DarthVivic;43436304]Because, why wouldn't I? Have you ever gone to school and saw a kid getting bullied for no reason? Ever have the calling to stick up for them even though you don't know them. You people are really what the heck is wrong with this planet.[/QUOTE]Pretty sure these are two wildly different scenarios. And I'm pretty sure that if he'd be offended by people calling him a nut, which he likely gets called fairly often, he would also get offended by someone saying he needs others to stick up for him. Drop the white knight act. [editline]6th January 2014[/editline] [QUOTE=DarthVivic;43436304]You guys just act like little girls gossiping behind someones back, when it's done to your face you can't stand it.[/QUOTE]I laugh at people that do it to my face, it's genuinely funny.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;43436326]Pretty sure these are two wildly different scenarios. And I'm pretty sure that if he'd be offended by people calling him a nut, which he likely gets called fairly often, he would also get offended by someone saying he needs others to stick up for him. Drop the white knight act. [editline]6th January 2014[/editline] I laugh at people that do it to my face, it's genuinely funny.[/QUOTE] Well atleast I agree with you. And I totally agree with the laugh at people that do it to my face.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;43436278]They're not giving away classified info, it's garbage. None of it has ever been substantiated by any means. And you literally just linked me to the CIA mainpage as if that does anything whatsoever. The UFO "phenomenon" gets ridiculed because it is ridiculous. It has no backing whatsoever. Just because a few former government officials may go "[I]ALIENS[/I]" doesn't mean shit unless they can put up verifiable evidence.[/QUOTE] [URL]http://www.foia.cia.gov/collection/ufos-fact-or-fiction[/URL] Sorry I was on my phone. The UFO phenomenon isn't ridiculous. Aliens are but not the UFO phenonemon and top scientists and a lot of governments and people working for the military agree. But I know that you couldn't even be bothered to read one page of the CIA files. There are some with pictures all of which are censored. Some files have 20+ pages with 19 pages censored. Makes you wonder why all the secrecy if there really is nothing about "UFO's".
[QUOTE=Simski;43435783]Reminds me of this :v: [t]http://i.imgur.com/Mtcfmmr.png[/t][/QUOTE] God I haven't read this for about 5 years, thank you. Now through reading this again I see a pretty big plot hole :( [sp]The infallible predictor wrongly predicted that we would spill out and destroy the writers planet. Yet the next post says that we become cool dudes all about art.[/sp]
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;43436306]We got in to space because we had an international pissing contest where we wanted to launch bigger phallic imagery in to space and shoot it farther than anyone else and while trying to figure out quicker, more efficient ways to make them stop being alive if they pissed us off too much.[/QUOTE] Yes, you're right, we did. And then the outer space treaty was created and all of a sudden everyone seemed less interested in space except for the people who were interested in it for non-violent purposes. Regardless, weaponising space only really kept the local space of Earth of interest to anyone. Even if we didn't have the outer space treaty and had the cold war never ended we'd probably have stuck fairly close to Earth because the interest was in having orbital superweapons, effectively. Having a weapon positioned out at Jupiter does nobody any good.
[QUOTE=The Saiko;43436350] [url]http://www.foia.cia.gov/collection/ufos-fact-or-fiction[/url] Sorry I was on my phone. The UFO phenomenon isn't ridiculous. [B]Aliens are but not the UFO phenonemon[/B] and top scientists and a lot of governments and people working for the military agree.[/QUOTE] wat So, you agree that there are objects that humans have seen and haven't been able to identify, but aliens visiting Earth is a ridiculous idea? Then what the fuck are you exactly arguing?
[QUOTE=DarthVivic;43436304]Because, why wouldn't I? Have you ever gone to school and saw a kid getting bullied for no reason? Ever have the calling to stick up for them even though you don't know them. You people are really what the heck is wrong with this planet. You guys just act like little girls gossiping behind someones back, when it's done to your face you can't stand it.[/QUOTE] Just to recap you are being very defensive over some dude who thinks aliens visited earth then went away. I mean each to his own but don't expect everyone to not think he has a few screws loose. I mean that's how forums work, people share opinions. The fact that you targeted him on something completely unrelated to his observation is actually pretty funny. When you could have approached his view point through multiple options and even tried to make a case that his belief is not all that dumb.
[QUOTE=Stopper;43436366]wat So, you agree that there are objects that humans have seen and haven't been able to identify, but aliens visiting Earth is a ridiculous idea? Then what the fuck are you exactly arguing?[/QUOTE] That maybe informing yourself is going to do more good than just trying to defend your standpoint. Yes, I believe there is shit flying around which no one knows is (well maybe SOME people know) doesn't mean I straight jumped to the conclusion that it must be aliens.
So we're talking about a man saying aliens have visited and are playing Overwatch with our species, and you defend his statements and go "They're not really crazy." and "1% are left unexplained." then carry on and say "Well the aliens are bullshit, but not UFOs." When we're very clearly talking about two different concepts of UFOs.
As a little aside to the alien behavior/xenopsychology conversation, there's no telling what they may do, every single idea we have would be intrinsically anthropocentric. Frankly, this may be the reason why we haven't found any extraterrestrial life, as we're thinking of what we would do.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;43436399]So we're talking about a man saying aliens have visited and are playing Overwatch with our species, and you defend his statements and go "They're not really crazy." and "1% are left unexplained." then carry on and say "Well the aliens are bullshit, but not UFOs." When we're very clearly talking about two different concepts of UFOs.[/QUOTE] Maybe I worded myself a little bit wrong. I don't think this man is lying. I just can't believe him because extraterrestrials already being here is just an absurd thought to me. But there is tons of evidence for UFO's and I mean UFO's in the literal sense. So I have to believe that.
[QUOTE=Robber;43435969]I disagree, we have over 17 thousand nukes and only used two and that was when they were still new and humanity was stupid(er).[/QUOTE] There has been over 2000 nuclear weapon detonations on this planet so far. Not two. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLCF7vPanrY[/media] when you time lapse it, it looks like a game of defcon.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;43436416]There has been over 2000 nuclear weapon detonations on this planet so far. Not two. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLCF7vPanrY[/media] when you time lapse it, it looks like a game of defcon.[/QUOTE]I think he was trying to say only two have ever been used as a weapon in a conflict.
[QUOTE=ExplodingGuy;43436402]As a little aside to the alien behavior/xenopsychology conversation, there's no telling what they may do, every single idea we have would be intrinsically anthropocentric. Frankly, this may be the reason why we haven't found any extraterrestrial life, as we're thinking of what we would do.[/QUOTE] its not a massive assumption to assume that they understand mathematics. And mathematics can be applied to many interactions. Such has Game Theory.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;43436431]I think he was trying to say only two have ever been used as a weapon in a conflict.[/QUOTE] Aliens don't know that. All they see is heat signatures.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;43436431]I think he was trying to say only two have ever been used as a weapon in a conflict.[/QUOTE] "we have 17000 nukes and only used two" more like "we have 17000 nukes and only used two-thousand"
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;43436431]I think he was trying to say only two have ever been used as a weapon in a conflict.[/QUOTE] That doesn't matter much to people observing from way up with no knowledge of the planet.
You know, this guy may be a bit nutty, but if his crazy "logic" is part of what helped us stay a non-nuclear nation during the cold war, and is part of why we kept trying to do peacekeeping and stop wars from breaking out during the Cold War then as unorthodox of a reason as it is, he still helped our country in forming its international image into what it is today. I now realize we have a peacekeeping reputation to try and please some aliens that may or may not exist.
[QUOTE=ExplodingGuy;43436402]As a little aside to the alien behavior/xenopsychology conversation, there's no telling what they may do, every single idea we have would be intrinsically anthropocentric. Frankly, this may be the reason why we haven't found any extraterrestrial life, as we're thinking of what we would do.[/QUOTE] Except logic is, at its nuts and bolts, an undeniable thing (you can argue against it, but then you're being illogical and surely a spacefaring species would not be illogical). A very violent or militaristic species that has never encountered alien life before and only knows of its own kind would, no doubt, come to the same realisation as we did during the cold war - controlling the space directly adjacent to Earth, controlling orbit basically, gives planet wide domination. I see no reason why such a species would wish to venture outwards except for in the EXTREME long run if they managed to exhaust their own planet's resources and needed new ones. Any serious voyages past the orbit of a world or the occupation of its moon(s) would most likely be undertaken out of necessity (in the situation of there being no resources left, but depleting a planet of resources isn't exactly an easy task, and if you did depleting the rest of a star system of resources would be exponentially more difficult), out of scientific curiosity, or for the sake of exploration. Two of those three scenarios are non-violent, so I don't see why if we do encounter aliens we should immediately fear them and presume them hostile.
[quote]The great silence (i.e. absence of SETI signals from alien civilizations) is perhaps the strongest indicator of all that high relativistic velocities are attainable and that everybody out there knows it. The sobering truth is that relativistic civilizations are a potential nightmare to anyone living within range of them. The problem is that objects traveling at an appreciable fraction of light speed are never where you see them when you see them (i.e., light-speed lag). Relativistic rockets, if their owners turn out to be less than benevolent, are both totally unstoppable and totally destructive. A starship weighing in at 1,500 tons (approximately the weight of a fully fueled space shuttle sitting on the launchpad) impacting an earthlike planet at "only" 30 percent of lightspeed will release 1.5 million megatons of energy -- an explosive force equivalent to 150 times today's global nuclear arsenal... (ed note: this means the freaking thing has about nine hundred mega-Ricks of damage!) I'm not going to talk about ideas. I'm going to talk about reality. It will probably not be good for us ever to build and fire up an antimatter engine. According to Powell, given the proper detecting devices, a Valkyrie engine burn could be seen out to a radius of several light-years and may draw us into a game we'd rather not play, a game in which, if we appear to be even the vaguest threat to another civilization and if the resources are available to eliminate us, then it is logical to do so. The game plan is, in its simplest terms, the relativistic inverse to the golden rule: "Do unto the other fellow as he would do unto you and do it first."... When we put our heads together and tried to list everything we could say with certainty about other civilizations, without having actually met them, all that we knew boiled down to three simple laws of alien behavior: THEIR SURVIVAL WILL BE MORE IMPORTANT THAN OUR SURVIVAL. If an alien species has to choose between them and us, they won't choose us. It is difficult to imagine a contrary case; species don't survive by being self-sacrificing. WIMPS DON'T BECOME TOP DOGS. No species makes it to the top by being passive. The species in charge of any given planet will be highly intelligent, alert, aggressive, and ruthless when necessary. THEY WILL ASSUME THAT THE FIRST TWO LAWS APPLY TO US. ... Your thinking still seems a bit narrow. Consider several broadening ideas: Sure, relativistic bombs are powerful because the antagonist has already invested huge energies in them that can be released quickly, and they're hard to hit. But they are costly investments and necessarily reduce other activities the species could explore. For example: Dispersal of the species into many small, hard-to-see targets, such as asteroids, buried civilizations, cometary nuclei, various space habitats. These are hard to wipe out. But wait -- while relativistic bombs are readily visible to us in foresight, they hardly represent the end point in foreseeable technology. What will humans of, say, two centuries hence think of as the "obvious" lethal effect? Five centuries? A hundred? Personally I'd pick some rampaging self-reproducing thingy (mechanical or organic), then sneak it into all the biospheres I wanted to destroy. My point here is that no particular physical effect -- with its pluses, minuses, and trade-offs -- is likely to dominate the thinking of the galaxy. So what might really aged civilizations do? Disperse, of course, and also not attack new arrivals in the galaxy, for fear that they might not get them all. Why? Because revenge is probably selected for in surviving species, and anybody truly looking out for long-term interests will not want to leave a youthful species with a grudge, sneaking around behind its back... I agree with most parts of points 2, 3, and 4. As for point 1, it is cheaper than you think. You mention self-replicating machines in point 3, and while it is true that relativistic rockets require planetary power supplies, it is also true that we can power the whole Earth with a field of solar cells adding up to barely more than 200-by-200 kilometers, drawn out into a narrow band around the Moon's equator. Self-replicating robots could accomplish this task with only the cost of developing the first twenty or thirty machines. And once we're powering the Earth practically free of charge, why not let the robots keep building panels on the Lunar far side? Add a few self-replicating linear accelerator-building factories, and plug the accelerators into the panels, and you could produce enough anti-hydrogen to launch a starship every year. But why stop at the Moon? Have you looked at Mercury lately? ... Dr. Wells has obviously bought into the view of a friendly galaxy. This view is based upon the argument that unless we humans conquer our self-destructive warlike tendencies, we will wipe out our species and no longer be a threat to extrasolar civilizations. All well and good up to this point. But then these optimists make the jump: If we are wise enough to survive and not wipe ourselves out, we will be peaceful -- so peaceful that we will not wipe anybody else out, and as we are below on Earth, so other people will be above. This is a non sequitur, because there is no guarantee that one follows the other, and for a very important reason: "They" are not part of our species. Before we proceed any further, try the following thought experiment: watch the films Platoon and Aliens together and ask yourself if the plot lines don't quickly blur and become indistinguishable. You'll recall that in Vietnam, American troops were taught to regard the enemy as "Charlie" or "Gook," dehumanizing words that made "them" easier to kill. In like manner, the British, Spanish, and French conquests of the discovery period were made easier by declaring dark- or red- or yellow-skinned people as something less than human, as a godless, faceless "them," as literally another species. Presumably there is some sort of inhibition against killing another member of our own species, because we have to work to overcome it... But the rules do not apply to other species. Both humans and wolves lack inhibitions against killing chickens. Humans kill other species all the time, even those with which we share the common bond of high intelligence. As you read this, hundreds of dolphins are being killed by tuna fishermen and drift netters. The killing goes on and on, and dolphins are not even a threat to us. As near as we can tell, there is no inhibition against killing another species simply because it displays a high intelligence. So, as much as we love him, Carl Sagan's theory that if a species makes it to the top and does not blow itself apart, then it will be nice to other intelligent species is probably wrong. Once you admit interstellar species will not necessarily be nice to one another simply by virtue of having survived, then you open up this whole nightmare of relativistic civilizations exterminating one another. It's an entirely new situation, emerging from the physical possibilities that will face any species that can overcome the natural interstellar quarantine of its solar system. The choices seem unforgiving, and the mind struggles to imagine circumstances under which an interstellar species might make contact without triggering the realization that it can't afford to be proven wrong in its fears. Got that? We can't afford to wait to be proven wrong. They won't come to get our resources or our knowledge or our women or even because they're just mean and want power over us. They'll come to destroy us to insure their survival, even if we're no apparent threat, because species death is just too much to risk, however remote the risk... The most humbling feature of the relativistic bomb is that even if you happen to see it coming, its exact motion and position can never be determined; and given a technology even a hundred orders of magnitude above our own, you cannot hope to intercept one of these weapons. It often happens, in these discussions, that an expression from the old west arises: "God made some men bigger and stronger than others, but Mr. Colt made all men equal." Variations on Mr. Colt's weapon are still popular today, even in a society that possesses hydrogen bombs. Similarly, no matter how advanced civilizations grow, the relativistic bomb is not likely to go away... We ask that you try just one more thought experiment. Imagine yourself taking a stroll through Manhattan, somewhere north of 68th street, deep inside Central Park, late at night. It would be nice to meet someone friendly, but you know that the park is dangerous at night. That's when the monsters come out. There's always a strong undercurrent of drug dealings, muggings, and occasional homicides. It is not easy to distinguish the good guys from the bad guys. They dress alike, and the weapons are concealed. The only difference is intent, and you can't read minds. Stay in the dark long enough and you may hear an occasional distance shriek or blunder across a body. How do you survive the night? The last thing you want to do is shout, "I'm here!" The next to last thing you want to do is reply to someone who shouts, "I'm a friend!" What you would like to do is find a policeman, or get out of the park. But you don't want to make noise or move towards a light where you might be spotted, and it is difficult to find either a policeman or your way out without making yourself known. Your safest option is to hunker down and wait for daylight, then safely walk out. There are, of course, a few obvious differences between Central Park and the universe. There is no policeman. There is no way out. And the night never ends.[/quote] I've always liked this.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;43436592]I've always liked this.[/QUOTE] It's a good read but I disagree. The metaphors don't paint Sagans theory wrong and I still think he got the right thinking approach.
[QUOTE=The Saiko;43436645]It's a good read but I disagree. The metaphors don't paint Sagans theory wrong and I still think he got the right thinking approach.[/QUOTE] Hawkins vs Sagan. To the thunder dome.
[quote][B]when aliens saw the atomic bomb they decided that we were a great threat to the cosmos.[/B][/quote] Hahahahahhhahahahaha, our nuclear bombs are a threat to the cosmos? That's the dumbest thing I think I've ever heard on sooo many levels :v:
[QUOTE=Asmaedus;43436356]God I haven't read this for about 5 years, thank you. Now through reading this again I see a pretty big plot hole :( [sp]The infallible predictor wrongly predicted that we would spill out and destroy the writers planet. Yet the next post says that we become cool dudes all about art.[/sp][/QUOTE] [sp]It wasn't wrong, the future still was that we all came to destroy their planet. Even if it's because they nuked the fuck out of Earth. Self-fulfilling prophecy I think it's called[/sp]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.