Re: Time to scrap SETI?

From: Junky Thompson (jk_at_driixel.net)
Date: 12/14/04 

Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 10:29:03 -0600

Joe Strout wrote:
> In article <mRovd.1661$896.1264@fe06.lga>,
> "Junky Thompson" <jk@driixel.net> wrote:
>
>>> But, as another poster pointed out, it costs very little to listen.
>>> And everybody needs a hobby -- this one is at least as relevant as,
>>> say, hacky-sack (though perhaps without the health benefits).
>>
>> You are assuming that the ET's in question are technologically
>> superior to us, and while in some cases this might be true, in
>> others not so. ??? <g>
>
> Think it through. Virtually all of human science and technology
> developed in the last couple millenia, and the vast majority of that,
> in just the last few centuries. Compare this to the time in which
> life has been evolving on Earth -- about 4 billion years.
>
> First Life on Earth: 4000000000 years ago
> Discovery of Radio: 200 years ago
>
> See the difference? Our technological civilization is 0.000005
> *percent* of the time life has been mucking about here.
>
> Now, even supposing life on another planet happened to start at
> exactly the same time as life on Earth, do you really think it will
> have evolved within 0.000005% of the exact same time? It's
> ridiculous. I know that's how the Star Trek universe is, but it's
> ludicrous to think that the real universe is like that.
>
> So, either ET is less advanced than us -- most likely, in the
> single-celled organism stage -- or more advanced than us. In the
> former case, we won't be hearing anything from them (though
> eventually we could detect their presence through more direct
> observation). In the latter case, then ET is more advanced than us,
> and most likely, by hundreds of millions of years (which would still
> mean evolving at the same time as us to within 10% or 20%). That's
> enough time for him to have colonized the whole galaxy, as I pointed
> out before.
>
> Best,
> - Joe
>
>

Joe, you are assuming that evolution is a fact, and that the universe was
not created all at once. While the idea that the universe was created is
not thinkable for some, it should be considered, imo.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Astronaut Confirms Aliens exist
    ... greater technology exist and have and maybe still are visiting us. ... The same elements make up the universe therefore the exact ... water (real water and not CO2 frozen) was found on Mars. ... Primitive life forms first remember - it ...
    (soc.culture.scottish)
  • Re: What does ID have to offer to the scientific community?
    ... No, for the IDist, life is *Technology*. ... "God" and Chaotic Inflation Theory ... It doesn't take all that much to create a universe. ... This is one possible explanation for the universe, but it says nothing about the origin and makeup of life. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: The Protein Takeover. PNs scenario
    ... universe, with all the physical laws and fundamental constants exactly ... or that some lucky life form beat us to it and is responsible for our ... with technology only marginally more advanced than ours)  arising from ... technological species is likely to seed ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: The uncertainty of evolution
    ... > The whole Universe evolves, so does life on Earth, and so does human ... The Universe as a whole evolves in one ... It's only *without* such technology that primitive ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)
  • Re: Astronaut Confirms Aliens exist
    ... greater technology exist and have and maybe still are visiting us. ... The same elements make up the universe therefore the exact ... water (real water and not CO2 frozen) was found on Mars. ... Primitive life forms first remember - it ...
    (soc.culture.scottish)