What are we?

The next step is try to to figure out WTF those probes are doing because I'm drawing a blank as to what an alien civilization would be doing putting on an air battle show in our atmosphere.

They were probably nearby and just happened to end up in our atmosphere after some fighting over who knows what :x
Or, they were fighting over our planet, but when they saw how much of a dump it was, they left ^-^
 
Level 12
Joined
May 11, 2005
Messages
416
They were probably nearby and just happened to end up in our atmosphere after some fighting over who knows what

given the size of the universe, the chances of that happening are so small that i can only assume you suggested that as a joke.


i don't have a particular problem with the belief that extraterrestrial civilizations exist, i bet they do. i don't really believe we've been visited, i find that rather unlikely, why would a species so technologically advanced that they can travel to neighboring stars be so incompetent at hiding themselves if they want to stay hidden, or so elusive if they're not trying to? so, given a report of strange sky-bound events i'd rather believe it is either a hoax, a misinterpreted atmospheric phenomenon, or a mass hysteria induced hallucination, but nevertheless, i don't think it is impossible.

i do have a problem though when someone tries to further the notion that human intelligence couldn't possibly have evolved from earth animals without exterior intervention, or that modern or ancient societies couldn't have evolved without extraterrestrial intervention. i find it arrogant to distance oneself so much from the other animals, and it is counter to our knowledge. it's a cop-out, instead of trying to find information about the past through legitimate investigation and intellectual effort, they're inventing a mythology to explain the holes in our historical knowledge, and even worse than that, they're inventing holes that don't really exist, just to support their fantasy.

there is something very wrong when you find it easier to believe that you are more closely related to a million light year distant species than a chimpanzee. If you cannot recognize enough humanity in the face of any vertebrate, any mammal, any ape, not even on an australopithecus skull to believe that we evolved from those, i doubt you'd ever recognize an extraterrestrial intelligent species as a life form at all. I don't think such a person is grasping the full implications of alienness.
A "life-form" that evolved on a different planet, in a different chemical environment, from a different set of inorganic elements, would be so genetically distant from you that it would be easier for you to procreate with a prokaryota than to have any extraterrestrial "genes" artificially inserted. The possibility of them even having a biological structure with a function similar to earthly genes is so unlikely, and it would still be a trillion times more likely than them being compatible enough for any genetic interaction to be possible.

My point is, if you have trouble believing we could evolve naturally form our earthen relatives, and expect to find an even closer relative outside of earth, you probably have an heavily antropomorphically biased conception of aliens. Chances are, if you ever met an extraterrestrial lifeform, you'd find yourself more closely related to a fruit fly than to it, both in body shape as in thought processes.
 
Level 22
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
3,973
You're half right. It is reviewing itself and seeking to improve in large part, but you must realize that it is composed of homo sapiens. Now, I don't know if you know much about homo sapiens, but I can tell you that every one of them I have ever met has had trouble admitting their mistakes.

Relatedly, neither of you is an idiot unless you're convinced the other one is.

Sounds fair to me, believe me even with all the research I've done (im not some old d00d with 40 years research but still can say 'enough research) I'm not convinced there are ET visits although I'm more than 60% certain they are. That's good - some people believe in everything on the internet - from YouTube videos of some lights most of them faked to sites speaking about various civilizations (some could be true though). So im not that gullible but I do know such visit likely happened and is happening probably to these days.

At the same time evolution especially originating from one old ancestor does sound right considering the similarities - that we have features of common ancestor is pure proof - was it evolution alone or evolution+smth else, it has yet to be researched about the second.

There is nothing physically preventing extraterrestrial civilizations from sending probes to Earth. There never has been. There is no reason to believe we've never had such a device come to Earth at any point in it's history. The very fact of the matter is that we are not only capable of doing this ourselves, but we already have.

Now while people laugh at Illuminati blah blah blah the other truth is the Military Industrial Complex already have quite advanced technology to travel faster. So it's either aliens + reverse engineering or just a bunch of military's dirty secrets of possessing a technology far more advanced that you've seen.

Either way, meet your doom when these technolgies are used in war

I'll be watching and laughing to those who doubt about all I said
 
Level 6
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
190
You're half right. It is reviewing itself and seeking to improve in large part, but you must realize that it is composed of homo sapiens. Now, I don't know if you know much about homo sapiens, but I can tell you that every one of them I have ever met has had trouble admitting their mistakes.

Relatedly, neither of you is an idiot unless you're convinced the other one is.


There is nothing physically preventing extraterrestrial civilizations from sending probes to Earth. There never has been. There is no reason to believe we've never had such a device come to Earth at any point in it's history. The very fact of the matter is that we are not only capable of doing this ourselves, but we already have.

When we're dealing with events like cited in the previous post, we first have to determine that what is being witnessed is not technologically possible for humans at the time. Being as we are now, there is little we can witness that we can say for sure was not human. As time goes on this will get worse and worse. We can't use probability here. We can't just keep going on dismissing the claims because of how unlikely we calculate them to be. It is just the opposite. Our calculations of how likely it is should be dictated by what is claimed. Anything else is confirmation bias.

The next step is try to to figure out WTF those probes are doing because I'm drawing a blank as to what an alien civilization would be doing putting on an air battle show in our atmosphere.
I think I've posted this before, in fact, I think it was in this thread.

We survive to live. We live to survive.

That is the purpose of all Earth's inhabitants. We're bound to it, and I don't think we can ever escape it.
Our life revolves around surviving so that we will be able to live. Our life revolves around procreating so that our offspring's life can revolve around surviving.

The reason to why we have to survive is so that we don't die. This means to keep on living.

This is simple. It isn't pleasant being hungry. It isn't pleasant being thirsty. It isn't pleasant to bleed. It isn't pleasant to be too hot. It isn't pleasant to be too cold.
If you don't want to die, then survive.

This is an example of how our life revolves around surviving.

Question is, why do we not want to die? Surely it isn't only the pain of dying that keeps us wanting to live?
It depends, really. Some don't want to live at all. Some don't want to live at all and they will take care of that. Some don't want to live at all but don't do anything about it. It isn't easy to kill yourself.

That's the odd thing about humans. It isn't supposed to be an option to kill yourself. Yet, we do. Do other animals on Earth do this? None that I know of. Maybe in some rare instances it will happen. But that's irrelevant. The point is, to other animals of Earth, death is not an option. Death is never an option.

If one day a voice would suddenly be heard by every human on Earth, saying: "I will grant you painless death at this very instant. All you have to do is nod your head." How many people on Earth would die that day?

What really distincts us from the rest of the bunch? Is it our feelings? No, I don't believe that. I believe our feelings are just a part of every animal's survival mechanism. We love our child to protect it. We feel joy from doing progressive things so that we may continue working progressively. We feel pain so that we will learn to avoid what's causing it.
Every animal has the same feelings.
There's something else that allows us to interpret our feelings the way we interpret them.

That is conscious thought.

We are aware.

Of course, we also developed a lot of things because survival of the fittest hardly applies to us anymore. We don't face life threatening situations daily (i.e. situations that require physical, animal-like behaviour) anymore, which allowed us to evolve and grow into what we are today.
But that's not the point. The point is, that somewhere on this very planet, long, long ago, a human, homo sapiens, one of the first of his kind, thought simply to himself: "Why?"

And that pretty nicely wraps the whole human race into one nifty word. "Why."

What caused that man to wonder why, or should I say, why did he wonder why?
Is there anything that explains this?
Is it only because we're intelligent that we're able to wonder why? Is that really the ultimate answer to all of this, that just because we can do a math equation we were able to think "with black rocks I can create the sun, given I have sticks to carry it"?

Well. We are born with feelings, but we have to learn to be intelligent. Knowledge is something we pass along, and must pass along. A computer can have a powerful processor but without any software on it, it can do nothing. It needs input.
A child will not know how to light a fire with flint and firewood just because its parent did.

But I'm going nowhere.

Maybe it was just because that man had a powerful processor that he was able to use it to wonder why. Maybe that is the only reason that we have conscious thought. Just because some evolved form of monkeys had wit.
There's nothing to prove or disprove.

I've been talking about this because I've been wondering if there can be intelligent life that is incapable of conscious thought.

That is, aliens.

Basically, a race as, or way more intelligent than humans, but are not aware that they exist.

If that were the case for humans, would we be further into technology? Would we be a further advanced race?

I'm baffled.

If "why" is what caused us to advance, and only with conscious thought were we able to think "why", then technically, shouldn't we have advanced less were it not for "why"?

I don't know. Possibly this would mean that the only reason for an intelligent race without conscious thought to advance would be if it needed to. The only reason it would invent fire is if it was dying out of cold. The only reason it would invent the wheel is if, well, the wheel has so many uses. If it needed a wheel in order to survive, then it would invent it. Otherwise, it wouldn't.

Would it advance only for convenience?

I don't think so. Without conscious thought you don't care about convenience. You only care about surviving.

But if you're living in a small cave, with a larger one near it, would you honestly not move into the larger one, even if you didn't need to?

At this point, I don't know anymore. A larger cave would provide you better chances of surviving. Would that make you move into it? Probably. Would that mean advancement could occur, not for convenience, but for better chances of living, even though there isn't an exact need for it?

I'm baffled.

Maybe conscious thought is just a survival mechanism. Maybe we're made wonder why only to better our chances of surviving. It could be something else. If it is something else, then there is a chance that we would be able to escape these silly, silly instincts of ours that have prevented us from reaching our intelligence's full potential. But it would take time. More time than we have. Humans won't live very long, sadly.

But again, conscious thought may just be a survival mechanism. That would mean there is no escape. Not through evolution. Not with time. Nothing. It would mean there isn't a single species on Earth that is unique. That is pretty sad.

We'll all just keep drinking that water. Animals alike. Hail the Earth's ocean.

What a piece of shit.

I have also wasted your time if you read all this.
 
Level 12
Joined
May 11, 2005
Messages
416
the thing is, conscious thought wasn't 'made' to further our chances of survival, it wasn't consciously created with any specific objective, it just arose randomly, and the reason it stuck around is because it contributed to our survival, but it certainly had other random consequences.

'Why' didn't necessarily arose exclusivelly in humans, there are other animals capable of solving problems using conscious thinking
some large birds, for example, have demonstrated curiosity, linguistic abilities, and arithmetic abilities. crows are capable of solving very complex mechanical problems, and i know one fascinating case of a parrot who was able of constructing composite words: he had been taught to say "strawberry" when presented with a strawberry, and to say "orange" when presented with an orange. one day, they showed him a red apple, the parrot said "strauborange"...

suicide isn't that uncommon in animals either. it isn't a natural behaviour, and generally only shows itself in very stressful situations, but one could argue that suicide isn't a natural choice in humans either. many animals in captivity refuse to eat and drink, we are somewhat more proactive about it, and probably more aware of the consequences, nevertheless, it is a self destructive behaviour that is counter to the self preservation instincts most animals have. there's also 'natural' behaviours that give their life for a greater cause: getting laid. think of all the not-so-grieving widows in the insect world, or the male anglerfish, whose single objective in life is basically attaches himself to a female, only to dissolve his entire body, becoming nothing more than a pair of testicles hanging from a female abyssal monster

natural selection does it randomly, and it often get's it wrong in many ways, but as long as it works most of the time though, it stays.
 
Level 6
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
190
the thing is, conscious thought wasn't 'made' to further our chances of survival, it wasn't consciously created with any specific objective, it just arose randomly, and the reason it stuck around is because it contributed to our survival, but it certainly had other random consequences.
I wasn't stating the contrary.

'Why' didn't necessarily arose exclusivelly in humans, there are other animals capable of solving problems using conscious thinking
There is no way to prove that it's actually conscious thought.
 
Level 27
Joined
May 30, 2007
Messages
2,872
Given a report of strange sky-bound events I'd rather believe it is either a hoax, a misinterpreted atmospheric phenomenon, or a mass hysteria induced hallucination.
It's not about what you want to believe. The fact of the matter is that an event occurred. We can derive from it what we can derive and we can't derive anything else. If we some day meet an alien civilization that says, "Yeah, that sounds like our technology," then we can go back and say whether or not any given event was likely to be extraterrestrial or something else. The point is that your wanting to believe is scientifically destructive to this ongoing experiment that cannot be conducted as rigorously as we should wish.
A "life-form" that evolved on a different planet, in a different chemical environment, from a different set of inorganic elements,
I don't think modern science is really looking for these. As far as I know we're looking for Earth-like life.
I've been talking about this because I've been wondering if there can be intelligent life that is incapable of conscious thought.
This line of reasoning is relevant to AI research, and furthermore, is the reason we shouldn't fear AIs so much as some of us like to make believe.
One day, they showed him a red apple, the parrot said "strauborange"...
Awesome.
Natural selection does it randomly, and it often gets it wrong in many ways, but as long as it works most of the time though, it stays.
No, the driving force of evolution is that, by sheer force of numbers, eventually one arises that works. It may take eons, but it finds the few working ones among the millions upon billions upon trillions of possible configurations.
 
Level 12
Joined
May 11, 2005
Messages
416
618px-JeanLucPicardFacepalm.jpg
 
Level 6
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
190
This line of reasoning is relevant to AI research, and furthermore, is the reason we shouldn't fear AIs so much as some of us like to make believe
I'm also wondering which is more efficient. Been a while since I wrote that post, but, I think I was leaning towards questions of this kind:

Was it conscious thought that caused technical advancement?
Would've technical advancement been achieved anyway?

Which would've been faster and more efficient?

Is conscious thought preventing us from reaching our intelligence's full potential?
Has it slowed down the process of advancing?
Would've robots done it better?

If an alien race would've been created at the same time homo sapiens came to life, being exactly the same in every way, living in the same exact conditions, all the same except behaving like robots, AI, having no conscious thought, who would've made it further by this point?
What would be different?

Because when we think what makes humans unique we don't look at our intelligence. We look at the stranger helping an old woman pick up quarters she accidentally dropped on the ground.

and i know one fascinating case of a parrot who was able of constructing composite words: he had been taught to say "strawberry" when presented with a strawberry, and to say "orange" when presented with an orange. one day, they showed him a red apple, the parrot said "strauborange"...
A computer can do a 2+2 calculation as well. It doesn't necessarily mean the parrot was improvising. Even if he was, it still proves very little.

By this point, though, I only see conscious thought being something caused by the animal's level of intelligence. Could be something all descendants of Earth are capable of. Or bound to. We all drink that stupid water anyway.
This of course means conscious thought is nothing special, and only a survival mechanism. Just the brain doing what he does best. Make us believe there's more to something terribly simple.
 
Level 22
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
3,973

Is this facepalm supposed to mean some kind of superiority when you're kind of... younger and obviously with less experience of life?

Yes this was for fun, glad you liked it. It is because of such video makers that the topic is ridiculed. However, you seem to be having a problem facing what apparently is different from what you read in text books - let me tell you, when it comes to history some turn out to be wrong. No worries, I've been an excellent student at school, I study/ed (and will still study) Astronomy so I do realize the majority of fake stories and videos and know these things you're quoting in textbooks.

But you're just a kid, it's fine, when you grow up you will understand that on contrary to popular belief (actually the popular belief is there are, the minority are those whose thinking is closed in box), there are strange things happening and indeed things to point in the direction we are not alone, which I could've made a thread-page long post about.

So while the accepted theory of evolution seems to be the one (im not denying it), you've got to ask yourself how life was started, was it really an asteroid with life on it and if so - then well it must be coming from somewhere else which further suggests there is life outside.

of course, the argue is about evolution but since you are so close-minded about other intelligent life existing when so much data exists and yes even the credible one is so much, I had to open you a little bit on the previous pages..
 
Level 12
Joined
Jul 7, 2009
Messages
1,030
Some may argue we were the handicraft of a greater being, a deity. Others say we were the product of chance, appearing at the right time, right place and temperature for a new race to begin.

All that aside, we are thriving. And that's all that really matters.
 
Top