this is absolutly the most awesome awe inspiring pictue i have ever seen

SaltwaterServr

Blank Paper Offends Me
Messages
8,124
Reaction score
1
theogt;3314745 said:
Yes, I assume that one group as technologically advanced as ours and another group technologically advanced to the point of being able to travel through space in such a manner would be to communicate.

Seems a pretty simple assumption. Pretty far cry from ants. This is getting a bit silly.

Thought you might walk right into it, and you did. The assumption that we are important enough to garner the attention of an advanced race is predicated on that advanced race NOT having the consideration to leave an evolving race alone to complete its natural evolution. For all we know species evolve, reach a pinnacle, and either are killed by cosmic forces or by their own means. Perhaps 1 in 10000 make it to the point in which their particular world becomes on population not divided by religious or other ideals.

If the race is as intelligent to travel the width of our own galaxy, why would they risk tampering with an infant civilization? Again, the ant analogy. You don't kick the mound if its not bothering you.
 

theogt

Surrealist
Messages
45,846
Reaction score
5,912
SaltwaterServr;3314908 said:
Thought you might walk right into it, and you did. The assumption that we are important enough to garner the attention of an advanced race is predicated on that advanced race NOT having the consideration to leave an evolving race alone to complete its natural evolution. For all we know species evolve, reach a pinnacle, and either are killed by cosmic forces or by their own means. Perhaps 1 in 10000 make it to the point in which their particular world becomes on population not divided by religious or other ideals.

If the race is as intelligent to travel the width of our own galaxy, why would they risk tampering with an infant civilization? Again, the ant analogy. You don't kick the mound if its not bothering you.
Actually, the assumption is not at all predicated on that notion. They are mutually exclusive ideas. If you had actually read the thread, I have already offered the reason that there could be a conscious decision to not make contact in this thread. I even make mention of the movie Contact in which this idea is explored.
 

SaltwaterServr

Blank Paper Offends Me
Messages
8,124
Reaction score
1
theogt;3315005 said:
Actually, the assumption is not at all predicated on that notion. They are mutually exclusive ideas. If you had actually read the thread, I have already offered the reason that there could be a conscious decision to not make contact in this thread. I even make mention of the movie Contact in which this idea is explored.

Ah, yeah. Read that yesterday. Again, the ant analogy holds. A species as evolved enough to travel the cosmos and seek out other civilizations in which to make contact wouldn't necessarily pick the hardest one to communicate with, if the choice exists.

We as humans pick the smartest of the great apes to communicate with. Not the middle of the pack and not the most primitive of them. The ones that we are most able to communicate with. You ignore the ants until extenuating forces predicate otherwise. Water finds its own level.
 

Hoofbite

Well-Known Member
Messages
40,865
Reaction score
11,566
SaltwaterServr;3315088 said:
Ah, yeah. Read that yesterday. Again, the ant analogy holds. A species as evolved enough to travel the cosmos and seek out other civilizations in which to make contact wouldn't necessarily pick the hardest one to communicate with, if the choice exists.

We as humans pick the smartest of the great apes to communicate with. Not the middle of the pack and not the most primitive of them. The ones that we are most able to communicate with. You ignore the ants until extenuating forces predicate otherwise. Water finds its own level.

Yeah but in a universe with relatively few options, can beggars be chosers?

If you seek out other places, wouldn't you want to make contact with any civilization that had the capacity to understand that you were making contact.

Can ants really perceive that humans are humans? We'd know an alien if we saw one and could likely communicate in some way or form. I've yet to see an ant wave me down and ask for a little help building the colony.
 

CliffnDallas

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,484
Reaction score
215
All this talk of ant's in Starships reminds me of an argument I had one time with a friend. I contended that a "modern person" from say 2010 would have a far easier time adapting to being flung say...300 years in to the future than would say...a person from 300 ago being dropped in the middle of a modern city.

It's all a matter of points of refrance.
 

SaltwaterServr

Blank Paper Offends Me
Messages
8,124
Reaction score
1
Hoofbite;3315118 said:
Yeah but in a universe with relatively few options, can beggars be chosers?

If you seek out other places, wouldn't you want to make contact with any civilization that had the capacity to understand that you were making contact.

Can ants really perceive that humans are humans? We'd know an alien if we saw one and could likely communicate in some way or form. I've yet to see an ant wave me down and ask for a little help building the colony.

No, ant's can't perceive humans as anything other than threats whether or not that is the case in each contact between the two species. Humans also are great at perceiving threats if we don't understand the contact. Storms, volcanoes, solar eclipses were all seen as either threats to our civilization at one time or another in one part of the world or another.

Again, beggars that cannot be choosy would possibly not bother at all until the species they were observing had the ability to initiate contact on their own and at a level of a certain sophistication.

If the ant can talk, it changes the ant/human interaction.
 

rkell87

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,443
Reaction score
880
SaltwaterServr;3315142 said:
No, ant's can't perceive humans as anything other than threats whether or not that is the case in each contact between the two species. Humans also are great at perceiving threats if we don't understand the contact. Storms, volcanoes, solar eclipses were all seen as either threats to our civilization at one time or another in one part of the world or another.

Again, beggars that cannot be choosy would possibly not bother at all until the species they were observing had the ability to initiate contact on their own and at a level of a certain sophistication.

If the ant can talk, it changes the ant/human interaction.
but they can

movie1262821825.jpg
 

SaltwaterServr

Blank Paper Offends Me
Messages
8,124
Reaction score
1
rkell87;3315143 said:
but they can

movie1262821825.jpg

Is it me or is it sadly surreal to see any old movie, photo, or advertising with the World Trade Center buildings standing?

Remember when, so very long ago but only yesterday, when the worst thing we had to worry about was if we would have electrical power the next morning after Y2K?
 

CowboyWay

If Coach would have put me in, we'd a won State
Messages
4,445
Reaction score
554
theogt;3314486 said:
By receptive I mean able and willing to communicate. Ants aren't. We are. The analogy is useless.

Ants communicate with each other. It it a primitive use of communication? Yes.

Humans communicate with each other. Is it a primitive use of communication? To a species that has just traveled 10 billion light years, yes.

The analogy stands.

A species, technologically capable, of traveling 10 billion light years, could learn next to zero from us. It wouldn't even be worth the trip. Just like its not worth humans stopping at an ant pile to communicate with them. There is so little to learn from them, its not worth the trip.

Unless of course this new species wanted to scoop a few thousand of us up, put us in a human equivalent of an ant farm, and watch us run around like fools, which I will give you, could be very amusing in its own right.
 

theogt

Surrealist
Messages
45,846
Reaction score
5,912
SaltwaterServr;3315088 said:
Ah, yeah. Read that yesterday. Again, the ant analogy holds. A species as evolved enough to travel the cosmos and seek out other civilizations in which to make contact wouldn't necessarily pick the hardest one to communicate with, if the choice exists.

We as humans pick the smartest of the great apes to communicate with. Not the middle of the pack and not the most primitive of them. The ones that we are most able to communicate with. You ignore the ants until extenuating forces predicate otherwise. Water finds its own level.

CowboyWay;3315217 said:
Ants communicate with each other. It it a primitive use of communication? Yes.

Humans communicate with each other. Is it a primitive use of communication? To a species that has just traveled 10 billion light years, yes.

The analogy stands.

A species, technologically capable, of traveling 10 billion light years, could learn next to zero from us. It wouldn't even be worth the trip. Just like its not worth humans stopping at an ant pile to communicate with them. There is so little to learn from them, its not worth the trip.

Unless of course this new species wanted to scoop a few thousand of us up, put us in a human equivalent of an ant farm, and watch us run around like fools, which I will give you, could be very amusing in its own right.
I think there very clearly is a level of evolution/technological advancement where two species will always be able to find a way to communicate (hence, be "receptive" to one another). Obviously ants aren't. Humans (and any life with the technology to travel space) are.

If they can travel space, they can figure out saying, "Oh hai, my name is Carl." Analogy sucks.

As to the "little to learn" argument, that's bogus. We have little to learn from discovering the 1000th species of ant in the rainforest, yet we have scientists all over the world still discovering new species of animals in remote places. It's called curiosity. All intelligent life is struck with it. It's the only reason to develop the technology to travel through space in such manner in the first place.
 

rkell87

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,443
Reaction score
880
SaltwaterServr;3315152 said:
Is it me or is it sadly surreal to see any old movie, photo, or advertising with the World Trade Center buildings standing?

Remember when, so very long ago but only yesterday, when the worst thing we had to worry about was if we would have electrical power the next morning after Y2K?
yeah it is i can wait till the freedom towers are done
 

CowboyWay

If Coach would have put me in, we'd a won State
Messages
4,445
Reaction score
554
theogt;3315221 said:
If they can travel space, they can figure out saying, "Oh hai, my name is Carl." Analogy sucks.

Yet again, you are assuming that they can "dumb down" their level of communication to communicate with us.

If that is true, why can't we "dumb down" our level of communication to communicate with ants?

Analogy works.
 

rkell87

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,443
Reaction score
880
here is what sucks about talking about whether or not there are other sentient being out there, the argument is that with the vastness of space and the shear volume of the # of galaxies with billions of stars each and each one of those possibly having planets that orbit each of those stars and all of them have the possibility that there is or once was life on that planet and the fact that we know there can be life because we are here, how could there not be right?

but if we are going big bang/evolution theory here the series of events that it took to get us here are overwhelmingly against us. first a big ball of dust has to form, heat, then cool to form the planet. in that dust has to be key elements to support life, and at the same time that planet has be at the exact perfect distance from the exact perfect size, and perfect temperature star(or what will eventually be a temperature for supporting life). then while all this is going on we are waiting for a few more key elements for supporting life which we are hoping to get from asteroid and meteor strikes but not just any asteroid and meteor, we need ones carrying the exact right elements we need to support life, and they need to get here in the exact right window of opportunity when the sun is hot/cool(who knows which) enough to support the growth of life. BUT WAIT. our planet is too big. now we need to hope a huge asteroid slams into earth, and breaks off a chunk of it the size of the moon(arr,arr,arr) but the asteroid cant be too big cause it would break the whole planet, but it cant be too small cause it wouldn't break off enough of the planet. so now we have everything we need now we wait for evolution to kick in and hope nothing happens or changes so that the planet no longer can support life and that we evolve fast enough to adapt to any changes. oh and BTW somewhere in there the ozone layer was was formed(who knows how it got there), it shields us from the suns harmful rays, something that without we could not support life.

so. how long did all this take? well the universe is believed to be just under 14 billion years old, the earth and sun are between 3.5 and 4.5 billion. oldest bacteria found is 3.5 billion years old. oldest dino fossil, about a half billion. so three billion years from micro organism to dinosaur and another half billion from dino to us.

we got here late people. our sun is only expectd to last about another billion years, that means that at some point it is going to start cooling off and wont give off enough heat to support life.

there are billions and billions of possibilities for other life out there, but billions and billions of things had to happen just right for us to be here(big bang/evolution theory) and we happened pretty late by astronomical standards, if we had happened earlier in the creation of the universe i would say there is a good chance that life is out there but truth is we are most likely the only intelligent life in the universe right now; but there is a chance there is life that is evolving right now and there is also a chance that life has already come and gone on another planet somewhere, and eventually, after our sun has long been burned out that the cosmos will align again and support life somewhere else similar to ours.
 

DallasCowpoke

Fierce Allegiance
Messages
5,539
Reaction score
302
CowboyWay;3315444 said:
If that is true, why can't we "dumb down" our level of communication to communicate with ants?

I communicate with fire ants quite fluently. I speak "Ortho" to them, and they understand perfectly that they've just been evicted from my property.

:p:
 

theogt

Surrealist
Messages
45,846
Reaction score
5,912
CowboyWay;3315444 said:
Yet again, you are assuming that they can "dumb down" their level of communication to communicate with us.

If that is true, why can't we "dumb down" our level of communication to communicate with ants?

Analogy works.
You're just messing with me right? Please tell me you're just screwing with me because you think I like to argue.

Ants cannot read and write a language. They cannot understand multiple languages. They do not understand technology. They can't add, use tools, use logic, relay feelings. Ants can't point or mimic or gesture or do any of the things necessary to communicate. Humans can.

This is getting stupid.
 
Top