It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
JadeStar
Anthropomorphizing human - alien contact by using a human - human contact is automatic fail in my book.
The gulf between white colonizers and the indigenous Australians in reality was very little. From an ET perspective they pretty much would be one and the same just with slightly different technologies.
At the end of the day, both were human with the same human needs, motivations, environmental stressors, and mortality. There was a commonality of the human condition between them.
This is nothing like what the gulf between two species which evolved on two different planets light years apart with perhaps very different environments and separated by a billion years would be.
Throw in the fact that one species might be immortal or a machine intelligence and you have even less in common.
EnPassant
They are technologically more advanced than us but spiritually behind us, by a long way. They are NOT superior in spiritual terms. They are invading by stealth, creating hybrids to get power in the world. It is degrading to compare us with ants, and it is dangerous to make ETs look invincible. That just gives them more power...
At the end of the day, both were human with the same human needs, motivations, environmental stressors, and mortality. There was a commonality of the human condition between them.
People are always wondering "why" ET doesn't make contact. Yet, when ET does try, he is routinely rejected as a "delusional". Typically without examining ET statements or evidence.
And then of course, you go on to wonder why ET won't make contact. WOW!
Puzzuzu
reply to post by Unity_99
So you believe that ET is supernatural and able to interact with humans who wish to interact with them? You sound solid in your answer, is there a reason why you have you come to this conclusion? Thanks for the response
tanka418
Really? So I guess that ET IS a GOD then.
Zeta Reticuli for instance; some like to paint them as 6+ billion year old stars, while others say as young as 1.5 billion years. Real precise there; isn't it...
If we use methods from other sciences
we arrive at what is prbably a more realistic value: 4.75 Billion years. And that would put Zeta Reticuli at about the same age as Sol / Earth. Thus, no reason to think they would be any more advanced than Terrestrials.
JadeStar
When you are talking about a species that is likely a few million to several billion years ahead of us in terms of biological and/or technological evolution you really ARE talking about the difference between ants and humans.
JadeStar
Really? So I guess that ET IS a GOD then.
No. To Hom Erectus we'd have seemed like a God. But we are not. We're simply more advanced.
You've misunderstood the science and I am not sure you understand how star ages are determined. Its not a simple process and requires study of various factors. What you see as disagreement is actually part of the process of science in defining constraints.
If we use methods from other sciences
Other than astronomy and astrophysics? That doesn't seem very productive.
we arrive at what is prbably a more realistic value: 4.75 Billion years. And that would put Zeta Reticuli at about the same age as Sol / Earth. Thus, no reason to think they would be any more advanced than Terrestrials.
What are you basing this on?
tanka418
[
Yes I'm very aware of how science works. Where do you think science get some of its software? (that would be people like me)
What I see in the process of star age; scientists who have no idea what they are looking at. The methodology seems discontinuous, and a bit illogical. The parameters vary all over the place, and not even a single scientist can do any more than specify a range, typically covering billions of years. So...
yourignoranceisbliss
reply to post by Puzzuzu
I agree, it is a bit cliched and is an old example, yes.
But I think the hardest hurdle to overcome is for a person to step back, look at Humans on Earth from a distance, and accept that on a universal scale, we're really just as insignificant as the microbes you would find roaming around in groups on the surface of an apple held before you in the palm of your hand.
Imagine yourself no longer bound to that apple, able to traverse not just to every tree and fruit in the world, but to every tree and fruit on every other planet, to every tree and fruit in every other reality. The limit to your power being the limit to your imagination.
This is the power we find only in our concept of God. Yet most people are of such limited imagination, they do not even attempt to imagine for themselves what the power of God is, and content themselves by settling for "anything".
Going back to the cliche with ants, if an ant, for a brief moment (to us) was able to look up at us, the face of God as it were, could that ant know more than that we are all encompassing, larger than life, able to squash entire worlds within our grasp? No, the ant cannot perceive much more than we expect it capable of perceiving.
So Humans as well are inherently limited in perception. Try this thought though; If you were able to answer than ant's question "who are you?" your answer to that ant would likely be "don't worry, it doesn't matter".
And so the Alien response to us would likely be "don't worry, it doesn't matter".
AliceBleachWhite
JadeStar
When you are talking about a species that is likely a few million to several billion years ahead of us in terms of biological and/or technological evolution you really ARE talking about the difference between ants and humans.
A slightly relevant example could be illustrated with the fall of the Soviet Union. Once the Iron Curtain fell, and Westerners were allowed in, many of the technologies in common use were 20 - 30 years behind the West. Communism wasn't exactly the font for innovation. They were on their way to a technological stall, and would have never innovated much without any competition with the West.
It wasn't a culture conducive toward innovation.
Up to a certain point, innovations and "new" will start to occur less frequent, where major discoveries come once a century, or so far apart that style and fashion takes more precedence over function.
Billions of Years advanced could quite literally translate into mere tens of thousands of real years of innovations, which is still nothing to sniff at, but, definitely something fun to consider and think about.
Exploring the concept of upper limits to evolution might even be worth a new thread in and of itself.
edit on 11/24/2013 by AliceBleachWhite because: (no reason given)
Puzzuzu
1. There is no such thing as ET and what many have recorded and claimed to see are in fact natural
phenomenon that can be explained with science.
2. Aliens are observing us, yet are staying hidden because:
a) They know how the human race reacts in confrontation with anything foreign and how cross-cultural interactions have been played throughout history.
b) They want to see how humans evolve without a superior species messing with a natural progression
c) The human race is their creation/experiment and to involve themselves is to ruin the experiment
d) They are learning everything about us to either kill us, enslave us or know how to interact with us.
3. They have made contact with world leaders/Illuminati/TPTB etc. and they are:
a) in cahoots with them
b) They know disclosure would dismantle the establishment
4. ET is really the human race in the future who have developed time travel and they cannot interact with the present 'us' without influencing 'them'.
5. Aliens are trans-dimensional beings/ spiritual beings that have limited agency over this realm of existence either by their own limitations or the limitations enforced by a Creator.
Let me know what you think ATS.