mercenar1e
Member
We will never find out but that shouldn't stop us from exploring and visiting other planets.
Why havent aliens landed yet on earth?
- Thread starter RustyNails
- Start date
- Status
I'd much prefer us to be the "aliens" visiting other worlds instead. Dont be so quick to wish for beings that would be above us in the food chain. We have been on top for so long here on earth that i think that we simply forget how devastating it would be to lose that control.
I actually think its up to us to make meetings like this possible. We can speculate all we want about how amazingly intelligent aliens could theoretically be, but here on earth, within our sample size, we are in a completely different dimension compared to all other animals, both when it comes to cognitivity and our ability to manipulate our surroundings.
I really think that we should be those beings that you describe, that extraterrestrials wonder about and hope to one day meet.
I actually think its up to us to make meetings like this possible. We can speculate all we want about how amazingly intelligent aliens could theoretically be, but here on earth, within our sample size, we are in a completely different dimension compared to all other animals, both when it comes to cognitivity and our ability to manipulate our surroundings.
I really think that we should be those beings that you describe, that extraterrestrials wonder about and hope to one day meet.
Only some of those potential reasons are within our control, of course. Some astronomers believe that our (thus far) rather unusual solar system structure, with large gas giant outer planets "guarding" the rocky inner planets, may be required for the evolution of advanced life forms. Jupiter's massive gravity well deflects or absorbs into the planet itself a ton of potentially deadly objects before they can reach our part of the neighborhood. If something like that is required to stave off mass extinctions enough so that life can have uninterrupted periods of growth, that adds a very interesting variable to the "where is everybody" equation.
Earth might simply be a very, very rare bird, even astronomically speaking.
The Dennis System
Banned
Colonizing other planets wouldn't solve the problem of overpopulation on Earth. If the Earth had a limited number of people it could sustain, say 50 billion, then once we hit that limit we'd have to ship out to another planet the same number of people who are born every day on Earth beyond that 50 billion limit. Presumably, millions of people would be born every day, and so we'd have to ship out millions of people to a distant planet every day, which would be financially and technologically impossible.
Absolutely. Step one, we need to build a moon base. This should be human priority number one.
rokkerkory
Member
these threads always come up on drunk Saturday nights don't they lol
JordanN
Banned
Who says they haven't landed?
Aliens could have visited earth when it was still in its volcanic stage and never came back.
There's also an alternate theory. What if they don't care? They probably saw how humans tend to hate each other to the point of war, it's not worth their time coming here.
Aliens could have visited earth when it was still in its volcanic stage and never came back.
There's also an alternate theory. What if they don't care? They probably saw how humans tend to hate each other to the point of war, it's not worth their time coming here.
There's one behind you RIGHT NOW.
Maybe we'll just be the Africa to their China.
Another thing I'd like to point out about the whole "there are planets billions of years older than Earth" bit -- how much does the age of a planet really factor in? Earth has gone through multiple mass extinctions in the last 600 million years. Let's say another habitable planet out there was about the same age as the Earth, or even younger, but underwent fewer mass extinctions. Wouldn't that potentially allow more time for species to advance?
Even with that factor involved, it's still hard to tell how unique the Earth is given the sheer number of planets that probably exist in this galaxy alone. The number very well may be in the trillions, or is probably at least in the hundreds of billions.
Even with that factor involved, it's still hard to tell how unique the Earth is given the sheer number of planets that probably exist in this galaxy alone. The number very well may be in the trillions, or is probably at least in the hundreds of billions.
Drunk Saturday night GAF is best GAF! Well, maybe not, but if you're drunk on Saturday night and on here, then GAF is probably all youve got! (Like me)
Add that to the deteriorative effects of zero gravity on the human body, its not just impractical, its dangerous
Mexen
Member
I'm curious, OP. How would you react if they made their existence known?
We're probably pretty boring in the scheme of things. I mean, if life isn't some rare and incredible thing in the universe, aliens probably would only come here to fuck with us, like the dudes who go down to the city dump to get drunk and shoot at rats.
I'm interested in aliens though. You know, instinctive reasons.
I'm interested in aliens though. You know, instinctive reasons.
t-storm
Member
lol humans
and that doesnt even begin to tackle the probability of life, much less life that is capable enough to accomplish space travel.
I'm sorry, the first thing I thought of when I read this part was "we can mate with them right?". lol
Came here to post this, glad to see somebody beat me to it.
There are lots of explanations for why there is absolutely no sign of alien life.
The 3 I find most compelling are;
1.) We are the first life, or at least the only current life (meaning other life died out).
2.) We are the only lifeforms capable of any form of space travel. This could mean other life isn't intelligent, or it could mean other things like other life isn't physically capable of building space machines, or that there is intelligent life capable of building space machines except they don't have the necessary materials on their planets.
3.) Space travel simply isn't possible on the level that science fiction proposes. Perhaps life in the universe is just spread out way too far, and it just isn't feasible to travel to other solar systems.
Bonus possibility; there is other life at least as advanced as us, but we're all just too scared to send signals out into space or to make any other attempts to communicate with each other. Seems unlikely though - somebody would have to be brave/confident enough to attempt communication with other planets, right?
Welcome to you're "DOOM!"
Neo Member
Maybe they ignore our existence like we do to an ant.
Maybe we're the first species to reach this level of intelligence.
Maybe they haven't made it to our part of the neighborhood yet.
It's impossible to know really
Maybe we're the first species to reach this level of intelligence.
Maybe they haven't made it to our part of the neighborhood yet.
It's impossible to know really
I wish. I have a lot of questions.
DiscoJer
Member
Because there are no aliens. At least not in this galaxy. The galaxy is more dangerous than people think, and we are likely in just the right spot in the galaxy where we are fairly safe.
Beyond that, we seem to have a freakish solar system, with several things just right. Like having a big moon, having Jupiter where it is. Even just being a single star (not binary or trinary) is pretty rare. Heck, most stars are in clusters, which won't support life.
Even if you have all the right conditions, you need to have all those right conditions for a long amount of time for life to develop (say 250 million years?).
So even with the galaxy as big as it is, I think it's certainly possible we are alone in it. At least at present.
That's not really true though. At 1/10 of the speed of light, which is certainly doable, you could start in one solar system as a young man and visit another when you are elderly.
From the perspective of one person's life time, space travel is slow, but when you look at it over the history of a race, it's really not. What if we had space travel in 1500, not 1950? We could very well have been colonizing space for 300+ years, we'd have colonies on stars within 30 light years.
Beyond that, we seem to have a freakish solar system, with several things just right. Like having a big moon, having Jupiter where it is. Even just being a single star (not binary or trinary) is pretty rare. Heck, most stars are in clusters, which won't support life.
Even if you have all the right conditions, you need to have all those right conditions for a long amount of time for life to develop (say 250 million years?).
So even with the galaxy as big as it is, I think it's certainly possible we are alone in it. At least at present.
That's not really true though. At 1/10 of the speed of light, which is certainly doable, you could start in one solar system as a young man and visit another when you are elderly.
From the perspective of one person's life time, space travel is slow, but when you look at it over the history of a race, it's really not. What if we had space travel in 1500, not 1950? We could very well have been colonizing space for 300+ years, we'd have colonies on stars within 30 light years.
The great myth of science fiction is that an advanced civilization capable of interstellar travel has any need for resources from a habitable planet. You need water? It's downright plentiful in the universe so long as you don't care if it is frozen. Iron? One of the most common elements in existence. Complex hydrocarbons and ammonia compounds? You can find moons covered in them. Diamonds? There are planets in our Solar System where they literally rain from the sky.
Really, resources are amazingly plentiful in the universe. Any civilization that can explore the stars will want for nothing. With that being true, taking resources from an inhabited planet would be orders of magnitude more trouble then it is worth. Siting back and observing us would probably be far more beneficial to them than trying to move into our planet.
lastplayed
Member
Maybe they don't have landing technology.
The problem is, the Fermi Paradox already kind of explains away all of those reasons.
1) With so many planets probably so much older than Earth, it's highly improbably that Earth is the first planet to harbor life.
2) The actual nature of extraterrestrial life is probably the most unknowable aspect of this whole discussion. I would say that the actual materials required for space travel probably aren't unusually common on Earth, but that's just me.
3) Even without science fiction-speed travel, there has been way more than enough time for some civilization, somewhere, to have explored the galaxy.
Let's say that they can travel intergalactically - isn't the caveat our comparatively young radio/television-broadcast technology not having traveled through space very far? Thereby preventing any intelligent life from even finding us because they wouldn't be able to detect us anyway? And with space being as large as it is, there's quite a lot of nothing they would be finding before they discover our signal. They'd have to be relatively close to us before they even intercepted a radio broadcast.
bloodforge
Member
Aliens aren't programmed into our simulation.
speculawyer
Member
My view to the Fermi Paradox is that life rarely evolves intelligence. How many other species on earth have it?
That and interstellar travel is fucking hard.
That and interstellar travel is fucking hard.
TheLaughingStock
Member
They would probably be killed by bacteria/viruses.
TheLostBigBoss
Banned
Galaxy is big and FTL is most likely impossible.
They are trapped on their local system just like us, wondering the same thing.
Lots of mammals are intelligent. I think what we need to think about is evolved to the point where they use tools, not just plain intelligence.
They are trapped on their local system just like us, wondering the same thing.
Lots of mammals are intelligent. I think what we need to think about is evolved to the point where they use tools, not just plain intelligence.
Angelus Errare
Banned
Even if we are the visitors, there's nothing stopping us from visiting a dominating species who knocks us out of the top of the food chain.
WiiRevolution1
Member
If we are the aliens, does that mean there are no humans?
Arrogant Bastard
Banned
Meh, we judge intelligence based on our own. But I would agree that advanced intelligence (so far as we acknowledge it) is rather rare. Even so, I would bet that there exists significant intelligent life...probably well beyond us.
In the end I think the most significant hurdle revolves around the vastness of space. Even in another couple thousand or million years (assuming all goes well) I doubt we will have visited another star.
1) I agree, but with no known signs of other life, and with the "Special Earth" concept factored in, it doesn't seem impossible that we could be the only current life - or at least the only life within a huge number of light years.
2) Agreed. I was going to write something about how it seemed unlikely that there would be intelligent life on a planet without any usable materials for building spacecraft, or without the technology to artificially create those materials, but I didn't really want to make my post too lengthy or get too deep into things.
3) While I don't think you can state that as a fact, if we do take it as fact it only makes it seem less likely that there is any other intelligent life out there. I mean, if there was a civilization going all around the galaxy, we can assume they would have spread out to some of the most habitable planets. And as we know, Earth is extremely habitable (at least for the life that lives here).
Of course, they might not have needed to develop on Earth specifically, but then you'd have to think they would at least have developed on one of the many planets we can observe with our current technology. And if that was the case, you'd think they could observe us too. But with their superior space travel technology, you'd think they would take the time to come over and say "WOW, IT'S ANOTHER LIFEFORM!!"
So at that point it brings me back to my original points 1 or 3, which are that there is either no other life anywhere near us (and by near I mean anywhere we could ever theoretically travel to), or that widespread space travel just isn't feasible (not necessarily due to lack of speed/technology, but possibly due to the logistics of it).
We are basically discussing the fermi paradox. There have been billions of species before us over billions of years. We do not fully understand why we, the only species to develop advanced technology in earth, evolved. Though we have a rough idea and it seems to be a matter of chance circumstance. This means that intelligent life is rare on earth and may be a rare occurance on any given planet that already had life. That is not an unreasonable conclusion. What that realistically means is that the probability of intelligent life is lowered which equates to greater distance between given worlds.
I mean egg laying is vastly more efficient than live birth. It gave the dinosaurs dominion over the world for millions of years. Could any intelligent enough animals be birthed from eggs? Or does that require the extra time for development in a womb. If it requires a womb, how could any mammal evolve beyond a tiny size with egg layers dominating?
It is not unreasonable to conclude that in our case terrestrial dinosaurs had to go extinct for us to evolve. So if egg laying provides a serious advantage in evolution, then other worlds may have to have similar extinctions of dominant egg laying terrestrial animals before intelligence could arise. And in our case it was happenstance. Dinosaurs routinely survived mass extinctions. It was the unique circumstances of the last one that doomed them and allowed for us to evolve.
I mean egg laying is vastly more efficient than live birth. It gave the dinosaurs dominion over the world for millions of years. Could any intelligent enough animals be birthed from eggs? Or does that require the extra time for development in a womb. If it requires a womb, how could any mammal evolve beyond a tiny size with egg layers dominating?
It is not unreasonable to conclude that in our case terrestrial dinosaurs had to go extinct for us to evolve. So if egg laying provides a serious advantage in evolution, then other worlds may have to have similar extinctions of dominant egg laying terrestrial animals before intelligence could arise. And in our case it was happenstance. Dinosaurs routinely survived mass extinctions. It was the unique circumstances of the last one that doomed them and allowed for us to evolve.
- Status