CompuServe Messages

>> If you were flying over Ruwanda and saw what was going on… would you be "interested" in landing? << No, but I'd be interested for several reasons. I'd want to know what these "people" were fighting about, as it would be fairly apparent that it was not just over food. >> I guess going back to my point about how violent we are makes me thing that anyone with anything serious to do in the universe wouldn't want to waste thier time on a species that can't keep from destroying each other. << Ah yes, but then we really don't know do we. We haven't done it yet and while I grant you the potential is high, and sometimes it seems like a miracle it hasn't happened, the fact is it hasn't. If I was an E.T. this fact alone would be worth investigating. You raise some interesting points that really require some space to elaborate on. The definition of "higher beings" alone could get really complicated. So rather than try to answer each point, I'll try to present an overall perspective. There have been two major advances for humanity, that have tested his intellectual development. The first was fire, the second was nuclear energy. Fire became a very important tool for man as it allowed him to do a variety of things once he got control of it. But it was a double edge sword because if he misused it, it had the potential of burning down his house, destroying his crops etc. On the other hand it could be used as a powerful weapon, preserve his food longer and protect him from the other animals who instinctively feared it. Once he'd mastered it, he could forge stronger tools and construct more elaborate dwellings. How long before mankind as a whole mastered it? There's really no way of telling for sure, but its a fair assumption that there was a lot of tragedy along the way. This was man's first intellectual test before he could develop further. Without it he'd still be scurring around like the rest of the animals, but having mastered it he was able to advance. Without mastering it he would have continued to destroy himself. But mastering is a relative thing, evidence the fires in L.A. Without going into great detail I think you can see the same correlation with regard to nuclear energy. The technology mastered has the potential to feed everyone on this planet and provide a good life for the majority of the populace; uncontrolled it has far greater potential to devistate the entire planet. Now as the sun is one great big nuclear engine, it really doesn't matter if we blow ourselves into oblivion. It would just be a ripple in space. On the other hand, used intelligently nuclear energy has the potential to propel us into the universe and onto distant galaxies. It all comes down to our ability to manage it, and the intellect to use it wisely. If we don't succeed we won't be contaminating other solar systems with our aggressive behaviour, but if we do, then one can assume that our intellect has risen above our aggressive nature. Without getting too abstract, it seems that whatever alien life forms are out there, they would have to meet the same challenges. Unless the physics of the universe is different in different parts, which seems rather unlikely. And of course this supposes on what is known, ie: conventional travel as opposed to "thought" travel. A debate that would be similar to how many UFO's have traveled to earth. <g> So this being said, there appear to be certain rights of passage which any lifeform has to overcome to escape the bounds of their solar system. This is what keeps less intellectually advanced civilisations from contaminating other less advanced civilisations in the cosmic sense. From this standpoint I think an alien civilisation visiting earth would be very interested in our development and whether in time we would have the capacity to overcome our destructive tendencies that we might one day be traveling to other star systems as well. If we can't master our intellect, we'll just leave a burnt out shell of a planet, not much different than Mars or Venus. And in a few billion years our sun will go supernova and destroy what remains of our solar system. No damage done in the grande scheme of things. One other assumption that an alien race would have to make is that while we may have the capacity to destroy ourselves, we haven't. And that in and of it itself would be noteworthy, as I suspect that other civilisations if they exist have had an aggessive past as well. Its in the nature of nature. -JE P.S. I don't expect you to buy this interpretation, its just to let you know my perspective. I haven't found any serious flaws in it but on the other hand you may believe certain things that don't fit into it, which is o.k. There are many religious points I can't or won't argue. And now that I've presented my perspective, I've really got to cut back on answering as it takes up too much space. <g>