Funniest News this week Aliens are dangerous

[Arc Michael]

Steven Hawking, remoulded world theoretical physicist claimed in documentaries and communications that Aliens form outer space will kill all of us, so be-careful not to invite them by searching for them. So what does. That was 2 years ago. this last week, Hawking started a group to look for Aliens ( Reuters news).

Steven Hawking #1 world threat is an alien invasion. Lolz.

how far our scientists have become vacillating morons.

[angelagent]

Hawking may have finally realized that risking the extermination of homo
sapiens by highly advanced space aliens by letting them know we exist,
isn't necessarily as threatening to a species as fucked up as this one
as it would be to allow it to survive and take its bloody insanity to
other planets.

So it might be, too, that Hawking has reconsidered that it might be a
humane, compassionate act of genocide by the space beings.

Perhaps, if this mass murder of homo sapiens comes to pass some day, the
aliens will begin with the drunken crazed street bums in North Hollywood.

LOL! :))~

[Arc Michael]

ever hear of curiosity killed the cat? that is Hawking for you.

[Open other end]

Arc Michael wrote:

[---snip---]

I've long since given up on trying to decipher
the screechings you post under this handle, but
a quick Googling on "Hawking" and "Aliens" shows
recent news coverage on Hawking's efforts to
find aliens...

I agree that it's a stupid effort. Every human
culture that has been "Visited" by a more advanced
human culture has regretted it. Well, those that
survived anyway...

And people aren't ready for it. Oh, we'd get by.
It wouldn't collapse society or anything. But
why cause trouble?

And how would it benefit us? It's not like we
could hold a conversation with another
planet. Even 10 light years away means -- you
guessed it -- *20* years before receiving a
reply...

Pay attention now: 10 light years means 10
years, at the speed of light, for your message
to reach them. And then another 10 years, at
the speed of light, for their reply to get all
the way back to us. Grand total: 20 years!

...and would we ever be telling another
world how to split the atom? Build super
computers? Guidance systems with strategic
capabilities?

And lets say that they did just happen to be
a little ahead of us, say a few centuries,
that would mean that they know our every last
dirty secret.

Think about it...

They've received every last radio communication
sent on earth since, when? 2005? Assuming that
they're only 20 light years from here...

They've read all the coded Desert Storm traffic.
Everything about Vietnam. Korea. WWII.

They know everything we know, PLUS everything that
governments keep from us...

Imagine having access to super computers that are
200 years more advanced than ours, and using them
to crack modern codes...

Imagine their storage capabilities. They could store
every signal from the entire planet on a server, and
have the computer power to scour it in search of
patterns...

They would know us better than we do.

Ask yourself this: Do you think that would make them
trust us?

Would you?




-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/124804159263

[manfromu.f.o.]

Have you ever been with a man or woman that had an IQ way beyond yours?

I have. Had a good friend in my high school days that was so highly
intelligent that it was like I was tic-tac-toe to his multi-level chess
game.

Upper 10% of his graduating class, perfect 4.0 GPA. Invented things.
Went to work as one of Boeing's engineering prima donnas. Won the
highest awards galore in all kinds of endeavors.

When I think of this guy, who is just another really smart guy of our
own species, at his point in our evolution, it spurs me to imagine what
another species far beyond our evolution might be able to accomplish.

There's nothing irrational about thinking that way. Quite the opposite.
Nor is there anything "kooky" about considering the possibility that
what hinders or blocks homo sapiens' progress in space travel, has long
been overcome by a more advanced species of another world.

It is discomforting to think that all our Einsteins' intelligence
capacities might well be far surpassed by an extraterrestrial species'.
That what we wrestle with as seeming impossibilities for us have
possibly become everyday workable reality for space aliens.

Discoveries aplenty are awaiting us, ready to zoom us past
"impossibilities" -- and many in the past have evolved our then present
knowledge and application of it rather suddenly, in fact, relegating
those past harping skeptics to the ash heap of history.

:))~~!

[Open other end]

manfromu.f.o. wrote:

> Have you ever been with a man or woman that had an IQ way beyond yours?

I.Q. is irrelevant. If you could step back
into ancient Egypt, Babylon (etc) with modern
technology you would have ZERO difficulty making
them believe you are a god.

Yes, even the most intelligent amongst them...

> When I think of this guy, who is just another really smart guy of our
> own species, at his point in our evolution, it spurs me to imagine what
> another species far beyond our evolution might be able to accomplish.

So, again, you argue out of ignorance...

"Well I don't know, hence SUPER INTELLIGENT ALIENS!"

Again, intelligence is irrelevant. Someone today with
an I.Q. in the 100 range would have ZERO difficulty
convincing the smartest person in ancient times that
they were a god, if they had access to all the technology.

> It is discomforting to think that all our Einsteins' intelligence
> capacities might well be far surpassed by an extraterrestrial species'.

Think about what you're saying here. If true, then
the opposite is exactly as likely. Right? We could
be talking about a race of beings that, on average,
is dumber than we are.

Maybe they're more like ancient Egypt, where only
a small elite class are educated and intelligent,
and the rest have to be threatened with eternal
damnation to keep them from wanking off inside the
temples... JUST LIKE THEY DID IN ANCIENT EGYPT!

Get? We had some people engineering the great
pyramids, while others didn't know enough to
not wank off in public temples...

Your "Possibilities" are never random there,
you only ever consider "Possibilities" that
allow for your desired outcomes. And you ignore
PROBABILITIES to reach them!

We could graph alien species as a pyramid,
with the most species on the bottom, the least
intelligent/technological, and the smallest
number at the top representing the most
technologically advanced. So if there's any
species within 50 light years of us it's
almost certainly not very intelligent at all,
and probably not the least bit technologically
advanced.






-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/tagged/food-porn

[Mike]

On Tuesday, 28 July 2015 11:40:37 UTC-7, Open other end wrote:
> manfromu.f.o. wrote:
>
> > Have you ever been with a man or woman that had an IQ way beyond yours?
>
> I.Q. is irrelevant. If you could step back
> into ancient Egypt, Babylon (etc) with modern
> technology you would have ZERO difficulty making
> them believe you are a god.
>
> Yes, even the most intelligent amongst them...

Unlikely, unless you take some technology with you.

[manfromu.f.o.]

On 7/28/2015 11:40 AM, Open other end wrote:
> manfromu.f.o. wrote:
>
>> Have you ever been with a man or woman that had an IQ way beyond yours?
>
> I.Q. is irrelevant. If you could step back
> into ancient Egypt, Babylon (etc) with modern
> technology you would have ZERO difficulty making
> them believe you are a god.
>
> Yes, even the most intelligent amongst them...

Yes, that is likely, but it is as likely that a highly technologically
advanced alien species would appear to be indistinguishable from magic
to even the most intelligent members of our species existing today.

LOL!! IQ is relevant. Alien intelligence far advanced over homo sapiens
would likely be undetectable, and if detected, unprovable. Aliens could
literally be merrily running circles around out baby crib of
evolutionary progress, playing with us in such a manner that their
mischief has been translated by us into "demons" and other
"mythological" entities.

There would, too, likely be skeptics in ancient times interpreting
aliens' high jinks as gods, similar to today, in which such paranormal
phenomena as "ghosts" and "Sasquatch" are interpreted to be spirits of
dead humans and a homo sapien missing link, respectively.

The common comforting thread of skeptics' "impossibility" of the
paranormal would be broken by the supremely advanced IQ that created the
aliens' "magical technology." At each stage of human evolution (from its
origins over 200,000 years ago), a co-existing far evolved alien species
would be as a 80 year old genius scientist of our species compared to a
3 year old toddler, intellectually.

IQ is not only most relevant to my point, it is likely damning to your
counter-argument since your IQ has been stunted by anthropocentrism. LOL!!!

:))~

[manfromu.f.o.]

Probably. Just relating to ancient people the aliens' highly advanced
knowledge and its technological application, in words alone, or even by
pictures, would not convince but a small minority that their
(fallacious) claim of being a god or gods was true.

Like today, ancient people would need a hardware demonstration of some
kind to be truly convinced. Allegedly, Area 51 has that demonstrative
value to prove alien presence on Earth. There are some who accept those
claims as evidence, however, to support their pre-existing belief of
alien existence here.

So, in ancient times, it is likely there would be those less demanding
of the quality of the evidence presented, but I agree that the
technological demonstration would be highly convincing to so many more.

:))~~

[Open other end]

But I did say WITH MODERN TECHNOLOGY, though "technically"
I never had to, as aliens couldn't get here WITHOUT
advanced technology, so in order to preserve the parallel
it's a given that you would have to have modern technology
with you.



-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/tagged/food-porn

[Open other end]

manfromu.f.o. wrote:

> the aliens' highly advanced
> knowledge and its technological application

Again, the odds OVERWHELMINGLY STATE that any
aliens within 50 light years of us (or more)
are not very technologically advanced... perhaps
way below us, in fact.




-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/tagged/food-porn

[Open other end]

manfromu.f.o. wrote:

> Yes, that is likely, but it is as likely that a highly technologically
> advanced alien species would appear to be indistinguishable from magic
> to even the most intelligent members of our species existing today.

Of course. But the odds say that they wouldn't
be very advanced.

> LOL!! IQ is relevant. Alien intelligence far
> advanced over homo sapiens would likely be
> undetectable

Why would it have to be any more advanced?

Instead, I would expect alien brains to function
DIFFERENTLY from our own. This may be construed
as "More Intelligent," but it would be more accurate
to refer to such a brain as "Differently Intelligent."

...even human populations (sub species/species)
in the past appear to have evolved separate lines
of "Intelligence." One example is "Tonal Language"
and the specific genes which seem to be associated
with it.

ASIAN BRAINS WORK A LITTLE DIFFERENT!

This is probably a hold over going back to Peking
Man or earlier...

Neanderthals got smarter by growing bigger brains.
Homo sapiens sapiens appear to have gotten smarter
(better working) brains. But the real revolution
happened when the two mixed! It was only THEN that
we start finding artworks, religion, musical
instruments in the archaeological record...

"Differently enabled."

> Aliens could literally be

And they literally could be hanging from tree limbs,
chucking poo at each other.

It's not even a case where both are equally as likely!
The poo-throwing stage would have to be far more common
than the cloaking device stage...

> IQ is not only most relevant to my point

Which is why your point is bullocks.

Culture/social mores & time are vastly more
important here.

An alien civilization that was a little dumber
than we are, but many times our age, would
almost certainly be more advanced than us. While
an alien civilization with brains that make us
look like chimps, but isn't very old, would likely
be way behind us.

You need "Wicked high I.Q.s" for your Star Trek
narrative. That's all. There is nothing the least
bit realistic in your models.




-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/tagged/food-porn

[manfromu.f.o.]

On 7/28/2015 5:38 PM, Open other end wrote:
> manfromu.f.o. wrote:
>
>> the aliens' highly advanced
>> knowledge and its technological application
>
> Again, the odds OVERWHELMINGLY STATE that any
> aliens within 50 light years of us (or more)
> are not very technologically advanced... perhaps
> way below us, in fact.
>
>

Still desperately clinging to that one man's "calculations" of odds, eh?

There are those who have calculated differently, and ended up with
contrasting results.

It's all theoretical, Virginia.

If aliens explored the universe, they'd more likely use robots. It would
explain why alleged aliens sighted have a homogenized appearance, often
without clothing. Even their behavior is amazingly non-distinctive
individually in the many alleged appearances.

I quote:

This portrayal of extraterrestrials, however, strikes some scientists as
unrealistic. Should any real visitors -- or conquerors -- from space
come to our planet, the scientific odds strongly suggest the aliens will
be completely artificial forms of life.

"If an extraterrestrial spaceship ever lands on Earth, I bet you that it
is 99.9999999 percent likely that what exits that ship will be synthetic
in nature," said Michael Dyer, a professor of computer science at the
University of California, Los Angeles (appropriately enough).

In civilizations advanced enough to travel between the stars, it is
quite likely that machines have supplanted their biological creators,
some scientists argue. Automatons -- unlike animals -- could withstand
the hazards to living tissue and the strain on social fabrics posed by a
long interstellar voyage.

Furthermore, nonliving beings would not have to worry all that much
about the environmental conditions at their destination -- if the planet
is hot or cold, bacteria-ridden or sterile, has oxygen in the air or is
airless, machines would not care.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/scientists-if-aliens-arrive-expect-robots/

So many different supposedly "scientific odds" calculations, all based
on what one species, homo sapiens, isolated on a tiny island in the
oceanic dark matter (which, btw, hasn't been identified yet), fantasizes
about what aliens would be like.

Seemingly quite pathetic.

:))~

[Open other end]

manfromu.f.o. wrote:

> Still desperately clinging to that one man's "calculations" of odds, eh?

It's not merely a calculation.

ALL species without exception would have to
pass through a primitive stage. Period.

None have to reach an advanced technology stage.

Get it?

A primitive stage is required, an advanced
technology stage is not...

Passing through a primitive stage and graduating
to high technology requires time. The more time
that passes, the less likely any species survives.

This is a fact.

The longer a species exists, the more likely
they will see a killer asteroid, or the "Perfect
Storm" of volcanic activity... nuclear war or
accident... disease...

Google "Snowball earth." If such an ice age
struck again (and it's a matter of "When"
and not "If") then nearly all life on earth
save for some bacteria will cease to exist.

There are endless ways that a species might
go extinct, and the longer they exist the
more likely they will see them... all.

> There are those who have calculated differently, and ended up with
> contrasting results.

Garbage In/Garbage Out

> If aliens explored the universe, they'd more likely use robots.

True.

But economics still play a super important role.






-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/tagged/food-porn

[manfromu.f.o.]

On 7/28/2015 5:54 PM, Open other end wrote:
> manfromu.f.o. wrote:
>
>> Yes, that is likely, but it is as likely that a highly technologically
>> advanced alien species would appear to be indistinguishable from magic
>> to even the most intelligent members of our species existing today.
>
> Of course. But the odds say that they wouldn't
> be very advanced.

What criteria was used to calculate such odds? One can find as many
"scientific calculations" running rampant across the internet about
anything that is, in fact, unknown.

Yes, it is all unknown. And what you propose to be "known" is nothing
more than an educated guess by one or more members of a species isolated
on an island in an endless ocean of dark matter.

Very limiting, if not pathetic.

>
>> LOL!! IQ is relevant. Alien intelligence far
>> advanced over homo sapiens would likely be
>> undetectable
>
> Why would it have to be any more advanced?

Why would it not?

> Instead, I would expect alien brains to function
> DIFFERENTLY from our own. This may be construed
> as "More Intelligent," but it would be more accurate
> to refer to such a brain as "Differently Intelligent."
>
> ...even human populations (sub species/species)
> in the past appear to have evolved separate lines
> of "Intelligence." One example is "Tonal Language"
> and the specific genes which seem to be associated
> with it.
>
> ASIAN BRAINS WORK A LITTLE DIFFERENT!
>
> This is probably a hold over going back to Peking
> Man or earlier...
>
> Neanderthals got smarter by growing bigger brains.
> Homo sapiens sapiens appear to have gotten smarter
> (better working) brains. But the real revolution
> happened when the two mixed! It was only THEN that
> we start finding artworks, religion, musical
> instruments in the archaeological record...
>
> "Differently enabled."
>
>> Aliens could literally be
>
> And they literally could be hanging from tree limbs,
> chucking poo at each other.

No, they'd not be candidates for an technologically advanced species
whose greater intelligence created the "magical machinery." We used shit
eating, piss-drinking monkeys as very early astronauts, but they knew
nothing about flying the capsules or building the rockets that got them
into orbit.
Your remark is typical of your notorious senselessly blathering history
here.

>
> It's not even a case where both are equally as likely!
> The poo-throwing stage would have to be far more common
> than the cloaking device stage...
>
>> IQ is not only most relevant to my point
>
> Which is why your point is bullocks.

If it's bullocks, it still falls short of the shit-concepts that dribble
out of your anthropocentric mind.

>
> Culture/social mores & time are vastly more
> important here.
>
> An alien civilization that was a little dumber
> than we are, but many times our age, would
> almost certainly be more advanced than us. While
> an alien civilization with brains that make us
> look like chimps, but isn't very old, would likely
> be way behind us.
>
> You need "Wicked high I.Q.s" for your Star Trek
> narrative. That's all. There is nothing the least
> bit realistic in your models.
>
>
>

It's commonly observable in human history that advanced technological
progress has come from a higher intelligence (aka knowledge and
application), and when the Western advanced intelligence/technology was
introduced to isolated primitive tribes, it wowed them into interpreting
it as forms of magic.

Likewise, in rational extrapolation, differing intergalactic tribes
would be at wildly disparate levels of intel/tech knowledge and
application, and when meeting with a less evolved and knowledgeable
tribe, i.e., homo sapiens, or ANY other, on another planet, the latter
would regard their technology as magical, and perhaps emanating from gods.

However, skepto-phrenics then as now, have offered up "convincing"
"scientific" hypotheses as rational explanations, and simply dismiss it
all as hallucinatory and hoaxes.

They'd confidently go to bed hugging their laptops, and work that
magical technology without a thought of any rational comparison.

LOL!!!

:))~~~

[manfromu.f.o.]

And when was the first tribe of intelligent beings in the universe created?

LOL!

:))~~

[Open other end]

manfromu.f.o. wrote:

> And when was the first tribe of intelligent beings in the universe created?

To the best of YOUR knowledge, we are the first.





-- --

talishi wrote:

> What happens when you

I'm sorry, I keep forgetting that you're filled
with mass media stories which you think are
"Science."

Here, you'll like this:

http://www.nytimes.com/1991/02/07/us/not-using-fossil-fuels-could-add-to-warming.html

It's actually the sulfur dioxide, as they explain,
released by fossil fuels, which result in a net
COOLING of the earth.

You wouldn't know, you being a hysterical fool
to the media. But, the whole "Global Warming"
mantra is so fake, so THE OPPOSITE of anything
real that the chosen culprit, fossil fuels,
COOL the earth -- they don't warm it!

That's how ignorant you are...

[Open other end]

manfromu.f.o. wrote:

> What criteria was used to calculate such odds?

All species would have to pass through a primitive
stage. None are required to reach an advanced
technology stage.

All species are required ==> None are required.

Unless you want to argue that ALL species survive,
ALL reach a highly advanced space traveling age,
even a Koolaid guzzling UFO nutter has to admit the
obvious: The more advanced you want to imagine them,
the fewer which can exist.





-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/125197857743

[angelagent]

Bull. There is no apparent compensation in your boxed mind that the
intelligence capacities of an alien species could genetically begin at a
much higher level early in their evolution, and that climate change
would be among the possible catalysts including inter-breeding mutation.

In addition, later in their evolution, aliens may have had their brains'
capacity accelerated. Scientists speculate hominids' brains unusually
accelerated at some point into homo sapiens' much greater capacity
brains by mating with a yet unknown species.

What would have happened if hominins had started with brains that had
used much more at that early stage of their evolutionary capacity? Had
found other perhaps more intelligent homo species to breed with?

Are we to seriously expect the evolutionary ladder of aliens would be
the same as ours? Or even remotely similar?

Well, we could logically expect that pathetic box-brained
skepto-phrenics like yourself would likely had been much fewer in
number, despite retaining a craving for bananas and peanuts.

And we'd be likely using anti-gravity vehicles, air and land commonly
by now, abandoning much of the fossil-fuel addiction that is harming our
health and environment.

Aliens' intelligence capacity may be beyond ours due to its perception
and adaptation inherent in its quite different physiological
constitution, permitting it to run circles around homo sapiens.

I quote:

Published on Mar 10, 2014

Dr. Michio Kaku returns to Big Think studios to discuss his latest book,
The Future of the Mind (http://goo.gl/1mcGeb). Here he discusses the
minds of aliens and animals.

Transcript -- I love to watch science fiction movies but I cringe -- I
cringe whenever I see a depiction of the aliens. First of all the aliens
speak perfect English. Not just British English. They speak perfect
American English. And obviously they're a human inside some kind of
monkey suit. I mean we have Hollywood special effects, right. So why
can't we get better aliens. And then the aliens think just like us.
They're territorial. They want to conquer. They want resources. They
want -- they see humans as inferior. But you see, that's only a
byproduct of our evolution. Look at other animals in the animal kingdom.
Some animals are not territorial, okay. They don't have to conquer. We
have other paradigms in the animal kingdom which are totally different
form the way our brain is constructed. But when we look at aliens in the
movies we're basically projecting our own consciousness in aliens. Our
fears, our desires are projected and they are a mirror of who we are,
not a mirror of who they really are.

For example, if we take a look at a bat or a dog, the dog's brain is
mainly interested in smells. It's swirling in a universe of smells while
a bat's brain mainly is concentrated on sonar, on detecting clicks and
echoes. Same thing with the dolphin brain. Their consciousness is
totally different from our consciousness because they see things
differently than us because of their evolutionary history. For example
when we see a cat and the cat comes up to us and tries to purr next to
us, we say to ourselves, "Oh, nice cat. The cat is being affectionate."
No. The cat is not being affectionate. It's simply rubbing his hormones
on you and saying, "I own this human. This human is mine. I'm marking my
territory. This human feeds me twice a day. I've trained him."

So a cat sees the universe totally different than we do and yet we
impose our thinking on an alien. Now on the question of intelligence. If
these aliens are more intelligent than us, how would they be more
intelligent? In the book I say that one of the main ingredients of
intelligence is to predict the future. The ability to simulate today so
we see tomorrow. And that requires a high level of intelligence to be
able to understand the laws of nature, the laws of people. What is the
most likely outcome of a future event. That requires intelligence. If
they are more intelligent than us they will see the future much better
than us. They will see outcomes that we cannot foresee. They will
simulate scenarios that we cannot even dream of. They can outwit us
every time.

Think of a safecracker. A safecracker may have a low IQ, may have
dropped out of elementary school. But the safecracker can simulate the
future much better than a cop can and that's why he can rob banks and
get away with it. And so in other words, the criminal mind is not
necessarily stupid because it has low IQ. It's quite well adapted for
what it does. And what it does is to simulate the future of a crime. Now
think about when we encounter intelligent life that is more intelligent
than us. They may see the world totally differently. Their world may be
a world of smells, a world of sounds rather than a world of eyesight
like our brain is constructed. And most important, they may be able to
see the outcome of future events much better than us. They'll be able to
actually run circles around us because they see the future.

Your anthropocentrism keeps dribbling out your worn-out yazoo.

:)~

[Mike]

On Wednesday, 29 July 2015 21:25:39 UTC-7, angelagent wrote:
> On 7/28/2015 8:07 PM, Open other end wrote:

.... a low IQ, may have dropped out of elementary school .....

Sometimes I wonder why you even bother........

[Open other end]

angelagent wrote:

> Bull. There is no apparent compensation in your boxed mind that the
> intelligence capacities of an alien species could genetically begin at a
> much higher level early in their evolution, and that climate change
> would be among the possible catalysts including inter-breeding mutation.

You're just rambling.

You're assuming whatever it is you need in
order to be right, instead of weighing
actual possibilities.

> In addition, later in their evolution, aliens may
> have

Or may not have. This is stupid. You're trying to
justify your Star Trek fantasy here, not explore
any of the actual possibilities.






-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/124804159263

[Open other end]

angelagent wrote:

> So a cat sees the universe totally different than we do and yet we
> impose our thinking on an alien. Now on the question of intelligence. If
> these aliens are more intelligent than us, how would they be more
> intelligent? In the book I say that one of the main ingredients of
> intelligence is to predict the future. The ability to simulate today so
> we see tomorrow. And that requires a high level of intelligence to be
> able to understand the laws of nature, the laws of people. What is the
> most likely outcome of a future event. That requires intelligence. If
> they are more intelligent than us they will see the future much better
> than us. They will see outcomes that we cannot foresee. They will
> simulate scenarios that we cannot even dream of. They can outwit us
> every time.

This was written by an idiot, by the way. They're
talking about pattern recognition. That's all.

The moon doesn't cycle randomly, there's a pattern
to it. The same with the sun. The same with the
coming & going of the seasons.

Patterns.

But birds are supposedly VERY adept at patterns,
and last time I checked we eat them, NOT the
other way around.

As I pointed out, and you so cleverly ignored,
intelligence isn't much of a factor here.

Economics is.

Could an alien species justify the enormous
and incredibly long-term investment in deep
space travel.

Period.

That's it.





-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/124804159263

[D]

On Wed, 29 Jul 2015 21:25:37 -0700, angelagent <clou...@aol.com> wrote:
>On 7/28/2015 8:07 PM, Open other end wrote:
>> manfromu.f.o. wrote:

snip

>
>Bull. There is no apparent compensation in your boxed mind that the
>intelligence capacities of an alien species could genetically begin at a
>much higher level early in their evolution, and that climate change
>would be among the possible catalysts including inter-breeding mutation.
>
>In addition, later in their evolution, aliens may have had their brains'
>capacity accelerated. Scientists speculate hominids' brains unusually
>accelerated at some point into homo sapiens' much greater capacity
>brains by mating with a yet unknown species.
>
>What would have happened if hominins had started with brains that had
>used much more at that early stage of their evolutionary capacity? Had
>found other perhaps more intelligent homo species to breed with?
>

When you consider the possibility of sentient beings
being first and foremost as thought-forms which rose
up from the heaven-on-earth paradise into the mortal
struggle of physical existence and survival, then it
begins to make more sense as to who engendered whom.

No arguments there. Remember that old Star Trek
episode with a clever black cat named "Isis" and
her pal "Gary Seven"? You know how fads come and
go, what if a tee-shirt company issued a line of
black "ISIS" T-shirts and people started showing
up at shopping malls wearing them . . . bad idea?

>Now on the question of intelligence.
> If these aliens are more intelligent than us, how would they be more
>intelligent? In the book I say that one of the main ingredients of
>intelligence is to predict the future. The ability to simulate today so
>we see tomorrow. And that requires a high level of intelligence to be
>able to understand the laws of nature, the laws of people. What is the
>most likely outcome of a future event. That requires intelligence. If
>they are more intelligent than us they will see the future much better
>than us. They will see outcomes that we cannot foresee. They will
>simulate scenarios that we cannot even dream of. They can outwit us
>every time.
>

Clairvoyance isn't about likelihood, it's seeing
the future in the present-tense, and so there is
no possibility of any other outcome any more than
anyone can go back into the past and change that,
either. Such natural instinct only works when it's
not interfered with. Control-freaks need not apply,
so the comparative intelligence issue is separate.

>Think of a safecracker. A safecracker may have a low IQ, may have
>dropped out of elementary school. But the safecracker can simulate the
>future much better than a cop can and that's why he can rob banks and
>get away with it. And so in other words, the criminal mind is not
>necessarily stupid because it has low IQ. It's quite well adapted for
>what it does. And what it does is to simulate the future of a crime. Now
>think about when we encounter intelligent life that is more intelligent
>than us. They may see the world totally differently. Their world may be
>a world of smells, a world of sounds rather than a world of eyesight
>like our brain is constructed. And most important, they may be able to
>see the outcome of future events much better than us. They'll be able to
>actually run circles around us because they see the future.
>

Fifty years ago, the term "safecracker" had a very
different meaning from what it might mean in this
uber-digital age. Old-school, master safecrackers
spent most of their time assessing the potential
and practicality of a heist, conducting research
and doing their homework. No room for "guesswork".
Then they had to have special tools prepared for
each specific job, test those tools to make sure
they function as expected within the usually very
limited timeframe within which they had to work.
And they had to consider ingress, egress, alarms,
guards, noise levels, and trustworthiness of any
partners or insiders involved. Not an easy task.
These people were not common B & E jewel thieves
using stethoscopes to feel tumblers clicking in a
wall or floor safe. These guys were more like roc-
ket scientists who could not afford an "IQ" below,
say, that of an astronaut.

[angelagent]

Well, do you know why a sober person occasionally engages a barfly in a
tavern "debate"?

If you do, you have your probable answer, albeit variable.

;)~

[manfromu.f.o.]

Possibilities are what YOU have rejected, including the possibility
you're totally, asininely wrong.

:))~~

[Open other end]

manfromu.f.o. wrote:

> Possibilities are


"Possibilities" are limited only by your imagination.
It is only by a PROBABILITY comparison that you
might accurately judge them.

For instance, PROBABILITIES overwhelming favor any
"Alien" visitation being a hoax. They WAY over favor
a hoax. It's not even close. The odds are so lopsided
in favor of a hoax that you can't rightly entertain
real aliens.




-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/125204447133

[manfromu.f.o.]

LOL! Well, it'd all depend on what aliens would think was so interesting
about our world and/or our (and other) species here, wouldn't it??

I don't think any human can solidly provide a definitive answer to that
question.

What aliens would find interesting enough to "invest" such time and
energy in, would be as difficult to accurately answer as why you
"invest" so much time obsessing about online strangers' penises.

Obviously, the aliens' possible motivations as with yours, would give
license to all sorts of speculation, none of it being satisfactory but
to each person or group that has a "vested interest" in consideration or
acceptance of it.

:))~~

[Open other end]

manfromu.f.o. wrote:

> Open other end wrote:

> > As I pointed out, and you so cleverly ignored,
> > intelligence isn't much of a factor here.
> >
> > Economics is.
> >
> > Could an alien species justify the enormous
> > and incredibly long-term investment in deep
> > space travel.
> >
> > Period.
> >
> > That's it.

> LOL! Well, it'd all depend on what aliens would
> think was so interesting about our world and/or
> our (and other) species here, wouldn't it??

No it wouldn't. They wouldn't even know our world
exists unless they FIRST decided that deep space
exploration was economically viable.

You've got it backwards, where they invest in the
exploration, discover us and then decide to invest
in the exploration necessary to discover us...

> What aliens would find interesting enough to "invest"
> such time and energy in

Ah, you're wrong again...

There are no aliens. None that we know of. And the odds
say that if there are any within a hundred light years
from us right now then they're bacteria.

> Obviously, the aliens' possible motivations as with yours

These being the non-existing aliens...






-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/125325933355

[manfromu.f.o.]

We don't know that there are no aliens here, or there, or anywhere. And
we don't know that they all would be "likely" no more intelligent or
technologically advanced than us.

You don't know. Science doesn't know. I don't know. WE don't know!

As with you, and them, it's popular speculation that I engage in - not
an acceptance of their ET existence. I do, however, have an acceptance
of the possibilities, which you and so many skeptoids cannot entertain.

Calculating odds that this or that might or might not exist, is an
exercise if bias reaffirmation, as useless as new knowledge as honey on
a shit sandwich.

Have yours with a prickly pickle and ego chips.

:))~~

[Mike]

Most species stay out of each other's way for obvious reasons. Most cockroaches and bees have never seen a human, and most humans have never seen a lion. I might have seen a real lion once, and I can't even remember
when, so it's a silly argument that we should even know about ET's or there
should be any evidence.





>
> :))~~

[docufo]

The invention of the microscope opened up a wondrous world of bizarre
creatures human, animal, and insect eyes had never seen before.

Technological advancement does that kind of thing.

Yes, quite different species can co-exist with each not aware of any other.

The universe, our environment, could have alien life forms heavily in
our midst without detection, as I've said many times. And if detected,
usually by higher technological means, and, yep, they wouldn't
necessarily have to be more intelligent or technologically advanced.

Amoebae aren't more intelligent than homo sapiens...well, at least as
far we can define what we think of as intelligence. As some have pointed
out, animal intelligence may be less by human standards, but their
environmental adaptive "smarts" and physiological differences leave us
often at a disadvantage.

But, unseen alien life on earth, or elsewhere, could also be more
intelligent than homo sapiens.

Almost anything is possible! But not to Boston Beanie! He has opted for
a very short menu of possibilities.

:))~~

[Open other end]

manfromu.f.o. wrote:

> We don't know that there are no aliens here

Actually, we do.

> And we don't know that they
> all would be "likely"

We do.





-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/125547790706

[Mike]

On Monday, 3 August 2015 21:53:54 UTC-7, Open other end wrote:
> manfromu.f.o. wrote:
>
> > We don't know that there are no aliens here
>
> Actually, we do.
>
> > And we don't know that they
> > all would be "likely"
>
> We do.

So you're calling yourself a 'we' now?

[Open other end]

Mike wrote:

> Open other end wrote:
> > manfromu.f.o. wrote:

> > > And we don't know that they
> > > all would be "likely"
> >
> > We do.
>
> So you're calling yourself a 'we' now?

It doesn't matter how many people believe in
the Invisible Pink Unicorn, WE -- everyone
else -- know that it doesn't exist.

"Aliens" are a product of the mass media coupled
to an inability to comprehend scale. ACROSS THE
BOARD.

At speeds even a sliver of C, a grain of sand
holds enough kinetic energy to obliterate a
ship.

Even at the speed of light, a round trip a quarter
across the galaxy is 50,000 years or more.

Given a life expectancy of a billion years -- which
is roughly a thousand times the average life
expectancy for a species here on earth -- the time
scales are so large that any alien species could
have gone extinct billions of years ago, or still
be billions of years away from evolving.

At 1/100th C, which STILL leaves you obliterated by
the tiniest pebble from the kinetic energy, we're
talking about a 900 year round trip to our nearest
solar neighbor. Which makes as much sense, economically,
as investing heavily in a voyage back in the year
1115, knowing you won't see a return until 2015.

You wouldn't be investing in yourself. You're not
even necessarily investing in a nation or an
ethnic identity -- not on those time scales. So,
economically, you will never see a return. It's
always a net loss.





-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/125783838788

[Mike]

On Tuesday, 4 August 2015 08:49:24 UTC-7, Open other end wrote:
> Mike wrote:
>
> > Open other end wrote:
> > > manfromu.f.o. wrote:
>
> > > > And we don't know that they
> > > > all would be "likely"
> > >
> > > We do.
> >
> > So you're calling yourself a 'we' now?
>
> It doesn't matter how many people believe in
> the Invisible Pink Unicorn, WE -- everyone
> else -- know that it doesn't exist.
>
> "Aliens" are a product of the mass media coupled
> to an inability to comprehend scale. ACROSS THE
> BOARD.
>
> At speeds even a sliver of C, a grain of sand
> holds enough kinetic energy to obliterate a
> ship.

Suppose they don't come in 'ships'?

[Open other end]

WARNING: Horrible dirty joke to follow!

Mike wrote:
> Suppose they don't come in 'ships'?

'Suppose that's why they invented 'shore leave',
so the horny sailors could come on land.





-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/125783838788

[manfromu.f.o.]

On 8/3/2015 9:53 PM, Open other end wrote:
> manfromu.f.o. wrote:
>
>> We don't know that there are no aliens here
>
> Actually, we do.
>
>> And we don't know that they
>> all would be "likely"
>
> We do.
>
>

Intransigent biased affirmations without any evidential verification.

Your devout specialty.

One more biased opinion, one more belief, one more drooling cultist.

Skepto-phrenics rejoice!

It won't cut the mustard, ol' Chef. But your thick greasy baloney likely
satisfies your tastes without any condiment.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-l2GgSkA6U

:))~

[manfromu.f.o.]

On 8/4/2015 11:46 AM, Open other end wrote:
> WARNING: Horrible dirty joke to follow!
>
> Mike wrote:
>> Suppose they don't come in 'ships'?
>
> 'Suppose that's why they invented 'shore leave',
> so the horny sailors could come on land.
>
>
>

No, sailors never come on land. Never known a sailor, sober or drunken,
to have wasted his load on the ground.

You've just insulted all the sailors of all the nations.

You should apologize.

However, I will remind you that aliens may not need to come. They may
have sent androids.

;}~

[Mike]

Something makes me believe he's got more than just a few 'aliens'
up hiding up his bum.



>
> ;}~

[Open other end]

manfromu.f.o. wrote:

> However, I will remind you that aliens may not
> need to come. They may have sent androids.

The Mars rover mission cost $2.47 BILLION.

Billion.

You're talking about something a lot more significant
than the Mars rover, and with zero return for possibly
thousands or even hundreds of thousands of years.






-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/125905102238

[Open other end]

manfromu.f.o. wrote:

> Intransigent biased affirmations without any evidential verification.

Yeah, like I could type out even half those
words without the help of a spell checker...

"Well you could be a real person or you
could be an alien masquerading as a person.
So I guess it's 50-50."


Possibility != Probability





-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/125905102238

[angelagent]

On 8/4/2015 10:57 PM, Open other end wrote:
> manfromu.f.o. wrote:
>
>> Intransigent biased affirmations without any evidential verification.
>
> Yeah, like I could type out even half those
> words without the help of a spell checker...
>
> "Well you could be a real person or you
> could be an alien masquerading as a person.
> So I guess it's 50-50."
>
>
> Possibility != Probability
>
>

My, my! Didn't you know that's why we have dictionaries?

Try one sometime. Increase your vocabulary. It doesn't hurt, honest.

:))~

[Open other end]

angelagent wrote:

> Open other end wrote:

> > "Well you could be a real person or you
> > could be an alien masquerading as a person.
> > So I guess it's 50-50."
> >
> >
> > Possibility != Probability

> My, my! Didn't you know that's why we have dictionaries?
>
> Try one sometime. Increase your vocabulary. It doesn't hurt, honest.

You're so clever you make yourself look stupid.





-- --

http://jtem.tumblr.com/post/126056102228

[manfromu.f.o.]

On 8/7/2015 9:29 PM, Open other end wrote:
> angelagent wrote:
>
>> Open other end wrote:
>>> "Well you could be a real person or you
>>> could be an alien masquerading as a person.
>>> So I guess it's 50-50."
>>>
>>>
>>> Possibility != Probability
>
>> My, my! Didn't you know that's why we have dictionaries?
>>
>> Try one sometime. Increase your vocabulary. It doesn't hurt, honest.
>
> You're so clever you make yourself look stupid.
>
>

> r
>

Then, LOL, if that were true, in contrast, you'd still come up terribly
short.

:))~