Why the Prime Directive is Real

I know there are plenty of religious and other dogmatic people who adamantly BELIEVE that the mind(s) of the advanced, unseen nonhuman(s) (and humans?) can't possibly be understood at all by we mere Earth dwellers, and I admit I could be wrong, but there's NOTHING else that makes ANY sense for the lack of absolute proof of their presence than an actual PD (or whatever it's called) policy in place concerning the quarantined xenophobes on this rock, and everyone is just dumbly sitting here with thumbs you-know-where. PD doesn't mean no involvement; just no hard evidence. There have to be enough hearts and minds behind the idea (meaning truly against official secrecy in general) before any kind of (civlized enough) Contact can happen. As it stands now, it very strongly appears that the only time they'll formally-officially arrive is in a post-catastrophic capacity; if ever.

Or IF they're planning a surprise invasion-intervention, you can bet your last dime they're waiting until THE literally last possible minute. Thoughts?

I don't believe in a Prime Directive. I think ET civilizations would act independently in relation to their own agenda's or curiosities if/when they visit earth. To be honest those two words (Prime Directive) kinda make me squirm because it reminds me that so many people on this forum think TV Sci-fi is real.

I'm not saying that you have personally confused entertainment with reality... but many on this forum are guilty of such.

IRM

reply to post by InfaRedMan


Again the actual name doesn't matter. Chances are it's called something else. There may be competing agendas among the unseen ones, but there's certainly a basic consesnsus and set of rules concerning interaction with people here.

The term 'Prime Directive' is subjective. And it's a human(all be it sci-fi) term.

I don't know, from what I've researched.. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that they have already made contact with us long ago.

reply to post by Lightworth


OP Sounds familiar you just asked in a different way. If there are many civilisations visiting they would probably find it as difficult to communicate with each other as indeed us. That’s why I don't think they do or in a minimal way. By minimal I mean by actions, they speak louder than any words. If that’s non interference then they have confirmed it by default by doing nothing

MJ2

I actually agree with the "containment and observation" theory. It logically fits all of the characteristics attributed to sightings. It explains the need for secrecy, why there has been no official grand-scale contact, the interest in military capabilities, and occassional abductions. It may even give good justification for our governments participating in the coverup. (i.e. faced with overwhelming technology, and threats).

My personal pet theory is that we learned to split the atom as a fluke, and long before the curve of most other civilizations. This act was a wakeup call felt by others, and they came to investigate, noticed where we were technologically vs. society, and enacted a policy of containment until further development. It's what I'd like to believe anyhow, as other ideas as for the secrecy, etc. are pretty unnerving.....

Originally posted by Gazrok
the interest in military capabilities, and occassional abductions.

Perhaps the two, are related. When we try and understand the Betty and Barney Hill case for example, it almost seems as if (at the time) there might have been military psychological operations/experimentations.

Another theory relates to an alleged treaty being signed, between the ET's and Eisenhower if I'm not mistaken. The alleged Eisenhower briefing document; can be found here;

Eisenhower Briefing Document

Apparently, the 'authenticity' of the document, is rated 'high' by majesticdocuments.com

Originally posted by Gazrok
that we learned to split the atom as a fluke. This act was a wakeup call felt by others, and they came to investigate

Brings to memory Stanton Friedman's opinion, and I strongly share the same view as well in this regard.

SETI won't attract attention with their radio signals IMO, but a nuclear/atomic weapon..is sure to attract anybody's attention. I often wonder how far an atomic signature my be detected in our galaxy.

Perhaps the visitors are secret inhabitants of our own solar system. Afterall, none of us has ever been out there to know for certain, so I wouldn't 'unconditionally' trust NASA.

Cheers!!!

[edit on 9/2/09 by Majorion]

reply to post by Lightworth


I don't believe in alien visits, I regard it as a possibility, but an improbable one, so I respectfully disagree with a lot of people here (so I'm not after arguing ). However, I think if aliens were visiting I would very much hope for both a prime directive and strict hazardous materials procedure. There are many examples of foreign species and diseases causing havoc with eco-systems and the idea of poor quarantine procedures for any biological material from another planet would be terrifying. That cuts both ways for 'visitors' and us.

As IFM brought up, I think any sort of Prime Directive is science-fiction and little more, for the simple fact we do not see it in play on Earth. In our day-to-day lives there is no such thing as a Prime Directive. Scientists do not operate under anything of the sort when studying wild animals or isolated human societies; they will interact with them if necessary. Why should we expect any alien civilization to operate different; certainly a sufficiently advance civilization would view us as mere animals at worst or as we do primitive tribes at best.

reply to post by SaviorComplex

Biologists are quite careful, after cane toads and the like, with introducing foreign species and diseases into environments because of unintended consequences.

[edit on 9-2-2009 by jackphotohobby]

Originally posted by Majorion
SETI won't attract attention with their radio signals IMO, but a nuclear/atomic weapon..is sure to attract anybody's attention. I often wonder how far an atomic signature my be detected in our galaxy.

Probably not very far. The energy released by an atomic weapon would be negligible compared to that released by a star we sit almost right on top of. Anyone looking for such an event would have to be looking in the precise spot at the precise moment. We have had ecological events (think Krakatoa) that released more energy and were more powerful than any weapon we have detonated; why wouldn't something like that attracted otherworldly attention?

Originally posted by jackphotohobby
Biologists are quite careful, after cane toads and the like, with introducing foreign species and diseases into environments because of unintended consequences.

No doubt. However, I was speaking strictly on an interaction basis. I do think if there were aliens visiting the planet, a large part of a cover-up would involve making sure germs do not jump species.

Originally posted by Lightworth
but there's NOTHING else that makes ANY sense for the lack of absolute proof of their presence than an actual PD (or whatever it's called) policy in place concerning the quarantined xenophobes on this rock, and everyone is just dumbly sitting here with thumbs you-know-where.

Occams razor in reverse?

Of course there's SOMETHING that makes sense for the lack of proof: They dont exist.

The idea that they would be using a prime directive rely on a whole bunch of things... Things that are not "it makes sense so it MUST be true!" classed IMO. Especially not if you follow the logical base for this conclusion, the human mind. We cant even make a "prime directive" on our own planet work, everyone do what they want anyway. Is there a UN in space? If aliens exist, I'm sure of it. But other races probably dont give a rats arse..

But the Prime Directive was dreamed up by Gene Roddenberry who also wrote 'Star Trek' there's NO WAY the aliens could have know about this law or even implemented it into their system of contact procedures?

SETI won't attract attention with their radio signals IMO, but a nuclear/atomic weapon..is sure to attract anybody's attention. I often wonder how far an atomic signature my be detected in our galaxy.

Well, if we suppose that the aliens use some kind of drive that warps space/time, then they'd have to very carefully monitor all such warps both natural (i.e. wormholes) and artificial (other such ships). My 'theory' is that in this monitoring process (quantum computerized, I imagine), they picked up a small fluctuation (from the nuclear device) where it wasn't predicted/expected, which would have been like a giant red flag....

As for SETI, as I've often said here, I don't think most people are considering all of the variables...

Even if you were aimed at the exact right spot, and the alien was trying to see your signal, you'd still have an enormous crapshoot...

First, he'd have to be using a technology capable of receiving your transmission. (they may be more primative, may be more advanced...for example, conventional tv broadcasts will end here soon)

Second, he'd have to have this tech at time the signal arrives (which could be thousands of years after sending it)....

So, if an alien had TV 50,000 years ago and broadcast, and he was far enough that the signal took 30,000 years to get here....then that signal would STILL be on the way and undetectable until 20,000 years from now... It's like finding a particular grain of sand on a beach out of many beaches.... But, that doesn't mean it's pointless. SOMEBODY has to win the lottery, after all...regardless of the odds.

Originally posted by SaviorComplex
The energy released by an atomic weapon would be negligible compared to that released by a star we sit almost right on top of

Hehe, you never cease to amaze me SC, and how do you happen to know so much about nuclear energy?.. or is this statement based on some supporting data you've seen?

Originally posted by SaviorComplex
Anyone looking for such an event would have to be looking in the precise spot at the precise moment.

It's almost as if you're describing SETI right there.

Originally posted by SaviorComplex
We have had ecological events that released more energy and were more powerful than any weapon we have detonated; why wouldn't something like that attracted otherworldly attention?

Perhaps, I haven't flat out dismissed any such possibilities.

I've heard an opinion/theory of the Roswell crash in 1947, which coincides with the invention and first practical use of the atomic bomb. Haven't really delved deep into this theory, but I thought it interesting.

Majorion

Whether it has a different name or not, it makes a lot of sense. It doesn't matter if we think it started in science fiction. That would just mean that Gene Roddenberry came up with a very good idea. It really doesn't matter much how likely we think it is either.... it either is or isn't true, regardless of what guesses we make. We could say it's likely, but then aliens could make direct contact the next day.

Originally posted by SaviorComplex

Originally posted by Majorion
SETI won't attract attention with their radio signals IMO, but a nuclear/atomic weapon..is sure to attract anybody's attention. I often wonder how far an atomic signature my be detected in our galaxy.

Probably not very far. The energy released by an atomic weapon would be negligible compared to that released by a star we sit almost right on top of. Anyone looking for such an event would have to be looking in the precise spot at the precise moment. We have had ecological events (think Krakatoa) that released more energy and were more powerful than any weapon we have detonated; why wouldn't something like that attracted otherworldly attention?

I think it’s the other way round. A volcano would not be recognised easily it has no or little RF energy. A nuclear explosion would however it is still limited to radiation that travels at he speed of light so it is only 50 light years away and it is relatively instantaneous – I agree it would be lucky very lucky.

Originally posted by Majorion
Hehe, you never cease to amaze me SC, and how do you happen to know so much about nuclear energy?.. or is this statement based on some supporting data you've seen?

Well..let's see here...

The bomb dropped on Hiroshima had a yield of around 15 kilotons and the one dropped on Nagasaki had a yield of 21 kilotons.

This compared to the nuclear engine we orbit, the size of almost 333,000 Earths.

Now you tell me...which releases more energy?

Well..let's see here...

The bomb dropped on Hiroshima had a yield of around 15 kilotons and the one dropped on Nagasaki had a yield of 21 kilotons.

This compared to the nuclear engine we orbit, the size of almost 333,000 Earths.

Now you tell me...which releases more energy?

A valid point, but given our limited understanding of space/time, etc., can we be so sure that radiation is all that is given off, or do these atomic explosions cause even minute disturbances in space/time.... Your supposition is that the sun would effectively mask an atomic explosion on the planet, but consider the assumed nuances of interstellar travel using space/time, and the level of monitoring we assume it would require.

Given our current ideas, if one were capable of warping space/time for travel, it stands to reason that they'd need to be able to predict the exact placement of objects and calculate for the gravity that affects them... Even a minute change in that calculation could send up a red flag. So, you then go to investigate why a planet (not a star) just registered a nuclear explosion throwing off your calculations. You get there, and some kind of artificial wave generator (primitive radar, that they probably used thousands of years ago for all we know) is unexpected, so a few of you crash (like we saw reports of in the 40's) until you then compensate for this unexpected development. Again...just a theory...