Is it possible that Humanity really IS the only "advanced" civilization in the Universe? RE: Civil

After having read a few threads about the on-going discoveries of "Earth-like planets" that exist elsewhere in space, and after having been re-educated on the concept of Type 0/1/2/3 civilizations, it made me wonder if the reason we don't see any evidence of extra-terrestrial INTELLIGENT life, is simply because we really are it, or rather, we are the only life form to have advanced the furthest up to this point, without killing ourselves off yet ("MAD, aka Mutually Assured Destruction").

Now, I'd rather not get into the discussion of exactly why we would exist in the first place (intelligent design, impossible luck, etc), but rather what exactly the implications of being truly "alone" would mean for us. So PLEASE keep that sort discussion out of this thread.

I also know how arrogant and ignorant this sort of thinking usually is, but just pretend those concepts didn't exist, and play along. Think outside the box. [As a tangent, perhaps the application of the "arrogance" and "ignorance" labels to our thoughts about the subject matter is itself a defense mechanism to cope with the notion that we really may be alone.]

Yes, I know about light years, the speed of light, etc, and how those concepts could also be a reason why we cant seem to find "advanced" civilizations. That is, perhaps by the time the light from those places has reached us (during this relatively brief and recent period in Human history where we have the ability to see and detect extraterrestrial planets), the civilizations on those planets could have long since expired, never having made it past Type 0/1, by wiping themselves out in the transition phase ("MAD").

Assuming the entire Universe suddenly sprang into existence (either though the Big Bang, Creation, or otherwise [again, in any case, the cause of the spontaneous existence is irrelevant]), does that not mean that the potential life scattered around it had an equal amount of time to develop and evolve into actual life? Does that not mean that if there is (or was) intelligent extraterrestrial life, that it is (or was) more or less in line with where we are right now (presumably with a few hundred Earth years of deviation)?

I also realize that we haven't even scratched the surface on the search for extraterrestrial life, but that too is beside the point.

In other words, what if we are experiencing what countless civilizations (terrestrial or extra-terrestrial) before us have? Will we wipe ourselves out (again)? Will we succeed in becoming a Type 1 civilization?

ARE WE IT?

[The bit about the Universe existing and life advancing at once could be complete ignorance talking, but that was essentially the starting point of this line of thought.]

It would be a bad thing to think that all that 4 billion years of evolution produced was a species of advanced self-destructive monkey. Yeah we're smart & can figure stuff out, but we're not responsible enough to harness our talents as a collective whole and use it beneficially. For every doctor that's searching for a cure for a disease, there are fifty crackheads out there that would cut your throat for a 20 dollar bill. For every one person that does care about the environment PROACTIVELY, there are a thousand others that flip cigarette butts everywhere & throw trash out of the window of their car.

It would be sad if we were all that the universe had come up with. If not, then earth surely has to be the armpit.

yes its possible ... simply because, even if a species did evolve like us, they probably couldnt evolve to the next step and save themslves from the dangerous of space

we will probably die in a few hundreds years, we cant protect ourselves

the problem with your statement is that we simply cant right now communicate with any type of alien species, because of the lights year math @ lol

so, even if we detect a signal right now, there is nothing we can do about it, so, we will probably never know, unless some alien introduces himself to us

It could very well be that we're on our own, but I disagree. I am of the belief (since I can't prove it) that we're NOT alone. Also keep in mind another civilization(s) could have started evolving millions of years before us. Meaning, if they didn't destroy themselves, they would have had plenty of time to work out the kinks in their society.

Something that really cemented the idea that we are not alone is the scale of the universe. Quite literally beyond the mind's capacity to comprehend. The numbers of stars, let alone planets, is humongous.

While it's given science that traveling faster than the speed of light is impossible. That may be for now, but just like we had proven other science to be not 100% correct, there could be a new discovery or a whole new line of technologies that will allow us to circumvent that limitation somehow. If aliens possess this technology, it could be assumed that they would be much further down the societal and individual development compared to us. We are technologically advanced by socially we're lagging behind quite heavily. Corruption, wars etc.

If aliens are more advanced socially, then it could be argued that they will have rules for interfering with other life forms that are not traveling the stars themselves. See Prime Directive in the Star Trek universe.

Right now, it could be that aliens have actually found us. We have ZERO idea of what kind of technology or society they possess. They could detect life everywhere in a galaxy for all we know. As such, we can build our house of cards in any shape or form on the topic of extra-terrestrial life.

We cannot say for sure, unless you have a truthful experience with Aliens

But if that's the case then no one would believe you unless you had concrete proof or showed us in person.

If that's true, we live in an awful, terrible universe.

reply to post by inivux


Universe, no... Local stellar group, possibly. Certainly not most advanced in the galaxy. Our galaxy is older than our solar system, we are not the most advanced. the universe has ever seen and we must remember that however advanced a race is, it is still bound to the laws of physics. Some things just may not be possible, regardless of how fanciful and imaginative science fiction portrays the so called "possible".

It is possible that we're the first civilization (and currently "advanced") in the universe. We could also be the ones who will seed the universe of life. 4 billion or whatever years of evolution the scientists are speculating is a mere blink in the universe.

In the end nobody really knows. It's all speculation.

Originally posted by Unregistered
It is possible that we're the first civilization (and currently "advanced") in the universe. We could also be the ones who will seed the universe of life. 4 billion or whatever years of evolution the scientists are speculating is a mere blink in the universe.

In the end nobody really knows. It's all speculation.

Our universe is over 150 billion years old, given that it's structure requires that amount of time to form... Our planet is shy of five billion years old. There is no way we are the most advanced species our universe has currently or has ever seen... It's just not possible and any musing or serious thought on the matter simply borders madness and narcissism. I'm not trying to be rude, I'm just being realistic here.... Our insignificant planet out of an uncountable other planets is simply not that important or special. Let's be honest in this discussion!

reply to post by sirnex

I understand the "arrogance" conclusion is the one people usually come to, but I tried to initially discount it in a thought inducing manner, in my original post.

Anyway, the crux of my "argument" is that if the Universe is the same age all over (~16 billion years), wouldn't the "proto-life" have advanced at the same rate into actual life, as the life on Earth did? Why would life (and the previous building blocks of life) progress faster or sooner elsewhere?

This is an interesting thread and hopefully no closed minded people feel to share their thoughts. Everything humans have true knowledge of is based upon our own concepts and what we know for us and our planet. It is possible life may need what only earth offers to exist but at the same time depending on the species life can or can not exist. Think of species variations, you can not place an elephant in Greenland and expect it to live long on its own nor a tuna fish in a pond. If what exists on eath is completely necessary for any life form whatsoever to exist than there is a smaller chance of life to exist but if not than it is possible. Some unicellular organisms actually require methane gas in order to live which means it's possible for an oxygen free environment to exist as long as the organism has a source of energy.

And I don't believe intelligent life is impoosible, there could be a god or gods who created the laws of physics and life however most theists claim the earth and mankind couldn't come from nothing but can't explain their creator(s) as more of coming from nothing and always being here. Fact of the matter is it's harder for something to be more powerful and ruling to come from nothing than something coming from nothing being simple and taking eons to come into form. It's like making a fire with flint and tender without a spark for most creationists...it just came into being, it didnt take time and change into conditions. I'm not saying they are wrong or evoluationists are wrong, there are countless possibilities of what really occured but life can easy exist anywhere depending on what life really requires.

The title scares me more than some of these Holloween avatars. If humanity is the most advances & civil example / role model, then we are the ancients that the future will be talking about, and we are not setting a good example, imo.

Advanced, civil, civilization, ... we may be messing our chances for success up, me thinks.

Anybody else out there?
How are we still here?

pleasantries,
ET

Life could be out there waving whatever their version of a "flag" might be, in our general direction, dying to get our attention - much as we happen to be doing.

The catch is that we might all have different definitions of what constitutes a "flag".

We could be being bombarded with alien messages, nonstop, without even realizing it because they might utilize a method of communication that we aren't yet familiar with. This doesn't even imply that they are superior. It only suggests that they might have found a different path technologically speaking.

Diversely, there might be an alien world out there, somewhere, that has its airwaves completely polluted with episodes of "I love Lucy" and the music of Bennie Goodman. But if they don't have radios and televisions, or any devices which monitored those specific frequencies, they'd never know it.

reply to post by inivux


We are doing our best to wipe out the planet and ourselves.

So far, the planet is winning.

And if there is not a more intelligent species than humans, I might just have to lie down and die with the planet.

In other words, if there are beings on other planets, maybe they are more intelligent than we are - maybe they are not killing their planet.

reply to post by Hefficide

reply to post by OmiOra


Both of you raise interesting points. Life as we know it, is not necessarily life as "the others" know it. COGNIZANT/INTELLIGENT life itself could be so varied, that we from Earth would not recognize it if it was right in front of us.

Which brings me to the next excellent point; the issue of "incompatible" "flags".

If Life (specifically of the cognizant variety) is as varied as OmiOra opines, perhaps the flags really are passing straight over our heads (literally and figuratively), and vice-versa, as Heff suggests?

Perhaps, the inherent cultural and societal makeup of these hypothetical races is of non-violence, thereby circumventing and avoiding the MAD scenario? Of course, if that were true, they would have survived themselves, and would then send signals. Whether or not we could detect or interpret them then becomes the problem again.

It also means that they could have potentially advanced past Type 1, and that our inability to detect them could simply be the fact we haven't searched that part of sky yet. But if they are Type 2+, they would have spread to other star systems, and possibly other galaxies, thereby increasing our chances of detecting them! And yet, how can they advance past Type 1, if Life advances at the same rate, and started advancing at the same time?

There seems to be a paradox in there somewhere.

Alternatively, perhaps there is a extra-terrestrial civilization with an inherent makeup of isolationism, indifference and/or voluntary ignorance to the concept of life beyond their own world? Maybe they have received our signals, and just don't have the capability or the willpower to answer back?

Maybe they are inherently both non-violent and indifferent?

Regarding the airwaves comment though, it has recently been postulated that the airwaves we have been inadvertently broadcasting into Space have simply been "absorbed" by the sound of the electro-magnetic energy of Space itself.

reply to post by inivux


I'd like to believe this, even though I don't. I think people need to give this theory serious consideration.

My guess is that most of the objections to this thread will come from those that basically say "but we're so primitive, so violent, so superstitious, how can we be it?" Well, what if we just are. We haven't met the others yet, we don't have anything to base the other's off of.

What if the dirty, violent, superstitious, humans really are the most technologically advanced society in the universe? I see no reason why not, other than vanity about our potential veiled as optimism about other 'more enlightened' beings.

watch one of those size of the universe videos then tell me we're alone.

i will laugh in your face!

I think that in our solar system we are definitely alone! But there are too many possibilities of other life when we are discovering new planets if not everyday, every other day!

They say the universe is expanding but I just think it is our minds understanding how vast it really is!

reply to post by 19872012

Really man, did you read the thread at all? Come on.

Originally posted by inivux
reply to post by sirnex

 

I understand the "arrogance" conclusion is the one people usually come to, but I tried to initially discount it in a thought inducing manner, in my original post.

Anyway, the crux of my "argument" is that if the Universe is the same age all over (~16 billion years), wouldn't the "proto-life" have advanced at the same rate into actual life, as the life on Earth did? Why would life (and the previous building blocks of life) progress faster or sooner elsewhere?

edit on 5-10-2010 by inivux because: (no reason given)

Even *if* the universe were roughly that young, not all solar systems containing habitable planets would be of the same age. Some would be older, some would be younger and some would be long gone by now. Either way we slice and dice it, it's very likely we are not the most advanced now nor has ever been seen.

The very structure of the observable universe itself requires an age of at least 150 billion years. Current technology prior to that discovery gave the age you are more familiar with. My personal belief is that our universe/reality is much older than we can currently estimate due to limitations in our sciences and technologies. As we learn more and develop more advanced technologies through out the ages our estimations of the age of life and our observable universe has always increased.