Aliens Myths: 5 Big Misconceptions About Extraterrestrial Life, page 1
Topic started on 18-6-2012 @ 04:51 AM by ChaoticOrder
Story From: Huffington Post
Author: Natalie Wolchover
Published: 06/14/2012
Aliens Myths: 5 Big Misconceptions About Extraterrestrial Life
Yes I used xuenchen's thread style because I liked it, it's good to have the dates and author clearly listed. Anyway, I found this article quite interesting because it claims to be debunking several big misconceptions about extraterrestrial life, yet at the same time it's promoting several mainstream misconceptions using very deceptive logic. Let me explain.
The very first thing they do is promote one of the biggest misconceptions EVER about aliens. The truth is most people believe that they wont come in peace. In reality most people are scared that aliens will arrive on our planet because Hollywood has conditioned them to believe it's going to be a very negative event and they will try to kill all of us to steal our planet or resources, despite the fact the Universe is absolutely overflowing with the resources found on Earth, which would be easily accessible to any species capable of travelling to Earth from another star system. In fact the article goes on to claim "Aggression evolved as a trait among Earthlings because it helps us obtain and protect resources.", and so they claim aliens would also have similar traits even if they evolved on a totally different planet.
What they fail to take into account however, is the nature of sentient consciousness. Do you think Humans would attempt to destroy an entire species for some resources? A rare few of us may consider it, but the truth is we would never put it into action because most of us can see how despicable that would be. For any alien species capable of reaching Earth, they would have to be vastly more advanced than us and most likely much wiser. All wise beings know that war and destruction is never the best way to solve a problem, because the losses are often greater than anything gained from the conflict. It is also highly likely they were able to achieve such a high level of technological development because they learned to work together as one species instead of fighting and killing each other, and destroying their planet in the process.
This claim is perhaps just as contradictory as the first. Most people believe aliens haven't visited Earth or else we would know about. It's only a fringe group of alien researchers and historians who actually believe in the Ancient Alien Hypothesis. Not to mention their whole counter-argument here is based on the idea that "we aren't special"... how completely idiotic is this author. The Ancient Alien Hypothesis is simply a variant of the Panspermia Hypothesis, there is nothing "special" about it unless you want to believe that aliens are some type of Gods or Angels or Demons, which only a fool would believe. The concept that our early ancestors were placed on this planet by humanoid aliens just like us is not some type of magical religious hypothesis, it's actually a way to rationalize the origins of religion.
And the other 3 points aren't really so stupid, they are rational legitimate points that I can't really argue with. Point 3 claims that they would be immune to Earth's bacteria because they wouldn't have DNA the same as Earth life and the bacteria wouldn't be able to international with their biologically, which is presumably true... unless we are talking about humanoid aliens who are some how related to us. The 4th point claims "they won't eat us", which is probably the most truthful point, it's unlikely any species would be reliant on interplanetary food sources to sustain their species. The 5th and last point, "they won't mate with us", is not so clear imo. They may use some type of advanced genetic manipulations to cross-breed our species, and once again, if they are a humanoid species with genetic relations to our species they very well may be able to mate with us.
Author: Natalie Wolchover
Published: 06/14/2012
Aliens Myths: 5 Big Misconceptions About Extraterrestrial Life
Yes I used xuenchen's thread style because I liked it, it's good to have the dates and author clearly listed. Anyway, I found this article quite interesting because it claims to be debunking several big misconceptions about extraterrestrial life, yet at the same time it's promoting several mainstream misconceptions using very deceptive logic. Let me explain.
1. They won't come in peace
The renowned physicist Stephen Hawking once famously warned that humanity's efforts to radio communicate with extraterrestrials could be endangering us. If the aliens that detect our signals are technologically capable of coming here — proof that they are far more advanced than we — "I think the outcome would be much as when Christopher Columbus first landed in America, which didn't turn out very well for the Native Americans," Hawking said.
The very first thing they do is promote one of the biggest misconceptions EVER about aliens. The truth is most people believe that they wont come in peace. In reality most people are scared that aliens will arrive on our planet because Hollywood has conditioned them to believe it's going to be a very negative event and they will try to kill all of us to steal our planet or resources, despite the fact the Universe is absolutely overflowing with the resources found on Earth, which would be easily accessible to any species capable of travelling to Earth from another star system. In fact the article goes on to claim "Aggression evolved as a trait among Earthlings because it helps us obtain and protect resources.", and so they claim aliens would also have similar traits even if they evolved on a totally different planet.
What they fail to take into account however, is the nature of sentient consciousness. Do you think Humans would attempt to destroy an entire species for some resources? A rare few of us may consider it, but the truth is we would never put it into action because most of us can see how despicable that would be. For any alien species capable of reaching Earth, they would have to be vastly more advanced than us and most likely much wiser. All wise beings know that war and destruction is never the best way to solve a problem, because the losses are often greater than anything gained from the conflict. It is also highly likely they were able to achieve such a high level of technological development because they learned to work together as one species instead of fighting and killing each other, and destroying their planet in the process.
2. They didn't put us here
"I get emails every week saying that Homo sapiens are the result of alien intervention," Shostak said. "I'm not sure why aliens would be interested in producing us. I think people like to think we're special. But isn't that what got Galileo and Copernicus into trouble — questioning how special we were? But if we're just another duck in the road, it's not very exciting."
This claim is perhaps just as contradictory as the first. Most people believe aliens haven't visited Earth or else we would know about. It's only a fringe group of alien researchers and historians who actually believe in the Ancient Alien Hypothesis. Not to mention their whole counter-argument here is based on the idea that "we aren't special"... how completely idiotic is this author. The Ancient Alien Hypothesis is simply a variant of the Panspermia Hypothesis, there is nothing "special" about it unless you want to believe that aliens are some type of Gods or Angels or Demons, which only a fool would believe. The concept that our early ancestors were placed on this planet by humanoid aliens just like us is not some type of magical religious hypothesis, it's actually a way to rationalize the origins of religion.
And the other 3 points aren't really so stupid, they are rational legitimate points that I can't really argue with. Point 3 claims that they would be immune to Earth's bacteria because they wouldn't have DNA the same as Earth life and the bacteria wouldn't be able to international with their biologically, which is presumably true... unless we are talking about humanoid aliens who are some how related to us. The 4th point claims "they won't eat us", which is probably the most truthful point, it's unlikely any species would be reliant on interplanetary food sources to sustain their species. The 5th and last point, "they won't mate with us", is not so clear imo. They may use some type of advanced genetic manipulations to cross-breed our species, and once again, if they are a humanoid species with genetic relations to our species they very well may be able to mate with us.
edit on 18/6/2012 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)
reply posted on 18-6-2012 @ 05:55 AM by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by AquarianHerald
edit: I have removed this post because it was off topic. I will include this post in the other thread if I make it.
edit: I have removed this post because it was off topic. I will include this post in the other thread if I make it.
edit on 18/6/2012 by
ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)
reply posted on 18-6-2012 @ 05:57 AM by igor_ats
reply to post by DeadSnow
That could be a false dichotomy.
Things could get complicated. It would be immoral to intervene and against space convention on early civilizations. Letting a specious develop through their own wars and politics etc, is normal.
Would be great if the did intervene though. Religion would be relegated to fiction, and they could tell us the real history of man.
That could be a false dichotomy.
Things could get complicated. It would be immoral to intervene and against space convention on early civilizations. Letting a specious develop through their own wars and politics etc, is normal.
Would be great if the did intervene though. Religion would be relegated to fiction, and they could tell us the real history of man.
reply posted on 18-6-2012 @ 06:04 AM by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by DeadSnow
That's a legitimate statement and I think there are legitimate explanations to that. I don't think there is necessarily anything forcing them to "care" about us. What if there are hundreds or thousands of species in our galaxy as the Drake Equation suggests? Why would they have a responsibility to help any species having trouble? And don't you think it would be much more rational to let us solve our own problems on our own in our own time instead of having all the solutions handed to us on a golden platter? What would we really learn if they did they? NOTHING... we would learn nothing except that we can act however we want and it wont ever matter because the big powerful guys will always come swooping in to solve everything. That is just lazy and ridiculous, if we ever want to evolve as a species we need to go through the hard tedious process of fixing our own mistakes and learning from them... that's the only way.
If they cared they wouldn't watch us destroy ourselves and if they created us we're nothing but an experiment and they won't intervene.
That's a legitimate statement and I think there are legitimate explanations to that. I don't think there is necessarily anything forcing them to "care" about us. What if there are hundreds or thousands of species in our galaxy as the Drake Equation suggests? Why would they have a responsibility to help any species having trouble? And don't you think it would be much more rational to let us solve our own problems on our own in our own time instead of having all the solutions handed to us on a golden platter? What would we really learn if they did they? NOTHING... we would learn nothing except that we can act however we want and it wont ever matter because the big powerful guys will always come swooping in to solve everything. That is just lazy and ridiculous, if we ever want to evolve as a species we need to go through the hard tedious process of fixing our own mistakes and learning from them... that's the only way.
edit on 18/6/2012 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)
reply posted on 18-6-2012 @ 06:05 AM by Astyanax
reply to post by ChaoticOrder
No, but...
Yes, most certainly. I don't think it, I know it. Because we can and we have – repeatedly.
Yet it has happened, not once or twice, but many times over. Extinctions, genocides, massacres... the history of humankind is rife with such atrocities.
And aliens, if they are sentient, will be no different from us. How could they be? Natural selection and competition for resources would have shaped their nature just as it has shaped ours.
It is not cooperation but competition that drives scientific and technological advance.
Yet every week – no, every day – we get several posts on ATS advancing or supporting the AAH. Must be a big fringe.
You are mistaken. The first is a great science-fiction idea whose finest expression was in the movie 2001: A Space Odyssey. The second suggests that life may have evolved from organic molecules that arrived on Earth from outer space and is originally attributed to Hoyle and Wickramasinghe.
Which is why they may not think twice before exterminating us.
Do you think Humans would attempt to destroy an entire species for some resources?
No, but...
Do you think Humans would... destroy an entire species for some resources?
Yes, most certainly. I don't think it, I know it. Because we can and we have – repeatedly.
The truth is we would never put it into action because most of us can see how despicable that would be.
Yet it has happened, not once or twice, but many times over. Extinctions, genocides, massacres... the history of humankind is rife with such atrocities.
And aliens, if they are sentient, will be no different from us. How could they be? Natural selection and competition for resources would have shaped their nature just as it has shaped ours.
It is also highly likely they were able to achieve such a high level of technological development because they learned to work together as one species instead of fighting and killing each other, and destroying their planet in the process.
It is not cooperation but competition that drives scientific and technological advance.
It's only a fringe group of alien researchers and historians who actually believe in the Ancient Alien Hypothesis.
Yet every week – no, every day – we get several posts on ATS advancing or supporting the AAH. Must be a big fringe.
The Ancient Alien Hypothesis is simply a variant of the Panspermia Hypothesis.
You are mistaken. The first is a great science-fiction idea whose finest expression was in the movie 2001: A Space Odyssey. The second suggests that life may have evolved from organic molecules that arrived on Earth from outer space and is originally attributed to Hoyle and Wickramasinghe.
I don't think there is necessarily anything forcing them to "care" about us.
Which is why they may not think twice before exterminating us.
edit on 18/6/12 by Astyanax because: aliens don't have second thoughts.
reply posted on 18-6-2012 @ 06:15 AM by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by Astyanax
Yes, after re-reading what I wrote I knew someone would make that point. However, I was clearly talking about a sentient species on another planet. We would not invade another planet which was home to another self-aware species and destroy them and steal all their resource, it just wont happen, people would protest such actions stronger than they have ever protested anything before. I'm sure some large corporations and corrupt politicians would like to see it happen, but there would be FAR too much resistance from the masses of our species. Inadvertently destroying species on our own planet, species which are presumed to be non-sentient, is not the same as invading the home planet of another sentient species for completely immoral and greedy reasons.
If you hadn't noticed ATS is a fringe conspiracy website where we talk about and promote alternative theories which counter the mainstream theories.
No I don't think so... both theories suggest life was "planted" or "seeded" on Earth from an external source so I don't think it's unfair to say one is a variant of the other.
Do you think Humans would... destroy an entire species for some resources?
Yes, most certainly. I don't think it, I know it. Because we can and we have – repeatedly.
Yes, after re-reading what I wrote I knew someone would make that point. However, I was clearly talking about a sentient species on another planet. We would not invade another planet which was home to another self-aware species and destroy them and steal all their resource, it just wont happen, people would protest such actions stronger than they have ever protested anything before. I'm sure some large corporations and corrupt politicians would like to see it happen, but there would be FAR too much resistance from the masses of our species. Inadvertently destroying species on our own planet, species which are presumed to be non-sentient, is not the same as invading the home planet of another sentient species for completely immoral and greedy reasons.
It's only a fringe group of alien researchers and historians who actually believe in the Ancient Alien Hypothesis.
Yet every week – no, every day – we get several posts on ATS advancing or supporting the AAH. Must be a big fringe.
If you hadn't noticed ATS is a fringe conspiracy website where we talk about and promote alternative theories which counter the mainstream theories.
The Ancient Alien Hypothesis is simply a variant of the Panspermia Hypothesis.
You are mistaken.
No I don't think so... both theories suggest life was "planted" or "seeded" on Earth from an external source so I don't think it's unfair to say one is a variant of the other.
edit on 18/6/2012 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)
reply posted on 18-6-2012 @ 06:19 AM by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by HomerinNC
Yes I just addressed that point in my last post. I knew people would pick up on that, I should have made myself clearer.
Yes I just addressed that point in my last post. I knew people would pick up on that, I should have made myself clearer.
reply posted on 18-6-2012 @ 06:33 AM by bluestreak53
Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by Astyanax
The Ancient Alien Hypothesis is simply a variant of the Panspermia Hypothesis.
You are mistaken.
No I don't think so... both theories suggest life was "planted" or "seeded" on Earth from an external source so I don't think it's unfair to say one is a variant of the other.edit on 18/6/2012 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)
Yes. I agree. The only "leap of faith" involved in the "ancient aliens" hypothesis is the assumption that civilizations can technologically develop to the point where they are capable of "inter-stellar" travel. But if "intelligent life" can travel between stars, it certainly is possible that when they get there, they might tinker with the existing DNA of the native life - might. Certainly, that is not "crazy sci-fi" since our scientists have created thousands of genetic mutations through bio-engineering.
Plus I also think that panspermia is now seen as a very mainstream theory. DNA, the basic building block of life, may well be spread throughout much of the cosmos.
reply posted on 18-6-2012 @ 06:45 AM by DeadSnow
reply to post by igor_ats
Have you ever thought that perhaps they were once referred to as Gods & religion will exist with or without them? Or they could make us mine for 'their' gold. Either way we lose, They don't care....
Have you ever thought that perhaps they were once referred to as Gods & religion will exist with or without them? Or they could make us mine for 'their' gold. Either way we lose, They don't care....
reply posted on 18-6-2012 @ 08:06 AM by something wicked
reply to post by ChaoticOrder
edit on 18-6-2012 by something wicked because: Deleted as others have made the same comment
reply posted on 18-6-2012 @ 08:17 AM by The_Oracle
Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
Story From: Huffington Post
Author: Natalie Wolchover
Published: 06/14/2012
Aliens Myths: 5 Big Misconceptions About Extraterrestrial Life
Yes I used xuenchen's thread style because I liked it, it's good to have the dates and author clearly listed. Anyway, I found this article quite interesting because it claims to be debunking several big misconceptions about extraterrestrial life, yet at the same time it's promoting several mainstream misconceptions using very deceptive logic. Let me explain.
1. They won't come in peace
The renowned physicist Stephen Hawking once famously warned that humanity's efforts to radio communicate with extraterrestrials could be endangering us. If the aliens that detect our signals are technologically capable of coming here — proof that they are far more advanced than we — "I think the outcome would be much as when Christopher Columbus first landed in America, which didn't turn out very well for the Native Americans," Hawking said.
The very first thing they do is promote one of the biggest misconceptions EVER about aliens. The truth is most people believe that they wont come in peace. In reality most people are scared that aliens will arrive on our planet because Hollywood has conditioned them to believe it's going to be a very negative event and they will try to kill all of us to steal our planet or resources, despite the fact the Universe is absolutely overflowing with the resources found on Earth, which would be easily accessible to any species capable of traveling to Earth from another star system. In fact the article goes on to claim "Aggression evolved as a trait among Earthlings because it helps us obtain and protect resources.", and so they claim aliens would also have similar traits even if they evolved on a totally different planet.
What they fail to take into account however, is the nature of sentient consciousness. Do you think Humans would attempt to destroy an entire species for some resources? A rare few of us may consider it, but the truth is we would never put it into action because most of us can see how despicable that would be. For any alien species capable of reaching Earth, they would have to be vastly more advanced than us and most likely much wiser. All wise beings know that war and destruction is never the best way to solve a problem, because the losses are often greater than anything gained from the conflict. It is also highly likely they were able to achieve such a high level of technological development because they learned to work together as one species instead of fighting and killing each other, and destroying their planet in the process.
I think she's mistaken on the first point.Since when does Stephen Hawking's opinion as a scientist influenced by Hollywood? And if so, why isn't she?
And she is also mistaken to claim humans wouldn't wipe out a species for their resources because "very few" of us would tolerate it.Well guess what, it only takes one of those few to become a leader and decide to take such action.It happened in the past with spaniards for aztec gold or the US and native americans for their lands.
So it isn't as far fetched to assume they might just have the same flaw as we do in having leaders that shouldn't be there in the first place.
edit on 6/18/2012 by The_Oracle because: (no reason given)
UFO Filmed From Avebury Crop Circle, UK With Multiple Witnesses
Posted 19 days ago with 89 member flags
Posted 19 days ago with 89 member flags
The Mysterious Baltic Sea Object : an Update from Peter Lindberg "Ocean Explorers Team"
Posted 16 days ago with 41 member flags
Posted 16 days ago with 41 member flags
Did a RAF Tornado crash during a UFO intercept mission in 1997?
Posted 14 days ago with 39 member flags
Posted 14 days ago with 39 member flags
Newest topics, updated in real-time:
Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:
We'll be uploading our entire MINDS to computers by 2045 Google expert claims
Science & Technology: 10 hours ago, 17 flags
Science & Technology: 10 hours ago, 17 flags
Pics from The Akron Zoo - Honest Feedback? Like them or not and why?
Member Art: 14 hours ago, 17 flags
Member Art: 14 hours ago, 17 flags
Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:
The Cartoon That Will Destroy America And/Or Entertain Some Children
General Conspiracies: 6 hours ago, 115 replies
General Conspiracies: 6 hours ago, 115 replies
We'll be uploading our entire MINDS to computers by 2045 Google expert claims
Science & Technology: 10 hours ago, 75 replies
Science & Technology: 10 hours ago, 75 replies
Russell Brand on MSNBC Mocking Media through intellectual comedy
Education and Media: 6 hours ago, 41 replies
Education and Media: 6 hours ago, 41 replies
Supreme Court rules against the 5th Amendment, your right to remain silent.
US Political Madness: 6 hours ago, 38 replies
US Political Madness: 6 hours ago, 38 replies
The Above Top Secret Web sites are a
wholly owned social content community of
The Above Network, LLC.
This content community relies on
user-generated content from our member contributors.
The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership
who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides
a collaborative venue for free expression.
ATS Server: www2.theabovenetwork.com
Header data: 0.002 seconds
Page processed in: 0.371 seconds
wholly owned social content community of
The Above Network, LLC.
This content community relies on
user-generated content from our member contributors.
The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership
who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides
a collaborative venue for free expression.
ATS Server: www2.theabovenetwork.com
Header data: 0.002 seconds
Page processed in: 0.371 seconds
