The aliens would win
June 7, 2012
Prometheus (credit: Twentieth Century Fox)
Alien invasion is alive and well in Hollywood this season, given Men in Black III, Battleship, and Prometheus, which opens June 8 in the U.S., IEEE Spectrum Tech Talk reports.
Cue Seth Shostak, senior astronomer with the SETI Institute, who offers five points about aliens that don’t cut it in Hollywood:
1. Your great-great-grandma was probably not from outer space.
“I get emails every week saying that Homo sapiens are the result of alien intervention. 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.”
2. If aliens come, we’re probably toast.
“Whoever takes the trouble to come visit us is probably a more aggressive personality. And if they have the technology to come here, the idea that we can take them on is like Napoleon taking on U.S. Air Force. We’re not going to be able to defend ourselves very well. But if I wanted that to be correct, it would be a very short movie.”
3. They won’t catch our colds.
“Alien life forms wouldn’t come here only to be done in by our bacteria, unless they were related biochemically to humans. Bacteria would have to be able to interact with their biochemistry to be dangerous, and their ability to do that is far from a sure thing.”
4. Aliens don’t look like Screen Actors Guild members.
“Thanks to computer animation, we now have more variety of aliens in films, but they’re still soft and squishy—and big on mucus. Chances are, the first invaders will be some sort of artificially intelligent machinery. But in films, even machinery needs to look like biology, otherwise actors would be talking to a box.”
5. Nobody’s getting lucky.
“The idea that they’ve come for breeding purposes is more akin to wishful thinking by members of the audience who don’t have good social lives. Think about how well we breed with other species on Earth, and they have DNA. It would be like trying to breed with an oak tree.”
Comments (36)
by Fnasse
War and conflict is a primitive thing. When intelligence and science evolves, its likely to less interesting to wipe others out. If Aliens could travel here, they have probably left the war-stage far behind them. We see that already on earth. The more primitive the cultures, the more likely they are involved in conflicts. That I would argue applies to almost all religious-fanatic countries who despise science in favour of believing in myths, legends and told stories. The chance that Aliens would come here only to wipe out mankind is highly unlikely.
by Jack
The aliens would be so advanced that we would be unaware of their presence.
They would probably have a “prime directive” to only observe and not interfere with out natural development. We would be insignificant to them.
by Bri
Wow! Do we like aliens or what? The closet alien is AI and it’s almost here! It’s always more beneficial to cooperate, but that doesn’t mean that an ET would. Just to move a space ship implies a level of energy manipulation, far beyond our tech. I’m glad we really don’t need to think about this. Anyone feel like discussing something important? Twenty four coments about far fetched movies, when an alien intelligence of our own creation consumes our social fabric. Talk to Ramona lately? Get a grip. It certainly is.
by Christian Gehman
Au contraire, the aliens who have been here for years exactly resemble Hollywood stars. Haven’t you noticed?
by A4i
As John Dove wrote, we humans have no valuable material possession from cosmological point of view. The only thing that can be described as unique is our human intelligence. Obviously in its current form it can’t be superior to the intelligence of spacefaring aliens. There are other species on Earth that can achieve intelligent status if their evolution is not obstructed by humans. So probably some aliens may be interested in simulating an outcome where marine species gets intelligent. That would involve wiping us out. Maybe from game theory perspective we humans are just another non-cooperative player in a long list of extinct dominant species like dinosaurs.
by Kyle
While I agree that aliens do not have to be aggressive, I would also point out that they could be a generally peaceful civilization, but resort to violence in order to cleanse the life sustaining Earth of a harmful species. This would leave it open for a more benevolent species to rise up. While Hollywood loves the alien invasion movies, “The Day the Earth Stood Still,” would likely represent this scenario well.
by Lord Penguin
It’s possible that life on Earth is from another planet, evolved from bacteria (or organic molecules) that got knocked off the alien planet by a large meteor. Of course, the life there wouldn’t be at all like us, the only similarity would be the DNA (not necessarily intelligent either, even with a head start in evolution). It’s also possible that life/organic chemicals from our planet fell on some alien one from one of the meteors that hit us, like that article a while back suggested (but evolution doesn’t work fast enough for those to be intelligent by now, as far as we know).
by egore
If I were an alien, I would probably be of hydrogen formation, since it is the most prevalent. I would be so advanced as to be able to manipulate Hydrogen atoms to create an unforseeable environment for myself, probably we as a species would not be aware that any alien environment was around. we would not be able to
by Helio Perroni Filho
“We’re not going to be able to defend ourselves very well. But if I wanted that to be correct, it would be a very short movie.”
Greg Bear’s The Forge of God tells of an alien invasion that quickly ends with the destruction of Earth, before humans can do much of anything. The only survivors are those rescued by another alien race, who then proceed to equip humanity with the tools required for them to seek revenge.
So perhaps a frontal conflict between humans and alien invaders couldn’t be depicted in any level of realism, but how about a forceful introduction to a space civilization, from the bottom of which us chimps would then work our butts up?
by Matt Reagan
This stuff is all pretty obvious to a thinking person, but thanks. ;)
by {i}Pan~
The aliens are in the virtual mutli-verse, not meat-space.
by John
We must expand to fill the universe as quickly as possible.
The Big Rip will hit us in 10 billion years.
If we work hard enough we will discover FTL or alternative technologies.
We may be able to engineer the universe and stop the Big Rip once we occupy the whole volume.
Team up with aliens will be a wise choice.
by tedhowardnz
While I agree with most of the postulates in the original article, like most others who have posted, the postulate about aggression is clearly false.
Looked at from a games theory perspective, evolution can be seen as competition within successive levels of stabilised cooperation.
The big leaps in cooperation seem to have been:
Between RNAs and proteins to form cells;
Between bacteria to form eukaryotic cells;
Between cells to for multicellular organisms and organs;
Between organisms to form social groups;
And now, many more layers in the mimetic realm as we form ever more complex cooperative groups for our mutual benefit.
It seems to me that any organism capable of stabilising intelligent life to the point it could form space faring technology would most probably have developed cooperation to a level beyond anything humanity as a whole yet exhibits (though it is exhibited by many subgroups within the whole).
It seems to me that our fixation with money, and market valuation, is the single biggest obstacle to our development of such cooperation. The scarcity multiplier built into money (the more scarce something is, the more it is worth) seems to be a fundamental destabiliser in human dynamics at present.
It seems to me that any alien arriving here is likely to be far more cooperative and aware than most humans are at present, and has almost zero probability of posing any threat of force by intent. Any technology capable of crossing interstellar space would almost certainly be capable of using the uninhabited mass of this system and converting to whatever purpose they had need of it for; rather than focusing on the inhabited rock.
Alien invasion is good Hollywood fodder, and very poor science.
by John Goodrich
Thanks,
I agree with you .
A recent read of Kropotkin’s “Mutual Aid: A Factor Of Evolution ” substantiates that certainly all highly successful species on Earth and humans since our beginnings have subscribed to cooperation rather that the aggressive, self-centered learned behaviors enforced by statism and capitalism for the past few hundred years.
The concept of humanity’s original sin and inherent greed are also manufactured and kept alive by the fictions of organized religions .
I do not believe that any race that has the advanced intelligence and technologies to get them here would make the trip other than to communicate, learn and assist another fellow sentient (and so-far semi-civilized ) race in the vast and largely uninhabited reaches of the universe.
Any such visitation IMO is highly unlikely given the enormous distances AND time .
Humans have been here only a few hundred thousand years at best which is a very small unit of time considering all the time the universe has been in existence and many extra-terrestrial forms of life may well have come and gone without the possibility of meeting us and likewise the human race may well come and go before we have the opportunity to meet an intelligent life form.
The egocentricity of the Bible and Hollywood in thinking we are the center of the universe may be the popular thinking but we are, after all, newcomers to the universe and off on a little blue speck in a small corner of an unimaginably large universe in a very tiny flash of time.
by Rob Fixmer
I find a number of Mr. Shostak’s assumptions amusing. For example: “Whover takes the trouble to come visit us is probably a more aggressive personality.” What a strange assumption! Is aggression and conquest of alien civilizations the reason behind our very expensive and sometimes ambitious attempts to explore extraterrestrial worlds? True, we might be seen as something akin to an annoying planetary infestation by aliens seeking our water or minerals or whatever — and indeed we are a planetary infestation by any objective standard. But I have a hard time believing we would be seen as a source of protein worth traveling light years for, just to tickle an alien’s palate. But let’s be honest here: The threat is not very serious for a more basic reason, which is that the lack of any evidence of intelligent extraterrestrial life, despite the overwhelming odds that it has developed elsewhere in our galaxy, let alone the universe, strongly suggests that technological species don’t survive long enough to spread themselves about the cosmic neighborhood. I love my SUV, but the poitcal, religious, economic and environmental issues invoved in powering it merrily down ribbons of asphalt will almot certainly result in our species cycling back to the existence of our cave-dwelling ancestors at some point. We’re not likely to ever be the alien aggressors terrorizing some distant civilization, and it stands to reason that other technological civilizations probably won’t fare much better. We will eat ourselves before we are eaten.
by jeff dorazio
Rob i agree with you that there is no serious threat and that there is a complete lack of evidence of intelligent e.t. – despite the overwhelming odds that there should be; however, this does not necessarily mean that they destroyed themselves with their tech. It is quite possible that they did wipe themselves out, but again, the overwhelming odds suggest that there have been many e.t. civilisations to reach the technological singularity stage…so why hasn’t at least one of these managed to send out bots to explore, etc.? Why haven’t we seen any evidence? The Fermi Paradox.
It is more likely (in my opinion) that once a race reaches technological singularity (at which point a person can do the equivalent of all of the thinking of all of the people ever done in only a second) there is something “more attractive” available than travelling vast distances to examine anthills…what this is i cannot tell you although i wonder about it quite often…
by John Doe
Why the hell would aliens be vicious? If they have the technical capability to get all the way to our crappy planet, then we have to ask ourselves for what reason they would want to invade.
It is analogous to the idea that humans will invade a random ants nest in a forest because it has a small stockpile of seeds. The ants think that their nest is pretty special, and that their seeds are valuable, but obviously we couldn’t give a damn. In fact, humans are trying to safeguard animals in more developed parts of the world, and indeed we have ethical systems in place to protect them.
I would imagine that the relative unimportance of our planet, our technology and our species is less likely to render us an intergalactic threat and more likely considered something to be protected or ignored entirely.
by Elliot
for real. we have nothing of value for an advanced civilisation. the only reason I can think of for aliens coming to visit is to gently integrate us into the galactic community so (a) we don’t freak out if a massively out-of-context event happens, and (b) we’re properly prepared for intersystem travel & socialising & we don’t bugger up any sensitive systems.
the way I imagine an advanced civilisation would see us, is either like a noob in an mmorpg – giving us some tips so we don’t die pathetically within seconds of stepping out beyond our system, or as like an excited 5-yr old in a china shop – giving us some sensible behaviour parameters so we don’t break anything precious that belongs to someone else.
by Gunnar Tveiten
True. We may well wipe their nest out, but certainly not in order to get to the seed-cache. More likely we’ll wipe them out without a second thought because, for example, they’re in the way, let’s say we want to build a road or a building at the site of their nest.
by Kaiser
Yes andamar, we are very close to having some amazing technology. I figure by the time they show up, we may have some impressive hardware Indeed :)
That is, as long as Asia and NA manage to keep the peace in the future. Ugly economic competition is leading to potential trouble in the Pacific. Aye.
by Jack Reeve
I have, on the desk right next to my computer screen, a real copy of “The Literary Digest for February 27, 1915.” It is open to the “Science and Invention” page, where the main story is of President Wilson speaking from the White House to a guy in California over the newly completed transnational telephone line. Quote: “The total weight of the four 3,400-mile copper wires in use between New York and San Francisco is 5,920,000 pounds. These wires are mounted on a total of 130,000 poles.” Unquote. There are millions of people still alive who were around at that time. Immaterial I guess, but thought I’d share the power of the dichotomy within it. It’s not lost on me that people the world over will read these words at zero cost in real time. Now, THAT’S progress…
by James Lindelien
The simplest, lowest-energy-budget alien invasion plan, and one offering high security, is to just nudge a sizable asteroid so that it eventually collides with Earth…then patiently wait somewhere out in the Kuiper Belt. Aliens? What Aliens? We’d never know. But that story is not sufficiently cinematic as far as the Hollywood box office goes. “We’ll orbit just inside their space, and listen to their rock-n-roll”, the aliens will say to each other.
by jeff dorazio
hmmm…maybe they felt threatened by the dinosaurs…
by Chuck
We are the most technological and aggressive society that we are aware of, but what drives us is curiosity not aggression .If we were to send out an interaction into space the purpose (as history would indicate ) will be curiosity not domination . The probability would be an even more advanced culture would do the same, not be a more “aggressive personality”
by jeff dorazio
very well-put chuck. I totally agree. The arguement of “well look at how we treat the natives when we travel to a new place” doesn’t cut it for me either. Sure our history is filled with examples of this happening but the arguement assumes that they are exactly like us and only looks at how we reacted to the need for land and food. When you have the tech to create food, gold, water, etc. from almost anything and for free the “desperate means/desperate measures” arguement ceases to hold any water. also look at how much things have changed in the past few hundred years when it comes to our treatment of another race/culture, etc. When it comes to new tribes and the likes we are benevolent…we don’t “invade”…
by Peter
“Whoever takes the trouble to come visit us is probably a more aggressive personality” says more about the writer than anything else..
by jeff dorazio
i must agree that i didn’t expect such a statement from someone as integral to seti as seth shostak. If they have the tech to get here they have already made it way past the nanotech stage…we will never make it through this stage if we are “agressive” never mind “more agressive”…when 1 person can simply think about a self-replicating bot destroying life on earth and make it happen we will need to have moved past “hostile takeovers” or we have a big problem…
by jes
Most of this is obvious, of course, and especially so in that humans (especially storytellers) treat any “other” as a different form of themselves: it’s tough to imagine the unimaginable!
But for argument’s sake, to point 1: what if it weren’t so specific, but more like amino acid seeding of asteroids/meteorites? They did have some very rich meteorites fall recently in California… another several billion years, and who knows?
by jeff dorazio
…i have considered this possibility myself. The issue here is that once they have the technology to seed an asteroid with aminos they also have nanotech within a few decades so it would seem much more likely to seed with bots or just send the bots out…i am aware of the findings of aminos in some samples but think it is much more likely that if we were “seeded” by asteroids the aminos in those asteroids came from another place where they formed during natural evolutionary proccesses…sort of like pieces of earth from a billion years ago landing on far away planets over and over until something clicks and evolution takes it from there…
by alan
The writer of this article does not have a clue as to what he speaks. Unless of course his information is meant as disinformation then it does make sense for a socially engineered linear mind.
by Jamie
Why? Please give examples
by jeff dorazio
…although i tend to disagree with the “hostile e.t. scenario” i must say that andmar74 is absolutely right. Here’s why: like andmar said we are only about 20 years away from the nanotech bridge, but even if we were 100 years away from it the fact still remains that the universe is 13.7 billion years old. the odds of an e.t. race being at exactly the same point as us on the evolutionary scale are incredibly slim. they are going to be hundreds of thousands of years behind us (in which case they wouldn’t make it here anyway) or they are going to be hundreds of thousands of years ahead of us. Also they aren’t going to be at the next star over, they are going to be randomly spaced across the galaxy with tens or hundreds of thousands of light years between them. For us to travel to our nearest solar neighbour (4 ly) using our current technology would take about 80 thousand years. The vast majority of methods in the works still only shave a small amount of travel time off of this 80k journey. The most promising form of interstellar travel involves the manipulation of quantum disentanglement in order to travel instantaneously as information. It is true that we will make a giant leap forward with nanotech doing the thinking on interstellar travel but until that point we are eons away from making it just to the nearest star. By the time an e.t. race has the ability to come visit us they will have also had the ability (for thousands of years) to send a bot to earth which self-replicates and wipes out humans completely in less than 90 seconds…so there really is no use worrying about or arming ourselves against “hostile e.t.’s”…
by jeff dorazio
…Seth totally knows what he is talking about when it comes to s.e.t.i. specifics but i agree with you that much of the seti thinking in general is rather linear. I was excited to see Jill Tarter of seti lecturing alongside Ray at ideacity 2008 here in Canada. Ray makes some excellent points about seti in “TSIN” however i still think e.t. can be found throughout the galaxy. Whether or not they can get here (or would want to) is the real dilemma. We have only been using radio tech for a couple hundred years and probably won’t be using it in another 50-100 years so listening for radio signals from a race that is hundreds of thousands of years ahead of us seems like a counterproductive waste of time. i have followed seti for a long time and would never discount the importance of “listening”…i just think they will have more luck with optical seti and the likes. I think it should be a prerequisite for all seti personnel to familiarize themselves with the ideologies of nanotechnology.
by andmar74
” the idea that we can take them on is like Napoleon taking on U.S. Air Force”
Actually, it would be much worse than that. The aliens could take us out without we ever knowing what hit us. This is easily deduced from considering what advanced technology is necessary to get here.
For example, we are only about 20 years from having nanobots. Surely the aliens would have them, and could program them to eat humans. There’s no way to defend against that.
by Khannea Suntzu
Well at least they might *try* and breed vigorously, with tentacles and all? No harm in like *trying* a while?
by Jay
this is accelerated intelligence news huh? my brain feels dirty now