From the Aliens' POV, Which of Earth's places would be the optimal choice for peaceful first contact? United States, European Union, Russian Federation, Middle East, or China?
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
37 Answers
I don’t think a first meeting amound a large coroboration of nations would be best…
An isolated meeting with one of the singular, more powerful nations would be best it seems.
if they were to jump in on a UN meeting, every nation will all be reacting in extremes all at once… if you isolate the first experience it reduces the chances of mass panic world wide.
Were I an alien commander (wow this is fun to think about) I would get information about the planet. Upon learning that their is comprised of many individual nations i would seek out a more global authority, hence I would contact the UN
There are no aliens, it makes for nice story though…
In the impossible hypothetical I would say the Navel
of the World…
@ Crusader
How would you know?
On the physical, sentient level that is.
what i meant was, how do you know that there are no aliens?
Signs, signs, everywhere the signs…
signs huh.
well signs tell me with a high degree of certainty that there ARE aliens and that they are visiting us.
I most certainly believe that there are aliens somewhere out there. I think it would be horribly selfish of us to assume that we are it in the huge thing that is space. I think that if aliens were to make contact they would either contact a powerful nation, the United States, or maybe somewhere neutral like Switzerland.
I know how much you all enjoy scientific evidence,
Here is the scientific likelihood of carbon-based
life forming on a gaia terran-class planet-Our Universal
Oasis-in scientific notation, 10 to the 74th power…
@ crusader, no the probability is 100%, because we exist.
Precisely, we exist, thank God.
Using the same formula, how likely is
it other planets with intelligent life exist?
For that matter, how likely is it that
We came into existance without the assistance
of an intelligent design, given the (literally)
astronomical odds against it..?
“For that matter, how likely is it that
We came into existance without the assistance
of an intelligent design, given the (literally)
astronomical odds against it..?”
100%, because we did
@Crusader – Sometimes things just happen to work out for whatever reason. Just because you can’t explain it or don’t understand it doesn’t mean it isn’t possible. I don’t think anything is really impossibe, just maybe improbable, but never impossible.
Seventy-Four Zeros, all preceded by a 1.
Thats;
1 in: 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
Chance?
this isn’t a matter of throwing dice every single time, it is a matter of accumulating changes and natural selection restricted by natural laws of physics. coupled with the sheer amount of planets in the universe plus the enormous amount of time available plus the fact that there are not many elements that have the similar properties as carbon (4 free electrons in the outer ring for molecular bindings), it is almost a certaint that life occurs by itself at one point.
Raq;
Yes, cumulative changes, precisely, in a precise combination
overy the eons in a precise sequence in which the final
calculation of it occuring Ever is 10 the 74.
Raq;
Interesting, thank you for the post.
Well, as I am a dedicated advocate of Intelligent
Design, I hold natural selection in a degree of disdain,
Yet, as a naturalist myself, I acknowledge their
may be sone truth to it, in non-human species…
However, comparing the arrival of a working clock
and a working Planet are as far removed from
eachother as arithmatic is from differencial calculus.
arriving at a planet is actually simpler than the evolution of life.
start with a huge cloud of matter (as was present in the proto universe after the big bang (which was not an explosion of nothing to something, contrary to what most creationists like to claim)) and add gravity and other forces(for example, van der vaals force) and some momentum in the cloud (as was also present in the proto universe).
Gravity will in due time cause matter to accumulate, the resulting accumulated mass will have naturally a higher gravitational pull and will pull in even more matter. In due time you will arrive at many pockets of matter (aka, stars, planets). The gravity of those pockets will affect the motion of the other pockets and result in curved movement vectors, some of those also known as orbits. The body with the largest accumulated matter, usually in the local center of the cloud, will finally ignite itself under its own pressure and become a star.
And violá, a solar system.
Very scientific, and extant, you are well versed in
astro-physics. I do have a couple of Q’s…
Where was matter Before the Bang?
Physically speaking, How do you have Something before Nothing?
Gravitational theory, velocity, and mass distribution,
are all plausible also. However, if I may,
I would like to amend my former analogy to
A Living Planet of Carbon-based,
highly reasoned sentient life forms.
Or even a planet with a non-toxic atmosphere,
Or an atmosphere at all capable of sustaning carbon
based life, much less the life itself..
One explanation is that time did ot exist before the big bang and that therefore technically there is no “before the big bang”.
Another one is that there is an infinite cycle between expansion and contraction of the universe (big bang, followed by a big crunch (the universe collapses in itself) and then it begins anew).
The third one i know of involves higher dimensions and so called “branes” that have more than our 4 dimensions that contain our universe and that the collision between those branes causes “big bangs” in the colliding branes.
But those barely qualify Hypothesises, so the answer is:
We don’t know.
But that is what science is for: finding out.
As for life: You severely underestimate the resilience of life and its ability to adapt to even the harshest of environments. Even here on Earth, we have discovered life around oceanig underwater volcanoes, which makes this environment scorching hot and extremely toxic. We have discovered bacterial life in arctic climates at temperatures of minus 20 and below. Life is not even bound to having sunlight, as they can, as in the case of those underwater volcanoes, can use other sources of energy.
Life can evolve and grow in even the (for us) deadliest of environments, a fact that creatly increases the chances of extra terrestrial life.
As for intelligent life, which requires a comparatively narrow niche of environmental factors.
As you can see on our own planet, a planet does not have uniform conditions planetwide. There is a whole flurry of different environmental conditions, each capable of accommodating different forms of sophistication. Given that, even if a planet is in such a position from its star, that the majority of the surface is not suitable for complex life, there is a good chance that there is a smaller patch on that planet that is, not even necessarily on the surface. This also increases the probability of extraterrestrial intelligent life.
Also do not think that intelligence is a maverick freak phenomenon on earth. There are thousands of species on Earth that have different levels of intelligence, some of them so high , like many of our closer primate relatives and dolphins, that they show signs of sentience and self awareness.
A chimpanzee for example has the mental capacity of a 6 year old human child and shows signs of planned actions and creativity. Chimpanzees have the ability to create artificial tools and teach these skills to others. Which is quite impressive.
@ragingloli I take it from your question you don’t think aliens would bother with Africa?
Perhaps there is some truth, perhaps not, these
are interesting theories, however, thank you for them.
And resiliency is precisely why we were placed
on Oasis Earth, because it is the Only hospitable
place in the Universe for life made in Gods image…
“because it is the Only hospitable
place in the Universe for life made in Gods image…”
where does this certainty come from?
i don’t suppose you have examined every single planet in the universe to claim this absolute knowledge.
Even if I am wrong, (and I do not believe I am,)
the Oasis Earth postulation may seem a lonely suppostion
but it presents an enormous psychic impression
to be the best ‘Stewards of the Earth’ as well
as to be a ‘brotherhood of Man, (and sisterhood of woman,)
rather than dividing into disparate group with
the faint, distant, belief that we can separate fromn
the ‘others’ and forge a new ‘colony.’
The Oasis Earth claim is in my estimation an extremely arrogant one, in the same category as the past, since disproven “Earth is the centre of the universe” Dogma, that, coupled with the “Man created in God’s image” Dogma, results in an almost narcissistic view of Humanity of itself as the Crown of all life with the right to do with the rest what it pleases. The practical results of that are plain to see: stabbing and poisoning the planet for our own benefit, the extintion of entire species by man, even the slaughtering, oppression and enslaving of other groups of humans.
Quite the contrary to the faithful who
are active believer and therefore commanded
to be ‘Stewards of the Earth.’ Your position
and mine are finally revealed in total, your science
is your religion, my faith, including Man being created
in Gods Image, and, while the Earth may or may not be the center of the Universe, it certainly is, for all intents
and purposes, the center of Our Universe, we have
No Where Else to Go.
Vain beliefs or speculations
is what lend man to the poisoning of the Earth and
extinctions and slaughterings, this and hypocritical
believers and non-believers alike, exchanging short-
term profit for long-term pollution. Without the
Christ faith, we destroy the Earth and /or its inhabitants,
likely both.
sunday must be the day of religious arguments. This question was great. It’s unfortunate it got hijacked.
@ crusader “Vain beliefs or speculations
is what lend man to the poisoning of the Earth and
extinctions and slaughterings,”
I don’t think so. The poisoning of the earth, the extinctions and the slaugherings happened because people did NOT speculate about the future. It happened because they “knew” that they had the right to do it, and that they had some kind of divine mandate to do it and that their respective god would take care of anything about the planet after they were gone and that they would eventually end up in some kind of blissful perfect afterlife for eternity and that they therefore did not need to care about the shape of the earth.
It is speculation that eventually lead to the environmental movement.
Not true, their were Christian environmentalist
Long before the current Communist politically inspired
movement.
Neo-Cons, (not Christian,) co-opted the Christian party and
demonized it giving the Communist environmentalists alleged
‘higher ground.’ You over-simply. Not difficult to
do in a government (USA) that simply refuses to be
a true Christian Nation throughout. Too much profit
in fear and duplicity evidently. ‘Green’ technology
was not even considered politically until the manufacturing
base of America was exported abroad. True Christians
have Always been the Stewards, not financially or
politically motivated surragates for the modern-day
Caesars. They were often murdered quietly and
never heard from again…Such is the way of the World.
Hello C. Heretic
Sorry you disapprove of the direction of the
thread, but the author is a direct participant
if you like the topic in the form you
beleive it should be discussed why dont
you create it?
The duchy of Grand Fenwick, of course you silly ninnies.
Answer this question 
This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.
Composing members:
0
