The traits that produce technological civilizations are in fact among the most dysgenic traits possible: they guarantee not only the extinction of the "technological" life form but every other life form that shares its environment. For all anyone knows, the universe is teeming with intelligent alien civilizations, but how would you ever know they're there? They don't do tech. They don't send off any unnatural signals into space.
>>16787102Or in simpler words: the universe is quiet because it selects for quiet life.
>>16787102>>16787104I personally just think we need a powerful enough telescope and we'll start seeing "real shit", but that telescope I imagine must require quiet the technology and resources, so maybe not even in our lifetimes
>>16787104It only take one stupid nigga to prove it wrong so why isn't?
>>16787102All it should take is *one* alien race that's the exception to the alleged norm and manages to strike a balance of developing technology while taking good care of its home ecosystem, and if they emerged millions of years ago they could have spread across the galaxy by now and there would be no paradox. It should be or should have been possible for humans to do this, some forms of resource extraction and energy sources are a lot less environmentally harmful than others, and not everyone/everywhere on earth has the same mentality about short term profits as the worst actors like ExxonMobil or the US military
>>16787167>All it should take is *one* alien race that's the exception to the alleged norm and manages to strike a balance of developing technology while taking good care of its home ecosystemAnd yet it clearly never happened. That's a testament to just how insanely implausible your techie utopian fantasy is.
>>16787102To me the stupidest thing about the Fermi "paradox" is the assumption that radio we discovered ~150 years is the peak of long distance communication and there is nothing better.We could be basically looking for smoke signals while everyone else is using laser relays.
>>16787181So all the other aliens in the universe just leapfrogged over all familiar artificial signal types straight to your undefined sci-fi. Or maybe you're just hyper-dysgenic and the Fermi "paradox" proves it.
>>16787171>clearly neverWhat's insanely implausible is thinking you have a clear enough view across the galaxy and its history to make such a broad assertion about the whole thing. What if somewhere, millions of years ago, a race peaked and died out *after* having spread from its home world and colonized a section of space? And maybe they didn't die out because of resource depletion, rather because they were too close to the core and some energetic stellar events got them, or something. Who are you to say nothing like that could ever possibly have happened?
>>16787187>leapfroggedWe have been braodcasting for ~130 years, if we find something better than radio in 50 years and it's widely addopted in 70 years that will mean humanity broadcast radio for 200 years of the ~300,000 years we have been around.What are the odds that they are using radio at the same time as us (adjusted for light delay) when they could have come a billion years before us?
>>16787190>all the scientific minds pondering the Fermi "paradox" are insane>they just never considered my undefined copeDon't even need any fancy arguments to tell you're heavily dysgenic.
" Hello mister alien, here there is a nice habitable planet, please come and invade us"
>>16787192>but what about muh undefined sci-fi?That already removes you from the discussion. But it's nice that you go further and make a trivial error: >if we find something better than radio in 50 years and it's widely addopted in 70 years that will mean humanity broadcast radio for 200Out of how many years that are relevant to this discussion?> ~300,000 That's wrong. Try again.
>>16787198>Out of how many years that are relevant to this discussion?Well SETI didn't start until the 80s so less than a 50 year window so far.
>>16787202I think I broke this LLM...
>>16787204I'll have you know I'm a SLM.
>>16787205Very cool. Either way, your cope doesn't work. It implies humanity is either the youngest technological civilization in EM signal range, or that everyone else keeps frogleaping over EM signals to undefined sci-fi. Neither option is worth discussing.
Maybe space is too big. We'd never detect a dead alien probe even if there were trillions of them floating in our solar system right now, they could be as big as football stadiums and still completely invisible. But realistically there aren't any. Our own planet demonstrates that life is fairly resilient once it gets going, but our observations suggest that worlds capable of supporting even crude forms of life are rare. Exceptionally rare. Our ability to survey other systems is pretty limited but given that billions of worlds in the galaxy have had billions of years to produce something of note we should've detected some long dead civilisation's leftover junk by now.
>>16787209You keep saying they must have leapfrogged radio but I don't understand why you think that's the case.Lets say they had radio 1000 years ago, used it for 300 years then moved on. They would have to be more than 750LY from us for us to ever pickup those signals otherwise they passed us before we could hear them.If their radio transmissions were hitting us while the Pyramids were being built and stopped by the time Ceasar took power how would we even know?
>>16787218>You keep saying they must have leapfrogged radioBecause I assumed you weren't retarded enough to suggest humanity is the youngest technological civilization within EM range.
>>16787220You are right, it's much more likely there are none in EM range or they are everywhere but quiet?Based on current data all we can say for sure is no one within 50ly is blasting out high power radio trying to get peoples attention.I simply offered another possibility rather than "there is no one at all".
>>16787224>Based on current data all we can say for sure is no one within 50ly is blasting out high power radio trying to get peoples attention.Which is a significant observation that's hard to explain plausibly if you assume humanity represents a typical occurrence in this universe. The most natural conclusion is that humanity is not, in fact, typical.
>>16787229My honest opinion on live is microbes are common, complex life is rare and technological life is extremely rare.We expend a shitload of energy on our big brains and it could be extremely rare for that to be worth while. It could also be common for technological life to wipe itself out.
>>16787233Here we have a Goddamned fucking genius!Holy Fuck, Anon, did you really think of all that by yourself?My God! Nobody in the past 100 years ever thought of that! You should publish your ground breaking ideas because we are sure no body ever published anything so fucking genius like that before!Wow, what a big boy you are! I bet you wear big boy pants! Yes, Mommy tales her BIG BOY shopping every month and buys him another pair of BIG BOY pants! My, aren't you lucky!Nice floppy big boy pants that are held up by stretchy elastic, which makes it easy for your grandfather to pull them down every time he wants to fuck your shit encrusted ass.
>>16787261Only I'm allowed to be angry in my thread. Fuck off.
Assuming that a sufficiently advanced species of alien would rather make space-faring empires instead of directing their evolutionary path to something like plants that form symbiotic attachments to their home planet, for example, is peak anthropocentrism. It just has to be so to justify humanity's implicit social darwinist POV where the purpose of life is to dominate all of your surroundings and "devour" the temperature gradient.
>>16787305Right, but that's just a gayer version of my point. Technology IS an inherently hostile enterprise.
>>16787310It can be fine if its not industrial era technology. Using stones and sticks to build a house is fine.
>>16787315>Using stones and sticks to build a house is fine.Sure. The problem is that in modern humans, this behavior is motivated by a chronic dissatisfaction with the planet's natural conditions. Birds build nests, beavers build dams, etc. but you don't call that "technology". You know exactly what "technology" entails.
>>16787167Spreading across galaxy is just not practical, civilisations would rather focus on constantly improving the life on their own planets
>>16787580>civilisations would rather focus on constantly improving the life on their own planetsDo you have any examples of civilizations operating this way?
>>16787584It seems logical to prioritize one's well-being over embarking on million-year-long voyages across the most dangerous parts of the universe for pretty much nothing
>>16787585>It seems logical to prioritize one's well-beingYour rulers do prioritize their well-being and it doesn't seem to conflict with their goal of endless expansionism. They also don't seem to mind running a civilization that makes life increasingly worse for everyone else.
>>16787586Throughout history, there are countless examples of countries that did not want to annex too much land because it would require their ruling elites to share power, all the more reasons to not make space colonies that would be impossible to control
>>16787591I don't care. I asked you to show me an example of a civilization that prioritized the well-being of its human slaves over the ambitions of its rulers.
>>16787595You contradict yourself. Why would the rulers have the ambition to create things beyond their control that could become their enemies? We're not running a charity here.
>>16787598You're a retard and I accept your effective concession that civilizations will happily make life worse for their human cattle, as human civilizations have been doing since the dawn of time and will continue doing to the point of human extinction. No one cares about your well-being. Not even you, since you will insist that your abysmal life and oncoming extermination is better than natural conditions.
Maybe advanced civilisations don't call because to them we're pic related
>>16787601Ah nvm I didn't realize I was talking to a seething /pol/tard, my b
>>16787198Most radio emissions into space from human tech would become too weak to pick up or decipher anyway, beyond a relatively short distance beyond which they fade into the cosmic background radiation.We could keep doing the same thing for thousands of years instead of hundreds and it wouldn't necessarily make us detectable outside of our immediate stellar neighborhood
>>16787305>where the purpose of life is to dominate all of your surroundingsname one life form that doesn't expand/multiply to the maximum of its ability
>>16787102Inner Earth you fucking nimrod. They have been on Earth for a long time. Also, in the cosmos. We are just being lied to. Its plain as day
>>16788235Bottom left shows a ship or organism siphoning the Sun, then ejecting away.
>>16788210humans
>>16787102So, original sin?
>>16788255Yep. What did you think the Garden of Eden story was about? A magical tree and a magical snake? No, it was about Man becoming too "smart" for his own good and abandoning the hunter-gatherer lifestyle in favor of senseless toil and endless war against nature. It was about Woman, with her shortsighted material greed, selecting for traits that amplify this behavior. I fucking bet the outline of this story is way older than semitic religions and goes all the way back to the first civilization.
>>16788276Enkidu is the earliest one of which we know. Religion is the only way to keep this shit in check.
