On what do you base this claim?

Are you asking about the claim that the aliens have been making technologies for billions of years, or the claim that the aliens wouldn't learn anything useful from our civilization? The latter would seem to be true to me if the aliens are indeed superior intelligences, whereas the former is quite fantastic. I have no idea how many years any other life forms have existed.

 

Are you asking about the claim that the aliens have been making technologies for billions of years, or the claim that the aliens wouldn't learn anything useful from our civilization? The latter would seem to be true to me if the aliens are indeed superior intelligences, whereas the former is quite fantastic. I have no idea how many years any other life forms have existed.

J... do you think us, as humans, could find any benefit at all from studying primitive life forms, such as insects or bacteria?
I think that the answer to this question would also apply to the perspective of any alien race visiting (or monitoring from afar) our planet, no matter how advanced they'd be compared to us.

 

Are you asking about the claim that the aliens have been making technologies for billions of years, or the claim that the aliens wouldn't learn anything useful from our civilization? The latter would seem to be true to me if the aliens are indeed superior intelligences, whereas the former is quite fantastic. I have no idea how many years any other life forms have existed.

I'm referring to the claim that the are billions of years beyond us. What basis do you have for claiming that they are billions of years beyond us. Why does being a "superior intelligence" require that they be billions of years ahead of us? By that line of reasoning, wouldn't we be billions of years ahead of the Neanderthals?

 

J... do you think us, as humans, could find any benefit at all from studying primitive life forms, such as insects or bacteria?
I think that the answer to this question would also apply to the perspective of any alien race visiting (or monitoring from afar) our planet, no matter how advanced they'd be compared to us.

Yes, of course. That is why biologists study the other forms of life and species on our planet. My comment I guess is that we can learn from practically everything in the realm of science, but we don't go out and start building ant mounds, or acting like ants. We can adapt from what we learn, but I am wondering just what we do as a society that these aliens haven't perfected?

 

I'm referring to the claim that the are billions of years beyond us. What basis do you have for claiming that they are billions of years beyond us. Why does being a "superior intelligence" require that they be billions of years ahead of us? By that line of reasoning, wouldn't we be billions of years ahead of the Neanderthals?

Good point... a life form could be around for billions of years and still be an evolutionary dead-end... and as for "superior intelligence", the accumulation of technological knowledge does not necessarily imply that intelligence has also grown with it... Just look at us... we're (quite possibly) not smarter than humans were a few thousand years ago.
Just because our lifestyles have changed dramatically because we've been building and discovering new things based on our predecessor's work does not make us more intelligent.

 

Yes, of course. That is why biologists study the other forms of life and species on our planet. My comment I guess is that we can learn from practically everything in the realm of science, but we don't go out and start building ant mounds, or acting like ants. We can adapt from what we learn, but I am wondering just what we do as a society that these aliens haven't perfected?

You seem to be operating on the premise that the ability to achieve a certain technological goal that is beyond our present capabilities requires that they be billions of years beyond us and that they have perfected everything to such a degree that they can't possibly even be interested in studying anything else.

That's akin to saying that since we achieved nuclear power we must, at least in relative terms, have perfected everything in society and would not be interested in even studying some alien civilization that we discovered that was still in its stone age.

 

The Asgard were quite impressed with human projectile weapons. Their advanced weaponry was useless against the replicators.

 

The Asgard were quite impressed with human projectile weapons. Their advanced weaponry was useless against the replicators.

Man.. I'm trying to recall what story or movie that was... but for the life of me, I can't remember!

 

I'm referring to the claim that the are billions of years beyond us. What basis do you have for claiming that they are billions of years beyond us. Why does being a "superior intelligence" require that they be billions of years ahead of us? By that line of reasoning, wouldn't we be billions of years ahead of the Neanderthals?

It's not fact that aliens have existed for billions of years, just how I might imagine it. Is it correct that humans were similar in intelligence to the Neanderthals, just survived longer than them? Humans were more evolutionary fit to survive, and possibly killed off their competition, the Neanderthals. I don't comprehend the line of reasoning that we would be billions of years ahead of the Neanderthals, but what's a few million years when you're extinct?

Good point... a life form could be around for billions of years and still be an evolutionary dead-end... and as for "superior intelligence", the accumulation of technological knowledge does not necessarily imply that intelligence has also grown with it... Just look at us... we're (quite possibly) not smarter than humans were a few thousand years ago.
Just because our lifestyles have changed dramatically because we've been building and discovering new things based on our predecessor's work does not make us more intelligent.

Very true. I think that human brain size has been decreasing as a trend.

You seem to be operating on the premise that the ability to achieve a certain technological goal that is beyond our present capabilities requires that they be billions of years beyond us and that they have perfected everything to such a degree that they can't possibly even be interested in studying anything else.

That's akin to saying that since we achieved nuclear power we must, at least in relative terms, have perfected everything in society and would not be interested in even studying some alien civilization that we discovered that was still in its stone age.

Well, is it the case that studying an alien stone age civilization will help us find safe disposal of spent nuclear fuel, or help us build fusion power plants commercially? If these aliens are like us, they will be diverse, and who knows, some of them would learn a great deal about the unknown aliens. Again, it is very extreme that I claimed these aliens were billions of years in existence and had superior technology to us.

 

Man.. I'm trying to recall what story or movie that was... but for the life of me, I can't remember!

Stargate SG-1

 

Last I heard their is some evidence we interbred with Neanderthals.

 

Last I heard their is some evidence we interbred with Neanderthals.

And that's what happens when you are assigned to isolated outposts.

 

It's also possible that the signals are coming from something human. Perhaps an unmapped spy satellite is hovering about, appearing to send signals from deep space.

Wouldn't ya think?...

To wit (More eloquently):
...the principle source of error in all human investigations lay in the liability of the understanding to under-rate or to over-value the importance of an object, through mere mis-admeasurement of its propinquity. --- E.A. Poe

Best regards
HP

PS
As an aside, such banalities as, for instance; crystal lattice, 'checking' of dried mud, weather patterns and, oh yeah, organisms (to but scratch the proverbial surface) are likewise highly 'regular' while 'richly complex' (and, hence, 'mathematical' in the sense of the article) -- So... Are we to leap to the conclusion that they too are 'engineered'? - That 'reality' is but a construct???
I think I'll never understand the distress experienced by some at the notion of an 'indifferent' reality

 

I think I'll never understand the distress experienced by some at the notion of an 'indifferent' reality

That distress is called religion. Humans are the only species we know of that engages in it.

 

That distress is called religion. Humans are the only species we know of that engages in it.

My dog thinks I am a god. But he might be dyslexic.

 

Humans are the only species we know of that engages in it.

How many human like species do you know?

 

How many human like species do you know?

And another question would be, what other traits unique to the human species are there?

 

And another question would be, what other traits unique to the human species are there?

Off hand, it seems apprehension of one's own mortality/transience is significant in this regard...

Best regards
HP

 

Off hand, it seems apprehension of one's own mortality/transience is significant in this regard...

Best regards
HP

Plus abstract reasoning and thought, a detailed capacity for communication, a deep appreciation for beauty in all senses, an innate sense of morality, a far more sophisticated sense of Time, a fundamentally creative spirit... the list can go on...

 

Plus abstract reasoning and thought

I believe you got it in one! -- Inasmuch as all other uniquely human traits are, inarguably, corollary of and to the above (to wit: abstraction of thought)

Best regards and bravo!
HP