Discovery: Hon. Paul Hellyer, former Minister of Defence of Canada
This article is part of a continuing Examiner.com series on the intent of extraterrestrial civilizations toward humanity.
On May 2, 2010 former Canadian Minister of Defence Paul Hellyer, who is “is the longest serving current member of the Privy Council, just ahead of Prince Philip,” publicly defended extraterrestrial civilizations as he believes that not only have extraterrestrials visited Earth but they have also contributed positively to human technological advancement, as was reported by Canada’s CTV News.
According to one source, the Queen’s Privy Council for Canada is the “full group of personal consultants to the monarch of Canada on state and constitutional affairs, though responsible government requires the sovereign and/or her viceroy, the Governor General of Canada, to almost always follow only that advice tendered by the Cabinet — a committee within the Privy Council composed of elected Members of Parliament. Those summoned to the QPC are appointed for life by the governor general as directed by the Prime Minister of Canada, meaning that the group is composed predominantly of former cabinet ministers, with some others having been inducted as an honorary gesture."
“The reality is that they've (extraterrestrials) been visiting Earth for decades and probably millennia and have contributed considerably to our knowledge. Microchips, for example, fiber-optics, they are just two of the many things that allegedly — and probably for real — came from crashed vehicles," Defense Minister Hellyer said.
Former Minister of Defence Hellyer accused Cambridge professor Stephen Hawking of spreading misinformation about extraterrestrial civilizations. In an interview, Mr. Hellyer said, “I think Prof. Hawking is indulging in some pretty scary talk there that I would have hoped would not come from someone with such an established stature.” Hellyer further added, “I think it's really sad that a scientist of his repute would contribute to what I would consider more misinformation about a vast and very important subject.”
On April 25, 2010, Prof. Stephen Hawking implied potential contact with extraterrestrial civilizations is dangerous. He stated on a Discovery Channel documentary, “If aliens ever visit us, 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.” While there may be benign aliens out there, Prof. Hawking says trying to make contact is “a little too risky.”
There are many credentialed witnesses to friendly Off Planet Cultures. For example, Examiner.com has also identified two whistle blower eyewitnesses to extraterrestrial civilizations from U.S. government secret programs, including former U.S. Department of Defense scientist Arthur Neumann, and former DARPA Project Pegasus participant and attorney Andrew D. Basiago. Mr. Neumann and Mr. Basiago have independently testified they have met with representatives of a friendly, advanced humanoid Martian civilization.
Transparent public diplomacy and cooperation with ethical extraterrestrial civilizations, by the evidence, is not a threat to humanity, and is in the strategic best interest of the U.S. and the entire world community.
As an illustration of where canonical academia – as opposed to exopolitical research - stands regarding the extraterrestrial presence, The Journal of Cosmology, a scholarly journal of Astronomy and Astrophysics associated with the Department of Astronomy, Center for Astrophysics, Harvard-Smithsonian, Cambridge, MA has published the views of 12 scientists commenting on Prof. Hawking’s statement regarding extraterrestrials. According to the Los Angeles Times, “Some criticized Hawking's use of human behavior to predict what aliens would do, but others said that human behavior was a reasonable yardstick. Few, however, questioned the premise of Hawking's statements — that alien life forms probably exist and we are likely someday to encounter them.”
Paul Hellyer and the ‘Decade of Contact’
On September 25, 2005, the Hon. Paul Hellyer, former Minister of Defence of Canada (1963-1968) and former Deputy Prime Minister of Canada under Prime Minister Pierre E. Trudeau, made an extraordinary speech at the University of Toronto, becoming one of the first statesman of a major NATO nation to express public concern about apparent U.S. plans to weaponize space for a possible interplanetary war against ethical extraterrestrial civilizations visiting Earth.
Examiner.com readers can view a video of that historic speech by Paul Hellyer, which was billed as:
"Hon. Paul Hellyer At Exopolitics Conference (Toronto)
Paul Hellyer, former Canadian Defence Minister endorses the validity of Colonel Philip J Corso's Book "They Day After Roswell" and agrees with Alfred Webre's Proposal of "A Decade Of Contact" with Extra-terrestrials, rather than interplanetary War."
In the months following Paul Hellyer’s speech, Gordon Heath wrote about Mr. Hellyer’s political graduation into exopolitics in “Paul Hellyer and the Politics of Exopolitics,” an excerpt of which states:
“Paul Hellyer, a former Minister of Defence in the Pearson Government, has announced his belief that UFOs are real and that the US is developing weapons systems for space which are to be used against alien craft entering earth's airspace. He voiced his opinions at the recent ‘2005 Toronto Exopolitics Symposium’.
“Exopolitics is a new term used to describe the study of the politics of extraterrestrial contact. It is usually discussed in a context which assumes that enough evidence exists from existing UFO reports to conclude that some UFOs are craft that are piloted by beings originating from other planets and solar systems. Hellyer's comments received some coverage in the national media and stirred some interest and reaction from the public, mostly from those who have some interest in UFOs”….
Hellyer Believes in Public Role in Government Response to Alien Contact
“Hellyer has stated his belief that elected governments have been largely excluded from information which is held within the bureaucracy about UFOs. He has in fact used his own experience to buttress this argument.
“UFOlogy has not made great strides in finding conclusive, unambiguous evidence for the ETH (Extra-terrestrial hypothesis) or any other theory on the origin for unexplained UFOs. Despite this failure, many UFOlogists have evaluated the evidence and concluded for themselves that the ETH is the most likely explanation for the phenomena. Given the potentially serious implications of this hypothesis, it makes sense to seriously investigate the potential implications of this hypothesis and to seek answers to the following questions:
“Who are the visitors?
What do they want from us?
How are our governments reacting to this presence?
Are government agencies hiding information about UFOs from the public?
“Paul Hellyer is the perhaps the first former senior Canadian government minister to suggest that these questions are important policy questions and that the public has a right to be involved in the development of policy regarding the response of government to possible extra-terrestrial contact events.”
What astrophysicists and astronomers have to say about Hawking’s statements on extraterrestrial civilizations
The following are excerpts from some of the responses of 12 astrophysicists and astronomers to Prof. Stephen Hawking’s on extraterrestrial civilizations, as published in the Journal of Cosmology. “Cosmology (from Greek κοσμολογ?α - κ?σμος-, kosmos, "universe"; and -λογ?α, -logia-, "study") “is the study and understanding of existence in its totality, encompassing the infinite and eternal, and the origins and evolution of the cosmos, galaxies, stars, planets, earth, life, woman and man.”
As stated by Hawking, "To my mathematical brain, the numbers alone make thinking about aliens perfectly rational. The real challenge is to work out what aliens might actually be like..." According to Hawking aliens "would be only limited by how much power they could harness and control, and that could be far more than we might first imagine...Such advanced aliens would perhaps become nomads, looking to conquer and colonize whatever planets they can reach...I imagine they might exist in massive ships, having used up all the resources from their home planet...If aliens ever visit us, 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."
The full responses can be accessed in the Journal of Cosmology here.
1. Hawking's Alien's Squawkings, John Menninger, Ph.D., University of Iowa.
Aliens, as perceived by Hawking
Could soon visit Earth for some gawking.
They might do good, but Oy!,
They might wish to destroy!
We'll more likely be bored by their talking.
(-- with apologies to E. Lear)
ative science fiction may turn out to be closer to the truth than we would like.
3. Alien Conquistadors? Hawking is Right, Robert Ehrlich, Ph.D., Professor of Physics, George Mason University.
It is easy for one’s initial reaction to Stephen Hawking’s assertion about predatory alien visitors to be dismissive, since while he is perhaps our greatest living physicist, he has no more expertise in the area of alien motives than anyone else – assuming that intelligent aliens even exist. But after a little thought one’s second reaction might be “how could it be otherwise?” Given the obstacles to alien life evolving beyond the microbial stage in our own solar system, one presumes that alien visitors would come to us from other star systems – the other possibility being that microbial aliens might hitch a ride on a meteorite blasted off from a planet within our own solar system.
Alien visitors from the stars would fall into one of four categories, i.e., they (1) have mastered the technology of faster-than-light travel (if that is even possible), (2) be adaptable robots whose mental processes reflect those of their senders, (3) have such long lifetimes that interstellar voyages are possible, or (4) have lived for many generations aboard their ships. My own guess is that number 2 would be the most likely, but with all these choices it would be a safe guess that if these space-journeying aliens exist, their technology is light-years ahead of ours, and that they are almost certainly the preeminent species on their home planet.
How would a species attain that favored status? Certainly, intelligence is a factor, but one can always imagine unintelligent species winning out. For example, it is not out of the realm of possibility that intelligent humans could be wiped out by lowly microbes. Nevertheless, all our experiences on Earth suggest that when a more technologically advanced species or group of humans encounters another and competes for the same resources, the result is always conflict, with the more advanced group emerging victorious – the movie Avatar notwithstanding. Being a member of a species generally means you value the lives of your own members above those of other species, even if you might not wish to see them die needlessly.
On Earth our recognition of the deep mental and emotional lives of some of our fellow passengers on the planet has come exceedingly slowly – with Rene Descartes even holding that animals are simply robots having no thoughts or feelings. Given the probability that the gap in intelligence between alien visitors and humans would be far greater than that between humans and our close relatives on Earth, how could they not think of us as a very lowly life form, certainly not worthy of treating as equals?
One also needs to ask what motives aliens would have for taking the trouble to travel across the stars. Could it be simple curiosity, and a desire to have us join the “Galactic Federation?” This seems highly doubtful, because interstellar communication would seem to be the far easier course of action in that case. Of course, there is the limit of the speed of light to consider, which makes interstellar communication a rather prolonged affair. However, if we have already allowed faster-than-light travel, there is no reason to exclude faster-than-light communication, using tachyons perhaps, which incidentally are not entirely excluded based on experimental searches to date.
Let’s assume Stephen Hawking is correct then, and proceed to the next step – what should we do? One might argue that we should make no attempt to communicate with intelligent aliens by broadcasting signals. The temptation to do so could become quite strong if SETI ever detects an unambiguously positive signal. On the other hand, such communication would be quite pointless should the signal be from a star 500 light years away, given that the beings who we will have likely evolved into (or who replace us) in 500 years will bear little resemblance to those of us who sent the message. Moreover, given the difficulties we now have in even taking simple actions to save the planet from manmade environmental catastrophe, one can only imagine the debate in the halls of Congress and United Nations as to how to reply to alien attempts at communication.
8. Why Should Hawking's Aliens Wish To Destroy? GianCarlo Ghirardi, Ph.D., Dept. of Physics, University of Trieste, the Abdus Salam ICTP, Trieste, Italy.
It is my firm conviction that, in principle, there are no reasons to exclude that there might be living creatures on other planets or celestial bodies in the cosmos. Yet why should they wish to target and destroy the inhabited planets of the universe? To better focus the general issue let us take into account that our existence on Earth is surely quite limited on cosmological time scales, modern humans have existed for less than an eye-blink of cosmological time, and that the cosmos has a radius of various billions of light years, as well as the fact that nothing can travel faster than light. Therefore, if these hypothetical alien beings have lived in a similar time span, then the probability that by endless travel they might reach us now or in any reasonable time interval from now, is infinitesimally small. So it seems to me that Hawking's hypothesis is not unreasonable but is more in the realm of science fiction than a realistic scenario.
Hawking has raised several issues which appear to me to be rather obscure and confusing. If aliens are microbes or human, why would these aliens wish to destroy human life? If an alien civilization has been able to build giant spaceships which can travel through space for many many light years and have built destructive devices which would allow them to conquer, enslave, destroy and colonize the terrestrials of Earth, then their civilization must surely be more advanced, from a scientific and technological point of view, than ours. This point of view makes also me inclined to believe that these aliens could not be like microbes or insects, at least to the extent in which we attach a precise meaning, based on our experience, to these terms. There is no evidence that microbes or insects look to the heavens and ponder questions such as "are we alone", nor is there any suggestion they would be interested in space travel. These are "human" attributes which we must not impart upon hypothetical aliens.
And if Hawking's aliens are anything like humans, then I am optimistic, in a certain sense, that their scientific development should be accompained also by an ethical development, and might value life. Certainly these beings would realize that there is life on the earth, and would not be motivated to authomatically enslave or destroy other living beeings, as these are rather primitive, unthinking, reactions, and not the mark of what we might expect of a higher culture and ethics. And if life is everywhere, then it might be expected that these alien wanderers would not only see it as pointless to destroy life, but might develop a respect for all the living creatures they would have met in their endless travel. Curiosity and the desire to acquire knowledge does not equate a desire to conquer and destroy.
The first "aliens" we encounter may not even be alive. I believe that a civilization which has developed robots is a civilizations of intelligent beings. Accordingly, they might very well send robots to explore the cosmos. However, this again presents us with the problem of time. The time needed to journey to Earth from the nearest solar system in which intelligent life might have been evolved, is enormous, and probably comparable to the total period of existence of the considered intelligent species. Then, which would be the purpose of sending robots to such far away regions of the cosmos that the time necessary for these robots to send back the information concerning what they have discovered would bypass the probable period of existence of the aliens of the home planety who have sent them around? Accordingly, it also seems reasonable to assume that Hawking's giant spaceship would contain both robots and their intelligent builders. Therefore, they might take their civilization with them. However, unless they have discovered the secret of eternal life and cannot evolve or change, they again might change their minds before they reach Earth, and decide not to conquer or destroy. So, there is the possibility they could come in peace and also the one that they change their minds during the many lights years such a journey would take.
I am perfectly aware of the fact that I am tackling the problem by assuming a perspective that reflects, to a great extent, our present knowledge of the cosmos and of the natural and biological laws. An easy objection would be to configure the development of hybernation techniques allowing to preserve a living being for billions of years or to suggest that presently unknown topological structure of the cosmos would allow faster than light travels.
And then there is the idea of "shoot first and ask questions later", a view which I do not endorse. I believe that action must be preceded by knowledge and reflection even in the case in which this might imply serious risks of destruction.
9. The Dangers of Anti-Science: Stephen Hawking’s Fear of Dangerous Aliens. Stephen Freeland, Ph.D., University of Hawaii NASA Astrobiology Institute, Institute for Astronomy, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA
Scientific knowledge is quite different from the authoritatively-voiced opinions of a famous scientist. The remarkable scientific successes that have brought professor Hawking well-deserved fame (and thus a voice that the public wants to hear) also bring a responsibility to clearly distinguish these two different types of information when commenting on the potential dangers of an encounter with extra-terrestrial intelligence. Listeners are otherwise led to one of two incorrect inferences: that scientific knowledge exists where it does not, or that speculation is the best that science can currently offer. Both perceptions undermine the emerging and vibrant science of astrobiology. No one has yet come up with a scientific test for Hawking’s specific claim (and that is precisely what makes his comments unscientific) but thousands are applying their ingenuity and expertise to find ways in which science can approach aspects of the bigger questions of life’s origin(s), evolution, distribution, and future in the universe (see: http://astrobiology.nasa.gov/about-astrobiology). Ironically, on the same evening that Hawking’s opinions were aired on U.S. television, hundreds of astrobiologists were converging in League City, Texas for the annual Astriobology Science Convention-- the largest such conference in the world. Presenters include representatives from the SETI Institute, whose science focuses on the question of what science can infer regarding communications with an intelligent alien species. I doubt that any of them will be opining about the origin and early evolution of the universe as if professor Hawking’s field of science did not exist (and if they did, this would be quickly addressed by the criticisms of colleagues in the frank exchange of knowledge that marks a healthy science).
But a deeper, underlying problem is that supposedly science-friendly mass media are actually weakening public understanding of what constitutes science when they replace scientific information with the opinions of a famous scientist. Scientific inquiry represents just one of several approaches by which we humans form our beliefs: alternatives include pure reasoning, “arguments from authority” and instinct. Science is distinguished from these alternatives only by its focus on what can be tested empirically. Even the most brilliant minds can perceive truths that seem rational (logical) and perhaps even obvious - but which fail when formulated as testable propositions and measured against empirical observations. Aristotle’s famously erroneous philosophy that women possess fewer teeth than men (Mayhew 2004) could have been transformed into a foundation for scientific inquiry by the simple expedient of recording careful measurements in the good-humored company of one of his wives. The problem was not that Aristotle failed to notice this possibility -indeed, he may have started with observations for all we know (Mayhew 2004)- but his sub-culture held logical reasoning superior to the information of the senses, so no supporting empirical data were offered and it was left for later investigators to find that his reasoning had failed him. Subsequent generations have worked hard to disentangle the strengths and weaknesses of Greek rational philosophy, sometimes finding that specific assertions possessed no more solid foundation than the authority of a famous voice. The emergence of modern science is largely the story of its invention and runaway success as a tool for distinguishing between good and bad ideas of 'natural philosophy'. This success has gone on to shape a culture that now values empirical evidence above reason: the information of our senses, properly channeled into scientific tests, is widely held as the ultimate arbiter of truth (Evidence for this widespread cultural perspective is seen, for example, in the popularity of crime-related entertainment where detectives follow the empirical clues to confound prejudice and common-sense; the recent trend for forensic science to play a central role merely emphasizes this point). In this context, it undermines the very notion that science has brought us progress if we now turn and blur the distinction between scientist and science.
Scientists, like rational philosophers, are humans and prone to the same range of belief-forming tendencies as the rest of us whenever they are not actively practicing their science: even the most extraordinary achievements in one dimension of scientific inquiry do not imbue a scientist’s beliefs with automatic credibility on any other topic. One example of direct relevance to the theme of panspermia concerns sir Fred Hoyle’s infamous statements for disbelieving conventional science of biological evolution (Hoyle 1981). Although most evolutionary scientists utterly reject the “Hoyle Fallacy” as a trivial error (e.g. Dawkins 1986), Hoyle's opinions still routinely appear four decades later in anti-evolutionary literature as evidence that eminent scientists have found fundamental flaws in the theory of evolution ( Institute for Creation Research: http://www.icr.org/article/243/). Thus, when Stephen Hawking (or any other scientist) find themselves speaking as a scientist on the likely nature of visiting aliens, they have a responsibility to defend the integrity of science by either demonstrating the scientific basis (empirical tests) for what is being said, or clearly explaining the other (non-scientific) credentials for their information. Failure to do so can hardly help the growing problem of scientific illiteracy in the USA and elsewhere (California Academy of Sciences 2009).
10. Who’s Afraid of Hawking’s Aliens? Arpita Roy, Ph.D.1, James D. Wells, Ph.D.2,3, 1Department of Anthropology, University of California, Berkeley Berkeley, CA USA, 2CERN, Theory Group 385 Route de Meyrin CH-1211 Geneva 23, Switzerland, 3 Department of Physics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor Ann Arbor, MI USA
A dog discovers another dog at a garbage dump. The first dog bares its teeth. This stimulates the other dog to respond by a growl. The most interesting aspects of this encounter are the signs and the stimulus given off, the absence of any verbal communication, and the sizing-up prowl of the animals. The mere sighting of the “other” is not inherently dangerous, but the subsequent engagement can be if one views it in his best interest to fight for whatever reason. Hawking’s comment on the dangers of seeking out aliens (Hawking, 2010) provokes us to think not so much on whether aliens exist or not but on our capacity to imagine what they could be like if they were to exist, the scenarios of possible interaction, and the pragmatics of contact. Engagement with the extraterrestrial has three stages: discovery, monitoring, and contact. Discovery can be safe -- we passively look for signals of alien activity from afar. There is no reason not to do that. We would be imprudent even not to. America spies on Canada, to name just one other hyper-careful act. On the other hand, it is not prudent to send out probes into the cosmos with a plaque bearing our return address as was the case with the Pioneer 10 and 11 space crafts, launched in 1972 and 1973.
Monitoring leads to risks as we may wish to utilize interventionist technologies to find out more, or simply approach to study the phenomenon at close range, thus provoking a reaction. Here extreme caution should be displayed, and contingencies envisioning all possible consequences should be formulated. Contact is even more risky, with the prospect of malevolent beings colonizing and plundering us, or even benevolent or dispassionate beings unwittingly spreading diseases or agents that would destroy us. Hawking mentions the aftermath of Columbus' discovery, but it was not guns and superior technology which destroyed the Aztec civilization, but the microbes, viruses, and disease which the would be conquerers carried with them.
If aliens exist, it is inevitable that someday there will be contact. We are fully engaged in the discovery phase now, and our curiosity will inevitably lead us to contact, if they exist. They might give us insight into the origin of life and our place in the universe. Is there a purpose to life, or is it all a cruel cosmic joke? Christians might ask: "Did Christ die on the cross for them?" Others might ask: "Do they believe in god"? Humans look to the heavens for answers, and we might assume that what might bind us to aliens of other worlds is our desire to know more. Hawking tells us that our curiosity may kill the cat, that looking to space for others of our kind may lead to the extinction of the human race. But this search for answers is also what makes us. We must know, even if it spells our doom, just as the male Black Widow spider must mate even though it spells his doom.
Be it radio and TV signals beamed into space, gold anodized plaques with our return address attached, or the many government and non-government programs designed to search the heavens for signs of life, if there is intelligent alien life, then someday contact will happen.
Despite Hawking’s warnings, the search continues. Contemplation of alien life has moved up from popular films to peer reviewed journals, “one of the sacred pillars of the scientific edifice” (Goodstein, 2000). Experimental studies and computer simulations suggest (Xie et al., 2010) that the cosmos is brimming with life-friendly Earth-like planets in the near cosmos. NASA and other space agencies have an ambitious program for the discovery of living planets under the name PlanetQuest (NASA, 2010). These include the current Kepler Mission, which has already launched and achieved data (Borucki et al., 2010), and the future Terrestrial Planet Finder mission, which is slated for launch in the near future. We are making serious scientific efforts to discover if aliens exist, what they may be like, and on what planets might they live.
Perhaps we should pay heed to the findings detailed in a Brookings Report written nearly a half a century ago (Michael, 1961): "anthropological files contain many examples of societies, sure of their place in the universe, which have disintegrated when they had to associate with previously unfamiliar societies espousing different ideas and different life ways; others that survived such an experience usually did so by paying the price of changes in values and attitudes and behavior." History has taught us there may be a price for the search for knowledge. And the anthropological record is replete with deadly encounters which led to the demise of those who were not prepared or equal to the challenge, such as the Neanderthals’ encounter with modern humans 30,000 years ago. However, we see no reason why we should be more afraid or less afraid this time than in the past.
In the space between paranoia and speculation, lie the clues we can pursue by diligent anthropological, astrophysical, and biological detective work, which may enable us to conceive and to prepare for the inevitable contact with intelligent aliens. In the process of this search for answers we may discover our own self just as an infant seeing its own image in the mirror marks the first step in the child’s identification of its "self" (Lacan, 1968). It has been said that we are defined by what we are, and what we are not. Otherness, what is alien, can also be a mirror that leads to self-discovery. Unresolved questions of our own origin and development may be fruitfully explored while working on shadowy aliens. The trope of alterity that the alien offers is a bona fide muse (Mack, 1994). Albee’s masterpiece "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" is a story replete with symbolism which speaks to the illusions which bind human relationships, but which are destroyed by the discovery of a son’s existence. The "discovery" leaves them devastated – the original believers and nonbelievers alike. So too might the discovery of alien life devastate believers and non-believers alike. This is a price that throughout history, humans have been willing to pay, and it is this search which defines us and distinguishes us, as human.
Stephen Hawking says, “To my mathematical brain, the numbers alone make thinking about aliens perfectly rational” (Hawking, 2010). Even if aliens are nonexistent or there is no hope of contact, may the illusion continue – it serves us well.
11. Stephen Hawking Is Wrong. Earth Would Not Be A Target For Alien Conquest. Harold A. Geller, Ph.D., George Mason University, USA
On 25 April 2010 Stephen Hawking was widely quoted as saying that our species should not try to talk to aliens (Leake, 2010). As detailed in the Abstract to these commentaries, Hawking is quoted as saying that “if aliens ever visit us, 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.” It should be noted immediately that there are several flaws in the Hawking analogy to the invasion by White men of the Americas. The motives of the invading Whites would be nothing like those of aliens who might contact Earth.
European explorers and Native Americans, in the days of Columbus and today still, were of the same species, Homo sapiens sapiens, which consists of males and females. Inevitably, sexual relations were a natural consequence of contact, and which produced viable offspring. Furthermore, both have the same physical, chemical, mental and intellectual attributes which mark both as human. Aliens from another planet outside our solar system will most likely not be of the same species as that of Earth. Humans killing humans poses a decidedly moral dilemma (Washburn, 1957). Aliens killing humans, or humans killing aliens may also pose a moral dilemma, but then it may not.
Humans kill for sport, and for access to resources. Competition for scarce resources leads to conflict. But would aliens, as Hawking's envisions them, be interested in the same resources which are of value to the humans of Earth?
The probability that intelligent beings from another star system would share a common biology, chemistry, psychology and sociology with humans might be infinitesimally small. Therefore, it would be unlikely they would compete with humans for sex partners, as the biological purpose of sex is reproduction. If alien biology and chemistry is significantly different form humans, not only would they be unable to reproduce offspring with the humans of Earth, but they may not be interested in the same resources.
For example, whereas humans consist of right handed sugars and left handed amino acids exclusively, such is not likely (p=0.25) to be the case with alien species assuming they use sugars and amino acids (Zubay, 2000). Would Hawking's aliens also use ATP as their cellular energy transfer molecule? Although this is not a determinable likelihood, but if not, then it can be assumed that Hawking's aliens would not be interested in preying upon and consuming humans or other animals or vegetable matter as an energy source. Why would an alien species bother with our cellular bodies?
Furthermore, if the alien species has, as Hawking states “used up all the resources from their home planet,” why bother to traverse interstellar space for these resources? The resources available to the alien species are much more likely to be available on other planets in the alien’s home solar system, and can be acquired at a much reduced energy cost.
But Hawking may insist that the aliens have used up all the resources in their star’s system. However, if Hawking's aliens are sufficiently intelligent to exploit all sources of energy, including from their sun, wouldn't they also be intelligent or wise enough to plan ahead for the future so they do not consume all their energy sources? And if they did not plan ahead, how is it then they would have enough energy available to supply a fleet of giant space ships to travel across interstellar space to far away and distant planets?
An expedition, or alien armada targeting Earth, also implies that the aliens knew years in advance that another star system exists which would be ideal for them. However, if that were the case, then they would logically immediately disperse an expedition to that star system and not use up their own system’s resources first. While this may be analogous to the colonization of the Americas here on Earth, the time required to cross interstellar space is not analogous to the time required to cross the Atlantic Ocean, even in 1492. This appears to lead to a circular reason for any space travel by such a civilization, and it ignores the energy requirements of space travel itself, which have long been known (McNutt et al., 2002).
Research into the energy requirements of interstellar space travel has determined that energy efficient mechanisms must be developed which require at the very minimal, an energy equivalence to fusion reactors, or even better, anti-matter reactors (Crawford, 1990). Such energy efficient mechanisms for propelling space craft interstellar distances would likely be fueled by some form of hydrogen or one of its isotopes. This leads one to believe that the largest requirement of an interstellar alien species would be hydrogen or some isotope thereof. Why go to another star system just for hydrogen, the most abundant chemical element in the universe? It is simply not reasonable that such aliens would traipse about the galaxy just to pilfer the puny resources of a tiny planet laden with such heavy elements when it is the lightest most abundant gasses they would most likely require. As to the possibility Hawking's aliens might desire heavy metal elements such as would be found on a planet like Earth, these same elements could be produced as the byproduct of a fusion engine, the very source of energy which may be used by any space faring alien civilization (Crawford, 1990). In fact, as far back as 1986, Michael Harris of the University of Texas suggested that gamma-ray telescopes could be used to search the skies for the exhaust of interstellar spacecraft, as the exhaust would most definitely include gamma-ray radiation (Harris, 1986).
Then there is the energy of the sun. Our galaxy is estimated to contain at least 500 billion stars. Andromeda is believed to consist of over a trillion suns (Mould, et al., 2008). If it is the energy of the sun they require, then given the rather small stature of our sun, and the greater abundance of more desirable and larger stars, it would seem the Earth and our solar system would not be of interest to alien invaders.
Thus, it would appear that Professor Hawking is needlessly worrying about invasion and conquest by aliens. Also, it is way too late for any ban on communications which might be intercepted by extraterrestrial intelligences. This planet has emanated radio frequency electromagnetic radiation in all directions for the better part of a century. If there were an alien species listening within 50 light years or so, and if they were capable, they will be here soon enough. And if they are able to make the voyage, they won’t do so to get a natural resource that they can easily produce from nearby stars, hydrogen gas, or the very engines that bring them to this planet.
12. Evolution and Alien Visitors From the Stars, Rhawn Joseph, Ph.D. -Emeritus, Brain Research Laboratory, Northern California.
NASA REACHES OUT TO ALIENS:
In 1972 and 1973, NASA attached a pair of gold anodized aluminum plaques to the Pioneer 10 and Pioneer 11 spacecraft, in the hope they would be intercepted by aliens. The plaques featured a nude male and female, along with several symbols designed to tell extraterrestrials about humans and the location of the Earth.
In 1977 NASA sent a complex recorded message to the peoples of other planets: the Voyager Golden Record, which was attached to the Voyager spacecraft. This was NASA's way of saying to Aliens: "hello!"
So far, Aliens have not responded.
REACHING OUT TO PREDATORY PLANETS?
If there is complex ET life, is it a bad idea to make our presence known? Are we announcing to predators: "Come and get it?" or to would be conquerers: "We have a great planet, why don't you kill us and make it your own?!!"
If "aliens" are anything like humans, then perhaps we should be afraid, very afraid.... for the likelihood is they would conquer, destroy, exploit, and enslave.
And if they came in peace, the likelihood is the humans of Earth would attack them and seek to conquer, exploit, "study," and enslave...
ARE WE ALONE?
Some scientists believe life exists only on Earth. Others such as Beer, King, Livio, and Pringle, propose that life in the universe is rare. Nobel Laureates Svante Arrhenius and Francis Crick, and esteemed scientists including Lord Kelvin, Hermann von Helmholtz, Sir Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe, are of the opinion that life may be pervasive throughout the cosmos. This is also the view of this author: the genetic seeds of life swarm throughout the cosmos and life arrived on the early Earth buried in planetary debris; the possible remnants of the parent star which gave birth to our own (Joseph 2009a,b; Joseph and Schild 2010a,b).
If these theories are correct, life may have taken root and evolved on innumerable worlds much older than our own.
Or perhaps ET life is limited to microbes, or ET does not exist at all.
From the perspective of a hypothetical ET, maybe what has taken place on this planet is so common and mundane, there is no motivation to communicate with a world that is just like a trillion other planets swarming with human-like creatures. Or maybe the humans of Earth are so violent we have been cut off from the rest of the cosmos, isolated, like a disease.
The nature of life, is death, over 99% of all species have become extinct. If the history of the Earth were a 24-hour clock, fully modern humans have been on this planet for only 15 seconds. Unlike other animals, humans flirt with species-wide mass suicide and mutual self-destruction. The human animal can also become extinct. Maybe this is what the future has in store.
If human life evolved on other worlds, perhaps they are no more; self-destructing in poisoned planets or the nuclear fires of their own making. Maybe this is a pattern throughout the cosmos: humans evolve and destroy human-life, bequeathing their planets to insects and microbes: the end.
...And before the universe could take a breath, they were no more.
EXTRATERRESTRIALS: WHERE ARE THEY?
Given our own curiosity as to life elsewhere in the cosmos, it is certainly conceivable that some of those who have evolved in the more ancient corners of the cosmos might be interested in and quite capable of not just observing, but visiting the Earth. If that is the case, it might be asked, then why don't they announce themselves and open up lines of communication?
Perhaps, like good anthropologists they merely observe and gather information, and for the most part leave Earthlings to behave largely unmolested. Speculating wildly, maybe it is even against some type of Cosmic law. Or there is little or no motivation to visit a world that is just like a trillion other planets swarming with violent, sex-obsessed, power-hungry human-like creatures.
Or, perhaps the humans that evolved on other worlds self-destructed in the nuclear fires of their own making. That is, life appears, undergoes metamorphosis, humans emerge only to destroy human-life, the end.
As humans have a propensity for exploration, curiosity and the seeking of knowledge, it could be assumed that those aliens who have reached a similar or advanced level of neurological development would, like Earthlings, share similar social- emotional, and intellectual inclinations, including curiosity, jealously, and pride. Regardless of differences in physical appearance, some advanced alien species -at least those who have evolved from mammal-like creatures- would likely behave, feel, and think in a manner grossly similar to human earthlings.
For example, like humans, it might be expected that some aliens would thirst for knowledge, or revel in games, sports, competition, conquest, exploitative acquisition, and the glory of rape and slaughter of war. Like modern humans, some aliens would be conquering, enslaving, predatory killers, with little or no compassion for the vanquished. Some aliens might be expected to behave in an irrational and destructive manner, whereas yet others would be seekers of knowledge, wisdom, and spiritual growth.
It is naive, however, to believe that radio or TV transmissions are a yardstick for the measure of intelligent alien life. Highly creative, artistic, talented, and intelligent humans sporting a brain 1/3 larger than modern humans, stalked the Earth over 30,000 years ago. Without benefit of radio, TV, or electricity, Neolithic cultures built Stonehenge, the ancient Egyptians erected the pyramids and in ancient China the "Great Wall." The ancient Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Mayans, and peoples of India, and so on, developed science, culture, religion, and created monumental buildings, temples, and empires--all without the benefit of radio, TV or vehicles which could propel them through space. The failure to detect electronic transmissions or space craft from other planets does not mean we are "alone."
Moreover, on some worlds, highly intelligent species, with an intellect comparable or far superior to humans, may have "evolved" from mammals other than primates, such as wolves and canines, or even insects or plants. Indeed, there may be "dog stars" where upright Canis sapiens sapiens stare into space wondering if they are alone; and planets blooming and buzzing with highly evolved intelligent vegetable and insect life.
On some ancient worlds, mammals may never have evolved, such that the metamorphosis of increasingly intelligent life arose from a completely different branch of the forest of life. The direct line leading to hominids may have been killed off due, perhaps, to that planet's unique environment, climate, atmosphere, gravity, and distance from the sun, and/or because the planet passed through a viral cloud of contagion or was struck by massive debris which chopped off the branch that would lead to primates just before that branch began to bloom.
EVOLUTION IN THE ANCIENT CORNERS OF THE COSMOS
Consider, as a further thought experiments, the future of human evolution on this planet. If science marches on, and given advances in genetic engineering, the creation of designer babies, designer babies designing their own superior babies, future humans which genetically engineer their own brains and bodies... and imagine the nature of human life 1000 years from now. What of humans a million years from now? Or a hundred million? Or a billion? Then what of those planets which shine in the darkness of night which were formed billions of years before the Earth became a twinkle in god's eye. If life evolved on these ancient worlds, what might they be capable of as compared to the humans of Earth?
From the perspective of modern humans, these evolutionary advanced alien humans might seem as gods, even if they were still humans. And modern humans might seem like reptiles in comparison. Indeed, even the "gods" may have "gods" who have "gods", and if some of these "gods" are devils and if they ever set their alien eyes on planet Earth, Hawking's nightmare vision could become a hellish reality.
How to evaluate these “cosmological” responses by mainstream science
1. Scientific incompetence – As previously stated by Examiner.com in Scientists at UK Royal Society ET conference unaware of extraterrestrial presence on Earth, these mainstream Cosmology scientists seem largely unaware that extraterrestrial civilizations are visiting Earth at present, and ignorant of the empirical evidence for their presence. A summary of this empirical evidence is available here and here. Clearly the “canon” of science excludes any information outside of the 20th century paradigm that humanity are the only higher intelligent species in Earth’s immediate environment.
2. Paul Hellyer’s vision – Paul Hellyer continues to be the only statesman who has spoken out about the dangers of interplanetary war the U.S.-U.K. military-intelligence establishment seems to be carrying out.
Although other former government officials have come forth to affirm the extraterrestrial presence, none have publicly expressed concern about space weaponization and space warfare against ethical extraterrestrials.
3. Stephen Hawking - Examiner.com has expressed its opinion of Prof Hawkings statements in:
Hawking: A U.K. psyops to promote space weaponization and a false war against extraterrestrials?
Why is Hawking affirming time travel theory and appearing ignorant of DARPA secret time travel?
|
Note: Permission is granted to include extracts of this article on websites and email lists provided a link is included to the original. This article is copyright © and should not be added in its entirity on other websites or email lists without author's written permission. For permission please contact: exopolitics@exopolitics.com |
Comments
d
I'm sure all of these scientists are very nice men and informed scholars, but
I just have to smile, except for Paul Hellyer, and those who agree with his evaluation, their thinking, as well intended as it is, is just so linear.
I would just like to ask them all, isn't it a slippery slope? If you believe life exists elsewhere in the galaxy, then you must believe there would exist more that one species. And if there's more than one species, it stands to reason there would exist civilizations that defy the bounds of our imagination.
And the "opposable thumb" thing, that's a good one. Amazing how they got us all to buy that, when most of the world believes in a higher power that created the human race. Right now it's called "religion," but what if it turns out to be real science?
When I think about the "in the box" thinking of some of the above gentlemen, I'm reminded of a show I saw about production of ducks.
i'll finish in next post . . .
The ducks were in a clean pen, fed well, they could mate and have little duck friends. But they were oblivious to the fact that there's a Chinese restaurant in Jersey somewhere, or that there are animal-right's activists, or anyone in between.
Oh, but I forgot, we are man the supreme. Masters of our universe.
I think the ultimate wisdom is realizing you don't know everything. Thanks for reading.
all this was plagiarized from The Onion right? ;D
great article, Thanks
This makes me just question, why now? Why hasn't any scientist approached the subject of dangerous aliens from outer space in a serious world wide media blitz before now? The implications as to why now, are pretty interesting, considering all the UFO sightings at night, day, all over the world in plain site for years...Who knows what the reality is? For all we know we could already be under control conquered etc by aliens for centuries...Think your free, that you have free will and a clear view of reality, take another look, because your only fooling yourself...This is pure propaganda and Hawkings should be ashamed of himself, what a sell out, he must have needed some PR because he has not come up with much of anything in a decade or so to give him publicity...Never the less, his guess is just as valid and good as anyone else, and honestly if the Bad conquering "Aliens" are more technically advanced than we are, we can kiss out human butts goodbye...
Dr. Michael Salla, the EXOfantasist, invented the Exopolitical News Department, and this justifies our growing skepticism.
There are NO NEWS in Exopolitics, so, Salla will need all his imagination and "anonymous sources" to invent these"news"
Curiously, Alfred Webre is not included in the staff of ExoNews.
Well, each one invents the aliens he/she likes best. James Black created a blog about Exopolitical And Extraterrestrial News. Enjoy, the EXO Circus offers new "attractions" but of course, never true aliens.
People of the Earth.
Prepare for War against the Vampiric Aliens.
Some contacts with the Mercenaries of Algol guarantee that we will be able to fight and defeat the Invaders.
Aliens go Home
The Solar System belongs to HUMANITY.
Down with Extraterrestrial Imperialism.
Earth Defense Command
If there are alien Outposts visiting us then their own secrecy speaks volumes about them.
We can be friendly, BUT;
It is absolutely correct and sane to be wary of newcomers.
It is even MORE correct and sane to be wary of those who have operated in secret FOR WHATEVER REASON.
But a widespread BELIEF in UFOs (whether real or not real) can serve the interests of those who want us distracted for other reasons.
And some had said Hawking was imitating a Movie in his remarks. So I went to netflicks and got and watched INDEPENDENCE DAY. (good flick by the way).
They're right, Hawkings comments are almost verbatim the PLOT of that movie. Aliens looking for resources come to Earth, are Hostile and travel on HUGE Interplanetary ships.
Sorry. His comments are BS and obviuosly have some kind of agenda. But to qoute a Friggen Movie???
These are pretty simple and obvious truths .
Look, the TRUTH is -- THEY ARE ALREADY HERE. In fact, been dictating a newspaper for over 20 years. See WWW.PHOENIXMATERIALS.ORG / CONTACT NEWSPAPER.
SEE WWW.ZETATALK.COM
Come on guys, where in the hail have you been?
Look under the constellation Scorpio every night they change their position. They are on a giant craft called the "PHOENIX".
They are from the PLEAIDES.
There is LITERALLY A PARTY GOING ON OUT THERE AND EVERYONE IS PHILOSOPHIZING AND POSTULATING IF THEY EXIST OR NOT. OR --- IF THEY ARE GOING TO EAT US IF WE ALLOW THEM INTO OUR SPACE. WHAT A BUNCH OF BUNK.
We make the mistake of judging aliens based on the conduct of humans on of this world . We refer to human beings as intelligent life, but perhaps we are the bottom of the galactic gene pool and our fear of aliens is rooted in the fine examples of war, famine, greed, exploitation and selfishness humans of this world excel in. It could just be that we are the aggressive ones to be evaded.
Talk about beating a dead horse...
Are we simply incapable of taking Hawking's concerns for what they are? The possibility does exist for bad aliens as much as it does good. It is beyond argument, or as a political play toy, to deny.
It will be those life forms that are competitive, if not aggressive, that survive to evolve onto higher levels. They will be the product of the same universe that spawned humanity.
We would be foolish not to consider the traits of our own species when preparing for contact with another one.
Stephen Hawking is a great example of why I have almost no respect for modern science or the majority of scientists endorsed therein. It takes no courage to tow the company line.
Christopher Columbus did NOT discover America. He plundered and pillaged the small island that we now call the Dominican Republic and Haiti; an island that ironically has continued to be plundered and raped, most recently a victim of a space based weapon, HAARP.
The integrity of Paul Hellyer speaks for itself, and he need not a title declaring his honourable status for humanity. He is honourable for speaking up and out consistently regarding a matter whose implications are quite serious and lasting for humanity.
Space based weapons are already in use.
Why is it that we can send a rover to mars but we cannot stop an oil spill from gushing thousands of gallons of oil per day into the Gulf of Mexico? (13 days and counting) The ET's might help us.
Maybe if we throw out our tv's we can discover th
The space aliens all look like John Travolta and they're going to bore us to death with $cientology and second-rate science fiction.
Sorry Dr James Madison,
Went to your Phoenix site. It is FULL of Masonic symbols and the typical "galactic federation' type BS. Nothing new here move on.
D Graham,
I agree when you say we can rover the Moon and Mars but can't deal with an oil spill. Oil spills and the potential for them have been there a long time, It's hard to believe that there is absolutely NOTHING that is practical. Another example: We can operate on a tiny blood vessel and remove a clot, or transplant hearts and lungs and now even faces. But NO PROGRESS in the spill area. Right!
An ongoing spill would seem to act in this Administration's favor given their agenda. Chaos from Oil spill, Chaos from economic havoc (which they continue), Chaos from huge illegal immigration, chaos from a supposed nuclear Iran etc..
Further, Many of you here as well as the author are asking that people "Just Believe" without any concrete proof.....Like the Angels dancing on the head of a Pin. Both are useless w/out proof.
I read Hawking interview and he is right when the first white man come to the new world they were treated like gods. The native had no idea there lives were so filled with living. People in this world are getting stagnate they know we are visited everyday; they also know we are being lied too and misled.
Questions to ask you’re self why would you come to a world that kills its own lies, attempts to keep others from knowing.
Human mind is developing and growing we are looking for the real meaning of purpose. When we look up in the night skies not everyone is scared. We want to know what is really out there and most of all where did we come from other then a slug or a monkey.
Our governments are the ones that are scared if they did make there presence known to what point would world leaders lose there control that’s there fears.
In hopes that that day we make the right choices on how to welcome and/or defend our selves. Weapons for defense are good to have but useless they have p
Hawking needs to shut his computerized ass up and just die. He is no longer needed, wanted nor respected anymore by anyone. Wasn't he relevant in the 70's and 80's? His time is up.
For every bad ET, there is a good Et. Has Stephen Hawking for gotten that he opened the two part episode "Decnt" from StatTrek The Next Generation? If Hawking believes we Shouldn`t becontacting ET`s,then not only is he lloking in the wrong end of the telescope,we earthlings would have been eaten, canbalized and we would all be dead by now!
Stephen Hawking is barking up the wrong tree! If these Et`s were all bad, unethical, melevolen,etc, etc,we would all be conqured, canabalized,eaten, toasted and dead by now!
“The reality is that they've (extraterrestrials) been visiting Earth for decades and probably millennia and have contributed considerably to our knowledge. Microchips, for example, fiber-optics, they are just two of the many things that allegedly — and probably for real — came from crashed vehicles," Defense Minister Hellyer, easy to say where is the proof? Wishful thinking perhaps
and where does his authority and knowledge of such matters come?
When second guessing what another race will do with abilities above our own, history has shown we can't guess what humans will do Prof. Stephen Hawking is no fool, and when an intelligent man
offers advisable caution I find it prudent. We could have used that type of advise for off shore drilling, and you can wager that the US government knows more than they are telling, and people believe them everyday...
...Rome burns. All the talk of good vs bad Ets and them giving us ICs and by association i-Pods etc., is ALL Speculation. EVEN if they are "here".
Without proof it is like talking about Angels and such....and as such doesn't really matter for us at this time.
There are many other important issues that we should be working on. Not the least of which is the Grab for power of the Bankster Elites. So let's get to work on a REAL threat.
Many good comments here, the "spirit" of some comments leads me to think there's a misunderstanding of the type of life that may come from a completely different world, a different atmosphere & perhaps different physics (some the same, some maybe NOT), not to mention the "cultural" differences! Not being able to either see or accept these differences & clinging to the paradigm that all that might be out there should be analyzed from a Human perspective, this is, well... childish!
This is called anthropocentrism (or measuring anything new or not understood, based on our Human experience).
Mr. Hawking's comments are perhaps the most uninspired revelations I have ever heard from someone so revered. Comparing Columbus to meeting North American natives is also very adolescent (IMHO). I mean... shouldn't we compare apples to apples instead of apples to Moba fruit? Please give this some thought? Thank you!
Yikes! Microchips and other advances came from Space Aliens?!?!? What a load of tommyrot. Any engineer knows the tech progression that lead to the chip began with transistors. As for the position of Professor Hawking, I'm inclined to agree that on the top of any planet's ecosystem food chain, you aren't going to find any biological wimps. They will be by nature predatory & agressive beings.
Our governments have been in contact with ETs for years. Much of our technology is reverse engineered from theirs. For science and the government to pretend that they don't know anything about ETs is laughable. What a farce. I am not certain why the public believes these outrageous statements from 'scientists' like Hawkings.
Is this a satirical newspaper or are you guys for real? You sound like lunatics
@ Dr Weird,
It's not our blood they want - they're not vampiric. It's our women!
Tell you one thing - they're not getting the TV!
Scoby, these guys are all lunatics in need of a head examination. I think they all watched too much X-Files and thinks there is some sort of conspiracy to hide alien existence. Those are signs of a mental disorder. Alfred here is a fraud that tries to get attention by attacking a well-known and respected scientist.
DJamil, if you don't believe in science, why don't you try to jump out of a 20 storied building, I bet you that the "scientific" concept of gravity will be all too real. You are a typical example if an illogical, paranoid and delusional man, a ripe target for fraudsters like Alfred here to recruit.
Watercooler,
Of course there's no evidence of ETs etc.. But if you can't tell that Dr Hawkings words are equally wacked out, then you are no follower of science. But are instead guilty of a kind of 'hero' worship.
We have eaten most of the edible species on this planet and we have destroyed many life forms. We are engaged in a deadly battle with other life forms that are able to compete with us for control of the planet - insects. Having observed our behaviour towards these life forms any intelligent alien civilization will refrain from contacting us since they would expect us to eat them or destroy them.
(C) HUDSON.NET.NEWSWIRES (redistribution cleared with HNNEWS credit)
Hawking Alien Invasion Comment "Drive-By Science" Says R&D Engineer
by Clarence Cleary
The world has had time to digest the latest pontification from eminent physicist Stephen Hawking, but what they didn't know is that the man who claims to have sold more books on physics than Madonna has on sex is prone to make "quips" that are less science than they are satire. So says noted research and development engineer Marshall Barnes who has published a new article about Hawking's proclamation that we shouldn't broadcast signals into outer space for fear that alien armadas could arrive and be as about as good for us as Christopher Columbus was for the Native Americans.
(Read the full story at the topix.com space forum, extension T8QGD5N7VV5B8KNRC )
thanx for this article -- tweeted and facebooked
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!