Quote:
Originally Posted by Laurent Quinn Proper
Believing another intelligent civilization millions upon millions of light-years away would come all the way to our planet simply to destroy us is completely ludicrous to me. A civilization that intelligent and advance would have no need for violence and would almost certainly not have someone so reckless and barbarian represent their existence. Instead I imagine they are looking for other intelligent life to learn from one another. Acknowledging that we are not alone in this vast and seemingly endless universe seems much more important that conquering at this point.
|
are you ever out of touch with reality.
1. you assume in their space travel they are specifically planning to come here. did columbus plan "oh, i'm going to go to the new world and kill all the annoying indians"? no. explorers venture into uknown territory, thats what exploring is. an alien species may have no idea who or what lives on earth before coming near it. that said, they might, (i would think they would scout it out from afar first, though most likely not from their home planet, all things considered...) we don't know any of this because we've never met any extraterrestrial species.
2. you improperly assume that there is a correlation between technological advancement and morality. the examples i can use to enforce this are myriad because we have such little knowledge about extraterrestrial species. an extraterrestial species could have achieved heightened technological advancement within (or even because of) what we see as an immoral or amoral system. as i have already said, perhaps the moral system of our visitors would call for our destruction, to protect our planet. as well as i have already said, it is also improper to assume that all members of an extraterrestrial species share the same moral system, if any at all. are we meeting scientists? traders? military? a combination? slavers? an amoral predator species hidden among our own? the possibilities are endless and there is no reason for you to assume level of technological advancement is intrinsically correlated to a moral system.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Laurent Quinn Proper
Those who kill another human are those whom are unfit in some way or another. Whether it be psychically, psychologically, or morally and so they hardly represent every one of us.
|
really? i'm sure somewhere in your ancestry there is an individual who fought and killed in some conflict. was he mentally unfit? if a man kills his child's killer is he mentally unfit? why does killing a human make one unfit, but killing animals doesn't? to that point - man may be animal to an extraterrestrial species. to claim that all who have taken lives are in some way unfit is not accurate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Laurent Quinn Proper
These people wouldn't govern a civilization with the sufficient power brain to develop space crafts and telecommunication devices that could travel the light-years warrant to cause bodily harm to another civilization.
The resources needed to travel and then destroy a civilization are far too vast and irreplaceable for someone looking to "kill annoyances".
|
the rest of my post already covered this.