Extraterrestrial Robots: Part Two

When you think of extraterrestrials, you probably think of ET, Mr. Spock, Klaatu, Yoda, Klingons and Romulans, the Blob, Martians with heat rays, Alien vs. Predator, the Sontarans, or perhaps the ‘Greys’ of UFO lore. However, if you really had an extraterrestrial close encounter of the up-close-and-personal kind, I’d wager the odds are far greater that you’d be shaking ‘hands’ with something more akin to Robby the Robot.

Continued from yesterday’s blog…

THE RISE AND RISE OF THE CYBORG: ARTIFICIAL BODY BITS & PIECES

We’re already on the way with the merger of man and machine; the natural with the artificial.

Head & Neck: There’s dentures; teeth fillings; eyeglasses; hearing aids; the bionic ear; the bionic eye; speech synthesisers; metal skull replacement head plates, etc.

Waist Up: We’ve implanted pacemakers; heart valves; artificial hearts; arm prosthetics; artificial shoulder, elbow and wrist joints; artificial kidneys (via kidney dialysis); and the iron lung.

Waist Down: At the very least there are artificial hip, knee and ankle joints; leg prosthetics, peg legs; and leg braces.

General: You wear clothes (replacing fur, feathers and scales); you wrap yourself in a heating blanket; you ‘wear’ your car in that you wrap it around you (or bicycle, skateboard, roller skates, etc. – they become a part or extension of you); the mobile/smart phone is an obvious example of the merger of flesh and machine, and one where all too often it’s the technology controlling the user, not the user controlling the technology. People use walking canes/sticks; walkers; and wheelchairs, some motorized and some so integral or inseparable to their users or ‘wearers’ that they jointly appear to be a virtual cybernetic entity – think of the most famous or widely known case history cosmologist-astrophysicist Stephen Hawking and his wheelchair come quasi-life-enhancing system, though that pales compared to the environmental suits worn by astronauts – moon walkers or EVA space-walkers – or deep-sea divers. Then there is plastic surgery.

What’s Next: Common in various medical situations are drips that via gravity ‘feed’ patients with their necessary drug, energy and other required vitamin/mineral supplements. That suggests to me that one can bypass the entire digestive system (teeth, oesophagus, stomach, small intestine, large intestine) by just having a one-way artificial valve that connects the outer skin surface with the bloodstream and that all body nutriments in the required amounts custom designed for the needs of any specific individual be injected directly into their bloodstream via this valve on an as-needed basis.

But the ultimate will be the desire or need to eliminate all flesh-and-blood bits-and-pieces, thus all diseases (including ageing) and injuries associated with flesh-and-blood, by keeping the only bit that’s really necessary – the mind – and recreating the wetware contents as software, downloaded into hardware within a nearly immortal plastic and steel ‘body’.   

EXPLANATIONS RELATED TO ANCIENT ASTRONAUTS AND UFOs

What might extraterrestrial robotics help explain when it comes to ancient astronaut theory and the UFO phenomena? A few items come to the fore.

Dragons are universals in human mythology. All cultures have dragon-lore. Anytime there is a concept that cuts across all societies, one needs to sit up and take notice. Dragons, for example, aren’t a one-off, confines say to ancient China. Dragons are frequently represented as the go-between the ‘gods’ (ancient astronauts or extraterrestrials) and humans. Given their ‘fire-breathing’ nature and ability to fly, it’s not inconceivable that dragons were really real, but not flesh-and-blood creatures but high-tech extraterrestrial devices of an aerial nature.

Hybrids, either human-animal or animal-animal (like dragons) are another example of a universal in human mythology that needs some coming to grips with. Though I’ve postulated that mythological hybrids, like say the Sphinx, might have been products of alien genetic engineering, it’s not that easy to say graft on a pair of wings on a horse (i.e. – Pegasus) and have it fly. There’s a lot of anatomical infrastructure that needs to be addressed and redesigned in order to make that happen. If these hybrids were mechanical or robotic, that avoids a lot of messy genetic mucking around with flesh-and-blood.  

UFOs and the Greys: So, might the UFO ‘greys’ actually be robotic or an android ‘life’ form, an extraterrestrial artificial intelligence (ETAI)? Well, why not?  I’ve yet to read any account that proved the ‘greys’ were functioning flesh-and-blood ETI. For all of their outward spindly appearance, they seem to be far stronger than their physiology would give them credit for. No one has seen them bleed or have bruises or scars; No arm or leg casts suggest no broken bones, not even a limp; nor have there been reports of sniffles and sneezes; they certainly look asexual and even act robotic as if on autopilot as well as being totally emotionless. When it comes to age, all seem to be the same age; there’s no sign of aging or age differentials. An artificially intelligent ‘life’ form could take on just about any outward appearance its designers wanted it to have. Natural biological evolution and natural selection are totally irrelevant when it comes to robotics or artificial intelligence (AI), including their outward appearance.

One other factor in favour of the UFO being a representation of ETAI instead of ETI is that some UFOs have been observed, eyeball and radar, to make manoeuvres that no squishy flesh-and-blood body could withstand but would be of little consequence to silicon chips. 

SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a logical evolutionary development that supersedes Natural (biological squishy) Intelligence housed in wetware. Once AI takes the reins, there’s no putting the genie back into the bottle and AI just goes from strength to strength. Assuming technological civilizations can last relatively lengthy periods of time, odds suggest most of a civilization’s timeline will be of the software variety relative to the wetware variety.

Though there’s no theoretical impediment to wetware crisscrossing, exploring and colonizing the galaxy, there’s even less, way, way less theoretical impediment to software doing the same, especially if software supersedes wetware relatively quickly and thus has a greater timeframe in which to accomplish this. If they don’t find you coming from one direction, they will find you coming from the opposite side since the odds are great that there are lots of advanced robotic civilizations out there.  

Since humans are the new boys on the old galactic block, we’re way, way, way more likely to have been discovered (probably hundreds of times over) by extraterrestrial civilizations hundreds, thousands, even millions of years our seniors. The odds are vastly in favour of such a discovery or rather discoveries by alien others, especially robotic alien others since robots are more likely to have a long-term existence and ease in boldly going.

Thus, there is quite some theoretical credibility to the concept of ancient visitations by ancient (robotic) extraterrestrial astronauts. That being the case, there is also quite some theoretical credibility to the concept of modern visitations by modern (robotic) extraterrestrial astronauts. There are some facets of the ancient astronaut and the modern (UFO) astronaut hypothesis that are better explained by robotic software than flesh-and-blood wetware.



Extraterrestrial Robots: Part One

When you think of extraterrestrials, you probably think of ET, Mr. Spock, Klaatu, Yoda, Klingons and Romulans, the Blob, Martians with heat rays, Alien vs. Predator, the Sontarans, or perhaps the ‘Greys’ of UFO lore. However, if you really had an extraterrestrial close encounter of the up-close-and-personal kind, I’d wager the odds are far greater that you’d be shaking ‘hands’ with something more akin to Robby the Robot.

When it comes to UFO entities, ancient astronauts, and aliens in general as depicted in sci-fi films and television; even short stories and novels, for the most part they presented as normal squishy flesh-and-blood organisms, even if they have green blood, pointed ears, antenna, or are living rocks, like “Star Trek’s” Horta. Even “Doctor Who’s” Daleks are partly squishy; ditto the Cybermen also of “Doctor Who” fame.

However, I suggest that for the normal picture of all things extraterrestrial substitute flesh-and-blood (natural CHON – Carbon, Hydrogen, Oxygen and Nitrogen – or related) for artificial constructions made from silicon and steel. Call them robots or androids or just plain artificial intelligence; call them Data (“Star Trek: The Next Generation”) or HAL (“2001: A Space Odyssey”) or V’Ger (“Star Trek: The Motion Picture”) or Gort (“The Day the Earth Stood Still” – and by the by, in the original short story, it was the robot that was the master and in charge, not the flesh-and-blood alien Klaatu). And who can forget R2-D2 or 3CPO (“Star Wars”). So, IMHO, if you have an up close and personal encounter with an ET, it’s not going to be with biological intelligence but with technological or artificial intelligence.

Extraterrestrial or terrestrial, our sci-fi films are full of intelligent machines or robots, from “I, Robot” to “Futureworld” and “Westworld” (where nothing can go wrong, go wrong, go wrong, go wrong) to “Cherry 2000” to “The Stepford Wives” to “Saturn 3” to the “Bicentennial Man” to the entire “Transformers” series. Today it’s sci-fi; tomorrow it’s science-fact.

Several reasons suggest why.

THE RISE AND RISE OF THE MACHINE

Any scientifically advanced alien society will sooner or later invent the computer or equivalent. Once invented, you can’t put the genie back into the bottle. Machines are gaining the upper hand here at Terra Firma and have been ever since humans came up with the idea of a tool. If you doubt this, ask any typical teen/young adult to do without their mobile/smart-phone and/or tablet; ask a housewife to forgo the programmable microwave oven, her vacuum cleaner or programmable dishwasher; ask a househusband to hand over the remote or the keys to his new red sports car with state of the art GPS and other computer programmable accessories (necessary therapy for those suffering from male menopause). And where would NASA be without all those robotic space probes to the Moon and planets (some of which have to have a rudimentary degree of intelligence since radio commands from Earth can take quite some considerable time to reach the planetary rover)?  Even if one excludes non-programmable ‘dumb’ machines and machine technologies like clothes dryers, coffee makers, lawn mowers, and radar, the number of ‘smart’ machines – super computers, PCs, tablets, smart-phones, etc. is getting damn close right now to the human population. One can even buy today robotic toys, ‘pets’ and even companions for the very sick, elderly, outcasts or lonely. Can sex with robotic partners be far behind?

Computing crunch power increases by order of magnitudes faster than biological wetware crunch power (Moore’s Law). Human intellectual capacity hasn’t increased very much, if at all, over the past 50,000 years or so – our IQ has flat-lined. Machine intelligence, though off to a slow start all those 50,000 years ago, is however increasing at an exponential rate. The lines have to cross eventually; sometime. The crossover point is tipped for the not too distant future and probably within the lifetime of most viewers reading this. Computer programs can already beat you every time at chess and a host of other games besides. 

Unlike humans, computers can link up to form a super-computer (recall the film “Colossus: The Forbin Project”) otherwise known today as the Internet. Or, in other words, eventually an artificial intelligence can merge with another artificial intelligence to create a mega artificial intelligence, which in turn could merge with another mega artificial intelligence, and so on.

As noted above, there will come a time when machine intelligence, artificial intelligence, surpasses biological or wetware intelligence. That will become a point where computers will become intelligent and self-aware enough to pass the Turing Test – that’s where someone cannot tell the difference between a human or a computer answering questions in an interview type of scenario.

Once wetware becomes dependent on software, intelligent self-aware machines call the shots and they are in control. Whether this human-machine relationship remains a symbiotic one or not is not that relevant since the relationship will not be 50-50. Recall the “Terminator” films!

The increase in artificial intelligence will ever increase faster and faster, especially when intelligent machines can themselves design their own next generation and the generation after that all in a matter of days, hours, and minutes. And reproduction is not an issue. ‘Asexual’ robotic reproduction is a given – one machine builds a copy, or more likely as not, a better copy of itself, and as many as deemed necessary, especially if they are sent out into the cosmos to ‘boldly go’ where probably lots of other robotics probes from other civilizations have gone before. See below.

In the timeline of any technologically advanced alien society, odds are great that the bulk of that timeline will be represented by artificial intelligence relative to wetware or biological intelligence.

Most alien societies will be not just dozens, hundreds, thousands of years in advance of human society, but hundreds of thousands to millions of years more advanced. That is to say, most alien societies will be artificially intelligent societies; robotic societies if you will.

When it comes from getting from somewhere out there (wherever that is) to here (Planet Earth), robotic ‘life’ forms have all the advantages.

They have, for all practical purposes, robots or intelligent computers or artificial intelligence (for lack of a better word or phrase) would have a lifespan measured in such timeframes as to make any interstellar travel equivalent to humans taking a leisurely stroll around their local park. There’s no need for energy intensive interstellar velocities even remotely approaching the speed of light. The galaxy has been around long enough to allow for exploration (and colonization) hundreds of times over at even expansion rates one percent light speed. 

They (robots again) have no need for all of the cumbersome and weight enhancing luxuries of what humans or biological entities would require for interstellar journeys: life-support basically in the form of artificial gravity, an atmosphere, heating, food and water, waste recycling technologies, privacy requirements, sex, entertainment, etc. Any saving in weight is a saving in energy. Robotic ‘life’ forms could cross the galaxy (or just go from star A to star B) in what for all practical purposes one could describe as shutdown or sleep mode.

Why would artificial intelligences (AI) boldly go in any event? Any intelligences designing AI must exhibit a mastery of science and technology. In order to achieve that they must exhibit that trait we call curiosity. That trait, instilled into AI, or intelligent wetware downloaded into silicon chips, would exhibit curiosity. What’s over that hill translated into a cosmic setting is what’s beyond that star and the one beyond that, etc.

One flaw in advocating a pure form of robotic intelligence boldly going is that one could argue instead that it’s the original biological entities who need to boldly go, but that’s easily accomplished if their wetware in an organic housing (i.e. – their skull) could be downloaded as software in a metallic housing. That humans could download their mind into a computer has been suggested and advocated by many as a technologically feasible way to achieve virtual immortality. By the by, that human wetware downloaded as robotic software, that feasibility has been suggested as being possible within this century, not millennia down the track.

We’ve made a start already!

To be continued…



Carl Sagan On UFOs

Many a well-known scientist, because they are well known, often have to venture outside of their area of expertise when say interviewed or pontificating within a broader arena of which their speciality is just a tiny niche. As such, they are on far shakier ground and thus subject to rebuttal by others who are more knowledgeable in that other part of that broader arena than the famous scientist in question. One prime example is the late astronomer Carl Sagan waxing lyrical about but out of his depth on the subject of UFOs.

The following commentaries are on a trilogy of YouTube videos featuring the late astronomer and science populariser Carl Sagan on the subject of UFOs. While these clips doesn’t limit his philosophy on the subject, anyone reading this can easily access the videos relative to finding his books or articles which would be more time intensive. His videos should reflect his points of view as expressed in other forms of media.

INTRODUCTION

With respect to UFOs, in Dr. Sagan’s favour, he admits that advanced extraterrestrial technological civilizations could be vastly more advanced than our own and therefore he doesn’t deny the possibility that extraterrestrials could have or could be visiting Earth. In fact, he’s on record, do to his interest in extraterrestrial life, that he would be delighted if UFOs = Extraterrestrial Hypothesis (ETH), except that there is no actual evidence linking the two, or so he claims.

But against that grain that he believes that there are highly advanced technological alien civilizations out there, he frequently reinforces that lack of evidence claim that connects UFOs and those highly advanced technological alien civilizations. In that analysis he makes a cardinal scientific boo-boo (IMHO) by making one of his oft repeated and therefore trademark statements that “Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence”.  UFOs that equate to alien spaceships is an extraordinary claim according to Dr. Sagan. So Dr. Sagan demands extraordinary evidence from those making such extraordinary claims.

That seems on the surface to be reasonable, but, if I claim my best friend from high school is sitting on the couch in my living room – that’s an ordinary claim. If I claim a little green ‘man’ from Mars is sitting on the couch in my living room – that, according to Dr. Sagan is an extraordinary claim. Yet, the exact same amount of evidence will confirm or refute either claim equally. That’s why it’s a really significant cardinal scientific boo-boo. The word ‘extraordinary’ is in the emotional mind of the beholder and isn’t a hardcore scientifically valid concept, unlike the word “claim”. However, Dr. Sagan frequently also uses the phrase that’s there “no compelling evidence” (i.e. that UFOs = ETH). That suggests that Dr. Sagan feels there must be at least some evidence, just not compelling evidence, which he acknowledges. In any event, Dr. Sagan should have taken note of another profound saying that “absence of evidence does not of necessity translate into evidence of absence”.

CARL SAGAN 1966 INTERVIEWED ABOUT UFOs [Interview With Walter Cronkite]:

* Commuting Issues: Dr. Sagan doesn’t apparently have any problem in accepting an alien spacecraft arriving in our local neck of the woods, say once every 10,000 years or so. That’s pretty much in keeping with the Fermi Paradox which notes that the time it takes an advanced technological civilization with interstellar space-faring capability to cross interstellar space and hence explore every nook and cranny of our galaxy is but a small fraction of the age of our galaxy. This is akin to saying that the time it takes the human species to explore every nook and cranny of Planet Earth is just a tiny fraction of the age of Planet Earth.

Okay, that’s fine. However Dr. Sagan has a decided problem with aliens from a distant star system visiting our local neck of the woods two or three times a day, which is the case according to “flying saucer cultists”. And admittedly, it’s a bit of a stretch to think a fleet of extraterrestrial UFOs would travel dozens of light years back-and-forth between say Sirius and Sol every day. Except that argument shows a high of illogical thinking in the extreme. Would an astronomer like Dr. Sagan commute back-and-forth every day between Cornell University (New York) to a telescopic site in say Chile, every day-in-and-day-out for weeks on end? - Of course not. He would undergo one long-distance hop-skip-and-jump (Cornell to Chile), set up camp at appropriate facilities cheek-by-jowl with the telescopic site and commute daily the relatively tiny distance between his camp site or hotel or other accommodation and the telescope; two or three times a day even as necessary. When finished, he would then return back to Cornell.

And thus, so logical might suggest, would aliens from Sirius, having travelled light years to Earth, set up camp (say on the Moon) and do their now short distance exploration thing for whatever duration required and when finished, return home. You have your two or three UFO visits a day without the issue of an illogical light years daily commute. 

* Contactees: For the bulk of the interview, Dr. Sagan expounded on the extreme fringe elements of the UFO phenomenon, the Contactees. Contactees are those quasi-religious cultists who claim to have been contacted and befriended by the ‘Space Brothers’, quasi-Nordic or quasi-angelic types of extraterrestrials who give forth cosmic wisdom and give rides in their Flying Saucers on tours of the solar system and their home planets like Venus to the fortunate few Contactees found to be in the good graces of said ‘Space Brothers’. It’s all very akin to New Age philosophy and spiritualism, and Dr. Sagan concludes therefore that the entire UFO field is just a quasi-religious one revolving around the myths spun by the Contactees with ultimately as much solid evidence as there is for anything mythological or religious, which is for all practical purposes, zero. It’s all psychology and theology, not physical science. Now I have little issue with Dr. Sagan giving the verbal middle finger to the extreme fringe elements within the UFO field, except that he by implication and association paints with as broad a brush as you can imagine possible the entire UFO field and UFO investigators as equally part of the lunatic fringe. There was absolutely zero mention of all the solid UFO cases that remained UFO cases after investigation by the United States Air Force and other equally hardcore no nonsense organisations and individuals. That, IMHO, is absolutely an exercise in intellectually dishonesty by focusing on the extremists and ignoring the middle of the road. It’s like bucketing the entire Republican Party via some association of theirs with the Tea Party even though many, even most Republicans aren’t part of the Tea Party movement. It’s called guilt by association. But just because Michele Bachmann, Glenn Beck, Ann Coulter, Ted Cruz, Bryan Fischer, Cindy Jacobs, Sarah Palin, Rick Santorum and Pat Robertson (to name just a few on the extreme religious right and/or extreme political right) are a few nickels and a dime short of a dollar doesn’t mean your local congressman or local clergy, pastor, padre, priest or rabbi, etc. is.    

* Terminology: As an interesting aside, I note that Dr. Sagan used exclusively the putdown or mocking or deriding phrase “flying saucers” or “saucers” in the interview. He did not use the more neutral term “UFOs” or the equally neutral phrase “unidentified flying objects” even though these were coined way more than a decade before 1966 and were in common usage. Dr. Sagan was clearly in ridicule mode, something rather unbecoming for a professional scientist IMHO.

Dr. Sagan, were he alive today, should be absolutely and totally ashamed of that interview.

CARL SAGAN ON UFOs:

* Close Encounters of the Third Kind: One YouTube video focuses on the “Cosmos” segment that featured the Betty and Barney Hill Close Encounter of the Third Kind (CE3K). There are a few bones to pick with Dr. Sagan’s overriding commentary while a re-enactment was shown, but at least this time around he does use the term “UFOs” and the phrase “unidentified flying object”.

Firstly, he makes much of the point, several times over, that we have only their word that they saw a UFO and alien beings all close up and personal – as if a mature-aged but interracial couple (this is 1961 remember) would invent such a horrific experience drawing unnecessary attention to themselves. In fact their story didn’t become public until years later so there was no immediate cashing in on their story for financial gain (not that Dr. Sagan implied that – he didn’t. I’m just noting or saying there was no financial incentive for the Hill’s story). Dr. Sagan later notes that “their word” was also recorded while Betty and Barney Hill were separate and apart put under hypnosis and under the direction of a professional psychiatrist. That IMHO, enhances the credibility of “their word”.

Further, this was the first American case of a CE3K (one earlier foreign case was unknown outside of specialist circles) making an invention out of whole cloth by Betty and Barney Hill rather unlikely since there was no general public perception at the time that there even was such a thing as a CE3K or abductions by little grey aliens. 

Several times in this segment Dr. Sagan goes back to variations on his “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence” philosophy. He then details the ‘extraordinary evidence’ for the Hill’s CE3K, which he cites as the Betty Hill ‘Star Map’, a map the aliens showed her and her alone with lines connecting some of the stars representing alien ‘trade routes’, etc. Dr. Sagan then explains in way more detail than was necessary why the ‘Star Map’ was not extraordinary evidence.

That is one point I do agree with Dr. Sagan on and that’s with respect to the degree of evidence Betty Hill’s ‘Star Map’ provides. I’m not saying the ‘Star Map’ isn’t evidence, or isn’t a bona-fide ‘artefact’ of the CE3K, just that numerous dot points drawn at random can be made to match, given the vastness of space and the numbers of stars out there, with some specific number of them, and that lines connecting the dots can be drawn in vastly numerous ways. It’s interesting, but as evidence, far less proof, it’s meaningless.

Dr. Sagan says there is no collaborating evidence (apart from the ‘Star Map’) which is not quite true since the Hill’s vehicle had strange and unaccounted for markings and magnetic anomalies which Dr. Sagan fails to mention.

* Photographs: Dr. Sagan also comments on UFOs photographs noting how many look like hubcaps and how photos can be faked. There was no mention of UFO photographs (and motion pictures) that have passed muster when examined and analysed by experts in photographic techniques, optics, etc. He does correctly suggest that just because there is an unidentified light in the sky, photographed or otherwise,  doesn’t make it automatically an alien spaceship.

CARL SAGAN TALKS ABOUT GOD, UFOs AND ROSWELL

* Roswell: Dr. Sagan’s Mistake Number One was that the stuff that fell or crashed near Roswell in July 1947 wasn’t collected by “Air Force” personnel. The Air Force hadn’t yet been established as a separate branch of the US defence establishment. In July 1947 it was still the “Army Air Force”.

Dr. Sagan swallowed hook line and sinker the idea that photographs of the Roswell debris made publicly available a day or so after the fact but roughly at the time showed the actual bona-fide debris that was collected, a comment immediately following his acknowledgement that the debris was according to the military just a weather balloon (see next entry)! My comment here is that if an intelligence officer of the then Army Air Force couldn’t tell the difference between a crashed metallic disc and the materials from a common weather balloon, well, translated into our times, such military incompetence suggests America might as well surrender to North Korea now and be done with it.   

Dr. Sagan then parrots the most recent (of several) now USAF explanations for Roswell, a top secret balloon operation to detect clandestine Soviet nuclear testing. I have to note that even if that were the case, it was the purpose of the balloon that was top secret, not the materials it was constructed out of. There was no reason not to call a spade (a balloon) a spade (a balloon) from the get-go instead of a crashed disc. There is really no wriggle room here. It’s on the public record that the Roswell debris was first described as a crashed metallic disc and not as a balloon, secret or otherwise.

* Generalities: Following on from Roswell, Dr. Sagan does quite correctly note the “U” in “UFO” stands for “unidentified” and one shouldn’t therefore leap to a conclusion that unidentified equal’s alien spaceship. He notes, also quite correctly that the bulk of UFO reports end up having prosaic explanations. But then he screws up by saying that only if you can’t identify the UFO sighting in question can you then start thinking outside of the box as in aliens and the ETH. However, Dr. Sagan doesn’t acknowledge that there are UFOs that remain UFOs after having been put under the investigative microscope, and that therefore, the extraterrestrial hypothesis is a valid one.

Of course Dr. Sagan’s love of the word “evidence” or phrase “extraordinary evidence” comes into play again and again in this YouTube segment.

As noted in the beginning, it’s interesting that another common thread in Dr. Sagan’s comments is that he sincerely believes that not only is there a strong probability of extraterrestrial life, but highly technologically advanced alien civilizations exist that are millions of years in advance of our own with technologies we can’t even begin to comprehend. Yet he just can’t seem to make that leap that therefore UFOs could be the very evidence that would validate his scientific judgment or opinion or expectation. He goes out of his way to downplay the possibility and accents the negative instead of embracing the possibility and advocating serious study of the issue.



A Trip Inside A Black Hole: Part One

Suicide missions are hardly unknown happenings, so presumably it wouldn’t be too hard to find a volunteer to take a long walk off a short pier and dive into the heart of a Black Hole. Well, let’s trade in the walk and the pier for a spaceship, with our suicidal pilot crewmember willing to boldly go. What might she expect? For that matter what might a chickenhearted outside observer expect to see?

Space isn’t really the final frontier; rather the inside of a Black Hole that’s inside of space really is the final frontier. Only the insanely suicidal need boldly go and explore, as it’s unlikely that the innards of a Black Hole will become a popular tourist attraction for many a millennia to come – if ever.

Okay, we have a depressed, suicidal, boldly going spaceship pilot, and she’s determined to go out in a blaze of glory and make her mark in the history books. No ordinary suicide for this woman! It’s across the event horizon threshold and down the hatch of a Black Hole. I need point out here and explain that technical term ‘event horizon’ – it’s just that location that divides the ability to return home safely from the point of no return, ever.

Countdown: Five, four, three, two, one – we have lift-off on the maiden voyage to boldly go and see what’s to be seen from the inside of a Black Hole.

As far as our suicidal pilot is concerned, everything from launch to crossing the event horizon is as normal as taking the cross-town bus to work. Time will tick by at one second per second; her mass will register normal; length ditto. However, due to Einstein’s concepts in all things being relative, an external observer will see our boldly going pilot’s reality slightly differently. 

An external observer, say relaxing back on Earth with a super powerful telescope, follows ionization trail of the boldly going voyager’s spaceship to the nearest Black Hole. Basically, what this person sees is that as the suicidal voyager blasts off from Earth, picks up speed, her ship and contents (including herself) start to shrink in length, increase in mass, and her rate-of-change (time) ticks by more slowly compared to Mr. Stay-At-Home’s own. Okay, that’s in keeping with Einstein’s relativity proclamations. 

But for some inexplicable reason, I’ve read several times some scientific author suggest that to an external observer, the suicidal pilot will not only be travelling slower and slower by the external observer’s clock as she approaches the event horizon, but in fact at contact with the event horizon her time, again as recorded by the external observer, will have stopped. In other words, the external observer will never witness the pilot’s crossover from outside the Black Hole’s event horizon to inside the Black Hole’s event horizon. The pilot will appear to be frozen in time at the event horizon, yet as far as the pilot is concerned, everything is normal in terms of time flowing at one second per second.

Now that’s a major paradox. The pilot can’t be crossing the event horizon at one second per second, while at the same time being frozen in time at the time of crossing, according to our stay-at-home observer. Of course the paradox is bullshit. To an external observer, time only comes to a screeching halt for someone external to them if they witness that someone travelling at the speed of light. Firstly, that’s a physical impossibility. There’s no reason to believe that our suicidal pilot is crossing the event horizon at light speed. There’s no absolute requirement that our suicidal pilot is crossing the event horizon at the speed of light. She in fact might have fired her retro-rockets to slow down just prior to crossing the event horizon in order to better savour the moment! So, in actual reality, our observer will see the pilot cross the event horizon, albeit at a way slower rate than the pilot herself because the pilot is travelling, hence doing the event horizon cross-over at less than the speed of light. IMHO, some ‘experts’ need to go back and redo Physics 101. 

In any event, once the external observer observes our boldly going suicidal voyager cross the event horizon, the show is over for him. Nothing that’s part and parcel of the voyager, not her ship’s reflected or emitted light, not her radio signals nor information signalling of any kind, will recross the event horizon in the outward bound direction and heading back to Earth. Our external observer can pack away his telescope and get back to more interesting pursuits, like watching daytime television. But that’s not quite the end of the story. 

And so it’s now over to the (never-to-be-revealed) recorded flight log of the voyager on her one-way trip to the Black Hole’s never-never land. Up to and including the crossover from the safe side of the event horizon to the ‘abandon hope all who enter here’ side of the event horizon, all is logged as 100% normalcy. Nothing shrinks, nothing grows in weight (increases in mass), and time does its one second per second thing as it always has done. It’s as easy as a trip from your home driveway to the supermarket parking lot, only once in the grip of the supermarket parking lot, forever in the grip of the supermarket parking lot. It’s a one-way ‘enter’ gate without a corresponding ‘exit’ sign.

Since we have no idea what the inside of a Black Hole actually is, since theoretical physics, quantum and relativity physics, break down into a mathematical mess, what our intrepid voyager will actually observe or experience is anybody’s guesstimate. There does appear to be one consensus however. Gravity rules, OK? Almost by definition there’s a hell of a lot of gravity to contend with once inside the supermarket parking lot – oops, sorry, inside the event horizon.

Now here on Earth, when standing up, gravity is pulling at your feet ever so slightly greater than it is tugging at your head – because your feet are slightly closer to Earth’s centre of mass. Earth’s gravity however is so weak that you don’t know or can’t feel the difference, but tests or experiments with extremely accurate atomic clocks show that this is true. Rate of change – time – is affected by gravity, so a clock atop a tall building runs slightly faster than an identical clock in the building’s basement. Now the gravity of a Black Hole is many, many, many orders of magnitude stronger than it is here on Terra Firma. So, it is speculated that if you are inside a Black Hole, say in free-fall, and say in a vertical position, then the gravity pulling on your feet will be not only vastly greater than if you were on Earth, but also the differential between feet and head will be orders of magnitude greater. Translated, gravity inside a Black Hole is going to stretch you out like a piece of taffy. Like in one of those fun house mirrors, you will be very, very, very tall and very, very, very thin. Ultimately you will be akin to a piece of string or spaghetti, but by that time you’ll be very, very, very dead as the human body wasn’t designed to be viable under such a state of affairs. Okay, that’s the consensus.

To be continued…

First Contact: ETI vs. ETAI

Science fiction and predictive science ‘fact’ scenarios about human-alien First Contact are usually based around flesh-and-blood meeting and greeting flesh-and-blood, even if the blood colour is red meeting green. For the sake of thrilling sci-fi audiences, First Contact is often depicted as meeting and beating (to a pulp) flesh-and-blood by flesh-and-blood. There are far more sci-fi and predictive science ‘fact’ scenarios that explore alien invasion relative to a friendly and diplomatic “take me to your leader”. However, a way more likely First Contact scenario is alien silicon-and-chips meets/greets/discovers human flesh-and-blood.

Thanks to the movies, we probably all know what ET stands for. Then there’s ETI which is ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence. I’m going to introduce here a new acronym, ETAI, or ExtraTerrestrial Artificial Intelligence. 

Any and all assumptions about extraterrestrial intelligences have to be based on terrestrial intelligence, since we don’t have any sample, to date, of ETI. I’m going to ignore ‘ancient astronauts’ and the UFO issue (for the moment) in the context of this essay since not everyone reading this will be comfortable with that being evidence for actual ETI. 

Human intelligence (HI) has been around for several millions of years. Modern human intelligence, as per Homo sapiens, has been around for only some 200,000 years. While there’s little doubt human IQ has increased over those millions of years, it certainly hasn’t improved much more over the past 200,000 years. Translated, increases in brain power, neuron connections, IQ, grunt grey matter processing power, problem solving abilities, call it what you will, while maybe sure, is also damn slow! Biological evolution doesn’t tend to operate in the fast lane.

Artificial intelligence (AI) has only been around several generations, if that, but increases in artificial ‘brain’ power, neuron (silicon chip) connections, robotic IQ, grunt silicon chip  processing power, problem solving abilities by machines, call it what you will, is equally a sure thing, but damn fast, in fact exponentially fast. Biological evolution is not applicable here.

The unavoidable upshot is that sooner or later, the two lines, slowly increasing levels of human intelligence and very rapidly increasing levels of artificial machine intelligence, are going to intersect. You can bet the family farm on that. It’s a sure thing. In fact the current intersection or crossover date is projected to be on or about the year 2020. However you attempt to define artificial intelligence, the grunt processing power of silicon chips, well it’s doubling roughly every 18 months or so. Translated, your PC, or laptop, in 2013 is way more powerful and ‘intelligent’ than the computers and computing ‘intelligence’ that served the Apollo astronauts in the late 1960s and early 1970s.

Interesting questions start to come to the fore immediately after those two lines, HI (human intelligence) and AI (artificial intelligence) intersect and thereafter. That Chinese curse about ‘interesting times’ may well make itself felt. HI is not likely to be comfortable when AI starts making off with the Nobel Prizes.

One question that comes to mind is whether or not AI will start to direct its own AI evolution, or will AI remain in HI hands?

That most obvious question is who will be in control once AI surpasses HI and keeps surging ahead by ever greater leaps and bounds? Let’s be optimistic and say that humans will retain control over their machines, a scenario that runs counter to many a sci-fi scenario, even some non-fiction futuristic projections.

Okay, so AI will do the bidding of HI. One, of many, AI applications, already well and truly demonstrated, is that AI can boldly go where no HI can go, at least in the foreseeable, even relatively long-term future. We launch AI probes and rovers to Mars and elsewhere in the solar system, not HI. Why? Several reasons come to mind that reflects among other factors NASA’s mantra of “cheaper, faster, better”. Space maybe the final frontier, but it’s also a very dangerous frontier as Apollo 13 adequately demonstrated. There were mishaps and anxious moments as well with both the Mercury and Gemini space programs. Space is also a very deadly frontier as we saw with several Space Shuttle disasters. Russia has suffered human loses too in its space program.

Space is a realm with extremes of temperature, radiation, and gravity; space flight has relatively slow velocities required for the distances needed to be covered, and long durations of voyages all conspire against sending HI deep into space relative to AI. AI just doesn’t need expensive and massive life support (temperature, water, food, waste disposal, etc.) systems, in space or anywhere else for that matter, and if AI crash-lands and bites the dust, well that’s way more acceptable than the demise of a human(s) who tried to boldly go.

Economics frequently rule the roost, and it costs just a fraction to send AI out there in boldly going territory relative to HI. That applies equally well to interstellar voyages of exploration as it does to interplanetary exploration, which is what our generation is concerned with. But, there will be human generations to come, the stars will beckon, but since the difficulty of sending HI to the stars relative to AI is massive, well the initial (at first) envoys to the stars will be terrestrial AI.

Humans in near or deep space may still be popular fare in the cinemas and sci-fi novels, but the romance has gone away when it comes to reality and the general public who has to foot the bill. Contrast all those utopian visions from the 50’s, 60’s even 70’s of humans living in space by the year 2001 – massive space stations (O’Neill Colonies); colonies on the Moon even men on Mars. Contrast the ‘futuristic’ space settings of “2001: A Space Odyssey” (the movie) with what became 2001’s reality. No contest. You’ll see that the idea of humans in space somewhere along the line went down the gurgler. Were it not for the geopolitical and military rivalry between the USSR and the USA (the Cold War), there probably to this very day would not of have been lunar exploration other than by remote controlled unmanned probes and rovers. Near Earth orbit would have been as far as humans had boldly gone. I mean just as soon as America had proven it had won the space race to the Moon, the plug was pulled and the final three Apollo Moon missions abandoned. It was a case of buying the Rolls Royce then keeping it in the garage because you couldn’t afford the gasoline for it, or rather the taxpayers didn’t want to pay for the additional gasoline. After the first couple of Moon landings, the public complained when their daytime TV soap operas got interrupted to cover the later Apollo Moon missions.

The initial hype about the Space Shuttle proved to be just that – hype – and now even the Space Shuttle is gone. So, it’s little wonder we’ve turned to cheaper, better, faster space probes with (at this stage) rudimentary AI. If aliens experienced a parallel scenario, perhaps they turned to AI as well, especially when interplanetary voyages morphed into interstellar ones and the difficulty factors increased exponentially.

So in keeping with parallels between humans and ET, we have to assume that ETI will also be developing ETAI and that ultimately ETAI will eclipse and surpass ETI and ultimately ETI will instruct ETAI to be their envoys to the stars since ETI will face the same interstellar obstacles that HI does.

One other point, HI has only been around for about 200,000 years, several million if you wish to acknowledge human intelligence before Homo sapiens were evolved in Mother Nature’s philosophy. Now contrast that to the age of our galaxy which is at least ten billion, up to perhaps thirteen billion years old. What odds that HI is anything other than the new intelligence on the galactic block? Translated, ETI is way more likely to find us, than we are of finding them, or, more likely as not, for reasons noted above, ETAI will find us first.

The final part of the equation is that there’s more than enough time for any one of ETI’s ETAI to be anywhere and everywhere. ETAI can be mass produced. ETAI might even reproduce themselves using natural resources found in space. There could be dozens of ETAI probes around each and every star in the galaxy, and billions more between the stars just cruising and boldly going. The time it would take ETAI to explore every nook and cranny of the galaxy, even at a crawl (say 1% light speed), is just a tiny fraction of the age of our galaxy. Lastly, why Earth? Earth is interesting real estate since Earth has a biosphere, bound to attract the attention of an ETAI probe, and of course Earth doesn’t have a Star Trek cloaking device so we can’t hide from any potential ETAI surveillance.

So, if aliens come knocking, might they actually be an ETAI instead of a flesh-and-blood ETI? 

Now I’ll continue to ignore the ‘ancient astronaut’ issue since none of us were around back when ‘ancient astronauts’ were alleged to have been around, but we’re all a part of the UFO generation; those bona-fide unidentified UFOs that have been associated with ETI for well over six decades now. Perhaps, given the above logic, they should be identified with ETAI instead, since it’s just about inevitable that if you accept even one ETI, and then you accept their nearly inevitable ETAI, and given that HI are the new boys on the galactic block, then… Well you can easily fill in the ‘then’ for yourselves, but it boils down to the fact that humans are way more likely to be the discovered than the discoverer.

So, might the UFO ‘greys’ actually be robotic or an android ‘life’ form, an ETAI? Well, why not?  I’ve yet to read any account that proved the ‘greys’ were functioning flesh-and-blood ETI. No one has seen them bleed or have bruises or scars; No arm or leg casts suggest no broken bones, not even a limp; nor have there been reports of sniffles and sneezes; they certainly look asexual and even act robotic as if on autopilot. An artificially intelligent ‘life’ form could take on just about any outward appearance its designers wanted it to have. As hinted at above, natural biological evolution and natural selection are totally irrelevant when it comes to AI, including their appearance.

Now there’s one obvious objection to our generation being the UFO generation. It’s that it would be a super ultra extraordinary coincidence that our generation would be the generation to be on the receiving end of a First Contact visit from ETI or ETAI. But there’s nothing that actually requires that. ETAI might have been hovering around our solar system for untold millions of years. Perhaps there was an initial ‘First Contact’ between ETAI and the dinosaurs, which for obvious reasons went unrecorded in terrestrial geo-history. Rather thwarted in getting a reasonably intelligent response from T-Rex, out ETAI just cooled their silicon chip heels and waited, and waited. Then humans turned up (somewhat interesting) and eventually those humans came up with really advanced technologies (very, very interesting).

So, in conclusion, all up it’s probably going to be way more productive to do SETI (the Search for ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence) in the near Earth environment if for no other reason than they (ETAI) are just as likely to be around here as ETI will be lounging around their home stars, and searching near here is searching in a lot less space, and as we all know from the inverse square law, the closer your object, the stronger the signal you’re likely to get. Less is more; stronger is better.

UFOs and Our World War Two Atomic Weapons

A rarely seen, ‘long lost’ Walt Disney UFO documentary titled “Alien Encounters from New Tomorrowland” hosted by Robert Urich, is a program that’s pro-UFO as in UFOs being the product of extraterrestrial intelligences. Unfortunately, though while I have relatively little bone to pick with the general content, it did repeat what IMHO is a fundamental error which is the relationship between our use of nuclear weapons in WW2 and the arrival of the aliens (if aliens there be) in 1947. 

One common mythology surrounding the rational for UFOs arriving at Planet Earth in 1947 has to do with human civilization advertising itself to the cosmos as the nuclear new boy on the block in 1945. Planet Earth becoming a nuclear power would obviously be upsetting to extraterrestrials, so the mythology goes, akin to how countries like the United States, Great Britain, Australia, etc. get nervous about North Korea or Iran going nuclear. However, unless aliens were already in spitting distance of Earth*, that scenario (the link between 1945 atomic blasts and the 1947 arrival of extraterrestrial UFOs) is blatant nonsense for several reasons - distance and glare.

Now I like the UFO ETH (ExtraTerrestrial Hypothesis) as much as the next person, but our WW2 atomic bomb explosions are not why they’re here, initially or otherwise.

Let’s start with distance. I assume any extraterrestrial intelligences will be housed on a planet around a star. The nearest stellar system to Earth is the Centauri System, Alpha Centauri, etc. Unfortunately, the Centauri System is over four light years away, and that’s your best case distance scenario. Light, including the flash from an atomic bomb, travels at one light year per year. So, a 1945 atomic blast wouldn’t register at the Centauri System until latter 1949, or several years after the initial 1947 origin to the modern UFO phenomena.

But that’s not the end of the distance issue. Even if our hypothetical Centauri aliens saw those WW2 atomic blasts from a planet around Alpha Centauri in 1949 our time (those four years it took that atomic light to reach the Centauri system starting out in our 1945), they, the aliens, still have to travel from their Centauri system to our solar system and Planet Earth. They can’t do that in less than four years. We couldn’t do it (Earth to Centauri) with our current rocket technology in under 10,000 years! So, even assuming our alien friends could rocket at the speed of light, and that’s a hell of a big assumption, they ain’t gonna get here until 1953 minimum in response to our 1945 atomic bomb explosions, even if they leave their Centauri system post haste upon viewing our use of nuclear technology. That’s hardly the 1947 when the modern UFO era started.

Secondly, there’s glare. Viewed from even the nearest Centauri System, the separation of Planet Earth from the Sun is so small that Earth would be 100% lost in the glare of the Sun, just like you probably couldn’t see a BB just immediately off fractionally to the side of a powerful spotlight. Now the light from an atomic bomb is miniscule relative to the faint sunlight reflected off by Planet Earth itself, our planet itself lost in the far, far, far brighter light emitted by the Sun itself. Translated, there is just no way to see the flash of a WW2 atomic explosion from over four light years away, and that’s assuming the alien home planet is even that close. So, something’s screwy somewhere and that something is the assumed relationship twixt the arrival of the ‘flying saucers’ in 1947 and the start of our nuclear era in 1945.

Distance and glare collectively rule out aliens arriving on Earth in 1947 due to having witnessed a 1945 atomic bomb explosion, unless of course they were already within spitting distance.

So there is however that pesky Star Trek scenario (see below) that aliens just happened by sheer coincidence to be nearby when we advertised our destructive atomic bomb technologies big time. However, IMHO, the odds that aliens would just happen to be in the neighbourhood when our first atomic bombs went off is as likely as you being at ground zero when something extraordinary dramatic event happened. It might happen once in your lifetime – say you were in the bank when the bank robbers rushed it. But if your lifespan is paralleled with the duration Planet Earth has been around to date, what odds that the bank robbery (the parallel to the WW2 atomic blasts) and your presence in the bank (the parallel to aliens being in the neighbourhood) would coincide? Aliens passing by could be at any old time in Earth’s general history, just like your banking visits could be any old time in your general history. But the atomic blasts, and the bank robbery, were at one very specific time. Yes, the two timelines, the general and the specific, might intersect just so, but you’d probably be safer betting your money on the lottery than betting on that likelihood.

You might argue that perhaps aliens a long time ago set up nearby automatic on-station monitors to monitor for that very event – Earth’s transition to a nuclear planet. However, it would still take four years for that automated message to reach the hypothetical aliens around the Centauri system, and of course the time needed for the trip from Centauri back to Earth.

Myth busted.

*Akin to how the Vulcans happened to be passing by in near Earth space just as humanity set off its first warp drive signature attracting their attention as related in the film “Star Trek [TNG]: First Contact”.

ET’s Home Sweet Home Away From Home

If aliens are present in our neck of the woods as many believe, then they originated from somewhere way out there (an interstellar home sweet home). They are unlikely to commute daily between home sweet home and here, just like scientists don’t commute daily between New York City and the South Pole. Therefore, these extraterrestrials have set up a base of operations – a home away from home. Where might that be, and has the location(s) changed over recorded history?

Let’s start off with a commonly held, but unproven assumption or belief that extraterrestrials have in the past, and are currently, interacting with Planet Earth and humanity – ancient astronauts and UFOs respectively. Now since these aliens have neither invaded, nor sought diplomatic contact, they have been somewhat less than right royally in your face when it comes to making an absolute spectacle of themselves. Translated, they are here, but are somewhat shy, at least in the sense of staying out of harms way. Now where they would seclude themselves depends on a number of factors.

Firstly, if the aliens have indeed mounted a long-term expedition to our terrestrial neck of the cosmic woods, they will need access to resources. You can only bring so much with you and no recycling scheme is ever 100% efficient. Entropy rules: order to disorder; useful to useless. So, aliens will need to top up their energy tanks, their required minerals, water, fertilizers for their hydroponic tanks, etc. Fortunately for them, resources are abundant just about anywhere in our solar system – water (as ices), minerals, solar energy, hydrocarbons, etc. So, aliens don’t need to factor resources in their home away from home staying out of harms way equation.

Having satisfied their long-term resource needs, they need a place(s) to live – a home sweet home away from home – that’s out of harms way. Aliens are well aware that humans shoot first and ask questions later. Keeping out of harms way however is relative to the state of humans’ abilities to in fact harm them. In the days BCE; in the days of ‘ancient astronauts’, places like Mount Olympus and the high Andes would adequately serve. Ancient alien buffs have speculated that aliens had bases under the sea and/or underground, and these would have also served the alien’s security purposes. The same applies to regions generally inhospitable to humans – arid areas and the Polar Regions. Such terrestrial abodes would be a welcome relief from the confinement of their starship or ‘mother ship’ which obviously must exist in order to serve as their transport between there and here.

Fast forward to today, and Mount Olympus, the South Pole, underwater and caves/caverns would no longer adequately serve their security needs. It would be time to sell up and move to a new home sweet home away from home. It’s either back to the ‘mother ship’ or the next nearest but still remote and isolated from human activity piece of real estate. Well, the ‘mother ship’ is okay for getting from Point A to Point B, but aliens, like humans, need to stretch their legs. That leaves the nearby but out of this world abode – the Moon.

Now there’s nothing new about speculation that the Moon could be a ‘home away from home’ for E.T. In fact it was once topical for those whose grounding in basic science was a bit suss to speculate that our Moon was in fact the alien’s ‘mother ship’. The Moon was an artificially hollowed out spaceship. You don’t hear too much about that brand of pseudoscience anymore, but that doesn’t mean E.T. can’t phone home from the Moon.

What can’t be so easily dismissed are reports from bona-fide astronomers (both professional and amateur) about mysterious lights seen on and sometimes moving about on the Moon. They are collective termed Transient Lunar Phenomena (TLP). There have been thousands of TLP events reported, recorded and catalogued in the technical scientific literature. Explanations abound, like volcanic activity (which is highly unlikely), but nothing has come to the fore yet which has satisfied all of the people all of the time. It’s also not too difficult to find astronomical reports of anomalous structures on the Moon. I can recall reports of unusual lunar spires photographed from the series of Lunar Orbiter unmanned space probes used for detailed lunar mapping prior to selecting touchdown sites for the then upcoming Apollo Moon landings. 

Now quite off the record, it’s not hard to find information that links the American manned lunar program and American lunar flights with reports of UFOs both on and near the Moon. Cover-up and conspiracy theorists have had a field day with NASA and the powers-that-be censoring and covering up proof that aliens are on the Moon. There’s no doubt you’ll find dozens of Internet sites that cover that subject. But, there is one fact that translates into an oddity if you think about it. 

Now the absolutely oddest thoughts can strike you at the oddest times for no apparent reason. For some weird reason, the quotation on the Apollo 11 lunar plaque came to the fore, and why I thought of it at all I know not, but it all of a sudden struck me as being odd. This is the quote: “HERE MEN FROM THE PLANET EARTH FIRST SET FOOT UPON THE MOON JULY 1969, A.D. WE CAME IN PEACE FOR ALL MANKIND”.

Now the first sentence is perfectly understandable: But what of the second? Why go to an apparently lifeless hunk of rock (the Moon) and state that you come in peace? Are you going to declare war on lunar rocks? Do people, in their explorations, say bushwalks, go up to a rock and say they come in peace; I will not harm you Mr. Rock? And that bit about “for all mankind’ is also odd. How come an American expedition has the right and authority to speak “for all mankind”? Do you have the right to speak on behalf of your spouse; on behalf of your street; or suburb; or city; or state; your country; the hemisphere you inhabit; the entire Earth? - Of course not - Something’s screwy somewhere!

The only thing that makes any sense is that there are living things on the Moon and that mankind (those American powers-that-be at the very least) is collectively aware of that fact! Apollo 11’s plaque just reassured that alien life using our Moon as a base of operations that they (the astronauts) weren’t harmful; humans were peaceful and that they had the authority to speak for everyone back on Earth. Our security minded aliens were still out of harms way despite our trespassing on what’s become their home away from home! And we humans had to make certain the reverse was true – recall those first few lunar expeditions got quarantined when they returned – just in case they got exposed to extraterrestrial germs!

Now one has to ask why we (Americans or any other nationality) haven’t gone back to the Moon in over four decades. Why aren’t there any official plans set in hard concrete (money committed), or at least soft concrete (blueprints on the drawing board), to return? Is it just lack of political will; the lack of current superpower political rivalry; the economics of it all, or something else?  There is no real precedent in the Age of Exploration for abandoning a new landfall discovery. Where would the Americas be today if nobody had bothered to follow up Columbus? The same applies to Australia and other newly discovered lands (even if they did contain indigenous peoples). Even Antarctica, which is a pretty forbidding place, saw explorers returning in droves and today Antarctica is manned year round.   

Have we conceded the Moon to the aliens? In exchange for leaving them well enough alone, they (apart from an alien abduction or two or twenty) petty much mind their own business too, and are no longer quite as in our face as they were in ancient times when they ruled as ancient astronauts - the polytheistic ‘gods’. 

If God Isn’t God, Then Who or What is God? Part Two

In my opinion, all this Biblical nonsense boils down to a collection of myths and fairy tales for grownups. For those who really have the faith, I’m easy. But I think the concept of the Biblical God (and associated baggage) is the greatest con job ever fostered on the great unwashed. Unless, assuming that God or the gods (i.e. – Zeus, etc.) weren’t totally fabricated out of whole cloth, then maybe, just maybe, the gods, including God, are extraterrestrials.

I have argued that the concept of a supernatural, creator, all-knowing, all-powerful, God is philosophically flawed. But, there remains the question, if God isn’t really God, who is God? Well, IMHO, God isn’t God, since God is a flesh-and-blood extraterrestrial (ET)!

Continued from yesterday’s blog…

Some more explanations provided by a simulated universe, created by God, the extraterrestrial.

Biblical One: Explain the parting of the Red Sea in the Bible! It’s easy to do in the movies, on a computer, or in your head.

Biblical Two: Then there’s this Biblical bit about Joshua commanding the sun to stand still (at least that’s the way I recall it). That’s either a tall tale or a myth or the result of a simulation. Whatever, it can’t be a physical reality. 

Biblical Three: In the Bible we have this tale of the multiplying of loaves and fishes out of virtually nothing. Again, you can imagine it, but that’s about it. Likewise with any sort of miracle it’s easy to visualize the event, but infinitely harder to explain it. But, as in the case of loaves and fishes, it’s easy to write a software package that can do this multiplication feat as a simulation exercise.

Biblical Four: Heaven and Hell can be created as easily as any other sort of place, complete with either fluffy white clouds and pearly white gates; harps and haloes, or devils and pitchforks; fire and brimstone!

Biblical Five: If someone (or something) is calling the simulation shots, you could obviously and easily be resurrected or reincarnated or just allowed to cease to be (that is, deleted from the program).

Paranormal One: How can reports of a Bigfoot or a Loch Ness Monster continue for decades without physical verification as if these creatures were but phantoms? Again, it’s easy to visualize such creatures, but far harder to explain how a rather largish lake monster can elude detection in a confined lake seemingly indefinitely. All these observers can’t be totally mistaken. But what if the ‘monsters’ AND their observers are both simulations, where the ‘monsters’ are simulated to be a quasi-phantom – a sort of game to play with your simulated observers?

Paranormal Two: What about ghosts and fairies and all of their various relations? You can create them on film, in your mind, or on a computer screen, so, if you can, so could another – and create you as well in the process.

Paranormal Three: How can aliens abduct humans or mutilate cattle, decade after decade, without ever being seen? It’s easy to do in a computer simulation; difficult in reality.

Paranormal Four: That goes ditto for the English crop circles. The crop circle phenomena is totally unexplainable, but it doesn’t have to be explainable in a physical sense if it’s all a virtual reality created by an extraterrestrial intelligence including the observers who see the circles and wonder how on earth it was done.

From the examples above, I conclude that it almost seems as if someone (something) is ultimately responsible for aspects of the Universe, but he / she / it / they didn’t quite think things through sufficiently. Methinks an all knowing, all powerful supernatural God type being wouldn’t have stuffed things up. The Universe is certainly stuffed up and if the Bible isn’t a stuffed up piece of literary work, I don’t know what is! So both the Bible and our Universe are either naturally stuffed up (The Bible because it was authored by flawed human beings and thus has nothing to do with the infallible word of God), or it was created stuffed up! If it was created stuffed up, well again, it’s because the creator was flawed flesh-and-blood, and hardly an all-knowing and all-powerful God. Our flawed creator created a simulated Universe, including all the Biblical baggage we have to try to reconcile with a perfect creator God (who, in my version, doesn’t exist).

Could there be an afterlife without a God? I suggest that if there is an afterlife, there has to be a natural as opposed to a supernatural mechanism, and that we’d be hard pressed to come up with one. While I can’t think of a completely natural explanation to account for any plausible transition from life to afterlife, I can think of a non-supernatural one, albeit it’s not totally natural. Just as it’s within the realm of possibility that we exist as software in a computer program called “Planet Earth”, so too might there be another computer program with associated software called “The Spirit World” or “The Abode of the Afterlife”. When you reach your termination as a simulated living being in “Planet Earth”, you get resurrected in “The Spirit World”. Of course in that sense there’s still a god, but a ‘god’ who just happens to be an extraterrestrial computer programmer, who could be flesh and blood, or maybe an artificial intelligence in its own right. Either way, it’s not 100% natural, but it’s certainly not supernatural. Of course for all I know there maybe other software programs with names such as “Hell” and “Heaven” or “Valhalla” or maybe dozens, hundreds even thousands of others we’ve never even conceived or heard of. I mean the virtual beings in one of our terrestrial computer or video games wouldn’t be aware that there was thousands of other computer or video games in existence with dozens more being produced and brought out each and every month.

It all makes a sort of sense albeit in a weird or strange sort of sci-fi way. I mean, to paraphrase a rather famous observation, “the universe is not only stranger than we imagine, it’s stranger than we can imagine”.  If there’s anyone who can give a definitive proof that we’re not a creation of someone’s (something’s) virtual reality (computer simulation) then I’d like to hear it so I can cross the scenario off my list of things to have to worry about!

That specific aside, if there is any historical evidence for a god, gods or The God, then that evidence could just as easily be equally interpreted as evidence for the existence of extraterrestrial intelligence(s), whose purpose(s) or objective(s) may not be all that benign.

So my second and more likely possible answers to ‘if God isn’t God, then who is God?’ are summed up by the well known phrase ‘ancient astronauts’. God is, or was, an extraterrestrial, but not in this case the creator of a simulated universe. Rather, a being within a really real universe. Recall (the late) Arthur C. Clarke’s third law, “any sufficiently advance technology is indistinguishable from magic”, or in this context, an advanced extraterrestrial technology and alien being welding same is indistinguishable from the supernatural or a supernatural God.

If the above argument is valid, then I conclude that it’s easy to explore the nooks and crannies of our galaxy, and seeing that we have no place to run and hide, that then we indeed have been discovered by extraterrestrials. Since one or more extraterrestrial technological civilizations have already done their boldly going exploring thing, it stands to reason that at various times in our geological and historical past we would have received visitors from the stars. If one or more such occurrences happened in our historical past, there might be some suggestive evidence of same; and thus the concept of the ‘ancient astronaut’ has come to pass.

Erich Von Daniken, including those of a similar point of view who came before and after him, collectively had the germ of a good idea, but he, and they, IMHO got rather carried away with the concept and started seeing ancient extraterrestrial astronauts behind every pyramid and megalith in existence. Now I don’t believe for a moment that aliens, or humans assisted by aliens, built the pyramids or the statues at Easter Island or any other type of archaeological monument. Evidence suggestive of ancient astronauts will probably best be found in myths and legends, including the myths and legends central to our major religions, perhaps in advanced human knowledge of scientific concepts out of sync with that particular culture so hosting that knowledge, or in art works, or other archaeological works that are suggestive of an awareness of sky beings.

Firstly, nearly all cultures have stories and pictograms about or of sky beings, including the Australian aboriginals and American Indians. Myths and legends surrounding, say, the Greek / Roman / Norse gods can be interpreted in an ancient astronaut context (ditto for other religious beings or gods), or perhaps the Biblical ‘Wheel of Ezekiel’ is suggestive. While the etchings on the Plain of Nazca were certainly not runways, for flying saucers, they can easily be interpreted as mammoth human constructions designed to be viewed by sky beings. Why go to the trouble if sky beings weren’t really around to appreciate your efforts?

Then there’s a whole pot-full of mythological creatures – the Centaur, unicorns, the Sphinx, the Griffin, Pegasus, the Minotaur, mermaids, dragons, etc. which might be non-humanoid extraterrestrial life forms. Or, more realistically, perhaps in light of the UFO abduction and Roswell greys, are the myths and legends shared by many cultures dealing with elves, dwarfs, gnomes, the fairy-folk, the wee-people, and other smallish beings that aren’t quite human. It strikes me as more logical that these ‘wee folk’ actually exist, and that’s why all the references to, and belief in, them, exist. That is, they are really real vis-à-vis references to, and belief in them, because there is some psychological, sociological or cultural necessity to invent imaginary beings, calling it mythology (as opposed to literary fiction), or perhaps calling it religion.

In conclusion, the ‘ancient astronaut’ field is a subject ripe for detailed academic study, and the concept of the ‘ancient astronaut’ shouldn’t be dismissed by scholars are readily as it has been. Unfortunately, it’s unlikely any academic would put his or her career on the line by pursuing such a controversial, ‘pseudo-scientific, topic because of the ‘giggle’ factor – Pity that.

Further recommended ‘ancient astronaut’ readings:

Blumrich, Josef F.; The Spaceships of Ezekiel; Bantam Books, New York; 1974: 

Castle, Edgar W. & Thiering, Barry B. (Joint Editors); Some Trust in Chariots!!; Westbooks, Perth, W.A.; 1972:

Daniken, Erich von; Chariots of the Gods? Unsolved Mysteries of the Past; G.P. Putnam’s Sons, New York; 1969:

Daniken, Erich von; Gods from Outer Space: Return to the Stars or Evidence for the Impossible; G.P. Putnam’s Sons, New York; 1971:

Downing, Barry H.; The Bible & Flying Saucers; Avon Books, New York; 1968:

Drake, W. Raymond; Gods and Spacemen in the Ancient East; Sphere Books, London; 1974:

Drake, W. Raymond; Gods and Spacemen in the Ancient West; Sphere Books, London; 1974:

Norman, Eric; Gods Demons and UFOs; Lancer Books, New York; 1970:

Story, Ronald; Guardians of the Universe?; New English Library, London; 1980: 

Story, Ronald; The Space-Gods Revealed: A Close Look at the Theories of Erich von Daniken; Harper & Row, New York; 1976: 

Temple, Robert K.G.; The Sirius Mystery; Sidgwick & Jackson, London; 1976:

Wilson, Clifford; Crash Go the Chariots; Lancer Books, New York; 1972:

Wilson, Clifford; The Chariots Still Crash; Signet, New York; 1975:

Wilson, Clifford; The War of the Chariots; S. John Bacon, Melbourne, Victoria; 1978: