UFOs Not, Because E.T. Isn’t: Part Three

Seeing as how the Universe is some 13.7 billion years old, and seeing as how the current human species (defined as Homo sapiens) has been around for only some 100,000 years (give or take), then I have to ask, is it logical to assume that we’re the proverbial ‘It’? If the answer should prove to be ‘yes’, if terrestrial life and humanity is the be all and end all of life in the Universe, then UFOs can’t have anything to do with extraterrestrials.

Continued from yesterday’s blog…

Longevity third:

Lastly, there’s the issue of longevity. If your neighbours buy up and move in, but then sell up and move out again in less than 24 hours, that doesn’t allow much time to meet and greet them and gossip over an afternoon cup of coffee - blink, and they’re gone. But if you’re both on the block for twenty years, that allows lots of time for afternoon teas, philosophical chats, bridge games, etc. So, how long do technological civilizations last?  

Well, the pessimist will look around and cite global warming, probably antibiotic resistant germs giving rise to pandemics, chemical, biological and radiological warfare and/or terrorism, the extinction of biological species, rampant industrial pollution, and in general an overall quality of life heading rapidly down the gurgler, right down to the point that the human race will probably go extinct by our own hand. But if you’re an optimist, then the sky’s the limit.

It’s not all that obvious that technology actually adds all that much value towards ultimate long-term survival. Lots of technological advancements have, like controlling energy sources such as fire, developing a sustainable food supply via agriculture, the rise of modern medicine and food preservation technologies. But then lots of modern technological wonders, the automobile, CDs, sofas, microwave ovens, and thousands of other consumer products don’t really contribute much to our overall survival – certainly cars don’t when considering the road toll! That brings up the fact that things technological can sometimes work in the opposite direction. Toxic this, pollutant that, nuclear the next thing; then throw in a bit of global warming; the rise of urban city living with overcrowding and in general overpopulation; chemical, biological and radiological warfare/terrorism; instruments of warfare in general, like guns; the overuse of antibiotics hence the rise of antibiotic resistant germs; exposure to electromagnetic fields – well, the list of horrors or potential horrors keeps on keeping on and on.

It makes for an interesting question: would mankind ultimately survive longer had technology never entered the equation, or not? It’s an unanswerable question in that 1) we can’t run the contrary as a controlled experiment, and 2) that the genie is well and truly out of the bottle and there’s probably no turning back now.

Assuming humanity as a collective whole doesn’t end up going the way of the Dodo within the next several generations, even centuries – whether it actually morally deserves to go extinct is another question – then what?.

It’s hard to imaging what human civilization, what humans themselves will be like 1000 years from now. If you could come back 1000 years hence, would you indeed find a human civilization, indeed find recognizable ‘humans’ at all? Once you have evolved to the stage of being a multicellular critter with intelligence and advanced technology, then physics, chemistry and plain everyday evolutionary biology are no longer in control of your evolution. You are now in control! You are in control not only over the future evolution of other species (artificial selection instead of natural selection) but of your own evolution. The age of the designer baby is already here, albeit still in its infancy (pun intended). What will another few decades bring to this now embryonic field; obviously one with an ever ongoing and continuing maturity? 

Humans will probably go kaput within 1000 years, not because of any global nuclear war, or pandemic, or asteroid strike, but because humans have by their own free will evolved themselves into something else, and the process has already started. In fact, it’s possible that in 1000 years time there could be two humanoid species on Earth. One will be an amalgamation of flesh-and-blood plus ‘iron-and-silicon’; the other pure ‘iron-and-silicon’ (artificial intelligence, perhaps in the form of robots).

The first is not too difficult a swallow. Just replace or augment flesh-and-blood bits with ‘iron-and-silicon’ bits (or wood bits, or ceramic bits, or plastic bits, etc.). Look at most pirate films and you’ll see those beloved peg-legs and hook-hands. Do you wear glasses or contact lenses? What about a hearing aid? Perhaps you have an artificial joint(s) or a heart pacemaker. You surely have a dental filling (or two), maybe even dentures. Then there’s artificial skin and all manner of other internal or external types of technology that have replaced your failed flesh-and-blood – like kidney dialysis. There’s now serious talk about the development of a bionic eye within a few years (to go alongside the bionic ear). What further artificial bio-bits will be available in another 20 years, another 50 years, or another 200 years? The era of “RoboCop” or a real life “Six-Million Dollar Man” (and “Woman”) is getting close to fruition.

Within 500 years or so, maybe less, I can envision that someone will be able to download the contents of their brain (their mind) into an ‘iron-and-silicon’ equivalent.  Why? Well, does the word ‘immortality’ (or as close to immortality as makes no odds) suggest a possible reason? You don’t think anything of endlessly replacing worn automobile parts for new parts to extend the useful lifetime of your car. Why not endlessly replace your worn parts? Your mind, that ‘inner you’ housed within your brain won’t last forever. Replace it - transfer it to a more durable technology. Do it again, and again and again as is necessary. In fact, one might create a mega-mind or super-mind by merging into an ‘iron-and-silicon’ body containing a lot of minds (in much the same way as computer hardware can have a lot of operating software programs. By merging the minds of say a cosmologist, general relativist, quantum physicist and mathematician, one might speed up the development of the Holy Grail of physics, the Theory of Everything (TOE) – which is as currently conceived, a theory of quantum gravity. 

Once your mind is contained in an ‘iron-and-silicon’ ‘head’, just attach that to an all ‘iron-and-silicon’ ‘body’. Then boldly go where no ‘iron-and-silicon’ human has gone before. Immortality indeed!

All of which leads to a future Earth inhabited by a humanoid robot species, artificially evolved from today’s human species. That process too has already started - robotic appliances, even artificial ‘iron-and-silicon’ ‘pets’ are now on the market. Research into artificial intelligence is ever ongoing. Watch that final minute of the final episode of the TV revision of “Battlestar Galactica’! How about those sci-fi “Transformers” or “Terminators”, or Data (from “Star Trek: The Next Generation”)? Then there’s “Doctor Who’s” Cybermen or his main enemy, the Daleks (though Daleks are part machine; part organism).

Think of those robots from “Westworld” or the “Futureworld” sequel where nothing can go wrong, go wrong, go wrong, go wrong, go wrong… Then there’s “The Stepford Wives”, “Cherry 2000”, the original Cylons from the original “Battlestar Galactica”, and many more. It might be just science fiction today – could it be science fact tomorrow? There doesn’t seem to be any violation of physics involved. In physics, everything not forbidden is compulsory! However, some of those sci-fi scenarios suggest that perhaps ultimately there might be a conflict between the (part) machines we become, and the (artificially) intelligent machines that we create!

We’re ultimately in control, so a quasi-robotic future isn’t of necessity compulsory. But I suspect it will happen. Why? There are rational reasons for humans deliberately abandoning their flesh-and-blood existence and evolving themselves, if not 100% into ‘iron-and-silicon’ then at least into something part flesh-and-blood coupled with part ‘iron-and-silicon’ – sort of like we have today (recall those now primitive dentures and peg-legs). 

Quite apart from immortality (well quasi-immortality anyway) arguments, its nice having more indestructible bodies and bodies that can be more easily repaired. Death won’t go away of course, not totally – accidents will still happen. Presumably, your mind will be able to absorb 10, 100, 1000 times the amount of experiences, memories, knowledge, etc. than is currently the case. You might be able to explore environments now closed to you, like taking a stroll across the sea bottom – many kilometres down – in your ‘iron-and-silicon’ robotic ‘birthday’ suit.

All of which then opens up the entire ‘boldly going’ experience hinted at above. What’s the hardest part of going to Mars? – it’s the flesh-and-blood frailty of the human body – the need for gravity, oxygen, organic food, water, space suits, and that you can’t carry spare flesh-and-blood parts along.  Extrapolate to our exploration of the entire solar system, then our stellar neighbourhood, eventually the galaxy. Even if you don’t want to go yourself, well, there’s artificial intelligence housed in perhaps nanotechnology bodies, spreading throughout the cosmos like so much a cancer analogy.  

The ultimate point of all of this is that if eventually us (humans), why not them (extraterrestrials) now? Translated, after a relative short period of biological development, a civilization can obtain longevity that evolutionary development into ‘iron-and-silicon’ provides, coupled with far easier expansion into the realm of outer space.

So, overall, UFOs might not be alien spaceships right here and now, because it’s 1) somewhat relatively hard to evolve multicellular organisms (but obviously not impossible); 2) will intelligence tend to have evolutionary survival? 3) Associated advanced technology isn’t inevitable and might even be counterproductive. 4) If counterproductive, longevity is at risk. Thus, Earth, with its multicellular critters and humanity with its technology, might be quite the rare planet within the Universe – according to some.

But, there’s a catch. There’s always a catch. What ultimately undermines the UFO ETH sceptics is that all you need is ONE boldly going, intelligent, advanced technological and long-lived extraterrestrial species and the galaxy is theirs for the taking and we’re in their sights. Few pundits would like to bet against that ONE, given, in the immortal words of the late Carl Sagan, a statistical possibility of ‘billions and billions’.   

Are We the Proverbial “It”? Part Two

Every one and their great grandmother has apparently had a go at, and calculated a value for the Drake Equation (named after radio astronomer and SETI scientist Frank D. Drake). The Drake Equation estimates (guesstimates is actually more accurate) the number of extraterrestrial civilizations in our galaxy that could in theory say “Hi” to us and receive our “Hello” in return by examining all the factors that are part and parcel of that scenario. Seeing as how the Universe is some 13.7 billion years old, and seeing as how the current human species has been around for only some 200,000 years (give or take), then I have to ask, is it logical to assume that we’re the proverbial “It”? Here’s my two cents worth.

Are we alone in the Universe? That’s a question that’s been asked by millions over the eons, without, to date resolution. Of course the word ‘alone’ implies alone in the sense of whether or not there exists elsewhere our rough equals, more likely as not betters. We want to get to know our neighbours across the street, not their pets, or their plants. The standard gut-feeling answer to the question usually revolves around how vast the Universe is, and surely, given the billions of stars in our galaxy and the existence of billions of galaxies each with billions of stars, etc. and the vastness of time, surely we can’t be the proverbial “It”. There’s unfortunately one slight flaw in that statistical approach. There’s a rather long chain of events that have to happen, hurdles to be jumped, in order to get from the elements of star-stuff to biological cosmic neighbours. Depending on whom you talk to, that chain can be extremely long indeed. The point is, if any one factor in that chain of causality has a very low probability of coming to pass, it matters not one jot whether or not all the other factors are extremely probable, the overall result is going to be low. If any one factor is as close to zero as makes no odds, then the overall answer will also be a close to zero as makes no odds. Certainty multiplied by certainty multiplied by certainty multiplied by certainty multiplied by zero multiplied by certainty multiplied by certainty multiplied by certainty ultimately equals zero!

Continued from yesterday’s blog…

Next, let’s assume your intelligent neighbours are fairly far away and the usual means of keeping in touch is by phone (or email). That introduces one additional complication; it’s not enough to just be intelligent. You need to have technology. Then, and only then, will the ‘are we alone?’ question be answered to our absolute satisfaction. We need technology if we are to find extraterrestrial intelligence(s); and/or extraterrestrial intelligence(s) will need technology to find us. One or both of us has to have invented engineering to a somewhat sophisticated level - maybe rocket ships, maybe radio telescopes, but something technological is required. There’s also a hidden assumption here – you actually want to seek out new civilizations. It matters not if you have all the required technology but care not to use it for the purpose of answering that question – ‘are you alone in the Universe?’ I’ll assume here that if you have intelligence, and it’s been able to construct technology, then part of your intelligence is devoted to be a curious critter who wants to know and find out things – so that’s a certainty of one. But what’s the level of certainty of developing technology in the first place? Rather poor judging from those terrestrial species that have some reasonable smarts to their credit. There’s the human species of course, and though while we’re not quite a sample of one, it’s pretty close. There are documentary observations of some animals (primates mainly) not so much making, but making use of existing ‘tools’ to assist in their survival. Alas, most intelligent species lack the anatomy and/or the right environment to manipulate objects. In the case of dolphins and whales, their ocean environment stymies any way and means of constructing things and making use of fire, for example. So, developing technology has to be rated, judging from our terrestrial sampling, as rather low. 

Technology is also a double-edged sword. The use of technology has had obvious survival value for the human species. You wouldn’t be hard-pressed to come up with dozens of technological inventions that have enabled us to survive longer and thrive better. But, out technological genie is out of the bottle, and unless you’re a hermit, you will have noted by now that technology can also reduce our quality of life, and no doubt you wouldn’t be equally hard-pressed to cite dozens of examples - which leads nicely into the last consideration. 

Lastly, there’s the issue of longevity. If your neighbours move in, but then move out again in less than 24 hours, that doesn’t allow much time to meet them and chat over afternoon tea - blink, and they’re gone. But if you’re both on the block for twenty years, that allows lots of time for afternoon teas, philosophical chats and bridge games, etc. So, how long do technological civilizations last?  

Well, the pessimist will look around and cite global warming, probably antibiotic resistant germs giving rise to pandemics, chemical, biological and radiological warfare and/or terrorism, the extinction of species, rampant pollution, and in general an overall quality of life heading rapidly down the gurgler, right down to the point that the human race will to extinct – by our own hand. But if you’re an optimist, then the sky’s the limit.

Longevity – It’s hard to imaging what human civilization, what humans themselves, will be like 1000 years from now, but if you could come back 1000 years hence, would you indeed find a human civilization, indeed find recognizable ‘humans’ at all? Once you have evolved to the stage of being a multicellular critter with intelligence and technology, then physics and chemistry and plain everyday evolutionary biology are no longer in control of your evolution. You are now in control! You are in control not only over the future evolution of other species (artificial selection instead of natural selection) but of your own evolution. The age of the designer baby is already upon us, albeit still in its infancy (pun intended). What will another several more decades bring to this now embryonic field but obviously an ever ongoing and continuing maturity! 

Humans will probably go kaput within 1000 years, not because of a global nuclear war, or pandemic, or asteroid strike, but because they have by their own hand evolved into something else, and the process has already started. In fact, it’s possible that in 1000 years there could be two humanoid species on Earth. One will be an amalgamation of flesh and blood plus ‘iron and silicon’; the other pure ‘iron and silicon’ (robots).

The first is not too difficult a swallow. Just replace or augment flesh and blood bits with ‘iron and silicon’ bits (or wood bits, or ceramic bits, or plastic bits, etc.). Look at most pirate films and you’ll see those beloved peg-legs and hook-hands. Do you wear glasses or contact lenses? What about a hearing aid? Perhaps you have an artificial joint(s) or a heart pacemaker. You surely have a dental filling (or two), maybe even dentures. Then there’s artificial skin and all manner of other internal or external types of technology that have replaced your failed flesh and blood – like kidney dialysis. There’s now serious talk about the development of a bionic eye within a few years (to go with the bionic ear). What further artificial bio-bits will be available in another 20 years, another 50 years, or another 200 years? The era of the “RoboCop” or an actual “Six-Million Dollar Man” (and “Woman”) is nearly upon us.

Within 200 years or so, I can envision that one will be able to download the contents of a human mind into an ‘iron and silicon’ equivalent.  Why? Well, does the word ‘immortality’ (or as close to immortality as makes no odds) suggest a possible reason? You don’t think anything of endlessly replacing worn automobile parts for new parts to extend the useful lifetime of your car. Why not endlessly replace your worn parts. Your mind (brain) won’t last forever. Replace it - transfer it to a more durable technology Do it again, and again and again as is necessary. In fact, one might create a mega-mind or super-mind by merging into an ‘iron and silicon’ body a lot of minds. By merging the minds of say a cosmologist, general relativist, quantum physicist and mathematician, one might speed up the development of the Holy Grail of physics, the Theory of Everything (TOE) – which is a theory of quantum gravity. 

Once your mind is contained in an ‘iron and silicon’ ‘head’, just attach that to an all ‘iron and silicon’ ‘body’. Immortality indeed!

All of which leads to a future Earth inhabited by a humanoid robot species, artificially evolved from today’s human species. That process too has already started. Robotic appliances, even artificial ‘iron and silicon’ ‘pets’ are on the market. Research into artificial intelligence is ever ongoing. Watch that final minute of the final episode of the TV revision of “Battlestar Galactica’! How about those sci-fi “Transformers” or “Terminators”, or Data (from “Star Trek: The Next Generation”)? Then there’s “Doctor Who’s” Cybermen or Daleks (though they’re part machine; part organism). Think of those robots from “Westworld” or “Futureworld” where nothing can go wrong, go wrong, go wrong, go wrong, go wrong… Then there’s “The Stepford Wives”, “Cherry 2000”, the original “Battlestar Galactica” Cylons, and many more. It might be just science fiction today – could it be science fact tomorrow? There doesn’t seem to be any violation of physics involved. Everything not forbidden is compulsory! However, some of those sci-fi scenarios suggest that perhaps ultimately there might be a conflict between the (part) machines we become, and the (artificially) intelligent machines that we create!

Of course we’re in control, so a robotic future isn’t of necessity compulsory. But I suspect it will happen. Why? There are rational reasons for humans deliberately abandoning their flesh and blood existence and evolving themselves, if not 100% into ‘iron and silicon’ then at least into something part flesh and blood coupled with part ‘iron and silicon’ – sort of like we have today (recall those dentures and peg-legs). 

Quite apart from immortality arguments, it’s nice having more indestructible bodies and bodies that can be more easily repaired. Death won’t go totally away of course – accidents still happen. Presumably, your mind will be able to absorb 10, 100, 1000 times the amount of experiences and memories and knowledge, etc. than is currently the case. You might be able to explore environments now closed to you, like taking a stroll across the sea bottom – kilometres down – in your robotic ‘birthday’ suit. All of which then opens up the entire ‘boldly going’ experience. What’s the hardest part of going to Mars? – it’s the flesh and blood frailty of the human body – the need for gravity and oxygen and organic food and water, and space suits, and how you can’t carry spare flesh and blood parts along too, etc.  Extrapolate to our exploration of the entire solar system, then our stellar neighbourhood, eventually the galaxy. Even if you don’t want to go yourself, well, there’s artificial intelligence housed in perhaps nanotechnology bodies, spreading throughout the cosmos like so much cancer.  

The ultimate point of all of this is that if eventually us (humans), why not them (extraterrestrials) now? Translated, after a relative short period of biological development, a civilization can obtain longevity that evolutionary development into ‘iron and silicon’ provides, coupled with far easier expansion into the realm of outer space.

This level of technology can also partly undo the bottleneck created by the relative improbability of multicellular evolution. There maybe relatively few multicellular infested planets, but once technology of the ‘iron and silicon’ kind happens on them, then boldly going, being fruitful and mechanically multiplying and colonizing the cosmos rapidly fill that gap.

All of which doesn’t mean that we are, in the here and now, the proverbial “It’. However, there are enough ‘probability one’ or certainty factors that suggest this is rather unlikely. The proof of the pudding will be to find them; or for them to find us.

Exobiology: The Final Proverbial “It”

Exobiology was the original term given to the sciences central to the question of life-in-the-Universe. It’s now been largely replaced by Astrobiology, but I’ll stick with the original. To investigate the probability of intelligent life-in-the-Universe one needs to examine how unique we humans are. Can we determine, theoretically, our uniqueness? The Drake Equation (named after radio astronomer and SETI scientist Frank D. Drake) estimates the number of extraterrestrial civilizations in our galaxy that could in theory say “Hi” to us and receive our “Hello” in return by examining all the factors that are part and parcel of that scenario. Seeing as how the Universe is some 13.7 billion years old, and seeing as how the current human species has been around for only some 200,000 years (give or take), then I have to ask, is it logical to assume that we’re the proverbial “It”? Here’s my final two cents worth.

Lastly, there’s the issue of longevity. If your neighbours move in, but then move out again in less than 24 hours, that doesn’t allow much time to meet them and chat over afternoon tea - blink, and they’re gone. But if you’re both on the block for twenty years, that allows lots of time for afternoon teas, philosophical chats and bridge games, etc. So, how long do technological civilizations last?  

Well, the pessimist will look around and cite global warming, probably antibiotic resistant germs giving rise to pandemics, chemical, biological and radiological warfare and/or terrorism, the extinction of species, rampant pollution, and in general an overall quality of life heading rapidly down the gurgler, right down to the point that the human race will to extinct – by our own hand. But if you’re an optimist, then the sky’s the limit.

Longevity – It’s hard to imaging what human civilization, what humans themselves, will be like 1000 years from now, but if you could come back 1000 years hence, would you indeed find a human civilization, indeed find recognizable ‘humans’ at all? Once you have evolved to the stage of being a multicellular critter with intelligence and technology, then physics and chemistry and plain everyday evolutionary biology are no longer in control of your evolution. You are now in control! You are in control not only over the future evolution of other species (artificial selection instead of natural selection) but of your own evolution. The age of the designer baby is already upon us, albeit still in its infancy (pun intended). What will another several more decades bring to this now embryonic field but obviously an ever ongoing and continuing maturity! 

Humans will probably go kaput within 1000 years, not because of a global nuclear war, or pandemic, or asteroid strike, but because they have by their own hand evolved into something else, and the process has already started. In fact, it’s possible that in 1000 years there could be two humanoid species on Earth. One will be an amalgamation of flesh and blood plus ‘iron and silicon’; the other pure ‘iron and silicon’ (robots).

The first is not too difficult a swallow. Just replace or augment flesh and blood bits with ‘iron and silicon’ bits (or wood bits, or ceramic bits, or plastic bits, etc.). Look at most pirate films and you’ll see those beloved peg-legs and hook-hands. Do you wear glasses or contact lenses? What about a hearing aid? Perhaps you have an artificial joint(s) or a heart pacemaker. You surely have a dental filling (or two), maybe even dentures. Then there’s artificial skin and all manner of other internal or external types of technology that have replaced your failed flesh and blood – like kidney dialysis. There’s now serious talk about the development of a bionic eye within a few years (to go with the bionic ear). What further artificial bio-bits will be available in another 20 years, another 50 years, or another 200 years? The era of the “RoboCop” or an actual “Six-Million Dollar Man” (and “Woman”) is nearly upon us.

Within 200 years or so, I can envision that one will be able to download the contents of a human mind into an ‘iron and silicon’ equivalent.  Why? Well, does the word ‘immortality’ (or as close to immortality as makes no odds) suggest a possible reason? You don’t think anything of endlessly replacing worn automobile parts for new parts to extend the useful lifetime of your car. Why not endlessly replace your worn parts. Your mind (brain) won’t last forever. Replace it - transfer it to a more durable technology Do it again, and again and again as is necessary. In fact, one might create a mega-mind or super-mind by merging into an ‘iron and silicon’ body a lot of minds. By merging the minds of say a cosmologist, general relativist, quantum physicist and mathematician, one might speed up the development of the Holy Grail of physics, the Theory of Everything (TOE) – which is a theory of quantum gravity. 

Once your mind is contained in an ‘iron and silicon’ ‘head’, just attach that to an all ‘iron and silicon’ ‘body’. Immortality indeed!

All of which leads to a future Earth inhabited by a humanoid robot species, artificially evolved from today’s human species. That process too has already started. Robotic appliances, even artificial ‘iron and silicon’ ‘pets’ are on the market. Research into artificial intelligence is ever ongoing. Watch that final minute of the final episode of the TV revision of “Battlestar Galactica’! How about those sci-fi “Transformers” or “Terminators”, or Data (from “Star Trek: The Next Generation”)? Then there’s “Doctor Who’s” Cybermen or Daleks (though they’re part machine; part organism). Think of those robots from “Westworld” or “Futureworld” where nothing can go wrong, go wrong, go wrong, go wrong, go wrong… Then there’s “The Stepford Wives”, “Cherry 2000”, the original “Battlestar Galactica” Cylons, and many more. It might be just science fiction today – could it be science fact tomorrow? There doesn’t seem to be any violation of physics involved. Everything not forbidden is compulsory! However, some of those sci-fi scenarios suggest that perhaps ultimately there might be a conflict between the (part) machines we become, and the (artificially) intelligent machines that we create!

Of course we’re in control, so a robotic future isn’t of necessity compulsory. But I suspect it will happen. Why? There are rational reasons for humans deliberately abandoning their flesh and blood existence and evolving themselves, if not 100% into ‘iron and silicon’ then at least into something part flesh and blood coupled with part ‘iron and silicon’ – sort of like we have today (recall those dentures and peg-legs). 

Quite apart from immortality arguments, it’s nice having more indestructible bodies and bodies that can be more easily repaired. Death won’t go totally away of course – accidents still happen. Presumably, your mind will be able to absorb 10, 100, 1000 times the amount of experiences and memories and knowledge, etc. than is currently the case. You might be able to explore environments now closed to you, like taking a stroll across the sea bottom – kilometres down – in your robotic ‘birthday’ suit. All of which then opens up the entire ‘boldly going’ experience. What’s the hardest part of going to Mars? – it’s the flesh and blood frailty of the human body – the need for gravity and oxygen and organic food and water, and space suits, and how you can’t carry spare flesh and blood parts along too, etc.  Extrapolate to our exploration of the entire solar system, then our stellar neighbourhood, eventually the galaxy. Even if you don’t want to go yourself, well, there’s artificial intelligence housed in perhaps nanotechnology bodies, spreading throughout the cosmos like so much cancer.  

The ultimate point of all of this is that if eventually us (humans), why not them (extraterrestrials) now? Translated, after a relative short period of biological development, a civilization can obtain longevity that evolutionary development into ‘iron and silicon’ provides, coupled with far easier expansion into the realm of outer space.

This level of technology can also partly undo the bottleneck created by the relative improbability of multicellular evolution. There maybe relatively few multicellular infested planets, but once technology of the ‘iron and silicon’ kind happens on them, then boldly going, being fruitful and mechanically multiplying and colonizing the cosmos rapidly fill that gap.

All of which doesn’t mean that we are, in the here and now, the proverbial “It’. However, there are enough ‘probability one’ or certainty factors that suggest this is rather unlikely. The proof of the pudding will be to find them; or for them to find us.

The UFO ETH: Pro and Con: Long-Lived Alien Civilizations Don’t Exist

With both the existence of pure theory and applied evidence supporting the plausibility of the UFO extraterrestrial hypothesis (ETH) – where the UFO remains a UFO after appropriate expert analysis has failed to find a more terrestrial explanation – lets look at a few snippets of the phenomena, this time the endless stalemate between those supporting the UFO ETH, and those sceptical debunkers of the UFO ETH starting with the most basic of all arguments, UFOs can not be extraterrestrial because while there are extraterrestrials, and some have evolved a high degree of smarts, and they have produced advanced forms of technology, they quickly blow themselves up or otherwise give themselves collectively as a civilization one huge Darwin Award. If there’s no extraterrestrial longevity once they reach the advanced technology state; no extraterrestrial UFOs are likely.

OBJECTION #4: Extraterrestrial intelligence exists, extraterrestrial intelligences developing advanced technology is commonplace, but they quickly exterminate themselves through nuclear war or as the result of other technologies. Very short-lived alien species means another no-go to the UFO ETH, or at least makes it way less likely.

ANSWER: Lastly, there’s the issue of longevity. If your neighbours buy up and move in, but then sell up and move out again in less than 24 hours, that doesn’t allow much time to meet and greet them and gossip over an afternoon cup of coffee - blink, and they’re gone. But if you’re both on the block for twenty years, that allows lots of time for afternoon teas, philosophical chats, bridge games, etc. So, how long do technological civilizations last?  

Well, the pessimist will look around and cite global warming, probably antibiotic resistant germs giving rise to pandemics, chemical, biological and radiological warfare and/or terrorism, the extinction of biological species, rampant industrial pollution, and in general an overall quality of life heading rapidly down the gurgler, right down to the point that the human race will probably go extinct by our own hand. But if you’re an optimist, then the sky’s the limit.

It’s not all that obvious that technology actually adds all that much value towards ultimate long-term survival. Lots of technological advancements have, like controlling energy sources such as fire, developing a sustainable food supply via agriculture, the rise of modern medicine and food preservation technologies. But then lots of modern technological wonders, the automobile, CDs, sofas, microwave ovens, and thousands of other consumer products don’t really contribute much to our overall survival – certainly cars don’t when considering the road toll! That brings up the fact that things technological can sometimes work in the opposite direction. Toxic this, pollutant that, nuclear the next thing; then throw in a bit of global warming; the rise of urban city living with overcrowding and in general overpopulation; chemical, biological and radiological warfare/terrorism; instruments of warfare in general, like guns; the overuse of antibiotics hence the rise of antibiotic resistant germs; exposure to electromagnetic fields – well, the list of horrors or potential horrors keeps on keeping on and on.

It makes for an interesting question: would mankind ultimately survive longer had technology never entered the equation, or not? It’s an unanswerable question in that 1) we can’t run the contrary as a controlled experiment, and 2) that the genie is well and truly out of the bottle and there’s probably no turning back now.

Assuming humanity as a collective whole doesn’t end up going the way of the Dodo within the next several generations, even centuries – whether it actually morally deserves to go extinct is another question – then what?.

It’s hard to imaging what human civilization, what humans themselves will be like 1000 years from now. If you could come back 1000 years hence, would you indeed find a human civilization, indeed find recognizable ‘humans’ at all? Once you have evolved to the stage of being a multicellular critter with intelligence and advanced technology, then physics, chemistry and plain everyday evolutionary biology are no longer in control of your evolution. You are now in control! You are in control not only over the future evolution of other species (artificial selection instead of natural selection) but of your own evolution. The age of the designer baby is already here, albeit still in its infancy (pun intended). What will another few decades bring to this now embryonic field; obviously one with an ever ongoing and continuing maturity? 

Humans will probably go kaput within 1000 years, not because of any global nuclear war, or pandemic, or asteroid strike, but because humans have by their own free will evolved themselves into something else, and the process has already started. In fact, it’s possible that in 1000 years time there could be two humanoid species on Earth. One will be an amalgamation of flesh-and-blood plus ‘iron-and-silicon’; the other pure ‘iron-and-silicon’ (artificial intelligence, perhaps in the form of robots).

The first is not too difficult a swallow. Just replace or augment flesh-and-blood bits with ‘iron-and-silicon’ bits (or wood bits, or ceramic bits, or plastic bits, etc.). Look at most pirate films and you’ll see those beloved peg-legs and hook-hands. Do you wear glasses or contact lenses? What about a hearing aid? Perhaps you have an artificial joint(s) or a heart pacemaker. You surely have a dental filling (or two), maybe even dentures. Then there’s artificial skin and all manner of other internal or external types of technology that have replaced your failed flesh-and-blood – like kidney dialysis. There’s now serious talk about the development of a bionic eye within a few years (to go alongside the bionic ear). What further artificial bio-bits will be available in another 20 years, another 50 years, or another 200 years? The era of “RoboCop” or a real life “Six-Million Dollar Man” (and “Woman”) is getting close to fruition.

Within 500 years or so, maybe less, I can envision that someone will be able to download the contents of their brain (their mind) into an ‘iron-and-silicon’ equivalent.  Why? Well, does the word ‘immortality’ (or as close to immortality as makes no odds) suggest a possible reason? You don’t think anything of endlessly replacing worn automobile parts for new parts to extend the useful lifetime of your car. Why not endlessly replace your worn parts? Your mind, that ‘inner you’ housed within your brain won’t last forever. Replace it - transfer it to a more durable technology. Do it again, and again and again as is necessary. In fact, one might create a mega-mind or super-mind by merging into an ‘iron-and-silicon’ body containing a lot of minds (in much the same way as computer hardware can have a lot of operating software programs. By merging the minds of say a cosmologist, general relativist, quantum physicist and mathematician, one might speed up the development of the Holy Grail of physics, the Theory of Everything (TOE) – which is as currently conceived, a theory of quantum gravity. 

Once your mind is contained in an ‘iron-and-silicon’ ‘head’, just attach that to an all ‘iron-and-silicon’ ‘body’. Then boldly go where no ‘iron-and-silicon’ human has gone before. Immortality indeed!

All of which leads to a future Earth inhabited by a humanoid robot species, artificially evolved from today’s human species. That process too has already started - robotic appliances, even artificial ‘iron-and-silicon’ ‘pets’ are now on the market. Research into artificial intelligence is ever ongoing. Watch that final minute of the final episode of the TV revision of “Battlestar Galactica’! How about those sci-fi “Transformers” or “Terminators”, or Data (from “Star Trek: The Next Generation”)? Then there’s “Doctor Who’s” Cybermen or his main enemy, the Daleks (though Daleks are part machine; part organism).

Think of those robots from “Westworld” or the “Futureworld” sequel where nothing can go wrong, go wrong, go wrong, go wrong, go wrong… Then there’s “The Stepford Wives”, “Cherry 2000”, the original Cylons from the original “Battlestar Galactica”, and many more. It might be just science fiction today – could it be science fact tomorrow? There doesn’t seem to be any violation of physics involved. In physics, everything not forbidden is compulsory! However, some of those sci-fi scenarios suggest that perhaps ultimately there might be a conflict between the (part) machines we become, and the (artificially) intelligent machines that we create!

We’re ultimately in control, so a quasi-robotic future isn’t of necessity compulsory. But I suspect it will happen. Why? There are rational reasons for humans deliberately abandoning their flesh-and-blood existence and evolving themselves, if not 100% into ‘iron-and-silicon’ then at least into something part flesh-and-blood coupled with part ‘iron-and-silicon’ – sort of like we have today (recall those now primitive dentures and peg-legs). 

Quite apart from immortality (well quasi-immortality anyway) arguments, its nice having more indestructible bodies and bodies that can be more easily repaired. Death won’t go away of course, not totally – accidents will still happen. Presumably, your mind will be able to absorb 10, 100, 1000 times the amount of experiences, memories, knowledge, etc. than is currently the case. You might be able to explore environments now closed to you, like taking a stroll across the sea bottom – many kilometres down – in your ‘iron-and-silicon’ robotic ‘birthday’ suit.

All of which then opens up the entire ‘boldly going’ experience hinted at above. What’s the hardest part of going to Mars? – it’s the flesh-and-blood frailty of the human body – the need for gravity, oxygen, organic food, water, space suits, and that you can’t carry spare flesh-and-blood parts along.  Extrapolate to our exploration of the entire solar system, then our stellar neighbourhood, eventually the galaxy. Even if you don’t want to go yourself, well, there’s artificial intelligence housed in perhaps nanotechnology bodies, spreading throughout the cosmos like so much a cancer analogy.  

The ultimate point of all of this is that if eventually us (humans), why not them (extraterrestrials) now? Translated, after a relative short period of biological development, a civilization can obtain longevity that evolutionary development into ‘iron-and-silicon’ provides, coupled with far easier expansion into the realm of outer space.

So, overall, UFOs might not be alien spaceships right here and now, because it’s 1) somewhat relatively hard to evolve multicellular organisms (but obviously not impossible); 2) will intelligence tend to have evolutionary survival? 3) Associated advanced technology isn’t inevitable and might even be counterproductive. 4) If counterproductive, longevity is at risk. Thus, Earth, with its multicellular critters and humanity with its technology, might be quite the rare planet within the Universe – according to some.

But, there’s a catch. There’s always a catch. What ultimately undermines the UFO ETH sceptics is that all you need is ONE boldly going, intelligent, advanced technological and long-lived extraterrestrial species and the galaxy is theirs for the taking and we’re in their sights. Few pundits would like to bet against that ONE, given, in the immortal words of the late Carl Sagan, a statistical possibility of ‘billions and billions’.   

So, IMHO, the fourth objection fails because all extraterrestrial intelligences, past and present, would have had to have gone extinct with short periods of developing advanced technology is statistically unlikely. Long lived alien civilizations with advanced technology might be rare, but not zero. They probably aren’t even rare since advanced technology quickly alters natural selection/evolution into artificial selection/evolution.