Submitted by thedailybeast t3_y296re in Futurology
Comments
Hot-Fox970 t1_is1m4an wrote
Idealistically no, realistically yes because humans are gonna human.
FuturologyBot t1_is1or51 wrote
The following submission statement was provided by /u/thedailybeast:
More and more scientists think it’s time to think through the political implications of first contact.
“In the event of contact, things will likely move very quickly, and we may not have the time to carefully vet our reasoning,” said Chelsea Haramia, a philosopher at Spring Hill College in Alabama.
When Kenneth Wisian and John Traphagan, respectively geophysicist and religious-studies experts at the University of Texas, studied the issue back in 2020, they came away more than a little worried.
Their main concern was that whichever country first makes contact with intelligent aliens—by way of a probe or radio broadcast or some other means—might suddenly become the most powerful country ever. Even if it wasn’t very powerful before first contact.
Knowledge of alien technology, “if wielded solely by one nation here on Earth, might enable it to dominate the world,” Wisian and Traphagan wrote in their peer-reviewed study, published in the journal Space Policy.
“Controlling communication with an [extraterrestrial intelligence] could be the biggest ‘prize’ ever in international competition.”
It was an alarming assertion. But not every scientist agreed with it. A team led by Jason Wright, a Penn State astronomer, rebutted Wisian and Taphagan in a different study. Their main point is that the most likely method of contacting aliens is also the easiest and cheapest: radio.
Almost any country with satellite T.V. could use the same basic tech to listen to, and talk back to, aliens. “There are an enormous number of radio dishes designed to communicate with Earth satellites that could easily be repurposed for such an effort,” wrote Wright and his coauthors.
So which group of scientists do you think is right? How will humans respond?
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/y296re/will_first_contact_with_et_spark_a_war_among/is1k035/
stereoroid t1_is1pasp wrote
Arthur C. Clarke was ahead of this question in Childhood’s End = recommended reading.
TyperMcTyperson t1_is1tqc3 wrote
Is there anything that DOESN'T spark a war among humans?
TheWeirdeaux t1_is1upbz wrote
I find it more likely that they (the space aliens) would observe from a distance. Maybe even send probes. But also we can’t really assume much because we’re looking at it through a human perspective. We have no idea what evolution of thought, philosophy, empathy, etc. looks like in intelligence outside Earth. Perhaps they are more hive minded like insects. Or philosophically cold and stoic - does empathy exist as a concept for them? Emotions? We know what ‘human’ reasoning looks like. Unless of course there is some sort of evolutionary constant across the universe we can’t really assume much if anything IMHO.
[deleted] t1_is2i7dl wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_is2snoi wrote
[removed]
Zoidbergslicense t1_is3ry9n wrote
Once thing is for sure, if they have oil both species will be subject to problems, up to and including termination.
Bobbert84 t1_is4kva1 wrote
Probably not. I mean we've pretty much confirmed ufos are a real thing and no one seems to care all that much. The defense department is being secretive about it because that's what they do. But assuming aliens wamt to talk with us any time soon, they won't be giving us tech. As if that was there plan they would have done it by now. Same for destroying us.
stovislove t1_is4x4at wrote
All of these are reasons why they haven't said Hi to us.
Wipperwill1 t1_is53mz1 wrote
Here's a better question.
What doesn't cause a war between humans?
Smur_ t1_is5jkhw wrote
I've always loved the idea of being alive to see contact if it ever happens, but I'm so disappointed (can't say surprised) at the fact that our first instinct is to worry about the power that a certain country may gain from actually doing it. It's so far down the list of things that'll need attention if it actually happens. Ugh
greywar777 t1_is777m9 wrote
ufos are one of those things where they require extraordinary proof as they are a extraordinary unlikely event. And I think for most its just not quite there yet.
Bobbert84 t1_isarneg wrote
I was very much in the anti-ufo camp for a while and only recently have come around due to the new evidence released by the government.
As far as extraordinary proof, that is a line i threw around too and still do on occasion. But recently i have changed the way i think about it. The saying is extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. And there is truth to it for sure. But it depends a lot of in what way the claim is extraordinary.
Basically here are the conclusions I came to. There are 2 ways a claim can be extraordinary. One is the likelihood of the claim, and the other is the importance of it to the person believing it. So if i were to tell you I won the power ball lottery, and then show you a picture of the winning ticket with the date and numbers, that wouldn't be equal proof to the claim, a photo can easily be photo shopped. But as long as I don't make any attempt to ever try to effect your life based on this claim, how unreasonable is it to believe it based on that scant evidence (unless and until circumstances change)? Not really unreasonable. It doesn't effect you or anyone else. It doesn't change your world view. It's just the claim of some guy on the internet. Nothing more.
Now let's flip things. Let's say that i take a deck of cards (a fair and full deck) and ask you to pick one card at random. You shuffle the deck then I pick the top card. If I pick your card, then you get shot. So you pick your card and I (without any cheating) take the top card off. I say it is your card and now you need to be shot. You would obviously say you need to check to be sure. So instead of showing you the card I picked I tell you to flip over each card left in the deck one at a time. After flipping over 50 cards there is only one left un-flipped. You still haven't seen the card you called (which i claim to be holding). There is only 1 other card left face down. The odds of me lying and that being your card are very very small. You would have had to have me lie as well as flip over 50 cards in a row without getting yours. So would you flip over the last card? and then demand to see mine? Even though it is highly likely I'm telling the truth?
Clearly the answer is you would. Even though at this point it is extremely likely I'm telling the truth, it's matters A LOT to you. So you would demand conclusive evidence even when something is already very likely to have happened.
Now this brings us back to UFOs and the claim being made. That UFOs (UAPs) are of alien origin. How much proof does this claim REALLY need? That is the important question we must ask when decided to believe it or not. Here are the claims about UAPs/UFOs. That they are of alien origin. That's it. As even if they are of alien origin, it isn't like they are going out of their way to contact us, give us tech, trying to influence us, or destroy us. At least not yet. While it would prove that we are not alone as far as intelligent life, that was already expected. This would just be confirmation that interstellar travel is possible. Which while at this point we aren't sure is possible, hasn't been ruled out.
Even the biggest skeptics will say not only does life exist elsewhere, intelligent life certainly does too. It is about it being able to get here that is where it becomes hazy. And if it is here, why isn't there incontrovertible proof. why don't they announce themselves after going to all that trouble?
To me this is moving the goal post and supposing things we shouldn't with no basis. We are supposing aliens would come here (or send their probes here) to contact/interfere as opposed to observe. Why would we suppose that would be their goal? What would they have to say to us at this point? Maybe they just want to keep tabs until we are more advanced or watch us for their own amusement? We can't know why they would come here. Also, while we have no proof of anything being able to go faster than light, we have several theories in primitive stages in theory crafting which some math supports.
But to me the rub is this: The biggest reason we say UFOs of alien origins can't be here is because faster than light travel violates our current understanding of the laws of physics. BUT we have seen UFOs (and it has been confirmed by the DOD) they move in a way which violates our understanding of the laws of physics. So that argument in my mind is on unsteady footing.
And anyone claiming these could be advanced tech from the US or some other country don't REALLY understand how incredible this tech is. It isn't just a generation or two ahead. It is like a caveman with a rock in his hand compared to a fully armed nuclear stealth bomber. They can't even be compared.
thedailybeast OP t1_is1k035 wrote
More and more scientists think it’s time to think through the political implications of first contact.
“In the event of contact, things will likely move very quickly, and we may not have the time to carefully vet our reasoning,” said Chelsea Haramia, a philosopher at Spring Hill College in Alabama.
When Kenneth Wisian and John Traphagan, respectively geophysicist and religious-studies experts at the University of Texas, studied the issue back in 2020, they came away more than a little worried.
Their main concern was that whichever country first makes contact with intelligent aliens—by way of a probe or radio broadcast or some other means—might suddenly become the most powerful country ever. Even if it wasn’t very powerful before first contact.
Knowledge of alien technology, “if wielded solely by one nation here on Earth, might enable it to dominate the world,” Wisian and Traphagan wrote in their peer-reviewed study, published in the journal Space Policy.
“Controlling communication with an [extraterrestrial intelligence] could be the biggest ‘prize’ ever in international competition.”
It was an alarming assertion. But not every scientist agreed with it. A team led by Jason Wright, a Penn State astronomer, rebutted Wisian and Taphagan in a different study. Their main point is that the most likely method of contacting aliens is also the easiest and cheapest: radio.
Almost any country with satellite T.V. could use the same basic tech to listen to, and talk back to, aliens. “There are an enormous number of radio dishes designed to communicate with Earth satellites that could easily be repurposed for such an effort,” wrote Wright and his coauthors.
So which group of scientists do you think is right? How will humans respond?