Professor Cox. The Aliens killed themselves

[seeder]

Quote

 

Aliens haven’t made contact because they killed themselves before they could – like we will, says stargazing TV professor Brian Cox

    British physicist Brian Cox believes he knows why we haven't found aliens
    He claims any sort of intelligent life is destroying itself before it evolves  
    Technology that allows power but produces greenhouse gases, or nuclear weapons, may destroy civilizations within a few thousand years - like us

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3829584/Aliens-haven-t-contact-killed-like-says-stargazing-TV-professor-Brian-Cox.html#ixzz4MctxMrOZ

 

 

[XenoFish]

Though nihilistic I've had the same thoughts.

[Thorvir]

It's certainly possible, but highly improbably.  The universe is a big place, certainly not all alien life will (or has) destroy themselves.

But, just because Cox says it, it doesn't mean it's true.  He's speculating just like everyone else is.

[seeder]

This    "  Technology that allows power but produces greenhouse gases,".... is a huge assumption that aliens had to take a similar path to us....burn wood, coal, oil...

But carbon based fuels are what us inefficient monkey men have discovered....what if they found some other energy source to start with? who is to say we all follow the same energy path?

Furthermore, even us dumb people know we need to move away from carbon fuels....and are slowly doing so

[seaturtlehorsesnake]

this is a pretty common theory, i think!

the article even mentios enrico fermi, who talked about it in the 50's.

[Lilly]

I've heard this idea before as well. While it's quite possible it's also rather depressing....I hope Dr Cox is wrong on this one.

[seaturtlehorsesnake]

i still wonder about the time and distance scales involved. our civilization has been capable of communicating outside of our world for what... 100 years or so? at most? is it possible that civilizations arise at such different times and at such huge distances from each other that even in the long term communication may simply never line up as possible.

does that make sense? it's been a long day

[Princess Serenity]

Whatever you say, Professor.

[psyche101]

Also from the article:

 

Professors Cox said: ‘What does a scientist want to be? Do we want to be right? Or do we care about understanding nature? If it is the latter, we should be delighted to be proven wrong.”

Professor Forshaw added: ‘In the same way, politicians should be delighted if their policies work, but just as delighted if someone comes up with something better.'

I'll wait for something better Even we are realizing the fossil fuels are going to run out one day, and we need greener ways to generate power, and we are developing them. Nobody could possibly get that right? Interesting that the article states it is Professor Cox's "belief" it would be great if these guys had the time to participate in these discussions about them and their comments to get a clearer picture. 

I'd like to see more focus on communications, gosh it would be a treat to discuss something like that with someone of Cox's abilities. I wonder if we could coax one of these fellows to glance at a thread. 

In any case, just more wild speculation like Hawkings so called "warning!!". I wonder of they will get anywhere near as much mileage from this comment? 

[+Hammerclaw]

The only Aliens we're likely to detect across interstellar distances will be so ancient and their technological achievements and architecture so vast our mind will cringe and flee from the very thought that they could possibly be artificial.

[Thorvir]

3 hours ago, Lilly said:

I've heard this idea before as well. While it's quite possible it's also rather depressing....I hope Dr Cox is wrong on this one.

He is most likely wrong.  Not certainly, definitely wrong, just most likely.  But, again, he's just guessing and there's always a chance that someone will guess correctly.  It's why we play the lottery.

Edited October 10, 2016 by Thorvir Hrothgaard

[psyche101]

16 minutes ago, Thorvir Hrothgaard said:

He is most likely wrong.  Not certainly, definitely wrong, just most likely.  But, again, he's just guessing and there's always a chance that someone will guess correctly.  It's why we play the lottery.

I'll bet he is right - some of the time. In a Universe this vast, a billion civilisations is probably neither here nor there. Even if he says "all" he can only mean our immediate vicinity. 

More likely is they are so far away that even a phone call has a delay of easily up to several hundred years, one might miss the call. 

And I do not see why they would have to be advanced. Why can't intelligent life just be a bit more daring and seek other civilisations in earnest earlier than we did? Or have perhaps i should say? 

[Thorvir]

Just now, psyche101 said:

I'll bet he is right - some of the time. In a Universe this vast, a billion civilisations is probably neither here nor there. Even if he says "all" he can only mean our immediate vicinity. 

Well, yeah, he could be right.  But he's just making a guess, whether referring to distant or nearby aliens.  We just don't know.

It would be the same if I said that NO alien civilization have destroyed themselves or ever will.  I'd just be making a guess.

Just now, psyche101 said:

More likely is they are so far away that even a phone call has a delay of easily up to several hundred years, one might miss the call. 

Oh true dat.  However, that still means some aliens civilizations haven't destroyed themselves yet, or might never do so.

Just now, psyche101 said:

And I do not see why they would have to be advanced. Why can't intelligent life just be a bit more daring and seek other civilisations in earnest earlier than we did? Or have perhaps i should say? 

That I agree with.  You know I've always said that technologies don't always have to advance the way we're advancing them.

[psyche101]

27 minutes ago, Thorvir Hrothgaard said:

Well, yeah, he could be right.  But he's just making a guess, whether referring to distant or nearby aliens.  We just don't know.

It would be the same if I said that NO alien civilization have destroyed themselves or ever will.  I'd just be making a guess.

Exactly, I do think think it is guys like Hawking and Cox that we need to be mad at or concerned about with these exaggerations, it is the press and how they regurgitate, rehash and stuff up most of what they hear. 

Might be just me, but Journalism seems to have REALLY dropped it's standards over the last 50 years or so? We used to respect those guys, heck even 20 years ago. Now, you would not believe a headline without at least 3 or 4 independent corroborating sources!!

27 minutes ago, Thorvir Hrothgaard said:

Oh true dat.  However, that still means some aliens civilizations haven't destroyed themselves yet, or might never do so.

Yep, that was why he called it a "belief" which didn't get much of a spotlight in the article .... would not sell as many headlines I would think  

27 minutes ago, Thorvir Hrothgaard said:

That I agree with.  You know I've always said that technologies don't always have to advance the way we're advancing them.

Yeah!  

I'd be every bit as happy to see some old clunker of a bits and pieces stuck together spaceship rumbling into the solar system to say Gidday! We all gotta start someplace! Lets hope if "they" are out there that they are not so egotistical as to be embarrassed by their ride!! 

[Golden Duck]

Meh...

This seems to be rhetoric intended for the climate change debate; and not a comment on the supposed futility of SETI.

I'm sure I've seen one of his documentaries where he plotted significant stages of evolution along a fence on a rural property. IIRC he concluded that this our only model for evolution; and we simply have no way of knowing if evolution happens faster or slower anywhere else.

Now he is basing his belief on his guess at the inherent nature of civilization.

We've already got a very good theory that signal degradation is a limiting factor for SETI.  Cox, I'm sure, knows this.

Regardless of the validity of climate change this is still political rhetoric.

Edited October 10, 2016 by Mangoze
Needed a secons go after posting on my phone

[Black Monk]

14 hours ago, seeder said:

 

How does Professor Brian Cox know aliens haven't made contact? He doesn't work for the British Government.

[geraldnewfie]

the hardest thing to think of is that was aliens alive millions of years ago or maybe do not exist for another million of years, look at the human race, we havnt been here that long in the scale of the age of the universe, we prob wont last another 1000 years with the way we are going with nuclear weapons. if there is an alien race it is either dead now or didnt evolve yet to be an intelligent species

[Black Monk]

21 minutes ago, geraldnewfie said:

the hardest thing to think of is that was aliens alive millions of years ago or maybe do not exist for another million of years, look at the human race, we havnt been here that long in the scale of the age of the universe, we prob wont last another 1000 years with the way we are going with nuclear weapons. if there is an alien race it is either dead now or didnt evolve yet to be an intelligent species

There are probably thousands of alien races in our galaxy alone.

[Derek Willis]

Just because a species can wipe itself out doesn't necessarily mean it will. The one example of an intelligent species we have is ourselves. We have been capable of destroying ourselves for the last sixty years - but we haven't.

Edit: I just noticed Prof Cox has a new book out (and new teeth, it seems). That might explain the headline grabbing comment.

Edited October 10, 2016 by Derek Willis

[Thorvir]

2 hours ago, Black Monk said:

How does Professor Brian Cox know aliens haven't made contact? He doesn't work for the British Government.

There no evidence that they have.

[Thorvir]

2 hours ago, geraldnewfie said:

...we prob wont last another 1000 years with the way we are going with nuclear weapons.

What's that supposed to mean?  We've actually been doing very well with nuclear weapons.  Since their invention, only two have been used out of necessity, and the world went through a very tense cold war where not one single one was used in anger.  We have non-proliferation treaties that have done fairly well in keeping these things out of the hands of evil-doers so far.  Only recently have rogue nations sought nuclear weapons, and of those Iran isn't doing very well with their weapons program (and if they get close enough, they'll probably get smacked back down), while North Korea is having trouble even pretending they are testing these things.  So while no one person can predict the future, you shouldn't worry about nuclear weapons until they actually do become a problem.

[Thorvir]

2 hours ago, Black Monk said:

There are probably thousands of alien races in our galaxy alone.

Probably.  I certainly hope so, but there are no guarantees.

[highdesert50]

The success of a civilization might be measured by the ability to successfully procreate and sustain itself. If we draw parallels to ourselves we have been thus far successful. But, there are environmental and subsequential economic limits as to how long we can sustain ourselves based on unlimited population growth. I suspect we have a small window of time from which we, or any other comparable civilization, has to populate another planet to sustain and further itself. We are in that brief window of opportunity.

[Zamor]

Prof. Cox statement is as relevant as if I would take a giant jar, put 100 blue marbles and 1000 000 green marbles in it, shake it and grab a handfull, only getting green marbles and say "Well, seems there are no blue marbles in this jar, guess they have dissapeared or never where there in the first place".

 

Zam

 

[Thorvir]

Just now, highdesert50 said:

The success of a civilization might be measured by the ability to successfully procreate and sustain itself. If we draw parallels to ourselves we have been thus far successful. But, there are environmental and subsequential economic limits as to how long we can sustain ourselves based on unlimited population growth. I suspect we have a small window of time from which we, or any other comparable civilization, has to populate another planet to sustain and further itself. We are in that brief window of opportunity.

"Brief"  I'm sure that's subjective to the civilization in question.  We haven't developed reliable long-range human space travel yet.  I think that window is larger and longer than you suspect, but as long as the human race continues as it is, we'll be fine.  Well, the majority of us will be fine.