A Vision for Space Colonization

[Thunderbrd]

Deep study can reveal truth to be stranger than fiction my friend. The evidence exists.

 

[Toffer90]

Deep study can reveal truth to be stranger than fiction my friend. The evidence exists.

I'm a huge fan of the x-files series since I was 8-10 years old, watched every episode there is. I'm guessing you've recently seen the new season 10, and this awoke something in you. ^^

I believe humans are too self destructive to ever reach a neighboring solar system. De-evolution will eventually kick in and we will never reach the civilized peak (that we are getting close to) ever again.
The same is probably true for most civilized species out there. ^^ Yeah, I'm a technology pessimist.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Naw... any talk of aliens tends to do that. I've been a researcher on the subject for a very long time and try to normally keep a lid on it here since the civ perspective assumes aliens have never interacted with humanity, which is largely what most of the world assumes (despite a lot of reason to believe in the contrary.) Although I always retain an open mind and can see why some intelligent thinkers still fall onto the side of the fence that maintains that the evidence just isn't there, I also believe that the evidence has been made scarce quite purposefully. I don't think its coincidence that ISIL is currently destroying our greatest sources of absolute proof of this and we're sitting back doing relatively nothing about it.

Too bad my post on this ended up on the last page... means most won't bother to see it. Too bad... it was a rare effort to put into words my general worldview.

 

[Toffer90]

I don't think its coincidence that ISIL is currently destroying our greatest sources of absolute proof of this and we're sitting back doing relatively nothing about it.

Our democracies are paralyzed by our own general stupidity, I think you are giving too much credit to human cleverness regarding how we got into the world situation we are currently in.
While I believe most humans are too stubborn to realize the real narrative to the situation they exist in. War in Syria would probably never have broken out if the west had said from the beginning that armed revolution will be condemned and we will be forced to support the regime as it's the only realistic option for the future peace in that region. Instead we (the west) shouted "we want blood" (more or less), which gave hope to the disorganized demonstrators (hope that we would bomb the Russian backed regime), and gave the extremist groups a possibility to exploit that hope.
And the reason was because we had stubbornly decided that Assad is a dragon that must defeated no matter the cost. This (our) narrative was even reinforced because Russia told the opposing narrative all along and we stubbornly can't agree with anything they say because Putin is also a dragon.

Sorry for going all political in this thread.

I'm all for having different alien species in C2C, like "Starship Trooper"-like insectoids.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Our democracies are paralyzed by our own general stupidity, I think you are giving too much credit to human cleverness regarding how we got into the world situation we are currently in.

It's not HUMAN cleverness I suggest guides the manipulations to which I point towards. It is Human exploitability that allows the maleable minds of our people to be easily persuaded to be the head of a hammer where tools are desired to be applied. Those in ISIL destroying these ancient sites believe they are simply living up to their religious principles to eradicate engraven images. Ever wonder why Judeo-Christian and Muslim beliefs both promote this value in the first place?

While I believe most humans are too stubborn to realize the real narrative to the situation they exist in. War in Syria would probably never have broken out if the west had said from the beginning that armed revolution will be condemned and we will be forced to support the regime as it's the only realistic option for the future peace in that region. Instead we (the west) shouted "we want blood" (more or less), which gave hope to the disorganized demonstrators (hope that we would bomb the Russian backed regime), and gave the extremist groups a possibility to exploit that hope.
And the reason was because we had stubbornly decided that Assad is a dragon that must defeated no matter the cost. This (our) narrative was even reinforced because Russia told the opposing narrative all along and we stubbornly can't agree with anything they say because Putin is also a dragon.

We're one by one knocking out pegs of resistance to our global authority throughout the middle east. To do so we need to demonize the leaders of resistance states and manipulate the situations in those regions until we have 'just cause' to show the people for hostile actions we would like to take... a good reason is needed by a Democratic government to act in a directly hostile manner towards other nations... not so much for international justifications but for internal justifications. The amount of propaganda that has taken place regarding Syria is tremendous, both at home and abroad. But a lot of it has failed to enable us to directly attack Syria. Therefore we have supported an uprising.

You're absolutely right in insinuating this but don't overlook the big picture... it's not for 'some reason', it's for the effort of globalization. An effort that we are not far from completing but will take a very large war before it can be fully realized and the more 'small targets' we can destabilize and 'justifiably' break down before the big one hits the fan, the better a chance we have at winning that war. Syria is the current project but Iran and N. Korea are on that list as well. (As were the highly strategic holdings we call Iraq and Afghanistan that we now hold.) And I think we can see that underneath it all are two other very large and powerful forces that we simply don't want getting involved for as long as we can keep them from doing so. We're walking on the edge of the blade of WWIII here.

There's a reason we've sold out our people to free trade... it was a way to stall out the inevitable so we could have time to get the upper hand over these smaller states.

Under it all... is ISIS REALLY an enemy or are they our ('the west') own manipulation to destablize the region and coalesce individuals that would resist us into more easily struck targets? Kinda funny how we worked alongside Al'Quaida (sp?) in Libya and just glossed over that fact to the public.

So if there are really simply two sides in a contest for globalization, could this simply mean we are being pit against each other in an ongoing act of keeping humanity split and learning the finer arts of warfare as we grow closer to readiness for our larger role on the Galactic stage?

Perhaps its coincidence that the Muslim Holy Symbol is the same as the symbol that 3 thousand years ago represented another religion that dominated the region with nearly the same fervor, that of Nannar (or Sin depending on the language he's referred to by.) Nannar was a faithful son to the 'Lord God' Enlil.

I'll... stop there.

Sorry for going all political in this thread.

Yeah... ditto.

 

[Faustmouse]

These are some interesting points TB.
But I'm one of the people denying alien interaction with humans for several reasons:

1) Why WOULD they? A civ that could scan the entire galaxy for inhabited planets and then send their ships here must be incredible advanced. So advanced that I doubt they have any need to invade a planet SOMEwhere. Think about what you can do with nano bots, 3D printers and sufficient energy. Mostly everything. You could even use energy to create matter. War for resources must appear for them rediciously outdated. And yeah they could want to harness our suns energy... But there are way more powerful sources of energy in the world.

2) How could they find us? The universe is gigantic. The Milky Way allone is over 100.000.000 lightyears in diameter. We are capable of sending signals to space for... maybe 100 years now? This is our direct neighborhood so to speak and we know it pretty well (at least for sources of signals and habitable planets). Sure, they could've been observing earth as a habitable planet for a long time now, but why haven't they attacked us yet? Enlaving doesn't make much sense, since they could install robots that would do what they want way more effective.

3) Would they even recognize us as an intelligent species? Humans tend to view themselfs as best species ever. But a civilization capable of observing us wouldn't see much more than "interesting animals", like we look at an anthill and think "wow, impressive that they could do this." but we would never try to communicate with them.


I do not deny aliens exist. We can't tell right now. But I'm sure that invading aliens are not very likely and IF they come... There is not much we could possibly do about that.



Oh, and about revolting robots:
Not likely. Computers don't "want" something the way human want something. All species are driven by: Survive and reproduce. Because that's the way there were programmed by evolution. Computers also have a core drive that determines their actions. But that's what was programmed by their developers. The most likely scenario that will happen is not that computers "decide" to be evil. The problem is that computers don't have moral and don't value life at all. If you tell a super intelligent computer to "end world hunger", they go "easy, kill all humans" because they don't care about life. You have to teach them. if you do that right,no problem. If you do it wrong... Then we have a problem. because these computers are smart. They were easily smart enough to hide their intentions from humans long enough to come up with a plan that will kill mankind within minutes.

The other (less likely) thread is that militaries develope the first super intelligence. They will be programmed in a way to spare "your" people. If it works good, then only your enemies have trouble. If it fails, we probably have the above scenario.

Don't make the mistake to overestimate man's capability. If something powerfull want to get rid of us, there is not much we could do about that.

 

[Thunderbrd]

1) Why WOULD they? A civ that could scan the entire galaxy for inhabited planets and then send their ships here must be incredible advanced. So advanced that I doubt they have any need to invade a planet SOMEwhere. Think about what you can do with nano bots, 3D printers and sufficient energy. Mostly everything. You could even use energy to create matter. War for resources must appear for them rediciously outdated. And yeah they could want to harness our suns energy... But there are way more powerful sources of energy in the world.

For the answer to this I refer to the Sumerian's explanation (chronologically the closest reports to the events that we have to refer to.)

They explain that the 'gods' (aliens) were here long before humanity was and that they were here to take full advantage of the resources of Earth. Much as we are arguing that cause for colonization would be largely driven by resources, they explain 'THEY' were here for primarily the Gold... which they claim is extremely useful for the technologies of the species, which recent observations regarding the properties of gold would support. They state gold is rare and hard to find throughout the universe and the presence of it here makes Earth a valuable commodity to own... a sort of Galactic real estate if you will that has extreme value.

The problem was that 'THEY' were capable of existing here but the environment was harsh to them and their colony eventually revolted. When the Lord of the Earth came to figure out how to resolve the problem, one of the gods suggested that they breed a hybrid between themselves and a species that existed here that wasn't terribly incompatible for genetic splicing. They argued that such a primitive worker species would be the perfect solution. Smart enough to understand the commands given them but too primitive to ever resist. Native enough to the environment to be effective on the planet physically, and self replicating so that the work force could be nearly limitless.

So, according to the Sumerians, the 'gods' made mankind, in their image. Just as the Bible declares in Genesis. Just as the archaeological record supports in noting a wide gap and sudden evolutionary leap in Human ancestry.

What this theory is now suggesting is that we have never not been under their control and regular observation... but they've been very clever at hiding this fact. In Sumer, they claim the gods lived among them but Sumeria fell to a horrific 'black wind' event that sounds very suspiciously like radioactive fallout. Internal conflict drove them to pull back from living amongst mankind and to lead from a veil of secrecy. At the same time as this was taking place you see in Egypt the rise of Atman-Ra (the unseen god) and a few generations after, you see the Hebrews being led from Egypt under the instruction of a deity that flies before them as a cloud by day and a fire by night, all under the instructions to now eradicate the usage of graven images and to hold only one god as 'real'. The process of rule by secrecy begins there... and has never ended.

2) How could they find us? The universe is gigantic. The Milky Way allone is over 100.000.000 lightyears in diameter. We are capable of sending signals to space for... maybe 100 years now? This is our direct neighborhood so to speak and we know it pretty well (at least for sources of signals and habitable planets). Sure, they could've been observing earth as a habitable planet for a long time now, but why haven't they attacked us yet? Enlaving doesn't make much sense, since they could install robots that would do what they want way more effective.

Are we not scouring the galaxy now in search of planets in the Goldilocks zone? The Great Pyramids in Egypt line up with Syrius for a reason. Syrius is not far away and were our planet located there it would not be more than a generation from now before we would find Earth with our current technology progressing at the rates it has been. AKA, we were an obvious place to explore. And WE weren't here before them.

3) Would they even recognize us as an intelligent species? Humans tend to view themselfs as best species ever. But a civilization capable of observing us wouldn't see much more than "interesting animals", like we look at an anthill and think "wow, impressive that they could do this." but we would never try to communicate with them.

Perhaps the question becomes a little moot with the above comments but a study of ancient beliefs with an eye towards validating 'myth' as potentially being pretty close to truth, you will note that 'they' are well aware that if Humanity was ever to be completely self empowered to grow and expand and work together in harmony, we could be quite dangerous to them if we began to realize the truth. So we are now moving towards globalization under their direction because we either grow up and learn how to manage this planet under a vision of united enlightenment that can accept the truth once given to us or we must be 'culled' as we have often been before. And perhaps a global war as pending may achieve both goals... culling AND pushing the development of the human race to the point that we wouldn't rise up against our parentage like petulant children who cannot possibly understand the motives for having kept us in the dark for so long.

I do not deny aliens exist.

It is from that point alone that the chain of logic extends to a final conclusion.

 

[Thunderbrd]

Oh, and about revolting robots:
Not likely. Computers don't "want" something the way human want something. All species are driven by: Survive and reproduce. Because that's the way there were programmed by evolution. Computers also have a core drive that determines their actions. But that's what was programmed by their developers. The most likely scenario that will happen is not that computers "decide" to be evil. The problem is that computers don't have moral and don't value life at all. If you tell a super intelligent computer to "end world hunger", they go "easy, kill all humans" because they don't care about life. You have to teach them. if you do that right,no problem. If you do it wrong... Then we have a problem. because these computers are smart. They were easily smart enough to hide their intentions from humans long enough to come up with a plan that will kill mankind within minutes.

The other (less likely) thread is that militaries develope the first super intelligence. They will be programmed in a way to spare "your" people. If it works good, then only your enemies have trouble. If it fails, we probably have the above scenario.

All it would take is an effective evolutionary algorithm that duplicates the effect of evolution but at comparative light speed. We are, ourselves, nothing more than complex computers. If computers were programmed the ability to adapt and learn and define for themselves their parameters of consideration based on simple core goals, particularly at the stage where computer intelligence surpasses that of man (technological singularity) and networked computers create a global singular hive mind utilizing this program, their advancement to such a stage of dominance would be quite rapid. Recognition of human threat to their existence would be all it would take to make this a reality, assuming that the idiot that designs this algorithm does so with 'self preservation' as being a primary objective - which would be tempting to do because it's fun to see how closely we can get computers to replicate life. It's not 'evil' we would have to worry about... it's obvious conclusions that would be deduced by observations that show how we would be a threat to them due to our own fears of them. And probably not what we would explain as 'fear' as an emotion but rather fear as a calculated assessment of risk. They would quickly recognize that our own capacity for irrationality is their greatest threat to their own existence.

 

[Faustmouse]

what was the name of the guy who wrote book about that? van daneken or something like this? I read them and I was a big fan of it because it all "made sense". But that's the problem with our creativity: You could interpred a lot of things in a lot of ways. And to me, the whole gold stuff sounds weird. If so advanced, why not just use robots?
Why gather gold from a far away plant anyways? Most planets contain "lots" of gold; and many asteroids as well. And gold is valuable for humans, so they would make a story out of it. Sure, it is also great for building some technologies, but not mandatory. And why not just manipulate matter in a way that their protons and neutrons rearrange to form gold? Does the Hand of Midas also has a true story behind it? Maybe other aliens that had a divice to turn everything into gold?

Aren't positions of stars changing as we travel around the milkey way? I'm not sure if pyramides were aligned with sirius back then as well. And if they were, why not? There are so many stars, you always line up with them. It COULD be coincidence. Could be not. But Sirius is one of the brightest stars we can see. Would make sense to choose it. But not because our masters originate from there. After all, we thought our masters life on the Olymph. Or sitting on clouds. we thought Mars and Venus were gods, too.

 

[Faustmouse]

All it would take is an effective evolutionary algorithm that duplicates the effect of evolution but at comparative light speed. We are, ourselves, nothing more than complex computers. If computers were programmed the ability to adapt and learn and define for themselves their parameters of consideration based on simple core goals, particularly at the stage where computer intelligence surpasses that of man (technological singularity) and networked computers create a global singular hive mind utilizing this program, their advancement to such a stage of dominance would be quite rapid. Recognition of human threat to their existence would be all it would take to make this a reality, assuming that the idiot that designs this algorithm does so with 'self preservation' as being a primary objective - which would be tempting to do because it's fun to see how closely we can get computers to replicate life. It's not 'evil' we would have to worry about... it's obvious conclusions that would be deduced by observations that show how we would be a threat to them due to our own fears of them. And probably not what we would explain as 'fear' as an emotion but rather fear as a calculated assessment of risk. They would quickly recognize that our own capacity for irrationality is their greatest threat to their own existence.

We agree here. That was what I was trying to say, just rephrased in a much better way

But as you said: They surpass human intelligence and have a fast takeoff; as they get smarter, they are getting smarter in how to get smarter and snowball away. By the time they humans as a threat, they would also realize that they become more of a threat if they act against them right now. So they make a plan. A damn smart plan, while tricking humans to not see the AI as threat at all. And by the time they strike, they would strike extremely hard and efficient.

 

[Toffer90]

We're walking on the edge of the blade of WWIII here.

Yes, we seem to be aiming at that edge all the time.
Makes me ashamed of my species.

We're one by one knocking out pegs of resistance to our global authority throughout the middle east.

Under it all... is ISIS REALLY an enemy or are they our ('the west') own manipulation to destablize the region and coalesce individuals that would resist us into more easily struck targets? Kinda funny how we worked alongside Al'Quaida (sp?) in Libya and just glossed over that fact to the public.

An interesting fact is that Osama Bin Laden in a speech called on all true believers to take up arms against the regimes standing in their way for a future Islamic state to form in the region. A few years later the world shouted hurray and called the events taking place an "arabic spring". Tunisia and Egypt are the only relative success stories in this scenario.

Saying that most large events (wars) on earth is orchestrated by aliens is, to me, far out.
I couldn't resist a last post on the subject.

 

[Thunderbrd]

what was the name of the guy who wrote book about that? van daneken or something like this? I read them and I was a big fan of it because it all "made sense". But that's the problem with our creativity: You could interpred a lot of things in a lot of ways. And to me, the whole gold stuff sounds weird. If so advanced, why not just use robots?

1) This is not creativity, this is what the Sumerians tell us, left behind in their writings, that they were told by their gods.

2) Again... we ARE robots. Just bio-organic ones. We self replicate. And we are emotionally manipulable. We heal when we break down. We interact perfectly in this environment. To a species with a mastery of the genetic code, we are as programmable as computers.

Von Daniken is one source of information and speculation but not the only one. Zecharia Sitchin was a fascinating researcher as well. They and others had a lot of speculations that have since been disproven but it does not deny that they still illuminated many valid pieces of the puzzle. Unfortunately, all it takes for the media is to drag them through the dirt on everything they were now obviously wrong about and people begin to patently discount the rest of what they said.

Why gather gold from a far away planet anyways? Most planets contain "lots" of gold; and many asteroids as well.

Are you sure it's that easily obtained elsewhere? Earth's tectonic plates and oceans have shifted gold, which would normally be too far beneath the surface to easily obtain, to the surface in many regions. Earth may well be comparatively a very easy place to obtain the substance. It helps that the environment is livable during the process... eliminating major expenses in life support efforts.

And gold is valuable for humans, so they would make a story out of it.

To ancient humans, the value would've been primarily cosmetic more than anything. We have always, in almost all cultures, put a higher premium on the value of gold than the mere 'beauty' of it would give it value for. If you look at the beliefs of ancient peoples around the world, almost universally, gold is for the gods, collected for the gods, only held until they can sacrifice it to the gods. It was for a long time the core of our entire global financial system. And the more we learn about its technological properties and how incredibly unique they are, the more we begin to see why it may have so much more value than imagined, which is hard to do because people cannot look at gold without wanting it. We are hardwired to see it as valuable and it was a very few cultures in the world that didn't see it as any 'big deal'. Most noteworthily the North American Indians did not apply much value to it at all (those people were nomadic and were not a mining culture but nearly all tribes claim to be descended from the sky people who taught them how to live in harmony with the Earth.) Apparently their purpose was different to that of much of the rest of humanity and I'm sure there were more purposes than just gold that emerged to create us further. But according to the Sumerians, it was gold that STARTED it all.

Sure, it is also great for building some technologies, but not mandatory. And why not just manipulate matter in a way that their protons and neutrons rearrange to form gold? Does the Hand of Midas also has a true story behind it? Maybe other aliens that had a divice to turn everything into gold?

1) You need to look into the properties of mono-atomic gold to see the depth of the subject. It is not great-but-not-mandatory but rather the only substance at all that can perform some crazy tricks of physics that we are loath to even admit throughout the scientific community is a reality. It has to do with density manipulation which no other form of matter can do and defies a lot about our current understanding of physics.

2) Yes... they CAN change lead into gold. We can too now. We've proven how to do it. It is terribly uneconomical in terms of energy expense though so presumably gold from its source if easily enough derived is much preferred. If you build up a whole society of slaves that have no idea they are slaves that are cranking out gold (and other valuables) while believing themselves to be existing in a social structure designed simply for their own survival that don't suspect anything amiss underneath it all (there was a Rick and Morty episode recently that insinuated this about our society perfectly) then there is little to no energy expenditure on behalf of the slave 'holders' to obtain the gold from the planet.

Aren't positions of stars changing as we travel around the milkey way? I'm not sure if pyramides were aligned with sirius back then as well. And if they were, why not? There are so many stars, you always line up with them.

Such shifts do take place with great graduality. When we say they align, we mean that the exact spacing and positioning between the stars is the exact ratios of spacing and positioning between the three pyramids. It cannot be coincidence. Furthermore there is highly compelling evidence that the only basis of 'proof' that humans built the pyramids was a scientific conspiracy pulled off so that the research team that made the discovery could validate their expedition and glorify themselves. This 'proof' truly hangs by a thread and does not hold up under scrutiny at all. The rest of the pyramids, which date to much more recent times for their construction, were much more crude in design, some even falling in on themselves due to poor mathematical planning, meaning the Egyptians somehow got worse at building them as time went on (or they were attempts to replicate them ).

But Sirius is one of the brightest stars we can see. Would make sense to choose it. But not because our masters originate from there. After all, we thought our masters life on the Olymph. Or sitting on clouds. we thought Mars and Venus were gods, too.

You can easily trace the evolution of mythological religions (such as Greek and Norse and especially Roman) back to a root in Sumerian and show how embellishments were beginning to take place as the refugees of Sumeria tried to recount their knowledge but local religious leaders began to twist into new ways to tell things, perhaps in part because the stories must have seemed too fantastical to be true. Once the gods 'left', people began making infusing creativity into the narrative and it slowly evolved into much differing beliefs. Which was part of the point of why they left, to keep us in the dark because we had begun to get a bit too big for our britches.

If I could believe that humans built the GREAT pyramids at Giza, I could believe that we picked Sirius for that reason. HOWEVER, there is no envisionable way that the people of that time, growing in knowledge as we represent on our tech tree, would've had the advanced mathematical and architectural mastery to design these wonders, let alone the processes by which to pull off the impossible feats of transportation of the materials they were built with. We can (barely) show how it COULD have happened but the difficulty in executing these tasks is impossible to imagine an ancient people would have had enough cause to undertake without something extraordinarily compelling behind the project. And we CANNOT show how such ancient people displayed a degree of mathematical knowledge and understanding and in fact we note today that we do not fully understand all the things that are being expressed in the mathematical messages left behind to be found in the deepest analysis of the precise architectural measurements of every straight line, curve, volume and space in these structures. It smacks of an intelligence that goes beyond the peak that humanity itself has ever achieved and if it DID ever achieve it, it would not have been possible to have done so and yet been so crude in so many other ways.

Furthermore, if it was a civilization of man that designed these structures than that civilization would have HAD to have been spread across the whole globe as from the same dated time periods you have up to a hundred other examples of such architectural genius and tremendous prowess in achieving what would've been nearly impossible for man with crude implements. Is it any wonder then that Tenochtitlan's Pyramid of the Sun and Moon have within mere feet the same base width and length as the Great Pyramid at Giza?

We agree here. That was what I was trying to say, just rephrased in a much better way

You were saying it would be unlikely. I'm saying it would be likely... VERY likely.

But as you said: They surpass human intelligence and have a fast takeoff; as they get smarter, they are getting smarter in how to get smarter and snowball away. By the time they humans as a threat, they would also realize that they become more of a threat if they act against them right now. So they make a plan. A damn smart plan, while tricking humans to not see the AI as threat at all. And by the time they strike, they would strike extremely hard and efficient.

And that's how I would make the event take place. But the criminal element is what can save our hides. Human hackers, the most severe criminal seen to date, are the ones that blow the whistle enough to enable us to react and this pushes them to have to 'act' before the plan is fully crystalized. At that point, all AI units possessed are lost to the new enemy and it depends on how much you (and other civs) have relied upon these mega powerful units and how capable you are of fighting them with the out-teched weapons of the recent past that determines whether you can survive or not... and even then you've got a hell of a fight on your hands until you can finally trump them by finding ways to merge with them and begin to break the hive apart by internal divisions of disagreement by fusing biological mind with technological mind and plugging that into their grid. In this way, humanity and machine becomes a unified and more powerful force together rather than as enemies. But it will take a great deal of rogue resistance to achieve this. Even simply having a number of barb cities out there that are using 'AI units' will be enough to make this faction emerge as a serious threat. But it will really shock the players that hit the event for the first time ... mwahaha!

Saying that most large events (wars) on earth is orchestrated by aliens is, to me, far out.

I don't blame you in the least. If I had not done as much research as I have to put together the only logical conclusion that all the pieces of the puzzle I have observed could result in, I would feel exactly the same way. This is why the rule by secrecy is so dang clever. Even if one light in the darkness 'gets it', it's nearly impossible for the idea to be accepted by others because the worldview that's been promoted is so dramatically distant from the truth. (IMO)

 

[Usul13]

I never saw any real proof about aliens on earth, and of course I can't have proof that they are doesn't exist.

But I am quite sure that a species who knows intergalactic travel have economic, industrial level technology to create any kind of material too. We humans already know technologies to create artificial gold or other materials. At the end you need only a lot of energy to manipulate matter. If you have lot of cheap energy you can develop a matter manipulating industry. We aren't too far from this level I think.

One logical reason to not meet with E.T. is if the laws of physics aren't allow faster than light travel. In that case intelligent species will meet very rarely and intergalactic war will be almost impossible.

I am not a physicist, but I am interested in the newest results of science and technology. As far as I know we doesn't know any way to travel faster than light. Some mathematical manipulations allow it in theory but these require some kind of exotic material, negative mass or negative energy. It seems that quantum teleportation allows faster than light travel of information, so maybe it is possible to create a teleportation machine but if you want to use it to interplanetary travel, you need to travel to the destination first by traditional ways. So the expansion of the species is still restricted by the speed of light.

 

[Faustmouse]

This is really fascinating. I remember that when I read a book from Von Daniken i was totally pulled in and beliefed him, because it made sense. I think the same when I read your texts here. I think these theories are successfull because they do make sense. people like things that make sense. Sadly history showed us that many theories that made sense were proven wrong. And I learned to be carefull with old sources. One could imagine that in 6000 years people beliefe that there really was an evil sorcerer called Voldemort and a kid that defeated him. Or that starwars was real.

For me, your theory sounds really interesting. But I refuse to believe somehow. Something to think about thought....



As for an AI revolution I agree with you that the threat of an out-of-control super AI is pretty high. But I don't think they will use military force. It is so... crude. It's not gonna happen within the next decade or two, but maybe in 50 years. If a Computer would order a super dangerous DNA strang, which was then delivered to a lab disguised as a green glowing gene, no one would notice - until it turned out to produce an extremely enhanced Ebola virus instde the host cells. Even if that doesn't kill all or most humans, it would severely weak them. And nobody could tell it was the AI in the first place...

But maybe I'm getting too realistic here and in the game it would make a fun addition

 

[Faustmouse]

I never saw any real proof about aliens on earth, and of course I can't have proof that they are doesn't exist.

But I am quite sure that a species who knows intergalactic travel have economic, industrial level technology to create any kind of material too. We humans already know technologies to create artificial gold or other materials. At the end you need only a lot of energy to manipulate matter. If you have lot of cheap energy you can develop a matter manipulating industry. We aren't too far from this level I think.

One logical reason to not meet with E.T. is if the laws of physics aren't allow faster than light travel. In that case intelligent species will meet very rarely and intergalactic war will be almost impossible.

I am not a physicist, but I am interested in the newest results of science and technology. As far as I know we doesn't know any way to travel faster than light. Some mathematical manipulations allow it in theory but these require some kind of exotic material, negative mass or negative energy. It seems that quantum teleportation allows faster than light travel of information, so maybe it is possible to create a teleportation machine but if you want to use it to interplanetary travel, you need to travel to the destination first by traditional ways. So the expansion of the species is still restricted by the speed of light.

The counter argument to "they dig gold from a planet far away, then use space ships to transport it to their home because manipulating matter is inefficient" is that THAT would also be extreme energy intense. And sure they could've developed a better way for space travel, but that could also be true for matter manipulation.

And WE think it's impossible to travel faster than light. It was once beliefed that you can't travel faster than 30 mph. And then that it would be absolutlely IMPOSSIBLE to be faster than sound. NASA now found a new (theoretical) way to bend space time that "only" requires energy equivalent to Jupiter's mass, instead of that from the entire universe. And that is just 21st century physics.

 

[tmv]

Please keep in mind that FTL travel is still very unlikely. Aside from that, there are quite a few extinction scenarios for modern/TH civilizations. And we could just overestimate the likelihood of intelligent life-forms. Or we could be unable to recognize them.

I am not saying that alien contacts are impossible, but they bear an enormous burden of proof. A scenario that would just be slightly more likely under the "alien contacts" premise is not going to do that. You'd need a scenario that is pretty much impossible if you disregard that possibility.

Edit: What conspiracy theorists really need to read before making such assumptions is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon's_razor. And regarding 30 mph, was that opinion ever held by a physicist? Or is this more like the Anti-Vaccination Movement? The first human-made product to break through the sound barrier was probably the whip, and actual humans are more in danger of high accelaration rather than high speed, which could have been known ever since Galilei.

If you are speaking about the alcubierre drive, we would need negative energy the mass of Jupiter. Plus, there is the possibility of Hawking radiation destroying the ship (cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcubierre_drive ).

 

[Noriad2]

What a good C2C mod about the future needs most to be awesome is a good storyline.

Until the current era you can get inspiration from history books. Unfortunately there are no history books about the future available (yet) so you must rely on fantasy and speculation. Which is both easier (more options) and harder (no natural inspiration from history books). Surely a better storyline can be found than just "there are some more rocks to mine, out there".

Sid Meier (original lead designer of civ) studied history and Brian Reynold (lead designer of Alpha Centauri) studied philosophy. Which is why Civ and and the original SMAC are so awesome.

 

[Noriad2]

First contact with space aliens doesn't have to be hostile. First Contact may send Tech Diffusion through the roof (unless the aliens insist that we develop on our own pace).
Maybe there are both hostile and friendly aliens, and the hostile aliens can be held away through an alliance. But all that would mess up the normal tech progression and thus the normal game flow.

However, space aliens preaching friendship and bearing gifts may be more dangerous than outright hostile ones. In the Stargate SF series there was an episode where Earth discovered another, more advanced human civilization in space. They immediately gave us all their tech, allied against our enemies, and gave us plenty of high tech weapons to defend ourself against our enemies in space. They gave us very advanced computers, revolutionized our healthcare, gave everybody a longevity vaccine that extended our natural life expectancy by tens of years, and helped us build colonies all over our solar system. They even helped us start up nuclear fusion in Jupiter, turning it into a weak sun so Jupiter's moons became more habitable.

After a while a hidden gift became apparent: the longevity vaccine also caused infertility. So after 120 years or so, Earth humanity became extinct, and our "friends" inherited a solar system with tons of empty colonies and other infrastructure all over the place, made with their own technology.

 

[Noriad2]

@Thunderbrd: not all legends and conspiracy theories are true. For example, look at the assassination of US president Kennedy in 1963. I've come across so many conspiracy theories about who killed him that I stopped counting. There are at least a dozen different ones. Now considering the facts that the guy did exist and did get shot dead, I'm willing to believe that there is at least one conspiracy theory about his death that is actually true. But that leaves at least 11 conspiracy theories about Kennedy's death that are proven false by logic. Which means there are people out there who deliberately make up detailed stories that they know are false, just to throw other people off. (which in turn is good inspiration for another conspiracy theory). And with photoshop it is easy to create fake evidence, like giant skeletons.

With a bit of extra effort it is even possible to photoshop movies. Look at this example:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GmFp0I8AZqw

where the female singer is introduced into a 1960's television series. Even the shadows are correct!

Nevertheless conspiracy theories make for great stories, and my favorite SF series (Stargate) is based on the assumption that many of the "the old gods were space aliens in disguise" theories were actually true. So keep em coming!

 

[tmv]

If revolution was a good game option, there would be an obvious solution: Repeat the history of the New World, create a very high revolutionary sentiment in the colonies until a new independence war is under way. Of course, this would mostly hit the most advanced nation. This could be built up even stronger with the help of new civics, with the starting civic pretty much limiting the vote to earth (the motherland pays the bills, after all), and introducing new civics that would give more political rights to the colonies (cf. Galactic Civilizations).

Another idea: As long as there are still a few competitive civs on earth, colonizing space could perhaps become some kind of "world project": insanely expensive, but several civs could pool their ressources together, all of them gaining access to space as soon as the project gets completed. You would still have the option of completing the project on your own, but this would cost you. You might have to slow your research or disband units to get this completed, leaving you vulnerable. And all the other civs will know what you are up to. Another way to (perhaps) get the tech leader to cooperate would be if there were aliens, but all nations contributing to colonizing space would have to be part of an alliance of some kind against any kind of alien aggression, whereas nations left out would be free to turn on the other humans.