Slashdot Mirror


How Do You Greet an Extraterrestrial?

The LA Times is running a story about Earth Speaks, a companion project to SETI, which focuses on how we would communicate with intelligent extraterrestrial life, should we happen to discover it. Far more effort has been devoted to searching for signals or a means to communicate than the question of what we might say once contact is established, and the folks at SETI have set up a website to gather opinions on what the best questions and statements are. "So far, the messages break down into a few distinct categories. Some people want to throw a block party to welcome the aliens to the neighborhood. Others, less trusting, would warn the aliens that we've got guns and know how to use them. Another group, possibly influenced by having seen too many movies, would have us hide under the bed until they go away. 'If we discover intelligent life beyond Earth, we should not reply — we should freeze and play dead,' wrote one contributor." What would you say first to an alien?

40 of 803 comments (clear)

  1. Squids by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We can't even communicate in any meaningful way with squids, which are genetically far more closely related to us than any possible extraterestrials. What in the world makes us think that it would be any easier to communicate with extraterrestrials?

    --
    http://www.geoffreylandis.com
    1. Re:Squids by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That assumption is that for communication, sharing intelligence is more important than sharing genetics.

    2. Re:Squids by timeOday · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't think genetic kinship matters, instead it would hinge on the aliens' intelligence (more specifically, capacity for information processing). If the aliens are just at the level of fungus, it would be hard to discover them in the first place, moreover their existence wouldn't matter much anyways.

    3. Re:Squids by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It would indeed be difficult, and I suspect that the "communication" that would be possible would not really look much like the common use of the word. However, there are certain reasons for optimism:

      Unless the laws of physics are a good deal weirder than we think, we already know a great deal about what math aliens would have to know to talk to us. We could also reasonably suspect some knowledge of physics, astronomy(adjusted for their location of course) and similar knowledge. It still would be far from easy; but if you are talking to somebody across interstellar space, you can make a decent number of assumptions about what they know, unlike the squid case.

      I'm not expecting any heart-to-primary circulatory nodule chats with green babes, of course.

    4. Re:Squids by artor3 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why assume that if they find us, they must have sci-fi movie technology? Isn't it more likely, that they'd find us through their equivalent of a SETI project, or perhaps by saying "Hey, that planet over there looks like it might have some water on it. Maybe there's life there."

      In which case, we might find ourselves receiving a weak signal from them many years later, and perhaps an un-manned (un-aliened?) probe many years after that.

      No matter who finds who, it's likely that it'll take many years just to let the other know they've been found. Distances measured in light-years suck like that.

    5. Re:Squids by vlm · · Score: 4, Insightful

      We could also reasonably suspect some knowledge of physics, astronomy(adjusted for their location of course) and similar knowledge

      Physics gets pretty hard to discuss beyond F=ma without a common frame of technological reference and there are huge mathematical syntax issues.

      Chemistry would work the best since there are so many obvious constants. ionization constant of pure water. All the orbitals of an iron atom. A benzene ring is ubiquitous. Curie temperatures. Melting and boiling points. "shelf stable" chemical propellants are pretty much constant across the universe, for a given temperature range. Permanent magnet technology. Even an old fashioned steam pressure/temp table (or other useful engineering liquids, like some hydrocarbons, or refrigerants) would be the same.

      Now what would be fun would be figuring out the "new" stuff on each side. Just think of what has been developed here over the last couple decades... What is this 60 atom carbon molecule they find so entertaining? Why do they want us to stick this weird mostly rare earth ceramic in liquid nitrogen with wires hooked up to either side? WTF you claim you can polymerize fluorine? Then there's "helpful" advice, like don't accumulate too many atoms with a weight of 235 hydronium nuclei in one place or else!

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    6. Re:Squids by h4rm0ny · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So it might have some nasty weapons but probably nothing we should really fear or that we could not destroy.

      A little scientific knowledge doesn't occupy a lot of mass. For all we know, it might need nothing more than a captured human to extrapolate from, and then seed the planet from orbit with germ weapons.

      But it might not need to resort to direct weapons. It would, in a knowledge-based economy, be staggeringly wealthy. And humans have demonstrated themselves woefully subject to greed and credulity. It could side with one faction on Earth and have willing allies. Or it could behave as in the film "The Man Who Fell to Earth" where the alien in disguise establishes some basic patents and proceeds to build a massive business empire from there simply through its superior intellect (I really like the scene where he is watching six televisions at once). If you want non-knowledge based wealth, it presumably has mobility within our solar system and some decent analysis tools if it got here and found us. There are whole asteroids up there which are practically great lumps of valuable minerals. It could work with us to provide that wealth and the next thing you know, hyper-rich alien again and we're right back to playing the human race against itself. But the knowlede is the thing. If the alien is smarter and more knowledgable than us, that's a powerful weapon in itself if it chooses. As the main character in Use of Weapons by Iain M. Banks remarks: "everything is a weapon."

      --

      Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
    7. Re:Squids by thasmudyan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The only reason for hostility would be that they want something we have, and that could really only be the planet.

      Two other categories come to mind: the alien equivalent of religious fanaticism and some form of paranoia causing them to consider a pre-emptive strike against us. There may be many more reasons we can't fathom just yet. However, I don't disagree with you. We're probably of little interest to anyone out there, as we and our world are likely not compatible enough in any significant way.

    8. Re:Squids by Requiem18th · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Assuming there are no caps to technology, if you assume technology has some limits then as the parent says they are unlikely to have sci-fi movie technology.

      For instance everything seems to indicate that FTL travel an communications are really impossible, any alien visitor is likely to "leak" their presence in the form of TV broadcasting millions of years before we can actually contact them.

      Another possible cap is that civilizations inevitably destroy themselves at certain technological levels so that any alien visitor is necessarily technologically crippled in someway or otherwise they wouldn't have made it here alive, etc.

      There are also limits to the amount of energy that can be extracted from matter so it's unlikely that a single ship can take control of the entire earth (an army could but as what price?).

      Humans of 2009 would be eaten alive by the Romans without support from institutions of 2009 providing them with weapons, rations and medicines.

      In fact the more technologically advanced you are, the more dependent in your source civilization you are, an alien invasion fleet would not only be technologically advanced, but physically huge, which then forces you to consider the economics of an alien invasion, is the planet even worth the resources necessary to reach it and knock out the natives?

      --
      But... the future refused to change.
  2. Obviously the first question is... by ItsJustAPseudonym · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...do you actually have any green women in bikinis?

  3. Our guns vs. theirs by oneirophrenos · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So we've got guns. I wonder how intimidated a civilization that has the technology to traverse light-years through space would be of our bullets and bombs. If they wished to annihilate us, I wager they'd be able to do it without even giving us a chance to react. If an alien race should contact Earth, I think our best bet would be to at least assume that they have peaceful intentions.

    1. Re:Our guns vs. theirs by RsG · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So we've got guns. I wonder how intimidated a civilization that has the technology to traverse light-years through space would be of our bullets and bombs. If they wished to annihilate us, I wager they'd be able to do it without even giving us a chance to react. If an alien race should contact Earth, I think our best bet would be to at least assume that they have peaceful intentions.

      ^ What he said ^

      Seriously, people. Whoever it was from TFA who suggested "we've got guns and know how to use them" as a response was clueless.

      If an extraterrestrial species is remotely close to human beings technologically, then there is no way for them to reach us anymore than we can reach them. Interstellar space is a wonderfully effective buffer. If we're communicating with a neighbouring species via radio, with no chance of visitation, then we needn't worry about hostilities. Try to imagine fighting a war between North America and Australia without ships, missiles or aircraft. And that analogy vastly understates the distances involved.

      If they can reach us, and we can't reach them, then threats or hostility is a non-starter. Any spacecraft capable of crossing the gulf between stars is very likely so far ahead of us that we'd be unable to scratch the finish. And any craft able to cross that distance at a significant fraction of the speed of light is, by definition, able to render this entire planet sterile by way of a RKV. Think muskets vs. nukes here.

      --
      Erotic is when you use a feather. Exotic is when you use the whole chicken.
    2. Re:Our guns vs. theirs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Exactly. Lets look at the facts. We have guns. They're all on earth. We've never had a person go further from earth then lunar orbit. While we've had some success with robots going further, they're extremely slow, taking decades to plan, build, launch, and move to other planets. Most of our weapons wouldn't even work in space. This means we'd almost certainly be fighting them... on earth, or at best in earth orbit. That means no nukes, unless we're particularly stupid.

      Now compare alien technology. If we're fighting them, they're capable of pushing a spaceship from their star to ours. That means they're capable of pushing a few dozen asteroids from our asteroid belt to our major cities. Maybe we could deflect one, given a decade notice, but we'd be powerless to stop a dozen on courses chosen to end quickly, and they never even get close enough to us for us to attempt to engage them. And that's not even considering things they may have developed specifically as weapons.

    3. Re:Our guns vs. theirs by keraneuology · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Unless interstellar travel is nothing but a single "duh" moment away - maybe we're just missing something that will make everything simple and easy to understand. Like pipes or the wonderbra.

      --
      If the g'vt kept the data on you that google does you'd better believe you'd be calling it "doing evil"
    4. Re:Our guns vs. theirs by amorsen · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They could concoct a biological weapon that doesnt require any more advanced science than we already know.

      We couldn't kill all humans with a biological weapon with our current level of technology. Maybe 90%, maybe 99% because society breaks down, but there would be survivors. Nuclear is the only option right now. In the relatively near future, an asteroid or comet strike might become an option, but that's pretty much it for now.

      Well we could of course cause runaway greenhouse effect and boil the oceans, but that would be a really big project and take a long time.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    5. Re:Our guns vs. theirs by glueball · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Perhaps the intention with saying "we have guns" is we could annihilate ourselves if we thought it was in our best interest. Game theory intergalactic style.

      Game type #1:
      So imagine you are an alien, all peaceful and loving and just wanting to love a new species. Everything would work out, right? These would be the aliens like ET or Cocoon. Sure, we'd be labeled the North Koreans on the galactic block but at least we have a new place to visit. Maybe they have an intergalactic Dr. Phil who can help establish some trust.

      Game type #2
      Now what if you were a not so peaceful alien. You want to live on earth, but wow. Those humans are bat-shit crazy enough to destroy the planet. We better treat them kindly because if we fuck with them, they'll torch the place. These would be the aliens from Predator or Transformers.

      Game type #3
      The third possibility is that they will annihilate us no matter what our response. If we can quickly convey that we are crazy and will salt the earth, at least we might have a dog in the fight. The weapons might be ineffective on the aliens but we know they'll work on earth itself. These would be the Independence Day aliens. Not everyone can place a virus into the mother ship, but there's a reason that the Independence Day aliens chose earth and not Mars.

      Being nice will leave you only +1 to the peaceful aliens. Being crazy will leave you +2 or +3.

    6. Re:Our guns vs. theirs by Latinhypercube · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Anyone who cites Game theory for dealing with peaceful and God powerful aliens is already bat shit crazy. A very paranoid and schizophrenic way of thinking (John Nash). Any alien race advanced enough to go wandering the stars HAS ALREADY FOUND PEACE AT HOME. No domestically waring race would divert resources to traveling almost infinite distances looking for a new fight. If we were to show ANY aggression it is US that would suffer. I always find it funny that we think aliens would come to the Earth to visit humans. How about them coming to visit the Earth with it's unique climate and beautiful variety of animals, plants, insects, single cell, marine life (that we are trying our best to destroy).

    7. Re:Our guns vs. theirs by jamstar7 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      These would be the Independence Day aliens. Not everyone can place a virus into the mother ship, but there's a reason that the Independence Day aliens chose earth and not Mars.

      Yeah, it's called a plot hook. If the aliens took over Mars & the asteroid belt, it would have been a completely different (and most likely, boring as hell) movie.

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    8. Re:Our guns vs. theirs by fractoid · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No domestically waring race would divert resources to traveling almost infinite distances looking for a new fight.

      Whuh? How'd you get that? I don't see an event like the invention of a practicable hyperdrive having that sort of effect on us war-crazy buggers, why should it affect aliens that way?

      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
  4. Re:Offer them a subscription? by youn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    > We should definitely show them that we are rational, well behaved lifeforms, with broad interests and predictable interaction

    You think we should lie to them, right off the bat?

    --
    Never antropomorphize computers, they do not like that :p
  5. Re:Welcome! by TeamSPAM · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is probably one of the few threads where this meme is on topic. To put this in perspective we are probably the native american indians greeting the european explorers. And we know how well that turned out for them.

    --
    Brought to you by Team SPAM! where we believe: "Information in the noise!"
  6. Freeze and play dead? by johannesg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Freeze and play dead? Someone really should have thought of that _before_ we started broadcasting radio and TV and a planet-wide basis. Those waves really don't stop when they hit the outer atmosphere you know... By now we should be fairly well-known in our galactic neighbourhood.

    As for talking about our guns, whoever shows up here has already demonstrated massively superior technology to ours (we are not showing up on _their_ doorstep are we?) so antagonizing them might not be such a great idea either.

    So yeah, by all means let's throw a party and hope it isn't us that ends up on the barbecue...

    1. Re:Freeze and play dead? by rastilin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't think that's a given. The only two things we're lacking in order to make a slow-boat colonization ship to another planet is: 1) Hibernation technology 2) The economic dedication required to do so

      Well we're also lacking the technology to build a structure that can withstand the trip and take all the stuff it needs with it. Even if we had the technology, we'd still need to design and scale up smaller models till we got to a point where we can build it. But that isn't my point, my point is that we'd be hard pressed to build a colony ship even if we dedicated the planet's whole productive and economic capacity into it. Even if we optimized it with those "keep me awake for a week" drugs and 100 hour work weeks. That means that even a low tech STL ship that comes in to Earth implies a level of mass production several orders above ours. That is a scary thing. It means that if they actually wanted to fight us, they could out produce us in terms of Armor and Planes. If they have a high level of automation, they won't even need many personnel.

      --
      How do you kill that which has no life?
    2. Re:Freeze and play dead? by Daniel_Staal · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Doesn't matter: They would have to be at least equal to us in most technology, and they would have a massive tactical advantage: A ship capable of spending an indeterminate time in deep space, with full life-support. They also would have to have more experience with space tech, notably propulsion.

      All they have to do to wipe us out is retreat to the asteroid belt, and lob a couple large ones this way. All of that would be easily within their demonstrated abilities. We have no weapons capable of attacking outside of low orbit, and no way of countering (much less actually stopping) an attack of that magnitude. Such an attack would almost certainly leave the biosphere intact, but would likely destroy all real industrial capacity and political stability on Earth. (And might even manage to wipe out humanity directly.)

      The only real reason not to do such if they wanted a war would be because they wanted our tech.

      Much better to be friendly, and see how well we can bargain. A planet-based civilization can't hold out against an attacker that holds the high orbitals.

      --
      'Sensible' is a curse word.
  7. There is no way to be "Silent"... by NukeDoggie · · Score: 2, Insightful

    They would be advanced enough to hear us like we hear them... We emit lots of noise without trying. We would have to face them head on and with as little fear as we can, which means each nation would try to oneup each other in favor, and then war would ensue...

  8. First... by shellster_dude · · Score: 1, Insightful

    We would need to find intelligent life on this planet before we can find it anywhere else!

  9. Atomic Rockets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Imagine yourself taking a stroll through Manhattan, somewhere north of 68th street, deep inside Central Park, late at night. It would be nice to meet someone friendly, but you know that the park is dangerous at night. That's when the monsters come out. There's always a strong undercurrent of drug dealings, muggings, and occasional homicides.

    It is not easy to distinguish the good guys from the bad guys. They dress alike, and the weapons are concealed. The only difference is intent, and you can't read minds.

    Stay in the dark long enough and you may hear an occasional distance shriek or blunder across a body.

    How do you survive the night? The last thing you want to do is shout, "I'm here!" The next to last thing you want to do is reply to someone who shouts, "I'm a friend!"

    What you would like to do is find a policeman, or get out of the park. But you don't want to make noise or move towards a light where you might be spotted, and it is difficult to find either a policeman or your way out without making yourself known. Your safest option is to hunker down and wait for daylight, then safely walk out.

    There are, of course, a few obvious differences between Central Park and the universe.

    There is no policeman.

    There is no way out.

    And the night never ends.

  10. This is all very optimistic by Vahokif · · Score: 1, Insightful

    What makes them think aliens even have anything in common with us? Read some Stanislav Lem for how that might not be true in the slightest.

  11. Do what they do and be patient by physicsphairy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If we encounter a civilization of vastly superior technology, the idea that we would possess any capacity to negotiate is more or less absurd. Hiding doesn't work either. Assuming it's them discovering us and not vice versa, the encounter cannot possibly be far from our highly-immobile civilization, and even if we immediately turned off all the power plants and went dark, it's not like there is such an abundance of life-supporting planets nearby that earth could hope to slip through the cracks. It may not even be wise to try and be all buddy-buddy with them, as who knows what sort of culture and religion they follow. ("you dare bow to us? we will surely annihilate you for the insult of that most obscene gesture!")

    The simplest and wisest thing to do is let them call all the shots. Speak when spoken to; otherwise, be silent. Look for opportunities to reciprocate any kindness. Any technology they can be convinced to offer is guaranteed to exceed the value of any riches we bring as tribute (which should have value by virtue of uniqueness even if their culture does not experience the same rarity of materials).

    If our visitors are demanding and unreasonable human being will almost certainly have to postpone any major rebellion until they are in a position to acquire some of their oppressors' technological resources.

  12. Re:Offer them a subscription? by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You're assuming that exploiting natural resources and fighting with each other is only a human issue.

    --
    Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
  13. Re:It really all depends on resources by RsG · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Wandering slightly offtopic...

    What would an alien civilization able to travel to earth consider a "resource"?

    For our purposes, we'd count fossil fuels, electricity, metals, arable land, industrial and commercial infrastructure, livestock, water, building materials, manufactured items, people... All things which are finite and useful.

    If a species has the tech to cross a few dozen light years, they won't need some of the above. Water, for example, is easy to come by even in our own star system. Electrical generating capacity would be far in advance of our own, given the amount of energy needed to move a spacecraft over such distances. Fossil fuels and uranium would very likely be useless to a species far ahead of us technologically.

    On the other hand, things we don't consider to be resources might be valuable to aliens. For example, we don't yet need He3 for anything, but we might want it some day as fuel. There are likely isotopes of elements we don't yet know the uses for, but an alien might.

    The point I'm getting at is that we don't know what an alien civilization considers a "resource", or what scarcity they'd have.

    However, I strongly suspect that there's no profit in travelling interstellar distances to get resources. The energy requirements for such a trip are too large; that same technology could almost certainly be put to use to acquire or synthesize resources much more easily.

    --
    Erotic is when you use a feather. Exotic is when you use the whole chicken.
  14. Re:stupid thought experiment by R2.0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Eight forms of human language remain uncracked by modern linguists. Surely trying to speak Ventaxian and understand their communication will be nigh impossible. Heck I don't think their characters have been encoded into unicode."

    I would disagree. Eight forms of writing remain uncracked. Were we to have a speaker of that language magically placed in front of those linguists, they'd crack it in about a day.

    "Language" must have context in order for it to be understood properly - writing is simply the 2 dimensional representation of a many-dimensional activity.

    --
    "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
  15. Re:Welcome! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Suppose there are aliens, with a unified intelligence, in strangely wider dimensions. Suppose they 'send' us cautious messages about ethics, say every 1000 earth/sun orbits. Then - all we do is write them down wrong, worship the misunderstandings generated, and fight the societies who corrupted the last version. "Greetings, Thor?", "Hail Xenu"? Douglas Adams could have told us.

  16. Re:It really all depends on resources by TuaAmin13 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Maybe they're tired of breathing canned air?

  17. Really so Advanced? by hax0r_this · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I keep seeing people posting about how much more advanced than us a species would have to be to reach earth. I simply don't see why thats true. To my knowledge we have at least general knowledge of every major technology we would need to travel between stars, and thats with NASA never having had a budget over about $34B 2007 dollars, and currently closer to half of that. If we spent less time and money on killing each other and bailing each other out, and maybe cared about something other than our own social problems, there's no reason we couldn't have people on other planets as we speak.

    Consider this:
    For about $135B 2005 dollars we effectively went from flying propeller planes to repeatedly placing men on the moon.
    Since 2001 we have spent about $865B in Iraq and Afghanistan.
    Since Fall of 2008 we have committed about $12.2 Trillion Dollars to "Economic Recovery" plans


    The barrier between us and the stars is not some insurmountable technology one, its a matter of money and willpower. The only hope I see is that private interests (including SpaceX and other companies) will pursue these technologies (considering that hundreds of companies have higher revenue than NASA) otherwise I'm afraid we may never get off this miserable rock before we kill ourselves off. You wouldn't bet the uptime of a moderately important website on a single webserver, yet we continue to bet the survival of our species on a single rock floating in space.

  18. Don't worry about those radio/tv broadcast by aepervius · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Freeze and play dead? Someone really should have thought of that _before_ we started broadcasting radio and TV and a planet-wide basis. Those waves really don't stop when they hit the outer atmosphere you know... By now we should be fairly well-known in our galactic neighbourhood.


    TV and radio braodcast are not detectable after a few dozen AU, at msot 1 light year (nearest solar system is 4 LY and galaxy width is measured in tens of thousand of LY to give you an idea). The reason for that is that the signal are not directional, and thus the strength of the signal goes weaker as you increase the sphere from which it diffuse to. At a distance we are speaking of, it is virtually undetectable. More or less you would have to make a powerful directional and very narrow signal toward another system to be detected at a few LY distance. Which is why SETI can only detect another specy which WANT to be detected for the same reason.

    As for being well known , we would be well known only in a very very small corner of our galaxy EVEN if the signal could travel such a distance... At most 100 LY if you count the first radio broadcast (and be VERY very very generous).

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  19. Re:There can be different kinds of intelligence by mahmud · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And note that simply having been around longer doesn't denote higher intelligence- 21st century technology knocks Ancient Greek tech into a cocked hat, but I'm not about to claim that we're all far more intelligent than Socrates, Aristotle and Plato.

    Once we get implants and augmented intelligence to play around with, the average Joe will easily outsmart Plato & Co, not to mention the potential DNA modifications that will likely be used to produce "faster" brains, with better analytical capabilities, thus making people "wiser" overall.

    If aliens have had millions of years to perfect themselves, it's not hard to imagine them leaving their early forms behind, and having merged with space itself.

    Humanity is still very young, and 8000+ years of semi-known history is but an instant.

  20. Re:There can be different kinds of intelligence by sznupi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Then most humans don't qualify also.

    --
    One that hath name thou can not otter
  21. What if They Don't Consider it Hostility? by Ken+McE · · Score: 3, Insightful
    If a civilization is advanced enough to travel here, they're probably advanced enough to not have any good reason to be hostile.

    If I decide to build a vacation house in the Everglades it might get a little rough for any alligators that happen to live on "my" lot. I'm not going to care if they've been there since sometime in the Mesozoic. I'm aware that alligators have some kind of intelligence, however I'm not that interested in it. They will never understand where I came from or how I got there, or what the hell I'm doing inside that big glass box my contractor put up on their best feeding ground. Any that get in my way will be dealt with, it doesn't matter how well they plan their defense. About all they can do is hope that I'm not a predator...

  22. Re:Closest Star is 3,900 years away by MrKaos · · Score: 2, Insightful

    We definitely do not have the technology to accomplish or even begin that goal. We'd need a multi-generational ship, capable of growing food without sunlight. It would need to survive longer than any culture or nation has by far.

    And how much do you think it will cost to invest in the technologies for us to get to that point.

    You have completely missed his point, which is spot on.

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.