/sci/ - Science & Math

>Considering no one has really made a valid answer for the Fermi Paradox outside of the rare earth hypothesis
The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

>>9957201
Yes it is in this case. I can safely say without much evidence that I likely have not been shot in the head given that if I were I would know. This is the same as how the Fermi Paradox states that if alien life existed we would know and before you reply actually learn what the fermi paradox is so you don't go "we just haven't found them yet".

>>9957197
That isn't a new idea at all, look up the great filter.

>>9957203
How would we know?

>>9957203
>Yes it is in this case.
No, it isn't in any case.

>>9957197
>Why is it so hard for people to accept that humans are most likely the only intelligent (as in capable of leaving our planet) species in the galaxy/galactic cluster?

Exactly, our galaxy/galactic cluster. And considering the universe is continues to expand and its significantly older than human existence, there is more likely than not intelligent species out there. The expansion of the universe may the obstacle that will ultimately decide if we will contact others.

>>9957197
>Considering no one has really made a valid answer for the Fermi Paradox
I find the Great Filter pretty convincing.

>>9957197
You have a claim, you need to prove it, you say aliens don't exist, prove it first ask later why others don't share your opinion.

>>9957201
>The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
The absence of evidence can be evidence of absence.

>>9957197
>Considering no one has really made a valid answer for the Fermi Paradox outside of the rare earth hypothesis
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox#Hypothetical_explanations_for_the_paradox

There's like 20 other arguments against it you filthy oxygen thief.

>>9957375
*takes scoop of sea water, "look, fish don't exist", absence must be proven as well by exhausting every other option first, and since we can't achieve that now, absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.

>>9957247
Space is boring as shit. Just look at the USA for a glimpse of the real future: a world of psychiatric drugs, pure spectacle, and withdrawal from reality.

Why go to a place that’s even more inhospitable than Earth when you can wither away in comfort watching a Chuck Lorre sitcom?

>>9957197
Why is it so hard for X to accept that we are most likely the only intelligent (as in capable of leaving our body a.k.a quantum telepathy) species in this multiverse cluster? Considering no one has really made a valid answer for out X Paradox outside of the rare intelligent quantum entanglement hypothesis, why do some still demand that there just have to be others out there? Doesn't the idea of being first not sit right with sci fi fans?

>>9957386
>Why go to a place that's even more inhospitable than Earth
Wanderlust plays a pretty big role in that, at least for me; and I'd imagine many other people who are interested in space exploration and just knowing what's out there and how. Besides,
>look at the USA for a glimpse of the real future
Again, it's not looking for a "future," or trying to make sense of what is to be. If I tell you there's something behind a door, but neither you nor I know what that is until we open that door, how are you ever gonna know? We could spend several millennia travelling space and never meet intelligent life or even reaching a hospitable planet/body but we'll never know until we get out there and explore.

>>9957203
>Yes it is in this case.

>>9957386
>Why go to a place that’s even more inhospitable than Earth when you can wither away in comfort watching a Chuck Lorre sitcom?
Isn't the big bang theory canceled?

>>9957386
Its in our inherent nature anon. We are like bacteria and viruses. We just aim to spread and colonize. That is why we need to continue infesting our surrounding galaxy.

>>9957197
Because there is no reason to think so. Fermi paradox is not even a paradox. There could be thousand interstellar civilizations in the galaxy without us noticing them. We don't know anything about their psychology or technology so we can't know how they would behave or if they would care about us any more than we care about ants

>>9957197
Humans being the only intelligent life doesn't make sense

Sorry to go /x tier here, but there is the possibility that the aliens are already here & monitoring us; they just have chosen for whatever reason to not publicly announce their existence. There have been plenty of eyewitness accounts, as well as strange videos and photographs of objects in the sky, like picture related, which was taken by a US Navy fighter aircraft; whatever it was could fly rings around existing craft, though it is unknown if it was ET or some fancy black-project craft.

>>9957583
It's an IR signature from another jet.
The strange shape and rotation come from the glare on a rotating lense/mirror arrangement in the camera assembly that allow for near 360 degree rotation.

>>9957570
We still have no idea how common life is, particularly complex life. Life on Earth got going shortly after the Earth cooled down enough, but took ~2 billion years or so after that to form even basic multicellular life. For all we know that jump to multicellular lifeforms is absurdly rare, and only occurs once or twice per galactic cluster per 5 billion years.

>>9957404
Now imagine that door has a billion dollar surcharge to go through.

Chuck Lorre sitcoms are free so long as they keep letting Lovagra ads play on the television.

Humanity’s wanderlust is overstated, anyways. Europeans didn’t discover the Americas because they were sick of their homeland, they did it because their food tasted like shit and they were prepared to do anything to get a new spice route, including funding a crank who said the Earth was half its size.

>>9957427
There will always be ten varieties of shit on TV so I can forget my pointless life grinding away in a forgotten department.

>>9957479
Humans don’t do shit. Humans are a substrate for technology to breed with, and humans will do anything to alleviate the burden of interacting with their reality. That is our nature.

>>9957630
You're projecting too hard, Anon.

>>9957649
I’m speaking plainly. Depression is on the rise, so is loneliness, and I have no tolerance for technological utopian. Technology is a system for substituting reality and interaction with that reality in favor of low effort and low investment solutions. The trend, ultimately, is to recess into a comfortable tomb.

Humanity will be lucky if its technological grave site forges into space on its behalf, but no human will leave the solar system.

>>9957663
It's easy to prognosticate as a doomsayer. No one ever remembers your projections if/when you're wrong, and it takes no effort to scoff in the first place. People will pursue a brighter future for no other reason than to spite that line of thought.

>>9957669
>a crock of “look up” platitudes

Yes, the genius of technological Utopianism. I can’t fault people for looking for a better future, but for god’s sake that better world will need to be founded on changes more fundamental than “build more rockets”.

But, since most people who spend their time dreaming about such futures do so from utmost childishness, their “better future” just means one with rockets so they can imagine their favorite video games (but for real!).

>>9957678
Technology doesn't solve every problem, but it solves a lot of them. It's not /sci/'s domain to address sociological issues anyway.

>>9957197
I know what the typical reaction is when it comes to UFO's but theres some curious ones that standout. The fly by of the whitehouse is one of the most notorious, and the reaction of the administration showed real fear. If they are out there, theyre likely watching us already.

>>9957408
>>9957213
>YOU CAN'T KNOW THAT THERE ISN'T ACTUALLY A DRAGON IN YOUR ROOM
How does it feel being a brainlet?

>>9957382
You are a retard. If there was no evidence at all that fish existed and you in no way ever heard of a fish then yes going to the see and not seeing fish would actually be evidence that fish don't exist.

>>9957546
>Doesn't understand the Fermi Paradox
The argument is that aliens would be nearly everywhere if they existed due to growth of population size or growth of technology used to extract energy

>>9957630
And humans will colonize space when they need more space to put people as the number of humans continues to grow

>>9957759
How can you be so stupid? Tell me something, do you breathe manually?

>>9957197
Sucks

>>9957757
>>YOU CAN'T KNOW THAT THERE ISN'T ACTUALLY A DRAGON IN YOUR ROOM
Who are you quoting?

>>9957201
True but considering the circumstances and the age of the Milky Way, why isn't there extensive evidence of INTELLIGENT LIFE. I'm 1000% sure there's alien life other than us but there's no evidence of existing intelligent civilizations, be it structures or communications.

>>9957197
You seem to be only looking at this from one angle. You're sure you've covered all the other possibilities why we may or may not be the only intelligent life in the universe? We haven't even reached intergalactic space travel to answer these questions. Yet we have the scientific community disregarding ufos instead of taking them seriously while our governments are withholding plenty of evidence about them. Ufo does not = alien, but do we still have the absolute truth of what they are? We know supernovas have been constantly releasing elements, amino acids found in space dust as well as meteorites, but how can anyone confirm that we were the first? How do you imagine us in one million years? Will we be dead, or will we evolve? Will we have the capabilities to search for intelligent life on other planets? Will we coincidently find other beings like us traveling through space or could they already be observing us quietly? No one can publicly say for sure.

>>9957589
And you do realize this isn't the whole clip when he says "THERE'S A WHOLE FLEET OF THEM!"

>>9957197
Life is more complicated than people think, people claiming "the universe is infinite or just really big therefore it should be teeming with life" are naive. On a cosmic scale you're much more likely to find boring black holes, stars, dead planets, or just empty space than an intelligent civ. Even approaching infinity the amount of dead to life ratio is large.

Physically, intelligent life might be so rare and far away that we may never know of their existence due to the expansion of the universe at which point they're effectively disconnected from our reality and falls into metaphysics like the multiverse conjecture that string theory results in.

>>9958222
>THERE'S A WHOLE FLEET OF THEM!
Eyewitness evidence is unreliable.

>>9957203
No, the more fitting comparison is taking a glass of water out of the ocean and concluding whales don't exist. You are heavily overestimating our observation capabilities.

And no matter how good they are, a much higher advanced civilization can probably always remain hidden from us if they don't want to be seen.

>>9957762
>growth of population size
Why would it grow forever? For most of human history our population remained stable
>growth of technology used to extract energy
Why would it grow forever? Why would aliens want to conquer the whole galaxy for energy?

>>9958307
Disagree, we can observe a large part of our universe, all signs of intelligence life have been found to be other explanations.

Claiming just because a civ is advanced therefore they must be cloaking their presence is theist level bullshit as if they wouldn't have had a stage in development where their signals weren't readable.

>>9958327
Dude we can observe a tiny bubble around us some light years away, we cant observe the whole universe for intelligent life, we dont have the capabilities to do so yet. And dont tell me about radio waves, its like having a telegraph sent a message in the internet age and ask why noone is responding.

Here we go with the fucking retards starting bait threads.

>Dur we don’t pick up TV signals from anywhere within MILLIONS OF LIGHT YEARS therefore there are no intelligent beings within MILLIONS OF LIGHT YEARS even though we’ve only gotten our signals sixty light years into space so far DUR

>>9957197
>Fermi Paradox
>why won’t advanced civilizations colonize galaxy like bacteria?
>why are civilizations that are 100 million years old refusing to talk to civilizations that are 10,000 years old?
brainlet

>>9957479
>We just aim to spread and colonize
I guess that’s why we colonized Antarctica, no nature parks exist and we never left habitable islands devoid of human population ever

>>9958114
>why isn't there extensive evidence of INTELLIGENT LIFE
google dyson sphere detections or Przybylski Star
Also advanced covilizations likely break their genetic programming to endlessly procreate

>>9958222
or the fact that they traced them for two weeks on radars
Personally I am sceptical about UFO’s but as I researched them I statred to notice that there are too many unexplained events and too much effort to discredit research for it to be so simple.

>>9957197
>why is it hard for people to accept a hypothesis as truth which is gaining more evidence to the contrary every decade through modern astronomical findings
hmmm

>>9957583
>look a ufo! quick! get out our worst quality camera!
You faggots had an excuse in the 60s, but if there's ayys flying around on earth in the time when everybody has a phone with a 20 duodecillion megapixel camera we'd have good pictures of them.

>>9958510
Yeah because a fighter pilot wouldnt rely on his onboard equipment to capture something he would whip out his iphone to take a picture, how can you be so dense?

>>9958525
Unfortunately the onboard equipment is shit.

>>9958561
And smartphone camera is better at tracking objects far away at such speeds? Sounds legit

>>9957197
I figure any alien disclosure would just be the (((CIA))) and the (((White House))) lying to the public yet again to fulfill some sort of agenda. I'd have to have an alien beam me up to their ship, fly me to their ship, and let me have intercourse with one of their hot alien woman before I was convinced they're not some politicians kids in alien costumes.

You also have to face the fact life is
>Rare as hell in the observable universe >Needs advanced technology and insane energy production to reach space in any meaningful way
>Needs to evolve sentience and consciousness over millions if not billions of years while avoiding falling victim to the thousands of existential threats that come with living in the universe

>>9958565
>tracking
Tracking is in the software not the fucking sensor you mong.

>>9958624
hahahahah holy fuck you're so retarded

>>9958624
Seriously i ask you again, do you breathe manually?

From a statistical point of view it's completely and utterly meaningless to talk about the likelihood of intelligent life considering our pathetic reach into space. I'd go as far as to say that even if we scanned every single shred of the Milky Way and found no intelligent life, it would be retarded to make a conclusion about the rest of the universe

>>9958443
>Which is gaining more evidence to the contrary
Fucking where anon?

>>9958390
>Population growth isn't inevitable
Brainlet

>>9958314
> For most of human history our population remained stable
This is false. Even if it wasn't false it would be because humans hit their carrying capacity

>>9958763
What is exponential growth?

>>9958307
>If they don't want to be seen
There is no reason to conclude this. You don't understand the fermi paradox

>>9958090
>Gets BTFO
>Only response is to be butthurt

>>9958314
>Implying human history is at its end and growth is an anomaly

What is energy exponential energy consumption both because population increases and machines get more intricate?

>>9958772
I guess that settles it, mouthbreathers, not even once.

>>9957201
>>9957208
>>9957213
>>9957356
>>9957408
>>9957546
>>9957570
>>9957213
>>9958410
>>9958307
>>9958314
>>9958357
>>9958390
>>9958723
>>9958767
>>9958307
>>9958776
>/sci/ doesn't understand the Fermi Paradox but still tries to argue about it
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox
Read up brainlets

>>9958781

>Providing WIKIPEDIA article

Please enlighten us oh enlightened one, ffs so many mouthbreathers.

>>9958784
Why don't you bother reading instead of posting brainlet?

>>9958788
The wikipedia article? I have already, whats your point exactly?

>>9958784
The Fermi Paradox isn't
>Why haven't we seen in aliens after looking around so hard
It's that if intelligent life existed it would have colonized all possible places it could colonize meaning we would see them everywhere

>>9958781
>wikipedia
any non popsci links?

>>9958792
Ok besides thats basically the same thing just with different starting points, did i ever say the opposite?

Such big assumptions to make, but here goes...

1) Intelligent Life, if it could, would expand through the Universe by colonizing other star systems.

2) Intelligent Life would be noticeable to our observations.

The absence of noticeable intelligent life so far indicates that we live in a region of space where no other intelligent life is present within this time frame.

Umm, okay, under those base assumptions you are correct, neglecting the fact that they are huge assumptions and that our ability to detect other intelligent life is extremely limited given all the possibilities that exist.

So. Your point is?

>>9958794
Considering you don't even know what the fermi paradox is you can clearly only think in Popsci

>>9958798
Intelligent life would be noticeable. You are just going
>WHAT IF THEY ARE INVISIBLE
or some stupid shit. If intelligent life was harvesting massive amounts of resources we would know at the very least due to heat loss being detected from black voids since it wouldn't be from a star directly

>>9958812
And you clearly do with those wikipedia links, whats next PBS Space Time?

>>9958818
>Desperate alien fag can't even argue

>>9958766
It is not false. World population changed very slowly for the vast majority of history. The big change only really started 200 years ago.

>>9958774
Why would population increase forever? A single star has enough energy for trillions and trillions of beings for billions of years. If they have interstellar colonies they have very limited contact with each other and eventually become completely different civilizations, making it rather pointless to expand infinitely after securing your species long term survival with few planets. Like I said, you are making huge assumptions without knowing anything about the psychology or technology of ayy lmaos.

>>9958792
And we are saying that that's absolutely retarded. Why would they colonize everywhere? The only reason to colonize other systems is to make sure your species survives long term.

>>9958823
>fag
Why the homophobia?

>>9958327
You can observe large part of the universe, but not detailed, for example we have never seen a planet beyond our solar system directly, and up until recently we also had no clue what Pluto looks like. As I said, you are extremely overestimating our observation capabilities. Just because we can see stars and black holes doesn't mean we can conclude that we also would definetely see other civilizations. To stay in the comparison, it's like standing on a beach, and being able to see the water all the way to the horizon. You now take a glass and scoop some water out, and conclude that nowhere in the water that you are seeing whales can exist.

>>9958825
I am not making assumptions of aliens i am making assumptions about humans. because as long as we contrinue to grow we will have a need for new places to live in, simple as that. a solar system is enough for trillions upon trillions of people living in habitats, since physical laws dont limit our growth why would we?

>>9958825
World population increased over that time even if not as quickly.
>Why would they colonize everywhere
Natural selection dictates that any trait that encourages reproduction be passed on and eventually outnumber organisms that can't reproduce as well.

>>9958823
Who says it, is.

>>9958831
Unlimited growth is not sustainable or desirable.

>>9958833
Humans aren't bacteria. You aren't fucking every minute to create as many babies as possible. When you are conscious you are able to control these things.

>>9958842
It is if you have unlimited resources, what are you talking about?

>>9958842
Humans don't because our reproduction strategy is different. It's still us optimizing our strategy for reproduction and our population is growing without bounds.

>>9958848
This, bacteria replicate at such speeds or insects for example because they are much simpler life forms, humans need 9 months to be born and then some years to be able to function on a basic level, dont look at todays society, think of the old days when people would have like 10 to 15 children. That was pretty close to bacteria reproduction. Live to reproduce.

Something like interstellar empires don't exist. Even if there are coloniser species out there, the colonies are not governed centrally and the colonisation is not coordinated centrally. This can simply not work due to distance. Let's say Earth had a colony 50 light years away. How exactly is that supposed to be governed from earth? Every piece of communication takes 50 years. If a rebellion happened there, we would only know about 50 years after it happened. And it would take much, much longer than that to actually do something about it. So every colony will be a completely independent entity, we are the same species but even within centuries we would be so different to each other that we would probably not have a common sense of identification anymore. So essentially, if you colonize, what you are doing is spreading potential enemies of yours across the galaxy, potentially on planets and solar systems much richer than earth and sol, therefore putting them in a position of superiority. So why would you colonise?

>>9958846
Why? There isn't anything to gain for a civilization to colonize another system beyond "if we get fucked there are still humans left". Trade over interstellar distances isn't practical. Nobody is going to pay for unlimited interstellar colonization projects when there is no longer any need for it and they will just become separate civilizations and probably future enemies. The idea that aliens would colonize hundreds of billions of stars is a ridiculous star wars tier fantasy

>>9958854
Unless you have control of the ultimate power in the universe, fear of this battlestation can keep systems in line.

>>9958854
Simply because you like your example showed you can't stop it. Once a group of people go far enough they can colonize and you can't do shit about it and it only takes a small group wanting to do it to do it.

>>9958857
Yes but you cant stop people from reproducing and since they will, there would be demand for new places to live in besides resources(trade wouldnt be cost effective on that we agree) but people will want to start anew somewhere else not to mention break away civilizations which could happen given the technology.

>>9958857
Because you need places to put people

>>9958865
Just chop their penises off with lightsaber.

Population growth isn't something that happens forever, our current boom that was caused by the industrial revolution is already slowing down and will eventually start declining like it's doing in the west already. Stable (and much lower) population is more preferable. The more people you have the harder it is to govern

>>9958874
Unless another revolution happens, something along the lines of idk AI? Which would both provide ample resources for consumption at a much lowr cost and keep an eye out on everyone way way easier than now.

>>9958879
AI is not free energy dingus.

>>9958882
Industry isnt free energy either, but it did happen and got better with time, General AI can happen and then it could provide free energy, is that impossible?

>>9958886
>free energy, is that impossible?
Yes.

>>9958879
I don't see how it really matters. It's not like the population explosion happened because people started fucking more. It was because child mortality went down but people kept making 10 babies because they still thought that half of them would die from flu and it took a while for them to get used to having only two kids. Just because there is energy for trillion people doesn't necessarily mean that people multiply until they hit that number of people

>>9958890
If you say so random guy online

>>9958879
If providing for your family isnt a problem why stop only at 1 or 2 children? Why not have 5-6 and so on?

>>9958891

see >>9958896

>>9958896
Because most people don't want that many kids. They used to have many because in the past most kids died before they turned ten and you needed children to take care of you when you were old, but the society no longer works like it used to, most kids don't die and you don't need kids to survive in old age

>>9958904
Most people want that many kids, they just cant take care of them all because it costs both money and time.

>>9958911
I really doubt that. If they really wanted then they would find a way. Most people in developed countries are happy with one or two and I doubt giving them billion dollars would change that a lot

>>9958916
They are because they grow them by themselves maybe with the help of granparents or aunts/uncles. But given enough resources so they could all live plentifully and they wouldnt need to work, so more time to devote to their family, no parent would say no to having another kid

>>9958920
Why would I want to have kids if I can be immortal and live in virtual harem surrounded by Asian-Arab traps with 10 inch cocks while I am not exploring Galaxy in my spaceship body?

>>9958920
Well I disagree. Most people don't want 10 children running around even if they have unlimited funds. Populations should be pretty stable but right now we are having this insane explosion and people seem to think that it's normal and aren't freaked out enough by it

>>9958867
our own solar system can count trillions of people, and neither do we colonize everything on Earth that is colonizable

>>9958831
you realize humans have abandoned habitable islands which remain empty?
Also a civilization capable of interstellar travel won’t need to colonize other worlds-they already know how to create artificial habitats or programm their genetic makeup to overcome natural desire for reproduction

>>9958923
Well i can only speak for myself and i would want 10 children.

>>9958933
The more you have the less time and love you have for each. Kinda like how if you have one dog and it dies you get sad but if you have hundred dogs you don't really get sad because it's too many dogs for your brain to comprehend. A bit extreme example but still

>fermi paradox
>doesn't take into account species longevity
garbo

>>9958865
>Yes but you cant stop people from reproducing and since they will
Most people want to have fun, not children

>>9958925
>Trillions
It can but even that wont be enough eventually. Anon you fail to realize that only a few thousand years ago there were less than 100k humans. That is an increase of a factor of 70 thousand in only a few thousand years. We can easily expect humans to get to the hundreds of trillions eventually and even then the entire solar system wont be enough

>>9958943
And children are not fun? They are the delight of life, partying and doing drugs leaves you empty and hollow at some point. Children can fill that gap.

>>9958940
>Thinks a species will just go extinct after it has colonized multiple planets
Your logic is garbo

>>9958952
lol, yeah especially their constant screaming, shitting the diapers and vomiting.Gtfo /pol/ breeder, probably a brainwashed americani as well

>>9958951
>humans are bacteria and reproduce endlessly
Meanwhile many countries have negative population growth already

>>9958952
I like children too but I would want more than two

>>9958955
>thinks a species won’t upload its minds into virtual or abandon reproduction all-together

>>9958958
Because i like family i am from pol and american? How do you make such correlation?

>>9958969
only a completely brainwashed fanatic could say children are fun

>>9958973
Are you stupid or something, honest question.

>>9957197
Humans have far from yet proved they are capable of making a big enough impression in the galaxy to be noticed by a other similar hypothetical lifeforms.

Even if we built a billion 10x10 ft sized probes that constantly pulsate radiowave messages and ejected them in every possible direction in space right now, and there were also a million other lifeforms just like us scattered randomly across the galaxy also ejecting a billion probes like this at random times in the Milky Way’s lifespan, the chances that even one of these total of a quadrillion probes would ever end up in a place where one of the lifeforms would likely detect the radio waves in the same roughly 100 year window that Humans have even been able to pick up interstellar radio waves is near infintismal.

The entire premise of your theory relies on the idea that we will EVENTUALLY be able to make ourselves noticeable, which is an assumption that is no more substantiated than the assumption that there could be some disastrous thing that happens to lifeforms once they reach a certain level of civilization that prevents them from making contact with each other. Or perhaps the theory that intelligent life eventually becomes SO advanced that it enters some kind of stage of transhuman existence that is practically undetectable by our level of civilization while they are looking at us the same way we look at monkeys in a zoo.

>>9958933
yes, you are indeed only speaking for yourself. there are clear correlations between high IQs, big incomes and few or no children.

>>9958955
Sorry I meant age of an individual

>>9958978
gurg need children, you stupid if you not clean diapers like gurg

>>9958990
>>9958996
Ok superbrains then dont have children i couldnt care less if your genes survive or not.

>>9959001
lool look at this butthurt breeder
enjoy sniffing kids shit

>>9959010
I will, enjoy dying alone in your own shit in an empty bedroom.

>>9958962
And that is only temporary. Guess how natural selection works anon? Those groups with a positive reproduction rate will over take those with a negative
>/sci/ doesn't understand basic biology

>>9959012
>implying anyone these days dies surrounded by children

>>9958967
Even if they did that that wouldn't change anything. Machines can and likely will still reproduce.

>>9959016
>Humans can’t overcome nature and will always remain animals

>>9959018
My granpas did some years ago, i would want to go the same way.

>>9959020
why?

>>9959022
>>9959029
Reproduction will always exist. It isn't about instinct it's about simple logic. Something that reproduces will outnumber something that doesn't meaning that any group that wants to reproduce (even if it's due to culture rather than genetics) it will outnumber anything that doesn't.

>>9959022
Literally yes and that isn't a bad thing. Even as machines evolution will take place. That is what it means to be alive

>>9959051
you can overcome nature and become immortal while improving yourself.
It seems breeders are limited by their genetic programming

>>9959051
>>9959060
breeders in charge of grasping vastness of cosmos and potential technologies of million year old civilizations

>>9958952
t. childless anon

>>9959063
>Genetic
You don't get it. Any trait that increases reproductive success passes on. It doesn't have to be genetic, it can literally be you deciding to reproduce. It's why all religions that are successful promote reproduction. You cannot stop this, an immortal being will also reproduce though immortality is literally impossible making reproduction necessary.
>>9959068
>Brainlet in charge of understand basic biology or culture

>>9959068
>Breeders
You mean literally all living things? Even if you are an incel virgin you are just a failed breeder

How do you propose we see them aliens? Literally the only way would be if they were right next to us and just happened to be technologically on the same level so that they would use radio waves to communicate like us. Less advanced and they can't communicate, more advanced and they probably use neutrinos or some shit. We can't just zoom into a planet in another system and check if there's a green dude waving at us. We can see that there's a planet and maybe study the atmosphere in the future but that's about it

>>9957214
>And considering the universe is continues to expand and its significantly older than human existence, there is more likely than not intelligent species out there.

The Universe has been incredibly violent and composed of lighter elements for most of its history and not at all suitable for life to develop over the same 3.8 billion years that it took single cell organisms to evolve in to humans without getting annihilated by some cosmic event.

Relatively speaking, solar system’s like ours with lots of heavy metals were extremely rare for most of the Galaxy’s lifespan, and the places that they would even really exist are near the center’s of Galaxies where they wouldn’t have over 3.8 billion years to evolve. Optimistically, the most inner galactic bodies with an abundance of heavy metals would be able to do is to randomly form complex moleculer combinations like proteins and then continuously eject them in an explosion to the outer regions of the galaxy until enough of these molecular components collided and combined in to a self replicating single celled organism until they ended up in a place like Earth where they could actually have time to develop. Earth is still the most life-suitable planet we’ve ever discovered, and it’s experienced period of being completely frozen over, periods of extreme greenhouse gas effects, widespread volcanic activity, and a massive asteroid collision during its life’s development.

The possibly that we could very well be the most intelligent and most technologically advanced life in the Galaxy at this point is not so unbelievably unlikely you when you consider the sheer number of unbelievable coincidences were required for us to simply exist here on Earth.

>>9959151
The fermi paradox and Dyson dilemma are as follows
>All living things reproduce as much as the environment would allow
>This should be the entire galaxy since all solar systems have resources
>We should look out at the night sky and see darkness due to every possible start (or nearly all) being harvested for sun light OR if they use some other means of energy we would see massive heat leaks in places that aren't stars

>>9959156
But the Fermi paradox is silly. Humans haven't colonized all of Earth even though we could. There's no reason to colonize the entire galaxy and a civilization capable of interstellar travel has already mastered living in space and probably wouldn't have any need to colonize planets in the first place but would view surface dwellers as primitive cavemen. Dyson spheres are only theoretical too and there's no guarantee a civilization would try to build something like that

>>9959162
>Humans haven't colonized all of Earth even though we could.
We are though. Our population is continuing to increase and we don't know what the carrying capacity is.
>There is no reason to colonize an entire galaxy
There is when your population keeps increasing.

>>9959156
humans have retreated from habitable islands and other environments that could have been colonized

>>9959151
>We can see that there's a planet and maybe study the atmosphere in the future but that's about it

you will be able to detect technosignatures this way like city lights during the night

>>9959169
That's because it's not necessary to live there yet. Say that again when we literally need to find new places to put people. There is going to be a certain point where there isn't enough space/resources so we will have to start putting people in space

>>9959167
But the population growth is already slowing down and is predicted to start declining eventually. Humans multiplying like cancer is a meme, population control is much easier and cheaper than just sending the extra people into fucking space

>>9959177
>predicted to start declining eventually
By who? Population growth slowing down in no way indicates a decline because the populations that are slowing will simply be replaced by the ones that are not. For example Muslims that live in 1st world countries still have much higher reproduction rates than the average.

>>9959180
By the UN for example. Fertility is dropping everywhere, of course muslims and africans are backwards and will take longer to get there. Either humans lower their population or nature will do it for us

>>9959156
The Fermi paradox and Dyson Dilemma make a completely unfounded assumption of how common successful abiogenesis is when we have no clue how it even occurred for life on Earth and have thus far never observed any non terrestrial life whatsoever, and that harvesting power from the sun is the most efficient method of producing energy when we already know there are unexplained phenomenons like Dark Matter and Dark Energy which produce a supposedly more powerful force than visual matter.

>>9959174
People don’t spread out like bacteria, they prefer to concentrate.
Also population growth drops off when country becomes developed

>>9959182
>tfw you cant understand that fertility isnt dropping its the will of having kids thats hitting rock bottom.

Mulsim women are not more fertile than european ones lol, they just live in a society with different values that gives them the primary role of a womb rather than a human.

And dont worry the next superbug is around the corner, pajeets and other poor hygiene people are screwd.

>>9959182
>Fertility is dropping everywhere
Still not negative and again people with a positive birth rate will beat those with a negative one so the population will still grow.
>>9959192
The fermi paradox makes no assumption about how common abiogenesis is and even if most civilizations let solar energy go to waste (unlikely since it is nearly free energy) they would be producing energy themselves which would be detectable.
>>9959194
Doesn't become negative.

>>9959196
How exactly is that different? Fertility is the birthrate of a population. People in poor countries have more children than people in rich countries, but of course culture plays part too. Then you also have Bill Gates pouring chemicals into your drinking water to make the frogs gay and to stop you from making children

>>9959199
It is negative in basically all developed countries except USA because they take so many immigrants.

>>9959199
breeder brainlets just can’t comprehend that interstellar civilization will be free from shackles of their own nature

>>9959204
That is false and even if it wasn't again those with a positive birth rate will outnumber those with a negative birth rate

>>9959210
>Doesn't understand natural selection
>Calls anyone else a brainlet
The irony. Hey dumb shit, natural selection doesn't just mean instincts or genes.

>>9959210
Ok anon, explain how to stop natural selection. I am eager to hear your solution.

>>9959211
You can check the stats yourself. Holy shit how many times does this need to be explained? As countries get developed their fertility drops. It is happening as we speak. They aren't just going to keep fucking forever, and if they were like you are saying and just took over first world then the modern world would collapse which would lead to an even bigger population reduction.

>>9957386
>Why go colonize the New World when you can wither away drinking ale.

To make something better somewhere else. To get rich and own slaves.

>>9959218
Fertility dropping is still positive net increase. I don't understand how this is so hard for you to understand.

>>9957197
What does /sci/ think of troodons? Would they have formed the first civilization if the meteor never hit?

>>9959199
Solar power is not even the most cost efficient power currently on Earth, and we are supposed to assume building an extravagant giant sphere around the sun is the most cost efficient means of power in the future and an inevitable requirement of an advanced civilization? That is ass backward retarded.

>>9959204
Aaaah man the frogs, thats hillary btw not bill

>>9959227
No one said that. Just like how humans use multiple ways to access power it is logical to assume advanced civilizations would too so we would likely see solar power along with many other forms but even if we didn't see solar power it doesn't matter because massive energy usage is easily detectable.

>>9959222
European and American populations would already be dropping without importing millions of people from poor countries. I don't understand what you are not getting

>>9959238
And again this isn't true for all Europeans meaning that the ones with a positive birth rate will outnumber the ones with a negative birth rate quickly. Why do I have to explain basic natural selection to you on /sci/?

>>9957197
>>9957203

People have an oedipus complex. THey want some alien teet to give them immortality so they can spend all of time trolling innocent people.

>>9959242
For fuck's sake are you even reading what I'm saying? When you move people from poor to rich countries their fertility drops too, not immediately but it eventually does. And in case it didn't, like you are saying, it would eventually lead to the collapse of the entire modern world when third world hordes take over, which would basically lead to most of the world dying

>>9959246
Fertility is how fertile a woman is not how many children she is having, thats reproduction rate.

>>9959246
> When you move people from poor to rich countries their fertility drops too
On average but this isn't true for all populations within the average. This means that the part of the population that has the positive birth rate will eventually become the norm. Why is this so fucking hard for you to understand?
>Third world hordes
Not everyone who has a positive birth rate are third worlders anon. Do you honestly think no white families have multiple children?

>>9959249
Fertility means birthrate of a population as well.

>>9959250
You're beyond hope. If positive birth rate becomes the norm then that will eventually lead to an even bigger reduction in population than would if it was dropping. I thought you were trying to argue that population is going to keep growing forever

>>9959237
A civilization that is capable of building a sphere around a star is probably also capable of directly harnessing the higher energy release of nuclear fusion. If you can afford to build spheres around stars to harvest solar power, you could almost certainly find a way to get more bang for your buck harvesting fusion power directly instead of taking the Sun’s inefficient sloppy seconds of ejected energy.

>>9959215
>Ok anon, explain how to stop natural selection
once you immortal you are beyond natural selection

>>9957197
then explain this

>>9959312
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFakY9qS47E
spoopy

>>9959226
I’m going to take your idea and actually post this it as a thread because I’m also interested.

>>9957201
I guess it's too late to say "DON'T FUCKING START!"

>>9957197
There's far more alternate explanations than that, some of which are very likely - though you've probably hit on the most likely one.

Biggest problem is we can't see shit, and have, at best, sketchy knowledge of some of the critical factors, and thus have insufficient data to make any assessment. Speculative shit is speculative.

>>9957630
>including funding a crank who said the Earth was half its size.
He didn't actually. A common misconception. He knew exactly how big the Earth was. He didn't know how big China was. He thought it was much bigger than it really is, leading him to underestimate how big the Atlantic was. He also believed there would be uncharted land East of China at which he could resupply. He just didn't expect that that land would be two whole continents instead of some shitty islands.

>>9959258
>You're beyond hope
I'm sorry I wont stop believing in Natural Selection stupid.
>lead to an even bigger reduction of population
No it wont stupid. How?

>>9959261
If you are a civilization you would likely use as much energy as you could get. Nuclear power would be easily detectable on a large scale because that would also have it's own heat signature.
>>9959281
Immortality is impossible and goes against the 2nd law

>>9959353
>Immortality is impossible and goes against the 2nd law
Tell that to the Hydra
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydra_(genus)

>>9959281
>immortality means you don't need to reproduce
That isn't how it works. If anything it would reproduce even more because it would be the best strategy.
>>9959358
Isn't immortal because it can still be killed.

>>9959350
Good luck trying to support +10 billion brown people on a planet with fucked up environment, destroyed crops, no clean drinking water and antibiotics that don't work
>inb4 hurr we'll just send the extra people to space

>>9959360
It is biologicaly immortal though, leave it alone, feed it and it wont die of old age. Thats pretty good

>>9959360
Without aging, humans could easily live hundreds of years. The better our medical technology gets, the fewer things will be lethal. Imagine how long people will live once we have nanobots that hunt down cancer cells and labs that can grow replacement organs.

>>9959156

Bootes void?

>>9959363
You putting "hurr durr" before something doesn't make it unlikely. Given that humans will continue to expand why wouldn't they go to space?

>>9959396
Yeah when everything is going to shit I'm sure the government is happy to spend money to send billions of people to the orbit instead of letting them die, after all getting up there is so cheap and they can just eat space when they get there

>>9959156
>All living things reproduce as much as the environment would allow
Not all living things are self-aware enough to realize this is unsustainable, nor live long enough to care, even if they are.

You most likely reach extreme longevity before you reach interstellar colonization (and, assuming FTL isn't a thing, require the former for the latter). At that point, you have one of two options: find a way to install a permanent population cap, or burn out your biosphere and go extinct.

Once you have the biotech to reach such extremes, however, you likely also have the capacity to change your base drives. Thus, odds are, any interstellar civilization isn't going to be defined by its biological drives, the way we are, but instead define them as they see fit.

Thus this part of the fermi paradox is out the window. A near immortal race is going to be quite forward thinking, and thus not go down an unsustainable path.

Assuming your mechanical tech has advanced at the same rate as your biological, there's no advantage to a larger population, even in war, as you're certainly going to be able to build faster than you can breed. Thus, over time, the population cap would likely become smaller, numbering in the millions, or even hundreds.

So, most likely, these near immortal and thus forward thinking and thus population capped and extremely efficient civilizations, have no need for anything like a Dyson sphere, most likely having a much smaller footprint than our own civilization, which is still slaved to its old drives, and thus still in the rampant expansion stage.

They might have two or three colonies spread well apart to prevent sudden extinction of their race to cosmological disasters, but expanding beyond that point does nothing to ensure the survival of such an advanced species, and ultimately, is unsustainable. ...Unless, of course, there are multiples of such civilizations and they are prone to conflict, but then every such civ would be in deliberate hiding.

>>9959408
>Random /pol/ conspiracy about how everything is going to go to shit forever
Amazing

>>9959410
>Thinks natural selection = base drives again
All traits that encourage reproduction survive while traits that do not die out.

>>9959413
Yeah climate change, overpopulation, ongoing mass extinction and overuse of antibiotics are just /pol/ conspiracy theories but USA having secret plan to teleport billions of starving people to another galaxy is totally real

>>9959414
Natural selection, for us, ceased to be a factor over 10,000 years ago. In that time, using information based evolution, we've gone to the moon, and in that time, all genetic evolution has gotten us is slightly better lactose tolerance.

Once you've got technology, natural selection is no longer a real factor. Once you've got a wrangle on your DNA, you can engineer yourselves into a far more sustainable lifeform than nature could ever create. And, indeed, have to, if you intend to survive.

>>9957630
Europeans didn't discover America. They just were the first to popularize and colonize it. Well besides the natives

>>9959418
>Natural selection, for us, ceased to be a factor over 10,000 years ago
No it didn't. Cultural selection and sexual selection exist and humans are building resistances to diseases still.
>>9959417
Those aren't going to cause humans to go extinct or permanently decrease our numbers.
>Conspiracy theory
No stupid, the continued advances in space travel.

>>9958781
> it's on Wikipedia so it's true
> not one college allows you to cite Wikipedia

I wonder why...

>>9959423
Of course, destroying the planet and modern civilization isn't going to reduce human numbers and real life is just like star wars we can just jump into hyperspace. I don't know why I even keep replying

>>9959419

Europeans did discover America, and they weren't the first to colonize it.

>>9959426
>It's true
It's just giving the definition of the Paradox.

>>9959428
I have never seen someone so stupid act so smug. If anything destroying the planet lowering it's carrying capacity would put even more pressure on us to invest in space travel
>Hurr durr hyperdrive
You don't need that for asteroid farming or space habitats

>>9959423
>Cultural selection and sexual selection exist and humans are building resistances to diseases still.
Cultural selection and sexual selection are not natural selection, those are artificial selections.

True about the disease resistance, but that rather pales in comparison to what informational evolution has done in that same time period, and will pale in comparison to the same disease resistance that technology offers.

Natural selection lead us to what we are, but has little say in what we will become.

>>9959434
Artificial selection is literally a form of natural selection except the selecting agents happen to involve humans. Cultures aren't purposely selected for, they undergo their own form of natural selection.

>>9959433
You are the dumbest person I have ever talked to. It's like you have some kind of advanced autism that doesn't allow you to accept that population can actually decrease like it has done numerous times throughout history. I'm done

>>9959438
>selecting agents happen to involve humans.
Which is the definition of "artificial".

>>9959439
>Decrease
Only short term but long term they have always decreased which again proves you wrong.
>i'm done
Good since you lost the argument a long time ago

>>9959441

It's not intentional though, so categorizing it with breeding rather than natural selection is pretty arbitrary.

>>9959441
Artificial selection is literally a form of natural selection and works the same way except humans are involved. Cultural selection is still natural.

>>9959444
>long term they have always decreased
I think you meant increased. Anyways what counts as "short term" for you?

>>9959439
>Can actually decrease
Only temporarily since obviously the human population is a lot bigger than it was 200 years ago.

>>9959444
>hurr grug win argument grug go and multiply forever nothing go wrong

>>9959439
I think, much like Thanos, you can't do math.

Even if you wiped out half the population now, you'd still have a magnitudes higher population than you did just a few centuries before, and continue right on growing from that point at that same agricultural-industrial accelerated rate.

More importantly, most of the population growth slowing we are seeing now is the result of cultural changes (eg. women with careers). Which is why the undeveloped world isn't slowing at the same rate as the west. That could easily change, say, for instance, if Islam took over.

>>9959450
everything is temporary, both increase and decrease and even your mom

>>9959451
Actually yes all living things will multiply until they reach their carrying capacity. This has literally always been the case. What you are saying goes against known science.

>>9959446
>Cultural selection is still natural.
Not if people are involved.

>>9959455
Actually, they quite often multiply beyond carrying capacity, and alter their environment so extremely as a result that they go extinct.

>>9959457
That is only a semantic difference but both work the exact same and are the same.

>>9959455
grug only bacteria grug no able to think! must make grug junior like bacteria!

>>9959450
In the past it was temporary, that doesn't say anything about the future.

>>9959461
>He actually thinks climate change will make humanity go extinct
It wont and even if it was that bad it would just make humans want to explore space even more to get the resources they could no longer get on earth
>>9959464
The human population is still increasing exponentially my butthurt friend.

>>9959462
Yes, because nature determines your religion you are, what your favorite movies are, and what brand of shoes are popular.

I mean there's semantics, and then there's literally ignoring the definition.

>>9959465
Natural selection will still exist in the future anon
>>9959468
It literally does. Ever read The Selfish Gene or the Extended phenotype? Culture is selected the same way genes are.

>>9959453
>More importantly, most of the population growth slowing we are seeing now is the result of cultural changes
>That could easily change

It *could* but it won't. It *could* also just start dropping.

>>9959466
grug have big family... when food run out grug will climb to heaven and grug live there

>>9959464
>NATURAL SELECTION WILL STOP EXISTING IN THE FUTURE FOR SOME REASON
>>9959475
Do you really think all humans will run out of food and all go extinct? You really are as dumb as your typing makes you sound.

>>9959464
I recall that time I tried to go to Israel, and then it became a thing that there was a picture of someone standing in the desert in front of what was likely the Santa Catalina mountains near my childhood home.

>>9959466
Can't just move to space to escape short term climate change. We won't go extinct, we'll just have to deal with lots of people dying and suffering.

>>9959475
>When food run out
What? Do you think humans will just suddenly stop producing food? Even if food is scarce humans as a whole will survive.

>>9959476
grug eat all food with family food never run out... grug eat no think

>>9959466
Wasn't thinking of humans specifically, actually - but it happens. Either you expand into new environs, you reach a painful equilibrium, or you go extinct.

But once you've reached the entire biosphere's carrying capacity, your only option is to escape it en mass, but we'll before can do that, we'll probably also be living a whole lot longer, yet still reproducing, so we'll have to deal with that problem first, or we'll be too tied up with the problems it causes and won't have the resources left to attempt it.

>>9959472
>>>9959465
>Natural selection will still exist in the future anon
Why would that stop the population from decreasing?

>>9959480
Yeah but that in no way stops space travel, if anything people will want to do it more as an alternative.
>>9959483
So you seriously think humans will just have no more food and all starve to death? How can you function? Do you understand what carrying capacity is?

>>9959468
Point is you decide your culture about as much as other animals decide who to fuck.

>>9959472
>It literally does. Ever read The Selfish Gene or the Extended phenotype? Culture is selected the same way genes are.
You can make the comparison, yes, but you can't say cultural selection is natural - anymore than skyscrapers are natural. At that point, you're just ignoring the distinction.

>>9959486
Natural selection dictates that any trait that encourages reproduction will be passed on and eventually outnumber organisms that can't reproduce as well.

>>9959478
In fact, I would probably try to look at the Santa Catalinas from over near the Rincons to find where they took the picture. That's my intuition.

>>9959487
t. grug

>>9959485
biosphere's far from full m8

>>9959496
So you decided to not even try arguing at this point? Well here are some facts for you.
>Humans will not completely run out of food any time soon
>If there isn't enough food to support more humans than humans have reached the carrying capacity and the population will match this carrying capacity
>Space travel will continue to develop with things like asteroid mining

>>9959492
Until someone invents an airborne retrovirus that makes all but an except few sterile and creates an army of mini-hunter drones to enforce their rule, and eventually gains the biotech to make that adherence genetic.

>>9959492
yeah plenty of species have declining numbers. natural selection doesn't make a species invincible.

>>9959498
Yes, but we're not near immortal, unlike a civilization with the capacity for interstellar colonization en mass would have to be.

>>9959501
>Makes all but an select few sterile
Then those will reproduce and the population will increase
>>9959502
Yeah but unlike the rest of the animals humans have yet to reach their carrying capacity and we have no predators. Humans will continue to increase in population until they have to colonize space to continue doing so.

>>9959504
by the time we run out of space on earth, we will have that capacity.

>>9959500
grug can eat asteroid? grug have trillion children now!

>>9959506
species can go extinct without predators. human population may very well level off or even decrease on earth.

>>9959508
yes, grug can eat asteroid. nuclear power to run some lights to grow some plants from dirt made from the asteroid.

>>9959506
>Then those will reproduce and the population will increase
Presumably only to the degree that said genocidal faction determines to allow, which becomes the dominant culture, and eventually engraves that desire genetically, while eliminating that which lead them to that path to begin with.

The alternative being eventual extinction.

>>9959508
You can turn the materials from Asteroids into farmland.
>>9959511
Humans aren't just going to decrease for no reason. No species has ever just gone extinct because they decided to stop reproducing. Nothing is out competing us

>>9959512
>>9959515
grug... so hungry... grug junior dead... grug eat junior... how this happen... grug... so...

.....

>>9959515
japan decreased

>>9959515
>No species has ever just gone extinct because they decided to stop reproducing.
We're the only one on the cusp of being able to do exactly that.

>>9959517
grug's a fucking idiot that can't run a nuclear power plant

>>9959513
>The alternative being eventual extinction
So your logical reason for why humans wont continue to increase in size is some magical robot army controlled by no one?
>>9959518
Only temporarily since there are pocket groups in japan with a positive birth rate that will eventually over come the people with a negative birthrate and even if all Japs go extinct other groups will just move in and populate it.

>>9959522
why would the groups with a high birth rate overcome that with a low birth rate
you realize birth rate isnt genetic right

>>9959520
Except we aren't because natural selection dictates that that can't happen. If you decide to not reproduce then the people who want to reproduce will outnumber you

>>9959527
but the people who want to reproduce will not have kids that necessarily want to reproduce

>>9959525
>Why would the groups witha high birth rate overcome that with a low birth rate
Are you trolling?
>>9959529
Cultural selection. It's why basically all popular religions entourage reproducing

>>9959473
>It *could* but it won't. It *could* also just start dropping.
Nothing stopping it from increasing at the moment, except culture, which is in constant flux. All the industrial and agricultural tech is there to keep going until we're living dozens to an acre.

Problem is, if we go there, there'll be so many issues as a result, we probably won't be going anywhere else in large enough numbers to matter. So, eventually, we'll have no choice but to put a cap on that shit, one way or the other.

>>9959527
Unless you force them not to "for the greater good" - again, something we're on the cusp of being able to do.

>>9959535
>Nothing stopping it from increasing at the moment, except culture, which is in constant flux
Eventually we'll have the capacity to engrain aspects of that culture genetically. Albeit, simpler to engineer global sterility and control the selected breeders from there.

>>9959538
Really? How are you going to do that? How are you going to make sure literally every group of humans on the planet will stop reproducing? Even if just one country is able to that is all it takes. Also even IF you could do the impossible and stop reproducing that would only work until humans develop decent space colonizing technology and then it would be both idiotic and again IMPOSSIBLE to stop population growth.

>>9959543
You cant stop people from reprodusing, lol dont waste your time any more on that idiot dude.

>>9959543
>>9959546
Several variants of an airborne retrovirus that makes everyone save a selection sterile. (I dunno how many times I have to repeat "on the *cusp* of being able to do".)

Granted, there are simpler and nastier methods, if you just wanna kill off a whole lotta folks periodically.

>>9959548
That wouldn't work. No virus will have a success rate big enough to get everyone you want them too and even an airborne virus can't get everyone. You read too much shitty Sci-fi. Also whoever did such a thing would get fucking nuked by every major nation on the planet.

>>9959548
Ok i will play along, in whose interest would it be to release such a virus?

>>9959557
You could get more than enough with multiple variants... And good luck figuring out who did it. (Though I'm sure we'd blame a random someone and nuke the fuck out of them, as per our usual political rigmarole.)

>>9959568
Any group of fanatics with access to the biotech as it becomes available?

>>9959575
And what would be the goal of those fanatics, and how would they keep such thing a secret in todays society from intelligence agencies?

>>9959573
>More than enough variants
Doesn't matter. You could never get 100% success, that is literally impossible. Also you would have to administer these different variants in many different locations all at the same time meaning it would be really fucking easy to figure out who did it since the more people you have working to do this stupid thing the bigger chance of detection. You read to many shitty Sci Fi books

>>9959578
And how would they take over and keep the population down once they did their impossible goal since those immune/not infected would still reproduce. What this anon is describing a retarded ass plan where ISIS takes over the world without anyone knowing.

>>9959581
Yeah i know, i am just playing along for the lulz

>>9959578
Population reduction, obviously - be it the Thanos minded or just straight up anti-natalists. Ya are aware that major population reduction plans crop up in government documents all the time, yes? (And, occasionally, we see a major population reduction effort put in place, though not this extreme, and not global - yet.)

...depending on why and how you wish to execute the plan, it doesn't even necessarily need to be secret.

>>9959579
Ya don't need a 100% success rate, ya just need enough to ensure your selection outnumbers the remainder, and limit them either genetically or through more conventional means.

>>9959584
>Your selection
And where are you going to find thousands of people to agree to this without any world government finding out? How would you administer this to every region in the world?

>>9959584
Tell us more about this population reduction plan anon, i am exstatic right now.

>>9959587
You don't need their consent or cooperation, ya just need to select them out with the viruses you create.

It's true, however, for a group that wants to make that reproduction reduction permanent, you do need either even more advanced genetic engineering deployable at the same time, or a considerable protected military force. Granted, we're talking far enough in the future that said force maybe entirely automated, though you'd still need to protect the workforce that creates it, even if it could be a whole lot smaller than a manpowered one.

>>9959596
>though you'd still need to protect the workforce that creates it
Not if you built up your million autonomous mini-hunter drones ahead of time. Mind, that kind of build up would be damned hard to keep secret, and the tech could easily bite you in the ass.

>>9959596
>Select them out
It doesn't work like that. Also you have no reason to believe they would agree with you and choose not to reproduce. Basically all that would happen is it would hit maybe a few dozen to a hundred people and the retards that made it get caught and get the death penalty.

>>9959599
>>9959596
Can i intersect and add out of control nano bots on the equation? Lets get wild here bois.

>>9959602
>It doesn't work like that
Yeah, viruses can be made to work exactly like that, even today.

>Also you have no reason to believe they would agree with you and choose not to reproduce.
The idea would be you'd select out the ones you DO want to keep reproducing, and let them do what comes natural.

>Basically all that would happen is it would hit maybe a few dozen to a hundred people and the retards that made it get caught and get the death penalty.
Assuming they get caught before they release their payload (which is likely, but there's nothing saying there won't be repeats and copycats). After that, by the time nations start noticing that reproduction rates have gone into the shitter, and figure out why, it'll already be too late.

>>9959612
So mass scale eugenics program? Go back to /pol/ anon, that aint happening.

>>9959609
Well, as we're really talking about how/why alien civilizations will become population capped, and talking about an age where near biological immortality maybe a thing, fuck it.

>>9959615
Could happen, the tech to do it ain't that far off, and the availability of that tech is only going to increase.

May not necessarily go the way /pol/ would like though. (Also you don't necessarily have to select based on race.)

>>9959617
Oh yeah this is the alien thread completely spaced it out(pun intended), doesnt matter anyway nano alien virus isis drone bots are coming to get us.

>>9959612
>By the time nations notice
Kek no. It would be easily noticed within days.
I am amazed by how idiotic your plan is.

>>9959612
>After that, by the time nations start noticing that reproduction rates have gone into the shitter, and figure out why, it'll already be too late.
Probably simpler just to add factors to the environment that reduce fertility by encouraging their use in industrial products, and introducing various cultural and employment scenarios that reduce rate of reproduction by make rearing children a financial burden, while still providing ample access to birth control so the populous can still feed their need to bump uglies.

So, basically, what most of the developed world is already doing, and attempting to spread to the undeveloped world.

>>9959623
How? Wouldn't hit everyone at once. Presuming your virus didn't do anything else obvious, it'd just look like a decline in fertility. If you were careful about it, even if they found the virus responsible, they might have to find several of the variants before they realized it was engineered. By then, far too late (not that you'd need more than a few weeks to get the coverage you need, assuming the damage can't be easily reversed).

>>9959533
Culture changes fast enough that that doesn't work.

>>9959670
Actually culture changing so fast is why it is able to evolve so quickly. Natural selection effects culture faster than it does genetics. I recommend reading Virus of the Mind or The Selfish gene.

>>9958090
he's right. your analogy is bad. its more like going to a lake and not seeing fish nearby and then someone asking do you think theres fish in the lake. if you think you can prove something doesnt exist you dont understand epistemology

aliens are already here and visiting us. in fact, they created us. earth is a petri dish used to combine genetic dna from us into them. the reason is because they are on a grand mission to combine DNA from everywhere and create the ultimate bipedal human, which would be the ultimate creation. that and they want this planet. they dont like how we destroy everything and fuck everything up, so they decided 10000 years ago that they were going to do the project. and when they do something, there is no guessing, or maybe, or jacking off on pornhub, its 100% focus until the job is done.

basically, they are taking over earth not by force, but thru eugenics. that is why they are covert, because if people knew the truth, they would be shot on sight. that is why there are abductions since the dawn of man. that is why there is secrecy. that is why ufos disable nukes (they want the planet).

inb4 mib say hello. truth is stranger than fiction.

t. " current engineer" from "s5". screencap this post for future reference when I told you so and my supervisors hold a press conference and tell the truth, which is never.

>>9959515
>Humans aren't just going to decrease for no reason. No species has ever just gone extinct because they decided to stop reproducing.


You don’t understand what post-biological means

>>9957197
because hardcore millitant atheists badly need to find alien life so they can brag about it in people that believe in God.

>>9962343
I... Dun think belief in alien life is exclusive to atheists. Indeed, among the staunch atheists and Christians I know, I see more atheists that doubt the existence of aliens, and, sadly, more Christians that believe in Ancient Aliens.

>>9961944
You don’t understand what natural selection is

>>9957197
>t. just finished watching a popsci youtube video

>>9957759
yet we know fish exist, so his analogy is correct, and basically you are a brainlet

>>9963272
>Move to mechanical bodies
>Keep defunct biological tendency that inevitably results in extinction
Any civ that does this is going to rig itself to be sustainable until at least heat death.

>>9957197
It's literally impossible that we are alone.

>200 billion galaxies in the known universe.

>A single galaxy, like the Milky Way, can contain more than 200 billion normal stars.

>Each star can have several planets.

I feel like the mouth on OP pic alien is taken from someone I know.

an alien species with our level of technology would colonize the galaxy within 250-400 million years

we havent seen this yet because we are the first intelligent species that can contemplate this question of 'where is everyone' or civilzations dont colonize entire galaxies, but stop after a few planets and civilizations dont need to build dyson spheres/swarms there is no need. civilizations probably go hybrid machine lifeforms until just being part of a computer grid

>>9958784
>hurrr if I call everyone this word someone called me on the internet I'll somehow feel intellectually superior, even though I bring nothing of substance to the conversation aside from vapid complaints
Begone from the board. Forever. Your ignorance will go to good use over at /pol/