Home
In response to my previous post, some noted that if another planet of humans had terraformed our own Earth for their future use, millions of years ago, they made a big mistake because Earth got populated by people who evolved here before they could use it.

To that I say once again you make the mistake of assuming Earth is special. If we had the technology to terraform planets, and the predicted need, we wouldn't take a chance on just one other planet. We'd spray a thousand probes into space all searching for their own planets to seed. Then when the time came, millions of years later, we'd colonize whichever one came out best, pushing aside any prehuman species that got in the way.

Therefore, if Earth was seeded for life by earlier humans, there is actually a very small chance they would choose Earth as one of the new planets they colonized. And that might be especially true if we evolved and populated the planet with humans before they had need for this planet.


 
Rank Up Rank Down Votes:  +3
  • Print
  • Share
  • Share:

Comments

Sort By:
Feb 7, 2009
Sounds very similar to Douglas Adams H2G2 series, where the dominant Neanderthals were replaced by the excess individuals from a distant civilization. We are all, in fact, descended from the useless third of the Golgafrincham population: management consultants, personnel officers, telephone sanitisers, etc. This is probably why we are hard-wired to find Dilbert subconsciously validating...
 
 
Feb 7, 2009
We have no evidence of aliens. Imagine if talk about aliens came out of a religious textbook how absurd that would sound. At least we have evidence of God which is easy to find if you open your mind to look for it. Lastly if you say that we are seeded on this planet that would solve the problem of how life spontaneously generated which no evolutionist seems to know. Unfortunately that does not get rid of the problem it just moves it to another planet which we cannot observe. At this point who is the one who has moved outside the realm of science?
 
 
0 Rank Up Rank Down
Feb 7, 2009
Our terraforming Creators who sent spores here to grow people have a thing for CO2. Oh and they eat plastic which is hard to grow on Nyptar.
 
 
Feb 7, 2009
Hmmm. I'm skeptical.

The resources to terraform a planet seem non-trivial. Thus why not go other routes to preservation, such as encoding the real humans into some form of persistent data cloud? We'll obviously have grown to the point where we can master the genome and many complex physics problems, so this route should be open. What meaning has shallow biological replication got at that point? We (they) would be transhuman and well off into 'why bother reproducing in that archaic fashion?'

It does make for an interesting sci-fi novel idea. Ship (or aliens) show up and say "Hmmm. Sorry, there's been a bit of a mix up. We terraformed this planet for OUR use. You'll have to go." and earth humanity going "Wha'choo talkin' about, Willis?!" Then the ensuing Bruckheimeresque explosions and mass deaths, the destruction of our version of 'cities' and the end result of the Aliens being felled by some tragically dangerous but unexpected despite their massive brains aspect of our world - say explosive aneurisms caused byParis Hilton reality TV or an allergic reaction to political punditry on Fox TV.

Or maybe they show up and explain what the Fjords were built for and by whom.

I suspect in the long run, we're more likely to have a Rapa Nui like end than the transendent one you propose (reminds me a bit of the post Bablyon-5 timeline where humans can turn themselves into energy and have spread across space, abandoning a dying Earth system). Resources will get tight, violence (which doesn't determine who is right but may determine who is left) will be in great supply, and then in the long run we'll all just die off due to (take your pick): Global Warming, Global Cooling, the reversal of the magnetic pole and the associated removal of our protection from cosmic rays while that happens, stopping of the deep ocean currents that help renew our atmospheric oxygen, or just killing all the other species. I'm sure we can add a few others like Nuclear Armageddon, another movie with Ben Affleck, or something of that sort.

Humanity is a blip on the cosmic time scale. Even if we do spread out, when the big crunch comes, we die in fire at the heat death of the universe. Or, if there isn't enough mass, we slowly freeze out as all the energy expeds and we're left in a cold, dead, very spread out space.

Fortunately, this is so far down that road that for any practical purposes, none of us need worry. We might well worry more about immediate concerns like food shortages, econocalypse, fossil fuels running out, or another Ben Affleck movie.
 
 
0 Rank Up Rank Down
Feb 7, 2009
Scott, I can sense one big flaw in your argument. You argue that as earth isn't special (I agree) they would have sent out many probes with the capability of terraforming the planet. Problem is, we ourselves are a lot closer to being able to detect from earth what planets suit our needs than we are of being able to even minimally terraform a planet. You have to agree that an advanced civilization would not waste energy terraforming planets when a large array are available that would suit their climate and atmospheric needs.



You might want to check out Arthur C. Clarke's book "The Songs of Distant Earth". It's loosely related to the topic as it talks about earth sending seedships before the explosion of the sun. In this case Clarke decided that instead of the seedship erasing all trace of a previous earth or mystifying the earth-inhabitants as another kind of God, it simply told the story as it was. Of course your version of the story would make for a pretty boring novel but nonetheless, it's a good read.
 
 
Feb 7, 2009
If what you say is true, the real question is now "Where are they?". Did they make another planet their own? Are they still looking for a perfect place to live? Could they be among us now? Or are they just sitting around watching us while ingesting their favorite beverage and laughing at our economic crisis?

What you're saying Scott raises many questions and I don't think any of them can be answered anytime soon.
 
 
Feb 7, 2009
If the goal is to perpetuate the race, then genetic infestation would be sufficient, with perhaps triggers in the genetic code of simple species to force evolution in a given direction. In that case, no "seeding" or colonization would be necessary.

If the goal was cultural preservation, then colonization would be necessary, although a culture that worked on geologic time scales is hard to envision.

But the work of O'Neill and others suggests that colonization of space itself, in habitats or even Dyson Spheres would be cheaper and quicker.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_colonization

Remember, "gravity is a downer"
 
 
Feb 7, 2009
Funny, because there's very little evidence that we evolved from a lower species. Isn't it more likely that if aliens terraformed this planet, we humans were part of the terraforming program? Then a later probe will introduce a code for us to suddenly bury ourselves, leaving the planet ready including infrastructure for them to come and take over.
 
 
Feb 7, 2009
Therefore rendering your initial idea correct without the need for anything to happen, ever.
 
 
 
Get the new Dilbert app!
Old Dilbert Blog