|
A PUZZLE
CONSTRUCTION : THE PRESERVATION OF INTELLIGENT LIFE Terrestrial life seeds should be scattered in the Cosmos to prove
man’s concern for the preservation of universal and intelligent life.
“Terraforming” of a solar planet (Mars, Venus?) would be the first step in this undertaking
for the promotion of a new intelligent species issued from terrestrial
primates.
In page below :
- A Blurred concept - Puzzle Part
5
- Monkey in Cage -
Life Preservation - Puzzle
Part 6
- Umbilical Cord -
Cosmic Responsibility - Stellar Squats
?
- Optimal Preservation
- Puzzle Part 2 -
Colonizing our Solar System - Last Update - Puzzle Part 3 - A
Naive Welcome - A
Threat for Man - Puzzle Part 4 - Peaceful Colonization ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ A Blurred Concept of
Freedom and of Democracy (Is the eunuch free in a
harem ?) A wise and rather
unusual declaration that should be followed by many leaders (religious,
political, economic, etc) : « If science
proves that some buddhist customs are false, then Buddhism will
change! » (from dailaî-lama Tenzin Gyatso, Neurosciences Congress,
Washington, Dec. 12, 2005) Passive non-violence is only
disguised violence. Unselfish
non-violence is truly required for survival, and this concept should therefore be
precisely defined. But in the
so-called “democracy of big cats” ( ** ) professed by the privileged
few, a blurred concept of freedom and democracy leads to mix solved and
unsolved problems and results quite naturally in endless and fruitless
discussions to the benefit of jungle law and general corruption. What else could be expected ? Could for
instance astronomy have progressed if the main physical constants (g, M, t,
etc.) were always re-discussed ? These precise data were adopted as
scientific references because they were revealed as the best known to
describe the real world (the truth), and any “untrue reference” is
accordingly declared as unscientific. As in science, precision is required in
the definition of democratic (and freedom) laws. Democracy should be integrated into science to be reliable and fair. It should be obvious that it can only be corrupted (as science in the
Middle Ages) if some constant values are not precisely defined on a
scientific basis. With modern devices (robots), this could well be done in
most fields (economy, law, etc). But the privileged few do not even
contemplate the idea of proceeding so, using even “scarecrows” (“Bigbrogther
threat”, “endangered freedom” ) to
frighten the underprivileged against such controls. After a fair scientific analysis, most laws
of market economy could indeed appear as incompatible with simple human
rights and freedom, and so would it be for most modern laws merely destined
to maintain the privileges of the ruling classes. There are lot of “democratic laws”
that are untrue (not coherent with facts, with human rights and freedom), and
consequently undemocratic and unscientific. Deprived of his due share in
market society, the underprivileged are not more free than the “eunuch in a
harem”, free perhaps to move around, but deprived of his natural
potential. Common saying advances that
all opinions are valid, but this is not true. As in a puzzle construction
where it is unreasonable to try stubbornly to set the wrong part in the wrong
place, an opinion (or a law) is not justified if it is against all scientific
evidences. It can only be justified if it is in accordance with all other
scientific laws (or facts) already well established. Justice is to be built as a puzzle game where each part (each law)
should find its exact place, and this requires precision and incorruptibility
that can only be given by robots kept as science under public control. False science cannot long exist, and so could it be with scientific
democracy and freedom. Our analysis in life preservation should therefore progress stepwise
as in a puzzle construction, starting each time from a basis of all the
problems previously solved (puzzle parts already placed). Let us always make sure that this
primordial condition of cosmic survival is well preserved before going
further ahead in the elaboration of our project of life preservation. This is
a control procedure commonly used in project management (check list). We shall follow this control procedure at each new step. Let us recall our First Puzzle Part so far placed (Survival Law N°1) : Survival Law or
Puzzle Part N°1:
In any human project, survival requires an attitude of unselfish non-violence
towards all others, including eventual ET beings! _________________________________________________________________________________ A REQUIRED PRESERVATION OF
INTELLIGENT LIFE (“Help yourself and Heaven will help you!”) Pure
natural risks: We know by now that
terrestrial life is naturally fragile and that man could be alone to keep the
flame of intelligence alight in this Universe. We cannot so far affirm that
Earth-like or other forms of life exist elsewhere. Terrestrial life is
therefore the more precious, and as intelligent and conscious beings, or at
least pretending to be so, it belongs to us to do our best to preserve and
perpetuate it. This is for mankind a sort of cosmic
duty. It would not even be human and intelligent to ignore it! The risks of a natural extinction of terrestrial life are not purely
imaginary as some still pretend. Our planet is in fact permanently exposed to
multiple natural risks of rapid destruction. Since its origin, the Earth has
been submitted to various celestial bombardments (asteroids, comets, rays,
etc.) which could have resulted in a general extinction of life on several
occasions. Partial extinctions have at least been recognized. The great dinosaurs and some other prehistoric animal species have for
instance disappeared from Earth after such a possible shock occurring some
sixty-five millions years ago. Traces of other destructive impacts have also
been discovered on our planet. The last relatively important impact occurred less than 100 years ago
(Tunguska, Siberia, 1908). It nearly wiped out two thousands square
kilometres of forest, and it would obviously have been much more devastating
over an inhabited area. Other threats of impacts are already forecasted in a
not too distant future. According to last astronomical data, at least two
relatively massive asteroids known as geo cruisers (crossing the Earth’s
orbit around the Sun) could represent some potential threat in the next tens
of years (as for instance, asteroid
Apophis in 2036). Impacts of tinier bodies are still occurring more frequently. It is
thus estimated that some ten thousands tons of such materials fall over our
planet each year, these being fortunately burnt and disintegrated before
reaching the ground. Still more massive objects could hit the Earth in the
future, and pure statistics even indicate that inevitable shocks will occur
within shorter or longer periods according to the size of the impacting
bodies. The Gaul people were right: “Heaven
can fall on our heads!” Life on our mother planet can be anytime destroyed
through the impact of a major celestial body, through the explosion of stars
even located at light-years from our Solar System, etc. The death of our own
star is already programmed in the cosmic calendar, even if it is not to occur
before some billions years. We are definitely vulnerable! Risks
of human nature: But
other risks should also be taken into account in our analysis. We are now a
growing source of threats to our own survival. As a matter of fact, we
represent a real scourge for terrestrial life in general. We are daily
increasing the risks of extinction of our own species (and of others too)
because of an unrestrained consumption of energy, because of global warming
and environmental pollution, exhaustion of most natural resources, wars and
repeated exterminations of people, nuclear threat, etc. Things should not turn any better if
we were to continue with our present model of consumer society. The richest
in the less advanced countries are naturally inclined to imitate and join the
privileged few in all domains of daily life (fashion, behaviour, consumption,
violence, etc.). But our western model of development cannot be used as
reference for the whole planet as we still claim it. An impossible model
of development! If all Earth
inhabitants were to reach a standard of living comparable to the French’s, a
world objective which can be viewed as quite normal and reasonable, then at
least three planets like the Earth would be needed for that purpose. To reach a US
level, six to ten planets would be required! The western model
of development is therefore totally inadequate for the Earth! But how could we refuse that right to people condemned to remain
deprived of it while the privileged few of our kind could themselves grow
greedier and greedier? Billions of fellowmen from China, India, and other
nations on this planet are impatiently waiting for the moment to sit down to
the table and even to have their superfluous extra part of consumption. The
number of polluting vehicles could therefore be doubled or tripled in the
world in the next tens of years, and we know that pollution knows no
frontiers. Where are we going to? This irresponsible behaviour toward our environment and toward our
fellowmen is that of a species engaged in the conquest of an enemy land. Do
we want to make a desert of our planet? If simple grass was not to grow again
in the Middle Ages after the passage of Attila’s hordes in western Europe, it
does not grow in fact behind the horses-powers of modern men. Life is anyway
growing poorer and poorer, with very little strength to sustain it. Our
worldwide society is steadily eating terrestrial life with unrestricted
greediness. On the past tens of years, the destructive consequences of this
irresponsible behaviour on our environment have followed an exponential
growth. If this was to go on, nobody could seriously bet on the survival of
mankind beyond a few hundreds years, and most probably less. Is mankind aiming at self-destruction? Assuming Cosmic Responsibility - You mentioned a term of hundreds or
tens of years before an eventual extinction of mankind? The longer part of my
life is already behind and I will be lying underground when it comes. I am
not really concerned. The future belongs to the youth! So could speak
the seniors among us, thus leaving the list of the condemned, and condemning
by the way all our children and grandchildren we still pretend to love. The fatalists
could add: - What could we
do face to this nature of things? We are totally disarmed. When we are gone
let happen what may! The youngest
(those to whom the future belongs) could close the discussion as follows: - Let us live our
present life in the meantime. We are still young men and women and we have
time to think about it later. Such replies from
people who pretend to be intelligent cannot be termed as responsible or
simply human. But there are lot of such aberrant contradictions in our
attitudes and choices in almost all domains of daily life : economy and
commerce, defence and security, energy consumption, etc. Today, modern
science and technology give us new cosmic responsibilities, and since we have
been in space, times have changed. Up to now, our relative inability to bring
real changes could justify this cosmic irresponsibility of mankind. Like a
child looking for excuses in the unconsciousness of a younger age, we want to
forget that we have by now reached the age of cosmic adultness. We cannot remain
passive: Cosmic
irresponsibility is no longer an argument for mankind’s inaction! Our science and technology enable us to advance practical solutions in
order to get out of awkward situations caused by our long cosmic
unconsciousness or by natural reasons. We can preserve terrestrial life and
intelligence if we chose to do it. We can better control our development and
make life more harmonious all over this planet for the human species as a
whole and for all other species too. We can build a society allowing both
man’s well-being and survival. We
could also disseminate the seeds of terrestrial life in the Cosmos in order
to give intelligent life more chances of survival in case of a possible
cosmic accident to our planet or to our species. With such assets, a new cosmic responsibility now belongs to us: The
time of cosmic responsibility has come for mankind! Alone
or not in this Galaxy and even in the whole Universe, we cannot keep all our
terrestrial seeds of life in a single “cosmic basket”, a small and exhausted
planet we could continue to pollute in view to satisfy all our selfish whims.
It is high time to set the watches right, to do the housework and to
prepare the cosmic future of our species in full consciousness! 1) If we are alone, the
preservation of terrestrial life and of intelligence would of course be still
more required: Man would be in the situation of the last couple surviving after a
Deluge. In such a situation, there would be no doubt on the most urgent thing
to do: the cosmic duty of this couple would obviously be to procreate. Mankind is now in this situation. We could indeed be alone and
represent the single chance of survival left to intelligent life. 2)
If we are not alone, we should still
multiply the life sources in this Universe in order to increase the chances of
intelligent life preservation. An inhabited planet more in this Galaxy would
be a chance more for intelligent life. It should not be overlooked that the cosmic risks of intelligent life
extinction could in fact be considerable, and that the existence of stellar
neighbours would not prevent us from creating new life sources in this
Galaxy. Do we seriously choose to remain childless because there are already
other children in the neighbourhood? Mankind would anyway have a specific
human patrimony to transmit, and as in biological unions, some interstellar
mixing of cosmic life could also be desirable. Let us not take eventual ET beings
far more advanced than us for idiots: our refusal to engage ourselves in the
preservation of terrestrial and intelligent life, and more globally, in the
preservation of universal and intelligent life, would be considered as a
testimony of the greatest cosmic irresponsibility by any intelligent
observer, even with medium intelligence. This cosmic irresponsibility would not allow us to expect any form of
relation with more advanced beings in this Universe. The last considerations enable us to place a second puzzle part by
stating the following law of cosmic survival: Survival
Law/Puzzle Part N°2 As the only conscious being so far
known, man should multiply the cosmic sources of life in order to increase
the chances of its preservation. This law is as ineluctable as the
previous one. Unless we consider
that man could reject all his traditional ethic values and commit some sort
of cosmic suicide through pure negligence, it seems that no other more
rational choice is left to him. Alone or not in this Galaxy, it is for him a cosmic
duty to multiply the sources of intelligent life, as it was formerly man’s
duty to give birth to biological descendants (is it still so?). - “Go forth and multiply”, was a very
old saying! But how could we survive and
perpetuate life on a small planet which could anytime be hit to death or turn
sterile some day, anyway? An eternal life assurance could not be placed from
the start since the Galaxy itself could also be “eaten” by a larger one! We
saw however that a dispersion of the existing life seeds in the space
accessible to us would already increase the chances of intelligent life
preservation in the event of some cosmic misfortune occurring to our mother
planet. Let us therefore start with it. But how could we do it, concretely? As we begin to master space
transportation, the first idea would be to colonize one of the nearest
planets of our Solar System, and this idea should indeed be advanced. It
would anyway be a first step to survival, before undertaking further steps
towards the other stars nearby. But there is a rub in it! According to our present knowledge, none of the nearby solar planets
is immediately habitable, except by small teams of astronauts well equipped
for a rather short stay. Long stays of living beings outside our planet are
still beyond the possibilities of our science and technology. Soviet
cosmonauts have lived, rather uncomfortably for over one year in space ships,
and the next US inhabited mission to Mars could perhaps last a little longer
(two years?). For a permanent colonization of another celestial body with living
beings such as men, things would be quite different! Would our civilization
be condemned to die in this terrestrial weight well, this cosmic cavern as
Earth could also be named? Man could not be kept closed! Science could perhaps present a cosmic issue to the problem. According
to recent studies, some neighbour planets of the Solar System could be made
habitable through purely artificial means known as “terraforming”. It
concerns advanced techniques leading to the progressive formation around the
selected planet (Mars, Venus?) of an atmosphere with an environment apt to
receive all terrestrial forms of life species (animals, plants, birds,
insects, etc.). Other studies should of course be carried out to confirm the
feasibility of such a gigantic cosmic project. Its realization would probably
extend over hundreds of years, if not even more. But it could be realizable
if we were ready to do what is required, and we could of course have the
means needed to do it. If the survival of mankind is on balance, who could
decide that it would be a too expensive or too difficult project for mankind
to undertake? What would then be more urgent to do ? But where could mankind find the means required for it? It would not
be too difficult to do so in such a waste society. We would simply have to
give our species other priorities! Sufficient means could be made
available! As a possible source of financing, all Earth military budgets (USA,
France, Russia, China, etc.) presently used for needless and destructive
purposes could for instance be consecrated to this project of intelligent
life preservation. According to several international agencies, over 1000 billions
dollars would then be made yearly available, and probably much more. This
represents five to ten times the total amount of all present international
space budgets. These are not the only savings that could be made available rapidly.
With such amounts of money, what space or other project could remain
unrealizable for mankind? It would be unimaginable for mankind to renounce. Could it remain
another choice than “terraforming”? We could also dream of a stellar squat, thus proceeding like some bird
species. Looking for Stellar Squats ? Some bird species are used to squat
the nests of other birds instead of spending hard and laborious time to
arrange their own lodgings. There are perhaps “free cosmic nests” waiting for
mankind’s arrival in this Galaxy, well prepared to welcome us when we decide
to arrive. Such dreams are
anyway free and could indeed be possible! Why not after
all! An interstellar
adventure of that kind would however not be any easier to achieve. In
addition to the fact that such stellar nests could be well guarded and
coveted by other beings (hi, extraterrestrials!), an interstellar undertaking
organized for their eventual discovery would still be longer and riskier than
any “terraforming” project of a nearby planet. The Sun’s nearest
star (Proxima Centauri) is in fact located at some 4.5 light-years, that is,
some 40,000 billions kilometres from our planet. It would be a rather long
cruise which could also return quite fruitless. We would even be lucky to
return safe. With the orbital
speeds currently performed, a manned spaceship would take thousands years to
cover this “small” interstellar distance, in fact, forty to fifty thousands
years. The first Pharaohs of Egypt would be far from the end of their journey
if they were gone with the equivalent of one of the most advanced spaceships
we could now build. Decisive
breakthroughs in science and technology could of course occur rapidly in the
domain of space propulsion, but our neighbour stars would still remain very
distant from us for long. Even if our cruise speed could be increased by a
factor of one hundred, we would still need over one thousand years for a
return travel to Proxima. If
extraterrestrial beings are already able to undertake such interstellar
travels to come and observe us, this single cosmic performance places them at
a level of development and intelligence which could not be compared with
ours. It is often wiser
not to go too far from home. We should therefore rather undertake the
“terraforming” of a nearby planet. Our third Puzzle Part can therefore be
placed by stating the following law of survival: Puzzle Part or Cosmic Survival Law
N°3 Man should undertake the terraforming
of one or several planets of the Solar System to preserve terrestrial (or
universal) intelligent life! Again another puzzle part and an
ineluctable law! It seems that there is no more rational issue left to our
species. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ COLONIZING THE
SOLAR SYSTEM “If a man does not know to which port he is sailing,
no wind is favourable.” (Seneca, Roman philosopher, -5BC 65AC) Let us come back to
the control procedure (puzzle construction) for a synthesis of the laws of
cosmic survival already checked, in order to make sure that unselfish
non-violence is well preserved in our cosmic project: In any project, the survival of the
species commands an attitude of unselfish non-violence toward others,
including toward eventual extraterrestrial beings (L1). As the only conscious
being so far known, man should multiply the cosmic sources of life (L2) and
undertake the terraforming of one or several planets of the Solar System in
view to increase the chances of intelligent life preservation through cosmic
dispersion (L3). After this routine control, let us continue with our cosmic project. Could we colonize
other planets of our Solar System? If we were able to make some superficial “dives” in space in the past
tens of years, the “terraformation” of a planet in order to receive and
sustain all terrestrial forms of life would be quite new to us. It would be a
project of unprecedented size and complexity, even among the most imposing
ones (the Pyramids, the Great Wall of China, the first man in orbit, the
first man on the Moon, the tunnel under the Channel, etc.). For the first
time in man’s history, we would be crossing a natural frontier in view to
settle living beings on the surface of another celestial body, in an
extraterrestrial space where other advanced beings of this Galaxy could have
legitimate interests. In such a cosmic project, our strategy of unselfish non-violence
already defined should be observed from the beginning. Face to eventual ET
beings who could exterminate us without any possibility of reply, a rational
attitude in cosmic relations would particularly be required from mankind from
the start. Beyond his natural frontier, any intelligent being should always
consider himself as a stranger exploring a new territory in which new laws
could eventually apply. The apparent absence of “owners” is not an evidence
of it. The best intentions cannot serve as arguments, and the newcomer’s
language can also be locally misunderstood. Everything in his behaviour
should therefore be consistent with true peaceful intentions and feelings,
and all his gestures or actions should leave no doubt about it. Crossing the terrestrial frontier could be full of consequences for
our species, and it should not be decided lightly. Let us again remind the
ultimate objective of our project, a cosmic objective with which other
intelligent beings could only agree: Multiply
the cosmic sources of intelligent life in view to increase the chances of its
preservation. How could we
proceed to peacefully colonize the Galaxy, beginning with an artificial
fitting up (terraforming) of a nearby planet? Do
we have any experience in colonization? Yes, despite all evil consequences it brought to us since! All past
human experiences should be profitable to the future, and the bad ones are
certainly not the last to be kept. After causing much harm, they can finally
bring positive consequences in the future if adequate lessons are drawn from
them. As a matter of fact, our long terrestrial experience in colonization
was not encouraging as concerns unselfish non-violence, but we could
precisely use it so that we do not renew it in the Cosmos. Our experience
was acquired during hundreds and thousands years of slavery, along rivers of
human blood that bruised mankind forever. It is now continued through a
systematic plunder of the weakest peoples of the Earth by the privileged few,
an unjustified appropriation of the main planetary riches by states or small
economic circles led by the strongest, globally by white men. The consequences
of this predatory experience are still effective and will probably remain so
for long, if not forever. Most of our present crucial problems are more or
less derived from this savage behaviour of the privileged few which was never
accepted by those who are still submitted to it under various forms of market
imperialism (embargo and economic war, military blackmail, etc.). All
conflicts which occurred during the last tens of years (Vietnam and Southeast
Asia, Algeria, Africa, Iraq, Middle-East, Cuba, Madagascar, etc.) are more or
less direct consequences of this predation led by the privileged few. The present world
belongs globally to the Whites coming from Europe and this appropriation of
the planetary riches by a small minority of predators is more than ever
unbearable for mankind. Booties accumulated for centuries allow the
plunderers to be now the richest and to make still larger profits (booties). The alleged
competition professed in the frame of World Globalization is a global farce! Our planet is now boiling and nearing to a point of final explosion,
and a cosmic dispersion of terrestrial life in a vast Galaxy could not
reasonably follow this terrestrial model of life predation. Any attempt in
that direction would inevitably fail, and it would be irresponsible from
mankind to try it again. Should we abandon any idea of some cosmic colonization in view to save
ourselves and to preserve intelligent life? If man had followed such a
philosophy of renouncement face to difficulties, he would still live in a
prehistoric cavern. A
very far example! Indeed, the
primate (man’s ancestor) showed the way to mankind. It took in fact the high
risk to come down from the tree and to leave the wild forest where it had so
far lived. It had even to
straight up on its rear feet in order to go ahead! According to a well-known Russian visionary and thinker Konstantin
Tsiolskovski (1857-1935) “the Earth is man’s cradle, but nobody remains in
his cradle forever.” Let us be prepared to quit this terrestrial cradle! The
discovery and colonization of new spaces are certainly desirable and
potentially fruitful for a species which is still in an evolution process. A
collective memory & a collective being! Man is probably a
single cell of intelligence within a Universal Intelligence, a cell that
should probably discover another field of development beyond a restricted
brain which is becoming too narrow to really apprehend this Universe. At the origin of
terrestrial life, more complex systems were born after the association of
single unicellular systems. Are we going likewise to a more complex form of
being? (see : “Cosmic Marriage” ) The preservation of life would anyway require that man crosses his
terrestrial frontier, but it is also true that all territories worth of
conquest are generally settled or coveted by others who consider themselves
as the best placed to assert their rights. This is the reason why any stranger is generally met with some
distrust that should be considered as quite natural when his arrival was not
long and wisely announced and prepared on both parts, in a common and
constant care for unselfish non-violence. The Naïve Welcome of the Primitives Looking back at history, we can now
see the naïve attitude of the primitive tribes of America and of other parts
of the world in their generally warm and peaceful welcome of the first
Whites. Indeed, these primitive and irrational people were more or less
expecting the landing of gods coming from Heaven, and gods were considered by
them as peaceful. Some of us are
probably likewise prepared to grant some divine part to eventual
extraterrestrials observing mankind! But behind all
soothing and misleading talks destined to deceive those welcoming them so
generously, the Whites, priests and monks included, were in fact the advanced
guard of an army of invaders sent to install outposts for the conquest of
whole territories and continents. Christopher Columbus and the first
navigators or monks in his company were not perhaps themselves
ill-intentioned. Many wanted only to discover the world. But they came from a
society of violence and selfishness and they could bring nothing else but
desolation and death in the wake of their vessels. As what followed
was rapidly to show, it was indeed the first landing of potential enemies.
Enemies who should have been met as such, at least for the time required to
learn and know them better. Whole tribes and nations were thus exterminated
by the Whites, victims of their artless dispositions and of the barbarous
behaviour of the strongest. We should expect to be received
likewise if we were to land some day in another stellar system, and advanced
extraterrestrial beings landing on Earth should also expect to be met so if
they consider men as reasonable and intelligent beings. If they were to act
otherwise, it would be a proof of their little consideration for mankind, and
we should consequently distrust this disguised form of violence in their
approach. For it would be a form of violence! In so doing, they
would be trying to dupe mankind on their true feelings and intentions. Their
force, whether displayed openly or not, would deny us any possibility of
reply. An unexpected landing or contact would be a manifestation of violence
from their part, anyway! SETI’s claimed prospects are pure lures! In their relations
with mankind, peaceful extraterrestrial observers are condemned to remain
silent until we prove our cosmic consciousness! If advanced ET are observing us as some people pretend, their
discretion denotes already an unselfish and non-violent attitude toward us,
especially if they know that their existence is now considered by mankind as
probable, if not certain. It is perhaps the reason why all alleged extraterrestrial visitors are
so far always so silent and rather furtive, according to all reports. Migration is never an insignificant problem to solve, as it can always
be observed nowadays in Europe and elsewhere. Once the frontier crossed, the
hopes nourished on both sides but in a mutual ignorance are suddenly
confronted to the realities of life. The immigrants coming from Africa or
from other parts of the world are well aware of the problems posed. After a
long journey which was often an ordeal, the arrival is rarely as it was
expected. Harmonious
relations between peoples issued from different worlds should be long
prepared on both sides, with a first concern for unselfish non-violence. Considering first an implantation of
life on another planet of our System, then in the other stellar systems of our
Galaxy, our cosmic project of intelligent life preservation would not be in
opposition with any extraterrestrial project, and could even favour
harmonious relations with other eventual beings. Our behaviour should speak
for itself without leaving any doubt on it! As soon as we cross our
terrestrial frontier, we could in fact be treading on a ground where other
intelligent beings could have legitimate rights requiring respect from our
part. One could of course object that we would remain in our own system, far
from places where extraterrestrials would have interests to protect. This would not be an argument to consider! Even if the solar planets are effectively nearer to Earth than to any
other star of this Galaxy, extraterrestrials could have legitimate claims
concerning them, as the United Kingdom toward the far Falklands, or France
toward Reunion Island which is as far too! If we were to ignore such rules of good behaviour in cosmic relations,
we would then have to expect eventual hostile reactions face to our
aggressiveness. Face to intelligent beings much more advanced than us, this
would represent a risk of death requiring a particularly prudent attitude
from our part. We should therefore take a good life-assurance before entering
such a risky way. This leads us to place our 4th Puzzle Part by stating the following
law of survival: Puzzle
Part or Law of Survival N°4 A permanent extraterrestrial
colonization by mankind should not represent any potential threat to any
other beings. Such an attitude of
non-violence is again the only one to insure peace. It would be a simple rule
of good cosmic neighbourhood. A cosmic
responsibility of the leading powers and of Mankind! As the main
predators of man’s civilization, the leading powers (USA, UK, Germany,
France, Japan, Italy, Spain, Russia, China, India, etc.) detain the keys to
the changes required for the preservation of intelligent life and the cosmic
survival of our species. It is therefore their cosmic duty and specific
responsibility to do what is required to achieve it. ET observers of mankind
would be aware of it, and openly or not, they could also be led to intervene
in man’s affairs on behalf of their own cosmic responsibilities. Should the underprivileged look forward to it? An open intervention of such advanced extraterrestrials should not be
expected from mankind as a whole since it would mean that we have failed to
meet their cosmic expectations! As previously discussed, their unexpected
arrival would already represent in itself a form of violence toward our
species. Mankind
should achieve life preservation and cosmic survival collectively ! ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ A
PEACEFUL MODEL OF COLONIZATION Control procedure
and Puzzle Construction for unselfish non-violence: In any human
project, the survival of mankind requires to adopt an attitude of unselfish
non-violence towards all others, including eventual extraterrestrials
(L1). As the only conscious being so
far known, man should multiply the cosmic sources of intelligent life through
life dispersion in order to increase the chances of its preservation (L2),
and he should “terraform” one or several planets of the Solar System to this
purpose (L3). A permanent extraterrestrial colonization by mankind should not
represent any potential threat to other beings (L4). This check for
unselfish non-violence and Puzzle Construction being carried out, we can
proceed further ahead. ______ Our sincere concern
for harmonious relations with other beings would in fact be affirmed from the
start by the very nature of our colonization project of another planet. It
could indeed interfere with other cosmic schemes or interests from which we
have no idea. We should never forget that our
behaviour speaks more than our talks on our real feelings. This is already
true in our relations with our fellow-men, but it would still be truer in
such a cosmic project in which other stellar partners may be implied. Our daily attitude toward our fellow-men and toward our natural
environment is again, most obviously, the sole language really reliable that
extraterrestrial observers could understand and trust. We are, first of all,
an intelligent species submitted to a social evolution, that is, an evolution
based on relations between individuals. At the level of the species as a
whole, there are no individual or collective practices or customs which
result in no implications or consequences, and that is why we stand for
keeping them. Our planetary history, with all human realizations and projects
to come, even those which will never be realized, could tell foreign
observers much on our real goodwill for unselfish non-violence between our
fellow-men, but also toward them if they were to land on Earth some day. All
our gestures and actions should therefore be balanced since we could not
pretend to act differently toward them as toward our fellow-men. According to current comments, we would be prepared to welcome
extraterrestrial observers if they decided to contact us! But would it be so
really? What would be our actual attitude toward such beings? Saying and doing are different things! Our numerous
messages of peace engraved on space vessels or sent in search programs for
extraterrestrial intelligences (SETI, etc.) do not commit us. These naïve
programs could only be addressed to stellar beings still less advanced than
ourselves. As such beings would not be able to receive our messages and to
answer to them, they are in fact aimless.
As concerns the most advanced stellar beings able to answer to our
cosmic messages and to visit us on our planet, it should be realized that the
initiative of an eventual first contact between our two stellar worlds would,
most probably, not belong to mankind. Their advance on us would be at least
equal to the travel time needed to reach the nearest star. At a considerable
speed of 1% of the speed of light, this would amount to at least 450 years,
and their advance on us would probably be several times more. Intelligent
exchanges could not even be contemplated with stellar beings with an advance
in development of thousands or millions of years, as it could be the case. If
we acted as they would expect us to do, we could eventually bring them to
break the cosmic silence or to disclose in some way their existence. They could so address “a kind of
invitation “to mankind. Some candid spirits are already dreaming of establishing actual
exchanges between our respective worlds (cultural and scientific, or even
technological or commercial, etc. in short, traditional business or like
exchanges that could be practised in the frame of our market economy). Our
consumer civilization is already looking forward to the conquest of new
markets in some kind of galactic competition! But our science and technology
would not allow interstellar travels already commonly practised by such advanced
beings. All we could tell them would be known for long by their advanced
civilization. They may know us better than we do since they could have
observed the whole process of life evolution on this planet since the
beginning, well even before man’s birth.
We could at best play the part of research subjects in
a kind of cosmic zoo or laboratory that Earth could
represent for such advanced beings. Our subordinate role in the initiative
for establishing an eventual contact between our respective worlds would
therefore be in the natural and cosmic order of things, and they would
contact us (or let us discover them!) only when they deem it appropriate, or
only when we come up to some of their cosmic expectations. It is rather surprising that this analysis is not more commonly
accepted in most studies on the subject. This first step of
the more advanced beings toward the more “primitive” is however a common
practice in our terrestrial experience. Could we forget our first
explorations of this planet? It was the Europeans who were the first to go
and meet the American Indians, the Africans, the people of New-Guinea…and not
the contrary. And we should never forget that the cultural ditch existing
between us and these people soon reduced to slavery was quite insignificant
compared to the bottomless abyss probably existing between ET capable of
interstellar travels and mankind. Like the first white navigators landing on the shores and territories
they discovered, such advanced beings would look like divine creatures for
most of us, even with an advance of some hundreds or thousands years. For an advance of millions or billions years, as it could well be the
case, a simple meeting seems quite impossible to contemplate. We could not
even pretend to play the part of a primitive man. In the place of the
primate, we could hardly take that of a frog face to such advanced beings! The image of a travel in time How could we look to people of our Middle Ages if we could visit them? Despite our explanations, they would most probably be unable to
understand the advances of our science and technology. They would take us for
gods, even if we do not pretend to be so. If such fantastic journeys in the past were to become possible, we
should probably think it over for long before deciding to cross the border
line! Why should it be different in interstellar relations? Man’s too often
claimed grandeur leads him to cherish illusions! It is incoherent to address simple messages (radio, written messages,
etc.) to beings much more advanced than us. We could not convince them with
simple words. Another form of expression should be used. The Monkey in the Cage The image of the
monkey in a cage is frequently used to illustrate some extreme situations: Consider a monkey
starving in a cage. One end of a very long string is attached to one bar of
the cage, and the other to a basket of bananas located out of reach outside. Very hungry and
even starving, the monkey would like to reach the basket, but cannot do it
despite all usual gesticulations. Even if the string is sometimes stirred up
quite inadvertently by the primate, there are so many bows of it on the
ground that the basket itself is never moved. What would expect
a human observer wanting to test the intelligence of the primate, or finally,
wanting to test the performance of its survival instinct since the animal is
starving? That the beast finally finds out that the string can be
straightened between the cage and the basket if it is progressively drawn.
Even if the basket remains long motionless, it will come within reach in the
end. The monkey would thus prove its ability to survive face to a threat of
fatal death. The animal could
long threaten, grunt and grimace. If there are some objects left within reach
(a stick, a hammer, some plates and glasses, etc.), it could destroy
everything around. It could also use such objects to bombard other monkeys in
nearby cages. But nothing of this kind of attitude will do to save it. Its usual
behaviour being ineffective, the primate has no other choice than to do some
unusual action in order to draw someone’s attention for an eventual help.
Only the string is connected to the outside world from where some help could
come. The string’s other end should be the one visibly attached to the
basket. Even if the basket of bananas was not in sight, it would still be
wise to draw on the string. It could be a creeper with a fruit at the end,
and it should therefore be drawn in order to check it. Stirring the other end
of the string could also draw the attention of an invisible observer. This possible
saver keeps silent. Why? He could be deaf
or particularly exacting, but not necessarily blind. At the end of the
string, there is perhaps a helping hand. This test is
probably too subtle for a monkey. Would man do better? We are behaving likewise face to the
threat of death on our species. We do not even think of drawing on the string
of survival. Yet, intelligent life on Earth could be a kind of cosmic string
or creeper! The problem is
not much more complex, but there is this time no visible string or basket.
Cosmic observers behind our extraterrestrial frontier could however help us,
at least rationally, statistically. Some of us even pretend to have seen
them. Still, they do not speak openly. Why? Locked with our stocks of arms and bombs in
the Earth’s gravity well (our cosmic cage!), we are obstinately acting as the
monkey with its stick and hammer, and we have already destroyed quite a lot
in our natural environment in this cosmic cage! Should we continue with this
destruction of life until we destroy ourselves? Our traditional calls for
cosmic contacts and help remaining so far fruitless, what can we do next to
draw the attention of our eventual silent observers, what else but a cosmic
demonstration of our intelligence and of our ability to survive? This is the very aim of our project
for the preservation of intelligent life! We are probably condemned to wait for the goodwill of eventual
extraterrestrial observers to contact and help us, and all talks addressed to
them would be needless! Our messages could only take the form of our current
realizations on Earth (material, social, spiritual, etc.). They would certainly be willing to test our intelligence, or finally,
to test our very ability to survive. This would certainly be the sole message
that advanced beings could appreciate and expect from mankind. The sole convincing demonstration is
our ability to survive! To cosmic observers, our intelligence
would only be confirmed if our terrestrial realizations prove by themselves
our ability to survive face to the risks of death we are now living. Our other
performances (atomic bomb, arms of massive destruction, radars, aircrafts,
satellites, etc.) prove nothing but our ability to exert violence, as for the
monkey armed with a stick or a hammer. Our unrestrained
consumption of energy and all our warlike gesticulations can only demonstrate
our thirst for destruction and our aggressiveness. A drowned man dying on a riverside
has little to expect from the most learned or eloquent men, but much from a
simple passer-by who knows how to practice the elementary gestures of
survival. The only
performance required in the circumstances is our ability to save our life! To determine the reality of our will for unselfish non-violence we so
often express in words and rarely in facts, ET would only need to observe us
living. If they could not honestly pretend to be gods face to us, they could
certainly see and understand to levels we could qualify as “godlike” and
which we are beginning to discover with man’s most advanced techniques
(remote sensing and control, remote survey, implants, etc.). These modern
devices are only at a beginning and would certainly be more developed in the
near future. To be fully understood and appreciated, our actions and testimonies of
human intelligence addressed to more advanced beings should therefore abandon
all verbal and fetish forms of worship resulting traditionally in offerings
and prayers. Our messages should rationally take the form of art objects
addressed to other beings endowed with an intelligence which is of the same
nature as ours, even if it is far more advanced. Should we be lacking in subjects of creation? On this wounded planet which is so often bruised, many works could be
done for this demonstration of universal peace, notably in the social domain
and in the protection of our natural environment. Since the beginning of the
industry and still more for the past tens of years, intelligent observers
should know for long what they could expect from us. And this would not plead
in favour of mankind so far. We should therefore give them the occasion to have another opinion on
our planetary civilization. Man’s language toward ET should be expressed in
concrete acts in order to be heard. Is it to say that it is too late, that we could already be condemned? Face to primitive beings such as men, we would have no chance to
survive. But we would have the chance to face extremely intelligent beings
since they could manage to survive so long, and our situation could be
different. Despite a violence reaffirmed daily all over the planet, mankind
could still have a respite! As long as we remain on our planet, advanced
extraterrestrials would probably consider that our problems are purely
terrestrial and that they are not to be directly implied. But it would be different for an extraterrestrial project decided by
mankind, such as our cosmic project for the preservation of life, or still
more, a project of space arms such as now programmed. Since we should display a clear will
for unselfish non-violence toward eventual other worlds, any undertaking
should not bear in itself any potential threat. It is time for mankind to
behave rationally in order to ensure our cosmic protection! Bad human testimonies! Some military projects for the launch
of arms of massive destruction into Earth orbit, and the recent bombardment
of a comet (Tempel 1) by a rocket (Deep Impact) for at least very ambiguous
reasons are certainly at the limits of what can be tolerated by observers of
mankind. A
new approach to life dispersion: The colonization of
our planet was not a success and we should not use that model again for the
colonization of our Solar System or of our Galaxy. This would not be allowed
to us! Any project, even embryonic, of a galactic colonization according to
this model would be viewed by stellar observers as a provocation from our
part. They would be aware of the potential risks of such a wild model of
colonization to universal life, and the installation of traditional settlers
on a planet or on an orbital station in view of a permanent residence should
therefore be excluded. Traditional
settlers would anyway violate our cosmic law of survival n°4 (potential
threat to life). But is there another more peaceful attitude? How could we reasonably
proceed otherwise? Cutting the Cosmic Umbilical Cord The problem with traditional extraterrestrial settlers lies precisely
in the fact that they would inevitably maintain a “cosmic umbilical cord”
with their mother planet and also with any other planetary colony of mankind.
This would be quite natural, and as soon as the colons would be settled on
their new planet or their new planetary or interstellar station, etc.,
conflicts would inevitably arise with the mother planet or the other
colonies, as it has always been the case between the Earth nations. Armed
interventions would therefore result, sooner or later. An extraterrestrial human colonization of our Solar System or of the
Galaxy could not bring peace to mankind, and our objective of life
preservation would therefore not be reached. Mankind’s terrestrial experience
cannot be ignored: terrestrial life is not better preserved since all
habitable lands were settled on this planet, quite the contrary! The population of our planet has obviously been multiplied, but so
were the risks of self-destruction too. The multiplication of the sources of life in the Solar System and the
Galaxy with traditional settlers would only be a lure. It would only protect
life against natural risks, the risks due to mankind itself being for their
part still increased because of this “cosmic umbilical cord” of increasing
complexity maintained between the Earth and its cosmic colonies, with a mesh
net growing in density and extending farther and farther with time. Peace
on Earth is not better preserved since western military and economic forces
are controlling the whole planet. Only the sources of conflict have been
multiplied! As a matter of fact, terrestrial life has never been so
threatened, and without an ultimate reaction of survival from mankind, we are
obviously going to self-destruction. Could the first American settlers forget old Europe? Blood and
historical ties cannot be cancelled so easily. The Earth and its cosmic
colonies could not do otherwise than maintaining this galactic net growing
more and more explosive. Life would be condemned to death! How can we avoid
this deadlock issue? The best would be to do what the
first American settlers could not even imagine: Cutting for ever this
“umbilical cord” from the very start of the colony! A definitive break of all communications would make impossible the
birth of conflicts or conspiracies between the colonies and the mother
planet. But a severe kind of prohibition should be imagined to this purpose,
a form of prohibition strong enough to be observed by all parties concerned. Could such an interdict exist? It seems at first unrealizable to cut the “cosmic umbilical cord” in
the descent direction, that is, from the mother planet to the colony
(extraterrestrial planet or spaceship). Indeed, the Earth could not forget
nor totally abandon a colony installed so laboriously. Anyway, such a cosmic
project could not be withdrawn from mankind’s memory. This abandonment of an
extraterrestrial colony would not be human! Should we therefore be condemned to exterminate ourselves soon on this
planet, or to do likewise a little later if we decide to colonize the Cosmos? No possible forgetting! A mother could not abandon and forget
the child she brought forth. She can sometimes leave him to the good cares of
someone else she believes better armed than herself to protect and make him
grow. Even in so doing,
she is still led by an instinct of survival. Looking at things more closely, cutting the “cosmic umbilical cord”
does not seem impossible in the ascent direction, that is, from the
extraterrestrial colony to the mother planet. A possible
forgetting! A child abandoned at a tender age can
forget his mother as well as his brothers and sisters he has never known. It is even the most general case. Totally unconscious colons of a cosmic experiment in which they would
have been pure objects would not be able to establish a connection with their
mother planet or with other brother and sister colonies of the existence of
which they are not even conscious. Could
then robots replace our extraterrestrial colons? Assuredly not, since it
would go against our cosmic law of survival N°4. As a matter of
fact, robots could be transformed by man into arms of massive destruction
against eventual extraterrestrials. The colons we would be led to settle in
the Galaxy could never be used to this purpose. Even in the case of
uncontrolled madness of our planetary civilization, as it could not be
excluded at a long term. The survival of our species, our main objective, requires a permanent
assurance for non-violence. This allows us place a new Puzzle Part by stating the fifth Law of
Cosmic Survival for our species: Puzzle Part or Law of Survival N°5 Any extraterrestrial colonization
should be undertaken with a primitive and unconscious form of life in order
to maintain unselfish non-violence. This law seems again an ineluctable
Puzzle Part required to make sure that unselfish non-violence is kept all
along in any project. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Whom to return what you owe? If there is nobody to
claim for it, summon yourself! (Seneca, Roman thinker, -5 BC 65 AD) AN OPTIMAL PRESERVATION OF LIFE Control procedure and Puzzle Construction : In any human
project, the survival of mankind requires to adopt an attitude of unselfish
non-violence towards all other beings, including eventual extraterrestrials
(L1). As the only conscious being so
far known, man should multiply the sources of intelligent life through its
cosmic dispersion in order to increase the chances of its preservation (L2),
and he should “terraform” one or several planets of the Solar System to this
purpose (L3). A permanent extraterrestrial colonization by mankind should not
represent a potential threat to any other beings (L4). An extraterrestrial
colonization should therefore be undertaken with a primitive and unconscious
form of life (L5). Survival being so
far preserved, we can continue with our cosmic project. In accordance with
the above laws of cosmic survival, germs of vegetal or animal life could be
implanted on a planet previously fitted up in order to receive it.
Terrestrial life is a unique patrimony. If it appeared as a result of a quite
random process, it would then have more chances to resume an evolution
interrupted on Earth after an eventual cosmic catastrophe. This dispersion of life in the Solar System could be done using the
most primitive forms of life appeared on Earth billions years ago, such as
vegetal germs, amine acids, mono or multi-cellular organisms, bacteria, etc.
It would not be a small success not to have to start again from the very
beginning! Terrestrial life was born less than five billions years ago and
the main part of its history would so be saved: in a cosmic calendar starting
from the Big Bang this would amount to some 75%. But mankind should surely be able to do better. It would be a pity if
intelligent life had to restart from such a primitive level of development
after a possible cosmic destruction of our planet (and of our species). In the frame of our project of life dispersion in the Cosmos, it seems
obvious that the form of life transplanted by man on another planet should be
as far advanced as possible, that the largest part of our experience as a
species should be saved in case of misfortune for mankind. The
Last Update Users of personal computers would
easily understand: when it comes to update a computer file or any document
realized in common by several people located in different places, all
modifications brought since the last update should reasonably be included. But
for pure technical or administrative reasons, some last modifications could
not be available in time. This is the reason why it is so difficult to get
some manuals in the very last updated edition when frequent modifications are
brought. This would be the case for life. Is there anything which is more often
modified than intelligent life? We saw previously that to ensure
non-violence and unselfishness, man himself could not settle elsewhere in the
Cosmos in this stage of his evolution. It seems therefore desirable that he
sends his nearest cousin, that is, the monkey. This choice would comply with our Law of Cosmic Survival N°5:The human
species could never use the monkey as an arm or as a mercenary against other
worlds. A colony of primates left on another planet of our Solar System would
not represent any threat to eventual extraterrestrial neighbours, or for
other solar colonies of human origin. A new Puzzle Part stated by the following law of cosmic survival can
therefore be placed : Puzzle
Part or Survival Law N°6 Man should settle primates of
terrestrial origin on one or several planets of the Solar System previously
“terraformed”. This is again the
most rational choice left by nature to our planetary civilization to disperse
life in the Cosmos while abiding by the cosmic concern for unselfish
non-violence. A
required phase of unconsciousness The choice of an unconscious being to colonize another planet on
mankind’s behalf should not surprise us. Man’s child comes to life quite
unconscious, and we could hardly imagine him as already endowed with a clear
consciousness of the prenatal world from which he is coming. If it were so,
he would arrive with his past problems, just like a stranger and perhaps an
enemy or robot. It would also be
difficult to imagine him coming to life with the knowledge and the
consciousness of an adult, an experience he is expected to acquire only all
along his future terrestrial life. If it were so, he would again be
considered as a stranger and perhaps as an enemy or as a robot as soon as he
is born. Non-violence
seems to require that biological life starts with a phase of total
unconsciousness. The primate of our cosmic project would start as the child just born,
without any consciousness of the world it left or of the world that is to be
discovered during the long process of hominization. Would it have more chances of
promotion than man’s child in our present civilization? A THREAT FOR MAN : THE DEATH OF THE MONKEYS Face to the death of many animal
species, the choice of the primate as mankind’s heir stresses the urgency of
the problem of survival our planetary civilization should solve at a
relatively near term. As a matter of
fact, many animal species are yearly added to the dead list. Because of his
way of living and consuming, man is destroying many forms of terrestrial
life, and the primates required in our cosmic project could soon have
disappeared from Earth, as many other species already dead. The danger is
particularly crucial and of first urgency! Monkeys are
hunted everywhere from their natural spaces and their territories are
dangerously reduced from year to year. If the population of primates was no
longer sufficient in the future tens of years, mankind’s own survival would
then be highly jeopardized. We would finally be compelled to rely on some
other more primitive form of life for this cosmic relay of intelligent life. Mankind’s
responsibility face to the Cosmos would be boundless! Animal
life should be protected! An optimal
preservation of life would no longer be possible for mankind if we continue
with the degradation of our life environment. To which level of
unconsciousness should we have to resort to preserve what could still be
done? If very advanced
beings do observe us, they are as ourselves the keepers of universal life,
and our cosmic patrimony is their too. They would therefore have their word
to say. They could not observe us passively as we continue in the destruction
of our planet and of universal life. We would probably have to answer for
this cosmic irresponsibility. Planetary
ecology is not only an opinion among others we could defend. It
is the very condition of our survival! _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ IS
MANKIND WILLING TO SURVIVE ? By Benoit Lebon (a book first published in French
under the title : Une hominisation extraterrestre vers la vie éternelle,
Editions Société des Ecrivains, Paris, 2006. Also with Trafford Publishing,
2006, Canada. All rights reserved. No
part of these pages may be used under any form without the written
prior permission of the author. Comments and proposals will be welcome. ) ______________________________________________________________________
Is Mankind willing
to survive?
|
