Why we have not been contacted by aliens

What does an octopus eat? For a creature with a brain in each arm,  whatever's within reach
Maybe aliens aren’t physically equipped for interstellar contact.

Astronomers estimate there are more than 2 trillion (2,000,000,000,000) galaxies in the observable universe, and these galaxies encompass more than 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets.

That makes for vast real estate on which some forms of life could exist — and that’s not even counting the various moons upon which life also could exist.

(Scientists even believe life may exist on certain moons in our own solar system.)

Admittedly, most of those planets and moons are not welcoming for what we consider to be life, and on most of the remaining, life either may not yet have developed sufficient intelligence to contact us, or for us to understand their contact.

Yet, 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 is a truly gigantic number, and we might think that by now we would have been contacted by at least one alien. So, in the words of Enrico Fermi, “Where are they?”

Among the many problems of intergalactic communication is that of timing.

While there has been life on earth for about 4.5 billion years, only in the past century or so have we been technologically sophisticated enough to initiate or receive contact with an alien life civilization. If someone had tried to send us a message just five hundred years ago — a mere speck in cosmic time — we wouldn’t have received it.

That may be the case with any alien forms. They may not yet be technologically advanced, at least not advanced enough to send radio messages, much less to actually travel among the stars.

I suspect there is an additional hindrance to inter-alien communication: Any life form that is clever enough to initiate such communication also is clever enough to destroy itself.

Think of what our cleverness has brought us: ever more deadly guns, nuclear weapons, poison gasses and liquids, and sophisticated weapon delivery systems.

Only in the past few decades have we had the war capability to destroy virtually all life, certainly all life advanced enough to receive and understand alien communications.

And it’s not just intentional war: We inadvertently or just carelessly have poisoned our air, our water, and our land. We have heated our climate to the point where some lands are, or soon will be, too hot for human life.

And though most of us say we would like peace and the preservation of our environment, that has proven to be mere lip service.

We have elected, allowed, and/or supported such anti-life leaders as Ivan IV, Stalin, Hitler, Kim, Mao, Duvalier, Amin, Pol Pot, Mussolini, Mugabe, etc., none of whom could have survived without the active participation of their thousands of followers and lackeys.

If humanity is a typical example of what an intelligent life form eventually becomes, whoever or whatever created the universe exhibited wisdom in keeping us lifeforms lightyears apart, for our first instinct is to conquer and/or destroy.

Explainer: a beginner's guide to the galaxy
Not stars, galaxies of stars.

Consider where we are now.

We know for certain that our activities are causing global warming by increasing the amount of carbon dioxide and methane — greenhouse gases — blanketing the earth.

We have the technology to use non-greenhouse sources of energy, and we even have developed a financial system — Monetary Sovereignty — that could fund the development and uses of those sources.

Yet we have elected, and we follow, leaders who not only fail to address the problem, but who deny there even is a problem. They have convinced a great multitude that:

  • The world is not warming, or
  • The world is warming but humanity is not responsible, or
  • A warmer world is better, or
  • The problem is not urgent, or
  • The problem is too expensive to fix, or
  • There’s nothing we can do because other people are doing nothing, or
  • We will be dead before anything bad happens so don’t worry.

Millions of us elect and continue to support leaders who claim all of the above.

Are we typical of intelligent life in the universe? Are we the inevitable result of intellectual evolution?

The universe is a harsh place, constantly fighting life, constantly destroying what life has built. Here is Earth, the most life-friendly place we know, yet 99.9% of all the species that ever have lived here, are gone.

Earth has witnessed five mass extinctions when more than 75% of species disappeared. Palaeontologists spot them when species go missing from the global fossil record.

“We don’t always know what caused them but most had something to do with rapid climate change”, says Melbourne Museum palaeontologist Rolf Schmidt.

Climate change always has been a killer. We are smart enough to know this and we are smart enough to know we are causing climate change. But somehow, our smarts don’t seem to work full time.

Experts believe that a sixth mass extinction is on its way. Estimates vary, but somewhere between a few dozen to more than a hundred species go extinct every day.

At that rate, it would only take a few tens of thousands of years to wipe out the same number of species as the third mass extinction.

This time, however, we can’t point to a meteorite as the cause. We only have ourselves to blame.

THIS TIME IS DIFFERENT
A species generally sticks around for anywhere from 1 million years (for mammals) to 11 million years (for marine invertebrates).

But we are the first species on earth, mammal or otherwise, that has had the power to destroy every living thing, and we are using that power right now.

With ecological suicide, war, and our indifference to the lives of our descendants, we greatly have accelerated the speed of our demise.

Has evolution made us this way? Evolution cares only about the near future. The sole question is, will a species survive long enough to create viable progeny?

Survival is a battle. We came from species that had to fight against nature and all other species, from viruses to predators. To survive, we became programmed for the fear and hatred of “others.”

We are evolved to be me-oriented, near-term animals. And though, intellectually, we know we should protect the earth for future generations, we simply are not constructed to worry enough about what happens a few centuries from now.

We burn fossil fuels and cut trees to pollute the air, water, and land. We spread plastics and other poisons into the oceans, lakes, and rivers. Our farming methods damage the land for future farmers. Well-meaning ignorance has banned genetically modified foods that could feed more of us, better.

We follow leaders who preach scorn for the “others” they claim can harm us — the basis for war and bigotry.

Pacifists are jeered. War-mongers are venerated. Love is weak. Hatred is strong. Bigotry is more powerful than compassion.

By what logic can anyone predict that the human species will not destroy itself within the next century? We are heading pell-mell into a dystopian world of misery and extinction.

And we know it. We even predict it. In fact, we love it. When I review Netflix, I see dozens of movies about gloomy, grim, somber, dictatorial, tyrannical, oppressive societies but almost none about joyful life.

Why do we find hell more enthralling than heaven?

It’s because of the battle. We have evolved not only to wage the battle but to enjoy the battle.

Evolution forces us to enjoy what we must do to survive — sex, eating, and killing are examples — so that we will do it willingly, eagerly. We happily battle nature.

We treasure guns. We love hunting animals. We enjoy killing. Animals. Trees. Everything.

As the song goes, “Pave paradise and put up a parking lot.” We bend nature to our will, not understanding that we are part of nature. We bend ourselves.

We battle each other, though the wreckage of our battles diminishes our lives.

Imagine what our first step will be if ever we learn aliens are coming. We will assemble the military for battle. That is who we are.

IS THAT HOW ALIEN SPECIES EVOLVED?
If any alien species evolved intelligence, as we did, did they also evolve the offensive-turned-self-destructive tendencies we have?

Are there no paths evolution can take, in which intelligence leads to compassion and mutual aid?

Animals generally do not destroy their own worlds. Birds don’t soil their own nests. So is there some point at which intelligence inevitably crosses some barrier, and begins to eat itself?

If so, that would explain why we never hear from any aliens. They suicide before they can learn how to communicate across the vast reaches of space.

If an alien species does make that connection, and successfully contacts us, why? Will it be to conquer and destroy, or will it be to make new friends?

Why do we hope to find them out there when our first instinct will be to kill them?

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

You can’t say we weren’t warned

You can’t say we weren’t warned. Hitler warned us, but like the Germans before us, we didn’t listen. Now, we have been repeating Germany’s mistakes.

Read this reprint from a post titled “Astounding similarities: Hitler in America. It’s happening now.” It posted way back in September 2016, when Trump was still running for office.

A host of earlier biographers have advanced theories about Hitler’s rise, and the dynamic between the man and his times.

Some have focused on the social and political conditions in post-World War I Germany, which Hitler expertly exploited — a yearning for a return to German greatness; unemployment and economic distress; and longstanding ethnic prejudices and fears of “foreignization.”

Hmmm . . . “Make America great again,” anti-Muslim, build a wall. Now, who is that?

Hitler as a politician who rose to power through demagoguery, showmanship and nativist appeals to the masses.

Hitler was often described as an egomaniac who “only loved himself” — a narcissist with a taste for self-dramatization and what Mr. Ullrich calls a “characteristic fondness for superlatives.”

Image result for trump
Using the Hitler playbook, down to the smallest detail.

What about this: do demagoguery, showmanship, and nativist appeals sound familiar? And which egomaniacal politician describes everything about himself as “incredible.”

A former finance minister wrote that Hitler “was so thoroughly untruthful that he could no longer recognize the difference between lies and truth” and editors of one edition of “Mein Kampf” described it as a “swamp of lies, distortions, innuendoes, half-truths and real facts.”

Which politician not only lies the most of any in recent memory but repeatedly denies the incontrovertible evidence of lies?

And this:

Hitler was an effective orator and actor, adept at assuming various masks and feeding off the energy of his audiences.

Although he concealed his anti-Semitism beneath a “mask of moderation” when trying to win the support of the socially liberal middle classes, he specialized in big, theatrical rallies.

Which politician is a professional TV actor? Who boasts about massive rallies with thousands of cheering people? Which politician breeds hatred of minorities? And this:

He peppered his speeches with coarse phrases and put-downs of hecklers.

Even as he fomented chaos by playing to crowds’ fears and resentments, he offered himself as the visionary leader who could restore law and order.

Which politician yells “Get ’em outa here” when heckled? Which politician promises to enforce “law and order”? And this:

Hitler increasingly presented himself in messianic terms, promising “to lead Germany to a new era of national greatness,” though he was typically vague about his actual plans.

He often harked back to a golden age for the country, the better “to paint the present day in hues that were all the darker.

Everywhere you looked now, there was only decline and decay.

Which politician repeatedly tells us we are losing to the Chinese, the Mexicans, and the terrorists- losing, losing, losing- but is vague about plans (sometimes claiming they are “secret.”?) And this:

Because the understanding of the masses “is feeble,” Hitler said, effective propaganda needed to be boiled down to a few slogans that should be “persistently repeated until the very last individual has come to grasp the idea that has been put forward.”

Seen any political slogans printed on hats and constantly repeated in speeches to remind the “feeble” masses? And this:

Hitler’s rise was not inevitable. There were numerous points at which his ascent might have been derailed.

(But) in addition to economic woes and unemployment, there was an “erosion of the political center” and a growing resentment of the elites.

(There was) the belief of Hitler supporters that the country needed “a man of iron” who could shake things up.

“Why not give the National Socialists a chance?” a prominent banker said of the Nazis. “They seem pretty gutsy to me.”

Does resentment of elites (aka “the establishment”) ring a bell? What about the need for change, to “shake things up”? And this:

(Hitler’s) conservative coalition partners believed either that he was not serious or that they could exert a moderating influence on him.

Know of any politicians whose own party continues to try to moderate them? Was there speculation about politicians not really being serious about running for President? And this:

Hitler, it became obvious, could not be tamed.

The independent press was banned or suppressed and books deemed “un-German” were burned.

Think. Which American politician wants to sue the press for unflattering articles? Germans believed, “It cannot happen here.” But, as the author asks . . .

What persuaded millions of ordinary Germans to embrace Hitler and his doctrine of hatred?

How did this “most unlikely pretender to high state office” achieve absolute power in a once democratic country and set it on a course of monstrous horror?

It happened in Germany. Actually, it has happened in many countries. People fundamentally are the same, everywhere, and everywhere they can be led like sheep to the slaughter by Hitlerian leaders.

Yes, it can happen here. It, in fact, is happening here, right in front of our noses. Don’t believe, even for one second, that we are immune.

Were it not for a few heroes who resisted Trump, we would have lost America’s democracy. Even now, there are Hitler, uh, Trump believers who would sacrifice America for a charlatan.

“Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” George Santayana

Learn.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

Twitter: @rodgermitchell Search #monetarysovereignty
Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

……………………………………………………………………..

THE SOLE PURPOSE OF GOVERNMENT IS TO IMPROVE AND PROTECT THE LIVES OF THE PEOPLE.

The most important problems in economics involve:

  1. Monetary Sovereignty describes money creation and destruction.
  2. Gap Psychology describes the common desire to distance oneself from those “below” in any socioeconomic ranking and to come nearer those “above.” The socioeconomic distance is referred to as “The Gap.”

Wide Gaps negatively affect poverty, health and longevity, education, housing, law and crime, war, leadership, ownership, bigotry, supply and demand, taxation, GDP, international relations, scientific advancement, the environment, human motivation and well-being, and virtually every other issue in economics. Implementation of Monetary Sovereignty and The Ten Steps To Prosperity can grow the economy and narrow the Gaps: Ten Steps To Prosperity:

  1. Eliminate FICA
  2. Federally funded Medicare — parts A, B & D, plus long-term care — for everyone
  3. Social Security for all
  4. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone
  5. Salary for attending school
  6. Eliminate federal taxes on business
  7. Increase the standard income tax deduction, annually. 
  8. Tax the very rich (the “.1%”) more, with higher progressive tax rates on all forms of income.
  9. Federal ownership of all banks
  10. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99.9% 

The Ten Steps will grow the economy and narrow the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and the rest.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY

An open letter to Justice Clarence Thomas

Dear Justice Thomas;

You have written that the rights to contraception (Griswold v. Connecticut, 1965), same-sex consensual relations (Lawrence v. Texas, 2003), and same-sex marriage (Obergefell v. Hodges, 2015)—all of which you explicitly named in your opinion overturning Roe v. Wade, should be “revisited” (Your word).Who is Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas?

May I ask you about the rights to contraception that you wish to “revisit.” Since Americans currently have the right to use many forms of contraception, your desire to “revisit” those rights can only mean that you oppose contraception.

Otherwise, why would you need or desire to revisit an existing right?

It’s reasonable to assume then, that since you oppose contraception for others, you and your partners do not use contraception. Surely, you would not be so hypocritical as to oppose it for others, but make use of it yourself, when you have sex.

Ordinarily, I wouldn’t ask you or anyone such personal questions. But, you broached the subject of contraception, and you wish to intrude on millions of married couples’ privacy, so it is reasonable to ask whether you practice what you preach.

You married Kathy Ambush in 1971 and divorced her in 1984. That’s 13 years. Yet you have only one child.

We assume you enjoy sex.

Anita Hill testified under oath, to that effect. 

And Lillian McEwen, in her book, said of you: 

“He was a ‘national treasure,’ she said, one she shared with other women in ménages à trois and in a voyeuristic pleasure palace. And she described her then-lover (Thomas) as being “easily aroused,” with a “strong interest in pornography.”

He “was always actively watching the women he worked with to see if they could be potential partners,” and noted he was “partial to women with large breasts.”

She detailed explicit details of her relationship with you,, which she said included a freewheeling sex life.

Moira Smith claimed you groped her at a 1999 dinner party in Northern Virginia.

And yet, with all these women and all those years and all your interest in sex, you have birthed only one child. How is that possible?

Presumably, you aren’t sterile.

So, it would seem to any logical thinker that you and/or your women partners must have been using some sort of contraception. Were your women on a pill or IUD? Did you use a condom? Have a vasectomy? 

Lest America and the world believe you are nothing but a mean-spirited, lying, immoral hypocrite, who only wishes to exert power over women and their husbands, you might wish to clarify.

Thank you in advance for your comments.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

 

 

And while you rage about Trump’s attempted coup, don’t forget this tragedy.

If you’ve read any newspapers, watch TV news (other than Fox), or watch the House investigation of the attempted coup, you justifiably are outraged.

We came very close to losing America we have known for more than two hundred years.

But, there is another outrage, that at any other time would be consistent front-page news, though in these criminal days, it largely has been forgotten.

It has cost more than a million American lives and sickened millions more.

It disrupted the economy like never before, and still, we have not recovered. We’re referring to the criminal fakery that prevented prompt action against COVID.

Trump team sought to suppress virus data to states, Birx testifies

Dr. Deborah Birx, President Donald Trump’s coronavirus response coordinator, told a congressional committee investigating the federal pandemic response that Trump White House officials asked her to change or delete parts of the weekly guidance she sent to state and local health officials, in what she described as a consistent effort to stifle information as virus cases surged in the second half of 2020.

Birx, who publicly testified to the panel Thursday, also told the committee that Trump White House officials withheld the reports from states during a winter outbreak and refused to publicly release the documents, which featured data on the virus’ spread and recommendations for how to contain it.

Her account of White House interference came in a multiday interview the committee conducted in October 2021, which was released on Thursday with a set of emails Birx sent to colleagues in 2020 warning of the influence of a new White House pandemic adviser, Dr. Scott Atlas, who she said downplayed the threat of the virus.

The emails provide fresh insight into how Birx and Dr. Anthony Fauci, the government’s top infectious disease expert, grappled with what Birx called the misinformation spread by Atlas.

The push to downplay the threat was so pervasive, Birx told committee investigators, that she developed techniques to avoid attention from White House officials who might have objected to her public health recommendations.

In reports she prepared for local health officials, she said, she would sometimes put ideas at the ends of sentences so that colleagues skimming the text would not notice them.

In her testimony Thursday, she offered similarly withering assessments of the Trump administration’s coronavirus response, suggesting that officials in 2020 had mistakenly viewed the coronavirus as akin to the flu even after seeing high COVID-19 death rates in Asia and Europe.

That, she said, had caused a “false sense of security in America” as well as a “sense among the American people that this was not going to be a serious pandemic.”

In summary, not only did Trump come very close to succeeding with a coup to destroy America’s government and the peaceful transfer of power — “the American miracle — but his intentional incompetence led to the COVID deaths of hundreds of thousands of Americans.

No American, much less a President, has done more harm to America.

And the Republican party still supports him and his policies!

Remember in November.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
Monetary Sovereignty

Twitter: @rodgermitchell Search #monetarysovereignty
Facebook: Rodger Malcolm Mitchell

……………………………………………………………………..

THE SOLE PURPOSE OF GOVERNMENT IS TO IMPROVE AND PROTECT THE LIVES OF THE PEOPLE.

The most important problems in economics involve:

  1. Monetary Sovereignty describes money creation and destruction.
  2. Gap Psychology describes the common desire to distance oneself from those “below” in any socio-economic ranking, and to come nearer those “above.” The socio-economic distance is referred to as “The Gap.”

Wide Gaps negatively affect poverty, health and longevity, education, housing, law and crime, war, leadership, ownership, bigotry, supply and demand, taxation, GDP, international relations, scientific advancement, the environment, human motivation and well-being, and virtually every other issue in economics. Implementation of Monetary Sovereignty and The Ten Steps To Prosperity can grow the economy and narrow the Gaps: Ten Steps To Prosperity:

  1. Eliminate FICA
  2. Federally funded Medicare — parts A, B & D, plus long-term care — for everyone
  3. Social Security for all
  4. Free education (including post-grad) for everyone
  5. Salary for attending school
  6. Eliminate federal taxes on business
  7. Increase the standard income tax deduction, annually. 
  8. Tax the very rich (the “.1%”) more, with higher progressive tax rates on all forms of income.
  9. Federal ownership of all banks
  10. Increase federal spending on the myriad initiatives that benefit America’s 99.9% 

The Ten Steps will grow the economy and narrow the income/wealth/power Gap between the rich and the rest.

MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY