SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for Bytram
A University of Arkansas mathematician argues that species, such as ours, go extinct soon after attaining high levels of technology.
"I taught astronomy for 37 years," said Whitmire. "I used to tell my students that by statistics, we have to be the dumbest guys in the galaxy. After all we have only been technological for about 100 years while other civilizations could be more technologically advanced than us by millions or billions of years."
Recently, however, he's changed his mind. By applying a statistical concept called the principle of mediocrity – the idea that in the absence of any evidence to the contrary we should consider ourselves typical, rather than atypical – Whitmire has concluded that instead of lagging behind, our species may be average. That's not good news.
[...] The argument is based on two observations: We are the first technological species to evolve on Earth, and we are early in our technological development.
[...] By Whitmire's definition we became "technological" after the industrial revolution and the invention of radio, or roughly 100 years ago. According to the principle of mediocrity, a bell curve of the ages of all extant technological civilizations in the universe would put us in the middle 95 percent. In other words, technological civilizations that last millions of years, or longer, would be highly atypical. Since we are first, other typical technological civilizations should also be first. The principle of mediocrity allows no second acts. The implication is that once species become technological, they flame out and take the biosphere with them.
Source: The Implications of Cosmic Silence
For background, see: Fermi's Paradox and the Drake equation.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 14 2017, @03:03AM (7 children)
Academia ca not solve the Fermi Paradox by ignoring evidence that humanity has survived cataclysms of Biblical proportions. [youtube.com]
Many structures claimed to be built by Medieval and Colonial peoples were built by far older civilizations. [youtube.com] The truth about our history is that historic sites like the Star Fortresses of Malta were built in antiquity by a technologically advanced civilization [youtube.com], and conquerors rebuilt upon the sites claiming the whole thing as theirs. This pattern is repeated time and again. Vastly more ancient structures with a bit of Medieval construction atop is all classified as Medieval in an attempt to maintain the bogus academic time-line.
Imagine you are the Christian Saint Peter and you've gone into the wilds of Russia and recruited some savages to build a city, St. Petersburg you'll call it. Obviously these savages would miraculously build in impeccable Roman style architecture adorning the buildings with roman gods and goddesses rather than Jesus or Mary, Moses, etc. But that is what they teach in Academia! It's ridiculous! The religious zealots like Joseph Justus Scaliger rewrote history by never questioning religious dogma but reinterpreting all the world to fit that narrative. And this is STILL Academia's basis for modern day history! Oh, so "scientific", it's not dogmatic at all... "Smart" progressive people actually defend this academic snake oil. It's no wonder the religious folks can trounce literally ignorant atheists who ape such nonsense.
This iron hammer is in rock strata dated to 100 million years old. [youtube.com] The handle has carbonized into coal.
Just look at all the structures on the sea floor. [vimeo.com] Clearly remnants of giant construction projects of an ancient lost civilization.
The coast of USA is littered with ancient canals [ancient-wisdom.com] and ports and sunken pyramids and cities [bitlanders.com] last above water before the last ice age ended 12,500 years ago.
Government funded Academia ignores these for the same reason that China pays farmers to obscure Chinese Pyramids [youtube.com] by planting trees on them. Such findings erode sovereignty claims of countries that now inhabit lands. Underwater exploration is banned off the coast of Brazil [archive.is] because Roman shipwrecks were found -- If Brazilian civilization was actually founded by Rome then its sovereignty is threatened by archeology which shows a debt is owed to the original (re)colonizers (like USA still owes debts to Brittan for its colonization efforts). Fortunately, some artifacts are not hidden away fast enough such as this Roman bust found in Mexico. [andrewcollins.com]
Academia labels all these findings "mysteries", but the truth is plainly apparent to any with eyes to see: We are lied to about the history of our world. We have survived epic world destroying cataclysms and risen from the ashes. Perhaps the Fermi paradox is that WE are the "aliens" -- colonists from neighboring lands destroyed by enormous natural disaster, who carried technology to the four corners of the earth and attempted to rebuild. Just as today there are unsophisticated native peoples in jungles living along side a technologically advanced race, the history may have been much of the same.
The Antikythera mechanism demonstrates an advanced technological level that was likely widespread enough to find an example of. While I'm not absolutely convinced, since there is much disinfo and poisoning of the well in the alternative archeology community, there could be some evidence that we may have even had electronic circuit boards. [youtube.com]
When considering the Fermi Paradox it's ridiculous to ignore the possibility that our advanced civilization may only be the latest of several iterations -- or perhaps those civilizations were of a different species... Alas, that is the state of modern day academics though: Asinine... "Where are the aliens?" Have you even looked? Just, asinine.
(Score: 1, Troll) by frojack on Monday August 14 2017, @03:28AM (2 children)
What drivel.
And throughout human history EVERY paleontologist wanted to maintain this bogus time line rather than re-write history.
Except this one clown with no credentials and his podcast?
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 14 2017, @09:14AM
You're just being willfully ignorant. How easy was it to get the theory of relativity or any new science widely accepted if it went against the dogma of the day? Don't be a dumbass.
It's common knowledge that rocking the boat in academia gets you fired. Same thing in Silicon Valley now, right? Simply stating the truth gets you fired, don't come at me with static trying to claim that doesn't happen. Do you know how many paleontologists have found soft tissue in dinosaur bones and been fired over it? About 50. Now such evidence is gaining acceptance, [livescience.com] but only because they can't keep it quiet and mainstream academia now has some insane theory about protein elasticity rather that admit the precious Scaligarian timeline is wrong. You know who else called bullshit on Scaliger's Timeline? The famous Scientist and Chronologist Isaac Newton, maybe you've heard of him? Oh, but why didn't you know he disbelieved the BS historical narrative? Is it because your education was lacking and you never did any research beyond the required craptastic scholastic curriculum?
Fact is: There has never been a study to determine the rate of petrification of silt. Carbon 14 is made in the upper atmosphere and amount fluctuates depending on the solar cycle and CO2 outgassing of the planet, so its dating is highly inaccurate beyond ordering samples with a small delta in age. Radioactive dating is based primarily on the rock layers that samples are found near, and comparing other samples against those samples -- with zero evidence to suggest how old sedimentary rock actually is. We could have stuck a ruler in the sea floor and waited a decade or two to get the petrification rate, but we haven't. Do some research and you'll find a figure for petrification stated, but no primary source -- only papers that cite each other. Classic case of Citosis. Archaeologists have no idea how old the rocks actually are... But you'll just dismiss this because you're willfully ignorant about the truth of academia. You haven't done any research yourself, but you'll glibly snub your nose at others making some stupid and inaccurate quip that makes you feel better about your cognitive dissonance. Rather than realize the false god of academic purity does not exist, and that dogma and politics are rife in academia, you claim any mention of such to be too conspiratorial to entertain. It's not secret, you're just ignorant. Dumb as a rock and twice as blind.
Watch the linked videos if you're interested, they're from several sources, and you can search for even more yourself if you like. Esp. watch the one with stuff on the sea floor, you can verify it yourself and oceanic survey imagery backs it up. The general public is kept dumb not in secret, but openly. Elites think that people like you who believe TV propaganda are so dumb they'd be dangerous if given full knowledge of the truth of our world, so while the media and government funded schooling is dumbing you down deliberately [youtube.com], the truth is out there for you to find. If you don't want to find out, then just stay ignorant chump. No skin off my teeth.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 14 2017, @09:01PM
Perhaps most all paleontologists are merely interpreting their results by the incorrect research of others. If governments can pick and choose who gets what funding for what research this provides an avenue to ensure certain uncomfortable truths are easily suppressed.
An example: Do ALL children in kindergarten conspire against each other repeating the story of Santa Claus? No, they do so because the information they have is incorrect. They're not willingly lying about reality to their peers, they just haven't researched everything for themselves yet. Most academics are overly specialized and don't have much time for broad cross discipline research. The big picture is easy to obscure if the system ensures viewers only have time to see a tiny part.
If you're repeating what's in the books you're given, you're not really "wanting to maintain" incorrect information. It could just be a case of innocent ignorance that perpetuates incorrect data. It should be quite readily apparent to any with a love of science that this is how the system works. Or, do you suppose that all those teaching Newtonian physics were conspiring to keep us from Einstein's relativity? Of course not, that's ridiculous.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 14 2017, @07:02AM
We have found the one probed by the Ancients! May god(s) have mercy on your soul for your blasphemy! You know damn well you are not supposed to talk about these things! I am reporting you to the Elders and The Ancient Ones who Sleep. You're in big trouble now, bub!
(Score: 2) by meustrus on Monday August 14 2017, @05:11PM (2 children)
What is this "academia" you speak of that seems to ignore all of the (archaeological) history that you somehow have gathered all by yourself? I guess it was people on vacation without any college education who discovered ancient foundations to supposedly medieval works? I sense a straw man.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 14 2017, @08:44PM (1 child)
It's quite ridiculous to think I've gathered this by myself, clearly there are many others recounting such evidence, you need only click a few links to discover this.
Academia government funded education and research.
If you doubt that governments suppress information, then I have no time to discuss reality with one so detached from it.
(Score: 2) by meustrus on Tuesday August 15 2017, @04:49PM
Academic papers provide citations to credible works, making them easy to access. They are admittedly a bit behind the times, tailored to a difficult and archaic library system rather than an easier system of universal resource identifiers (URI) that allow for immediate retrieval. But they, unlike you, have not left verification of their claims as an exercise to the reader.
It's a lot easier to infiltrate and manipulate Google search results than the decentralized academic system of intellectuals (who are generally less conforming and less trusting of authority than the rest of the population). One might even say that conspiracy theories like yours are the more likely CIA plot. And as we've learned from the tactics of the Heartland Institute (who surely learned a thing or two from 1984), simply discrediting objective evidence and facts is incredibly effective at preventing people from taking action to save themselves from the machinations of the rich and powerful.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?