The Zoo Hypothesis

Radio astronomer John A. Ball wrote a good paper on ETI some years ago (2004), entitled "Extraterrestrial Intelligence: Where is Everybody?". Some of his science is a little dated, but it is still interesting. He likes the Zoo Hypothesis, possibilities 6 and 7. I think I agree. Pssst's hypothesis seems to be a combination of 8 and 9.

From the paper:

I suggest that we try this analogy: The relationship of mankind with ETI is similar to the relationship of some form of primitive Earth life (PEL) with mankind. But which PEL? And how useful is this analogy? An argument based on relative time scales suggests that the appropriate PEL is an animal such as those in our Ordovician geological epoch, namely mollusks and trilobites. Now I can imagine talking with mammals and birds; indeed I've done it, although the conversation was on a pretty low intellectual level. But oysters? The point is that if this analogy is good for anything, then our relationship with typical ETI is probably nothing like the relationship of a primitive human tribe with technological man, which analogy seems to be in the minds of many who propose ETI searches, but instead is more like the relationship of a rather primitive animal with mankind.
....................................
Mankind should be able to take over our galaxy in a fairly short time say a few hundred-thousand years unless somebody else already has. But I think that there are many other civilizations, much older than ours, who might have taken over the galaxy eons ago. Where are they? Where is everybody?  
....................................
Spectrum of Possibilities

Popular Scientific Views

(1) There are no other civilizations (OCs). Earth is either unique the only biosystem or mankind is first in level of development.

(2) OCs exist, but they're very primitive; they don't know we're here (but they might like to know).

SETI Views

(3) OCs exist; they are about at our level of development; they suspect that we might be here; they might like to talk with us (The "Mirror View").

(4) OCs exist; they know we're here; they would like to talk with us if they could just attract our attention.

Unpopular View

(5) OCs exist; they know we're here, but they don't care; they're ignoring us. We pose no threat, and we have nothing they want.

Zoo Hypothesis

(6) OCs exist; we are of some interest to them; a few of their scientists are discreetly studying us.

(7) OCs exist; we are interesting to them; they are studying us in some detail but inconspicuously. 

Philosophy & Religion

(8) OCs exist; they are studying us and occasionally even dabbling in our affairs. (UFOs may be representatives of OCs.)

(9) OCs exist; we are an experiment in their laboratory ("Petri-dish Hypothesis").

Popular View

(10) A supernatural god exists, omnipotent and omniscient (this is the ultimate Extraterrestrial Intelligence). 
............................
Various combinations of these categories are possible. We might have, for example, (10) together with any of the others; and we might have one civilization, say in category (7), another in category (2), and so on. Some such combination, indeed, seems to me to be the most likely answer.

One of the possible answers to the Fermi Paradox that Ball overlooked is the "Independence Day" hypothesis: that there is just one other civilization in our galaxy, and the reason there is just the one is that it is extremely xenophobic and extremely advanced scientifically and technologically. They developed aeons ago and have just about wiped out all their competition in this galaxy. We're next.

How about:

(11) The universe and its inhabitants are manifestations of an infinite, timeless consciousness. Those inhabitants exist to experience the physical universe (and/or whatever alternate dimension they inhabit) and feed back that experience to the source. In that way, the source - and its manifestations - evolve. Those OCs which are more advanced than we are will understand this and, if and when appropriate, nudge us towards that understanding.

It seems to me that the ten options for consideration are all reflections of all-too-human hopes and fears. Projections of those hopes and fears on to any putative OCs. They are all "Mirror Views" in a way.

Radio astronomer John A. Ball wrote a good paper on ETI some years ago (2004), entitled "Extraterrestrial Intelligence: Where is Everybody?". Some of his science is a little dated, but it is still interesting. He likes the Zoo Hypothesis, possibilities 6 and 7. I think I agree. Pssst's hypothesis seems to be a combination of 8 and 9.

From the paper:

Zoo Hypothesis

(6) OCs exist; we are of some interest to them; a few of their scientists are discreetly studying us.

(7) OCs exist; we are interesting to them; they are studying us in some detail but inconspicuously. 

Philosophy & Religion

(8) OCs exist; they are studying us and occasionally even dabbling in our affairs. (UFOs may be representatives of OCs.)

(9) OCs exist; we are an experiment in their laboratory ("Petri-dish Hypothesis").

One of the possible answers to the Fermi Paradox that Ball overlooked is the "Independence Day" hypothesis: that there is just one other civilization in our galaxy, and the reason there is just the one is that it is extremely xenophobic and extremely advanced scientifically and technologically. They developed aeons ago and have just about wiped out all their competition in this galaxy. We're next.

Ball's Zoo Hypothesis #6 and#7 aligns with ET communicators who tend to use the Star Trek term "Prime Directive" a universally accepted non-interference in modern man. That directive ended in 2012 and was represented by the long Mayan calendar's announcement of the ending of an era - an era of non-intervention and selective, clandestine contact.

#8 works as well, #9 not so much. The "lab experimentation" ended when the Anunnaki left us to our own devices once we accidentally (Enlil position) or purposefully (Enki's deviation from Anu protocol) evolved into conscious beings.

What the most reliable ET communicators are saying is that we are of extremely keen interest to an uncountable number of beings because our physical reality is tone of the most inspirational and sensational soul adventures due to the severe limitations that we place upon ourselves in our Earthly incarnations. Literally, we are great teaches of turning the dark into the light in ways that are unprecedented. Word travels at the speed of though throughout Creation. In these days of High Acceleration of our consciousness, more and more ETs are seeking human vessels in which to incarnate, to have that experience of physical reality for their own. One of the reasons for the explosion of human bodies in the last few hundred years.

As to the Independence Day scenario, "that there is just one other civilization in our galaxy, and the reason there is just the one is that it is extremely xenophobic and extremely advanced scientifically and technologically. They developed aeons ago and have just about wiped out all their competition in this galaxy. We're next." I can say with complete confidence that there are more ET civilizations in our galaxy than one. Whether or not we are dominated by any ET species or groups thereof is a matter of which Earth one prefers and finds oneself in but that's another discussion.

First hard, consistent ET-human contact will be by an unnamed ET race (my guess it is a reptilian species) to be followed by the YahYel hybrids and then others as we acclimatize into becoming truly a part of the Cosmic Union. By 2050 +/-, we will be the "aliens" with UFOs floating around Barnard's Star, doing what aliens do prior to first, hard contact.

nbtruthman, thanks for the thread, sometimes I feel like no one is paying attention.

[Image: 2457004-crying2.jpg]


Kidding...

How about:

(11) The universe and its inhabitants are manifestations of an infinite, timeless consciousness. Those inhabitants exist to experience the physical universe (and/or whatever alternate dimension they inhabit) and feed back that experience to the source. In that way, the source - and its manifestations - evolve. Those OCs which are more advanced than we are will understand this and, if and when appropriate, nudge us towards that understanding.

It seems to me that the ten options for consideration are all reflections of all-too-human hopes and fears. Projections of those hopes and fears on to any putative OCs. They are all "Mirror Views" in a way.

And the prize goes to...K!

Ball's Zoo Hypothesis #6 and#7 aligns with ET communicators who tend to use the Star Trek term "Prime Directive" a universally accepted non-interference in modern man.

I still love the idea of extraterrestrials watching Star Trek. 

[quote pid='12949' dateline='1515027024']
Pssst Wrote: Ball's Zoo Hypothesis #6 and#7 aligns with ET communicators who tend to use the Star Trek term "Prime Directive" a universally accepted non-interference with modern man.

Chris
I still love the idea of extraterrestrials watching Star Trek. 
[/quote]

If an ET is coming through a channel, as Bashar does with Darryl Anka, ET is able to gain access to all of the energetic information of that channel. Language is one, professional interests another.

Anka's bio includes "over 30 years of experience in miniature effects, storyboards, sets and designs on three Star Trek films,  Iron Man, The Aviator, Pirates of the Caribbean 3: At World's End, I Robot, Live Free or Die Hard and Flags of our Fathers among several others."

That and This...

They watch us like hawks. Which is also true since they often tell us how entertaining we are. rofl- level entertaining.

How about:

(11) The universe and its inhabitants are manifestations of an infinite, timeless consciousness. Those inhabitants exist to experience the physical universe (and/or whatever alternate dimension they inhabit) and feed back that experience to the source. In that way, the source - and its manifestations - evolve. Those OCs which are more advanced than we are will understand this and, if and when appropriate, nudge us towards that understanding.

It seems to me that the ten options for consideration are all reflections of all-too-human hopes and fears. Projections of those hopes and fears on to any putative OCs. They are all "Mirror Views" in a way.

This is certainly putting your money where your mouth is with regard to your belief system, but I think it is dangerously presumptuous to assume that certain current human notions of spiritual existence and spiritual principles are universal truths valid over all time scales with all sentient beings. This may be, but it's an inconceivably vast and old galaxy out there. All possibilities need to be on the table. 

What needs to be kept in mind is Ball's rough estimate of humanity's status and development level relative to ETIs that, if they exist, quite likely developed geological ages ago. This status is likely to be lower than that of a fish or trilobite relative to a human. The thought processes and belief systems of such beings would likely be simply inconceivable to humans, and their technology akin to magic. 

For instance, can we really be sure that they believe in the Golden Rule and subscribe to our current Judeo-Christian principles of morality, which hold that it is wrong, evil, to cruelly exploit and torture other sentient beings? 

Present (relatively advanced) humans still indulge in such activities with animals and other humans alike. It is more a matter of faith than true knowledge that our current principles of morality are objective absolute principles, as opposed to being ultimately subjective and culture-dependent. Over history and prehistory, human morality has definitely been subjective, as a practical, empirical reality. The ancient Carthaginians are a case in point, where for centuries they burned their young children alive as sacrifices to their gods. Apparently, even the ancient Greeks and Romans who wrote about this had more interest in the practice as an oddity rather than as evil. Different cultures and belief systems.

There doesn’t seem to be any sort of human built-in moral “compass”, or instinctual morality, at least for the great majority of mankind. It seems to be a learned behavior and belief system with accompanying emotions that could be peculiar to our particular species and history. Why wouldn't this also apply to aliens?

For instance, can we really be sure that they believe in the Golden Rule and subscribe to our current Judeo-Christian principles of morality, which hold that it is wrong, evil, to cruelly exploit and torture other sentient beings? 

Firstly, I'm not sure that we can characterise the Golden Rule as a Judeo-Christian concept. I would have thought it would apply universally.

But let's imagine our ETs in a little more depth. Do they consider themselves to be separate from their fellow individuals? And even more separate from the individuals belonging to other civilisations?

To my mind, such an advanced civilisation as you propose - geological eons ahead of us - will have (eons ago) realised that the separation into individuals is an illusion. I mean, people we ourselves regard as ancient here on earth realised that thousands of years ago. If separation is an illusion and we are all one then the Golden Rule is inevitable, isn't it?

The fact that we talk the talk but don't walk the walk doesn't devalue the Golden Rule; it merely shows us to be the under-developed souls that we are.

Firstly, I'm not sure that we can characterise the Golden Rule as a Judeo-Christian concept. I would have thought it would apply universally.

But let's imagine our ETs in a little more depth. Do they consider themselves to be separate from their fellow individuals? And even more separate from the individuals belonging to other civilisations?

To my mind, such an advanced civilisation as you propose - geological eons ahead of us - will have (eons ago) realised that the separation into individuals is an illusion. I mean, people we ourselves regard as ancient here on earth realised that thousands of years ago. If separation is an illusion and we are all one then the Golden Rule is inevitable, isn't it?

The fact that we talk the talk but don't walk the walk doesn't devalue the Golden Rule; it merely shows us to be the under-developed souls that we are.

It's a big universe out there, and the possibilities are almost certainly beyond what we can imagine. Even within what we can imagine with our limited knowledge:  

Consider an ETI species that developed mainly as solitary predators rather than as social animals. Would they believe in and live the Golden Rule? It seems to me, probably not, because the essential ingredient of the Golden Rule is empathy, defined as the ability to share someone else’s feelings or experiences by imagining what it would be like to be in that person’s situation. Such feelings are probably peculiar to social species such as homo sapiens, and not solitary predators such as cats. The animals that have been shown to have empathy and understanding of the emotions of others are social animals such as dogs, primates and elephants. Furthermore, dogs have been bred so that they not only show empathy, but also show sympathy, which is a desire to comfort others who might be in emotional distress.

We can imagine other possible ETI origins where the GR might not be part of the beings' psyche. For instance, a species where evolution and necessity inevitably led to instinctive ritual and institutional cannabalism, once the species achieved civilization.  

For both of these hypothetical races of ETIs, the Golden Rule would be contrary to their built-in instinctual nature, and would not become part of their psyche and culture. It's not clear if it would even be possible for them to have some sort of spiritual realization of the GR, because it would be so contrary to their basic nature. 

If this reasoning is valid, then the Golden Rule is not an absolute objective universal principle subscribed to by all aliens, just those aliens with the right evolutionary history. We humans would be well advised to beware of those ETIs with the wrong evolutionary history.


Of course, this issue also relates to the evolution debate. If evolution is ultimately controlled or guided by intelligence beyond our world, then such hypothetical fundamentally amoral ETIs might never be allowed to come into being.  If there are intelligent forces behind evolution but they are built-in to the basic nature of life, then presumably totally amoral ETIs would be allowed, as hypothesized above.

Yet another side to this issue is the debate over the origin of life. Evolutionary biologist Eugene Koonin believes, and the continued failure of OOL hypotheses implies, that  the spontaneous chemical origin of life is vanishingly improbable given the probabalistic resources of this one universe. If this is the case then life on earth and its evolved intelligent human beings may really be unique in this universe or at least in this galaxy.  

Koonin then hypothesizes that life nevertheless originated spontaneously and chemically, but in one (ours) or some  number in an infinite or at least vast array of parallel universes (the multiverse) that came about through universal inflation. Our observation of our own existence would be due to the Anthropic Principle.

UFO ETIs would then have to be visitors from other parallel universes of the multiverse, that we are totally isolated from due  to our limited science and technology .