I think they're certainly out there, but I don't think they've ever visited. The way I see it: if they're technologically advanced enough to make it to earth in the first place, then we must be like ants to them. Why even bother? [..]
Curiosity would work as a general answer to that question. People who developed such advanced technology would probably be very curious, since they would have had to develop a very detailed understanding of how many aspects of the universe work.
Scarcity of life would work as another answer. If life is extremely rare, any life would be worthy of study. If life isn't all that rare but complex life is, then any complex life would be especially worthy of study. The formation of the now common cell with a nucleus, membrane, mitochondria, etc is a good example. Eukarocyte? (looking it up - I was close, it's eukaryote). As far as we know, it happened
once on Earth. Once. In billions of years with excellent conditions for life. A biologist with any kind of interest in that aspect of biology would be over the moon to have an opportunity to study lifeforms from another world, another instance of eukaryotes forming. If complex life isn't rare but intelligent life is, same thing. The technology of these hypothetical people would be far in advance of ours, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they are far more intelligent than us. We're no more intelligent than humans of 20,000 years ago, but our technology is so far in advance of theirs that we would be godlike to them. Even just 200 years, let alone 20,000 years, has brought a huge advancement in technology and knowledge.
Even if we were like ants to them, some of them would want to study us. But we're not like ants to them - they could detect that we have a degree of intelligence, that we have invented writing and art and a rapidly increasing level of technology and understanding of the ways that the universe works. Even if they were greatly superior to us, we'd be complex enough to be interesting enough to study. Especially if it's not all that difficult for them to come here.
My own point of view is that we don't know enough to make more than a pretty vague stab in the dark about how likely it is that other
people are out there, whatever their level of intelligence and technology. Anyone who claims certainty is working on belief, not knowledge. I prefer to avoid belief and acknowledge that I don't know when I don't know. All we
know that's relevant is that the universe is very big and that the chance of people existing is not zero. Maybe the chance is pretty high and there are thousands of species of people in this galaxy alone. Maybe the chance is so mind-bogglingly low that it's only happened once so far. Maybe it's happened a few times but all the other people are extinct now. So I'd be willing to bet some money on people existing somewhere else at this time, but I don't know it for certain and I don't do belief.
Given the sheer, unimaginable scale of the universe it would be rather arrogant to assume that the Earth is the only place that life managed to gain a foothold and flourish. [..]
I keep seeing that argument put forward as fact. I've never seen any evidence or reasoning put forward to support it. Why is it
arrogant to assume that the Earth is the only place that life managed to come into existence, gain a foothold and flourish? Very specifically
arrogant. Not an assumption. Not a belief. Not even an implausible belief. Where is the
arrogance?
![[FnG]magnolia](/styles/overclockers/avatars/9.png){kind=avatar}
