We've all heard of SETI — Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence. That's a passive means of looking for life in the Cosmos. After several decades and looking for signs of life from tens of billions of stars, we haven't had any luck.
Is intelligence life that rare? Perhaps it is. Although the building blocks for biological life saturate the universe, it's by no means certain that those blocks eventually evolve into an intelligent life form, at least, with any regularity.
So, as Enrico Fermi wondered, "Where are they?" The Fermi paradox states that because the universe is at least 13 billion years old, at least some alien civilizations should have been able to develop some kind of transport — faster than light speed, space-time folding — that would have brought them here to Earth at some point. So how come we haven't heard from them?
Fermi's paradox originated over a casual lunchtime conversation in 1950, so the brilliant physicist didn't work out all the details of his postulate. For example, how long does intelligent life survive? We know from our study of life on Earth that all species eventually go extinct. Is it possible that all intelligent life eventually destroys itself? Or dies out for other reasons? Or is destroyed by collisions with comets or asteroids? Carl Sagan wondered about that. He called it "surviving a technological adolescence."
There may be a more sinister reason we're not getting any signals from other worlds. What if other advanced civilizations learned the hard way not to be visible or not advertise their existence? What if there are species out there that prey on worlds stupid enough to reach out for contact?
This is the premise of Netflix's "3 Body Problem," based on the book by Liu Cixin. It's a cautionary tale about METI, or Messaging to ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence. A SETI scientist gets a response from her dish that says simply "Do not respond."
The message continues:
I am a pacifist in this world. You are lucky that I am the first to receive your message. I am warning you: do not answer. If you respond, we will come. Your world will be conquered. Do not answer.
The scientist responds: “Come,” she types. “We cannot save ourselves. I will help you conquer this world.”
Unfortunately, there are METI advocates who agree with that scientist. There are also METI advocates who think aliens will be helpful. The argument has split the SETI community and much of the scientific world.
METI scientists have sent several messages directed at what they think could be likely stars with planets that harbor life.
This is not just an esoteric argument. Yascha Mounk of Persuasion makes the case that if humanity is going to contact other civilizations, a much more developed discussion about the risks/rewards of such a venture must be undertaken.
Based on our own history and biology, we should probably think long and hard about trying to let others in the cosmos know we're here.
Open a biology book, and you will see how brutal humans have been to rival species. We have done terrible damage to other primates. And we may even be to blame for the demise of other humanoid species, from Europe’s Neanderthals to the Denisovans who once populated parts of Asia.
Open a history book, and you will see how brutal humans have been to members of their own species. We are capable of taking up arms against people who hail from very similar cultures, as bloody conflicts from the Spanish Civil War to the current war in Ukraine remind us. And we are ruthless in exploiting the weakness of more distant cultures that are technologically inferior, as the violent story of French, British, Russian, Japanese and Mongolian colonialism attests.
Science fiction author and futurist David Brin, who helped formulate First Contact protocols, broke with the METI community over their inadvisable decision to attempt to initiate contact with other species without giving the project a considerable amount of thought.
I should re-emphasize that our objection has never been to METI, per se but to METI-WC... or METI without consultation, refusing to subject questionable assumptions to input from humanity's best and wisest sages. We propose that when the objective is to transform human destiny (as METI zealots proclaim they aim to do) then a little discussion with peers would seem wise, while laying all the issues before a fascinated general public.
Indeed, despite continued obstinacy by those at the core of this mess, I can report that a little progress has been made. Some important names in the field — including Frank Drake and Jill Tarter — have taken some pains to separate themselves from the most fervent defenders of METI-WC, offering some support for our efforts to open up broader, more eclectic and ecumenical discussions.
If the METI fanatics are wrong, they will probably have the good fortune of never knowing that their stupidity destroyed the planet. The rest of us would find cold comfort in that.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member