What bothers me most about this kind of perspective is that it is very 'human focused' where, by definition, life around another sun would develop a very different perspective on similar lines.
Modern humans have really only existed for ~75k years (might vary depending on where the line is drawn) where dinosaurs went extinct about 65 million years ago. If that track had shifted to where dinosaurs would have carried on towards a human-type evolution path, they might have had a human-level society that could be ~60 million years old.
So, frankly, I don't see it as 'impossible' for life somewhere in the galaxy to have evolved 1-2 billion years earlier.
Besides, our understanding of "science" is, let's just say, ridiculously limited. Less so our understanding of what consciousness even is, let alone what it can do and where it can even thrive, so to speak.
There could well be hyper-advanced living beings capable of living joyfully upon the surfaces of stars but our self-imposed logical / intellectual limitations and "boxes" would never as much as be able to comprehend such beings, let alone come to terms with how they even live and whatnot.
We, as a culture, live in a bubble, and most don't even realize it (until it's far too late).
On consciousness; I've always been drawn to the interpretation of quantum physics that the 'observer' is required for the waveform to collapse. Which would mean that the universe could not exist other than as potential without a consciousness observing. Normies tend to oppose that view because the origin of science was to be able to explain the world without appealing to God.
The next facet would be what other lifeforms evolved on other planets would look like; beyond some general assumptions based on life on earth and its variety, there's very little that could be any certainty. What I mean is that we can generally assume that life would follow similar traits (animal, vegetable, or microbial) and that they would be roughly symmetrical. Beyond that would be guesswork, we can't know how life would evolve differently on a planet with more Oxygen, water, gravity, etc...
Most that go about speculating on alien life tend to focus on humanity as the primary success and extrapolate that other life on other planets would evolve similar traits when that's all human-focused projection.
I think the timeline we've been taught is whack. They're finding hammers, wagon wheels, and metal pots deep in the earth "where they shouldn't be" according to narrative. It supports major cataclysm burying ancient civilization. It debunks a lot of layers-mean-years theory. There are questionable surfaces that possess prints of creatures from different alleged eras. People go out of their way to destroy these a lot of times. They are the gatekeepers. The keepers of the know. Secret enforcers.
Oh, absolutely. The 10-12000 year modern history seems to fit far more. Frankly, humanity has been unchanged for at least that 50k-75k years, which at the least implies that there's no real reason why a civilization of comparable technology could have been built and rebuilt from scratch. Nothing genetically should preclude that.
Until that gets established as an equal unknown or estimate, it's generally safe to assume that MSM version.
What bothers me most about this kind of perspective is that it is very 'human focused' where, by definition, life around another sun would develop a very different perspective on similar lines.
Modern humans have really only existed for ~75k years (might vary depending on where the line is drawn) where dinosaurs went extinct about 65 million years ago. If that track had shifted to where dinosaurs would have carried on towards a human-type evolution path, they might have had a human-level society that could be ~60 million years old.
So, frankly, I don't see it as 'impossible' for life somewhere in the galaxy to have evolved 1-2 billion years earlier.
Besides, our understanding of "science" is, let's just say, ridiculously limited. Less so our understanding of what consciousness even is, let alone what it can do and where it can even thrive, so to speak.
There could well be hyper-advanced living beings capable of living joyfully upon the surfaces of stars but our self-imposed logical / intellectual limitations and "boxes" would never as much as be able to comprehend such beings, let alone come to terms with how they even live and whatnot.
We, as a culture, live in a bubble, and most don't even realize it (until it's far too late).
Excellent points, let me parse this a little.
On consciousness; I've always been drawn to the interpretation of quantum physics that the 'observer' is required for the waveform to collapse. Which would mean that the universe could not exist other than as potential without a consciousness observing. Normies tend to oppose that view because the origin of science was to be able to explain the world without appealing to God.
The next facet would be what other lifeforms evolved on other planets would look like; beyond some general assumptions based on life on earth and its variety, there's very little that could be any certainty. What I mean is that we can generally assume that life would follow similar traits (animal, vegetable, or microbial) and that they would be roughly symmetrical. Beyond that would be guesswork, we can't know how life would evolve differently on a planet with more Oxygen, water, gravity, etc...
Most that go about speculating on alien life tend to focus on humanity as the primary success and extrapolate that other life on other planets would evolve similar traits when that's all human-focused projection.
I think the timeline we've been taught is whack. They're finding hammers, wagon wheels, and metal pots deep in the earth "where they shouldn't be" according to narrative. It supports major cataclysm burying ancient civilization. It debunks a lot of layers-mean-years theory. There are questionable surfaces that possess prints of creatures from different alleged eras. People go out of their way to destroy these a lot of times. They are the gatekeepers. The keepers of the know. Secret enforcers.
Oh, absolutely. The 10-12000 year modern history seems to fit far more. Frankly, humanity has been unchanged for at least that 50k-75k years, which at the least implies that there's no real reason why a civilization of comparable technology could have been built and rebuilt from scratch. Nothing genetically should preclude that.
Until that gets established as an equal unknown or estimate, it's generally safe to assume that MSM version.