Alien Predators – Would you put all our eggs in their basket?
20th August 2010
I have written two books postulating the idea that if the UFO phenomenon as we know it is a genuine one that is present in terms of our physical reality and functioning under the sensory premises of humanity. We are, as the species homo sapiens sapiens, beyond a shadow of a doubt, the likely victims of a terrifying subterfuge, a subterfuge that can change the very nature and nurture of the human condition once and for all with a change that might rob us of a feature that underlies our very basic existential meaning as living beings.
On the Discovery Channel in his program 'Universe' broadcast earlier this year, Stephen Hawking gave his opinion that the existence of alien life is almost certain and that amongst such alien life there could be a few life forms that are intelligent and might pose a threat to humanity.
"To my mathematical brain, the numbers alone make thinking about aliens perfectly rational," he said. "The real challenge is to work out what aliens might actually be like."
Hawking postulates that aliens might simply raid Earth for its resources and then move on: "We only have to look at ourselves to see how intelligent life might develop into something we wouldn't want to meet. I imagine they might exist in massive ships, having used up all the resources from their home planet. Such advanced aliens would perhaps become nomads, looking to conquer and colonise whatever planets they can reach." He concludes that trying to make contact with alien races is "a little too risky. If aliens ever visit us, I think the outcome would be much as when Christopher Columbus first landed in America, which didn't turn out very well for the Native Americans."
Hawking is not alone, other great scientific minds of today are now coming to the same conclusion that not only are alien civilisations a very likely possibility but also a very frightening possibility. World renowned physicist Dr. Michio Kaku warns that the chances are that any alien life advanced enough to reach our planet is likely to be predatory in nature. He argues that human beings as the top of the food chain on this planet are predators and any intelligent life form, especially one that is capable of the advanced technology necessary for space travel is also likely to be predatory.
So where does all this insight take us? Now that we have the official scientific green light not only on the existence of the alien phenomenon but also on the likelihood of its danger to us, will the media be less inclined to ridicule those who take it seriously as sadly deluded new agers, outright nutters or even worse than that - attention seekers who fabricate evidence for personal gain?
To be honest, I think the answer to that question will be 'no,' it will not make the slightest bit of difference.
Why is it that the media consensus is to disregard authentic sources, military officers, pilots, doctors, policemen and focus only on the reports of sometimes whacky, sometimes neurotic or sometimes even downright manipulative individuals who put their tuppence worth into the equation? The media will report Hawking's opinion that alien life is a very strong possibility but as yet there has been no mention of the evidence from impeccable witness reports that has actually been suggesting this for years.
The phenomenon of alien abduction is even more chilling. The removal and implantation of sperm and ova is just one of the many gynaecological procedures that have been reported by hundreds of thousands of experients, the vast majority of whom are ordinary down-to-earth individuals with no previous interest in the paranormal.
Michio Kaku has said that he believes that it would be folly for Governments to make knowledge of such visitation public owing to the panic it would cause. The huge arrogance this belief presupposes is shocking. Does Kaku really believe that he and the Governments who might have this knowledge can decide to censor information on our behalf because we do not have the maturity to handle it responsibly? If the threat that reliable witnesses have been reporting for years and that Kaku himself and now Hawking too have affirmed, is real and present, would you want knowledge of it censored?
But hang on a minute, if Kaku and Hawking are right about the existence of intelligent and potentially predatory alien life forms the chances are that this information has already been censored. It implies that many of those who have reported alien encounters were indeed reporting real actual events.
How much longer are we, as the ordinary punters of our world, going to allow this to continue? We have recently seen how the self proclaimed moral arbiters of world politics, the US and British political cartels, positively fester with cleverly postured dishonesty, raw self interest and a devious and ruthless inclination for lies and misinformation. The Iraq war and the British parliamentary expenses scandal stand as hallmark affirmations that the prospect of such 'polluticians' ever giving us the truth about anything is remote.
If it has been discovered that there is and has been a significant extra terrestrial input into our affairs, there is going to be no way that these scoundrels are going to come clean about it all. Politicians and their ancillary governmental cadgers are going to be in the driving seat that interfaces with any alien contact. If any deals are going to be made by a technologically superior extra terrestrial power to take-over and run the human condition, those deals will be done with such as they. Where will their loyalties lie, or be forced to lie - in the interests of us all as the human family, or in their own interests? Interests that are likely to coincide with an alien purpose that, as expert and reliable witness reports suggest thus far, seem to centre on the hiding and the obfuscation of their presence and purpose here on this planet.
Whatever our existential base, whatever our meaning as a living thinking species, we can expect to be set against alien extraterrestrials and their implied superiority in their terms and not ours. It all implies control, the control of the inferior by the superior. We have seen how this works when our own record as a species is set against the control of non-human animal species. We have decimated them ruthlessly. This is I think the point that underlies Hawking's assertion. Yes he encourages that we avoid contact with an alien resource, but if it is inevitable and is forced upon us, we as individuals have an inalienable right to know what our fate is likely to be.
If an alien species with an advanced enough technology to conquer the speed of light in order to reach us has an interest in us with our relatively primitive levels of technology one would have to ask the question: Why? What can we as living beings give them that technology cannot? What can we do that the best most advanced robotic artificial intelligence cannot? It is so much easier faster and more predictable to work with artificial intelligence than natural intelligence so why would they bother with us? Our bodies are less resilient than robots. Our own motivations, wishes and wants will interfere with whatever programme they are trying to introduce whereas a robot is a clean sheet for writing on. If they want our planetary resources such as gold for example it would be so easy for them to harvest this with purely technological means. In fact they could find those resources easily on so many uninhabited planets with no troublesome inhabitants to bother them. If they want DNA from us that too is easily replicated endlessly from a small sample as our own biologists already do for their own research.
Yet for millennia it seems they have been interacting with our species. What do we have that fascinates them so powerfully? Their first concern will be to survive in the best capacity. What do we have that would benefit their survival? It might be said that they wish to hybridise with us so that they can survive on our planet by merging species with one already adapted for the local conditions. But then cloning would be a better solution. Clone and reclone humanity in hybrid mixtures with them. But they have tried this on the spaceships and they are weak and sickly by all accounts.
What then is it about us that we cannot be successfully cloned and mixed with their species prospectus? Why do they need to mix us with them in our natural original state over time with all the inconvenience for them that this produces? What do we have that a highly advanced biological laboratory such as theirs cannot replicate? I suggest that there is something else that comes into the equation, something that continually moves the goalposts. Something that natural birth has and cloned birth does not, something that allows for the possibility for life in the first place despite the dismantling mechanisms of a universe governed by the second law of thermodynamics. That something is what is commonly termed, for want of a better word, a 'soul.'
In our secular society we have unwittingly and inexorably it seems allowed science to be our oracle, our fountain of truth. Yet its prophets and soothsayers are now admitting that they too are in the dark. BBC's Horizon Programme: 'Is Everything We Know About The Universe Wrong' screened in March revealed that scientists at the cutting edge of cosmology and theoretical physics are happy to admit that their knowledge of how the Universe and all that is in it came to be is almost non-existent. They are forced by the data derived from their own observations of the universe to bring into the standard model of explanation exotic elements such as dark matter, dark energy and the new kid on the block - dark flow. These are all called 'dark' for a very good reason: Scientists are completely in the dark as to what they are. To all intents and purposes they do not exist in the observable universe. Yet if scientists are to make sense of what they can observe in the observable universe they have to exist somehow, somewhere. Could this, perish the thought, imply that there is indeed a reality beyond the physically observable that interacts with the physically observable? Could this imply something non-physical that might for want of a better word be termed 'God.'
It is our societal norm to see nothing beyond the scope of atoms. Just look at Hawking's latest statements for a beautiful illustration of this. His cynical view of extraterrestrials is based on observing an Earth life form – humans. He thinks it is a reasonable assumption that the behaviour of extraterrestrial civilizations would be similar to the violent and naturally exploitative behaviour of humans.Yet with ultimate irony he has recently suggested that the human race itself must move to a planet beyond our Solar System to protect the future of the species.
"Once we spread out into space and establish colonies, our future should be safe." "The human race shouldn't have all its eggs in one basket, or on one planet. Let's hope we can avoid dropping the basket until we have spread the load."
Putting all this together it would seem that Hawking is suggesting that humanity should spread its violent predatory nature out into space and join the predatory alien species out there in a battle for survival. Do you notice something a little shaky about the morality of that suggestion?
If there just might be a possibility that existence continues beyond an atomic scheme of things, as some of the greatest minds that came to this world have attested and science itself may now be implying. If there is indeed an eternal nature to our individual reality, how might this be compromised by the thinking encapsulated in Hawking's suggestion, how indeed might this be further compromised by an alien agenda that seems to centre on experimentation with our natural reproductive capacity with no regard for our freedom of choice? If the choices we make can affect our eternal prospectus as well as our temporal one what a catastrophe it could then be to each and every one of us, to trust this, our eternity, to the valencies and whims of politicians and their administrative goons.
With recent advances in bio-technology and cybernetics we are hurtling faster than ever before into what I call 'Sim Card Man'. Could it be that the Grey aliens that are a feature of almost all abduction experiences may themselves be the final product of a civilization at another location in the universe achieving this stage of technological advancement to its acme. Could this civilization have transformed their own natural bodies through artificial implants into bio-mechanical entities? Could the Greys have been the final product of a civilization that sought to avoid death in this way? Could they be the epitome, in other words, of artificial intelligence? This would be consistent with abductee reports which seem to suggest that the Greys have no sympathy towards us but no cruelty either, rather likea scientist behaves towards his lab rats.
If we are heading in the same direction as the civilisation that may have created these Greys, 'sim-carding' ourselves to a virtual existence in our quest for virtual realities, artificial intelligence and bio-technology we will be the rightful inheritors of Hawking's predator and prey universe.
Yet near death experiences point to an awesomely beautiful reality beyond the physical that transforms the lives of those who glimpse it. The value of thoughts and actions that are the obverse of the predator-prey relationship are immediately apparent to these individuals. Could it be that interference from an artificial bio-mechanical roboidal source is leading us away from this value system? Could they be leading us to follow their artificial format and perhaps program our own genetic structure into roboidal entities that we ourselves create to survive the rigours of space travel and re-construct our DNA in suitable hosts.
"What doth it profit a man if he gained the whole world and suffered the loss of his own soul."
These words echo through two millennia to sit on the verification of possibly the greatest mystery our species needs to solve. It will never be done if the mainstream media continue to hedge their metre on the side of sceptics, cynics and those who think with their brains plugged into the stanchions of temporal life and living with no allowance made for a grander existential scale.