This was a fun discussion. I think a lot of people are giving Jill hate because she spoke, but I think the presumption there is that her job is to only ask questions and then sit in awe of Neil. I'm happy she presented an alternate set of views. Also, I didn't hear too many new things on aliens from Neil. I've been hearing the Terraforming and the chimps arguments for years now. Overall though, lot of food for thought generally.
Sorc Erer Agreed, i'm happy she challenged his points of view and proposed new thought. That is science at a core isn't it? Haha. I do agree with the chimps and 1% DNA difference stuff getting old. Although this may be a new thought to others who don't follow people like Neil or Stephen.
I hear you. Yes, that is the core of science. Also, you're correct on the old arguments. I suspect Neil sees himself primarily as an educator who inspires an interest in science, and uses whatever arguments seem the most compelling and persuasive in his experience. There's probably enough newbies at any of these events, or watching online, that the repetition pays off in some sense.
There are different levels of maturity here. She's frustrated for some reason that some explanations are not making sense in her brain, which is odd since she's a scientist but then again we are all human and we all perceive information differently(based on association and past experiences). Her non-verbal messages are so clear and obvious that she's uncomfortable accepting some new arguments and instead wants to stay in her comfort zone of what she knows. This is completely acceptable for anyone, just, if you do manifest these emotions so visibly , don't go and interview someone like Neil. Either be a professional, objective, interviewer or just don't do it. No offence to her in any way though. She had a brilliant career and a great role model in the field.
Dr Tyson matches his brilliance with a great sense of humor, thus making it all so interesting.... This is exactly what all really good teachers bring to their students...causing us to realize where most of the problems in our schools and class rooms lie....but certainly not all.
*Jill Tarter is NOT an "interviewer." This is a dialogue between equals. She's the former head of SETI and one of the most respected astronomers in the world. Jodie Foster's character in the movie CONTACT was based on Jill Tarter.*
Interviewers can engage in conversation with the subject of an interview and can also hold inferior, equal or superior perceived status without predudice. In this video Jill Tarter metaphorically holds the gavel and can be sighted as the 'interviewer' without any actual or perceived detriment to her status and achievement. The only way that your comment could stand up is if the term 'interviewer' is seen as an inferior rank.... which of course is simply nonsense . It is simply a role played in an interaction such as an interview.
Yes but he didnt see the big picture. We need to leave the earth for survival of the species. We should go outside the solar system and live on huge spaceships. Terraforming Mars isnt good emough when our sun dies.
@@remcov2130 Why are you making assumptions and drawing guidelines for what should happen in several billion years, when it took us less than 2 centuries to go from horse-carts and oil lamps to LHC and comet-landings...
@@azka1912 Because every scientist knows that our sun will die, it doesn't matter what we have done the last 2 centuries or what we will do the next billion years if we don't leave this planet we will extinct.
@@remcov2130 What we did in the last 2 centuries, with a bit of luck and common sense, will eventually get us off the planet. But not for reasons of the sun dying any time soon. If we get extinct, it is far more probably due to our own errors and lack of judgement, than to cosmic phenomena. It's a simple matter of scale.
More open minded?? That is a stretch. They invented Cancel Culture and the banning of free speech on Campuses. The thought of a free speech Twitter horrifies them LOL
I've been interviewed by doctors, pharmacists, teachers and a few others. While still maintaining their profession, they *were* interviewers, interviewing me.
So many pathetic creeps inside these bully actions and attitudes ! They must have very empty lives. Nobody liking or respecting them because they never act worthy of it !
Yes, Jill Tarter is not just an interviewer. She is an acclaimed astrophysicist, Director of SETI, and the inventor of the concept of "Brown Dwarf" stars.
It's amazing to think that ETs 65/66 million light years away might now be observing a planet orbiting a yellow dwarf star being hit by an asteroid, and from a spectral analysis of the collision, detect signs of life.
they are not mutually exclusive, they are absolutely interconnected. and we already know how to take care of it. Be vegan, grow hydroponically, use solar power, recycle everything manufactured, we just choose not to because its currently inconvenient. In actuality colonizing mars is going to require to normalize this behavior which may in fact raise better generations when it comes to our planet
Unfortunately you have half the world population who thinks God is taking them to heaven, nothing else is out there, whatever we do to this planet doesn't matter and whoever doesn't agree with them are demon possessed sinners. And they get to vote. We go to the stars.
I dont agree with tyson's worm analogy. He says if we see a worm, are we going to stop and study it or see how intelligent it may be. He may be right about that here on planet earth,,but I believe we would be very interested if we found a worm on another planet.
Washademoak I totally agree, not to mention a worm cannot vocally communicate with us .he’s basing everything is off “his” assumption. What if there was another species out there that had very similar DNA and was not 1% more advanced but as advanced as us, yet had been around a lot longer to develop technology to travel the stars. In my opinion, that’s most likely how it’s going to go down ,if it ever does.
I have not seen Neil react to his interviewer this way since his mother did an interview with him. His mother is another old white lady with similar vibes.
Twins become different the moment they are born, through their experience of life because even if you kept them in the same place as much as possible, they are experiencing two different lives.
@ 19:30 reminds me of the Star Trek The Next Generation episode where the intelligent microbial life called the humans on the Enterprise who were unintentionally destroying their habitat "ugly bags of mostly water". Lol
This is why "Aliens and Cowboys" was such an interesting movie. The premise, at least. Granted it turned into a shoot-em-up action movie, but it removed the preconception that the aliens have to arrive in our time in order to create an acceptable story.
Aliens and Cowboys was a very pleasant surprise for me, considering all the crap that comes from hollywood & co. But if you look at the actual time scales of the universe, Clarke's 2001 intro had a much more plausible shot at the topic.
Some anthropologists have visited various hunter-gatherer societies (there were a very small number of them decades ago. I don't know if any have survived until 2018) and were very careful to disturb them as little as possible. There was the movie _The God's Must Be Crazy_ about this. It IS possible for more tech people to visit less tech people and not have it be a disaster.
If human civilization has been around for the last 5000 years or so, that .00000125 % of the 4 billion years the earth has existed. That's a cosmic blink of an eye.
That 1% theory Neil has is one of the scariest and interesting thoughts possible. I think about it a lot. We would be no match at all against an alien species that could make it over here.
Interesting stuff. Great point by Neil about an alien species not being susceptible to our diseases. Most don't consider that one. Neil failed to consider something about the dinosaurs that she brought up. She pointed out that our intelligence (as defined by us) may have indeed been a result of us being hunter/hunted. If that were an inevitable result of that situation then the presence of dinosaurs may have *hastened* our rise in intelligence. Let's be honest...even today we are physically inferior to a large number of other species on the planet....probably the majority would kick our asses in a fight. So our species has gotten around that problem pretty well due to intelligence. "The dinosaurs" weren't really some monolithic species either. The asteroid event didn't kill them all....most went extinct on their own. So "times they were a-changing" either way. Also at 18:55 he uses good logic in pointing out it is a mistake to superimpose our form of "intelligence" on the entire universe. But he had just previously superimposed the earth standard for "rare intelligence" on the entire universe. It's just as possible that there are places where the rise of intelligent species (by our standard) is much more common than on Earth. He did that thing which some scientists do when discussing life in the universe....using Earth as a standard. ("Water is needed for life" "The planet must be a certain distance from the star") That's surprising because he has pointed out that mistake in others himself.
Good points. But there are several critical conditions that pushed (or allowed) humans to evolve intelligence like they did. Some you already mentioned. -- planetary environment where atmosphere has sufficient pressure, and is transparent to many short wavelengths (good news for the evolution of eyes) -- a long prior "base" evolution caused by predator/prey competition, starting maybe in cambrian if not proterozoic. -- inferiority to many stronger, faster, deadlier animals (both as early mammals, and later as primates), which brought up important social developments. -- expanded versatility regarding the sources of food, which spared us from excessive physical specialisations seen in many other species. -- the opposable thumb that evolved because of tree dwelling, but which turned into the fortuitous advantage of tool manipulation. -- flexibility of posture, also evolved because of mixed tree/ground lifestyle, which eventually freed up half of all available members (that's HALF!!) so they could further "specialize" in general tool manipulation. -- several odd changes in the head and neck area that allowed for development of speech and a greatly increased brain (happy cascading accidents? systematic gene editing by aliens? ) -- a pretty long period of time (the last 100'sKA to MA) without major global catastrophes, without any sort of extinction level events, at least long enough to allow for the accumulation of the latter advantages. And I should add : -- several instances of sheer luck where the human species managed not to blow itself up with nuclear fire. Yet. I'd say intelligence does not often get a chance to reach even this point... But the universe is large, and so is Time. I'd also say intelligence MUST have gotten many chances already to reach far, far beyond our point.
The fact that someone gave anyone hate for speaking up. Questions an opinions are how advances are made. How answers are formed. They say the world is crazy but its people.
Are we kinder and gentler today? In my culture, an ancient king is believed to have given a chariot to a plant, so a flowering creeper won't suffer and would be able to climb on it and about kingdoms where great justice prevailed. So, how are we kinder and gentler? According to whose norms?
@@krzysztofbandyk168 Not sure if the stories are anecdotal since contemporaries have written about it. The past may not have been as cruel as we assume it to be. Think about today, we live in luxury while more than 50 percent of the world is starving and people dying for want of food. The info is not even hidden from us, we see it everyday on TV, the Internet, etc. so, how are we kinder and gentler today
@@sroy9789 Anecdotal as in a single accurance not as in "that hasnt happened". The amount of war per capita in the world keeps decreasing ever since 1945 what we mean by kinder and gentler isnt that people were less nice but rather more rude. I.e. tribal warfare, the witch hunts, the crusades, dictatorial states etc. We arent denying that there was kindness before but rather argueing there is more of it today. And while i understand its easy to think the entire world is terrible when watching news i'd like to remind you that journalists dont run "local boy scout helps grandma across the street" or "local cat got a big gift from his owner" stories. Also poverty is decreasing across the world. Also water acces is improving across the world. Starvation is less and less prevelant. Is everything as great as it could be NO. Are most things better than they were YES.
@@krzysztofbandyk168 Not exactly! Overall human beings have become extremely selfish and money oriented. Yes, there are a few good people here and there but the overall culture is about I, me and myself. Look at the devastation in Syria and Iran. Water shortage is a recent phenomenon.
Very interesting talk by Dr. Tyson. By the way, I’m guessing that a more intelligent species would, hopefully, have evolved more compassion towards helpless creatures, like worms, and not just step on them.
I don't know about that .. we are the most evolved on earth,we don't really care about any other life unless it affects us .. and compassion is an emotion ..which I presume would be an exclusive trait of life on Earth
The point on the asteroid, where mammals were nearer to a niche form of life as compared to dinosaurs at the period, and that as a freak accident really of the asteroid wiping them out, had given us greater foothold or leeway which we we would not of had otherwise. It begs a question of what other forms of life of the period would've also had their fate railroaded. That is one of the most interesting arguments I've heard, and plays on time scales.. I'm not sure I've the chance of getting my mind around lol..
One could expand upon your basic premise to imagine that learning how to survive inevitable crises (like meteors/resource depletion/solar burnout) is merely one more litmus test for continuing to expand intelligence to the point that we venture out into the cosmos. We are never going to find low-level life forms exploring space; only intelligent species can make that leap.
I hate that he says that aliens may be so smart that they would not be interested in us; comparing us to insects as if we would not care about insects. OF course they would be interested, because we are part of the universe. Just on this earth, we DO find insects interesting. People by their kids ant farms and sea monkeys. They catch lighting bugs and look at butterflies. Then you actually have people that study insects because they are actually interesting. Peoples study insects, people study plants, people study rocks, people study, "primitive" cultures, people study ancient civilizations, ancient art, ancient writing, and it so interesting and important that all of these things are funded by universities and philanthropists. EVERYTHING in the universe is inherently interesting. And even a civilization 10 times our intelligence would be curious about us and find us interesting.
The point is they would be more interested in those closer to their level of intelligence and accomplishment than those who are as inferior as insects are to us.
Humans are interested in finding any kind of life. Granted, "intelligent" life equal or greater to our own is even more interesting, but if we found life on another planet, we would be interested and would want to study it. There may become a time far in the future where we are tired of finding microbes, and are only interested in intelligent life close to our own, but I think it is just as likely that aliens visiting would at least be interested enough to study us, if they are not already. We may not be intelligent enough to speak to them however. I thought the movie Arrival had an interesting depiction of an alien visit where humans and the aliens we're very different from each other, and the humans had difficulty trying to communicate with them.
Lol...lol. that's what my best friend told her daughter when she started driving. .....lol!...lol...too funny Degrasse. Much respect!!! And long and happy, healthy life!!!!!
In every video of Neil DeGrasse Tyson, people put down the interviewer. Frankly, I think it's impossible to interview Neil DeGrasse Tyson without coming off badly. And the reason is Neil DeGrasse Tyson. I like what he says but HOW he says it makes it difficult for anyone to talk with him in a calm, civilized way. He tends to get defensive very quickly, overbearing and yes, too freewheeling with the hands and the touching. When he's calm and composed, he's golden.
He is very enthusiastic about what he is talking about and that alone makes him and the subject matter exciting. The touching is human and endearing so it is not a real issue. When he is over enthusiastic he tends to interrupt but if you sit back and allow him to soar it is a great adventure.
I put on my glasses and look at the sliver of the moon , I’m seeing double , 2 moons and I don’t know why? My glassses r screwed? Or something that u r putting in me? Altertering my vision?♥️🦋🙏🏻
Nie smiac sie z prowadzacej...jej pytania i pozornie ukierunkowany tok myslenia ma na celu wymuszenie na Neilu odpowiedzi a wrecz rozwiazania problemu z czym Neil swietnie sobie radzi o czym Ona dobrze wie. Mistrzowski "wywiad" a w zasadzie rozkmina ku uciesze publicznosci 🙏🙏🙏
"Whatever it is, it's got to be easier to deal with than to ship 4 billion people to Mars." 1) Neil, you're making a straw man. No one I have ever heard has talked about shipping 4 billion people to Mars. More like 1000s and they have kids and most of the population is born on Mars. Don't make arguements like this, you are better than this. 2) "It" will probably be something nobody expects, so there is no way to prepare for it.
Neil may have exaggerated some, but a viable society base would indeed need to be at least into the thousands... if not hundreds x that. They would need to fan out over the planet, so as to avoid disease/disaster/resource depletion.
Hawkings was right and Neill is wrong. We need to leave our planet if we want to survive the death of our sun. Our sun will die and if we dont leave our planet then the human species will die too.
Speaking of evolving as a species... when will we get to the point where a discussion doesn't have to always devolve into someone being right and winning over someone who is wrong? BOTH of these brilliant men have offered greatly to this subject; its not a gameshow where only one can win. Mars is an obvious expansion step, but it has its limitations and drawbacks (ultimately it will suffer the same fate as Earth when our sun dies). The clear preference is for finding Earth-like planets that don't need massive reshaping, and that mean interstellar travel. Great leaps will have to be made in travel and communications for such colonies to remain close to Earth (rather than just scattered seeds cast out into the cosmos). Whats the point in expanding if we can't remain connected? Tyson raises valid questions. Variety of views offers different takes (ie. perspective) on things, and thats a good thing.
Well alien ship crashes can have multiple explanations: 1. Police alien ship chase, the policmean alien shooting down the villain alien; 2. Alien children or stupid alien hijacking a ship and trying Top Gun manuvers that go bad; 3. Alien sentences for villains to stear a ship without computer help, if U survive - Ur pardoned, etc.
The richest have no reason to leave Earth, since they 'own' it... Some of the 'rest of us' would go to Mars, since we would have little to lose. . When we manage to make Mars habitable, then some of the rich would come to 'remind' us that Mars is also theirs. # welcome
People are complaining about Jill talking? if you knew anything about her, Neil should be the one listening. This is one of the most respected astronomers in the world and the former director of SETI. All the same Neil never disappoints. What a great talk.
I got tired of Tyson interrupting Jill....especially when he'd place his hand on her forearm as if to say shut up, I'm speaking now. Thanks for posting though.
He does talk to her as if men are better then woman. Shut up I am a man you are a woman let me speak now manor. He is dismissive and a bit bigoted. Feels to me like he is a bit sexiest. I was a little bit annoyed by it having six sisters being raised by a strong Mother and Grandmother although my father and grandfather where around they worked alot so I seen strong woman roles and I am raising my daughters to be strong woman I love Neil and respect his work but would never let my daughters be spoken too this way if they are as well trained and s well educated as this woman and as on pare in there failed as a man a man should treat them as. Coleage not talk over them
I think when you had someone more intelligent a question you should shut up and let them answer then you can debate and discuss what they say if you had the answers you wouldn't have asked him in the first and yes baby he should have put his hand on her shoulder he probably would get cooties
you're really projecting eh? is this your first time seeing him? This is how he is. You have no comment on her apparent condescending tone, as if she is explaining physics to him, lecturing to him etc., she also repeatedly interrupted him. As for the touching, this is the first time I have seen him interviewed by a woman. He interacts with her exactly as he interacts with male interviewers. This is the closest I have seen him sit to an interviewer. So it lends itself to physical contact by both of them upon the other, as you may have observed if you were not biased towards only seeing him touching her. Is there any other way to interpret the touching rather than "shut up, I'm speaking?" Why not just listen to their talk and stop projecting onto them.
The concept of “uplift” or “uplifting “ of species in SiFi where a lesser species is genetically modified to bring the species more intelligence, is something to think about. From the standpoint that maybe in the future the human species will use its technology to uplift itself, giving ourselves more intelligence, and use that same technology to eliminate human traits we don’t like, such as emotional instability or behaviors we find less than useful in a technological world. Or Maybe we get visited by a species who has already been uplifted or uplifted itself and that species gives the human species an uplift.
You are correct about Mr. Tyson. His surprisingly limited, almost innocent views on the subject of A.I. have puzzled me for a long time now. What's with that?
If intelligent life exists in the Universe and they’re too far away to ever have any interaction with us, do they really exist? That’s similar to the tree falling in the forest.
Is there some biological reason the dinosaurs couldn't have evolved to become just as intelligent as we are, if they hadn't been killed off by the asteroid?
They evolved to survive mostly by sheer size and strength. They were over-specializing against one another. They were over-adapted for quick growth in lush, warm environments, which did not push for stability and resilience against rare but abrupt and serious changes. Also see my reply to HarpoSpoke above for some factors critical to human evolution. Not a specialist, just what I gathered about it all.
What’s frustrating about this discussion is you have very informed and intelligent people talking and no new ground is covered here. It’s a lot of rehashing of tried tropes that aren’t really moving the dialogue forward. I struggle with Neil’s pessimism. He makes so many standard assumptions that generates the pessimistic outcome.
That's how you drive the spark of discovery. Americans didn't go to the moon because it was all fun and games. If the space race was a relay race then the russians won every step of it until the end when the Americans managed to reach a random relay and declare that's the finish line. They didn't go to the moon out of curiosity or a thirst for knowledge but because of fear.
EVERYONE 4:10 she asks a question and watch how he grabs her and changes the subject really quick. as she is asking the question watch his facial expressions. then he changes the subject and grabs her. keep replaying 4:10-like 5:00 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
@10:20 Neil mentions that if we terraform a planet, it needs to be a planet where 'life isn't already trying to hang on'. To me that seems contradictory to terraforming since whatever possible exoplanet we choose to terraform will need to support life, it should already have signs of life to prove that it can sustain life. Otherwise we might as well try to terraform the moon. Right? If a planet can support life, it should already have life. Our goal should be not to extinguish that life while terraforming. Interesting thought: humans leaving earth to terraform another planet, turning that into another earth, and so on... that to me sounds like a virus invading cells. Are we a universal cancer? Same question for other alien life forms.
The moon's too small and doesn't exactly have a warm enough core. Its tectonic plates aren't active, doesn't rotate, and the atmosphere is very small. It wouldn't be an ideal place to terraform. Mars is better suited.
Agent Smith from The Matrix seems to think we are a virus. "I'd like to share a revelation that I've had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species and I realized that you're not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply and multiply until every natural resource is consumed and the only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You're a plague and we are the cure."
@@CapitalJ2 That's why he said stated many many times that if we, in the future, have the capability of terraforming another planet we can apply the same bioengineering "fixes" to earth and keep if going.
Man flies but not like a bird... man goes fast but not like a cheetah... man thinks but not like a computer... so I think machines will think but not like humans.
Very fantastic conversation & a true hidden gem. Even all these years later. Ages like a fine martian core sample. Now imagine the 1% difference chimp hypothesis, imagine that among all the chimps, there is one, saying to all the other chimps, be careful what you wish for by saying "maybe there are species where evolution has taken they're intelligence beyond where ours is, and so too will they're technology. Would Both Neil and the Chimp get along? Would we like anti gravity technology? and would the chimp like the ripest banana?
First very enlightening discourse, need more of this. It would seem to be a huge waste of real estate if we were the only intelligent life in the universe. Many of the arguments why another species would want to invade are irrelevant, water is plentiful, minerals are abundant. why would they want the hassle of overseeing an indigenous species to collect resources that an Interstellar species could collect freely with more advanced robotic technology. The most likely scenario is that 1st they don't use radio anymore, too slow. And they look at us like we look at insects. Of the intelligent species on this planet we are unable to communicate with any of them in a meaningful way. What chance do we have of communicating with a species we have nothing in common with.
I 100% disagree. Let’s do it so everyone doesn’t die is the perfect excuse because at the end of the day it’s the only way to make it happen. Call it apples or oranges or tiddlywinks for all I give a dam; let’s call it a Nike sneaker and “just do it”.
But Mars and humanity being a multiplanetary specie is not how Neil describes it.... its a natural and gradual process. Plus extinction events are not limited to asteroids and AI, how about a supermassive volcano (that actually happened in the past by the way) or a runaway greenhouse effect....
We have a minimal magnetic shield a slightly larger or having more iron or spin etc. would have a large advantage of developing and maintaining life. Probably 1/2 the life zone planets have been around longer than earth. The main problem of ever contacting life on other worlds would be the enormous number of light years between those worlds that have the right conditions to develop intelligent life. Simply, if you say life is 1 in a billion then you have just also said that there are a trillion planets with life, not even counting Tritan like moons that could also develop life.
I didn't get the "we should not go to mars or other planets thing" - think of the world a few thousands of years ago - people explored other continents just the way we might explore other planets and solar systems and just like the way we settled in other continents and countries, there will be other planets with some small engineering will be habitable for us and people will settle there, it's just human nature, that's all
"I don't wish, one way or another. I want to know...what is." The true mark of a scientist if I ever heard one.
This was a fun discussion. I think a lot of people are giving Jill hate because she spoke, but I think the presumption there is that her job is to only ask questions and then sit in awe of Neil. I'm happy she presented an alternate set of views. Also, I didn't hear too many new things on aliens from Neil. I've been hearing the Terraforming and the chimps arguments for years now. Overall though, lot of food for thought generally.
Sorc Erer Agreed, i'm happy she challenged his points of view and proposed new thought. That is science at a core isn't it? Haha. I do agree with the chimps and 1% DNA difference stuff getting old. Although this may be a new thought to others who don't follow people like Neil or Stephen.
I hear you. Yes, that is the core of science. Also, you're correct on the old arguments. I suspect Neil sees himself primarily as an educator who inspires an interest in science, and uses whatever arguments seem the most compelling and persuasive in his experience. There's probably enough newbies at any of these events, or watching online, that the repetition pays off in some sense.
but she's still kinda uptight. she removed his hand off her shoulder. i'm sure she saw it as a harassment
There are different levels of maturity here. She's frustrated for some reason that some explanations are not making sense in her brain, which is odd since she's a scientist but then again we are all human and we all perceive information differently(based on association and past experiences). Her non-verbal messages are so clear and obvious that she's uncomfortable accepting some new arguments and instead wants to stay in her comfort zone of what she knows. This is completely acceptable for anyone, just, if you do manifest these emotions so visibly , don't go and interview someone like Neil. Either be a professional, objective, interviewer or just don't do it. No offence to her in any way though. She had a brilliant career and a great role model in the field.
@@msaintpc Aren't you the most righteous tolerant and non judgemental person ever...
Jill Tarter was one of the better interviewers because she is a scientist as well.
None of their discussion was based on Science. Speculating on the behavior of other life forms.
Duh. It’s because there can be no science on something that we haven’t found proof of yet
Dr Tyson matches his brilliance with a great sense of humor, thus making it all so interesting.... This is exactly what all really good teachers bring to their students...causing us to realize where most of the problems in our schools and class rooms lie....but certainly not all.
Two intelligent people with different opinions. Love it. Stimulating debate! Only wish they'd go into more depth...
No need to....just see ‘To the Stars Academy’....
I like how she challenged him throughout the conversation to keep bias off the table
*Jill Tarter is NOT an "interviewer." This is a dialogue between equals. She's the former head of SETI and one of the most respected astronomers in the world. Jodie Foster's character in the movie CONTACT was based on Jill Tarter.*
Thanks
Interviewers can engage in conversation with the subject of an interview and can also hold inferior, equal or superior perceived status without predudice. In this video Jill Tarter metaphorically holds the gavel and can be sighted as the 'interviewer' without any actual or perceived detriment to her status and achievement. The only way that your comment could stand up is if the term 'interviewer' is seen as an inferior rank.... which of course is simply nonsense . It is simply a role played in an interaction such as an interview.
It reminded me of a conversation with my mother in law.
Stop the press! Jill Tarter is interviewing NDT..... Jeezzzz
No she was not, it was Lisa Randall that Jodie Foster played in Contact. Get your facts right.
I agree with Neil DeGrasse Tyson on the issue of protecting ourselves from meteor impacts. After all, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
Yes but he didnt see the big picture. We need to leave the earth for survival of the species. We should go outside the solar system and live on huge spaceships. Terraforming Mars isnt good emough when our sun dies.
@@remcov2130 Why are you making assumptions and drawing guidelines for what should happen in several billion years, when it took us less than 2 centuries to go from horse-carts and oil lamps to LHC and comet-landings...
@@azka1912 Because every scientist knows that our sun will die, it doesn't matter what we have done the last 2 centuries or what we will do the next billion years if we don't leave this planet we will extinct.
@@remcov2130 What we did in the last 2 centuries, with a bit of luck and common sense, will eventually get us off the planet. But not for reasons of the sun dying any time soon.
If we get extinct, it is far more probably due to our own errors and lack of judgement, than to cosmic phenomena. It's a simple matter of scale.
Fantastic discussion, wish it was longer. First time I’ve seen anyone challenge Neil - respect to Jill! Always love hearing NDT talk!
Not only are they growing up with technology and accepting science but even more secular and open minded. I have faith in them
More open minded?? That is a stretch. They invented Cancel Culture and the banning of free speech on Campuses. The thought of a free speech Twitter horrifies them LOL
Jill Tarter is not an 'interviewer', she's a scientist.
I've been interviewed by doctors, pharmacists, teachers and a few others. While still maintaining their profession, they *were* interviewers, interviewing me.
Chris S ok...
Astrid 2 min in, i get the feeling shes kinda bitchy. Like she tryes to dominant de grasse.
So? Do you have to be an ignorant AH to be an interviewer? I do not get your point, may be I should be an interviewer!!
So many pathetic creeps inside these bully actions and attitudes ! They must have very empty lives. Nobody liking or respecting them because they never act worthy of it !
He's such a handsy and joyful kind of person, always stopping and placing a hand on the co-star when he gets excited and has a brainblast I love it 😂😂
You can tell that they are equal minds, she brings up great points that really makes him stop and think
Yes, Jill Tarter is not just an interviewer. She is an acclaimed astrophysicist, Director of SETI, and the inventor of the concept of "Brown Dwarf" stars.
Tarter originated the name, but not the concept of brown dwarf stars.
Jeff, no she didn't.
For a "smart person" she doesnt read an audience or subtext well at all...
I think she's thinking, "touchy feely, touchy feely"
Damn, I don't know why Neil Degrasse Tyson hasn't won the Nobel Prize as yet.
It's amazing to think that ETs 65/66 million light years away might now be observing a planet orbiting a yellow dwarf star being hit by an asteroid, and from a spectral analysis of the collision, detect signs of life.
What an amazingly positive way to finish by complimenting the intelligence of our young people and invoking hope for our species in the future!
I think that before we start populating the rest of the universe we should learn how to take care of the one tiny spot we already have.
they are not mutually exclusive, they are absolutely interconnected. and we already know how to take care of it. Be vegan, grow hydroponically, use solar power, recycle everything manufactured, we just choose not to because its currently inconvenient. In actuality colonizing mars is going to require to normalize this behavior which may in fact raise better generations when it comes to our planet
boo how dare you .....!! are you saying i need to clean up my dogs poo poo before i plant the neighbors garden!?.... what are you implying....
Unfortunately you have half the world population who thinks God is taking them to heaven, nothing else is out there, whatever we do to this planet doesn't matter and whoever doesn't agree with them are demon possessed sinners. And they get to vote.
We go to the stars.
I love Neil. The brother dope 🔥🔥
lol sure he is a clown and worst kind the clown that laughs at his own jokes .
Sort of like you, right?
"If you cross the galaxy, at least land safely... otherwise we don't need to have a conversation"
Omg that was great :)
I dont agree with tyson's worm analogy. He says if we see a worm, are we going to stop and study it or see how intelligent it may be. He may be right about that here on planet earth,,but I believe we would be very interested if we found a worm on another planet.
Washademoak I totally agree, not to mention a worm cannot vocally communicate with us .he’s basing everything is off “his” assumption. What if there was another species out there that had very similar DNA and was not 1% more advanced but as advanced as us, yet had been around a lot longer to develop technology to travel the stars. In my opinion, that’s most likely how it’s going to go down ,if it ever does.
24:05 Don't sit next to an octopus if you don't like tentacles LOL ...
I have not seen Neil react to his interviewer this way since his mother did an interview with him. His mother is another old white lady with similar vibes.
It’s very kewl to see Neil go head to head with someone of equal stature 👍
cool
I so wish that I had him as my teacher, defiantly my life would have been a different story.
I defiantly agree ;-)
The story is still being written, start changing the script today.
Twins become different the moment they are born, through their experience of life because even if you kept them in the same place as much as possible, they are experiencing two different lives.
@ 19:30 reminds me of the Star Trek The Next Generation episode where the intelligent microbial life called the humans on the Enterprise who were unintentionally destroying their habitat "ugly bags of mostly water". Lol
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_Soil
This is why "Aliens and Cowboys" was such an interesting movie. The premise, at least. Granted it turned into a shoot-em-up action movie, but it removed the preconception that the aliens have to arrive in our time in order to create an acceptable story.
Aliens and Cowboys was a very pleasant surprise for me, considering all the crap that comes from hollywood & co.
But if you look at the actual time scales of the universe, Clarke's 2001 intro had a much more plausible shot at the topic.
That movie was fun
Interesting conversation ... but they really like each other 😂
"I'll jump all over yours"
Some anthropologists have visited various hunter-gatherer societies (there were a very small number of them decades ago. I don't know if any have survived until 2018) and were very careful to disturb them as little as possible. There was the movie _The God's Must Be Crazy_ about this. It IS possible for more tech people to visit less tech people and not have it be a disaster.
ChrisBrengel said
Good and very interesting conversation.
This guy always amazes
If human civilization has been around for the last 5000 years or so, that .00000125 % of the 4 billion years the earth has existed. That's a cosmic blink of an eye.
it's remarkable this guy wasn't canceled after the allegations came out.
That 1% theory Neil has is one of the scariest and interesting thoughts possible. I think about it a lot. We would be no match at all against an alien species that could make it over here.
Her candy crush notifications going off
Interesting stuff.
Great point by Neil about an alien species not being susceptible to our diseases. Most don't consider that one.
Neil failed to consider something about the dinosaurs that she brought up.
She pointed out that our intelligence (as defined by us) may have indeed been a result of us being hunter/hunted. If that were an inevitable result of that situation then the presence of dinosaurs may have *hastened* our rise in intelligence.
Let's be honest...even today we are physically inferior to a large number of other species on the planet....probably the majority would kick our asses in a fight. So our species has gotten around that problem pretty well due to intelligence.
"The dinosaurs" weren't really some monolithic species either. The asteroid event didn't kill them all....most went extinct on their own. So "times they were a-changing" either way.
Also at 18:55 he uses good logic in pointing out it is a mistake to superimpose our form of "intelligence" on the entire universe. But he had just previously superimposed the earth standard for "rare intelligence" on the entire universe. It's just as possible that there are places where the rise of intelligent species (by our standard) is much more common than on Earth.
He did that thing which some scientists do when discussing life in the universe....using Earth as a standard. ("Water is needed for life" "The planet must be a certain distance from the star") That's surprising because he has pointed out that mistake in others himself.
Good points.
But there are several critical conditions that pushed (or allowed) humans to evolve intelligence like they did. Some you already mentioned.
-- planetary environment where atmosphere has sufficient pressure, and is transparent to many short wavelengths (good news for the evolution of eyes)
-- a long prior "base" evolution caused by predator/prey competition, starting maybe in cambrian if not proterozoic.
-- inferiority to many stronger, faster, deadlier animals (both as early mammals, and later as primates), which brought up important social developments.
-- expanded versatility regarding the sources of food, which spared us from excessive physical specialisations seen in many other species.
-- the opposable thumb that evolved because of tree dwelling, but which turned into the fortuitous advantage of tool manipulation.
-- flexibility of posture, also evolved because of mixed tree/ground lifestyle, which eventually freed up half of all available members (that's HALF!!) so they could further "specialize" in general tool manipulation.
-- several odd changes in the head and neck area that allowed for development of speech and a greatly increased brain (happy cascading accidents? systematic gene editing by aliens? )
-- a pretty long period of time (the last 100'sKA to MA) without major global catastrophes, without any sort of extinction level events, at least long enough to allow for the accumulation of the latter advantages.
And I should add :
-- several instances of sheer luck where the human species managed not to blow itself up with nuclear fire. Yet.
I'd say intelligence does not often get a chance to reach even this point...
But the universe is large, and so is Time. I'd also say intelligence MUST have gotten many chances already to reach far, far beyond our point.
Only Neil DeGrasse could call everyone in the building unintelligent and get applause LOL.
The fact that someone gave anyone hate for speaking up. Questions an opinions are how advances are made. How answers are formed. They say the world is crazy but its people.
the question is are we ready for aliens
I think we crossed the line into being a noticible intelligent species when we split the atom.
Probably why these aliens keep an eye on america's nuclear silos & those of other nuclear countries. Aliens fear we might destroy ourselves.
@@Arseve119 Why would they care?
For every big bang there is a black hole
David Grush and Karl Nell. Going to blow their worlds apart. They’ve been here all along. 🛸👽
I do love NDT but he's often like a broken record and seldom do you hear different points of view when he's got the stage.
He likes to talk more than listen to the other(s)
Are we kinder and gentler today? In my culture, an ancient king is believed to have given a chariot to a plant, so a flowering creeper won't suffer and would be able to climb on it and about kingdoms where great justice prevailed. So, how are we kinder and gentler? According to whose norms?
It is belived in your culture that an anegdote once happened. In today world simillar anegdotes happen everyday.
@@krzysztofbandyk168 Not sure if the stories are anecdotal since contemporaries have written about it. The past may not have been as cruel as we assume it to be. Think about today, we live in luxury while more than 50 percent of the world is starving and people dying for want of food. The info is not even hidden from us, we see it everyday on TV, the Internet, etc. so, how are we kinder and gentler today
@@sroy9789 Anecdotal as in a single accurance not as in "that hasnt happened". The amount of war per capita in the world keeps decreasing ever since 1945 what we mean by kinder and gentler isnt that people were less nice but rather more rude. I.e. tribal warfare, the witch hunts, the crusades, dictatorial states etc. We arent denying that there was kindness before but rather argueing there is more of it today. And while i understand its easy to think the entire world is terrible when watching news i'd like to remind you that journalists dont run "local boy scout helps grandma across the street" or "local cat got a big gift from his owner" stories. Also poverty is decreasing across the world. Also water acces is improving across the world. Starvation is less and less prevelant. Is everything as great as it could be NO. Are most things better than they were YES.
@@krzysztofbandyk168 Not exactly! Overall human beings have become extremely selfish and money oriented. Yes, there are a few good people here and there but the overall culture is about I, me and myself. Look at the devastation in Syria and Iran. Water shortage is a recent phenomenon.
Very interesting talk by Dr. Tyson. By the way, I’m guessing that a more intelligent species would, hopefully, have evolved more compassion towards helpless creatures, like worms, and not just step on them.
I don't know about that .. we are the most evolved on earth,we don't really care about any other life unless it affects us .. and compassion is an emotion ..which I presume would be an exclusive trait of life on Earth
The point on the asteroid, where mammals were nearer to a niche form of life as compared to dinosaurs at the period, and that as a freak accident really of the asteroid wiping them out, had given us greater foothold or leeway which we we would not of had otherwise. It begs a question of what other forms of life of the period would've also had their fate railroaded. That is one of the most interesting arguments I've heard, and plays on time scales.. I'm not sure I've the chance of getting my mind around lol..
One could expand upon your basic premise to imagine that learning how to survive inevitable crises (like meteors/resource depletion/solar burnout) is merely one more litmus test for continuing to expand intelligence to the point that we venture out into the cosmos. We are never going to find low-level life forms exploring space; only intelligent species can make that leap.
I hate that he says that aliens may be so smart that they would not be interested in us; comparing us to insects as if we would not care about insects. OF course they would be interested, because we are part of the universe. Just on this earth, we DO find insects interesting. People by their kids ant farms and sea monkeys. They catch lighting bugs and look at butterflies. Then you actually have people that study insects because they are actually interesting. Peoples study insects, people study plants, people study rocks, people study, "primitive" cultures, people study ancient civilizations, ancient art, ancient writing, and it so interesting and important that all of these things are funded by universities and philanthropists. EVERYTHING in the universe is inherently interesting. And even a civilization 10 times our intelligence would be curious about us and find us interesting.
The point is they would be more interested in those closer to their level of intelligence and accomplishment than those who are as inferior as insects are to us.
yeah but my point is that insects are still interesting.
I'm so Alien, I sit in the TV, and watch the couch.
Humans are interested in finding any kind of life. Granted, "intelligent" life equal or greater to our own is even more interesting, but if we found life on another planet, we would be interested and would want to study it. There may become a time far in the future where we are tired of finding microbes, and are only interested in intelligent life close to our own, but I think it is just as likely that aliens visiting would at least be interested enough to study us, if they are not already. We may not be intelligent enough to speak to them however.
I thought the movie Arrival had an interesting depiction of an alien visit where humans and the aliens we're very different from each other, and the humans had difficulty trying to communicate with them.
You point makes many assumptions with no proof.
Lol...lol. that's what my best friend told her daughter when she started driving. .....lol!...lol...too funny Degrasse. Much respect!!! And long and happy, healthy life!!!!!
She said step on it lol. Thats a mentality.
This generation = Designs ICBMs that can wipe cities off the map.
Next generation = Designs systems that can wipe asteroids off the Sol system.
17:17 "Major extinction events have happened multiple times. We are forcing one now ourselves"
They might be a bit hungry. Just as mariners would leave animals on islands along sailing routes. Earth might be a resupply planet.
My vision is being split by 6 inches when I look up!♥️🙏🏻🦋
In every video of Neil DeGrasse Tyson, people put down the interviewer. Frankly, I think it's impossible to interview Neil DeGrasse Tyson without coming off badly. And the reason is Neil DeGrasse Tyson. I like what he says but HOW he says it makes it difficult for anyone to talk with him in a calm, civilized way. He tends to get defensive very quickly, overbearing and yes, too freewheeling with the hands and the touching. When he's calm and composed, he's golden.
I agree i noticed the touching and i said he needs to tone down a bit but ik he is not perfect and doesn't mean it but its honestly how he feel.
He is very enthusiastic about what he is talking about and that alone makes him and the subject matter exciting. The touching is human and endearing so it is not a real issue. When he is over enthusiastic he tends to interrupt but if you sit back and allow him to soar it is a great adventure.
Neil needs to do standup.
"...there's no sign of intelligent life..." "isn't that thing kinda pretty?, whats it called again, a Human?" "..such a strange looking thing."
I put on my glasses and look at the sliver of the moon , I’m seeing double , 2 moons and I don’t know why? My glassses r screwed? Or something that u r putting in me? Altertering my vision?♥️🦋🙏🏻
What NDT does here, which is so often ignored, is the time window.
Sometimes Neil dGT sounds like T-Rex from Toy Story.
Well, here is an idea: Can dark matter form planets? Stars? Can dark matter form life?
No, because dark matter doesn't collide with our regular matter or itself.
Nie smiac sie z prowadzacej...jej pytania i pozornie ukierunkowany tok myslenia ma na celu wymuszenie na Neilu odpowiedzi a wrecz rozwiazania problemu z czym Neil swietnie sobie radzi o czym Ona dobrze wie. Mistrzowski "wywiad" a w zasadzie rozkmina ku uciesze publicznosci 🙏🙏🙏
"Whatever it is, it's got to be easier to deal with than to ship 4 billion people to Mars."
1) Neil, you're making a straw man. No one I have ever heard has talked about shipping 4 billion people to Mars. More like 1000s and they have kids and most of the population is born on Mars. Don't make arguements like this, you are better than this.
2) "It" will probably be something nobody expects, so there is no way to prepare for it.
Neil may have exaggerated some, but a viable society base would indeed need to be at least into the thousands... if not hundreds x that. They would need to fan out over the planet, so as to avoid disease/disaster/resource depletion.
Hawkings was right and Neill is wrong. We need to leave our planet if we want to survive the death of our sun. Our sun will die and if we dont leave our planet then the human species will die too.
ChrisBrengel is disappointing some people are even entertaining your rebuttal
Speaking of evolving as a species... when will we get to the point where a discussion doesn't have to always devolve into someone being right and winning over someone who is wrong? BOTH of these brilliant men have offered greatly to this subject; its not a gameshow where only one can win. Mars is an obvious expansion step, but it has its limitations and drawbacks (ultimately it will suffer the same fate as Earth when our sun dies). The clear preference is for finding Earth-like planets that don't need massive reshaping, and that mean interstellar travel. Great leaps will have to be made in travel and communications for such colonies to remain close to Earth (rather than just scattered seeds cast out into the cosmos). Whats the point in expanding if we can't remain connected? Tyson raises valid questions. Variety of views offers different takes (ie. perspective) on things, and thats a good thing.
You are basically discussing about nothing meaningful. And here I am adding to this thoughtless comment more power. ✌️
Well alien ship crashes can have multiple explanations: 1. Police alien ship chase, the policmean alien shooting down the villain alien; 2. Alien children or stupid alien hijacking a ship and trying Top Gun manuvers that go bad; 3. Alien sentences for villains to stear a ship without computer help, if U survive - Ur pardoned, etc.
Only the elite richest would be going to mars, the rest of us bye bye !
The richest have no reason to leave Earth, since they 'own' it...
Some of the 'rest of us' would go to Mars, since we would have little to lose.
.
When we manage to make Mars habitable, then some of the rich would come to 'remind' us that Mars is also theirs.
# welcome
Thanks for this. A real treat.
People are complaining about Jill talking? if you knew anything about her, Neil should be the one listening. This is one of the most respected astronomers in the world and the former director of SETI. All the same Neil never disappoints. What a great talk.
Not to mention she had a movie character based on her.
I got tired of Tyson interrupting Jill....especially when he'd place his hand on her forearm as if to say shut up, I'm speaking now. Thanks for posting though.
He does talk to her as if men are better then woman. Shut up I am a man you are a woman let me speak now manor. He is dismissive and a bit bigoted. Feels to me like he is a bit sexiest. I was a little bit annoyed by it having six sisters being raised by a strong Mother and Grandmother although my father and grandfather where around they worked alot so I seen strong woman roles and I am raising my daughters to be strong woman I love Neil and respect his work but would never let my daughters be spoken too this way if they are as well trained and s well educated as this woman and as on pare in there failed as a man a man should treat them as. Coleage not talk over them
I think when you had someone more intelligent a question you should shut up and let them answer then you can debate and discuss what they say if you had the answers you wouldn't have asked him in the first and yes baby he should have put his hand on her shoulder he probably would get cooties
you're really projecting eh? is this your first time seeing him? This is how he is. You have no comment on her apparent condescending tone, as if she is explaining physics to him, lecturing to him etc., she also repeatedly interrupted him. As for the touching, this is the first time I have seen him interviewed by a woman. He interacts with her exactly as he interacts with male interviewers. This is the closest I have seen him sit to an interviewer. So it lends itself to physical contact by both of them upon the other, as you may have observed if you were not biased towards only seeing him touching her. Is there any other way to interpret the touching rather than "shut up, I'm speaking?" Why not just listen to their talk and stop projecting onto them.
The concept of “uplift” or “uplifting “ of species in SiFi where a lesser species is genetically modified to bring the species more intelligence, is something to think about.
From the standpoint that maybe in the future the human species will use its technology to uplift itself, giving ourselves more intelligence, and use that same technology to eliminate human traits we don’t like, such as emotional instability or behaviors we find less than useful in a technological world.
Or
Maybe we get visited by a species who has already been uplifted or uplifted itself and that species gives the human species an uplift.
i don't agree with neil about A.I. He's not thinking it thoroughly
True. The AI is not a problem in itself. The problem is with the programmers and with the users. Or should I say, abusers.
You did not say anything....
You are correct about Mr. Tyson. His surprisingly limited, almost innocent views on the subject of A.I. have puzzled me for a long time now. What's with that?
If intelligent life exists in the Universe and they’re too far away to ever have any interaction with us, do they really exist? That’s similar to the tree falling in the forest.
There's no negotiation. We found no life. It's ours
as i listen to this today with COVID flying around, NdGT is right! we humans were very lucky to have had the window to exist ......until now.......
My only issue is that with such prestigious guests these are the best chairs they could provide. Way too short for My Tyson. Cheap looking..
Is there some biological reason the dinosaurs couldn't have evolved to become just as intelligent as we are, if they hadn't been killed off by the asteroid?
They evolved to survive mostly by sheer size and strength. They were over-specializing against one another. They were over-adapted for quick growth in lush, warm environments, which did not push for stability and resilience against rare but abrupt and serious changes.
Also see my reply to HarpoSpoke above for some factors critical to human evolution.
Not a specialist, just what I gathered about it all.
But machines were made by humans.
What’s frustrating about this discussion is you have very informed and intelligent people talking and no new ground is covered here. It’s a lot of rehashing of tried tropes that aren’t really moving the dialogue forward. I struggle with Neil’s pessimism. He makes so many standard assumptions that generates the pessimistic outcome.
That's how you drive the spark of discovery.
Americans didn't go to the moon because it was all fun and games.
If the space race was a relay race then the russians won every step of it until the end when the Americans managed to reach a random relay and declare that's the finish line.
They didn't go to the moon out of curiosity or a thirst for knowledge but because of fear.
okay.. I want that sticker!
I'm just thinking that Neil and Jill have different interpersonal interaction styles.....
Clever guy...and girl...
EVERYONE 4:10 she asks a question and watch how he grabs her and changes the subject really quick. as she is asking the question watch his facial expressions. then he changes the subject and grabs her. keep replaying 4:10-like 5:00 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
You watch too much pro wrestling; this isn't the Octagon.
@10:20 Neil mentions that if we terraform a planet, it needs to be a planet where 'life isn't already trying to hang on'. To me that seems contradictory to terraforming since whatever possible exoplanet we choose to terraform will need to support life, it should already have signs of life to prove that it can sustain life. Otherwise we might as well try to terraform the moon. Right? If a planet can support life, it should already have life. Our goal should be not to extinguish that life while terraforming. Interesting thought: humans leaving earth to terraform another planet, turning that into another earth, and so on... that to me sounds like a virus invading cells. Are we a universal cancer? Same question for other alien life forms.
Luthien Seldomane That life may have bacteria and stuff that could kill us
The moon's too small and doesn't exactly have a warm enough core. Its tectonic plates aren't active, doesn't rotate, and the atmosphere is very small. It wouldn't be an ideal place to terraform. Mars is better suited.
Agent Smith from The Matrix seems to think we are a virus.
"I'd like to share a revelation that I've had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species and I realized that you're not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply and multiply until every natural resource is consumed and the only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet. You're a plague and we are the cure."
@@CapitalJ2 That's why he said stated many many times that if we, in the future, have the capability of terraforming another planet we can apply the same bioengineering "fixes" to earth and keep if going.
Next time sit further away from him. He uses touching as a way to control the debate.
Gopher State woow wtf
...the
relative
DEITY.
.👽👽👁️🕳️😵👿🌚
Man flies but not like a bird... man goes fast but not like a cheetah... man thinks but not like a computer... so I think machines will think but not like humans.
You don't know that they're that much smarter
24:04 the best part hahahahhahaha
Very fantastic conversation & a true hidden gem. Even all these years later. Ages like a fine martian core sample. Now imagine the 1% difference chimp hypothesis, imagine that among all the chimps, there is one, saying to all the other chimps, be careful what you wish for by saying "maybe there are species where evolution has taken they're intelligence beyond where ours is, and so too will they're technology. Would Both Neil and the Chimp get along? Would we like anti gravity technology? and would the chimp like the ripest banana?
First very enlightening discourse, need more of this. It would seem to be a huge waste of real estate if we were the only intelligent life in the universe. Many of the arguments why another species would want to invade are irrelevant, water is plentiful, minerals are abundant. why would they want the hassle of overseeing an indigenous species to collect resources that an Interstellar species could collect freely with more advanced robotic technology. The most likely scenario is that 1st they don't use radio anymore, too slow. And they look at us like we look at insects. Of the intelligent species on this planet we are unable to communicate with any of them in a meaningful way. What chance do we have of communicating with a species we have nothing in common with.
I 100% disagree. Let’s do it so everyone doesn’t die is the perfect excuse because at the end of the day it’s the only way to make it happen. Call it apples or oranges or tiddlywinks for all I give a dam; let’s call it a Nike sneaker and “just do it”.
The argument against multiplanet species was so childish
The search for intelligent life within the vacuum between Neil DumBasse Tyson's ears continues...
I'm still hoping to find intelligent life on Earth.
But Mars and humanity being a multiplanetary specie is not how Neil describes it.... its a natural and gradual process. Plus extinction events are not limited to asteroids and AI, how about a supermassive volcano (that actually happened in the past by the way) or a runaway greenhouse effect....
We have a minimal magnetic shield a slightly larger or having more iron or spin etc. would have a large advantage of developing and maintaining life. Probably 1/2 the life zone planets have been around longer than earth. The main problem of ever contacting life on other worlds would be the enormous number of light years between those worlds that have the right conditions to develop intelligent life. Simply, if you say life is 1 in a billion then you have just also said that there are a trillion planets with life, not even counting Tritan like moons that could also develop life.
Life as we know it*
If bacteria can survive eating hot soup on the bottom of the ocean then there's a fuck ton more ways for life to pop up
Or better known as double vision ❤
No Ice Fishing On Europa!
I didn't get the "we should not go to mars or other planets thing" - think of the world a few thousands of years ago - people explored other continents just the way we might explore other planets and solar systems and just like the way we settled in other continents and countries, there will be other planets with some small engineering will be habitable for us and people will settle there, it's just human nature, that's all
That makes me sick ...we are forcing extinction now .. damn