Vatican Astronomer Comments On Extraterrestrials 1312
An anonymous reader writes "There's an Astrobiology.net interview up with a Vatican astronomer, Guy Consolmagno, who also curates one of the world's largest meteorite collections. On the possibility of a non-terrestrial lifeform, he says initially 'I don't know', followed by three scenarios. First, he argues: 'We find an intelligent civilization and there's no way in creation we can communicate with them because they're so alien to us. We can't talk to dolphins now. In which case, we'll never know.' Secondly, he suggests: 'We find the intelligent civilization. We can communicate.' As agents of free-will, the aliens are self-aware of good and evil, thus convertible to some terrestrial religion. Thirdly: 'We find a dozen civilizations out there, and a bunch of Jehovah's witnesses go up and convert them all.' The question of whether an alien civilization might convert Earth to their religion, or become a religion unto themselves, is left unconsidered. This compares to the many reasons people give for hosting a SETI@home client, including that ET contact would unite humanity, challenge religion, or all of the above."
Re:mod as flamebait (Score:3, Informative)
FYI, "flamebait" isn't a synonym for "I disagree".
While we're on the subject... (Score:5, Informative)
See the video [thesandiegochannel.com]. Check out Wired [wired.com].
The video looks pretty convincing, and according to AP and Reuters, the Mexican military is standing behind the story.
The detailed information is at Rense [rense.com].
The interesting thing is that the Mexican plane was a drug interdiction aircraft with advanced radar and forward-looking infrared. It was designed precisely for the task of finding, intercepting and identifying unidentified aircraft, and it sounds like the data was handled in a way that would meet legal evidentiary standards (for obvious reasons: it was designed to convict drug smugglers).
Maybe the Vatican missed a fourth option: they're already here.
Whoa whoa whoa! (Score:5, Informative)
He doesn't even IMPLY that.
What he SAYS is that if we can communicate intelligently with the aliens the question becomes, are religious concepts of right and wrong UNIVERSAL, and if so would their concepts match ours? He hopes so.
Later on, he states: "The other thing that happens is that each side learns from the other, inevitably. And the sense of acculturation continually goes on. It went on when the missionaries from Italy showed up in Ireland. Irish sensibilities became part of the Christian milieu. German sensibilities. Russian sensibilities. Every culture has added something to the mix, and brought something out of the mix. It's inevitable. You can't pretend that it's a one-way street. Even if you wanted it to be a one-way street, it wouldn't be."
He also answered the reverse question (Aliens converting us):
"We can't even convert ourselves"
Some Christian writers who pondered ET life (Score:5, Informative)
There is, of course, an existing tradition of Christian thought on extraterrestrial life.
C.S. Lewis' Cosmic Trilogy is probably the best known example: Out of the Silent Planet and Perelandra took H.G. Wells as its point of departure and speculated upon other world in which the corruption and redemption of humanity and nature had followed different courses. (I never got far into Vol. 3, so I can't recommend it.) Probably both are in a library near you.
Going back a little farther, the poetry of the Catholic writer Alice Meynell (1847-1922) touched on a few of these themes, e.g. in 'Christ in the Universe':
Meynell's works are available online.
Re:Or how about (Score:5, Informative)
This material's been done.
Since the calendars have been fucked around by the Conspiracy, 1998 hasn't arrived yet and the space critters from Planet X are yet to arrive (or "Bob" fucked up and transcribed 8991 as 1998, the year of the Rupture). However, once they do, they're only concern is to take this planet as the valuable resource it really is. They rescue all the Subgenii and whisk them off the planet to have sex with space goddesses with three pussies and fifteen tits, and destroy all the Pinks infesting
Earth.
Anyway, that's what it says in The Book of the Subgenius. You decide.
Fuck 'em if they can't take a joke.
Re:Some speculation on alien religion (Score:4, Informative)
(the Aiwa (sp?) in Japan were mostly replaced by the Japanese, the Hopi were replaced by Christians. Muslims spread over N. Africa replacing whatever proto-voodo gods were native there (I don't know) etc.)
1. The Ainu.
2. There are still Hopi. Also, a lot of Native Americans were converted to Christianity. A LOT. Nowhere near as many as were wiped out by disease (often the disease wave moved slightly ahead of the colonization wave, carried by explorers and native American travelers who had contact with colonizers), or killed in conflict with colonizers (or internecine conflicts aggravated by the presence of colonizers), and not all of them, but enough to make it an interesting case study for first contact situations.
3. In most areas, Islam displaced modern religions, not "proto-Voodoo". North Africa was basically Christian, with some outlying "pagan" areas (what we would call polytheists): for instance, keep in mind that St. Augustine lived in Carthage in what today is Tunisia. The city of Cyrene in what is today Libya was an important Greek city with a Christian population. The Egyptians were mostly Christians - today we call the "indigenous" Egyptians Copts (Boutros-Boutros Ghali, for instance), and they are Christians. There were various other traditional religions in trans-Saharan Africa (e.g., in what is now Nigeria) that might have contributed to the cultural background of Santeria, but they weren't as simple as many outside observers would imagine.
In Arabia (don't call it Saudi Arabia until the 20th century) and Mesopotamia (modern Iraq), you've got Christians and Zoroastrians as well as "pagans," in Bactria (Afghanistan) you've got Buddhists, in India you have mostly Hindus with some Buddhists, in Persia you have mostly Zoroastrians, and in Russia (before the Horde) you have various kinds of animists. In China you have Confucianists, Taoists, Buddhists, Nestorian Christians, and a bunch of other religious communities before Islam is introduced (I imagine it reached China through "evangelism" before the Khanate); only the first three had significant effects after the Yuan. (Indeed, I think the Yuan basically "converted" - this is not as meaningful a term outside Western religions as it is within - to Confucianism, but I'm no expert on Chinese history.
I think the concept of a nation being tied to a territory may be original and tribal, but in modern times it is an outgrowth of "modern" European nation-state theory, and is already under assault. Yes, I think that interplanetary (and if possible interstellar) colonization will have dramatic effects on nationality and religion, and these are interesting speculations; but keep in mind that ethnicity and religion (which often go hand in hand) are rather inertial concepts, and are quite capable of surviving even as great a shock as extraterrestrial contact or interstellar diaspora.
The UFO Thing (Score:4, Informative)
Here's an easy answer: Yes! They're Unidentified! They appear to be flying! They're objects!
I'm pretty sure that serves all the relevant criteria, right there.
Re:It will make no difference, (Score:1, Informative)
> You are full of shit
Sounds pretty much like flaming to me
Sincerely
Re:Ninnle has you ! (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Or how about (Score:1, Informative)
I don't think we have to search far to find aliens.
Re:Or how about (Score:4, Informative)
Most people here, these days, probably don't even remember the squabble [slashdot.org] over the scientology post.
Thing is, however, the reader posted a chunk of copyrighted text (who the hell copyrights their own religion?) and the scientologists used the DMCA to cut it down.
You, on the other hand, merely pointed out that the scientologists are, in yours, and mine, and pretty much all sane people's opinions, a bunch of babbling loons.
If anyone from the church of scientology would like to contact me and try to argue against my opinion, my e-mail address is available with this post (a package deal!). Feel free. I need a good laugh.
Re:Or how about (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Or how about (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Or how about (Score:3, Informative)
ah...you picked two out of three... omnipotent, omnibenevolent, and omniscient.
very wise
Re:Or how about (Score:2, Informative)
Uh, no. Those references refer to limits on people's activity, not God's. The God of the Bible is always portrayed as being unlimited in power. The episodes in book of Judges do show that God limits his intervention in human affairs, but iron chariots do not pose a problem (Judges 4:13-15).
You are incorrect (Score:4, Informative)
You're wrong. Well, you're right if you read Paul and pretend that Jesus didn't say anything. Jesus and Paul don't agree on many things. Salvation is probably the biggest one. Consider this scripture:
31"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. 32All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.
34"Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.'
37"Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?'
40"The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'
41"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.'
44"They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?'
45"He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'
46"Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."
Mat 25:31-46.
Here Jesus gathers up everyone in the world ("all the nations") and judges them. What is the criteria for judgement? Faith? Abosolutely not! Jesus doesn't even mention faith! The criteria is works and works alone.
That's it. Nothing else to it. It's in black and white in the Bible. You'd have to actually read it to know that, though.
Nice little dig. Unfortunately for you, I *do* read the Bible and know exactly how flawed it is and can detail and debate those flaws with any Christian on the planet. It is the work of humans, not the perfect work of a divine being.
There's no difficult list of rules, either.
Again, wrong. In order to get into heaven, you must do the following:
If you do those things, you go to heaven. Otherwise, you roast in hell. If you disagree with this, then you are disagreeing with Jesus. Your likely response is to argue, "That's what Jesus said, but that's not what he meant." Or perhaps you'll try, "You're taking things out of context." Maybe, if you're desparate, you'll try the "natural man" argument.
The majority of the New Testament is philosophical explanation of Jesus' words, and guidelines for behavior given by the early apostles, not the direct handing down of a list of rules by God (like the Ten Commandments).
Incorrect again. The majority of the New Testament is the creation of the "Christian" doctrine by
Re:Some Christian writers who pondered ET life (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Is it that likely? (Score:3, Informative)
Christian theology (specifically the concept of the Incarnation) really wasn't designed to cope with a planet with separated hemispheres, let alone planetary systems separated by trillions of miles.
Read the article. The writer specifically says that this exact issue (the possibility that God created other worlds) was addressed by the Catholic church in the 13th century. They decided that, theologically, the possibility could not be ruled out.
Peace be with you,
-jimbo
Speaking at Cranbrook This Weekend (Score:3, Informative)
For those of you in SE Michigan, Br. Guy is going to be speaking at the Cranbrook Institute of Science [cranbrook.edu] this weekend. He's a fascinating public speaker and all-around great guy.
Re:Or how about (Score:5, Informative)
Reading past the passage you mentioned would have cleared things up a little:
This passage, when considered alongside the many other verses that say salvation is achieved through faith and not deeds, tells us that 'good works' 'living the good life' (read James 2 1-12, previous to the verse you posted) is intertwined with faith (see verse 22 above).
Re:More Christian musings! (Score:5, Informative)
What ignorant bullshit. Have you ever been to Spain? Have you ever seen the al-Hambra [greatbuildings.com]? The fact is that during the 7th through 10th Centuries, while Europe was little more than a stinking barabaric backwater, Islamic civization was very highly developed. They even had soap [gabarin.com]. During the Crusades, many Christian lords would try to get hold of Saracen physicians, because everyone knew that their medical methods were far superior to the European ones (which tended to consist of bleeding and wrapping the wound in dung).
It was Arab scholars who preserved much of the ancient Greek litterature. Without them we would have none of it. As for your statement about the library of Alexandria, you should read this [ehistory.com].
In addition, who do you think invented algebra? (a hint: it should be al-gebra). Most of the stars visble to the naked eye have Arabic names (Aldebaran, Almitak, Algol, Betelgeuse, Achernar etc etc.), meaning that they had highly developed (for the time) mathematics and astronomy.
I understand you're pissed about terrorism; who wouldn't be? But don't make the mistake of letting current events color your view of the past. It's bad enough the other way around.
Re:While we're on the subject... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:More Christian musings! (Score:2, Informative)
Although it's true that algebra gets its name from al-Jabr, and it's also true that some of the great Arab mathematicians (including al-Khwarizmi) codified many algebraic structures and practices that are now common (al-Khwarizmi essentially worked out the "Completing the Square" method of solving quadratic equations), it's a bit of a stretch to attribute everything to the Arabs.
The Chinese were one of the first pioneers in mathematics to lay down many of the standard practices we use in algebra today. They were one of the first major groups to adopt and accept negative numbers, drawing them in red and putting slashes through the last digits to indicate negative quantities (when it took Leonardo de Pisa [Fibonacci] a thousand years later to look at negative numbers in financial problems as losses - he still did not accept negative roots of quadratics). The Nine Chapters on the Mathematical Art, the earliest known work of Chinese mathematicians, dates from around 200BC, and illustrates 246 practical math problems on surveying, conversions, etc. You could argue that these basic math methods of solving equations is a good basis for algebra.
Not to mention that the Babylonians, around 2000BC, began the first major study and work of mathematics in the world. They used a fairly sophisticated positional Base 60 system, showed knowledge of the quadratic formula (the first known civilization to do so), and even looked at (though couldn't derive a solution to) cubic equations as well.
Lastly, one very common misconception: although we refer to our numeral system as the Arabic Numeral system, the actual "figures" we use to draw the numbers 1, 2, 3, etc, were brought to the Western world from India, not from the Arabian peninsula. Many attribute the adoption of the Indian Numeral system to al-Khwarizmi, but it may have been earlier than that. Regardless, they were the ones to give us that number system (including the use of 0 to hold a space in positional number systems), not the Arabs.
I don't mean to belittle the great works done by early Arabian mathematicians - they easily were one of the most influential and driving forces in bringing the mathematical knowledge of the Far East to the Western world, especially when the "dark ages" of mathematical learning dawned when the Greek & Alexandrian schools of learning faded away. They were the greatest preservers of the ancient Greek writings, and quite often the only copies we have today of some of the Greek works of Euclid, Thales, Pythagoras, and others is an English translation of a Latin translation of an Arabic translation of the original Greek. Still, some of the basic practices of algebraic solving existed quite before the great Arabic mathematicians -- they tend to get the "credit" of inventing algebra because they were the main ones to gather, collect, comment, and extend most of that early work.
Oh, and as to the contention that the Arabs were highly developed in astronomy since most of the stars visible to the naked eye have Arabic names, that is a bit misleading. Consider what I mentioned about the "Arabic Numeral" system. Just because something is named in a way doesn't indicate anything about its creators. Many now believe that Pythagoras did not "invent" the Pythagorean Theorem. It is now commonly attributed to an anonymous student of the Pythagorean School of Learning, not to mention how the Babylonians a thousand years before had cuneiform tablets with the same triangle work done on them. It was actually the great Greek astronomer Hipparchus who catalogued thousands of stars and their positions in the 2nd century BC, and whom Ptolemy recorded much of the work. Once again, we owe a great debt to the great Arabic astronomers for preserving and expanding on those earlier works of the Greeks and others - but reali
The problem of the 'plurality of worlds' (Score:4, Informative)
I was gratified to receive also several letters from theologians who knew the present Church position on the problem of the 'plurality of worlds', as most of my correspondents obviously did not
I will quote Mr Gerald Heard, who has summarized the position best of all:
If there are many planets inhabited by sentient creatures, as most astronomers (including Jesuits) now suspect, then each one of such planets (solar or non-solar) must fall into one of three categories:
(a) Inhabited by sentient creatures, but without souls; so to be treated with compassion but extra-evangelically.
(b) Inhabited by sentient creatures with fallen souls, through an original but not inevitable ancetral sin; so to be evangelized with urgent missionary charity.
(c) Inhabited by sentient soul-endowed creatures that have not fallen, who therefore
(1) inhabit an unfallen, sinless paradisal world;
(2) who therefore we must contact not to propagandize, but in order that we may learn from them the conditions (about which we can only speculate) of creatures living in perpetual grace, endowed with all the virtues in perfection, and both immortal and in complete happiness for always possessed of and with the knowledge of God.
Of course, the aliens that are the subject of Blish's book fall into none of these scenarios...
Re:Scary (Score:3, Informative)
Praise "Bob",
Rev^3 K