Introduction

Tout voyageur est planétairement surnaturel. Ainsi sera perçu un homme chez un extraterrestre moins avancé, de même qu'un nomade chez un prédateur terrestre impérialiste et furtif qui extermine par tous les moyens (drones, OTAN, OMC, FMI...) tous ceux qui ne s'alignent pas : la faune, la flore, les pauvres, les communistes, Le Che, Sadam, Ben Laden, Kadhafi, Milosevic, ... Un voyageur infiniment plus fort ne permettra pas la survie d'une espèce humaine qui le menace potentiellement en s'en prenant à la vie. Il n'est pas scientifique ni prudent d'écarter la loi d'un plus fort potentiellement furtif, comme l'homme l'est déjà envers les plus faibles : la sagesse commande de se protéger contre une Apocalypse imparable en allant au-devant des souhaits de potentiels voyageurs invincibles, comme tout état qui se protège dans une alliance déjà existante ou à créer (Europe, ONU, OTAN...). Le "surnaturel" devient alors un moyen naturel de transmission de messages forts* de l'amont vers l'aval, sans des échanges directs conflictuels et mutuellement autodestructeurs. Déjà supervisée ou non par des aînées plus avancées dans leur transcendance, toute génération cosmique devenue scientifiquement irrattrapable par les suivantes interviendra ainsi à son niveau dans l'évolution en aval : le modèle gigogne d'un apartheid cosmique rationnel imposé par le plus fort devenu aussi le plus sage. L'homme attendra-t-il l'Apocalypse pour y adhérer ? Une science enfin reconvertie à la paix * anoblira l'espèce pour la préparer à s'intégrer pour son salut dans une chaîne furtive de bienveillance en communion cosmique d'amont en aval !

jeudi 11 octobre 2007

A COSMIC PROTECTION INITIATIVE FOR MANKIND

The ordinary citizen is commonly asked to let the field of reflection to the scientist, even in the fields ignored by science. So is it with the cosmic protection that mankind would have to face in the event of the existence of interstellar travellers, benevolent or not. As he cannot state such an existence, man has perhaps too rapidly decided that there is no problem with it. But as he also cannot state the contrary, the problem may well exist.
This is for instance a common practice in terrestrial defence. As an example, a US president would launch a new defence initiative at the faintest doubt on the existence of a new weapon capable to destroy his country with impunity by potential adversaries. No actual evidence is required. A cosmic protection initiative would in fact be nothing but an assurance strategy for the species against possible cosmic predators. For the existence of such beings cannot be excluded.
The Occam razor cannot exclude an existence of interstellar travellers and of cosmic predators. But everybody can already observe that pure science allows man to say that we would be seen as gods by our ancestors and that we would likewise see our descendants as gods if the future could be explored. Man is so a potential creator even if he is alone, at least if he manages to survive.
He cannot assert the existence of interstellar travellers and their evolution. But he could without risk well bet on a universal instinct of survival common to all intelligent beings, an instinct leading them to survive and to resist any evolution transforming them into pure preys for eventual cosmic predators such as man himself.
It is therefore incoherent to think that beings capable of interstellar travels would proclaim far and wide their existence as it is assumed in research programs such as SETI. Such beings would do as little noise as possible. A neutral analysis of the strategic problem posed in terms of pure security for our species would also lead man to abstain from proclaiming his existence as long as he persists to become a cosmic predator, as it is so far the case. For to a cosmic predator, any unknown territory should indeed be considered as potentially full of predators the more dangerous as they are apparently non-existent. And our sole galaxy will long remain unknown to man, if not for ever.
____________________
A choice of peace or war
Because of this ignorance, man is therefore now face to a choice:
-The choice of a clear universal demonstration of his will for peace by giving up his millenary practices of predation and violence,
-Or the choice to remain silent while preparing mankind for war.
Man could not anyway hide face to such advanced beings. But the choice of peace could bring him some form of protection from any benevolent advanced ET, and the choice of war the indifference or the ire of all of them.
Conscious or not, the choice of man for predation and violence is so far unambiguous to any ET observer. Man is behaving toward the ET world as the American Indian condemned from the start to disappear face to travellers able to cross the wide sea. Beings able to cross interstellar spaces would still be more formidable, and betting on their inexistence or on their lack of sight could be fateful to man. He could only rely on their wisdom to survive, a wisdom grown during the very long time required for the preparation of their interstellar journey. But advanced ET could be benevolent as well as malevolent, and before going too far, man should decide which side he is prepared to support.

If science would be a decisive asset for peace or war, it could not help man any better than common sense and reason in this strategic choice.

1 commentaire:

William a dit…
Ce commentaire a été supprimé par un administrateur du blog.