We have a lot of these 'aliens invade earth' films with massive ships, impenetrable shields and death rays that incinera
-
J_R_Cash — 15 years ago(November 17, 2010 06:07 PM)
There are a few movies that don't play on the whole aliens invading us/killing us scenario, but I do agree that it is getting a little old with that type of story telling. I'd love to see more Avatar's and District 9's to be honest, I find those to be really great movies story-wise, technically, acting, etc.
hubpages.com/profile/TheSablirab -
Hospitaller24 — 15 years ago(November 18, 2010 03:39 AM)
I take all your views into account. It is just good to see peoples opinions on things. I agree with the the person who mentioned aliens avoiding Earth. The speed at which we advance technologically, our untrustworthy natures and the goal of self preservation would make us a very dangerous foe. Of course we have good in us too haha
-
ShadyFTW — 14 years ago(August 10, 2011 10:03 AM)
The speed at which we advance technologically, our untrustworthy natures and the goal of self preservation would make us a very dangerous foe.
What? You have no idea how "fast" we advance technologically compared to possible alien races. Maybe it's slow as hell. Likewise, what makes you think we are more untrustworthy as a species? And you think alien creatures wouldnt have self preservation? How the fk can you assume any of this?
I don't normally reply to stupid posts, but that one just made me facepalm.
"Silence is golden, but duct tape is" ah screw it, this is so unoriginal. -
king_of_bob — 14 years ago(August 28, 2011 01:17 PM)
Compared to a species capable of traveling between stars, we would be no threat at all. If they thought we might become a threat, they would likely wipe us out before we ever became technologically advanced enough to harm them.
Prof. Farnsworth: Oh. A lesson in not changing history from Mr. I'm-My-Own-Grandpa! -
nineteeneleven — 15 years ago(November 19, 2010 02:04 AM)
Here's why they would be more advanced than us:
The closest dwarf star galaxy is about 40,000 LIGHT YEARS away. If an alien race traveled from there at the speed of light, it would take them 40,000 years to arrive at earth. That means they would have achieved light speed, and left their home planet while we were still cavemen trying to figure out how to use fire.
Not only that, but they would have to have the technology required to survive space travel for such a length of time. Including, food and energy. Imagine the type of energy required to travel such a vast distance (read: unlimited energy).
Also, it means that their civilization would have to have been in existence MUCH longer than ours - for the same reason above.
We as a civilization are not even close to being able to do something like that. Our space shuttles travel approximately 4000 miles per hour. (Light speed is approx 183,000 miles per SECOND). If we wanted to fly to the nearest dwarf star it would take 7 BILLION years based on today's technology.
Don't even get me started on if the aliens could travel through space via wormholes or faster than light.
You see, the movies get it wrong. They create weaknesses in the aliens to create hope for the audience. If aliens were to really arrive here - we'd better pray that they're merciful and don't instantly destroy or enslave us. We would not stand a chance.
We would be like ants trying to fight gods. -
President_Ackbar_Impeached — 15 years ago(November 22, 2010 08:19 PM)
"The closest dwarf star galaxy is about 40,000 LIGHT YEARS away."
So what? Proxima Centauri is the closest star at only 4 light years away.
"If an alien race traveled from there at the speed of light, it would take them 40,000 years to arrive at earth."
Or, only 4 years from Proxima Centauri.
"That means they would have achieved light speed, and left their home planet while we were still cavemen trying to figure out how to use fire."
Or, while Bush was president.
"Not only that, but they would have to have the technology required to survive space travel for such a length of time"
4 years?
"Imagine the type of energy required to travel such a vast distance (read: unlimited energy)."
The Voyager 1 spacecraft, launched on Sept. 5, 1977, is 11 billion miles away from the sun, and is using no energy at all, other than inertia ( read: no energy )
"Also, it means that their civilization would have to have been in existence MUCH longer than ours"
Well, at least 4 years longer.
"We as a civilization are not even close to being able to do something like that. Our space shuttles travel approximately 4000 miles per hour."
The Helios missions to the Sun both reached a velocity of 153,800 mph.
"Don't even get me started on if the aliens could travel through space via wormholes or faster than light."
Why not? I want to see some more wrong information from you.
"You see, the movies get it wrong. They create weaknesses in the aliens to create hope for the audience."
Destruction by the fusion reaction of a nuclear warhead is not a "created weakness". It's a fact.
"If aliens were to really arrive here - we'd better pray that they're merciful and don't instantly destroy or enslave us. We would not stand a chance."
Well, not unless we had nuclear warheads.
"We would be like ants trying to fight gods."
Thank god ants don't have nuclear weapons. -
UberNoodle — 15 years ago(December 03, 2010 08:27 PM)
So what? Proxima Centauri is the closest star at only 4 light years away.
Or, only 4 years from Proxima Centauri. [to travel to earth]
Or, while Bush was president. [the time it would take to develop LS tech]
Well, at least 4 years longer. [the age of this civilisation]
Fair enough assertions but does that star support life? Is that life of a level of civilisation and development sufficient enough to have discovered LS technology "white Bush was President"? Is that civilisation capable of applying that technology to a war effort against Earth, a planet they may not even be much aware of? Does that civilisation even have the resources or geopolitical factors required to create even a couple of LS craft appropriate for such a purpose? Additionally, there are more factors involved other than technology and will. Does this alien civilisation possess the cultural cohesiveness required to become first a Planetary civilisation, then a Solar one, and then beyond? We humans have not even truly become planetary, in the sense that by that definition we should have reached a level of unity, cohesiveness and technology which we do not yet possess. It is unlikely that we will leave our solar system in any meaningful way until we acheive that step first.
The Voyager 1 spacecraft, launched on Sept. 5, 1977, is 11 billion miles away
from the sun, and is using no energy at all, other than inertia ( read: no
energy )
And unless it can exert the same energy against that intertia, it can't stop. The Voyager is also not a craft capable of transporting and supporting an invasion force. Besides, could an invasion force maintain lightspeed for 'at least four years' and all that that may require, without consuming a lot of energy resources of all kinds? How much energy is needed for just invading the next nation on Earth?
The Helios missions to the Sun both reached a velocity of 153,800 mph
Which is not light speed, which is what the poster was clearly referring to. No matter how fast Helios was, it is not the speed of light and far from such technology. The poster's point was that we humans are far from the mark required to invade another solar system, let alone send people far into our own. Weren't you asserting that an alien invasion need only require a minimum of 4 years? Helios' speeds are therefore unimportant. Are we four years away from large scale LS travel?
Why not? I want to see some more wrong information from you.
And are theories about worm-holes TRUE information? Such simplistic thinking is contrary to what science is all about. Only last week, NASA found new life that threw out a certain definition many poeple may have considered "true" and not "wrong".
Destruction by the fusion reaction of a nuclear warhead is not a "created
weakness". It's a fact.
Fair enough, but the poster was speaking in generalities towards the genre, not just this film. So, since you've taken your "hair-splitting" tact, thats "one down, several thousand to go" for you.
Well, not unless we had nuclear warheads. [about aliens being no threat]
Thank god ants don't have nuclear weapons.
You used the "why not?" argument above, so accept it here. If a race is capable of sending an invasion force at the speed of light to the Earth, especially after (this is your assertion) just inventing the technology recently; and if that society is advanced enough in all the other areas required for such a journey and pupose (and to enable it to happen in the first place) - WHY NOT allow them to have a means to repell most attacks, even nuclear warheads?