Extraterrestrial Contact: The Players

I suggest in this blog that an extraterrestrial civilization interested in making Direct First Contact could leverage the power and technology of the international news media to reach all humans with a message of introduction. I don’t necessarily believe there are extraterrestrials out there waiting to do such. It’s merely a suggestion of what could be done.

What happens next would depend on some key players. These are some of the players I think would be involved in the response to Direct First Contact:

-President of the United States: The country with the most established space program and greatest military strength would certainly be a major player in any First Contact event, no matter how it occurs. The President of the United States would likely have a huge impact through direct actions (deployment of military forces, NASA and other federal agencies) and the indirect actions, such as global leadership. Other nations would look to the U.S. for an indication of how they should react. A President who handles First Contact in a thoughtful and rational way could set the tone for the world reaction. Knee-jerk and fear-based reactions could be disastrous. The Hollywood view of the President somehow being the defacto leader of Earth in such an interaction is, of course, ridiculous. The United States would play a part in such an event; however it would only be one player on a crowded international stage.

-China and Russia: Both of these nations have the military power and international influence to change the nature of First Contact. They also have highly-developed space agencies and scientific communities, both of which would be critical in the response to First Contact. It would be important to engage Russian and Chinese leaders immediately in any First Contact response. The Chinese reaction is especially important because of the unique nature of the Chinese government and economy. China might react quite differently than other nations to First Contact.

-Other World governments: There’s more to global politics than just the actions of the old fashion big three: the United States, China and Russia. The individual governments of other powerful nations on Earth have the ability to influence First Contact in many ways. Governments, such as Germany, influence other countries both regionally and, as blocs, internationally. Their reaction would be critical to the overall international response. They also have military power that could make things more complicated and potentially dangerous. Considering the reaction of certain influential countries on Earth, outside of the big three, would be essential.

-Political groups within nations: We would be naive to think that politics would not be a major force in First Contact response. Political groups would stake out turf and look to protect their interests in the wake of First Contact. The political battles in each country will have a profound impact on the overall international response, unless the other key group involved, the United Nations, can find the strength to act independently.

-United Nations Security Council: This would likely be the first group charged with responding to First Contact at an international level. This powerful group of nation representatives handles international security issues for the United Nations. They could set the tone for First Contact diplomacy.

-United Nations Secretary General: Calm, cool and decisive leadership would be important in any First Contact scenario. In the United Nations this leadership would need to start with the Secretary General.

-United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space: COPUOS is the primary United Nations group to consider space issues and it seems likely that they would have a major role in a First Contact event. This committee has been presented with First Contact preparation proposals on several occasions and has failed to act on them.

-The United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs: The primary functions of UNOOSA are space treaties and the consideration of Near Earth Objects (NEOs). However, given their unique functions at the U.N. they would most likely be a critical group in any First Contact scenario. The current director, Mazlan Othman, has seriously considered First Contact issues. Thus far, however, she has not been able to get the UNOOSA parent body, COPUOS, to pay serious attention.

-SETI scientific community: If First Contact comes in the form of the discovery of an engineered signal, clearly SETI scientists would be front and center. It would probably be they who would discover such a signal in the first place. However, SETI scientists also have an important function in other First Contact scenarios. These scientists are a small group of dedicated researchers who have actively and rationally considered the impact of First Contact. It seems likely the media would need them as expert commentators in the wake of First Contact. It also seems logical that the United Nations would turn to them for advice and counsel.

-Social scientists: Very few social scientists have actively considered First Contact issues. And yet this may be the most important field After First Contact. Social scientists would be needed to take the collective pulse of human society. The social sciences could monitor reactions in the world economy and the global political arena. Scientists would need to evaluate human perception of First Contact, to help us better understand the public reaction taking place. Surveys and analysis would provide the United Nations and other world leaders with important data to help them move forward.

-Mainstream media: Leveraging the news media for live coverage of First Contact has certain implications. That coverage would certainly depend on how an extraterrestrial civilization decided to use the media to reach humanity. The most important part of the process would actually come later for the news media as editors and reporters find the time needed to develop enterprise stories. These pieces are not part of the breaking news/headline news cycle. Enterprise stories focus on a range of subjects outside of the obvious. For example, if we know that aliens exist, then no matter what the aliens tell us, the alien abduction folks would suddenly seem a lot more believable. The media would probably have to consider some of these “conspiracy based” ideas. How far do they take it? How much does that coverage influence the overall process?

-Alternative media: First Contact would lead to much speculation. The very notion that an extraterrestrial civilization exists would open the door for a wide range of theories and ideas, many of which may fall on the fringe of current commentary and yet would find new life in the wake of First Contact. How web communities respond to First Contact would be essential for what happens next. If conspiracy theories and fear spread on the Internet the mainstream media will be forced to consider such issues. The result could be a collective hysteria of sorts that would not be good for human civilization.

-Fringe elements: Religious, political and cultural groups have elements on the fringe of majority thought. Those fringe groups, by their very nature being small, can react more dynamically than the rest of the population to situations, creating disruption and perhaps chaos. A certain amount of fringe reaction is important for the overall conversation. First Contact would need to include a number of different viewpoints and consider a variety of concerns. However, the degree to which fringe elements drive the overall world response may ultimately dictate what happens after First Contact. Fringe elements often speak the loudest and react in visible ways that garner a great deal of attention. They are not necessarily acting in the best interest of the public or acting for the common good. They often have a particular agenda and seek to gain power.

-Sensible majority: The Arab Spring protests and recent Occupy Wall Street movement shows that the Internet can be a powerful tool for organizing a large response to world events. The trend lately in protest is not so much one organized group expressing dissent, but rather many groups coalescing around one general idea and then growing a protest movement through the social media. This shows hope for the sensible majority in the wake of First Contact. It seems likely that at first fringe elements would be speaking the loudest After First Contact. It could be necessary for the sensible majority to speak up with a collective voice to influence world leaders and keep the First Contact process moving forward in a positive way.

Extraterrestrial Contact: Secrecy

It’s an essential question of any extraterrestrial First Contact scenario: disclosure. Do the people who make First Contact with an extraterrestrial civilization tell the rest of the world? It’s easy to assume the inherent correctness of full disclosure. First Contact would change human history and it might be nice if all humans knew that it was occurring and perhaps had some say in how First Contact diplomacy progressed. Recently, a reader made a sound argument for keeping First Contact secret. The basic premise is that certain people in leadership positions should develop an action plan in secret, exploring the possibilities and negative impacts, before notifying the world. There are clear benefits to secrecy. Decisions can be made without the weight of public opinion and influence of potentially fractious public debate. Building a framework for diplomacy behind the scenes could help prevent panic. Humanity would be presented with a safe and controlled First Contact event, not one fraught with uncertainty and fear. Military leaders could asses threats and make preparations for defense. The group or nation in question could benefit from alien knowledge and prevent the release of technological information that could be dangerous in the wrong hands.

Allen Tough covered many of these ideas in a paper for Acta Astronatica in 1990 titled “A Critical Examination of Factors That Might Encourage Secrecy”.Tough breaks down the possible benefits of secrecy, including: prevention of panic, controlling the impact on our culture, and allowing one group to gain competitive advantage. However, he is clearly in favor of transparency. He refutes each of the reasons for secrecy and provides arguments for why transparency would be beneficial.

Panic is his first point. Some argue that the public will panic if information about First Contact is released without government control. Tough points to studies that show the majority of humans believe in extraterrestrial intelligence. Those studies also show that people would be inclined to handle the news with wonder, not panic. Popular fiction has certainly allowed us to play out the many possibilities and fears involved in extraterrestrial contact. It seems unlikely that the real thing will be anywhere near as dramatic as Hollywood portrayals. So, why panic?

The next point is impact on culture. Controlling the impact on our culture is more of a gatekeeping issue. The question is not whether the revelation of First Contact would change us, but rather that the information that could be revealed to us in a high-information First Contact scenario could affect us. Tough reasons that the scientific and other institutions that hold together our society are resilient and would be unlikely to crumble under the weight of high-information First Contact. While I can agree that we humans are a fairly adaptive lot, I do think that high-information First Contact would pose major challenges for our institutions- especially for the scientific and economic communities. I believe that some form of gatekeeping is essential when it comes to information provided to us in a First Contact situation.

Gatekeeping is a problematic issue. The very nature of gatekeeping means that someone must be privy to information that others are not. In a sense, in advocating for gatekeeping, you are advocating some degree of secrecy. I believe that information that could cause volatility to our economic and scientific systems must be carefully considered before release. That’s not to say I’m advocating for not releasing such information, but merely that we consider the consequences and look to alleviate the negative impact as much as is possible. That will require some group keeping matters secret for a period of time. The only way to make this transparent is to make the process of gatekeeping transparent. You admit there is information that is not being released. You give a timeline for when you will be able to release the information and you keep as much of the gatekeeping process in the public eye as is possible.

Tough points out that competition is another critical factor in secrecy. Researchers could seek to keep news of First Contact secret until they can develop the discovery and stake a bigger claim in the scientific history books. Still, it seems to me that the bigger question is of national control of First Contact news. If one nation discovers extraterrestrial intelligence, those leaders might hope to keep that discovery quiet. That would give them time to determine what technological information might be derived from the contact, giving that nation a very strong advantage in everything from military strength to economic power. Luckily, in a SETI based discovery there are likely to be teams of scientists involved in not only the discovery of a signal, but more importantly the confirmation of such a signal. SETI scientists already have a protocol for sharing information in order to confirm that a signal might actually have been created by extraterrestrial intelligence.  

Keeping secrecy is not as easy as one might think. The United States couldn’t keep nuclear weapons technology secret in the 1940’s and 1950s. Many nations gained advantage through spy programs. With electronic communication those leaks are even more prevalent. Consider the primary revelation of the Wikileaks release of top secret military information. That top secret info that Wikileaks uncovered was actually available to tens of thousands of government employees. So, when the White House comes out and says they have no evidence that extraterrestrial intelligence exists or that any human has had contact with extraterrestrial intelligence, as they did recently, I believe them. It would be unlikely that any government could keep such information secret for long. This is especially true since the investigation of any extraterrestrial contact would require help from the scientific community and most scientists seem to agree that such First Contact should be a public concern, at least after such a signal is confirmed.

The biggest problem with secrecy is the long-term damage created by such a strategy. Trust will be a big issue in the wake of First Contact. Creating and keeping trust will be the only way to avoid fearful reactions and the development of wide-spread conspiracy theories. No matter how mentally prepared we think we are, in reality I think First Contact will create a feeling of vulnerability in various forms across human society. The only way to lessen fear and concern is through transparency. For that transparency to be effective it needs to start at the very beginning of First Contact and continue through the diplomatic process.

I have said it before, and I know I probably sound like a broken record: First Contact needs to be an open event for all nations and all of humanity. The information shared should be shared equally. The process developed for the international response needs to be protective of our society but also transparent and open to public debate.

Extraterrestrial Contact: Alien Agenda

I know, I know…the phrase alien agenda sounds like a paranoid conspiracy theory worthy of a bad made for TV movie.  In reality though, I think it’s something that needs to be taken seriously if high-information First Contact ever does occur. I bring up the concept of alien agenda in order to expand on the idea of First Contact motivation. 

Motivation is something I have discussed frequently on this blog. If First Contact occurs because extraterrestrials are simply responding to our electromagnetic signals beaming through space, their only motivation might be to say hello. However, if an extraterrestrial civilization initiates First Contact there will probably be a more complex reason for them doing so.  If they didn’t have a reason for contacting us, then they would simply leave us alone, which could very well be the current situation.

A motivation naturally leads to some sort of agenda for carrying out what they hope to accomplish with First Contact. Their objective, and the subsequent agenda of First Contact, could be quite benign. It could be a simple matter of scientific curiosity. They could also be trying to educate us, enlarge our perspective or make us aware of a danger. The agenda could be more controlling in nature. They may want to impact how we handle technology or treat our environment. Perhaps they think we should change our religions, or even our forms of government. How controlling are they? Do we consider it interference? How do we make sure we control the situation? What if we don’t agree with them? I think these are all legitimate questions in any First Contact scenario.

We can’t afford as a civilization to head into such a dramatic set of events in a naïve manner. Caution and careful consideration would be critical. True critical thinkers will of course point out that all of these possibilities are anthropomorphic.  It’s quite possible that extraterrestrials would have a motivation, an objective and agenda that we cannot fathom.  They might understand the universe in ways that we cannot even conceive of, and thus their motivation is beyond our comprehension.

So, do we give up and hide under the covers and hope that the aliens go away? I would be willing to bet that there are some in human society who actually suggest such a thing in the wake of First Contact. Clearly that isn’t a rational response. Once the veil is lifted humans will have no choice but to confront the challenges that come with First Contact. We can’t lose sight of the opportunities as well. While the alien agenda might seem negative in nature, it could just as well be positive. They may truly want to help us develop as a civilization and provide information that helps us better understand the physical world around us.

The only real solution to the alien agenda is questioning. We need to question every action and take a critical look at every step we take. It may not be rational to hide under the covers and hope they go away. It’s just as nuts to throw open our arms and let extraterrestrials do as they please. A little paranoia can go a long way.

Extraterrestrial Contact: Globalism and Conflict

I think it’s safe to say that high-information First Contact with an extraterrestrial civilization would change the future for humanity. The real question is how? Much of that would depend on the nature of the First Contact, the aliens themselves, their motives and perhaps most importantly, the type of information we receive. Just what would happen to our civilization would depend on a number of factors that are pure speculation on our part. There are reactions that we can better predict. They involve the very forces at work in human society today.

First Contact would present a great need for some sort of organized diplomacy on the part of the people of planet Earth. That would most likely occur at an international level. Right now, the only organization capable of carrying out such diplomacy would be the United Nations. All of this would lead to a conflict that I don’t think has been well-considered yet: globalists versus the opponents of globalism.

You probably don’t think of yourself as a globalist. It’s kind of an odd term in the first place. It is popular with some on the political right. It’s defined in many dictionaries as a national policy that treats the entire world as a sphere for political influence. Primarily this refers to the United States. However, it can also be defined as placing the interests of the entire world above those of individual nations. It is this meaning that is most often used by conservative thinkers. It represents a concern that the United Nations and other global bodies will lessen the power of the United States.

How does all of this tie into First Contact? Let’s ask American Free Press writer Keith Johnson, who writes about the spat of popular media coverage about a journal article exploring First Contact scenarios, some of them negative in outcome (covered here a few weeks ago). Johnson basically says that liberals are once again preaching doom, this time in the form of alien invasion, to bring about world government and ultimately take away our liberties. My apologies for linking to a news outlet that is considered extremist in viewpoint by many, but don’t get the impression that the fear of globalism is a fringe view. It’s become a rallying cry of the Tea Party movement. President Obama is routinely criticized for being a globalist. Presidential candidate Michelle Bachmann frequently rallies against globalism. It’s a popular subject for evangelical Christians, as pointed out in a recent Mother Jones article (I had to balance the Free Press link). The worry seems to be that world government is a sign of the apocalypse and part of a movement towards secularizing the world and destroying Christianity. The “Left Behind” series of books and movies are perhaps the best known examples of this concern. The stories portray the rise of the anti-Christ as the United Nations Secretary General, who is increasingly given more power due to dire world situations. Christians, who arrive at the notion too late to be part of the rapture, ban together on Earth to fight back.

Globalism often gets wrapped up with globalization, which is more commonly viewed as a process that is occurring in the world economy, as nations increase trade through the reduction of tariffs and restrictions. Globalization is perceived as a widespread action toward economic interdependence due to technology and international relations. Interestingly, many on the left also fear globalization, because they say it’s allowing multinational corporations to form alliances to control the world economy and create widespread economic disparity. The World Trade Organization, the World Monetary Fund, the G-8 and the G-20 are frequently cited as enabling this corporate power grab, and they are the subject of many protests by leftist organizations. It is one area in which the far left and the far right could perhaps agree: big government and big corporations are dangerous for individual liberties. Both try to limit the power of individuals to be successful and prosperous. I can’t say I disagree with those concerns. Globalization may be inevitable, but how that globalization occurs will be a significant question. The rights of individuals need to be protected. How far you take those views is what can make them fringe in nature.

Globalism is usually viewed as an active movement to strengthen international authority, and weaken individual nations, especially the United States. For the critics, it’s a big step towards the infringement of individual freedom. The religious right perceives globalism as similar to the growth of government in the United States. They see any big government as a threat to individual freedoms, and secular government in general as a threat to Christianity.

Let’s get back to the extraterrestrials. Ronald Reagan said it best:

“I occasionally think how quickly our differences, worldwide, would vanish if we were facing an alien threat from outside this world.”

President Reagan was speaking to the United Nations and while he was using the concept to make a larger point about the need for international cooperation, it’s an idea that makes sense. And it doesn’t have to be an aggressive alien threat. Just the fact that there is at least one other civilization out there in the Universe would naturally bring humans closer together. At first this might not seem like a controversial idea and I would expect it to be a common theme After First Contact. Once the surprise wore off though, I would imagine that the anti-globalists, and especially the evangelical Christian community, would begin to perceive a new threat.

You might say that this would merely be a fringe issue, with no bearing on world politics. However, I think it’s naïve to think that evangelical Christian philosophies are limited to fringe groups. There’s a good possibility that the next President of the United States will be an evangelical Christian (again). What would be the reaction of that evangelical Christian President to First Contact? Would he or she be able to separate religious views from practical politics? Would the result be outright hostility to alien visitors? Evangelical beliefs are held by many powerful members of congress. How would they react?

Any measure giving the United Nations power would be perceived as a threat. That would include giving them the power to lead diplomatic relations with extraterrestrials. It would certainly be considered a threat if the United Nations were to lead the gatekeeping effort for releasing extraterrestrial information.

Sorry, I know this sounds like conspiracy theory. It’s really not intended to be that at all. It’s a practical examination of how key groups in this country, and across the world, might react to extraterrestrial First Contact. It’s something that I don’t think has been discussed. First Contact needs to be considered in a real-world environment. Earth is a complicated place with many competing beliefs. I think there is a very good possibility that First Contact could set up a confrontation between people fearing globalism and those pushing for a world response to First Contact. Would it be possible for these two factions to find common ground? Perhaps. However, it could also lead to severe turmoil here on Earth. How severe might depend on who is leading the charge on both sides.

Do I consider myself a globalist? I certainly believe that a global response to any future extraterrestrial First Contact is the only logical response. It is ridiculous to think that every nation on Earth is going to somehow establish separate relations with extraterrestrials, by-passing the United Nations. Giving the United Nations more power would be fraught with challenges. The U.N. has not been a very effective body in its history thus far. Leading extraterrestrial diplomacy and contact would be a huge job for the U.N.

I don’t advocate world government and I share the concerns of those who worry about large government infringing on individual rights. Government can be stupid and big government really stupid. We need just enough government to have a cohesive, fair and productive society. Anything more can become intrusive and wasteful. Government must be watched closely, forced to be efficient and effective, and limited in both power and scope. It must not be allowed to take away from individuality and the power of people to join together in communities that they determine: neighborhoods, churches, organizations and advocacy groups.

We need people fighting for individual rights. The tug and pull of the left and the right in this country is a necessary and important part of our society. It’s when fringe elements on either side try to hijack the system for their own personal beliefs, and personal gains, that the system becomes distorted and ineffective. It will be up to the sensible majority to pull humanity through a time of great debate After First Contact. That sensible majority is usually quiet. They will need to stand up to be heard loud and clear in the wake of First Contact.The future of humanity will depend on it.

Extraterrestrial Contact: Distractions

Timing is everything. That old saying may be a consideration for extraterrestrials debating the timing of contact with planet Earth. Timing is only a factor in First Contact if the extraterrestrials in question (and I’m not saying there actually are any extraterrestrials in question) are closely monitoring what humans are doing. This could be accomplished with some sort of probe connecting to our Internet. That may sound far-fetched, but if you, an extraterrestrial, had the technology to do such, why wouldn’t you? Monitoring human activity would allow you to know exactly what you are getting into, before you say hello.

So, back to timing. What factors might an extraterrestrial consider when deciding if and when to say hello? It seems to me that one consideration would have to be critical world events. An example is the recent negotiations in the European debt crisis. There were tense moments as the world economic community waited for word that European nations had agreed on important measures to bailout Greece and shore up the European monetary system. And there may be more tense moments to see if Greeks actually agree to the deal in an upcoming referendum. Extraterrestrials, with our best interests in mind, would probably want to avoid saying hello to humans at such important moments. The distraction caused by any First Contact, but especially a dramatic Direct First Contact event, would likely be enormous. What if European leaders were so distracted that they didn’t take the necessary measures to stabilize the European economy? Some may laugh and say that important world needs would still be important. I think that is a dangerous under estimation of the effect that Direct First Contact would have on the human civilization. There would most likely be a period of a stunned reaction that would bring most everything, except for basic functions, to a stop. Then there would be a period of intense debate over what actions to take in response to First Contact. Both of these periods would involve concentrated focus. And that means distraction and likely a very high degree of distraction, especially for world leaders. A signal discovered in space is certainly much less distracting and yet still a concern.

Distraction can of course be viewed in several other ways. Perhaps the extraterrestrials don’t have our best interest in mind at all? They could pick a critical moment to say hello in hopes of distracting us and causing harm to the planet. That seems like a rather round-about way of trying to harm humans. Creative extraterrestrials could probably come up with much more sinister ways to tear at the fabric of human civilization. It’s something that doesn’t seem likely if First Contact ever occurs, but certainly an idea that must be considered.

And then there is the beneficial distraction. Perhaps First Contact would be powerful enough to stimulate the world economy and help lift us out of global recession? It could take away attention from differences between nations and join us closer together. First Contact could be excellent motivation for global cooperation.

How long humans would remain distracted would depend on the type of First Contact and the actual nature of the events involved in that contact. Dramatic events would probably have a more distracting effect than a series of less dramatic events. You would imagine First Contact distraction would have an initial peak of effect, dissipating over time in strength. The toughest part of distraction is that when it’s occurring virtually no one is considering the impact- they’re simply distracted. Keeping a watchful eye on old worries and needful realities, in any First Contact situation, would seem prudent. Now let’s just hope that the Greeks can stay focused.

Extraterrestrial Contact: Time to Prepare

Extraterrestrial First Contact ranges in impact from the least, an engineered signal being discovered, to the highest, in the form of Direct First Contact. Those two poles are also relevant in an examination of the time element in First Contact. By time element I mean the amount of time each scenario gives us to prepare our society and our institutions for the impact of First Contact.

The one end of the spectrum, discovery of an engineered signal, gives us the greatest time to prepare for impact, because it could take many years to decipher such a signal. Depending on the location of that signal it could take decades to send a signal in reply, if we should chose to do so. There would be much time to debate each step. The response would have time to develop organically.

Direct First Contact, an extraterrestrial civilization visiting Earth, provides no time to prepare and that would have major repercussions for our response. The lack of debate could cause a forced response, rather than an organic response, and easily lead to knee-jerk reactions. Those knee-jerk reactions could come in the form of an over-welcoming response, one that is not grounded in cautious, critical thinking. It could also lead to a hostile reaction, with too much worry and not much welcoming.

No matter what the type of First Contact, and how quickly a response must be developed, there are steps we will need to take:

-Appoint an organization or organizations to take the lead role in diplomacy and response

-Provide for international participation in that diplomacy and response

-Control the immediate situation and determine the most immediate needs

-Set up gatekeeping procedures for any information that might be received

-Develop an efficient bureaucracy to manage the response

-Create a framework for moving forward

-Develop a list of the most important considerations

-Bring in expertise to examine those considerations and provide recommendations

-Determine a method for making final decisions, while providing for as much global inclusion as possible

-Make sure that the process is transparent and open to all

-Determine, through gatekeeping, what information cannot be made open yet and develop a strategy to evaluate, act and then eventually make that information open for examination

-Bring in expertise to determine long-term impact

-Have a conversation about how First Contact could change humanity

-Make decisions about how we want to manage that change

-Develop long-term response strategies

Extraterrestrial Contact: The Media After First Contact

Our understanding of the larger world depends greatly on the media. These days those media sources are numerous and growing. A recently released Pew Research Center study shows that Americans are now blending their news sources among many outlets, including television, online newspapers, web sites, and blogs.

I have advocated that television would be an excellent tool for visiting extraterrestrials in a dramatic Direct First Contact event. I know that sounds a bit “out there” but consider the advantages: Television has global reach, specializes in breaking news and live coverage and has a sharing network among news outlets unrivaled in the world.  Clearly though, the type of coverage a Direct First Contact event received would change in the days and weeks following the initial event. Depending on how the event was to occur, coverage would begin to migrate from live to enterprise journalism. This is a natural cycle in the news business. When wildfires break out in a community, live coverage dominates at first. As the situation is eventually managed, the reporters begin to do enterprise stories focusing on the people impacted and critical pieces, such as determining the cause, the firefighting response and whether the proper precautions were taken to help prevent such fires.   

One could expect that Direct First Contact coverage would move in the same way. The question is how those follow-up enterprise stories would be handled. The big difference between wildfires and extraterrestrials visiting Earth, aside from the scope of the story, is that wildfires are something we understand fairly well. First Contact would create all sorts of uncertainty. The media would need to look for experts and that’s probably a list they don’t have prepared. Hopefully, they would look in the right places and interview the folks from the SETI Institute, the International Astronomical Union or the other astrophysicists who have actively considered First Contact issues. Secondarily, there would be futurists and science fiction writers who have explored First Contact scenarios. Unfortunately though, there is a whole other group of writers who fall into what one might call the UFO community. I know it’s unfair to lump people together, but I think it’s safe to say that in any First Contact situation the UFO community will be extremely vocal. Because of the high degree of uncertainty in First Contact they may suddenly seem more credible to the mainstream media. If aliens do come to Earth to say hello or if we discover an engineered signal far off in space, doesn’t that lend some credibility to alien abduction theorists or those who believe we have been visited by aliens in the past? In all fairness, I think you would have to consider those questions in some fashion- the best way would of course be to ask the aliens themselves. Still, the effect that uncertainty has is to create a vacuum of information and usually people try to fill that vacuum with any information they can find. The UFO conspiracies would receive much more attention from the general public and the news media. The difference is the media, in the many forms it takes these days, has the ability to influence public perception. If they are chasing after every alien conspiracy theory that could have a dramatic impact on how people view extraterrestrials. It could lead to fear and knee-jerk reactions based on fear. I have said it before: I think there will be a vocal minority of isolationists that will be active in any First Contact situation. They will advocate for isolationism and suggest that we tell the aliens to leave us alone. How much steam this movement picks up will depend greatly on the media coverage. If the mainstream media gives such views quite a bit of attention, the number of people advocating isolationism will increase. If the media manages to realize the danger in chasing after every conspiracy theory, calmer heads might prevail.

In the end it comes down to two primary points: critical thinking and credibility. We will need to utilize critical thinking in the wake of First Contact. This includes the news media. Plenty of tough questions will need to be asked. Any information provided to us by extraterrestrials would need to be carefully weighed. However, credibility will be essential. The media will need to realize that crack-pots before First Contact could still very well be crack-pots After First Contact. Just because their subject matter turned out to have some basis in truth (aliens do exist) doesn’t mean that everything else they advocate is true (aliens kidnapped my cousin Earl and he was forced to mate with them).

Is the collective global media up to the task of critical thinking? Well, perhaps some outlets. Others, one would imagine, will go crazy with fear-mongering, headline-grabbing stories just to get attention. It will be up to news consuming public to decide who they will trust. The sensible majority will need to stand up and be counted.

Extraterrestrial Contact Scenarios: Getting Beyond the Media Hype

As usual, the media distillations of journal articles are rarely a good judge of the actual content of the article in question. Such is the case with the media hubbub caused by the article in Acta Astronautica by Baum, Haqq-Misra and Domagal-Goldman titled “Would Contact with Extraterrestrials Benefit or Harm Humanity? A Scenario Analysis.”

While Acta Astronautica requires a subscription, Dr. Baum has now placed the article on his website. It’s a worthy read for many reasons. As I have discussed before, the article is a series of extraterrestrial intelligence (ETI) First Contact scenarios, organized according to the possible impact on humanity. It’s loosely divided into categories: negative, positive and neutral. Most of the scenarios might seem quite familiar: ETI that enslaves us; outright destruction of Earth by ETI; helpful ETI that helps us solve problems; ETI that ignores us; ETI that spreads biological threat etc. The media had a field day with the negatives and the right-leaning media had fun with the scenarios that were based on environmental concerns. The primary ecological scenario involves ETI destroying us because of what we are doing to our environment and what we might do to the rest of the galaxy. Snickering media or not, it’s an interesting set of questions: at what point would ETI consider us a threat and what might they do to eliminate the threat?

Yet, it’s the extrapolation behind the rather general scenarios that provides the real meat to the article. The authors raise the idea that ETI might have a diverse population making up their civilization, with many competing, and perhaps conflicting, cultures and views. This possibility of ETI heterogeneity is of course based on our only possible study group: humans. If we were to land on another planet and meet another civilization, it seems likely that there would be a raging debate over what we should do. Some may advocate taking any advantage we can get. Others might say that we should have a policy of non-interference and only study the newly discovered civilization. So, if that’s how humans would react, who’s to say an extraterrestrial civilization visiting Earth wouldn’t have exactly the same situation? The authors point out that power shifts and changes in attitudes in ETI leadership could be dangerous for humans. We could receive mixed signals from competing ETI interests. This is an important point and it examines First Contact with a complexity that I think has been lacking. It seems likely that extraterrestrial First Contact will be extremely complex and nuanced, perhaps in ways that we do not understand at first.

Baum, et al. tackle many of what I would call the more subtle scenarios. Hollywood is fixated with marauding aliens or beneficent ones. In reality, the reaction of humans could be the most significant concern in a First Contact scenario. The authors point out that the detection of ETI could make existing conflicts here on Earth much worse, as nations compete for control. Religious groups could find a challenge to their beliefs and react quite negatively and perhaps even violently.

There is a primary way that Baum, et al. seek to define ETI: Universalist versus selfish. What this means for us would seem clear at first glance, but once again the authors examine the shadings of these definitions. For example, ETI could seek to destroy us for Universalist reasons- they want to save the rest of the galaxy from us. I would provide additional shading to the selfish end of the spectrum, not examined in the paper. Perhaps we offer ETI something significant that would not require our destruction. Perhaps it is in their best interest to befriend us?

The authors call for more in-depth study in their conclusion. With any scenario being possible and no data of any sort, it’s quite difficult to put together a quantitative risk analysis. However, they argue that we should work in that direction, as it would prove invaluable in the case of First Contact. They call for a development of scenarios, free from pre-conceived notions about what we expect ETI to be like. They also suggest that we should carefully consider whether we should send signals into space or respond to an engineered signal that we might find.

I would agree that caution and careful consideration are essential parts of any response to any type of First Contact. We quite simply have not examined this issue enough. The existence of ETI may be completely unknown to us now, but if we do discover an extraterrestrial civilization, the impact to humanity could be dramatic.

Who Reads This Blog?

You, my reading friends, are a very small group. This blog is a bit odd and I think it tends to alienate (pun fully intended) the two largest groups of potential readers. The UFO community doesn’t seem to like it much, primarily because I don’t believe that there is any evidence that aliens have visited, or are visiting Earth. I think that what is being currently presented as evidence is not real evidence. The scientific community, for whom I have immense respect for their efforts and incredible achievements, tends to shy away from this blog because of my focus on Direct First Contact, which is arguably the least likely form of First Contact, should it ever occur.

That’s fine. I don’t mind chatting with a small group. I am fascinated by a few things about you, the readers. First, you are an international group. From the time I installed Google analytics on the blog, a few years ago; it has received hits from 112 different nations. Most readers are in the United States and Europe. The United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, Poland, Germany, Finland, India, Brazil and Ireland make up the top ten nations. And this part is perhaps the most interesting to me: China, the most populous nation on the Earth, has exactly one page view, out of Shanghai, in all of those years. Are the Chinese just not interested in this subject? Or perhaps they are blocked from being able to search about this subject? I’m not sure why the Chinese government would care enough to block viewing. Who knows? Interesting, though.

A few locations stand out as regular readers: Hello Rohnert Park, California, Lambeth, England and lately Stuttgart, Germany. And also a shout out to long-time readers in Georgia and Utah. I thank all of you for taking the time to read and I encourage you to chime in on the comments. They are open to everyone. 

Welcome.

Good Guys or Bad Guys?

A recent opinion column in the New York Times by Gary Gutting, a professor of philosophy at the University of Notre Dame, points to a serious concern that people have about contact with an extraterrestrial civilization. The primary questions are simple: would extraterrestrials be good guys or bad guys and do we really want to risk the bad guy scenario?

The debate is not new, however it has become re-energized with statements by Stephen Hawking and a recent study published in Acta Astronautica by a group of researchers postulating possible First Contact scenarios.

The possibility that aliens might be harmful to the human race must be considered. However, I would urge a more thoughtful approach to the debate. Perhaps we should take a look at the only civilization we currently know: humans. Let’s say that we develop space faring technology some day and travel to another planet. What type of extraterrestrial visitors would we be? Of course, John Cameron took his stab at the idea with Avatar. Science fiction writers have been exploring the topic for decades. The answer those authors usually come up with is based on the reality of humanity: we are neither good guys nor bad guys; we’re a mixed up, confusing, stew of good and bad intentions, and good and bad actions. Sometimes we think we’re doing something good and it goes terribly wrong. Humanity is complicated and often difficult to understand. I think we are naïve to expect aliens to be any different. They are likely to have motives that we might consider to be good and others that we might not like at all. Perhaps the most dangerous situation would occur if they have motives with good intentions that lead to bad consequences for us. It might be hard for us to recognize the danger because of the good intentions. 

No matter how long a visiting extraterrestrial civilization might have been studying us, they would be relative novices at dealing with the human race, assuming that the First Contact in question is their first attempt. That means that they would not fully understand our society or how we might react to First Contact. Even worse, because of our lack of serious consideration of the issue, we would not be able to predict how we might react to First Contact. There would be a high degree of uncertainty for all parties involved. There is always risk inherent in uncertainty.

So, if aliens present themselves do we collectively turn off the lights and hide behind the couch? Of course not. We do what humans have done from the beginning. We move forward cautiously. We use reasoning and critical thinking to set a course. We learn from our mistakes. We analyze, make decisions and adjust our path. We keep moving forward. It is what humans do and it is what we will need to do in the wake of First Contact.