

Alien Invasion - Why Stephen Hawking Is Wrong - grellas
http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2010/04/27/war-of-the-worlds-why-stephen-hawking-is-wrong-about-aliens/

======
jheriko
"Just because we go around wiping out our competitors doesn’t mean aliens
would do the same"

This is true, but this same statement /proves/ that aliens might do the same
(we serve as an example) - imo that is good enough to justify a fear of alien
invasion.

"A civilization that has endured for millions of years would have overcome any
aggressive tendencies, and may well have genetically engineered its species
for harmonious living. Any truly bellicose alien species would either have
wiped itself out long ago, or already taken over the galaxy."

Stuff like this is pure speculation without justification - and arrogant
speculation at that.

At least Stephen Hawking's reasoning is minimal with the assumptions, and the
assumptions he does make are on the "safe" side, i.e. assuming the worst
possible risk will actually happen. e.g. aliens exists, they will be as
violent as possible, they will find us etc.

I'm not saying its a significant risk though...

------
khafra
Funny that an economist[1] has an immeasurably more coherent and logically
compelling model of the probability of alien spacefarers, and what that means
for us, than Stephen Hawking and the WSJ put together.

[1]<http://hanson.gmu.edu/greatfilter.html>

~~~
xiaoma
That was an excellent read and probably the most convincing answer I've seen
to the Fermi Paradox.

------
consultutah
If someone thinks they are smarter than Stephen Hawking. That someone is
wrong. Q.E.D.

(I know. Complete misuse, but funny.)

