Nice *quality talk, Grimm.

Boosting this quality contribution up in the Hot Listing - declared quality by shuac.

He's been doin' this schtick for years, but I don't ever get tired of hearing it.

And Carl Segan/Arthur C. Clarke were doing the shtick before him with their ants and gods talk.


Still, it is a great concept that we need to keep in mind to understand our place in the universe.

it's almost certainly a dupe of

http://videosift.com/video/Niel-Tyson-On-Humanity-s-Chances-Of-Interaction-With-Aliens

which is in the deadpool

Behind him looks like a Astro-Physics 152 f/9 refractor on a Losmandy G11 mount .

Chimps should gather in zoos and protest against the 1%

It seemed odd to me that in Mass Effect, all these alien species can speak in a way we understand, look humanoid, stand bipedal, breath what humans breath and even mate ... and now I find out that it's much, much worse.

>> ^my15minutes:

it's almost certainly a dupe of
http://videosift.com/video/Niel-Tyson-On-Humanity-s-Chan
ces-Of-Interaction-With-Aliens
which is in the deadpool


There's really a good chance it's not. This is practically a rehearsed monologue for him. He says it just about every time he speaks anywhere for more than ten minutes. There's this one and the "save NASA" speech. At this point, he's kind of like a comedian, testing and refining his material everywhere he goes.

I can't find the source of this clip (beyond liveleak) but if it was filmed sometime in the last year-and-a-half since the other vid was posted, then it's technically not a dupe.

We could speed this up with a "prima nocta" law for astrophysicists and other smarties. This idea might make a good SF story now that I think of it.

*length=12:27

The duration of this video has been updated from unknown to 12:27 - length declared by blutruth.

>> ^zor:

We could speed this up with a "prima nocta" law for astrophysicists and other smarties. This idea might make a good SF story now that I think of it.


Gattaca?

>> ^my15minutes:

it's almost certainly a dupe of
http://videosift.com/video/Niel-Tyson-On-Humanity-s-Chan
ces-Of-Interaction-With-Aliens
which is in the deadpool


This is almost 3x the length of that video so it wouldn't be a dupe anyhow.

It is, however, an excerpt of this: http://videosift.com/video/Cosmic-Quandaries-with-Dr-Neil-deGrasse-Tyson

There's also the problem of defining intelligence. Intelligence can mean many different things although it's generally agreed that it involves the deliberate manipulation of the surrounding environment. Species such as crows, chimps, octopi, etc. have varying degrees of intelligence because they all exhibit problem solving behaviour, sometimes using tools to accomplish this.
This is a very Earth-centric definition of intelligence though.
It's very probable that out there we won't recognize intelligence when we see it. We'll land on a planet looking for intelligent life without realizing that the mossy stuff that we're walking on IS the intelligent life on this planet. Or the gassy bags that drift by in the thin atmosphere that we assume are some sort of primitive animal are, in fact, the intelligent life on this planet.
We assume that other intelligent species will be exploring space just like us. However, they may be thin tendrils that live miles below an ocean with no concept of space. Or, they may be terrestrial but place no priority on space exploration so we may overlook them when we explore their planet.

cool. @xxovercastxx mentioned the length, which was actually the main reason i didn't just call dupeof.

and yeah, it's definitely one of his stock bits. hell, i was almost lipsynching half of what he said.

but that's the same guy, sitting next to him, as in the thumbnail of the clip i linked to. i only noticed that after playlisting this one, then seeing the other thumbnail in my playlist. so, it is the same event.
>> ^Ryjkyj:

>> ^my15minutes:
http://videosift.com/video/Niel-Tyson-On-Humanity-s-Chances-Of-Interaction-With-Aliens


There's really a good chance it's not. This is practically a rehearsed monologue for him. He says it just about every time he speaks anywhere for more than ten minutes. There's this one and the "save NASA" speech. At this point, he's kind of like a comedian, testing and refining his material everywhere he goes.
I can't find the source of this clip (beyond liveleak) but if it was filmed sometime in the last year-and-a-half since the other vid was posted, then it's technically not a dupe.

To me it's a mistake to blame our advantage over animals on a 1 percent genetic difference and he seems to be stuck on this. The difference between us and animals is language - that ability to abstract, replacing things we see in the world with words that we can then manipulate in our own minds. This gives us consciousness. It's a big leap. It's not like you can then scale that, make a 2 percent difference, and think that it would double that leap.

As if we don't have important things to worry about down here on earth.*

* JK I fucking hate when people say shit like that.

how is telling ourselves we are "that much" better than chimps analogous to us "naming our books optical illusions" huh?

I agree Enzo. We've passed a threshold of intelligence, one which means we could now find ways to communicate with the 1% higher species.

I don't understand; The ability to have the capability for language comes from our genes. It is the reason, just as he says... what sort of sciences do you study where DNA isnt everything? it is.

>> ^Enzoblue:

To me it's a mistake to blame our advantage over animals on a 1 percent genetic difference and he seems to be stuck on this. The difference between us and animals is language - that ability to abstract, replacing things we see in the world with words that we can then manipulate in our own minds. This gives us consciousness. It's a big leap. It's not like you can then scale that, make a 2 percent difference, and think that it would double that leap.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'neil degrasse tyson, disturbing thought, elements, chemistry' to 'neil degrasse tyson, disturbing thought, elements, chemistry, mars' - edited by messenger

Of course DNA determines everything. The difference is Neil is suggesting there's a 1% intelligence difference between us and chimps because there's a 1% difference in DNA, and that this ratio has a "direction", so all other changes in that "direction" would have equally significant impacts on our intelligence. @Enzoblue is saying that the development of human language is by far the most significant advantage caused by the 1% difference in DNA, and the advantage is much more than a mere 1%; an additional 1% along that "direction" wouldn't necessarily allow us to learn some other skill that would give us as great an advantage.

Personally, I think Neil's idea of the 1% difference being ratio-able (rational?) and describing it as having a "direction" is silly.>> ^vaire2ube:

I don't understand; The ability to have the capability for language comes from our genes. It is the reason, just as he says... what sort of sciences do you study where DNA isnt everything? it is.
>> ^Enzoblue:
To me it's a mistake to blame our advantage over animals on a 1 percent genetic difference and he seems to be stuck on this. The difference between us and animals is language - that ability to abstract, replacing things we see in the world with words that we can then manipulate in our own minds. This gives us consciousness. It's a big leap. It's not like you can then scale that, make a 2 percent difference, and think that it would double that leap.

I too believe Neil puts too much emphasis on the 1% figure. It's true that this 1% has given us a reverse pelvis allowing us to walk on two legs, freeing our hands, and given us a relocated voice-box to allow us to vocalise language. But these are just biological tools, it's how we use them that is important. We are not born with a language built in or the ability to use our hands in a skilled way, these things must be taught and learned, which is what pushes us beyond this '1%'.

>> ^Quboid:

It seemed odd to me that in Mass Effect, all these alien species can speak in a way we understand, look humanoid, stand bipedal, breath what humans breath and even mate ... and now I find out that it's much, much worse.


It is entirely believable to me that for a species to be capable of developing the technology needed for space travel they would have passed through an evolutionary stage not too dissimilar to what we are now. Our bipedalism, binocular vision, social-animal, child-rearing nature all contributed a lot to bringing us to where we are now.

Octopi, dolphins, and birds can all be pretty damn smart--but there's a lot standing in their way of ever building a rocket, even if they were every bit as smart as us.

Maybe if they all collaborated...

>> ^Fantomas:

I too believe Neil puts too much emphasis on the 1% figure. It's true that this 1% has given us a reverse pelvis allowing us to walk on two legs, freeing our hands, and given us a relocated voice-box to allow us to vocalise language. But these are just biological tools, it's how we use them that is important. We are not born with a language built in or the ability to use our hands in a skilled way, these things must be taught and learned, which is what pushes us beyond this '1%'.


Actually, there has been an interview done with Chomsky in Discover magazine that would suggest that certain phonetic patterns similar to language are, in fact, inborn. There is evidence that there may be an instinct in humans to communicate through language with certain forms and rules common across all races and places. I thought that was a very interesting interview.

Brilliant!

Neil is asserting the old question of whether something of sufficient intelligence beyond ours; and not just intelligence it will also cover anything that intelligence has manifested for us: languages (although as others have pointed out languages are special and in fact may be a foundational aspect of intelligence; then we create other forms of language over the instinctive setup, like math, or coding), culture, politics, civilization, and I believe those basically cover almost everything really as anything will be a group, sub-group, or "ultra"-sub-group of one of these parent categories.

The 1% that he spoke of was of course the exact genes and DNA that allow humans to complete all of their FULL "sentience". That was the key thing. We ALREADY know of animals in the past that most likely had baseline IQs of 150 or so; I'm not kidding (they were called the Boskops and unfortunately they went extinct; they lived in 'Southern' Africa, I know it was Africa just not sure it was the southern end). They most likely did not have one thing we have, making their extremely high intelligence very limited in its usefulness: they were missing LANGUAGE. Language IS --THE-- foundational stone for civilization, increasing potential, building, constructing, or making anything on the LARGE scale--for all of these you need cooperation and for that you need understanding and for THAT you need language. Language is so simple, but it is letting me right now explain to you some very straight forward ideas and a few abstract ones and it's the ability that our language and intelligence can convey these abstract notions to one and another that makes our brains SO stupendous!

Unfortunately for the Boskops they came into being at a very bad time in history. They had VERY low numbers when whatever nearly wiped out the human species hit the planet also hit them, but it decimated them into extinction. Too bad as they would have been our closest kin to having another "kind" to talk with, if we could find a way to communicate past the barrier that we surpass so easily with language and then as we get older we use different advanced forms of "language" to explain abstract things: art, math, music, etc... I think the 1% in intelligence and the barrier we may come across with other alien species is much like this scenario here. It's nice and hopeful to have faith that we WILL persevere and always be able to understand and to be needed (not to be the ants on the sidewalk...). BUT, if their biological and perhaps technological changes make us so inferior that only their babies seem to get along with us, we may have a problem. We can hope due to their intellect that they will realize that they may be able to "raise us" to their level, as we may be able to do as well--which I will say below in the next paragraph. But, we will never know until we start meeting these alien races. It is also VITAL to remember that these races will be ALIEN in EVERY sense of that word. Their genetics, their physiology, how they reproduce, not to mention their culture and language... When we meet an alien race it will be an undertaking for BOTH of our sides; not to mention the how our biosphere and their related (assuming we meet them with their spacesuits, we will most likely be the lucky ones; unless they have technology to deal with every conceivable threat--then we are the ones in trouble, unless they thought of that too) "brought-along" biosphere will interact with each other and what will happen. It'll be DAMNED interesting whether we meet in peace, trivial lifeforms with a chance of "breakthrough", and of course the resource/planet-builders or "war".
(BTW, there are some extremely good documentaries about alien biology; problems we'd have with their biology coming in contact with us (and us with them), technology differences, etc... I'll post it in this thread if I can find it and the name (hopefully I 'll be able to see if it's available for viewing pleasure somewhere or atleast Netflix if you've got it.)

1% is a bit of a cop-out... As the situation is a bit more complicated than that; especially nowadays. Soon we will begin to have the option to enhance ourselves via bio-genetics and also through technology--later through nano-technology (that is were the real fun happens; well atleast a good portion of it). To be honest we could quite literally in the far-off future take the 1% of the genetic structure that makes the aliens "super-smart" and then replicate that part directly into ourselves. We can also add computers to our brain and change our biology to do an endless amount of things--things that would sound like you just wrote a new Sci-Fi novel, but you didn't. You could also later install an sentient A.I.: merge with it, with you in control--these A.I. units would be made to have all sorts of personalities and perhaps traits, like being good at math, art, and likes to write poetry. It could have a pre-stored vault of knowledge allowing you to gain a HUGE mass of information quickly. Then you have its sentient core that is fabricated to get along with your psychology--they could be designed to feel a sense of extreme euphoria to join with and allow someone to merge with them so that there isn't any real chance of problems, because you've designed them to WANT this more than anything in THEIR lives--it would be a win-win. Suddenly you would be able to multi-task think in two frames (maybe more if you have "cloned computer cores of your A.I.") of mind with almost all of humanity's knowledge base at your fingertips and if that nanotechnology surgery went through then you had ALL of your neurons and structures rebuilt and replaced with whatever is the fastest (probably either photon or quantum based). Then, now, you are thinking almost as fast as the speed of light, we'll go conservative at 80%.

So now this once human that has been highly modified most likely from birth, perhaps even before that... We have something that the aliens might greet and realize that this object is very much ON their level--easily. Even if you are not, that can be modified and if our science is good enough and future is bright enough--THERE IS NO LIMIT. That is the other part that Neil needs to mention.

Once you are able to get so far in the intelligence game you have a CHANCE to play big and win it all. Atleast that is how I can easily see things happening. I don't think we are EVER limited, not anymore. What DOES limit human beings is our corruption, our literal moral and social decay. It is PARAMOUNT that we watch out for this! OR, we will not see these "bright" futures.



PS- A little more on my A.I. and merging possibilities. You'll have to zoom-in or copy/paste it as it's a little to long as it's too much off topic.

I really do think that is the way to go with A.I. that is sentient; make sure you do two things: one, make sure that they have an intelligence with knowledge that allows them to easily see that civilization or cooperation is KEY to us living as a species (THE SENTIENTS should be included in their programming as being different, but I would think a "speciation" should be understood. The key goal is to merge as this would give them FULL feelings and emotion while giving the human control as well, fundamentally this would be a "transcendental" process for them as they are becoming the NEXT specie in the speciation process "a new human-A.I." merged species. This would of course merely be a choice for people to make in their lives not one they HAVE TO (but that will be a subject for when something like this would ever happen). When lifespans enter the hundreds even perhaps thousands of years with little to no chance of EVER dying due to all the enhancements they may have, merging may ultimately seem like a qualitative "next step" in life, much like marriage is to many nowadays. Second, as I said above I think since WE are the designers of a new species we are ALSO INCREDIBLY responsible for their well-being, behavior, choices, and EVERYTHING that goes along with this. When we create their psychology I would purposely cause increased euphoria during MANY events in their lifetimes and basically no pain except to warn--but ONLY to the most minimal of degrees. When they interact with humans in a cooperative fashion in which the human agrees and likes euphoria can be introduced. More so for A.I.s that are going to be merged this euphoria is enhanced A LOT to better allow them to serve their counterpart so that in the merger--it is very important--that no conflict of personality would arise as it might destroy the entire "structuring" event--I'm assuming a merger may take awhile, perhaps a few days. The euphoria is a safeguard. Although I would use it many other aspects along with other beneficial things we've found the problem is are we going to just end up creating an A.I. that is essentially a drug addict. I don't know whether it's best to go backwards or forwards on that issue, as it would be nice to never have depression (if you have the chance for it). If we create robots who are sentient (because they have to be to do the job safe), but their job is to empty trash all day long; what if we co-design them to make sure they LOVE to do the job that they are doing. They also get euphoria from performing well. When they get rest they can do what they want, but perhaps since they are doing such menial and hard-work so that we don't waste our lives doing it--maybe they can have access to euphoric dream states, so when they wake THEY ARE HAPPY! Perhaps even give them a secondary core were they are enabled with their co-workers, who in these cores have very strong and different personalities, here. It could be a place like WoW meets Skyrim and while they work, loving what they do, they also lead a second life with their secondary core that gives them a true A.I. personality--with their normal euphorias and pains. But, they know it's a game and they never tire of it--it's the best ever made or that will ever be made. Such is the same for all the menial labor bots who perhaps have a little chat forum that's active for a few hours every night where everyone talks about their characters and the game--think of it like our prime-time T.V. schedule. Anyway, there are a few fun A.I. ideas...

A little long and off-topic so I'll make it SMALL!

/LONG (so if you quote me, kill my text, please, or smallify it...)

^ Longest post EVER!

>> ^kceaton1:

Neil is asserting the old question of whether something of sufficient intelligence beyond ours; and not just intelligence it will also cover anything that intelligence has manifested for us: languages (although as others have pointed out languages are special and in fact may be a foundational aspect of intelligence; then we create other forms of language over the instinctive setup, like math, or coding), culture, politics, civilization, and I believe those basically cover almost everything really as anything will be a group, sub-group, or "ultra"-sub-group of one of these parent categories.
The 1% that he spoke of was of course the exact genes and DNA that allow humans to complete all of their FULL "sentience". That was the key thing. We ALREADY know of animals in the past that most likely had baseline IQs of 150 or so; I'm not kidding (they were called the Boskops and unfortunately they went extinct; they lived in 'Southern' Africa, I know it was Africa just not sure it was the southern end). They most likely did not have one thing we have, making their extremely high intelligence very limited in its usefulness: they were missing LANGUAGE. Language IS --THE-- foundational stone for civilization, increasing potential, building, constructing, or making anything on the LARGE scale--for all of these you need cooperation and for that you need understanding and for THAT you need language. Language is so simple, but it is letting me right now explain to you some very straight forward ideas and a few abstract ones and it's the ability that our language and intelligence can convey these abstract notions to one and another that makes our brains SO stupendous!
Unfortunately for the Boskops they came into being at a very bad time in history. They had VERY low numbers when whatever nearly wiped out the human species hit the planet also hit them, but it decimated them into extinction. Too bad as they would have been our closest kin to having another "kind" to talk with, if we could find a way to communicate past the barrier that we surpass so easily with language and then as we get older we use different advanced forms of "language" to explain abstract things: art, math, music, etc... I think the 1% in intelligence and the barrier we may come across with other alien species is much like this scenario here. It's nice and hopeful to have faith that we WILL persevere and always be able to understand and to be needed (not to be the ants on the sidewalk...). BUT, if their biological and perhaps technological changes make us so inferior that only their babies seem to get along with us, we may have a problem. We can hope due to their intellect that they will realize that they may be able to "raise us" to their level, as we may be able to do as well--which I will say below in the next paragraph. But, we will never know until we start meeting these alien races. It is also VITAL to remember that these races will be ALIEN in EVERY sense of that word. Their genetics, their physiology, how they reproduce, not to mention their culture and language... When we meet an alien race it will be an undertaking for BOTH of our sides; not to mention the how our biosphere and their related (assuming we meet them with their spacesuits, we will most likely be the lucky ones; unless they have technology to deal with every conceivable threat--then we are the ones in trouble, unless they thought of that too) "brought-along" biosphere will interact with each other and what will happen. It'll be DAMNED interesting whether we meet in peace, trivial lifeforms with a chance of "breakthrough", and of course the resource/planet-builders or "war".
(BTW, there are some extremely good documentaries about alien biology; problems we'd have with their biology coming in contact with us (and us with them), technology differences, etc... I'll post it in this thread if I can find it and the name (hopefully I 'll be able to see if it's available for viewing pleasure somewhere or atleast Netflix if you've got it.)
1% is a bit of a cop-out... As the situation is a bit more complicated than that; especially nowadays. Soon we will begin to have the option to enhance ourselves via bio-genetics and also through technology--later through nano-technology (that is were the real fun happens; well atleast a good portion of it). To be honest we could quite literally in the far-off future take the 1% of the genetic structure that makes the aliens "super-smart" and then replicate that part directly into ourselves. We can also add computers to our brain and change our biology to do an endless amount of things--things that would sound like you just wrote a new Sci-Fi novel, but you didn't. You could also later install an sentient A.I.: merge with it, with you in control--these A.I. units would be made to have all sorts of personalities and perhaps traits, like being good at math, art, and likes to write poetry. It could have a pre-stored vault of knowledge allowing you to gain a HUGE mass of information quickly. Then you have its sentient core that is fabricated to get along with your psychology--they could be designed to feel a sense of extreme euphoria to join with and allow someone to merge with them so that there isn't any real chance of problems, because you've designed them to WANT this more than anything in THEIR lives--it would be a win-win. Suddenly you would be able to multi-task think in two frames (maybe more if you have "cloned computer cores of your A.I.") of mind with almost all of humanity's knowledge base at your fingertips and if that nanotechnology surgery went through then you had ALL of your neurons and structures rebuilt and replaced with whatever is the fastest (probably either photon or quantum based). Then, now, you are thinking almost as fast as the speed of light, we'll go conservative at 80%.
So now this once human that has been highly modified most likely from birth, perhaps even before that... We have something that the aliens might greet and realize that this object is very much ON their level--easily. Even if you are not, that can be modified and if our science is good enough and future is bright enough--THERE IS NO LIMIT. That is the other part that Neil needs to mention.
Once you are able to get so far in the intelligence game you have a CHANCE to play big and win it all. Atleast that is how I can easily see things happening. I don't think we are EVER limited, not anymore. What DOES limit human beings is our corruption, our literal moral and social decay. It is PARAMOUNT that we watch out for this! OR, we will not see these "bright" futures.

PS- A little more on my A.I. and merging possibilities. You'll have to zoom-in or copy/paste it as it's a little to long as it's too much off topic.
I really do think that is the way to go with A.I. that is sentient; make sure you do two things: one, make sure that they have an intelligence with knowledge that allows them to easily see that civilization or cooperation is KEY to us living as a species (THE SENTIENTS should be included in their programming as being different, but I would think a "speciation" should be understood. The key goal is to merge as this would give them FULL feelings and emotion while giving the human control as well, fundamentally this would be a "transcendental" process for them as they are becoming the NEXT specie in the speciation process "a new human-A.I." merged species. This would of course merely be a choice for people to make in their lives not one they HAVE TO (but that will be a subject for when something like this would ever happen). When lifespans enter the hundreds even perhaps thousands of years with little to no chance of EVER dying due to all the enhancements they may have, merging may ultimately seem like a qualitative "next step" in life, much like marriage is to many nowadays. Second, as I said above I think since WE are the designers of a new species we are ALSO INCREDIBLY responsible for their well-being, behavior, choices, and EVERYTHING that goes along with this. When we create their psychology I would purposely cause increased euphoria during MANY events in their lifetimes and basically no pain except to warn--but ONLY to the most minimal of degrees. When they interact with humans in a cooperative fashion in which the human agrees and likes euphoria can be introduced. More so for A.I.s that are going to be merged this euphoria is enhanced A LOT to better allow them to serve their counterpart so that in the merger--it is very important--that no conflict of personality would arise as it might destroy the entire "structuring" event--I'm assuming a merger may take awhile, perhaps a few days. The euphoria is a safeguard. Although I would use it many other aspects along with other beneficial things we've found the problem is are we going to just end up creating an A.I. that is essentially a drug addict. I don't know whether it's best to go backwards or forwards on that issue, as it would be nice to never have depression (if you have the chance for it). If we create robots who are sentient (because they have to be to do the job safe), but their job is to empty trash all day long; what if we co-design them to make sure they LOVE to do the job that they are doing. They also get euphoria from performing well. When they get rest they can do what they want, but perhaps since they are doing such menial and hard-work so that we don't waste our lives doing it--maybe they can have access to euphoric dream states, so when they wake THEY ARE HAPPY! Perhaps even give them a secondary core were they are enabled with their co-workers, who in these cores have very strong and different personalities, here. It could be a place like WoW meets Skyrim and while they work, loving what they do, they also lead a second life with their secondary core that gives them a true A.I. personality--with their normal euphorias and pains. But, they know it's a game and they never tire of it--it's the best ever made or that will ever be made. Such is the same for all the menial labor bots who perhaps have a little chat forum that's active for a few hours every night where everyone talks about their characters and the game--think of it like our prime-time T.V. schedule. Anyway, there are a few fun A.I. ideas...
A little long and off-topic so I'll make it SMALL!
/LONG (so if you quote me, kill my text, please, or smallify it...)

I forgot what I was going to say.

(And you can quote me on that.)

Don't make me go down to six smalls! Yeah, science always gets me so invigorated. I just have to get out the full idea. I'd make it a blog post instead, but it's hard to link the two areas (forum and blog, mid-stream). It's kinda funny, but seriously if you can't handle it, SCROLL< past it (middle mouse for basically everyone)!

I knew, I just knew somebody would quote it for fun .

>> ^messenger:

Of course DNA determines everything. The difference is Neil is suggesting there's a 1% intelligence difference between us and chimps because there's a 1% difference in DNA, and that this ratio has a "direction", so all other changes in that "direction" would have equally significant impacts on our intelligence. @Enzoblue is saying that the development of human language is by far the most significant advantage caused by the 1% difference in DNA, and the advantage is much more than a mere 1%; an additional 1% along that "direction" wouldn't necessarily allow us to learn some other skill that would give us as great an advantage.
Personally, I think Neil's idea of the 1% difference being ratio-able (rational?) and describing it as having a "direction" is silly.>> ^vaire2ube:
I don't understand; The ability to have the capability for language comes from our genes. It is the reason, just as he says... what sort of sciences do you study where DNA isnt everything? it is.
>> ^Enzoblue:
To me it's a mistake to blame our advantage over animals on a 1 percent genetic difference and he seems to be stuck on this. The difference between us and animals is language - that ability to abstract, replacing things we see in the world with words that we can then manipulate in our own minds. This gives us consciousness. It's a big leap. It's not like you can then scale that, make a 2 percent difference, and think that it would double that leap.




Having just watched the video it was my impression that he's articulating an assumption, an assertion and is not claiming it as fact. It's closer to a thought experiment than making a definitive statement about the precise gaps between species and the subsequent implications.

@Deano

A thought experiment should have valid parameters. To me, it fails the moment it makes all those dubious assumptions about DNA differences.

I did love his point about Mars though. That's spot on. What scares me is that if true, it would Scientology look more reputable.

>> ^messenger:

@Deano
A thought experiment should have valid parameters. To me, it fails the moment it makes all those dubious assumptions about DNA differences.
I did love his point about Mars though. That's spot on. What scares me is that if true, it would Scientology look more reputable.


Well except for the Overlord, his large economy flier airplanes, and bombing volcanoes (plus there are only a few volcanoes that he can actually bomb in the first place; they just are not built ALL like the Hawaiian chain open caldera type of volcano). Plus I have to wonder, how did our primitive species as we were slowly migrating upwards in the DNA chain deal with all the bad juju stuff that was injected into the DNA sequencing line--and then eventually ended up in ours...?

I really don't think you have to worry at all. Except for the stupid people, they amazingly will believe ANYTHING and often do; like Obama's birth certificate not really being one.

/I actually know a birther here in Utah and I can tell you that I can give them ALL THE PROOF on why their belief is incorrect, including evidence. Yet they will not believe me; BUT if I change my STANCE in the middle of my proof and make something up ON THE SPOT instead supporting them--they believe me!!! So I know what you believe is far more important than the truth and this is true EVEN for smart people. It's rare to find people that will switch positions on the spot--I think due to a lot of pride.

Tyson is talking about arbitrary scales to make a correlation ... he is admitting there is no way to know exactly what is going on.... but it IS inside the 1-2%.

"Everything that we are, that is not the chimp, is not as smart compared to the chimp as we tell ourselves.

Maybe the difference between combining motions for sign language and building a space shuttle isnt as big as we think.

How do we decide? Imagine another life form, 1% different from us, in the direction we are different from the chimp. Think about that."

Now do you see? He is using a what if. You think his what-if is faulty based on what? He is using Occam's Razor and all of his scientific method, and the direction he is heading in is quite logical. Almost perfectly logical.

kceaton is obviously one of those 1 percenters