• De_Narm@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    That is a very human centric way to approach it. For starters, we don’t even know if other life has to be carbon based, let alone in which environments it exists. There could be an entirely different ruleset to their reproduction and of course their society. And even ignoring all these things, they could simply advance a lot faster, outpacing climate change and declining populations. Heck, we could be outpacing these problems if we never stopped puring endless ressources into space travel, but alas, capitalism deemed it unworthy.

    • Mac@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Yes, as a human, i usually have human-centric thoughts.

      You are right, of course.

      Sorry for sharing my thoughts.

      • De_Narm@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Don’t apologize, I didn’t mean to invalidate your thoughts. Until we’ve found other life, everything is possible. Maybe they all are slightly different humanoids with similar problems. In fact, many theories about why we haven’t found anything yet are based on the very same assumption.

        I just meant to add some additional food for thought.

        • Mac@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          It’s fine, I’ll just go cry.

          No, no worries. lol
          I recognize that realistically that’s not reasonable on a universal scale, even if humanity were to follow that path. It’s just an interesting thought experiment.