you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]EndlessSunflowers[S] 18 insightful - 6 fun18 insightful - 5 fun19 insightful - 6 fun -  (9 children)

I'll go ahead and take this wonderful opportunity provided by saidit to mention a few conspiracy theories that I believe to be true

My 1st and favorite is hidden human history. If we're supposedly evolved over millions and billions of years why is it wrong to think there were advanced societies a million years ago? I think it makes sense. and archaeological evidence is starting to come to light (big thanks to the internet! and free flowing information!) Two great youtube channels on this topic are Mystery History and vlad9tv

which brings me to #2 conspiracy theory. control of the narrative. I was thinking on my morning walk today how it is fine to be passionate about your favorite sportsball team or flavor of alcoholic poison - but don't get too excited about fixing serious problems with the structure of the modern mess we're in. pop culture does a good job of keeping millions of minds on the same page. (go blue team! lol)

also, #3 secret government programs. there is so much missing money. so many secrets. so much shady shit going on. testing. of all kinds. I'm sure there are some human-animal hybrids and other horrible wretched genetic experimental shit

The moon. #4 I believe in the moon. I think it's real and I think we landed on it. But there is a lot of weird shit. "they're parked on the far side of the crater, they're watching us" ... what?! Also, where the fuck did the moon come from! How is it exactly in the right spot so that an eclipse covers it perfectly. weird!

Anyway, I could probably go on... peace y'all!

[–]wizzwizz4 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (8 children)

That moon-sun apparent size thing is weird; astronomers haven't discovered another planet with moons like it. (Then again, that isn't too surprising – planets are hard enough to find without finding moons too – but it slightly reinforces how bizarre this whole thing is.)

I chalk it down to coincidence, but that's just 'cause I'm boring, and can't think of any more plausible hypotheses. But it's one of the things to watch; it's entirely possible that we discover something in the future that raises a hypothesis to be more probable than Occam's Razor suggests for the "coincidence" hypothesis.


Hidden history? Well, I'd probably make a bet with odds of 5:1 or above: I think there's about ⅙ of a chance of some isolated civilisation, of a similar advancement to our last century's civilisation in some respect (probably philosophy or maths or literature or something else theoretical), having existed. But that chance is only dropping with time, as we get more advanced and so raise the bar (90 years ago we were more "advanced" than 100 years ago, etc.), and time goes on and we leave fewer places to be searched.

I doubt very much that there's a conspiracy to hide some big globe-spanning advanced technological civilisation of the past from us, because one existing in the first place and then having disappeared without wiping out all humans is unlikely (although, Toba catastrophe theory makes this one around 5%, or 1 in 20), let alone while leaving sufficiently small amounts of a trace for its existence to not already be known to us (a hypothetical technological society accidentally self-destructing – or even deliberately, if it was anything like ours – would leave traces everywhere; even if all humans deliberately deconstructed our places of work, followed by our infrastructure, followed by our own homes, followed by suicide, we would still leave loads of traces like plastics and having used up the fossil fuels and circuit boards and stuff); assuming that the entire civilisation was green and eco-friendly and produced almost entirely bio-degradable stuff to the extent that there's almost no evidence of their existence… Given that it's humans running the scene, and that I've only got experience from the one civilisation I know about to go by, I'd generously rate it about 0.1% likely that a hypothetical civilisation would take this route (one in a thousand hypothetical civilisations would do this, I reckon). And then there would have to be evidence found by a select group of people, which, given how hard it is to find such evidence buuutttt the near-certainty that some artefacts would still exist but that we've hardly got anyone looking… 4% (1 in 25). And then that they stayed reasonably quiet about that discovery (an optimistic 5%, but only because it's conceivable that the sort of livelihood / hobby that would permit this discovery selects for people that would not write in to tabloids) but they published it somewhere (in a small scientific paper, on an obscure forum somewhere if the discovery was recent, etc.; 95%, I reckon), that conspirators (their existence a very generous 40%, because if they existed I wouldn't know) who cared about this issue (90%, because I can see why some hypothetical conspiracies wouldn't want the political instability but I can see why many conspiracies just wouldn't care at all, but I'm taking into account that there might be multiple conspiracies) would find it (given that it has to be obscure, but that the conspiracy would be monitoring known sources, but that this wouldn't be the only thing they cared about and they'd be assigning it a reasonably remote possibility because it's pretty unlikely on the face of it, but I'm giving them an insanity bonus and assuming multiple conspiracies, 10% chance of finding this… actually, scratch that; I'll give them 40% chance, because there can't be that many sources to trawl through, unless this discovery was reported in the Internet age in which case they could write a program to search for them), shut it down (this is conspiracies we're talking about; who knows how much power / influence / convincing ability they have? 80% chance of success), set up a worldwide network to monitor for new discoveries (95% chance, because we've already assumed they've got sufficient resources) and shut them down (90% success chance for shutting all of these down, because they're clearly putting more resources into this and catching it earlier).

Multiplying all of these made-up-but-reasonable-sounding probabilities together to find the total estimated chance of this scenario occurring? 5% × 0.1% × 4% × 5% × 95% × 40% × 90% × 40% × 80% × 95% × 90% = 0.0000009357%. Even assuming that I've overlooked a thousand possible ways that this could happen, this is not even worth considering the possibility of given the evidence – unless you know something you're not telling me.

[–]wendolynne 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Every so often a religion or a nation will come along that feels obligated to destroy the works of previous civilizations. A recent example: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/1326063/After-1700-years-Buddhas-fall-to-Taliban-dynamite.html It's not hard to imagine the Christians of yore destroying any evidence which contradicted their assertion that the earth was created 6000 years ago. they certainly destroyed the histories and science maintained by pagan people of Northern Europe (i.e. the witch burnings) and the Inca in South America. It's not hard to imagine that something similar might have happened over and over in the past 200,000 years that homo sapiens has been around, according to the current theories of modern anthropologists. Objects made of metals oxidize fairly quickly - copper buckles have turned into green smears in archaeological sites only 500 years old. While hiking in the wilderness I have come across abandoned automobiles less than 100 years old that are just rust, barely holding the shape of a car. I sincerely doubt micro-circuitry is going to last for millennia without careful conservation. Plastics either.

Glaciers have tremendous power to grind stone objects into gravel, very little would still be recognizable if it was built in the path of the Ice Age glaciers.

So I think your estimation of probability is a bit low.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Plastics either.

Oh, no, plastics will unless deliberately burnt, and it'd take most of our species's resources to go out and find all the plastic and get rid of it in a lifetime. The rest of your points are good, though.

Your point about the Ice Age glaciers is especially good, too. Given this new information, I can update my estimate (after looking up the Bayesian formula and how to use it, because stupid old me hasn't memorised that yet) Bayes' Theorem is not useful here.

I've upped my 0.1% to 2%; 1 in 50 chance that the vast, vast majority of the evidence was either wiped out, buried by subduction, dismantled by other humans or otherwise rendered unreachable to us. Because your "human destruction" and "glacier" hypotheses are things that I hadn't thought of, and taking that into account makes it conceivable that such a thing might've happened in a hypothetical world (glaciers trashed loads and loads of evidence, and humans who didn't like it cleaned up the rest, so the hypothetical civilisation wouldn't have to have been so unsimilar to my expectations of how humans behave).

That makes 0.000018714%. It's still not really worth considering.

[–]wendolynne 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Once you abandon the "young Earth" mindset, you can look at certain things in a different light. Egypt has some artifacts created with technology at our level or better. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7d-hjlU0O4

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

I've taken that into account. They didn't really require more technology; it was more about more effort going into making the things. We couldn't create those artefacts with our current level of technology quickly enough for us to not get bored.

[–]wendolynne 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

So, the attributes of an advanced civilization: plastic technology and a short attention span.
The word 'plastic' means changeable, by the way. Our plastic technology is approximately 100 years old. plastics deform easily - relatively low heat deforms them. grease reacts with tupperware. Hard plastics are brittle, shatter easily. If an ancient civilization had invented DVDs, and Medieval people found one, would they have any idea how to read it?

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

The word 'plastic' means changeable, by the way.

Ok. Hydrocarbon-based polymers.

If an ancient civilisation had invented DVDs, and Medieval people found one, would they have any idea how to read it?

No, but they'd probably cotton on pretty quickly that it was made of something they didn't recognise. Then they'd probably give it to children to play with as a Frisbee, or just discard it, or possibly keep it as a trinket for a few years.

Where are you going with this?

[–]wendolynne 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Perhaps something similar has been discovered, and we have no idea what it really is.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

and we have no idea what it really is.

It's likely that someone nowadays would post it on the web, and people would share it if it was strange.