Fermi Paradox Hypotheses

"If such things existed intelligent life would have used them to reach us."For what reason would we be a magnet for everything out there to have to come visit us (the assumption being that if they don't visit us it can't be possible because we are somehow too important to ignore)? It's a rather flawed basis for an argument.Our communications out don't speed up getting to them because their ability to get to us has. There is no reason to assume anyone knows we exist yet.

I don't think it's anthropomorphism so much as logical deduction. Our planet's chemical makeup has been advertising its life-supporting properties for millions of years. Lately we've been (perhaps foolishly) advertising ourselves to the galaxy via radio, etc. Surely it would be interesting to other observers in the galaxy.Perhaps by setting off nuclear weapons, we advertised ourselves as a potential threat, inviting more scrutiny.Here's an article that discusses th

Are you assuming there's no other intelligent life in the universe? :-)

Why assume an alien species would value contact?

You've just described the Zoo Hypothesis:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoo_hypothesis

This is the kind of thing I could spend hours talking and thinking about, and often do, and now will by presenting some possible reasons why this may not be the case:1. The aliens had no idea we were here; they expect life to be so rare as to be practically non-existent. They no more expected us to be here than we expected to see green-skinned Martians out of Curiosity's camera.2. Interstellar drives aren't like getting in a vehicle and driving to a destination; maybe it's n

It isn't a good resolution, because it assumes all intelligent species in the universe must think and act according to the same rationale. But the one example of an intelligent species we're aware of (humanity) doesn't think and act this way - we've been blindly sending signals and probes out for decades now, and anyone observing our planet would probably notice obvious tech signatures.

Probably the standard is to maintain the ecosystem, currently there are many species that will go extinct, the ecosystem is out of balance.Our understanding of travel through space is limited by our understanding of the universe, a century ago nobody believed that we will land on the moon.A few centuries ago we used horsemen to send messages, now we use radio waves, maybe also radio is something primitive to advanced civilizations, who knows what we will discover, quantum entanglement for

Michio Kaku says: "Lets say we have an ant hill in the middle of the forest. And right next to the ant hill, they’re building a ten-lane super-highway. And the question is “Would the ants be able to understand what a ten-lane super-highway is? Would the ants be able to understand the technology and the intentions of the beings building the highway next to them?"The chance of higher civilisations being all around us, but us being too primitive to perceive them is my favourite explana

I've always been a bit confused about the idea that an advanced civilization would be uninterested in us because we've "only" reached the ability to communicate via radio waves. We're either a threat or an ally to these other civilizations, and if you were them and you detected a society that was clearly on course to eventually catch up, it would be in your best interest to treat them like one of those things ASAP so you can have a hand in their development.To me it f