• There are billions of stars in the Milky Way similar to the Sun.
• With high probability, some of these stars have Earth-like planets in a circumstellar habitable zone.[9]
• Many of these stars, and hence their planets, are much older than the Sun. If Earth-like planets are typical, some may have developed intelligent life long ago.
• Some of these civilizations may have developed interstellar travel, a step humans are investigating now.
• Even at the slow pace of currently envisioned interstellar travel, the Milky Way galaxy could be completely traversed in a few million years.
• Since many of the Sun-like stars are billions of years older than the Sun, the Earth should have already been visited by extraterrestrial civilizations, or at least their probes.
• However, there is no convincing evidence that this has happened.

ATTENTION, PEOPLE OF EARTH

We are on our way to your planet. We will be there shortly. But in this, our first contact with you, our “headline” is: We do not want your gravel.

We are coming to Earth, first of all, just to see if we can actually do it. Second, we hope to learn about you and your culture(s). Third—if we end up having some free time—we wouldn’t mind taking a firsthand look at your almost ridiculously bountiful stores of gravel. But all we want to do is look.

You’re probably wondering if we mean you harm. Good question! So you’re going to like the answer, which is: We mean you no harm. Truth be told, there is a faction of us who want to completely annihilate you. But they’re not in power right now. And a significant majority of us find their views abhorrent and almost even barbaric.

But, thanks to the fact that our government operates on a system very similar to your Earth democracy, we have to tolerate the views of this “loyal opposition,” even while we hope that they never regain power, which they probably won’t (if the current poll tracking numbers hold up).

By the way, if we do take any of your gravel, it’s going to be such a small percentage of your massive gravel supply that you probably won’t even notice it’s gone.

You may be wondering how we know your language. We are aware that there’s a theory on your planet that we (or other alien species from the far reaches of the galaxy) have been able to learn your language from your television transmissions. This is not the case, because most of us don’t really watch TV. Most of our knowledge about your Earth TV comes from reading Zeitgeisty think pieces by our resident intellectuals, who watch it not for fun but for ideas for their print articles about how Earth TV holds a mirror up to Earth society, and so on. We mean, we’ll watch Earth TV sometimes—if it happens to be on already—but, generally, we prefer to read a good book or revive the lost art of conversation.

Sadly, Earth TV is like a vast wasteland, as the Earthling Newton Minow once said. But, for those of you who can understand things only in TV terms, just think of us as being very similar to Mork from Ork, in that he was a friendly, non-gravel-wanting alien who visited Earth just to find out what was there, and not to harvest gravel.

Speaking of a vast wasteland, you might want to start picking out and clearing off a place for our spacecraft to land. Our spacecraft, as you will see shortly, is huge. Do not be alarmed; this does not mean that each one of us is that much bigger than each one of you. It’s just that there were so many of us who wanted to come that we had to build a really huge spacecraft.

So, again, no cause for alarm.

(Full disclosure: each of us actually is much bigger than each of you, and there’s nothing we can do about it. So please don’t use any of your Earth-style discrimination against us. This is just how we are, and it’s not our fault.)

Anyway, re our spacecraft: it’s kind of gigantic. The deceleration thrusters alone are sort of, like . . . well, imagine four of your Vesuvius volcanoes (but bigger), turned upside down. — THE NEW YORKER

Have you ever feel that the universe conspires against you? — Niki Wonoto

Bathrooms are for personal hygene and getting rid of waste bodily fluids. — Philosophim

I'm also very open to the idea that XYZ condition offers some advantages — Hanover

What can work? — Baden

Morality is typically defined as a collection of rules.
Moral realism says these rules have their source in something that transcends the human psyche.
The golden rule requires a person to look within, to their own love for themselves to find the right path.
Love replaces rules.

The golden rule is moral nihilism. — frank

These are old tired points about the nature of truth and objective and subjective truth, based on perceived reference frames. — universeness

The truth is important to me, and my secular humanism needs no supernatural input to function. I find this functionality, to be very useful, based on my 99.999% conviction level that your god does not exist. — universeness

Things are improving even more in places like the UK, where for the first time in recorded history, there are more brits who consider themselves non-religious, compared to the number who consider themselves religious. — universeness

I agree, but I think the reason why, is that they are under attack from a growing global secular humanist movement — universeness

Afaik, protestants do not believe in the trinity. — universeness

well if he was a socialist — universeness

Because I believe in the existence of God.
— Hanover

Which one? — universeness

I am interested in people's actual belief systems, as they directly affect what they choose to act upon. — universeness

"According to sociologists Ariela Keysar and Juhem Navarro-Rivera's review of numerous global studies on atheism, there are 450 to 500 million positive atheists and agnostics worldwide (7% of the world's population) with China alone accounting for 200 million of that demographic."

Knowledge/wisdom falling on deaf ears is considered "ignorance." — Benj96

others downfall is their success — Benj96

For me society/social cohesion is born of and propagated by a permanent state of autocorrection. Re-evaluation and implementation of corrective measures to bring things back to balance. — Benj96

The victims of thieves than the perpetrators of theft. The victims of violence and rape are deserving of more compassion then the perpetrators of violence and rape and the victims of online misogynistic abuse are deserving of more compassion than the perpetrators. — Baden

You don't get moral brownie points for a pseudo-Jesus act that pretends they are all the same. — Baden

if all you are saying is we should always be compassionate for everyone regardless of what they've done or what they stand for then you really aren't saying anything but just effacing all moral distinction. — Baden

and then specify you're talking about others more deserving of sympathy. — Baden

You said "we", not individuals. In normal parlance that is a generalised "we" that includes women and everyone else. — Baden

suggests you don't know what you're saying. I don't want to hound you but I think it's fair to ask what you're talking about. — Baden

's the year 2045, the world is for the most part matriarchal. — Benj96

Somehow, hatred and loathing don't sound all that enticing in a prospective date. — Vera Mont

maybe not all nations have officially approved it as a new term. Some nations have though. — Christoffer

So those without them need to nurture charisma to overcome the initial barrier. — Benj96

Women lacking respect for men is run-of-the-mill. When men do it, it's just pitiful. — T Clark

maybe create a healthier dating app that emphasises more the character of a person than their appearance. Many people would go for that. There's success and money to be made and a gap to be filled in the market — Benj96

You shag a bunch of them and maybe one stays with you. — bert1

I think increasing social atomization is at the root of this, basically forcing young people into an artificial dating scene that for obvious reasons doesn't appeal to nor suit many of them. — Tzeentch

Then one must look to prehistory. — Vera Mont

among those ages 25 to 64, men outnumber women by a large margin among never-married adults (125 men for every 100 women), but men are outnumbered by women among previously married adults (71 men for every 100 women).

Among never-married young adults with post-graduate degrees, women outnumber men by a large margin. There are 77 never-married men ages 25 to 34 with post-graduate degrees for every 100 women with similar educational credentials. Among never-married young adults with a bachelor’s degree, the male-to-female ratio is 102 men for every 100 women.

They only see through the lens of expectation. — Benj96

It's not just a matter of a bunch of guys holding onto an outdated ideologies, I think you underestimate 1) how biology played a role into forming these traditional ideologies in the first place, and 2) how their frustrated biological drives now plays into forming post-hoc misogynists rationalization. I bet a lot of incels coudn't care less about traditional norms and values... they're mostly frustrated, and invent stories to make it more bearable for themselves. — ChatteringMonkey