Famed physicist Stephen Hawking repeatedly warned against attempting to contact extraterrestrial civilizations, arguing that it could put humanity in grave danger
Whilst worldwide intrigue surrounding UFOs and extraterrestrial life continues to escalate, renowned physicist Stephen Hawking consistently advocated for restraint, contending that mankind’s enthusiasm to establish contact with alien civilisations could prove catastrophic.
During the period before his passing in 2018, Hawking persistently cautioned that any intentional effort to communicate with extraterrestrial beings, particularly those potentially far superior to our own species, might jeopardise humanity’s survival.
His concern centred on the possibility that rather than approaching us with inquisitiveness or goodwill, a supremely intelligent alien race might view Earth as a world ready for plunder.
“If aliens ever visit us,” Hawking said in a 2010 episode of Into the Universe, “the outcome might be similar to when Columbus landed in America, which didn’t turn out well for the Native Americans.”
Hawking argued it would be foolish to presume that sophisticated civilisations would inherently embrace peace, reports the Express US.
If anything, humanity’s historical patterns, particularly when dominant societies encounter less developed cultures, indicate that domination, settlement, or disregard for suffering are equally probable as negotiation.
Hawking theorised that alien societies with interstellar travel capabilities would probably have depleted their homeworld’s natural resources, driving them to traverse the cosmos seeking fresh planets to colonise or mine for raw materials.
Under these circumstances, Earth might be perceived as a viable conquest rather than an ally. Despite championing the hunt for intelligent life beyond our planet, Hawking drew a firm distinction between listening and making contact.
Whilst initiatives like Breakthrough Listen, which earned Hawking’s backing, focus on picking up alien transmissions, other programmes including Breakthrough Message and METI (Messaging Extraterrestrial Intelligence) advocate actively broadcasting messages into the cosmos to announce our existence to other civilisations.
Hawking staunchly rejected these approaches. From his perspective, passive monitoring was scientifically sound, but broadcasting our whereabouts to mysterious galactic neighbours was recklessly foolish.
“We only have to look at ourselves to see how intelligent life might develop into something we wouldn’t want to meet,” he cautioned.
This warning has resurfaced lately following heightened public and governmental focus on unidentified aerial phenomena (UAPs, the military designation for UFOs).
American authorities have released classified military footage of mysterious airborne objects, whilst parliamentary sessions have spotlighted whistleblower allegations regarding possible non-human intelligence.
Although numerous researchers continue to doubt these encounters involve extraterrestrial visitors, public fascination has been rekindled, alongside fresh interest in Hawking’s viewpoint. Detractors of active messaging contend that we simply can’t predict the ethics, objectives, or behaviours of extraterrestrial beings.
Even if intelligent aliens are aware of our planet, making ourselves known could provoke a response, positive or negative, that we’re ill-equipped to manage.
Stephen Hawking wasn’t alone in his apprehension. Notable figures such as physicist Michio Kaku and SETI pioneer Frank Drake have voiced their ambivalence towards interstellar communication.
The late Carl Sagan, though generally more hopeful, also underscored the need for caution, pointing out the unpredictability of alien psychology.
Despite these cautionary words, some scientists argue that maintaining silence is neither practical nor beneficial. Given that Earth has been emitting radio waves into space for over a century, technologically advanced civilisations may already be aware of our existence.
From this perspective, intentional messaging might not make much of a difference.