UFOsandUAPs ADA034236

;g IUiMiiii
With rhe development of clothing, fire, and fabricated shelter, the techno-
logical species will become less environmentC~;ll~ limited. Further, it will become
dominant over all other species because of the increasing power of its tools. Its
"tool-teeth" will eventually be sharper than any other animal's teeth; its "tool-
muscles" will b3 stronger; its "tool-feet 11 faster. The technological species will
dominate its biosphere, and as its naturul enemies are overcome, its r.umbers will
dramatically increase. But ironically, its developing technology cau;;,es it to
accelerate toward its own destruction.
When programmed animals fight for territory, females, or food, the 11fight" is
usually conducted in a rigidly stylized mariner if within the same species. The
victor rarely kills or seriously wounds the vanquished because the victor is
programmed to stop fighting when the loser retreats or yields. This is not from
benevolence, but from programming. However, the deprogrammed animal is not
rigidly hardwired to relent \!hen it dei·'3ats another member of its own species, and
it will very often kill the loser. Being highly adaptive, it can and does adapt a
much greater variety of reasons f01 killir.g into its competition. To its own species,
the de programmed, intelligent, technologicu! ~~pecies is .1 self-competitor and a
self-killer. Since its ability to comp8t:'. is ~ function of its developing technology,
its internal competition th~1s is increasing. Technology feeds back to increase its
own rate of development, and thus the species conflict has positive feedback.
Viewed as a s8rvomechan1stic complex, the technologicctl species is actually out of
control, hiyhly unstable, and it is headed pell-mell exponentially toward resonance
and biospheric explosion. Unle~s its servoamplifier gain and competitive positive
feedback can be dampened, the technological species wili catastrophically expire.
But the significant reduction of udaptive, dcprogrammed behavior would
con~titute the loss of intelligence per se and would be a giant step backward in
evolution. Genetically there is no return for the deprogrammed technolO'Jical
species, which has crossed a one-way threshold in evolution. The spr~cies will
go into destructive resonance and explode within perhaps tens of years, while
evolutionary changes to genetically re-introduce behavior control would require
hundreds of thousands or even IT'illions of years. The natural evolution of Man
is finished now, within the lifetime of the average reader. The fifth stdge of
planetary evolution of life is the final stage of evolution by natural selection.
Thus, any "next step" in evolution must be taken technolugically by tbe
species itself if it is to be taken at all. Any such step to a ~ixth stage of evolution
must paradoxically involve the reimpositioi"\ of positive internal control, somehow
without giving up genetic deprogramming. The fact that r:i.gid and foolproof control
must be established to eliminate destructive competiEon, whilE:l ut the same time
genetic control must remain relinquished if intelligence is to be retained, is the
precise, contradictory, solitary human problem. It is this hard nut that all systems,
organizations, governments, societies, sciences, theorists, religious leaders,
meglomaniacs, dictators, por>tificators, and well-meaning but ignorant visionaries
and humanitarians have failed to chew and swallow since time immeworial. The usual
solution advanced is this. "If everyone would just be a perfect citizen, behave
ideally, and love and help everyone else always, then the problem would be solved."
2.