Read some
inspirational quotes!
Print page!
9/11 Commission
Frank W. Abagnale
Jamal Ahmidan
Dale Amon
Michael Anissimov
Abdullah Ahmad Badawi
Scott Borg
Nick Bostrom
BT (British Telecommunications) white paper
Joe Buff
Warren Buffett
William E. Burrows
George W. Bush
Charles M. Chafer
Arthur C. Clarke
Michael Crichton
DEBKAfile
Gen. Wayne A. Downing
Eric Drexler
Robert A. Freitas Jr.
Bill Frist
Rudolph Giuliani
Alan H. Goldstein
Michael D. Griffin
Julian Haight
Stephen Hawking
Robert A. Heinlein
Houston Space Society
Barbara Marx Hubbard
David E. Jeremiah
Bill Joy
Michio Kaku
Garry Kasparov
Mickey Kaus
Ed Koch
Charles Krauthammer
Ray Kurzweil
John Leslie
Ken Livingstone
András Lörincz
Richard Lugar
Kelvin G. Lynn
John Robert Marlow
MIT Technology Review
Peggy Noonan
Rep. David R. Obey
Tara O'Toole
Ian Pearson
Chris Phoenix
James P. Pinkerton
Sir Martin Rees
John Reid
Adeo Ressi
Glenn Reynolds
Condoleezza Rice
Tom Ridge
Donald H. Rumsfeld
Carl Sagan
Marshall T. Savage
Robert J. Sawyer
Jaap de Hoop Scheffer
Rep. Brad Sherman
StrategyPage
Ted Turner
Neil deGrasse Tyson
US National Academy of Sciences
Vernor Vinge
Ken Wear
White House
White House Official
Bob Woodward
Jonathan Zittrain
9/11
Commission, an independent, bipartisan commission created by
congressional
legislation and the signature of President George W. Bush in late 2002.
It is chartered to prepare a full and complete account of the
circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, including
preparedness for and the immediate response to the attacks.
"The greatest danger of another catastrophic attack in the United States
will materialize if the world's most dangerous terrorists acquire the
world's most dangerous weapons."
Frank
W. Abagnale was the master criminal whose autobiography
Catch Me If You Can was turned into
a film by Steven Spielberg starring Leonardo DiCaprio and Tom
Hanks.
"It is important to remember that technology breeds crime, it always
has . . . it always will."
Jamal Ahmidan was a principal behind the 3/11 attacks in Spain that left
2000 dead or injured and Spain with a new government that retreated out of
Iraq.
"We change states, we destroy others with Allah's help and even decide
the future of the world's economy. We won't accept being mere passive
agents in this world."
Dale Amon writes for the Samizdata blog.
"We are in the middle, not merely of a war in Iraq, but of a global war
on whose outcome our very lives may depend. I am too close to technology
not to realize how much evil can be done by a small number of dedicated
followers of the dark side."
Michael Anissimov was recently
advocacy director for the Singularity Institute for
Artificial Intelligence.
He is now
our new Fundraising Director, North America, and a
member of our Scientific Advisory Board.
"The arrival of nanotechnology will herald a mess of totally unmanageable
difficulties. Human intelligence and ethics are not enough to handle
these challenges. Without smarter-than-human, kinder-than-human forms of
intelligence to assist us in confronting these grave difficulties, our
continued survival cannot be ensured."
"If my million dollars can avert the chance of existential disaster by,
say, 0.0001%, then the expected utility of this action relative to the
expected utility of life extension advocacy is shocking. That's 0.0001%
of the utility of quadrillions or more humans, transhumans, and
posthumans leading fulfilling lives. I'll spare the reader from working
out the math and utility curves I'm sure you can imagine them. So,
why
is it that people tend to devote more resources to life extension than
risk prevention? [My guesses are]:
- They estimate the probability of any risk occurring to be extremely
low.
- They estimate their potential influence over the likelihood of risk
to be extremely low.
- They feel that positive PR towards any futurist goals will
eventually result in higher awareness of risk.
- They fear social ostracization if they focus on 'Doomsday
scenarios' rather than traditional extension."
"If an existential disaster occurs, not
only will the possibilities of extreme life extension, sophisticated
nanotechnology, intelligence enhancement, and space expansion never bear
fruit, but everyone will be dead, never to come back. Because we have
so much to lose, existential risk is worth
worrying about even if our estimated probability of occurrence is
extremely low.
It is not the funding of life extension research projects that
immortalists should be focusing on. It should be projects that decrease
existential risk. By default, once the probability of
existential risk is minimized, life extension technologies will be
developed and applied. There are powerful economic and social imperatives
in that direction, but few towards risk management. Existential risk
creates a 'loafer problem' we always expect someone else to do it.
I
assert that this is a dangerous strategy and should be discarded in favor
of making prevention of such risks a central focus."
Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, the Prime Minster of Malaysia and
Chairman of the 57-nation Organization of the Islamic Conference.
"The whole world is getting very disturbed. The frequency (of terrorist
attacks) seems to be mounting."
Scott Borg,
Director and Chief Economist of the
U.S. Cyber Consequences Unit, a
Department of Homeland Security advisory group and also
a member of our Scientific Advisory Board.
"My biggest obstacle is people's unrealistic belief that if a given
disaster
hasn't happened yet, it won't ever happen."
Nick
Bostrom, winner of a Templeton Foundation grant, cofounder of
The World Transhumanist Association, and is
director of the
Future of Humanity
Institute at the University of Oxford.
"At the present rate of scientific and technological progress, there is
a real chance that we will have molecular manufacturing or superhuman
artificial intelligence well within the first half of this century.
Now, this creates some considerable promises and dangers.
In a worst-case scenario, intelligent life could go
extinct."
"For example, if someone thought that a century-long ban on new
technology were the only way to avoid a nanotechnological doomsday, she
could still classify as a transhumanist, provided her opinion did not
stem from a general technophobia ... but was the result of a rational
deliberation of the likely consequences of the possible
policies."
"The technology to produce a destructive nanobot seems considerably
easier to develop than the technology to create an effective defense
against such an attack (a global nanotech immune system, an 'active
shield')."
"Our approach to existential risks cannot be one of trial-and-error. There is no opportunity to
learn from errors. The reactive approach see what happens, limit
damages, and learn from experience is unworkable. Rather, we must
take a proactive approach. This requires foresight to anticipate
new types of threats and a willingness to take decisive preventive action and to
bear the costs (moral and economic) of such actions."
"The Fermi Paradox refers to the question mark that hovers over the data
point that we have seen no signs of extraterrestrial life. This
tells us that it is not the case that life evolves on a significant
fraction of Earth-like planets and proceeds to develop advanced
technology, using it to colonize the universe in ways that would have
been detected with our current instrumentation. There must be (at least)
one Great Filter an evolutionary step that is extremely
improbable somewhere on the line between Earth-like planet and
colonizing-in-detectable-ways civilization. If the Great Filter
isn't in our past, we must fear it in our (near) future. Maybe nearly
every civilization that develops a certain level of technology causes
its own extinction."
BT (British Telecommunications)
white paper.
"It is clear from this section that we are rapidly inventing new ways of
destroying ourselves, and that the risk to mankind is increasing
exponentially."
As early as 2005, there will be a "deliberate biotech self-destruct by a
malicious biotech
researcher" and "terrorism will rise beyond the capability of government
systems."
Joe Buff, best selling author of Straits Of Power, Tidal Rip,
Crush Depth, Thunder in the Deep, and Deep
Sound Channel. He is a regular columnist for military.com
and is the winner of the 1999 and 2000 Literary Awards
from the Naval Submarine League.
"Some nut-case
getting hold of reprogrammable self-replicating nano-bots, originally
developed by mainstream experts for benevolent uses, is indeed a very
scary thought... As I'm sure you know, sad experience has shown that
often people who
commit suicide, or arson for revenge, or similar violent acts, have no
notion of the wider and lasting implications of their impulsive
behavior. So yes, I certainly agree, some loony with the access to the
tech, and the fleeting moment of irrational motive, could indeed
precipitate a gigantic state-change of the sort considered in the math
of Catastrophe Theory, far beyond the bad actor's expectation or
comprehension. Yikes!"
Warren Buffett, our
2002 Guardian Award winner, is the world's second
wealthiest
man, who is known as the 'Oracle of Omaha' for his astute investments.
"Predicting rain doesn't count, building arks does."
"Fear may recede with time, but the danger won't the war against
terrorism can never be won."
"We're going to have something in the way of a major nuclear event in
this country. It will happen. Whether it will happen in 10 years or 10
minutes, or 50 years... it's virtually a certainty."
"We would regard ourselves as vulnerable to extinction as a company if
we did not have nuclear, biological and chemical risks excluded from our
policies."
William E.
Burrows
is cofounder of the
Alliance to Rescue Civilization (ARC) and a member of our
Scientific Advisory Board.
"The question to ask is whether the risk of traveling to space is worth
the benefit. The answer is an unequivocal yes, but not only for the
reasons that are usually touted by the space community: the need to
explore, the scientific return, and the possibility of commercial
profit. The most compelling reason, a very long-term one, is the
necessity of using space to protect Earth and guarantee the survival of
humanity."
George W. Bush, U.S. President.
"Our generation faces new and grave threats to liberty, to the safety of
our people and to civilization itself. We face an aggressive force that
glorifies death, that targets the innocent and seeks the means to murder
on a massive scale."
"The gravest danger... lies at the perilous crossroads of
radicalism and technology."
"Wishful thinking might bring comfort, but not security."
"I don't think you can win [the war on terror]."
Charles M. Chafer has been involved in launching rockets for the
past 25
years, is cofounder of
Celestis, Inc., and is a member of our
Scientific
Advisory Board.
"If we get a second toehold in the solar system in the next 100 years,
we will have gone a long ways toward ensuring the long-term viability of
the human species."
Arthur C. Clarke, the prophetic SF author who in 1945 predicted a world linked by geostationary satellites.
"This terrorism is a
frightful danger and it is hard to see how we can get complete protection
from it".
Michael Crichton, author of The Andromeda Strain,
Jurassic
Park, and
Prey. He is also the creator of the television series
ER.
"Sometime in the twenty-first century, our self-deluded recklessness
will collide with our growing technological power. One area where this
will occur is in the meeting point of nanotechnology, biotechnology, and
computer technology. What all three have in common is the ability to
release self-replicating entities into the environment."
"Nobody does
anything until it's too late. We put the stoplight at the intersection
after the kid is killed."
"'They didn't understand what they were doing.' I'm
afraid that will
be
on the tombstone of the human race."
DEBKAfile's War
Diary
is included in the US Library of Congress historic
collection of 2003 War on Iraq on Internet. This online
news source contains
in-depth coverage of terrorism, security, political analysis, and espionage
and is available in English and Hebrew.
"While the Americans focus on their war against insurgents in Iraq and
the Israelis are caught up in fighting Palestinian terrorists, Al Qaeda
is drawing a ring of fire around both."
Retired Army General Wayne A. Downing was U.S. President George W.
Bush's deputy national security
adviser for counterterrorism until July 8, 2002.
"The United States may have to declare martial law someday in the case
of a devastating attack with weapons of mass destruction causing tens of
thousands of casualties."
"Most sobering to me was [the terrorists] research on chemical weapons,
radiological dispersion devices, and their fascination with nuclear
weapons. They are obsessed with them."
Eric Drexler, founder of the Foresight Institute, and founder
of the nanotechnology movement.
"Foresight's concern for the long-term potential abuse of
nanotechnology has been confirmed and strengthened. Those who abuse
technology from airliners to anthrax for destructive ends
do exist
and are unlikely to stop before full nanotech arrives, with all its
power for both good and ill."
"It would be easy to say, 'let government or industry figure out how
to prevent nanotech misuse,' but the events of Sept. 11 and afterwards
show this to be naive. (The current attempt to make airliners safer by
keeping all sharp objects off the plane is laughable a pair of
glass
eyeglasses is easily broken and used instead. The authorities dealing
with the anthrax attacks expressed surprise that anthrax could leak from
"sealed" envelopes when anyone who's ever licked one can see that
the
adhesive doesn't extend to the flap's edges.) Outside perhaps the
military, government doesn't do too well at anticipating emergencies and
planning policies for them their incentives are too political,
and
their time horizons are too short..."
"If extraterrestrial civilizations exist, and if even a small fraction
were to behave as all life on Earth does, then they should by now have
spread across space."
"By now, after hundreds of millions of years, even widely scattered
civilizations would have spread far enough to meet each other, dividing
all of space among them."
"An advanced civilization pushing its ecological limits would, almost by
definition, not waste both matter and energy. Yet we see such waste in
all directions, as far as we can see spiral galaxies: their spiral arms
hold dust clouds made of wasted matter, backlit by wasted starlight...
The idea that humanity is alone
in the visible universe is consistent with what we see in the sky...
Thus for now, and perhaps forever, we can make plans for our future
without concern for limits imposed by other civilizations."
Robert A. Freitas
Jr., was a research scientist at
Zyvex LLC, the
Earth's first molecular nanotechnology company and
is the author of Nanomedicine,
the first book-length technical discussion
of the medical applications of nanotechnology and medical nanorobotics.
He is a
2006 Lifeboat Foundation Guardian Award winner
and a member of our Scientific Advisory Board.
"Specific public policy recommendations suggested by the results of the
present analysis include:
An immediate international moratorium on all artificial life experiments
implemented as nonbiological hardware. In this context, 'artificial
life' is defined as autonomous foraging replicators, excluding purely
biological implementations (already covered by NIH guidelines
tacitly accepted worldwide) and also excluding software simulations
which are essential preparatory work and should continue. Alternative
'inherently safe' replication strategies such as the broadcast
architecture are already well-known."
Bill First, U.S. Senate Majority Leader.
"Like everyone else, politicians tend to look away from danger, to hope
for the best, and pray that disaster will not arrive on their watch even
as they sleep through it. This is so much a part of human nature that it
often goes unchallenged.
But we will not be able to sleep through what is likely coming soon
a
front of unchecked and virulent epidemics, the potential of which should
rise above your every other concern. For what the world now faces, it
has not seen even in the most harrowing episodes of the Middle Ages or
the great wars of the last century...
No intelligence agency, no matter how astute, and no military, no matter
how powerful and dedicated, can assure that a few technicians of middling
skill using a few thousand dollars worth of readily available equipment
in a small and apparently innocuous setting cannot mount a first-order
biological attack.
It's possible today to synthesize virulent pathogens from scratch, or to
engineer and manufacture prions that, introduced undetectably over time
into a nation's food supply, would after a long delay afflict millions
with a terrible and often fatal disease. It's a new
world...
So what must we do?
I propose an unprecedented effort a "Manhattan Project for the
21st
Century" not with the goal of creating a destructive new
weapon, but
to defend against destruction wreaked by infectious disease and
biological weapons...
This is a bold vision. But it is the kind of thing that, once
accomplished, is done. And it is the kind of thing that calls out to be
done and that, if not done, will indict us forever in the eyes of
history.
In diverting a portion of our vast resources to protect nothing less than
our lives, the lives of our children, and the life of our civilization,
many benefits other than survival would follow in train not least
the
satisfaction of having done right."
Rudolph Giuliani was the mayor of New York City when it was attacked on
9/11.
"The most dangerous situation is where you're facing peril but you're not
aware of it."
Alan H. Goldstein
is Professor of Biomaterials, Fierer Chair of
Molecular Cell Biology, and
Biomedical Materials Engineering and Science
Program Chair at
Alfred University
and is a member of our
Scientific Advisory Board.
"...because of nanobiotechnology, we have never been
closer to a Grey Goo scenario."
NASA Administrator Michael D. Griffin.
"But the goal isn't just scientific exploration... it's also about
extending the range of human habitat out from Earth into the solar system
as we go forward in time... In the long run a single-planet species
will not survive. We have ample evidence of that."
Julian Haight, president of
SpamCop.net,
the premier spam reporting service.
"I'm getting bombed off the face of the Earth and no one cares."
Stephen Hawking, the famous cosmologist who
discovered that black
holes are not completely black, but emit radiation and
eventually evaporate and disappear.
"It is important for the human race to spread out into space for the
survival of the species. Life on Earth is at the ever-increasing risk
of being wiped out by a disaster, such as sudden global warming,
nuclear war, a genetically engineered virus or other dangers we have
not yet thought of."
"In the long term, I am more worried about biology. Nuclear weapons need
large facilities, but genetic engineering can be done in a small lab.
You can't regulate every lab in the world. The danger is that either by
accident or design, we create a virus that destroys us."
"I don't think
the human race will survive the next thousand
years, unless we spread into space. There are too many accidents
that can befall life on a single planet."
Robert A. Heinlein was an
influential and controversial science fiction author.
The English language absorbed several words from his fiction,
including "grok", meaning "to understand so thoroughly that the observer
becomes part of the observed."
"The Earth is just too small and fragile a basket for the human race to
keep all its eggs in."
Houston Space Society.
"Perhaps the most immediate threat to humanity's survival on planet Earth
is the potential for madness, by a single person or by a group, to make
vast portions of the Earth's surface uninhabitable."
"We now have weapons of such sophistication that the elimination of our
planet's biosphere is a real near-term possibility. To protect against
such an event, we should seek to make humanity a multi-planetary
species."
Dr. Barbara Marx Hubbard is an author, public speaker, social innovator
and President of the Foundation for Conscious Evolution.
She is also a member of our Scientific Advisory
Board.
"If Earth is considered a closed system, there will be less for all
forever. The frontier is closed, the wilderness is gone, nature is
being destroyed by human consumers, while billions are starving. The
future indeed looks grim, and there are, ultimately, no really
long-range, positive solutions, nor motivation for making the
sacrifices and doing the hard work needed now, unless we understand
that we are evolving from an Earth-only toward an Earth-space or
universal species."
Admiral David E. Jeremiah, US Navy (Ret.), Former Vice Chairman, Joint
Chiefs of Staff
"Somewhere in the back of my mind I still have this picture of five
smart guys from Somalia or some other nondeveloped nation who see the
opportunity to change the world. To turn the world upside down.
Military applications of molecular manufacturing have even greater
potential than nuclear weapons to radically change the balance of
power."
Bill Joy
"Edison of the Internet"
is inventor of the Unix word processor vi, cofounder of Sun
Microsystems, and a
2006 Lifeboat Foundation Guardian Award winner.
"Hope is a lousy defense."
"We are being propelled into this new century with no plan, no control,
no brakes."
"But many other people who know about the dangers still seem strangely
silent. When pressed, they trot out the 'this is nothing new' riposte
as if awareness of what could happen is response
enough."
"I think it is no exaggeration to say we are on the cusp of the further
perfection of extreme evil, an evil whose possibility spreads well
beyond that which weapons of mass destruction bequeathed to the
nation-states, on to a surprising and terrible empowerment of extreme
individuals."
"An immediate consequence of the Faustian bargain in obtaining the great
power of nanotechnology is that we run a grave risk - the risk that we
might destroy the biosphere on which all life depends."
"...if our own extinction is
a likely, or even possible, outcome of our technological development,
shouldn't we proceed with great caution?"
Michio Kaku
is co-creator of
string field theory.
"Of all the generations of humans that have walked the surface of the
Earth for 100,000 years, going back when we first left Africa —
the
generation now alive is the most important.
The generation now alive, the generation that you see, looking around
you, for the first time in history, is the generation that controls the
destiny of the planet itself."
Garry Kasparov is
chairman of the United Civil Front, a democratic
activist group based in Russia. He was the world chess champion for
over 20 years.
"My matches against generations of chess computers made it painfully
clear to me that the march of technology cannot be stopped. The lucky
moment we have inhabited, in which weapons of mass destruction (WMD)
are prohibitively expensive and difficult to manufacture, is rapidly
coming to an end."
Mickey Kaus, author of the blog Kausfiles published in
Microsoft's Slate
magazine, authored the book
The End of Equality.
"Mass-destructive terrorism in the near
future won't even come from Al Qaeda, much less from nation
states but
rather from small groups of highly motivated causists or even from
loners."
"I'm especially not persuaded, for example, that when technology puts
greater and greater destructive power into the hands of smaller and
smaller numbers of individuals it won't ultimately lead to some sort of
doom. Imagine a rowboat with ten people, of varying religious beliefs,
all of whom have their fingers on the trigger of a personal nuclear
device. They try to get along and run a little society. How many times
will this scenario result in a big explosion? More often than not, I
suspect."
Ed Koch, former Mayor of New York City.
"I believe that the U.S. is faltering in the current war against
international terrorism, and we are losing our will to prevail."
Charles Krauthammer,
syndicated columnist who appears in the Washington Post and other
publications and commentator on various TV programs. He earned
his M.D. from Harvard University's medical
school in 1975 and won the Pulitzer Prize in 1987.
"Resurrection of the [1918 Flu] virus and publication of its structure
open the gates
of hell. Anybody, bad guys included, can now create it. Biological
knowledge is far easier to acquire for Osama bin Laden and friends than
nuclear knowledge. And if you can't make this stuff yourself, you can
simply order up DNA sequences from commercial laboratories around the
world that will make it and ship it to you on demand...
And if the bad guys can't make the flu themselves, they could try to
steal it. That's not easy. But the incentive to do so from a secure
facility could not be greater. Nature, which published the full genome
sequence, cites Rutgers bacteriologist Richard Ebright as warning that
there is a significant risk "verging on inevitability" of accidental
release into the human population or of theft by a 'disgruntled,
disturbed or extremist laboratory employee.'
Why try to steal loose nukes in Russia? A nuke can only destroy a city.
The flu virus, properly evolved, is potentially a destroyer of
civilizations.
We might have just given it to our enemies.
Have a nice day."
Ray Kurzweil, prophetic author of the 1960 book,
The Age of Intelligent Machines where he correctly predicted
advancements in AI.
He was also the principal developer of the first omni-font
optical
character recognition, the first print-to-speech reading machine for the
blind, the first CCD flat-bed scanner, and the first commercially
marketed large-vocabulary speech recognition. He is a
member of the U.S. Army Science Advisory Group, our
2005 Guardian Award winner, and is on our Scientific Advisory
Board.
"...the means and knowledge will soon exist in a routine college
bioengineering lab (and already exists in more sophisticated labs) to
create unfriendly pathogens more dangerous than nuclear
weapons."
"I advocate a one hundred billion dollar program to accelerate the
development of technologies to combat biological viruses."
"We have an existential threat now in the form of the possibility of a
bioengineered malevolent biological virus. With all the talk of
bioterrorism, the possibility of a bioengineered bioterrorism agent gets
little and inadequate attention. The tools and knowledge to create a
bioengineered pathogen are more widespread than the tools and knowledge
to create an atomic weapon, yet it could be far more destructive. I'm on
the Army Science Advisory Group (a board of five people who advise the
Army on science and technology), and the Army is the institution
responsible for the nation's bioterrorism protection. Without revealing
anything confidential, I can say that there is acute awareness of these
dangers, but there is neither the funding nor national priority to
address them in an adequate way."
"The decision by the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services to
publish
the full genome of the 1918 influenza virus on the Internet in the
GenBank database is extremely dangerous and immediate steps should be
taken to remove this data."
"Grey goo certainly represents power destructive
power
and if such an existential threat were to prevail, it would represent a
catastrophic loss... Although the existential
nanotechnology danger is not yet at hand, denial is not the appropriate
strategy."
"A self-replicating pathogen, whether biological or nanotechnology based,
could destroy our civilization in a matter of days or
weeks."
"We can envision a more insidious possibility. In a two-phased attack,
the
nanobots take several weeks to spread throughout the biomass but use up
an insignificant portion of the carbon atoms, say one out of every
thousand trillion (1015). At this extremely low level of
concentration,
the nanobots would be as stealthy as possible. Then, at an 'optimal'
point, the second phase would begin with the seed nanobots expanding
rapidly in place to destroy the biomass. For each seed nanobot to
multiply itself a thousand trillionfold would require only about 50
binary replications, or about 90 minutes."
"Recall that biological evolution is measured in millions and billions of
years. So if there are other civilizations out there, they would be
spread out in terms of development by huge spans of time. The SETI
assumption implies that there should be billions of ETIs (among all the
galaxies), so there should be billions that lie far ahead of us in their
technological progress. Yet it takes only a few centuries at most from
the advent of computation for such civilizations to expand outward at at
least light speed. Given this, how can it be that we have not noticed
them? The conclusion I reach is that it is likely (although not certain)
that there are no such other civilizations."
"To this day, I remain convinced of this basic philosophy:
no matter what quandries we face
business problems, health issues, relationship difficulties,
as well as the great scientific, social, and cultural challenges of our
time
there is an idea that can enable us to prevail.
Furthermore, we can find that idea.
And when we find it, we need to implement it.
My life has been shaped by this imperative.
The power of an idea this is itself an idea."
John Leslie is author of
The End of the World: The Science and Ethics of
Human Extinction
and a member of our Scientific Advisory
Board.
"Our failure to detect intelligent extraterrestrials may indicate not so
much how rarely these have evolved, but rather how rapidly they have
destroyed themselves after developing technological
civilizations."
"What is surprising is that so little has been done to develop
Earth-based artificial biospheres... If one-hundredth as much had been spent on
developing artificial biospheres as on making nuclear weapons, a lengthy
future for humankind might by now be virtually assured."
Ken Livingstone, the mayor of London, said the following after
Al Qaeda attacked Spain.
"It would be miraculous if, with all the terrorist resources arranged
against us, terrorists did not get through, and given that some are
prepared to give their own lives, it would be inconceivable that someone
does not get through to London."
András Lörincz,
Head Senior Researcher, Neural Information Processing Group,
Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary is a member of
our
Scientific Advisory Board.
"I subsign the following opinion:
The future and well-being of the Nation depend on the effective
integration of Information Technologies into its various enterprises,
and social fabric.
Information Technologies are designed, used, and have consequences in a
number of social, economic, legal, ethical, and cultural contexts. With
the rise of unprecedented new technologies ... and their increasing
ubiquity in our social and economic lives, large-scale social, economic,
and scientific transformations are predicted.
While these transformations are expected to be positive ... there is
general agreement among leading researchers that we have insufficient
scientific understanding of the actual scope and trajectory of these
socio-technical transformations."
Richard G. Lugar is the United States Senator for the state of Indiana.
He is also the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman.
"Even if we succeed spectacularly at building democracy around the world,
bringing stability to failed states and spreading economic opportunity
broadly, we will not be secure from the actions of small, disaffected
groups that acquire weapons of mass destruction."
Kelvin G. Lynn, Director of Center for Materials Research
at Washington State University. Dr. Lynn has developed an "antimatter
trap" that the U.S. Air Force is considering as the basis of an
antimatter bomb which would be over 1,000 times as powerful as an H-bomb.
"I think we need to get off this planet, because I'm afraid
we're going to destroy it."
John Robert Marlow, author of
Nanosecurity and the Future (if Any),
is a member of our Scientific Advisory Board.
"It would seem wise to locate the initial nanolabs in remote locations,
and to equip each with a sizable and immovable fusion warhead designed
to detonate upon notification of a nanoevent. To prevent the warhead
itself from being disassembled before notification can be sent or
received, redundant backup detonation procedures are called for. The
weapon could, for example, be placed in a vacuum which, if broken,
initiates detonation. Alternatively, the weapon could be suspended in
a fluid whose volume must remain constant, under pressure which must
remain unaltered, within an electromagnetic field which must be
maintained, etc. A combination of such measures the violation
of any one of which along will trigger detonation would perhaps
be wisest. Manual detonation might also be permitted."
MIT Technology Review.
"There is growing scientific consensus that biotechnology
especially,
the technology to synthesize ever larger DNA sequences has
advanced to
the point that terrorists and rogue states could engineer dangerous novel
pathogens."
Peggy Noonan is a contributing editor of The Wall Street Journal and
author of A Heart, a Cross, and a Flag.
"Man has never devised a weapon he hasn't eventually
used."
"We are up against not an organized state monolith but dozens,
hundreds and thousands of state and nonstate actors nuts with
nukes,
freelance bioterrorists, Islamofascists, independent but allied terror
groups. The temperature of our world is very high."
David R. Obey, U.S. House of Representative (Democrat -
Wisconsin).
"Obviously if there’s an attack in ports, you could have hundreds of
thousands of people die, depending on the weapons used, and there
certainly is a colossal risk to the economy."
Tara O'Toole, physician and director of the Center for Biosecurity at
the
University of Pittsburgh Medical Center.
"It is true that pandemic flu is important, and we're not doing nearly
enough, but I don't think pandemic flu could take down the United States
of America. A campaign of moderate biological attacks could."
Ian Pearson,
in-house futurologist for Futurizon, and advisor on our Scientific Advisory Board.
"In 1900 there were only a few ways for the planet to be wiped out:
comet, disease etc. But in the last few decades we have amassed a whole
plethora of possibilities: nuclear, environmental, biological, and a
lot of future threats will come from computing."
"We've managed to get ourselves into a position where the statistical
chances of extinction will soon exceed one percent [per year]. It
means that
sometime in the next 100 years the human race will be wiped out
somehow."
"Given this and the rate of technological advancement, I think the
human race could be extinct within the next 30 to 40 years."
Chris Phoenix is
cofounder of the Center for Responsible Nanotechnology.
"I don't see much hope if we enter the future unprepared."
James P. Pinkerton is a fellow at the New America Foundation,
a columnist for Newsday and TechCentralStation.com and a
contributor to the Fox News Channel. He authored
What Comes Next: The
End of Big Government and the New Paradigm Ahead and is a member
of our
Scientific Advisory Board.
"But the continuing advance of technology has brought a new dilemma:
Increasingly, any single individual or small group can wield great
destructive power. If one were to draw a line over the course of history,
from the first tomahawk, through the invention of gunpowder, all the way
to the A-bomb, one would see a steeply upsloping curve."
"Thanks to computers, that upslope is likely to stay steep for a long
time to come, as artificial brain power doubles and redoubles.
Techno-progress will be spread out across the full spectrum of human
activity, but if history is any guide, then much 'progress' will come in
the form of more lethal weapons, including nano-weapons. Thus, the
'suitcase nuke' that we fear today could be superseded by future
mass-killers that fit inside a thimble or a single strand of DNA."
Sir Martin Rees is Royal Society Professor at Cambridge University,
a
Fellow of Kings College, and the U.K.'s Astronomer Royal. The winner of
the 2001 Cosmology Prize of the Peter Gruber Foundation and our
2004 Guardian Award, he has
published numerous academic papers and books including
Our Final Hour: A Scientist's Warning: How Terror, Error, and
Environmental Disaster Threaten Humankind's Future In This
Century On
Earth and Beyond.
"Science is advancing faster than ever, and on a broader front... But
there is a dark side: new science can have unintended
consequences; it
empowers individuals to perpetrate acts of megaterror; even innocent
errors could be catastrophic. The 'downside' from twenty-first century
technology could be graver and more intractable than the threat of
nuclear devastation that we have faced for decades."
"If there were millions of independent fingers on the button of a
Doomsday machine, then one person's act of irrationality, or even one
person's error, could do us all in."
"Biotechnology is advancing rapidly, and by 2020 there will be
thousands even millions of people with the capability to
cause a
catastrophic biological disaster. My concern is not only organized
terrorist groups, but individual weirdos with the mindset of the people
who now design computer viruses. Even if all nations impose effective
regulations on potentially dangerous technologies, the chance of an
active enforcement seems to me as small as in the case of the drug
laws."
"We can ask of any innovation whether its potential is so scary that we
should be inhibited in pressing on with it, or at least impose some
constraints. Nanotechnology, for instance, is likely to transform
medicine, computers, surveillance, and other practical areas, but it
might advance to a stage at which a replicator, with its associated
dangers, became technically feasible. There would then be the risk, as
there now is with biotechnology, of a catastrophic 'release' (or that
the technique could be used as a 'suicide weapon')."
"To put effective brakes on a field of research would require
international consensus. If one country alone imposed regulations, the
most dynamic researchers and enterprising companies would simply move to
another country, something that is happening already in stem cell
research. And even if all governments agreed to halt research in a
particular field, the chances of effective enforcement are slim."
"Even if all the world's scientific academics agreed that some specific
lines of inquiry had a disquieting 'downside' and all countries, in
unison, imposed a formal prohibition, then how effectively could it be
enforced? An international moratorium could certainly slow down
particular lines of research, even if they couldn't be stopped
completely. When experiments are disallowed for ethical reasons,
enforcement with ninety-nine percent effectiveness, or even just ninety
percent, is far better than having no prohibition at all; but when
experiments are exceedingly risky, enforcement would need to be close
to one hundred percent effective to be reassuring: even one release of
a lethal virus could be catastrophic, as could a nanotechnology
disaster.
Despite all the efforts of law enforcers, millions of people use
illicit drugs; thousands peddle them. In view of the failure to
control drug smuggling or homicides, it is unrealistic to expect that
when the genie is out of the bottle, we can ever be fully secure
against bioerror and bioterror: risk would still remain that could not
be eliminated except by measures that are themselves unpalatable, such
as intrusive universal surveillance."
"It is not inconceivable that physics could be dangerous too. Some
experiments are designed to generate conditions more extreme than ever
occur naturally. Nobody then knows exactly what will happen. Indeed,
there would be no point in doing any experiments if their outcomes could
be fully predicted in advance. Some theorists have conjectured that
certain types of experiment could conceivably unleash a runaway process
that destroyed not just us but Earth itself."
"More ominously, there could be a crucial hurdle at our own present
evolutionary stage, the state when intelligent life starts to develop
technology. If so, the future development of life depends on whether
humans survive this phase."
"Suppose that we had a fateful decision that would determine whether the
species might soon be extinguished, or else whether it would survive
almost indefinitely. For instance, this might be the choice of whether to
foster the first community away from Earth, which, once established, would
spawn so many others that one would be guaranteed to
survive."
"Even a few pioneering groups, living independently of Earth, would offer
a safeguard against the worst possible disaster the foreclosure of
intelligent life's future through the extinction of all
humankind.
The ever-present slight risk of a global catastrophe with a 'natural'
cause will be greatly augmented by the risks stemming from
twenty-first-century technology. Humankind will remain vulnerable so long
as it stays confined here on Earth. Is it worth insuring against not just
natural disasters by the probably much larger (and certainly growing) risk
of human-induced catastrophes? Once self-sustaining communities exist
away from Earth on the Moon, on Mars, or freely floating in
space our species would be invulnerable to even the worst global
disasters."
"Once the threshold is crossed when there is a self-sustaining level of
life in space, then life's long-range future will be secure irrespective
of any of the risks on Earth. Will this happen before our technical
civilization disintegrates, leaving this as a might-have-been? Will
the self-sustaining space communities be established before a catastrophe
sets back the prospect of any such enterprise, perhaps foreclosing it
forever? We live at what could be a defining moment for the cosmos, not
just for our Earth."
"What happens here on Earth, in this century, could conceivably make
the difference between a near eternity filled with ever more complex and
subtle forms of life and one filled with nothing but base matter."
John Reid, the Home Secretary for the United Kingdom.
"We are probably in the most sustained period of severe threat since the
end of World War II.
While I am confident that the security services and police will deliver
100% effort and 100% dedication, they cannot guarantee 100%
success.
Our security forces and the apparatus of the state provide a very
necessary condition for defeating terrorism but can never be sufficient
to do so on their own. Our common security will only be assured by a
common effort from all sections of society."
Adeo Ressi, Founding Executive Partner of
Sophos
Partners, LLC.
"There's just no way to guarantee
human survival unless we move off this planet."
Glenn
Reynolds, contributing editor of Tech Central Station where his special feature on
technology and public policy called "Reynolds' Wrap" appears each week.
He is also the creator of the popular blog InstaPundit and
author of
An Army of Davids : How Markets and Technology Empower Ordinary People
to
Beat Big Media, Big Government, and Other Goliaths.
"Stephen Hawking says that humanity won't survive the next thousand years
unless we colonize space. I think that Hawking is an
optimist."
"Most people and politicians are worse, if anything have
short time horizons. Disasters are things that just don't happen, until they do.
Planning for them is ignored, or even looked down on, often by the very
same people who are making after-the-fact criticisms that there wasn't
enough planning."
"Over the long term, by which I mean the next century, not the next
millennium, disaster may hold the edge over prevention: a nasty
biological agent only has to get out once to devastate humanity, no
matter how many times other such agents were contained
previously.
In the short term, prevention and defense strategies make sense. But
such strategies take you only so far. As Robert Heinlein once said, Earth
is too fragile a basket to hold all of our eggs. We need to diversify, to
create more baskets. Colonies on the moon, on Mars, in orbit, perhaps on
asteroids and beyond..."
Condoleezza Rice, U.S. Secretary of State.
"The phenomenon of weak and failing states is not new, but the danger
they now pose is unparalleled. When people, goods and information
traverse the globe as fast as they do today, transnational threats such
as disease or terrorism can inflict damage comparable to the standing
armies of nation-states...
Weak and failing states
serve as global pathways that facilitate the spread of pandemics, the
movement of criminals and terrorists, and the proliferation of the
world's most dangerous weapons."
Tom Ridge, the first U.S. Homeland Security
Director.
"The general theme of it's-not-a-matter-of-if-but-when is
legitimate."
Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense.
"It is inevitable that terrorists will obtain weapons of mass
destruction, and that they will use them against us."
Carl Sagan, American astronomer, planetologist, biologist, and
popularizer of science and space research.
"All civilizations become either spacefaring or extinct."
Marshall T. Savage, author of
The Millennial Project: Colonizing The Galaxy In Eight Easy
Steps.
"Perhaps advanced civilizations don't use radio, or radar, or microwaves.
Advanced technology can be invoked as an explanation for the absence of
extra terrestrial radio signals. But is seems unlikely that their
technology would leave no imprint anywhere in the electromagnetic
spectrum. We have been compared to the aborigine who remains blissfully
unaware of the storm of radio and TV saturating the airwaves around him.
Presumably, the aliens use advanced means of communications which we
cannot detect. What these means might be is, by definition, unknown, but
they must be extremely exotic. We don't detect K2 signals in the form of
laser pulses, gamma rays, cosmic rays, or even neutrinos. Therefore the
aliens must use some system we haven't even imagined.
This argument, appealing though it is, cannot survive contact with
Occam's razor in this case Occam's machete. The evidence in hand
is simply nothing no signals. To explain the absence of signals
in the presence of aliens, demands recourse to what is essentially magic.
Unfortunately, the iron laws of logic demand that we reject such wishful
thinking in favor of the simplest explanation which fits the data: No
signals; no aliens.
The skies are thunderous in their silence; the Moon eloquent in its
blankness; the aliens are conclusive in their absence. The
extraterrestrials aren't here. They've never been here. They're never
coming here. They aren't coming because they don't exist. We are
alone."
"Now is the watershed of Cosmic history. We stand at the threshold of the
New Millennium. Behind us yawn the chasms of the primordial past, when
this universe was a dead and silent place; before us rise the broad
sunlit uplands of a living cosmos. In the next few galactic seconds, the
fate of the universe will be decided. Life the ultimate
experiment will
either explode into space and engulf the star-clouds in a fire storm of
children, trees, and butterfly wings; or Life will fail, fizzle, and
gutter out, leaving the universe shrouded forever in impenetrable
blankness, devoid of hope.
Teetering here on the fulcrum of destiny stands our own bemused species.
The future of the universe hinges on what we do next. If we take up the
sacred fire, and stride forth into space as the torchbearers of Life,
this universe will be aborning. If we carry the green fire-brand from
star to star, and ignite around each a conflagration of vitality, we can
trigger a Universal metamorphosis. Because of us, the barren dusts of a
million billion worlds will coil up into the pulsing magic forms of
animate matter. Because of us, landscapes of radiation blasted waste,
will be miraculously transmuted: Slag will become soil, grass will
sprout, flowers will bloom, and forests will spring up in once sterile
places. Ice, hard as iron, will melt and trickle into pools where
starfish, anemones, and seashells dwell a whole frozen universe
will
thaw and transmogrify, from howling desolation to blossoming paradise.
Dust into Life; the very alchemy of God.
If we deny our awesome challenge; turn our backs on the living universe,
and forsake our cosmic destiny, we will commit a crime of unutterable
magnitude. Mankind alone has the power to carry out this fundamental
change in the universe. Our failure would lead to consequences
unthinkable. This is perhaps the first and only chance the universe will
ever have to awaken from its long night and live. We are the caretakers
of this delicate spark of Life. To let it flicker and die through
ignorance, neglect, or lack of imagination is a horror too great to
contemplate."
Robert J. Sawyer is "the dean of Canadian science fiction" and
consulted with the Canadian Federal Government's Department of Justice to
discuss what Canadian law should be in relation to biotechnology,
stem-cell research, cloning, and the privacy of personal genetic
information.
He is a member of our Scientific Advisory Board.
"There's a long-standing problem in astronomy called the Fermi Paradox,
named for physicist Enrico Fermi who first proposed it in 1950. If the
universe should be teeming with life, asked Fermi, then where are all the
aliens? The question is even more vexing today: SETI, the search for
extraterrestrial intelligence with radio telescopes, has utterly failed
to turn up any sign of alien life forms. Why?
One chillingly likely possibility is that, as the ability to wreak damage
on a grand scale becomes more readily available to individuals, soon
enough just one malcontent, or one lunatic, will be able to destroy an
entire world. Perhaps countless alien civilizations have already been
wiped out by single terrorists who'd been left alone to work unmonitored
in their private laboratories."
NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer.
"We have terrorism everywhere. There's fights everywhere, be it here
in this city (Istanbul), be it in New York, Uzbekistan, Mombasa,
Yemen, you name it."
Brad Sherman, U.S. House of Representative (Democrat -
California).
"This technology [nanotechnology] is every bit as explosive as nuclear
weapons."
StrategyPage
offers
comprehensive bite-size summaries of military news and affairs on the
Internet. They provide inside data on how and why things happen.
"The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) initially sought to identify
all the vulnerabilities to terrorism in the United States. Month by
month, the list grew longer. It quickly became apparent that there would
never be sufficient resources to defend against all these potential
threats."
Ted Turner, American media visionary, philanthropist, and statesman.
"When people are moving too slowly to respond to a danger, one option is
to make it more vivid. Seeing the danger is the first step to reducing
the risk."
"Hurricane Katrina drove home the staggering devastation that disasters
natural or man-made can inflict. Meanwhile, July's attacks
on the
London Underground reminded us terrorists can still strike major world
cities. Now imagine the two joined together: terrorists, armed with
weapons of mass destruction, unleashing Katrina-scale chaos and death in
the heart of a U.S. city."  
"The risk of a Katrina-scale terrorist attack with Russian weapons is
too critical to tolerate any delays to these crucial efforts. Congress
must act and free us to meet what President Bush calls 'the greatest
threat before humanity today'."
Neil deGrasse Tyson
is Chairman of the Board of
The Planetary Society.
"If humans one day become extinct from a catastrophic collision, there
would be no greater tragedy in the history of life in the universe. Not
because we lacked the brain power to protect ourselves but because we
lacked the foresight. The dominant species that replaces us in
post-apocalyptic Earth just might wonder, as they gaze upon our mounted
skeletons in their natural history musems, why large headed Homo
sapiens fared no better than the proverbially peabrained
dinosaurs."
US National Academy of Sciences.
Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in
1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal
government on scientific and technical matters.
"Just a few individuals with specialized skills and access to a
laboratory could inexpensively and easily produce a panoply of lethal
biological weapons that might seriously threaten the US population.
Moreover, they could manufacture such biological agents with
commercially
available equipment that is, equipment that could also be used to
make chemicals, pharmaceuticals, foods, or beer and therefore
remain
inconspicuous."
Vernor Vinge, mathematician, computer scientist, and prophetic SF
writer who predicted the Internet in 1981 and the Singularity in 1993.
"If the Singularity can not be prevented or confined, just how bad could
the Post-Human era be? Well ... pretty bad. The physical extinction of
the human race is one possibility."
"Epitaph: Foolish humans, never escaped Earth."
Ken Wear authors the site
Rationallink.org and is on
our Scientific Advisory Board.
"As an armchair exercise you can reflect on the hundreds of
millions of years for intelligence to arise on Earth. And
then, with agriculture and the rise of leisure and then
science, comes the perennial struggle for power for the
dominion of one person over others which seems an
unavoidable consequence of intelligence. There results weapons
of war and destruction and their proliferation and the
possibility that one heedless maniac can destroy the entirety
of civilization. The window of time, for the rise of science
that can either destroy this world or undertake communication
with other worlds, is minute vanishingly small compared to
the time required for the rise of intelligence from the dust
of creation. That window of time will likely forever bar
communication and cooperation between worlds."
White House, US National Security Council.
"We are menaced less by fleets and armies than by catastrophic
technologies in the hands of the embittered few."
White House official, speaking to the Washington Post.
"They are going to kill the White House. I have really begun to ask
myself whether I want to continue to get up every day and come to work
on this block."
Bob Woodward has authored or coauthored eight No. 1 national
nonfiction bestsellers, including four books on the presidency.
"The realities at the beginning of the 21st century were two: the
possibility of another massive, surprise terrorist attack similar to
September 11, and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction
biological, chemical or nuclear. Should the two converge in
the hands of terrorists or a rogue state, the United States could be
attacked and tens of thousands, even hundreds of thousands of people
could be killed. In addition, the president and his team had found that
protecting and sealing the U.S. homeland was basically impossible. Even
with heightened security and the national terrorist alerts, the country
was only marginally safer."
Jonathan Zittrain cofounded the Berkman Center for Internet and Society
at Harvard Law School and holds the Chair in Internet Governance and
Regulation at the University of Oxford.
"[The system functions as well as it does only because of] the
forbearance of the virus authors themselves. With one or two additional
lines of code...the
viruses could wipe their hosts' hard drives clean or quietly insinuate
false data into spreadsheets or documents. Take any of the top ten
viruses and add a bit of poison to them, and most of the world wakes up
on a Tuesday morning unable to surf the Net or finding much less
there if it can."
|