New Mars Forums
You are not logged in.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Announcement
#51 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » A Dose of Hard, Cold, Economic Reality - International Cooperation is Essential » 2004-09-14 09:22:43
I want less federal spending and let the local government decide how they will
spend their local budgets which have increased without increasing taxes.
And just how did the local budgets increase without increasing taxes? The only healthy way that I can think of is that the tax base increased because more people/businesses wanted to locate there. While this sometimes happens, it is not typical. More usual is deficit financing, a distinctly unhealthy way of dealing with this issue.
Well what I mean is less federal spending and taxes and the local government then have the ability to increase their taxes as now they receive less funding from the feds but the local people are also paying less taxes to the feds.
However I'm not saying forget the USA and from now on many little countries. So you (the local governments) are still working closley together.
And also to keep a check of all the states, there must be something like the treaty of Maastricht. Meaning strict rules on local government budgets. If a state doesn't follow them then they can expect fines.
#52 Re: Terraformation » TNOs planetforming - coalescing the OO and KB mass » 2004-09-14 09:00:48
4. Moons can be constructed along the planets as easy ( or hard) as the planets themselves. But in principle I don`t consider that - the Moon is just an aspect of the earth life not necesity.
No the moon is very important. Especially for night hunters and foragers. Whole species of sealife base their mating season on the moon. And then you have also low and high tide which some life depend on.
#53 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » A Dose of Hard, Cold, Economic Reality - International Cooperation is Essential » 2004-09-13 22:26:03
Here's http://www.cato.org/dailys/12-29-03.html]an example of the negative reports that I read about FDR's new deal. However http://www.bergen.org/AAST/Projects/dep … ml]looking at this page shows me other information.
The funny thing about Bush (who you mentioned in your last line) is that I read an article about tax cuts and in it showed that in American history tax cuts have never ever worked. I don't remember the source.
http://www.counterpunch.org/freeman05302003.html]Here is an article (opinion?) that descripes the bush tax cuts with Reagons supply side economics. (in a very negative way)
http://www.commondreams.org/views01/0227-05.htm]This is another interesting article about the Bush II goverment being the richest in history.
#54 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » A Dose of Hard, Cold, Economic Reality - International Cooperation is Essential » 2004-09-13 20:25:15
How can the Mars Society take advantage of this situation? (Besides cashing in our savings bonds...)
In the present economic system, there absolutly nothing we can do, because the present economic system if finished and can not be redeemed.
But, if we go with an FDR type recovery of giving the Treasury Department the power to generate credit and a bankruptcy re-organization of the Federal Reserve system. Then we have some thing that we can put in front of the American people. The Federal would be able to finance government work project with credit generated from the Treasury Department. Of course most of those work project would have to be dedicated to projects inside the United States, but we would also dedicate some of those work project for building city space too. I am figuring about 90/10% break. Ninety present down here on a jobs program and the other 10% in a jobs program for space. Since the Federal Government is going to have to generate at least five hundred billion to maybe even one trillion dollars worth of fund on those programs on a big enough scale to have any significant impact on the U.S. Economy to be able to revive it. So there would be $50 to $100 dollars for our work program/space projects.
Since building a city in space beat starving to death, you might get a few takers to support your plan.
Giving the Treasury Department was that FDR generated the funds for his work projects that saved America from economic collapse.
I also might add, as that when Kennedy started the Moon Mission, the unemployment rate went down by two or three million people too.
Larry,
Some sources say that the FDR programs didn't do a lot at the end except spend a lot of money and get Americans used to socialisme.
As far as I know it was really WWII that kicked back American economy into its tracks.
So I don't think a Mars/Space program will do anything for America's short to mid term problems. Well not anymore then just taking that money that you would borrow and give it to all American citizens in cash.
#55 Re: Not So Free Chat » Hand Dominence - ...just curious/for fun » 2004-09-13 19:45:45
Left and the funny thing is that I'm exactlly like Rxke however I don't have a preference when typing on a keyboard.
Did they ever figure out why there is a predominant right-handedness in humans? What'ss the advantage/disadvantage? (except for being in majority of course. )
I don't know but an amazing fact is that all polar bears are left "footed".
#56 Re: Terraformation » TNOs planetforming - coalescing the OO and KB mass » 2004-09-13 19:41:34
You have a lot of interesting ideas Karov. Not saying I would personally would go for it or not but they would make nice science fiction stories.
---
I wonder how you would artificially cool the newly formed planet faster then normal natural ways. Drop ice comets, to melt (and so absorb the heat) and form oceans?
How will you collect all the dust / asteroids / comets to form a planet? Will you use space based bulldozers?
What about Jupiter like planets to act like a sun? As the sun it self it to far away to be of any use.
Animal life on Earth needs the moon for several reasons. Have you considered that?
#57 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » A Dose of Hard, Cold, Economic Reality - International Cooperation is Essential » 2004-09-13 16:43:53
This argument would then also be true for why multinationals are better then
small/mid sized companies and your mom and pop's / one man business.
Which in reality doesn't hold true as small / mid size companies tend to be as good or even better as multinationals.
There's an important difference. Multinationals seek to maximise profits by allocating production to where the price of
labour is the lowest, thereby reducing real wages worldwide through the "iron law" of LaSalle.
Government institutions and services on the other hand function basically as socialist re-distributors of wealth. Companiespay for services, for instance energy or communications, and the fee is transfered into consumer purchasing power.
Well a breakthrough in robotics and AI can possibly establish also the loss of local labour force. However being
multinationals with paper headquaters in the Bahamas. The rumour is that multinationals aren't that big tax payers at the
end. However perhaps stockholders of those multinationals are.
I believe that the burdens of "rational centralization" are bigger then its benefits
You're being too simplistic since not all branches of economical activity are equal. To illustrate the point of
decentralising governmental expenditure for example, think of a railroad that spans many localities. Now say we decentralised
it with every small county operating its own section of rail instead of devising a single time-table for the entire stretch
as well as forcing each locality to pay for rolling stock and maintenance to the best of their ability. Some localities would
be so rich they'll squander surplus resources on nonsense while others wouldn't even be capable of keeping the tracks in
order. Essentially, this is introducing inefficiency and waste into the system.
I think you are assuming a lot here. Saying because a state is rich it will waste money is not correct. I agree with your
points about infrastructure spending however not because local states will make a mess of it but more you need national
transportation ways. Another point is just because local states have more power it doesn't mean they don't have to work with
each other.
However richer states need a better developed infrastructure then poorer states. Their is no point in building expensive
infrastructures in areas where they are not used and just because that state belongs to the same country. An example would be
should all rural areas have access (garanteed by the federal government) to high bandwith communications (Internet) or
something good enough? And if so why should I pay for it? Why not just develop new technologies that would make it possible
without government help.
I think that you will gain a lot of flexibility with a more local way of government.
As for privatization there are several branches of economical/administrative activity of a similar nature such as
energy, hospitals, communications, roads, education, defense and spaceprograms. These are all activities characterized by
high capital investment and small profit margins, or even negative profit margins, but which are still essential for the
community and private business to function. Indeed, the more lavish services they can provide (provided of course the means
are wisely spent) the more private enterprise, like mom and pop's applepie bakery, will benefit from them.
I can see national roads (and other big infrastructure projects "Hooverdam"), defence and spaceprograms being paid for by a
federal funds or with aid of federal funds.
However energy, hospitals and education should and can be handled by local governments. But for instance with energy the
energy producing companies would be hooked up to a national grid and could sell their excess energy on it or handle power
failures of a local energy provider. Again just because its local doesn't mean you don't work together with other states.
I for one don't believe that education is really only based on the size of your budget but more on the quality. For example
if your school doesn't have money for the lastest Dell computers with Windows XP, does this mean you should forget about
having an IT department? Heck no, you can teach IT just as good on a 20 year PC. Not that I think there will occur worse
situations then there are now, just that the lastest and greatest stuff is not that imporant for a primary and highschool.
But agian now local states can decide them selfs how much they will spend on education and what kind of education and I don't
believe it will be a doom for the educational system as European countries have managed fine with their local education
budgets.
Socialism and capitalism must balance each other in order to achieve maximum utility and harmony.
You can have your style of government in your state. If the only way of doing business was by being big/huge then you would
only see those kind of companies. While at this moment you see all kinds of companies making profits with content employees
and actually being something good for society. So big government is not a garantee for success as the Soviet Union has
proven.
Lastly, as was already pointed out, the habit of pushing responsibility for federal services downwards to the local
level is in reality most often just a short-sighted excuse for getting rid of state expenditure. This is true all over the
world, not just in the United States.
Yes I agree that putting more burden on local government while not lowering federal taxes at the same time ,is actually just
a tax increase! But thats not what I want. I want less federal spending and let the local government decide how they will
spend their local budgets which have increased without increasing taxes.
---
Would you (as I saw that you are from Europe) want that everything is managed from Brussels or perhaps decide somewhat your
selfs (like now) how you will spend your budgets?
My ideas is basically like how the European Union works at this moment. However with a stronger European Defence Force and
big projects such as a space program or one off infrastructure expensis (such as the Euro Tunnel or the high speed trains).
However every other project must be paid by local governments which can apply for European help of funding. And further also
help for developing underdeveloped regions of countries
#58 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » A Dose of Hard, Cold, Economic Reality - International Cooperation is Essential » 2004-09-13 15:35:57
Furtermore, when both parents are obliged to work in order to maintain a minimum standard of living, who's there to provide for the children?
You're correct. IMHO, this is a symptom of the single greatest economic strain on the modern world. We tried to trade a lifestyle whose cost was high in terms of labor for one whose cost was high in terms of money, and ended up increasing the cost in both. Particularly here in the States. Labor saving devices serve no purpose if every time one saves you an hour you immediately fit some other task into it. The modern world must simplify its lifestyle or perish.
Well there is nothing wrong with a parent (be it man or woman) staying at home and taking care of the child. That is until the child is old enough for school and that parent can start working part-time.
However I think its the materialisme and consumption society that forces both partners to work full time as they want all of the latest of the useless goodies.
#59 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » A Dose of Hard, Cold, Economic Reality - International Cooperation is Essential » 2004-09-13 00:59:54
Also I think putting more burdens on local authorities is better. For an average American person in a highly populated and rich state there may not be a lot of change but it would make some states more attractive for investments that would have gone in foreign plants. And with this system if a state has bad budget it will not pull down the whole country like now a bad federal budget would do.
The point is when you put more burdens on local authorities you miss the benefits of rational centralization, co-ordination and specialization, making several bodies all trying to do the same thing on their own that don't interact very well or haven't the resources to handle the same obligations.
This argument would then also be true for why multinationals are better then small/mid sized companies and your mom and pop's / one man business.
Which in reality doesn't hold true as small / mid size companies tend to be as good or even better as multinationals.
I believe that the burdens of "rational centralization" are bigger then its benefits
#60 Re: Not So Free Chat » Pets » 2004-09-12 23:04:03
The funniest thing he does, though, is if he thinks someone is drowning in the pool (or something like that - he will do this if someone is underwater for a while, or if they're splashing a lot). He barks frantically, hopping back and forth, then jumps in the water towards the person. Then he starts yipping piteously, because he's scared of the water, and panics, completely ignoring whoever he was planning to rescue.
*Isn't it amazing how cats and dogs instinctively know how to swim? (And other non-aquatic animals too, I suppose...but I know this best in cats and dogs). If they get tossed into water (not by me!), they automatically know how to paddle to shore; even if never in water before, aside from womb waters of course. Nature has its ways with the 4-footed; often very impressive. As for we humans...most of us have to *learn* to swim or drown otherwise. ::shrugs::
--Cindy
Human babies know instinctively how to swim. I have seen videos of babies being pushed underwater and the babies would hold their breath and peddle like dogs.
They said that humans loose this instinct when they get older.
I couldn't find any good background information but heres]http://www.babyswimming.com/FAQ.htm]here's a site that talks about it. And further on if you would to do it you could start with a baby from the age of six months.
#61 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » A Dose of Hard, Cold, Economic Reality - International Cooperation is Essential » 2004-09-12 22:45:35
From what I hear the USA debt is pretty ok when compared with European countries or Japan. And those countries with the US face the same problems with a huge generation ready for retirement in a few years.
However the US has one advantage its population is still growing, which could help for paying the future debts. Unlike Europe and Japan which has a population getting older and older and hardly any fresh blood.
So perhaps technically the US is still in better shape then most other developed nations. However it could still hit a depression. However at this moment of time the only way that I see that happening in the short term (I'm not an economist) is by a terrorist attack of the same scale of 9/11.
About oil. I think if certain people really wanted the oil price could be much lower. And perhaps it will be in the future when finally the russian pipelines start working.
Also I think putting more burdens on local authorities is better. For an average American person in a highly populated and rich state there may not be a lot of change but it would make some states more attractive for investments that would have gone in foreign plants. And with this system if a state has bad budget it will not pull down the whole country like now a bad federal budget would do.
#62 Re: Human missions » China The Dominant Superpower In 20 Years..... - What does this mean for US? » 2004-09-08 16:33:37
Anyway you put its for China its better to have many of those pebble nuke plants then coal/oil/fossil burning plants or more of those huge dams that destroy a great deal of the country and makes millions of people move. Even when considering the nuclear waste.
#63 Re: Mars Rovers / University Rover Challenge » Simulation of Intelligent Robotic Colony » 2004-09-06 22:01:54
I wonder why software simulations can't anwser most questions asked here?
#64 Re: Human missions » China The Dominant Superpower In 20 Years..... - What does this mean for US? » 2004-09-05 17:36:39
Hydro power sounds 'green' on first glance, but isn't, as Grypd pointed out: loss of valuable aerable land, flooding of cities, villages (and polluted grounds from factories, based there(!)
irrigation headaches downstream...So: yay for the pebble bed reactors, bring 'em on!
From the same article (P3, last three paragraphs):
Coming to terms with nuclear energy is only a first step. To power a billion cars, there's no practical alternative to hydrogen. But it will take huge quantities of energy to extract hydrogen from water and hydrocarbons, and the best ways scientists have found to do that require high temperatures, up to 1,000 degrees Celsius. In other words, there's another way of looking at INET's high-temperature reactor and its potential offspring: They're hydrogen machines.
For exactly that reason, the DOE, along with similar agencies in Japan and Europe, is looking intently at high-temperature reactor designs. Tsinghua's researchers are in contact with the major players, but they're also starting their own project, focused on what many believe is the most promising means of generating hydrogen: thermochemical water splitting. Researchers at Sandia National Laboratories believe efficiency could top 60 percent - twice that of low-temperature methods. INET plans to begin researching hydrogen production by 2006.
So its looks like that the pebble reactor has another very imporant benefit.
#65 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » The Succession of Empires - Mars will trump the U.S. » 2004-09-03 14:20:10
I can count on one hand all the former colonies on Earth that are doing really well. Hint: they are all Anglo-Saxon colonies***
So who says that Mars will be a power monger in the future as so few colonies on Earth are that today. Well most of them are pretty much poor compared to western standards.
***
Canada
USA
Australia
New Zealand
#66 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » The Succession of Empires - Mars will trump the U.S. » 2004-09-03 14:11:36
hey, your talking aboutmy Marine brothers, you better watch what your saying. If i do remember correctly we liberated the Afghanis' from a tyrant and are in the hunt of another one right now...
If I say that I'm a Tyrant will you give me a billion bucks and a island to retire too?
#67 Re: Martian Politics and Economy » Hey, hey, hey, wait up - Mars is not a country » 2004-09-03 13:48:29
Perhaps I'd be more satisfied with an elected Chief Executive who serves a decade-long term of office, so they can make plans for more than 4 years in advance. Plus enough pomp and ceremony to make the House of Windsor jealous.
I can life with that but maybe every 5 years referendum, that basically asks: "I'm with the President / Yes" or "I"m against the President / No". If their are more No's then Yes's some procedures must come into action to and a follow up will follow.
Or you can do like the French a President for 5 years but with much more powers then the US one and he can serve as many terms as people vote for him.
#68 Re: Not So Free Chat » Religion vs Science » 2004-09-02 14:19:03
I think that the bible is written fractal programme based on time travel, with a serious resurrection principle, just as Douglas Adams has the Improbability Drive in the heart of gold and Heisenberg, the uncertainty principle.
Understanding the symbolism of the Bible with the view that Jesus wanted to go to space, the Bible could be seen as the document containing the information waiting to be unlocked.
Why is God confined to 10 Dimentions?
I can see that shape of 10 cubes in 3D is abstractly a Galaxy shape, but a 3D shape that has an 11 shape is a 4 triangle with two in the middle. It has a constant of 4, through the middle. God's name is traditionally seen as a tetragrammaton four letter word, 72 of them apparently.
1
1 1
1 2 1
1 1 1 1
Actually if you read http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,128 … thead]this article your post doesn't seem that weird.
A teaser:
MUMBAI, India -- What is the square of 85? In an instant, a 17-year-old boy said without blinking, "7,225."
Kamlesh Shetty had used a trick from a quaint concept called Vedic math, a compilation of arithmetic shortcuts believed to have been written by ancient Indians who lived centuries before Christ, during a glorious period in Indian history called the Vedic Age. Its math has now crawled into the 21st century to further Shetty's dream of cracking a nasty engineering entrance exam.
But I think on the other hand you one of those people that if the actual talk was about 30 dimensions would see something in the bible about 30 dimensions and hidden messages.
#69 Re: Not So Free Chat » Religion vs Science » 2004-09-02 14:07:46
This makes me think of two things:
1. God and religion are both manmade, or
2. God is like a kid with a stick stirring up an ant pile. Remember 'Q' from Star Trek TNG?
I want to add to this:
3. All problems on Earth are manmade.
I think if God had to step in and stop humans when they are not following the rules of the old testament no more then a few humans will be alive (think noah's ark)
Its better for humans to learn to deal with their own problems instead of some father figure needs to step in sort out their problems each time. Or else how else will they ever learn?
#70 Re: Not So Free Chat » Religion vs Science » 2004-09-02 14:01:24
Here's another thought. What if the traditional, supernatural concept of God is all wrong. If God exists and can be explained by science, does it cease to be God?
Basically I think if God doesn't like to be questioned he would not have created humans with brains.
I think God would be glad of it as it would be like the student exceeding the teacher.
As God does allow you do disagree with him or else the whole fallen angels (devils) mess wouldn't excist.
But really I think that now the having of souls and heaven can be explained by pseudo science. A soul is a form of (exotic) energy that has consciousness from which come free will and other factors. Heaven is another dimension which the energy (soul) enters when the biological energy stops.
Perhaps the heaven you are thinking of just another step. Maybe there you will evolve into some other being and go to heaven reloaded 
#71 Re: Not So Free Chat » Religion vs Science » 2004-09-02 13:43:37
A universe as complex as the one in which we live, with the conditions for life and consciousness to evolve forming out of cosmic accident is remarkable; but to suppose that an omnitient, all powerful being simply existed out of nothing and created all we see for whatever reason... that strikes me as an extraordinary claim.
I'm halfway through the book An Elegant Universe which is about general relativity, the other relativity (forgot the name) and quantum physics.
Basically if you would have an infinite microscope and would look at fabric of space you will not see a perfectly clear stretched material. It's more spongy. All the time at quantum scales, energy and matter (which is energy) seem to come to excistance in a matter of quantum seconds and then die again. Where does this come from? And quantum mechanics doesn't seem always to follow the laws of physics that we know of. Sometimes it just does things.
Or a more bad example are particle accelarators. You smash two protons and from no where you will find all sorts of exotic particles like anti matter.
So from this point of view it looks like energy seems to come from somewhere else. Heck even the big bang theory confirms this. As you in your remark, you will just have to ask where did this energy come from? However this doesn't prove a higher being watching over us. Just that matter (energy) seems to have come to excistance in this universe from nowhere or another place which is already a big deal.
#72 Re: Not So Free Chat » Religion vs Science » 2004-09-02 12:53:53
Quite aside from religious considerations, when one thinks of the difficulties we humans already have overcome to make ourselves aware of the Universe to the extent we have--using nothing but our own physical senses, native intelligence, and ingenuity to augment these--one wonders what we are ultimately capable of. Alone in the universe for all practical purposes, don't you all who are aware of this feel an urgent need to preserve life--all life--and get on with our expansion "out there" as rapidly as possible, before it's too late?
*Good points, and yes -- what ARE we ultimately capable of?
Trouble seems to be: Are most people (in the West and developing nations at any rate; we can't expect hungry folks in sub-Saharan Africa to care about going to Mars when they don't know if they'll eat tomorrow) even interested in space exploration and "getting on with it"?
Seems to me they're much more concerned about the latest fashion trends and who's winning what medal at the Olympics, etc.
Sometimes it feels trying to drum up enough interest in progress and capability (as science goes) is akin to the old "you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink" adage.
There's so much pettiness and unthinking herd following amongst we humans...I wonder if we'll ever get a chance to fully demonstrate our capabilities and potential (in a beneficial, progressive manner).
--Cindy
Where most common people interested in Colombus's expidition? I don't think so. When did at first normal people seem to be interested? When they found gold.
When did other people became interested in Nort America? Population pressure, hunger and bad local politics.
So from a pure scientific sence a lot of humans are not interested in exploration only if there is something for them there personally but humans at this moment in time with writing and all can learn from their pasts and realise that exploration is a good thing and thats why most people accept to pay taxes for NASA's funding.
However its not high on common peoples agenda's because they don't believe (and nor can Nasa proof that it will ) it will change their personal lives.
Beyond nationlistic propaganda space is a risky adventure with smalll (or none) short and mid term yields. In 500 years it could be something but then everyone who lives no is long long dead.
#73 Re: Not So Free Chat » Religion vs Science » 2004-09-02 12:33:09
The main theme in the first testament of the bible is "an eye for an eye". In a complete reversal is the theme of the second testament "forgive and forget".
Another thing that changed is that God was not only anymore for Jews but for all people that accept him.
I used to think that this showed an evolution in God Himself. Maybe He was trying to figure out the best policy for these humans He created? But you know, that just didn't sit well with me. God is supposed to be perfect and all powerful and while I do not believe He actually is I just couldn't get myself to believe that He would so drastically change His guidance for us
Why did God chance his message? Because humans unlike God are not perfect. So you will need to adapt your communication to their level.
Also when the human ate the apple in paradise they basically said to God: "I want to make my own mistakes and learn from them." Like children, you can tell them what's good and not but eventually they will need to learn it on their own and they want it that way.
So God from now on has basically one hand tied to his back when someone cries for his help. But like a good parent with children that just moved out of the house he now and then tries to help. If he still does so nowadays is a matter if you believe in miracles or not.
Also being a perfect being he may find it boring to know all and to make no mistakes and so he created humans in a way he would have wanted to be himself. Like a 100 year old that has seen all and done all but still looks at teenagers and their many faults as something that is fun to be.
God does not get involved with the day to day goings on of the universe. He created the universe with a balance. Matter-energy, light-dark, good-bad...
Personally I don't believe in good and bad. Or else animals would be bad too. Its just the way nature works.
Also this solves the question of "Why does God allow bad things to happen to good people?" Because He is not involved, His servants are or were. I believe the angels tried to help us in the past but maybe they backed off after we constantly misunderstood and went against their teachings. Humans chose the golden calf over their involvement. We wanted to make our own decisions so that is the way it is.
Well even the biblical times God allowed people to do bad things. Didn't he allow them to kills Jesus?
Basically doesn't show his face because humans don't want it. Do you Earth to be heaven? What for, Earth is a great place, we just need a way and motivation to stop the horriable acts commited by a very small percentage of humans. Life on Earth is great way for a human to explore his acts, thoughts and to learn about other humans and life and hopefully better them selfs.
I wouldn't trade in this experience for anything. Heaven can wait its not going anywhere.
Maybe Earth is actually Hell but instead of being tortured, locked up and raped by evil devils, God is more left winged and Earth is place for bad humans to learn to live with each other, develop their cultures. Basically a rehabilitation planet and universe. We can't do harm to anyone but ourselfs but also have a posibility to learn to enhance our selfs and find good things.
#74 Re: Not So Free Chat » Religion vs Science » 2004-09-02 12:05:26
I think God set the parameters, He made the basic laws, then He opened his hands and let it all begin.
This statement holds until you think of the posibility of micro universes in black holes with different parameters.
One certain fact; I read once is that the speed of light is lower then billions of years ago. So the parameters seem to change. But this could also have to do with the expanding of the universe I'm not sure.
#75 Re: Not So Free Chat » Religion vs Science » 2004-09-02 11:22:08
If you've ever seen a picture of the earth from space I think you'll know that this is not just an accident of physics.
I disagree with this view. As its all about perception. Someone color blind will see the images totally different as would perhaps an insectoid alien species with compisite eyes (fly like). And then a true AI (with human like intelligence) will again see it differently.
And then it also the thing of emotions. What another plant in the galaxy hosts some species like reptiles that are intelligent in mathimatical and physics sence but like reptiles are not capable of higher emotions?
When you see clouds passing above you in all sorts of shapes and in a color range from white to grey. Do you think of a higher being? The way the objects in space look is at the end as wonderfull as the the clouds above your head.