There are groups of designers who have the job of making symbols and systems that can survive for an extremely long time. One of their tasks was to design “signage” that might let generations thousands of years in the future not go poking around in nuclear waste yards. But the more crazy deadly and dangerous you make an artifact look, the more those future scientists are going to want to get into them.
Better off writing “this place is cursed and will kill those that enter”
They wrote that on the entrance to the pyramids. It didn’t discourage anyone.
The nuclear spike deterrent field has been a favorite of mine
This one looks cool, and I think that’s its biggest problem. It’s clearly a massive, man-made structure with no obvious purpose, yet with striking visual impact. To the hypothetical future civilization that is unaware of the dangerous nuclear waste, it basically begs to be investigated.
man-made structure with no obvious purpose
Probably something religious.
Yeah because desecrating religious sanctuaries has stopped humanity thus wait
Oh, I meant it more in the sense how archeologists/historians often say something was used for some religious or ritual purposes when they can’t come up with a better explanation. See for example Stonehenge or roman dodecahedrons. There was also the idea for an atomic priesthood which would be charged with keeping the knowledge about nuclear waste sites.
I was thinking about this and their thinking was way too complicated. The symbol you need is bones. Bones are always associated with death and decay because after death, bones are the thing that’s left.
And yes I know they thought of it but I think their dismissal of it is wrong. Their counter argument that it was once a symbol of something else by some culture, therefore. But again by its very nature it’s associated with death. Any society capable of this excavation is also capable of thinking “hmm what did they mean? outside of our own culture of course” and will quickly figure out it’s bad.
Yeah, Carl Sagan was like “skull and crossbones”
But of course everyone else wanted to over-engineer it, so you get proposed solutions like encoding messages in the DNA of plants, and color-changing cats with an accompanying viral song that no one’s ever heard of twelve years later… 🤦♀️
Like, guys, if people today can’t even figure out what it means, then it’s not a universal and enduring message.
And then some of the suggestions would only serve to make it a glaringly obvious archaeological dig site.
Skull and crossbones is about as universal as you can get. Maybe some atomic diagrams and radiation symbols, and written warnings in as many languages as possible, just in case people still understand them. And a giant slab that someone could only drill through deliberately, requiring heavy equipment.
I can’t believe these were supposedly some of the smartest people in the world, and yet they made the mistakes of assuming that future civilizations would be hyperintelligent and thoroughly inquisitive, while also not understanding any symbols from our era and being likely to avoid areas designed to seem ominous. As if egyptologists today respect the warnings on ancient tombs.
And yet they overlooked the skull and crossbones because it seemed too obvious. The whole point is that it’s supposed to be obvious!!!
Atomic diagrams would be good for advanced societies, but societies in the bronze age or middle age advancment are the ones that we have to worry about. They won’t understand atomic phyiscs but they are capable of excavation. Any fancy symbols might just intrigue them.
I think they underestimated the intelligence of possible future societies. Any society advanced enough to excavate this will be intelligent enough to ask “what does this symbol logically mean”. They won’t be limited to the ‘bad-vibes’ that the current ideas are heavy on (language aside).
They were really counting on a middle-age level of advancement when they suggested making a new religion with a priesthood and its own mythology…
Hm? All those things existed long before the middle ages. They even existed in prehistory.
Okay, so I should have said “middle age or prior.” Would that be better?
I mainly said middle ages since they compared the idea to the catholic church, but I understand the analogy could apply to other religions
Then I guess I just don’t understand your point. Obviously they’d assume a “middle age or prior” society when coming up with solutions to “how can we make sure a middle ages or prior society understands the danger of nuclear material”.
