As I explained in the first and second entries (Breakthrough If You Want It and Telepathy), I'm dedicated to the cause of truly effective Preservation of Earth and as much of humanity as possible, even if the course/agenda produces whatever amount of unintended consequences and/or unexpected resolution(s). The objective is to acquire as much nonhuman knowledge as possible; obviously while maintaining enough sanity. And if the whole shebang turns out to be Grade A hocus-pocusry (if you will), or at least effectively (which I would wager the biggest it isn't entirely), it's a necessarily evolutionarily scientific upgrade either way. It's the idea of all time whose time has come. Such a breakthrough will (or would?) certainly allow the creation of things like effective methods of preserving our home/host; therefore ourselves.
As I see it, rightly or wrongly, nothing less than that will be considered the right course in future history.
So how much would one want to know upon meeting "ET?" For obvious reasons of free will, my preference would be to not know what precisely happens to us after we shed our mortal coils. I don't see how merely learning that there is life after death (if applicable) would cause harm; but hopefully nothing too specific. Nor would I want to know precisely what is required in this life to attain any specific type of afterlife.
However, again, I'm dedicated to Preservation. That's my/our Mission unless something or someone stops it/us. I support whatever kind of lifestyle and knowledge required that are eco-friendly enough.
No one in their right (or right enough) mind would consider a violent, sudden depopulation of any species an acceptable/civilized solution. There's no real or good reason that I can see why ecological balance can't be done in a gradual enough fashion. Depopulation is necessary, of course, assuming, one, that modifications to industry (as we know it) alone won't be enough to reach the proper balance, and two, that there aren't enough biodiverse planets available for us to colonize (using technology and/or methodology that could only be realized via Contact with nonhumans).
Thus the only civilized solution I can think of is mass, gradual enough sterilizations. Which bloodlines are to remain must be balanced with the need for as diverse a gene pool as possible; with emphasis on the latter. (Christ knows we don't want to resort to cloning or obviously inbreeding). Can we assume there's an advanced unseen power with excellent geneaology knowledge of us? If not, we'll have to hash it out on our own (which we'll probably at least basically be doing anyway); seemingly with some type of lottery system.
As far as the inevitable violent/armed resistance to forced sterilizations, I can only hope there will (or would) be enough physical force to counter it.
I can't emphasize enough the need to look within the construct of our own government first - the real government (NSS) - as the real source of the (secrecy-based) problems. That's opposed to shouting stuff like Illuminati and NWO; which are (presumably usually unintentional) distractions.
To quote verbatim from the first entry, no one can be made to give a rat's arse about the future of humanity and Earth. I add now that it's the biggest psychotic folly to just shrug, abdicate responsibility, and say, "It's all in God's Hands, and I don't have to do or say a damn thing." Actually, those who believe that are, in a sense, right. Everything is, at least essentially, in "God's Hands," but it's entirely the choice of the collective human race as to what specifically is/will be in the "hands" of the (seemingly collectively, not singularly) intelligently unseen. Would one prefer to make it easier or more difficult? That part isn't "God's" choice.
We've no evidence to believe anything will happen until enough people become outraged enough by rule by secrecy itself. Collective focus/meditation creates whatever future we desire. Or that's where it begins. (Again see first entry). Peace and love.