Established Member
Maybe we are the only sentient beings in the universe. Will Earth become so ravaged with overpopulation, stupididity and insanity that some people will have to leave this planet and try to live on another planet, or a space colony, no matter how tough it wuld be, so sentience would not perish.
Established Member
I do not really agree with your notion that we are the only sentient beings---even without "solid" proof--->Originally Posted by potoole
Humanity will leave the boundaries of our home planet if and when we want to do so---> After we landed on the Moon, it was propitious for us to continue our explorations in space---> but we devoted our monetary resources to other aspects of the our existence-----> putting many scientists and engineers out of work.
If one believes that if history or economics is cyclical---> then we will venture back into the cosmos in earnest.
Of course, as you seem to point out humanity tends to make many mistakes and will ultimately leave this world behind----> I am unsure of what you exactly mean by your own words----> but ultimately there are those humans will argue that it is imperative to "heal" the wounds that we put upon our fellow humans (through "insanity" and "stupidity" --etc) before we leave our planet forever.
I am of the opinion that the majority of humanity will elect to do just that (heal our planet first) and then permanently venture beyond the confines of our planet.-----> it seems to be the pattern that seems more logical from past behaviors.
Order of Kilopi
The nature of life is to spread, adapt, and fill new niches. The "don't put all our eggs in one basket" philosophy was and is one of the oldest and most pursuasive arguments for settling space colonies-- if successful, just one self-sustaining off-Earth human gene pool doubles our survival chances as a species. And the more colonies we make, the greater the odds of some humans somewhere surviving.
I don't know if that means it's "necessary" to do so, but it is a very good idea.
STARGAZING: All I see are the lights of a billion places I'll never go. --Howard Tayler, Schlock Mercenary
Order of Kilopi
But if a large enough minority does leave the planet (more than 500) then it will have accomlished that goal without taking away from the healing. It isn't either/or, we can do both.
Presently the majority of people are doing neither.
STARGAZING: All I see are the lights of a billion places I'll never go. --Howard Tayler, Schlock Mercenary
Established Member
I recall someone, I think it was Freeman Dyson, saying that he thought we should take it upon ourselves to seed the universe with life, as it is quite possible we will never know if there is anything out there or not. He was talking about microbial life.
If we dont find any signs of life in our neighbourhood, then I think that idea has some merit. It would probably require some genetic engineering to toughen it up perhaps.
Sooner or later, living on earth is going to be very difficult, so yes ultimately there will be motivation to establish off world colonies, but i think that will be in the very far future.
Even without AGW, climate change is going to radically effect human civilization. How are we going to structure societies, are we still going to be citizens of nations, and what will be the economics of the future. We may find we dont have the means for grand projects.
Things could turn bad very quickly, so if you dont make hay while the sun shines, you may miss the chance.
Order of Kilopi
I had assumed the OP was talking about colonizing before things get bad, but it occurs to me that there's the possibilty of someone trying to flee the Earth during or after a global disaster. That would be a much more difficult proposition.
I suppose it's remotely possible, but to make it practical in the wake of a collapsing civilization would require extreme measures indeed. If the disaster were severe enough, then nuclear-pulse Orion lifters would not be out of the question. If it were some kind of pandemic, the uninfected might be considered justified in getting off the planet-- they might even get cooperation from other survivors.
If the problems that lead to collapse are just extrapolations of the ones happening today, then probably no. People adapt too easily and too quickly to think of "it gets a little worse every year" as a potential world-ender. The few that have the foresight to see otherwise are ignored now, they'll probably be ignored then.
STARGAZING: All I see are the lights of a billion places I'll never go. --Howard Tayler, Schlock Mercenary
Order of Kilopi
Those people are generally called "luddites" or "salt statues" because they keep finding reasons not to move forward.
Logical as in something you want to change or logical as in you think it's normal -- which it most certainly isn't.I am of the opinion that the majority of humanity will elect to do just that (heal our planet first) and then permanently venture beyond the confines of our planet.-----> it seems to be the pattern that seems more logical from past behaviors.
Et tu BAUT? Quantum mutatus ab illo.
Order of Kilopi
So...... you favor living in a bubble orbiting some place in our solar system rather than space ship Earth?
And you can't stand living in school for more than 7 hours without screaming ? Hmmm.... That I have to see.
Science fiction is fun to read. You should try living it for real sometime.
Established Member
So...... you favor living in a bubble orbiting some place in our solar system rather than space ship Earth?
And you can't stand living in school for more than 7 hours without screaming ? Hmmm.... That I have to see.
Science fiction is fun to read. You should try living it for real sometime.
I don't quite understand what you are driving at? I don't believe I currently have any chance of living anywhere but the Earth? and I am currently caring for an elderly parent?
Established Member
I am unsure why this post has gone into sociology---> however, when someone mistakenly "hurts" another ---is it not common for (or the law) to correct it or apologize or pay some form of restitution.
Although the topic is not quite mainstream ----> there appeared in the journal Science --a few weeks back--a general topic on Human Conflict--Although I will state that I am not an expert on Human psychology, have we not evolved to a point where we are more than single individuals only satisfying our needs?
Maybe I am wrong? But, if I am not mistaken, there is the case of bonobos--the close relative to chimpanzees--as well as humans---one major difference chimpanzees and bonobos is that the chimpanzee tend to be more violent when settling a conflict while bonobos are much more empathic and pro-social.
Although the correlations are weak (to say the least)--humans are possibly more closely related to the bonobo than the chimpanzee---how much I don't know and unfortunately for me that is pure speculation. However, IMO, it is a "night-and-day" qualitative comparison when one characterizes the general behavior of chimpanzees and humans.
Pardon any grammatical errors?
Established Member
I am sorry if I came across too harsh in any previous post----but I agree in one part of the post---> our sentient life will probably not perish as long as we extend ourselves and not give in to violent tendencies---I am much more idealistic in my beliefs that we will have to leave any aggressive tendencies behind us to a point where some mistakes can not be afford to be made outside the confines of a highly regimented environment.
Order of Kilopi
Understanding human dualism is leading to know and govern our emotions and boost our own responsibility and self reliance.
The closer the family and comunity, the more we remember and consider our relations with those around us. This remains true no matter where you hang your hat and toothbrush. It's all in learning to see .
Order of Kilopi
For most of human existence, people by necessity lived in extremely tight-knit family and tribal units, and in some places still do. Yet they still fought with other tribes, sometimes to the point of genocide.
STARGAZING: All I see are the lights of a billion places I'll never go. --Howard Tayler, Schlock Mercenary
Order of Kilopi
That's the problem, you're looking at the world as if there is some over-arching law or social group. There isn't. Most people subscribe to the International Relations theory of Realism, where states are unitary actors, which also coincides with an emphasis on power politics, and that is very different from concepts and structures of International Legalism.
Besides, I wasn't referring to all of humanity leaving Earth but only a very small subset, a splinter group. It's called a splinter group because it's only a splinter of the main beam. A small splinter is not going to heal the whole tree, but it might be able to take root elsewhere and grow into a whole, healthy tree.
Or to use a simpler analogy, if you're house is on fire and its too large to use an extinguisher on, you get out. Eventually, you'll find or build a new one.
That, actually, is the source of the problem. As we become more interdependent we feel that we can make demands on others and force our will upon them to meet our needs.Although the topic is not quite mainstream ----> there appeared in the journal Science --a few weeks back--a general topic on Human Conflict--Although I will state that I am not an expert on Human psychology, have we not evolved to a point where we are more than single individuals only satisfying our needs?
Et tu BAUT? Quantum mutatus ab illo.
Established Member
What I think is even more interesting is what would happen to our species after a diaspora (if something like that were to occur).
Natural selection could possibly split our species up into as many different variations as there were worlds to be colonized. What about direct genetic manipulation in order to proactively adapt to not so ideallic environments?
And what would happen to the gene pool here on Earth? It seems logical that colonists would be at least healthy, intelligent, and driven if not ambitious. Our world would lose some of its best genes with every ship to leave... Earth would get a progressively shallower and shallower gene pool while the colonies would get fresh starts with quality material.
Intelligence here could dwindle the more we spread it to the stars.
Order of Kilopi
It's highly doubtful that enough of Earth's best and brightest will leave to affect the Earthside gene pool that drastically. Even if space travel ever becomes cheap and plentiful enough to allow mass migrations (which would not be for quite some time, probably requiring several large space elevators, Lofstrom loops or the equivalent), there just aren't going to be enough great minds interested in leaving to affect the balance-- Most of them will have vested interests here on Earth.
STARGAZING: All I see are the lights of a billion places I'll never go. --Howard Tayler, Schlock Mercenary
Order of Kilopi
The concept of 'gene pools' will be obsolete quite shortly. Thanks to the efforts of geneticists, all the genes in a population will be recorded and expressed at will. There won't be any diminution in the human gene pool or that of any other species, so long as the digitised gene banks are preserved.
Order of Kilopi
There was a project several years ago to record genes from various rare or dwindling ethnic groups; the vast majority of them refused to contribute. Others even today (individuals and groups) refuse to give DNA samples on religious or philosophical grounds. So unless DNA donation is made mandatory worldwide, I can still see some of the population relying on old-fashioned methods.
STARGAZING: All I see are the lights of a billion places I'll never go. --Howard Tayler, Schlock Mercenary
Established Member
Perhaps 70 million humans = 0.1% are formally educated excluding quite a few who went though the process but some how missed the desired attitudes, compassion and logical reasoning and about that many more are well gifted with common scence, and/or largely self taught. That number would likely drop several percent per year, in a serious melt down of human society, which could begin without prior notice of even minutes. Off Earth habitats are not a present option, and would be expensive, crowded, dangerous and uncomfortble in 2050 even if we start large scale funding in 2013. Possibly there are already secret communities to continue sentience, but they will likely be terorized by desparate surviors of the meltdown. Neil
Order of Kilopi
Crowded is an easy fix-- don't send crowds. Send a small crew and a sperm bank. As for expensive, dangerous and uncomfortable, they beat being dead. Especially if the Earth becomes as crowded, dangerous and uncomfortable as you describe.
Last edited by Noclevername; 2012-Aug-06 at 09:22 PM.
STARGAZING: All I see are the lights of a billion places I'll never go. --Howard Tayler, Schlock Mercenary
Order of Kilopi
A ship on the ocean has a many many thousand fold advantage over any device in space. No question.
Order of Kilopi
During calm seas, sure, no question. It's harder to engineer against high pressure and high acceleration and frequent high kinetic impact events than against low pressure low acceleration and low kinetic impact events.
Et tu BAUT? Quantum mutatus ab illo.
Order of Kilopi
In peacetime. A ship facing a missile or torpedo has fewer charms.
The main advantage of space is distance. The best way to avoid an attack is to not be there when it hits. And collapsing civilizations, such as the one that this thread is about, often have such violent complications to deal with.
STARGAZING: All I see are the lights of a billion places I'll never go. --Howard Tayler, Schlock Mercenary
Order of Kilopi
Missiles and torpedoes are very expensive commodities indeed, and are only used on targets of merit for various and nefarious purposes. Would you use a $150,000 torpedo on a rowboat? The question is moot.
Life is still much easier on Earth than it could ever be in space. No getting around that.
By the way, I used to make my living firing torpedoes, as well as load them. Gotta be careful with those.
Order of Kilopi
And you're still missing the point. The OP asks if life becomes threatened on Earth, will some be foresighted enough to see space prefereable? Clearly, the answer is yes, as there are already be individuals who foresee that.
STARGAZING: All I see are the lights of a billion places I'll never go. --Howard Tayler, Schlock Mercenary
Order of Kilopi
Do you honestly expect such rational bean-counting during a global collapse? There are fanatics and terrorists right now who use antiaircraft and antitank missiles to shoot busses full of schoolchildren. Try to picture what would happen during the chaos of worldwide failures of communication and order-- there would be no more chain-of-command, no reliable news, and every target a potential enemy. In those circumstances it's not hard to picture someone torpedoing a rowboat that happens to get too close-- ask the sailors aboard the USS Cole if a small craft can't be a threat.
STARGAZING: All I see are the lights of a billion places I'll never go. --Howard Tayler, Schlock Mercenary
Order of Kilopi
A lot of bright people left Germany and other places to go to the United States, but I don't think there has been any notable effect on intelligence there. For one thing, genetics is not so clear that way. I think there is a concept called "return to the mean," which means that exceptionally intelligent people will tend to have children that are less intelligent than they are, whereas people who are exceptionally unintelligent will tend to have children that are smarter than they are.
As above, so below
Order of Kilopi
"Still" meaning Right Now it is.
This implies that at a future time, the human race on Earth will be in danger of extinction. Which may very well happen, humans being what we are.
If the risks of staying become greater than the risks of going, we'd be fools not to make the effort.
STARGAZING: All I see are the lights of a billion places I'll never go. --Howard Tayler, Schlock Mercenary
Order of Kilopi
Depends on who is in the rowboat. We've spent large sums of money to get just one person.
Et tu BAUT? Quantum mutatus ab illo.
Order of Kilopi
I hope we do. I'd hate to have humanity die off, for our kind of mind to end so soon.
Posting Permissions
