Will it become necessary for some humans to leave Earth and keep intelligence alive?

[Gomar]

I dont see humans living on other planets for hundreds of years yet. Perhaps in 500 years first colonists will settle Mars, or some other planet.
But, with present tech and problems, nope. As for reaching a star; not for 10,000 years.
Why not resolve problems on Earth instead? Polution, water, food, wars, etc. have to be addressed. In India people dont touch nor eat cows, yet, millions are starving. North Korea is a failed state; as is Syria, Egypt, Lybia, Yemen, Afghanistan, etc.

Sending a few people into space wont address any problems. In time, the colonists will split into nations, and go to war against each other
anyway just as on Earth.

[primummobile]

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

You mean 1% ?

[Noclevername]

Why not resolve problems on Earth instead?

Why assume that they're mutually exclusive?

Sending a few people into space wont address any problems. In time, the colonists will split into nations, and go to war against each other
anyway just as on Earth.

Missing the point of the OP. The scenario presented was if life on Earth becomes threatened. The idea is not to address human problems but to avoid dying.

[danscope]

I think Gomar got it right.

[Noclevername]

He's saying that a ship shouldn't have lifeboats because "we're only going to go sink another ship."

[primummobile]

He's saying that a ship shouldn't have lifeboats because "we're only going to go sink another ship."

Besides that, I wouldn't take it as a given that space colonies would go to war with one another. We go to war on Earth because it is easy. And most of our wars are over territory or resources. It wouldn't be easy for colonists on Mars to go to war with a colony around Jupiter, nor would it be cost effective to try to take resources from one another.

In a billion years, the Earth will be uninhabitable and all our surface water will be gone. If we don't leave sometime before then humanity will die.

[Ara Pacis]

I think Gomar got it right.

If you mean in his attempt to agree with you, then yes.

[Noclevername]

Sending a few people into space wont address any problems. In time, the colonists will split into nations, and go to war against each other
anyway just as on Earth.

At presnt we have one "ship", with zero lifeboats. Humanity would not survive even one "sinking".

If we build a fleet of ships, even smaller ones, at least some people could survive any single ship sinking, whenther caused by a war or other human activities, or natural disaster. We'd have redundancy for our species.

[Jens]

In India people dont touch nor eat cows, yet, millions are starving.

Do you really think the religious taboo is the cause of starvation?

[MaDeR]

Why not resolve problems on Earth instead?

Yes, sure, rotting here forever will solve every problem.

[Noclevername]

I'm all for trying to solve problems on Earth. It's still the home of 7 billion people, including my family. But we need a plan B, because fixing Earth's problems will involve a much bigger effort than building a viable off-Earth independent community, and even then might not succeed. If we try and fail to live in space, we can try again later with more knowledge. If we try and fail to avoid destroying ourselves, there is no second chance.

Colonizing space will cost about as much as a fair-sized war. Fixing Earth would take, as of last estimate, the collective will of the entire human race. Which is easier to achieve?

[Ara Pacis]

I'm all for trying to solve problems on Earth. It's still the home of 7 billion people, including my family. But we need a plan B, because fixing Earth's problems will involve a much bigger effort than building a viable off-Earth independent community, and even then might not succeed. If we try and fail to live in space, we can try again later with more knowledge. If we try and fail to avoid destroying ourselves, there is no second chance.

Colonizing space will cost about as much as a fair-sized war. Fixing Earth would take, as of last estimate, the collective will of the entire human race. Which is easier to achieve?

More importantly, colonizing space has the potential to fix Earth too.

[Sticks]

Do you really think the religious taboo is the cause of starvation?

Jens and Gomar you are sailing close to the wind on the no religion rule

Original Content:

Why not resolve problems on Earth instead?

Yes, sure, rotting here forever will solve every problem.

MaDeR you are sailing close to the wind on the civility front

So people can calm down, this thread is closed pending moderator discussion