Maybe I am baiting, but I think this needs to be discussed. I like to separate the skeptics from the trekkies. The human race is incorrigibly stupid and we are bound to die in the excess of our own filth. Just look around you. Knowing that 99% of all species that ever existed are extinct, why do we think we are any different? The dinosaurs lasted 300 million years but I doubt we will last another ten thousand. Perhaps after the next nuclear winter another species will evolve out of the cockroach that will be much more intelligent than we are. Life will go on, I am sure of that but it may not be human. Look how the one child policy in China got the right wing panties in a bunch. Basically humans are still stupid animals. We will breed like rabbits if we damn well please. The dream of space colonization is and will be only a dream. The trekkies are so optimistic that they think when the post-petroleum age comes around in fifty years that we will have something else to power our Hummers. I am not so optimistic. I love the human race and I think we are wonderful creatures. I hope we can outlive my predictions too. In the meantime I think we should not destroy the planet for ourselves believing a pipe dream that we can move on. I hate all the excess. It will be our downfall.
Space Colonization, A hippy dream
- Thread starter Morchella
- Start date
SpaceLord
Unregistered
S
Morchella said:
So, you're saying we are stupid, filthy, yet you love humanity. You say we should just give up on leaving this blue orb and die. Sorry if I don't agree with you. I hope to be a part of us reaching for the stars.
...
Well, if most people have that kind of opinion, then no, we won't.
I am thoroughly convinced that most of the human race are idiots.
However , (and this is more recent), I am also convinced that the main reason isn't genetics, it's how we are raised. And that, my friend, can be changed. I think we are going in the RIGHT direction, for a lot of things (Fuel cells, to name one). Yes, we have enough nukes to destroy the earth. But maybe, just maybe, we'll stop building more and get rid of a few. I think the 'limit' will be in about 50 years...that's my guess. By then, either we'll have gone on a path of destruction that cannot be stopped, or we will begin to rebuild the environment. Who knows?
Well, if most people have that kind of opinion, then no, we won't.
I am thoroughly convinced that most of the human race are idiots.
However , (and this is more recent), I am also convinced that the main reason isn't genetics, it's how we are raised. And that, my friend, can be changed. I think we are going in the RIGHT direction, for a lot of things (Fuel cells, to name one). Yes, we have enough nukes to destroy the earth. But maybe, just maybe, we'll stop building more and get rid of a few. I think the 'limit' will be in about 50 years...that's my guess. By then, either we'll have gone on a path of destruction that cannot be stopped, or we will begin to rebuild the environment. Who knows?
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2001
- Messages
- 53,097
Re: Re: Space Colonization, A hippy dream
LOL. About 10 years ago, I took some sort of 2 day computer seminar at Washington University in St. Louis. The instructor pulled out a letter he liked to read to his students for a laugh. It was dated 1966 (or somewhere around there), and was from the chancellor of WashU, addressed to the head of the Personel department. In it, he wondered about the number of computer programmers they were hiring, and "What are we going to do with them after all the programs are written??"
Dragonrock said:
LOL. About 10 years ago, I took some sort of 2 day computer seminar at Washington University in St. Louis. The instructor pulled out a letter he liked to read to his students for a laugh. It was dated 1966 (or somewhere around there), and was from the chancellor of WashU, addressed to the head of the Personel department. In it, he wondered about the number of computer programmers they were hiring, and "What are we going to do with them after all the programs are written??"
Dragonrock
Militant Elvisian Tacoist
Morchella said:
Oh god, we're all gonna die. There's no purpose, Elvis is dead and I will be soon. Humans are such dirty creatures. Dolphins are so much smarter. See them play? All they do is play, they don't kill each other. Do dolphins polute the land? Then why do we polute the oceans? Humans are so dirty. I'm dirty. I'm sorry mother Earth that I waste your bounty. I wish I'd never been born. I'm embarassed that I have to eat. Eating is killing. Why do we have to kill? Humans are such horrible creatures. Humans are an affront to nature. The Earth Mother made a mistake and that mistake is humans. The world would be better if all humans died. Humans are so evil. Let's all join hands and sing Kumbyah. Maybe if we all love then Mother Earth won't think we're a mistake. JOIN HANDS NOW AND LOVE WITH ALL YOUR HEART!!
bite me.
Guest
Unregistered
G
Excuse me if someone else pointed this out.
I love the space program and am all for colonization etc. BUT anyone who thinks it will have any impact at all on Earth's population can't do arithmetic, or hasn't thought it through.
I will try to dig it out, but once Robert Heinlein did a nice analysis of the problem and showed that there wasn't enough metal in the Earth's crust to build the number of spaceships necessary to make a significant dent in Earth's population. We simply breed too fast and there are too many of us.
Only if someone invents something REALLY radical - say, teleportation - will the bottleneck open up enough to relieve Earth of population pressures.
Like it or not, on Earth we are stuck with population control... either voluntary or Malthus's way.
And I don't know why it's a "hippy dream"; it long predates the hippies.
I love the space program and am all for colonization etc. BUT anyone who thinks it will have any impact at all on Earth's population can't do arithmetic, or hasn't thought it through.
I will try to dig it out, but once Robert Heinlein did a nice analysis of the problem and showed that there wasn't enough metal in the Earth's crust to build the number of spaceships necessary to make a significant dent in Earth's population. We simply breed too fast and there are too many of us.
Only if someone invents something REALLY radical - say, teleportation - will the bottleneck open up enough to relieve Earth of population pressures.
Like it or not, on Earth we are stuck with population control... either voluntary or Malthus's way.
And I don't know why it's a "hippy dream"; it long predates the hippies.
Like it or not, on Earth we are stuck with population control... either voluntary or Malthus's way.
I agree with this. This idea is that by moving into space, we can insure our survival as a species. Whether that is laudable or not is, I suppose, open to debate. Being a human, I am in favor of us continuing!
I am also all in favor of trying to preserve our planet...including limiting our birth rate. I doubt we are smart enough as a species to do that, though. Look at Bush...he says over and over that it is too soon to do anything about global warming; then, when his own people declare it to be real and man made, he declares it "too late." I wonder when the window of opportunity went by?
So let's go into space. I fear Malthus may get the last laugh here.
I agree with this. This idea is that by moving into space, we can insure our survival as a species. Whether that is laudable or not is, I suppose, open to debate. Being a human, I am in favor of us continuing!
I am also all in favor of trying to preserve our planet...including limiting our birth rate. I doubt we are smart enough as a species to do that, though. Look at Bush...he says over and over that it is too soon to do anything about global warming; then, when his own people declare it to be real and man made, he declares it "too late." I wonder when the window of opportunity went by?
So let's go into space. I fear Malthus may get the last laugh here.
In response to the thread originator, have you considered that colonization does not have to be exclusiveley or first at another solar system. Orbital habitats (both around a planet/moon and around the sun), terraformed planets, sculpted ateroids or comet nuclei all provide an almost unimaginalbly huge living volume right here in our own system. And let's not forget the most pressing reason to go to space. All of the raw materials we need to support a surplus on Earth are available in abundance in the asteroid belt and the cometary halo.
The ability to colonize of these nearer objects is rapidly coming into reach, and will be doable at reasonable costs if we (and I hate to say this) push unmanned probe development.
The ability to colonize of these nearer objects is rapidly coming into reach, and will be doable at reasonable costs if we (and I hate to say this) push unmanned probe development.
Wile E. Coyote
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2002
- Messages
- 342
We also have to look at space colonization as a modern version of the New World explosion of the 1500s. Many discoveries and inventions were realized because of the necessity of wilderness survival.
With space exploration, the same holds true. New technology for living in hostile environments will apply to living on Earth. Methods for terraforming Mars will help us repair damages here. Environmentally self-sufficient habitats in space and on hostile planets will help us to manage our population better at home.
Lastly, there is no denying that having all of our eggs in one basket (so to speak) is a fool-proof way to ensure our extinction. Once we are no longer dependent on this precarious bubble in a vacuum, we will be much better off.
With space exploration, the same holds true. New technology for living in hostile environments will apply to living on Earth. Methods for terraforming Mars will help us repair damages here. Environmentally self-sufficient habitats in space and on hostile planets will help us to manage our population better at home.
Lastly, there is no denying that having all of our eggs in one basket (so to speak) is a fool-proof way to ensure our extinction. Once we are no longer dependent on this precarious bubble in a vacuum, we will be much better off.
Plutarck
Unregistered
P
Uh, did I just step into a time warp or something with all this "overpopulation" crap?
For one thing, note that even in america, ripe with anti-birth control loonies, the birth rate has fallen to the point that soon it is predicted we will reach - if we aren't already at - the point of replacement of population only, and possibly will actually go negative in total population without imigration.
Nearly all developed countries are seing the exact same things, even without absolutely any cohereant "birth control" policy at all! Why? Well, Economic Development, of course!
The problem is the undeveloped world - namely Africa. China is finally pulling it's ass up towards development level and hell, one day they might actually manage to not need any government birthing restriction at all.
Africa however is continually and terminally ◊◊◊◊◊◊, and I don't think anyone has been able to truly, fully, and satisfyingly say precisely why it is.
Yet the basic reasons for the population growth halting in America has been explained by basic Economic principles - damn, I think it was in like the 3rd chapter of the first Economic course I ever took. It's a matter of diminishing marginal utility - given everything else you can do in life now, having children just isn't so important, and having a bunch of the critters - for the majority of people - teeters on being actually irrational. Regardless, there aren't enough people sufficiently economically irrational in that way to make much of an effect on a global scale.
Hell, and Malthus now adays is practically never ever mentioned by an informed person except to give a kick to yet another debunked dead guy. Human population growth has been utterly proven to NOT be exponential in reality.
Further, as to space colonization not being able to make a dent in the earth's population, it should be noted that other than not being neccessary, the need for resources from earth is vastly overstated as extraterrestrial resource mining is pretty well universally agreed to being a requirement of any serious space colonization efforts.
Given modern computer technology and the coming of the potential of advanced biology and genetics and nanotechnology, anyone stating that large-scale space colonization would not even be POSSIBLE in the span of even 1,000 years, much less 10,000, looks very much like a flat earther at this point. Only a truly remarkable level of ignorance or irrationality could permit it.
Lastly, anyone who still mentions Malthus seriously needs to, well, read a book or something. He is so incredibly and fundamentally wrong in light of even the least bit modern science in a wide variety of fields, not to mention observed reality itself, that it beggars belief that anyone could actually still believe it.
In short: Human growth is not exponential. As economic development occurs, specifically with the shift away from agriculture, population growth falls remarkably quickly. In service and high-tech oriented economies, it is questionable whether or not it would actually be unavoidable that left alone the population would go negative to a remarkable degree.
For one thing, note that even in america, ripe with anti-birth control loonies, the birth rate has fallen to the point that soon it is predicted we will reach - if we aren't already at - the point of replacement of population only, and possibly will actually go negative in total population without imigration.
Nearly all developed countries are seing the exact same things, even without absolutely any cohereant "birth control" policy at all! Why? Well, Economic Development, of course!
The problem is the undeveloped world - namely Africa. China is finally pulling it's ass up towards development level and hell, one day they might actually manage to not need any government birthing restriction at all.
Africa however is continually and terminally ◊◊◊◊◊◊, and I don't think anyone has been able to truly, fully, and satisfyingly say precisely why it is.
Yet the basic reasons for the population growth halting in America has been explained by basic Economic principles - damn, I think it was in like the 3rd chapter of the first Economic course I ever took. It's a matter of diminishing marginal utility - given everything else you can do in life now, having children just isn't so important, and having a bunch of the critters - for the majority of people - teeters on being actually irrational. Regardless, there aren't enough people sufficiently economically irrational in that way to make much of an effect on a global scale.
Hell, and Malthus now adays is practically never ever mentioned by an informed person except to give a kick to yet another debunked dead guy. Human population growth has been utterly proven to NOT be exponential in reality.
Further, as to space colonization not being able to make a dent in the earth's population, it should be noted that other than not being neccessary, the need for resources from earth is vastly overstated as extraterrestrial resource mining is pretty well universally agreed to being a requirement of any serious space colonization efforts.
Given modern computer technology and the coming of the potential of advanced biology and genetics and nanotechnology, anyone stating that large-scale space colonization would not even be POSSIBLE in the span of even 1,000 years, much less 10,000, looks very much like a flat earther at this point. Only a truly remarkable level of ignorance or irrationality could permit it.
Lastly, anyone who still mentions Malthus seriously needs to, well, read a book or something. He is so incredibly and fundamentally wrong in light of even the least bit modern science in a wide variety of fields, not to mention observed reality itself, that it beggars belief that anyone could actually still believe it.
In short: Human growth is not exponential. As economic development occurs, specifically with the shift away from agriculture, population growth falls remarkably quickly. In service and high-tech oriented economies, it is questionable whether or not it would actually be unavoidable that left alone the population would go negative to a remarkable degree.
For one thing, note that even in america, ripe with anti-birth control loonies, the birth rate has fallen to the point that soon it is predicted we will reach - if we aren't already at - the point of replacement of population only, and possibly will actually go negative in total population without imigration.
But we do have immigration, and our population IS growing. Where do you think all these people are coming from? Liberals building them from kits, are they?
Limiting immigration won't help...this is a global problem, not a local one.
But we do have immigration, and our population IS growing. Where do you think all these people are coming from? Liberals building them from kits, are they?
Limiting immigration won't help...this is a global problem, not a local one.
FireGarden
Philosopher
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2002
- Messages
- 5,047
BillyJoe
We might be those people "who are alive at the-end-minus-one-year ". I don't know.
All I'm doing is giving odds.
It's like everybody who buys a lottery ticket has a 1 in 14 million chance of winning the jackpot. Of course someone is going to win, but it's unlikely to be you or me.
(This is where you tell me that you are in fact a lottery winner!!)
We might be those people "who are alive at the-end-minus-one-year ". I don't know.
All I'm doing is giving odds.
It's like everybody who buys a lottery ticket has a 1 in 14 million chance of winning the jackpot. Of course someone is going to win, but it's unlikely to be you or me.
(This is where you tell me that you are in fact a lottery winner!!
)shecky
Master Poster
- Joined
- May 24, 2002
- Messages
- 2,192
After reading these responses, I'm struck by the thought that the notion of space colonization is the religion of the JREF skeptic.
I can't imagine anyplace within the solar system that can be transfigured into a place where I'd like to live without ridiculous amounts of resources probably better used in the planet we already have. Terraformed planets?!? Hollowed out asteroids?!? This has got to be a bad Sci-Fi Channel dream. I have serious doubts about the longevity a true space colony unless we can find/transform a planet to be exactly like earth. There's a huge difference between a self sustaining colony and a viable planet we'd want to call home.
Seems we could hollow out the earth much better than any asteroid. Morlocks would jump at the chance to live down there.
Furthermore, while I have strong feeling about my own survival,
I have no strong feelings about the survival of the race in the long term. None of us can expect to live forever, why should we expect humanity to last forever.
And sorry, Zakur, all those quotes reminds me of a bible thumper arguing the existence of god by quoting scripture.
There are a few reasons that we must colonize space. One is that our sun will run out of fuel. While I generally see the foolhardiness of procrastination, I can safely say we can put this off until later.
Another is that there is a more immediate danger from, perhaps, a collision with an asteroid. However, this event can happen next week, and all the money and hope in the world won't help much. Technologically, I'd hope we can eventually have the ability to avert such a disaster before relying on a colony to "preserve humanity". Unless these colonies are really nice places to live, I suspect they'll end up being ultimately futile examples of human grandiosity.
I can't imagine anyplace within the solar system that can be transfigured into a place where I'd like to live without ridiculous amounts of resources probably better used in the planet we already have. Terraformed planets?!? Hollowed out asteroids?!? This has got to be a bad Sci-Fi Channel dream. I have serious doubts about the longevity a true space colony unless we can find/transform a planet to be exactly like earth. There's a huge difference between a self sustaining colony and a viable planet we'd want to call home.
Seems we could hollow out the earth much better than any asteroid. Morlocks would jump at the chance to live down there.
Furthermore, while I have strong feeling about my own survival,
I have no strong feelings about the survival of the race in the long term. None of us can expect to live forever, why should we expect humanity to last forever. And sorry, Zakur, all those quotes reminds me of a bible thumper arguing the existence of god by quoting scripture.
There are a few reasons that we must colonize space. One is that our sun will run out of fuel. While I generally see the foolhardiness of procrastination, I can safely say we can put this off until later.
Another is that there is a more immediate danger from, perhaps, a collision with an asteroid. However, this event can happen next week, and all the money and hope in the world won't help much. Technologically, I'd hope we can eventually have the ability to avert such a disaster before relying on a colony to "preserve humanity". Unless these colonies are really nice places to live, I suspect they'll end up being ultimately futile examples of human grandiosity.
bjornart
Master Poster
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2002
- Messages
- 2,568
Plutarck said:
You're not looking at the big picture here. Human behaviour is caused in part by our dna and in part by our environment. At the moment there might not be enough "irrational" people having lots of children to make much effect, but these children are very likely to become the same kind of irrationals, due to genes and upbringing. Which means they will have lots of children, who will have... you see the picture?
In fact, it's time us rational people started a concerted breeding effort. Anyone want to help me out?
And overpopulation doesn't necessary involve more and more people. The key issue is resource use, and at the moment that's a real problem.
Colonization of space isn't a solution though. As several people have pointed out, the resource use for putting a single person into space far outweights the resource demands of that person on earth.
bjornart
Master Poster
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2002
- Messages
- 2,568
shecky said:
It isn't any religion of mine.
Then you have a very poor imagination. Although you have half a point. Space colonies are not a good option unless they can be self sufficient, so what is needed is manufacturing capability out there for the necessary stuff.
The earth isn't geologically stable. An asteroid would be. The asteroid could be equipped with solar panels or a nuclear reactor. Your hole in the ground would have to compete with all the buildings on top of it for energy, and would need somewhere 'safe' to put the reactor.
Why shouldn't we make the attempt to last forever? What's the point of trying to keep humanity around even for the next generation? People who don't have strong feelings about the survival of humanity need to be weeded out of the gene pool.Furthermore, while I have strong feeling about my own survival,
Well, I have to agree with that. Appeal to authority and all that...
Doesn't harm to start making the effort though, does it?
And how do you suppose this technology will arise? You expect there to suddenly be space colonies that are really nice places to live without any intermediate research? We can't have self-sufficient space colonies without first having orbital habitats supplied from earth. And we really should start working on some more decent orbital telescopes to look for those big rocks so we can knock them into the sun.
This is like the argument that we should all be happy if the GNP does up - even those sacrificing their wages to make it possible.Mark said:
When I'm dead, I don't give a damn about the species' survival - especially if it means I have to die!
