Peregrine Posted September 13, 2003 Share Posted September 13, 2003 Oddguy has a good point. Imagine if some we destoyed ourselves very quickly with a terrible new invention or something and then millenia later a medieval like society explored our strange otherworldly skyscrapers and cities, hmm spooky, you can imagine them thinking we had been struck down for the same reason as the Dwarves. Go read the book Eternity Road by someone I can't remember. And as for the death by environmental damage, its not very likely. Yes, we can cause a lot of damage, but even something that kills 90% of the population will still leave enough to rebuild. People will adapt. If, for example, all the theories about global warming are true, and all the ice melts raising sea level. Yes, the coasts are going to be in serious trouble, but a lot is still going to be left. Even if the quality of life is reduced significantly, humanity as a whole will survive. I still say that nothing short of massive asteroid impact or divine intervention will completely destroy us.Oh, and if you're right about the 2103 thing, expanding to other planets is not a realistic chance of survival. Unless some very suprising advances in technology happen, there is no way to get even a tiny percent of the population off the earth and into a quickly terraformed world. No, unless your definition of "survive" means a 15 person science team stranded on the moon, we're stuck with one planet for the forseeable future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Switch Posted September 13, 2003 Share Posted September 13, 2003 i dont know, technology is advancing surprisingly fast, and picking up pace all the time. for instance, 1900, we're living in grotty old houses, playing wooden boardgames and sewing, 2000, we have PCs, cars, buses, all sorts of new technology. and stuff is picking up the pace all the time. i dont necessarily see it as unpheasable that we'll be able 2 visit new planets by 2100 at the rate we're going :blink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted September 13, 2003 Share Posted September 13, 2003 Visit, yes, the limiting factor for small scale visits is the interest/investment of governments. I mean, if the US put the same effort into getting to mars as they did to the moon, it would be done by now. But... establishing a colony to avoid the earth's problems is an entirely different thing. For that, you've got two options... well, three, I guess:1) Divine intervention + massive new developments in physics + faster than light travel + finding an unoccupied earth like world somewhere. Not realistic unless you're a science fiction writer.2) Terraform moon/mars/etc. Probably the most likely option for long term settlements, but even the most idealistic theories involve a lot of time for this. Just because of the massive scale such a project would involve.3) Domed environments, kind of like how they lived on the moon. The fastest way to do it, but not really possible for a large population. Think about the size of a major city (you need a self-sustaining population if you're running from earth's destruction), add the need for farms, then you're talking about a really large structure. And the materials for it don't just appear out of nowhere. So its really only practical for a small scale temporary expedition. So my basic point is that space is not the solution unless our destruction is a long way in the future. Even the most idealistic "solutions" are only going to be able to save a tiny percent of the population. The size limits on spacecraft + lack of large scale habitable land is going to ensure this. And therefore no sane government is going to risk all their money in something like this instead of dealing with problems here on earth. Actually, an insane attempt to get off planet by major countries in the near future would be more harmful than good. Just diverting the money for it from problems here would only make things worse, and we could end up with self-fulfiling prophecies of doom. Then add in the fact that the overwhelming majority of the people whose life would be made worse would not be in the tiny elite group allowed to leave, and you'd have a new government very quickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Reaper Posted September 14, 2003 Share Posted September 14, 2003 i dont know, technology is advancing surprisingly fast, and picking up pace all the time. for instance, 1900, we're living in grotty old houses, playing wooden boardgames and sewing, 2000, we have PCs, cars, buses, all sorts of new technology. and stuff is picking up the pace all the time. i dont necessarily see it as unpheasable that we'll be able 2 visit new planets by 2100 at the rate we're going :blink: Sooner, I think they´re planing a mission to mars to be launched in 2025. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darmoth Posted September 14, 2003 Share Posted September 14, 2003 George Carlin said "Life is NOT THAT complicated! You get up in the morning, you eat three meals a day, you take one good dump and you go back to bed!" Ladies and gentle man, this is destiny of man kind.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Switch Posted September 14, 2003 Share Posted September 14, 2003 life isnt complicated now, but it will be in the future if we dont start to do SOMETHING, and soon. peregrine's probably right about not being able 2 get 2 other planets, but maybe a few hundred of us will survive... heh would be kinda wierd if we go like all the other civilisations did in the past as soon as they got advanced enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eltiraaz Posted September 15, 2003 Share Posted September 15, 2003 Humanity will never learn from itself :rolleyes: . I'm not trying to turn this into a religion vs. science debate, so lets try not to let it go there. However, many 'radical' Christians (pretty much the guys you see standing on the street yelling "repent!!") believe that the "rapture" is coming, and really soon at that. Even this generation or the next, because of hints given in John's Revelation. People believe global warming and pollution are some of the criterium for it. They say the world is ready for it, but the church isn't. :unsure: I'm not sure about that though. I think that when the end comes, whenever that is. It wont be quite as graphic and extreme as described in the Book, but it will be representative of it in a modern way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beaten by an Ugly Stick Posted September 17, 2003 Author Share Posted September 17, 2003 So one must logically ask: Why are we here if we die in the end? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThetaOrionis01 Posted September 17, 2003 Share Posted September 17, 2003 We're here because we are here. You're here because you were born. Does the universe care? No. IMO there is no higher purpose to the human race. Your purpose in life is what you make it. In my definition, anyone's purpose is to live the best life they possibly can - to develop their potential to the best of their abilities. To learn as much as you can, to learn to develop your own thoughts. To enjoy and appreciate life. Where do you humans fit in in the grander scheme of things? There is no grander scheme. So if we mess up and destroy ourselves, we haven't failed some cosmic plan which was 10 billion years in the development. Our responsibility is to ourselves, and we are responsible for the consequences of any actions we take. We're unimportant. We don't owe the universe anything. And that is a very liberating concept. Enjoy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiel Posted September 17, 2003 Share Posted September 17, 2003 Lol! what a lovely opinion! To summerise: We're here so what wahay lets party! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.