|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
It's become clear to me that "space colony" dreamers don't want to face the hard problems Earth-side
Mike Combs wrote: "Einar" wrote in message ups.com... I have heard similar drivel before, i.e humans should fix things over here first, before venturing beyond Earth. And it's always occurred to me that if you don't want somebody to do something, establishing an impossible precondition would be one way. One underlying assumption appears to be that the universe is some sort of a pristine plase that we bad humans shall mess up somehow if we first do not learn how to behave, And the reality is that the universe is (so far as we can tell) an utterly empty place. I've always said that if humans are arguably 51% good, then humanity spreading out into the universe would be an improvement of it. -- Regards, Mike Combs ---------------------------------------------------------------------- By all that you hold dear on this good Earth I bid you stand, Men of the West! Aragorn And, it also often neglect that fixing things over here may require resources that are beyond Earthīs own supply capabilities. Cheers, Einar |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
It's become clear to me that "space colony" dreamers don't want to face the hard problems Earth-side
On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 12:13:15 -0700, GatherNoMoss
wrote, in part: The hard issues like population control, political systems, environment and the uses of resources, conflict resolution and the effective discipline of aggression/ambition (for a truly advanced people this will be done on a personal basis.....as compared to totalitarian government), etc. Do you know *why* those are hard issues? They're hard issues because Earth is filled with *other people*. Other people who might decide not to control _their_ populations, even if you control yours. Other people who might decide to pollute the environment, even if you are responsible. Lots of people plus lots of heavy industry equals more ability to make war. So maybe the only *real* solution to the hard problems is for the sensible people who want to play nice to get so far away from the others who want to prepare for world conquest, never mind the cost to the environment and so on, that they can safely manage their own community in the way that makes sense. And, these days, far enough for that isn't anywhere on Earth. John Savard http://www.quadibloc.com/index.html |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
It's become clear to me that "space colony" dreamers don't want to face the hard problems Earth-side
On 26 Jul, 01:31, Einar wrote:
Aragorn And, it also often neglect that fixing things over here may require resources that are beyond Earthīs own supply capabilities. I think that is absolutely right. Control of global warming will ultimately require the control of sunlight from space. Suppose we found that we could perform thermonuclear fusion, but that neutrons were a bad idea and we needed lots of He3. Would you need a manned lunar colony? Not necessarily. We would have to send self repairing swarms to mine the Moon. BTW - Earth is NOT suffering from overpopulation. Demographers say the population will peak at just over 9 billion by 2050. In fact in the West we are facing an ageing population. - Ian Parker |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
It's become clear to me that "space colony" dreamers don't want to face the hard problems Earth-side
Ian Parker wrote: On 26 Jul, 01:31, Einar wrote: Aragorn And, it also often neglect that fixing things over here may require resources that are beyond Earthīs own supply capabilities. I think that is absolutely right. Control of global warming will ultimately require the control of sunlight from space. Suppose we found that we could perform thermonuclear fusion, but that neutrons were a bad idea and we needed lots of He3. Would you need a manned lunar colony? Not necessarily. We would have to send self repairing swarms to mine the Moon. BTW - Earth is NOT suffering from overpopulation. Demographers say the population will peak at just over 9 billion by 2050. In fact in the West we are facing an ageing population. - Ian Parker Indeed, out population appears to be peaking this century. Iīve also heard it mentioned that our planet could be shielded. Either of the two, make enough numbers of spacemirrors or enough numbers of solar sails, plase them in an orbit where they reflect a sufficient percentage of Sunlight away from the Earth. Itīs an engineering solution, perfectly dooable I have heard. Cheers, Einar |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
It's become clear to me that "space colony" dreamers don't want to face the hard problems Earth-side
Ian Parker wrote:
:On 26 Jul, 01:31, Einar wrote: : : And, it also often neglect that fixing things over here may require : resources that are beyond Earthīs own supply capabilities. : : :I think that is absolutely right. Control of global warming will :ultimately require the control of sunlight from space. : This is not the same thing as Einar said. We can do that with purely Earth-fabricated and Earth-launched material. : :Suppose we :found that we could perform thermonuclear fusion, but that neutrons :were a bad idea and we needed lots of He3. : Why, we would go get some, of course. : :Would you need a manned lunar colony? Not necessarily. We would have :to send self repairing swarms to mine the Moon. : We already have such "self repairing swarms". They're called mining crews. : :BTW - Earth is NOT suffering from overpopulation. Demographers say the opulation will peak at just over 9 billion by 2050. In fact in the :West we are facing an ageing population. : Demographics in the West have nothing to do with whether or not there is overpopulation. -- "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar territory." --G. Behn |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
It's become clear to me that "space colony" dreamers don't want to face the hard problems Earth-side
Einar wrote:
: :Ian Parker wrote: : On 26 Jul, 01:31, Einar wrote: : Aragorn : : And, it also often neglect that fixing things over here may require : resources that are beyond Earthīs own supply capabilities. : : I think that is absolutely right. Control of global warming will : ultimately require the control of sunlight from space. Suppose we : found that we could perform thermonuclear fusion, but that neutrons : were a bad idea and we needed lots of He3. : : Would you need a manned lunar colony? Not necessarily. We would have : to send self repairing swarms to mine the Moon. : : BTW - Earth is NOT suffering from overpopulation. Demographers say the : population will peak at just over 9 billion by 2050. In fact in the : West we are facing an ageing population. : : :Iīve also heard it mentioned that our planet could be shielded. Either f the two, make enough numbers of spacemirrors or enough numbers of :solar sails, plase them in an orbit where they reflect a sufficient ercentage of Sunlight away from the Earth. Itīs an engineering :solution, perfectly dooable I have heard. : You're thinking far too large. See Teller, Wood, and Hyde. -- "It's always different. It's always complex. But at some point, somebody has to draw the line. And that somebody is always me.... I am the law." -- Buffy, The Vampire Slayer |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
It's become clear to me that "space colony" dreamers don't want to face the hard problems Earth-side
On Jul 24, 7:57 pm, Hop David wrote:
There's at least the possibility that future spacefaring humans will encounter intelligent beings with a primitive culture. If our descendants are like us, such an encounter would likely be bad news for the alien life forms. Yes this leads to the thing I mentioned about "universal law". (I need to explain things more clearly...my bad) I think many people advocating mass space/planet colonization do so because "If we don't establish a colony, then humans will extinguish themselves on Earth. We need a life boat." This is the reason that Stephen Hawkings gives. I argue against this...or rather, I think it futile. Think of that scene in "Contact" based on Sagan's book.... Jodie Foster's character encounters the advanced alien and begs that , for humanities sake, for further contact. "Humanities in trouble !" argues Foster's character.(words not exact) "We're confused. Alone ! We need instruction from races that have already been through this crisis period in development." The advanced alien declines....not through cruelity, and that's key. More a tough love type deal. Humanity isn't going to get any help from anybody. To get help would be disasterous to all parties...mostly ourselves. "We learn through our suffering" individuals, nations, species. It's not loony. I intuitively know that we won't be able to "conquer space" until humanity has mastered ourselves and become expert stewards of the Earth. Because that's the natural way of development. Froget "saving" humanity through space/ planet colonization. That's putting the horse before the cart. A species that has to save itself by GETTING AWAY FROM ITSELF won't make it. It's a maturity issue. Technology is not the only measure of a species ! |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
It's become clear to me that "space colony" dreamers don't want to face the hard problems Earth-side
Fred J. McCall wrote: Ian Parker wrote: :On 26 Jul, 01:31, Einar wrote: : : And, it also often neglect that fixing things over here may require : resources that are beyond Earthīs own supply capabilities. : : :I think that is absolutely right. Control of global warming will :ultimately require the control of sunlight from space. : This is not the same thing as Einar said. We can do that with purely Earth-fabricated and Earth-launched material. : :Suppose we :found that we could perform thermonuclear fusion, but that neutrons :were a bad idea and we needed lots of He3. : Why, we would go get some, of course. : :Would you need a manned lunar colony? Not necessarily. We would have :to send self repairing swarms to mine the Moon. : We already have such "self repairing swarms". They're called mining crews. : :BTW - Earth is NOT suffering from overpopulation. Demographers say the opulation will peak at just over 9 billion by 2050. In fact in the :West we are facing an ageing population. : Demographics in the West have nothing to do with whether or not there is overpopulation. -- "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar territory." --G. Behn That is probably what you are talking about, however Iīm not entirelly clear on preciselly what he is proposing to do, when he talks about Geoengineering Earthīs radiation ballance. http://globalecology.stanford.edu/DG..._etal_2003.pdf What preciselly is he talking about to add to the athmosphere or to the Earthīs surface? That paper discusses 'scattering' strategies. I donīt know what the people you mentioned had in mind: http://a1692.g.akamai.net/f/1692/204...hse_teller.pdf Cheers, Einar |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
It's become clear to me that "space colony" dreamers don't want to face the hard problems Earth-side
GatherNoMoss wrote: A species that has to save itself by GETTING AWAY FROM ITSELF won't make it. It's a maturity issue. Technology is not the only measure of a species ! You are absurd. To begin with, itīs not possible to move any significant fraction of humanity beyond Earth, now thatīs merelly the Solar system. However, it īs possible to establish space colonies. Only over the long term will spacecolonization safe humanity, as after all life on this planet has only finite time, and thatīs without human intereference in natural cycles. There is no danger that humans will be spreading beyond the Solar System anytime soon. So any hypothetical aliens out there will be quite safe for quite a wile yet. However, we can begin spacecolonization this century, in this solar system. Maybe centuries from now the first colonists will arrive at the neighboring solar systems, but thatīs a worry for that time. Cheers, Einar |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
It's become clear to me that "space colony" dreamers don't want to face the hard problems Earth-side
On 26 Jul, 21:16, Einar wrote:
GatherNoMoss wrote: A species that has to save itself by GETTING AWAY FROM ITSELF won't make it. It's a maturity issue. Technology is not the only measure of a species ! You are absurd. To begin with, itīs not possible to move any significant fraction of humanity beyond Earth, now thatīs merelly the Solar system. However, it īs possible to establish space colonies. Only over the long term will spacecolonization safe humanity, as after all life on this planet has only finite time, and thatīs without human intereference in natural cycles. You are talking here about millions of years. My strictures about neocons are of course based on present politics. I think over the long timescale we will move into space, more or less regardless of what we decide now. i don't think the ultimate fate of Earth is really asddressing the point that it is futile to safeguard the human race in the sort/medium term from the consequences of our own folly. Indeed colonies have inherent ADDITIONAL risks attached to them. The problem with Iraq is that decisions were taken by people with little knowledge. Sending people out to "save the world" will lead to crucial decisions being taken with even less knowledge. What will a Martian understand of Arab culture? Yet he might well have the power to upset the applecart. There is no danger that humans will be spreading beyond the Solar System anytime soon. So any hypothetical aliens out there will be quite safe for quite a wile yet. However, we can begin spacecolonization this century, in this solar system. Be careful who you send! Maybe centuries from now the first colonists will arrive at the neighboring solar systems, but thatīs a worry for that time. You will need a VN machine and the million kilometer telescope before you send a VN probe. - Ian Parker |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FWD: ESA puts paid to Hoaxland's "Face on Mars" scam once and for all | OM | History | 3 | October 24th 06 09:10 AM |
FWD: new ESA images of Cydonia - boy is Hoaxland's "face" red or what? | OM | History | 2 | September 23rd 06 03:37 AM |
NatGeo's "Space Race - The Untold Story"...And you thought "Moon Shot" was bad, kids... | OM | History | 21 | July 5th 06 06:40 PM |
"The earth relatively to the "light medium".." -- Einstein. | brian a m stuckless | Policy | 0 | March 8th 06 08:38 AM |
"The earth relatively to the "light medium".." -- Einstein. | brian a m stuckless | Astronomy Misc | 0 | March 8th 06 08:38 AM |