Let's First See if Human Life Is Sustainable On Earth _Then_ Do Mars

For the kind of money necessary for the Mars mission, we could
electrify the entire Interstate Highway system and motor off the grid.


Bret Cahill

On Jul 21, 12:43*pm, Bret Cahill wrote:
For the kind of money necessary for the Mars mission, we could
electrify the entire Interstate Highway system and motor off the grid.

Bret Cahill

What if life *is* sustainable here, but only if we keep colonising new
planets?

darwinist wrote:
Bret Cahill wrote:

For the money necessary for the Mars mission, we could
electrify the entire Interstate system & motor off the grid.

What if life *is* sustainable here, but only if we keep
colonising new planets?

What if life *is* sustainable here, but only if we control
population?
..
..
--

On Jul 20, 10:56*pm, darwinist wrote:
On Jul 21, 12:43*pm, Bret Cahill wrote:

For the kind of money necessary for the Mars mission, we could
electrify the entire Interstate Highway system and motor off the grid.

Bret Cahill

What if life *is* sustainable here, but only if we keep colonising new
planets?

And that of our Selene/moon?

~ BG

On Jul 20, 11:44*pm, "David P." wrote:
darwinist wrote:
Bret Cahill wrote:

For the money necessary for the Mars mission, we could
electrify the entire Interstate system & motor off the grid.

What if life *is* sustainable here, but only if we keep
colonising new planets?

What if life *is* sustainable here, but only if we control
population?

How true, by getting rid of everyone that's not a Zionist Nazi or one
of their brown-nosed minions would certainly improve the odds. Is
that what you mean?

Having a planet of Ponzi Madoff(s) would also be terrific, in that we
could all live large regardless of the consequences.

~ BG

On Jul 20, 7:43*pm, Bret Cahill wrote:
For the kind of money necessary for the Mars mission, we could
electrify the entire Interstate Highway system and motor off the grid.

Bret Cahill

For 10% of what our mutually perpetrated cold war has cost us
(including its space race), we'd have nailed a cure fior all forms of
cancer, and the entire world would have had an affordable surplus of
clean energy to go right along with your electrified Interstate
Highway system, as well as the ten fold improved national energy grid
to boot.

~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet”

BradGuth wrote
Bret Cahill wrote

For the kind of money necessary for the Mars mission, we could
electrify the entire Interstate Highway system and motor off the grid.

Makes a hell of a lot more sense to replace coal fired power stations
with nukes, use electricity from nukes to heat our houses etc and use
the natural gas no longer wasted on heating in cars and trucks.

For 10% of what our mutually perpetrated cold war has cost us (including
its space race), we'd have nailed a cure fior all forms of cancer,

Easy to claim. Have fun actually substantiating that claim.

and the entire world would have had an affordable surplus of clean
energy to go right along with your electrified Interstate Highway system,

Makes a hell of a lot more sense to replace coal fired power stations
with nukes, use electricity from nukes to heat our houses etc and use
the natural gas no longer wasted on heating in cars and trucks.

as well as the ten fold improved national energy grid to boot.

"Rob Dekker" wrote in message
...

"Bret Cahill" wrote in message
...
For the kind of money necessary for the Mars mission, we could
electrify the entire Interstate Highway system and motor off the grid.


Bret Cahill


Your comment does not directly reflect the subject of your post, although
it hints at maximizing energy efficiency, which is a good start for
sustainable living in the long run.

Looking at the rate that the human race has been devours this planet's
resources over the past 100 years, while growing exponentially in numbers,
it is not hard to imagine that our planet will show it's limits in the
near future.

Will the era of homo sapiens (man, the thinker) go into history as the
greatest devastation that the planet ever went through, or will we go
through this period of exponential growth and find some form of
sustainable lifestyle with intelligence and technology still intact ? If
we make it though, we may have enough time to kickstart sustainable
colonies on other planets, first in our own solar system and much later in
neighboring systems. If that works, we may be able to colonize the local
neighborhood, and ultimately the entire Galaxy.

If anyone has the thought that colonizing the Galaxy is likely or even
inevitable given our self-proclaimed superior intelligence and ability to
adapt, then maybe the Fermi paradox would offer a humbling realization :
we would be the first in this Galaxy of 300 billion star systems to do so,
in the 13 billion years that this Galaxy exists.

If the counterthought would be that we are alone or unique in some way,
and that we are the first in this Galaxy to make it to this point, then
this should be reason enough to be very careful with what we are doing.
Very careful with this planet, with it's resources and with it's ability
to serve us with food, energy and natural resources in a suustainable
fashion.

After all, as far as we know, among the countless planets around the 300
billion stars in this Galaxy alone, Earth is the only planet with any life
at all.

Rob

Buzz Aldrin suggested anyone we send to Mars should be left there,
it'll be cheaper. I tend to agree.

On Jul 22, 4:55Â*am, "Rob Dekker" wrote:
"Bret Cahill" wrote in message

...

For the kind of money necessary for the Mars mission, we could
electrify the entire Interstate Highway system and motor off the grid.

Bret Cahill

Your comment does not directly reflect the subject of your post, although it
hints at maximizing energy efficiency, which is a good start for sustainable
living in the long run.

Looking at the rate that the human race has been devours this planet's
resources over the past 100 years, while growing exponentially in numbers,
it is not hard to imagine that our planet will show it's limits in the near
future.

•• Cahill and Dekker lost on the dark side of the moon or
up **** creek without a paddle.
Why don't you children try to provide proofs for your
nonsense. NO RealClimate.org is not a valid source.

––Â*––
There are three types of people that you
can_not_talk into behaving well. The
stupid, the religious fanatic, and the evil.

1-The stupid aren't smart enough to
follow the logic of what you say. You
have to tell them what is right in very
simple terms. If they don't agree, then
you'll never be able to change their mind.

2- the religious fanatic

If what you say goes against their
religious belief, they will cling to that
religious belief even if it means their
death."

3- There is no way to reform evil-
Not in a million years

There is no way to convince the terrorists,

anthropogenic global warming alarmists,

serial killers, paedophiles, and predators
to change their evil ways. They knew what
they were doing was wrong, but that
knowledge didn't stop them. It only made
them more careful in how they went about
performing their evil acts.

Rob Dekker wrote:
"Bret Cahill" wrote in message
...
For the kind of money necessary for the Mars mission, we could
electrify the entire Interstate Highway system and motor off the grid.

Your comment does not directly reflect the subject of your post, although it
hints at maximizing energy efficiency, which is a good start for sustainable
living in the long run.

Looking at the rate that the human race has been devours this planet's
resources over the past 100 years, while growing exponentially in numbers,
it is not hard to imagine that our planet will show it's limits in the near
future.

Will the era of homo sapiens (man, the thinker) go into history as the
greatest devastation that the planet ever went through, or will we go
through this period of exponential growth and find some form of sustainable
lifestyle with intelligence and technology still intact ? If we make it
though, we may have enough time to kickstart sustainable colonies on other
planets, first in our own solar system and much later in neighboring
systems. If that works, we may be able to colonize the local neighborhood,
and ultimately the entire Galaxy.

This entire idea of a sustainable economy is a nonsense term invented by tree
huggers.

A sustainable economy is easy to describe and it includes animals instead of
tractors as a trivial example. One can talk about renewable fuels for the
tractors to get some journalism majors to waste their time with you.

Fact is once there are tractors the entire chain of technology needed to make
tractors and everything that goes into them has to exist. Blacksmiths need not
apply. And that technology requires man power, bodies, large populations which
cannot be supported by any type of organic farming.

But do not worry. Antibiotics and vaccines take an equally wide range of
technologies including refrigeration and electricity and shipping and even
needles in the millions. That also requires a large population to maintain.

Anyone talking about a sustainable economy has to be living in a fantasy
world if he does not realize he is describing the technology of the late 18th
century minus the steam engine at best.

There is a solution and at the present time only one known solution. It is
called fission power plants. Without any new technology, and fusion or the
equivalent is the only alternative, the choice is nuclear power or the 1700s
without steam engines. If anyone takes a serious stance in favor of steam
engines, I will concede they are possible but not in the quantities needed to
replace all the trucks and cars and refrigerated cars. That still leaves them
to be loaded and unloaded with horse drawn wagons.

All the ways out that avoid the obvious are impossible Certainly super light
and super efficient cars are possible. But they are not possible without a
high level of technology at all levels and the people to operate that
technology. That requires them to be in production and not on the farm.
Farmers cannot feed a population that is 90% in the cities with horse drawn
plows. High tech cannot be a solution.

I have thought through most of the considerations. Anyone who thinks there is
a solution better than the 1700s with or without steam engines please feel
free to tell me about it. I do react poorly to handwaving and moral positions
and the like.

Of course fission has its drawbacks. So does the 18th century. It is not the
final solution. It simply replaces fossil fuels. That is important as a few
years ago the global melters got together with the peak oil folks and they
agreed we would run out of oil before we melt. So this is not something about
which there should be any treehugger disagreement. France and Japan are each
about 80% nuclear and at least the Japanese do not glow in the dark. You never
know about the French.

Yes, I know there are problems with decommissioning nuclear power plants. Are
they worse than strip mining and disposing of coal ash and all that CO2?
Anyway, I don't want to make this a sales pitch for nuclear and I hope it is
just an interim step to fusion.

The only point I hope to leave is that sustainable has consequences no
rational person would propose. Yes, I have read all the wonderland stories of
people who are living a sustainable life in their bewildered fantasy life. I
have yet to find a story of anyone who really is. A computer powered by wind
power? The infrastructure to make computers is not possible. Willing to give
that up? How many of those people weave their own cloth to make their clothes
and use 18th c. needles? Don't get me started on the shoes. I know there would
be division labor and trade in 18th c. terms but those people would not have
the free time to brag about being sustainable if they were growing the extra
food to trade to those who weave cloth. Preserving food for the winter? Who is
making canning jars and pressure cookers?

Certainly there are a few things which can be adapted from 19th c.
improvements to the 18th c. but not a single thing from the 20th.

--
We have learned from the religious riots in Israel that riots
are permitted on the Sabboth.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4171
http://www.giwersworld.org/israel/bombings.phtml a5
Wed Jul 22 20:32:04 EDT 2009