Thankful I'm in the winter of my life...

[Reader 2,021]

I suppose, if you miss the point entirely, then expanding the influence of the human race beyond this planet makes perfect sense. The idea that electric cars are the solution to any environmental issues is seriously mistaken, if a broader view of environmental impact is taken than simply the burning of fossil fuels to make vehicles move. The point is not specific to Mars, but is instead the illustration of the ability of the human race to ruin its own environment in the pursuit of perceived wealth, measured in money. How that proceeds in the new environment is not the point, the point is that it will and will have the same unfortunate effects.

Edited April 11, 2021 by Reader

[martin-w 3,235]

13 minutes ago, Reader said:

I suppose, if you miss the point entirely, then expanding the influence of the human race beyond this planet makes perfect sense.

 

Its not missing the point. The point is obvious. The human species on this planet is doomed. There have been numerous planet wide extinctions. Its not a matter of IF its a matter of WHEN!. It will happen!

Now, if you don't mind the entire human species being wiped out, all our science, all of our history, our music, our culture, our art... everything, then fine, lets remain on this SINGLE world and we will be gone for good.

However... if you wish the species you are part of to survive long into the future and not be wiped out of existence, then we NEED to live elsewhere in the solar system too.

If its the former, then your logic baffles me.  

 

Edited April 11, 2021 by martin-w

[martin-w 3,235]

14 minutes ago, Reader said:

The idea that electric cars are the solution to any environmental issues is seriously mistaken,

 

Nobody in this thread said it was. IT's PART of the solution. 

 

14 minutes ago, Reader said:

the illustration of the ability of the human race to ruin its own environment in the pursuit of perceived wealth, measured in money. How that proceeds in the new environment is not the point, the point is that it will and will have the same unfortunate effects.

 

Again, you are inventing a scenario. A full scale colony on Mars is way into the future. You have no idea how that colony will function. It could be an entirely different system.  And the point, is that we survive, instead of perishing if we remain on one planet. And if we survive there is the opportunity/possibility of progress, change, a better system. Isn't that better than a cynical, negative, we are all doomed, lets not bother attitude? 

 

 

Edited April 11, 2021 by martin-w

[hs118 707]

20 minutes ago, martin-w said:

Well yes, but that's an issue for manufacturing all across the planet for a multitude of different products. If you happen to be wearing a T-Shirt its highly likely it will have been manufactured by a small child in a sweat shop in horrific conditions. Same applies to many of the garments we wear. I'd bet good money you are wearing something now that applies to, and I'd bet good money that many of the products you own have been responsible for suffering abroad.

 

And that is ok as long as I perpetuate a fantasy about saving humanity? Your argument is a classic "whataboutism". Musk, as an individual and a business, profits and spends capital taken from those that need immediate care. Including US income taxes and government subsidies. 

Again, in attempts to realize his fantasy about escaping the crumbling world that he is personally responsible for destroying. And, to your point, and to @birdguy's point, so are other elistists.

 

[martin-w 3,235]

6 minutes ago, yurei said:

 and government subsidies. 

 

Of course he does. None of the companies ran by Musk are perfect. I actually made that point if you head back and take a look. 

But you referred to the mindset of being  "beyond the natural world and here to tame/modify/enslave".  You went on to claim that Musk was an archetype (perfect example) of that mindset. Well no, I disagree, he isn't the perfect example of that mindset for the reasons already stated. Now if you had chosen Jeff Bezos I might have agreed with you.  

[dave2013 1,130]

4 minutes ago, yurei said:

Musk, as an individual and a business, profits and spends capital taken from those that need immediate care. Including US income taxes and government subsidies. 

Again, in attempts to realize his fantasy about escaping the crumbling world that he is personally responsible for destroying. And, to your point, and to @birdguy's point, so are other elistists.

Yes, Musk, and many others, take advantage of govt. tax breaks and subsidies.  We need those incentives to make  alternative energy, electric vehicles, and energy efficient homes and devices, more cost-effective.  Do you think that any great inventor would not expect to be compensated for all their work and the risks they take?  Thank God for people like Elon Musk.  He thinks big, and that's what we need.  Do you think that politicians and govt. bureaucrats are going to solve our problems? 

Without great advances in technology and a lot of risk-taking, humanity would make little to no progress.  We're going to need technology advancements in energy, farming, and water supply in order to provide resources for another 2 billion people.

I agree with you on the cobalt mining issue.  I don't think that batteries are the answer for large-scale energy storage.  Like I've said before, a mix of nuclear, hydroelectric, wind, and solar, is the way to go.  Nuclear is extremely safe now, especially the newer reactor designs, plus they produce much less radioactive waste.  I would propose building an electromagnetic rail launcher to shoot the waste into the Sun so we don't have to store it here on Earth.

Dave

[birdguy 3,943]

1 hour ago, martin-w said:

How many people is not relevant. If, for example, a planet killing asteroid hits us (which it one day will - Its inevitable) then all of the human race will be lost, our entire culture, our entire history, everything we once were. It will be as if the human race never existed. So it doesn't matter if 100, 200, 500 1000, or millions of human survive somewhere else in the solar system, as long as its enough to procreate our species survives.

Your arrogance is unbelievable.

I happen to believe that in the entire universe there have thousands of civilizations that have been wiped out.  There are thousands that are just beginning to evolve.  There are even more thousands that are some point in their histories that we are.  If all of them keep surviving the universe will one day become crowded with humanoids.

What is so special about our selfish, greedy, arrogant and warlike species that we alone are to survive?  What about the other species on earth?  Don't they deserve a place on your galactic ark?  What about the birds and the fishes and the great and lesser apes and the bears and elk and deer and lions and wildebeast and caribou and crocodiles?  Do we have more right to exist than they do?  Having worked with and photographed wildlife not so long ago I sometimes find them sometimes more deserving of existence than the human race.  I see different species of waterfowl sharing the same pond and food therein without conflict.  Geese don't fight with Northern Pintails over space or available food.  By sharing there is enough for all of them

Yes, the human race will follow all the species on Earth into oblivion and become extinct someday.  On the universal scale that is not a bad thing.  It is just following natural law.

There is nothing special about the human race that puts them above the natural law of the universe.  Only our science gives us the arrogance to think so.

Noel

[martin-w 3,235]

12 minutes ago, yurei said:

Realize his fantasy about escaping the crumbling world that he is personally responsible for destroying

 

Musk is less responsible for the "crumbling world" than many others I can mention, especially when we consider how his companies (Tesla) are manufacturing products that do the opposite, so again, I disagree with you singling him out as a perfect example".

As for "escaping"... he of course wont be escaping anything, he has no plans to visit Mars. And the "escape" he refers to relates to big planet killing rocks, CME's and super volcanoes'.  

[ILSFREAK 56]

Truth is , from earliest biblical times till about 150 years ago, this planet, was RICH in recourses (wild live, fishing, birds , eggs, sea live etc....)

Were talking thousands of years. And in a matter of 150 years were almost on the point of no return. Iam not talking of thousands of years, I im talking couple of decades,  where things have gone so bad that  another 150 years from now , well, te my guest.

For me , normally the glass is half full, even after a year since Covid stole my job, but for the prredictions of this MOST beautifull peace of real estate in the universe, i dont know  

 

Edited April 11, 2021 by ILSFREAK
Second thoughts

[birdguy 3,943]

50 minutes ago, Reader said:

The point is not specific to Mars, but is instead the illustration of the ability of the human race to ruin its own environment in the pursuit of perceived wealth, measured in money.

Money is the single most thing that separates humans from the rest of the species on this planet.

Noel 

[dave2013 1,130]

12 minutes ago, birdguy said:

Having worked with and photographed wildlife not so long ago I sometimes find them sometimes more deserving of existence than the human race.  I see different species of waterfowl sharing the same pond and food therein without conflict.  Geese don't fight with Northern Pintails over space or available food.  By sharing there is enough for all of them

Yes, the human race is full of greedy, selfish people.  I think that most people are not greedy and would be willing to make reasonable sacrifices in order to provide for everyone.  The hypocritical wealthy elites who preach to the great unwashed about how we must surrender our liberty and let them run everything, however, will certainly not share and will not sacrifice anything.

Anyhow, those animals that you speak of would indeed be fighting each other if their water and food supplies became scarce.  Just like most people are kind and polite at the grocery store until there's a crisis, then they turn and become desperate and unkind very quickly.

Dave

[ILSFREAK 56]

9 minutes ago, birdguy said:

Money is the single most thing that separates humans from the rest of the species on this planet.

Noel , If ever heard a REALLY, REALLY true to the bone saying, this was it

And,as an afterthought, also our downfall

[martin-w 3,235]

45 minutes ago, birdguy said:

Your arrogance is unbelievable.

  If all of them keep surviving the universe will one day become crowded with humanoids.

 

There's no need to be rude because I disagree with you. No sir, I am far from an arrogant person. 

I don't think you realise just how big the universe is.

So to be clear, you think that if the human race has another colony in the solar system, ensuring our species isn't wiped out in the next 100, 200, 500, 5000 years, that that could result in the ENTIRE UNIVERSE being overcrowded?

Our galaxy alone is estimated to contain at least 400 billion planets. And the OBSERVABLE universe contains a possible TWO TRILLION galaxies. I'll leave you to calculate what 400 billion multiplied by two trillion is. Plus... that's just the observable universe and given that the geometry of the universe appears to be flat, it suggest the universe could be infinite... so trust me, the human race isn't going to overcrowd the universe. 😀

 

45 minutes ago, birdguy said:

What is so special about our selfish, greedy, arrogant and warlike species that we alone are to survive?  What about the other species on earth?  Don't they deserve a place on your galactic ark?  What about the birds and the fishes and the great and lesser apes and the bears and elk and deer and lions and wildebeast and caribou and crocodiles?

 

Well yes, you could look at the human race in such a cynical way, and only emphasise the negatives, the bad stuff, but it does make sense to consider the human races positive side don't you think? There are a lot of good things about our species you know? 

And yes, absolutely, saving the flora and fauna would be wonderful. Trouble is, you would have to tell me how that could be done. Some mega sized space arc perhaps? Is that what you had in mind? And what makes you think that wont be done? I would imagine in a few hundred years time, technology would enable us to do just that. But what if we can't do that, what if we cant save the flora and fauna? What then? Are you advocating that the entire human race just stays on a devastated world and commits suicide because we cant take the animals. That t doesn't sound logical. 🙂

 

45 minutes ago, birdguy said:

Do we have more right to exist than they do?

 

No, but if we cant take them, we don't have to commit suicide in solidarity. Pretty sure in time we will be able to though, so don't worry.

 

45 minutes ago, birdguy said:

Yes, the human race will follow all the species on Earth into oblivion and become extinct someday.  On the universal scale that is not a bad thing.  It is just following natural law.

 

Sure, I'm sure we will. But that doesn't mean we don't bother to save ourselves if a planet killing rock heads our way. What do you do if a car is heading towards you? Stand still and let it hit you? Or do you move? 

As for your natural law. Nature doesn't care about the human race. Nature is indifferent to the human race. There is no "natural law" that dictates that the human race can only last a given time. We are a product of evolution, and if we evolve to be capable of removing ourselves from the threat of extinction, then that is because nature gave us that capability. 

You can be pretty confident that there will already be species out there in the void that have been around for many orders of magnitude longer than us. If they've avoided the great filter that is. 

 

45 minutes ago, birdguy said:

There is nothing special about the human race that puts them above the natural law of the universe.  Only our science gives us the arrogance to think so.

 

Can you point me in the direction of this "natural law" that dictates that the human species can only last a given time? And what is that time frame? I'd like to know. 

Edited April 11, 2021 by martin-w

[birdguy 3,943]

9 minutes ago, dave2013 said:

Anyhow, those animals that you speak of would indeed be fighting each other if their water and food supplies became scarce.

Isn't that the secret?  Making sure there is enough for all?

I worked at a wildlife refuge where resources were managed to ensure there was enough for all.  It's only greed that prevents us from doing the same for the human species.

The refuge had a 'farm unit'.  Local farmers were allowed to go in and plant crops, mostly corn.  The could only harvest half of it for themselves.  They had to leave half of the crop on the ground for the Sandill Cranes and geese to feed on during the winter.

It's called managing resources.

Noel

[martin-w 3,235]

26 minutes ago, birdguy said:

Money is the single most thing that separates humans from the rest of the species on this planet.

Noel 

 

I'm disagreeing today a lot, sorry for that. 🙂

And you are pretty much correct, although female penguins trade sex for stones and chimpanzees trade sex for meat. So I guess you could say stones and meat are currency. 

One day perhaps we will have a Star Trek system where money doesn't exist. 

Live long and prosper. 

Edited April 11, 2021 by martin-w