Is Stephen Hawking Right?

[cosmictraveler]

Originally Posted by KilljoyKlown
I'm with you on the one government idea, but I would argue about what you consider high sacrifices. In any event just being able to focus resources to get us past the energy predicament we find ourselves in would be a big first step.

To see what a one world government would be sorta like look at the European nations that have combined recently under one monetary system. Even having only one form of money some countries are greedy and just spend, spend, spend, while others are careful about their spending and have a stabilized economy or at least an economy that has a much better control of itself and isn't in deep debts.

Everything we produce to consume that we currently throw away as trash needs to be recyclable with the appropriate laws to make it happen.

How about making stuff that actually lasts decades instead of being made to break only after a short time?

What about a laser fired type of waste disposal plant in which every single piece of trash is atomized and vaporized?:shrug:

 

[GeoffP]

LOL, troll fail of epic proportions

Bollocks. It's a ridiculous prospect from the go.

 

[ElectricFetus]

More radiation that humans get exposed to as well. They aren't protected with the magnetic field on the moon as they are here so they will be in great peril working on the moon surface.

Again we won't be colonizing space, our successor will be, and they will be far more resistant to radiation then us.

 

[cosmictraveler]

Again we won't be colonizing space, our successor will be, and they will be far more resistant to radiation then us.

And just how do they become radioactive resistant?:shrug:

 

[Fraggle Rocker]

Again we won't be colonizing space, our successor will be, and they will be far more resistant to radiation then us.

We have very nearly halted the evolution of our species by artificially granting people like Stephen Hawking a survival advantage he wasn't born with. The only way our descendants could evolve better resistance to radiation is to be subject to more radiation than we are, while living in an era when civilization has collapsed and they have no artificial protection against it. Those people won't be colonizing space.

 

[Gustav]

We have very nearly halted the evolution of our species by artificially granting people like Stephen Hawking a survival advantage he wasn't born with.

interesting
you appear to be advocating a view of evolution that requires a passivity and acceptance of the status quo. the faculty of consciousness, experience and reasoning is somehow postulated to be in opposition to "evolution"

we should be leading nasty, short and brutish lives
ja, we should not have introduce fluoride into our water supply

 

[ElectricFetus]

And just how do they become radioactive resistant?:shrug:

Lacking DNA for one. All that is needed is a heavily shield CPU, and then even solar flares would be harmless to subsystems.

We have very nearly halted the evolution of our species by artificially granting people like Stephen Hawking a survival advantage he wasn't born with. The only way our descendants could evolve better resistance to radiation is to be subject to more radiation than we are, while living in an era when civilization has collapsed and they have no artificial protection against it. Those people won't be colonizing space.

Or we could just give up on going along with Darwinian evolution altogether and switch over to pseudo-lamckarian evolved technological artificial bodies. Imagine a future were consciousness is just software: what need is there for flesh bag body that are inherently difficult to move around, have limited connotative capabilities filled with emotional and animistic urges and are prone to dying?

 

[KilljoyKlown]

Not seriously. Because it doesn't solve any problem of how the alien life form came to be intelligent, and just puts one more step in the regressive path, but adds nothing. You just have to entertain the idea that we could be the most advanced life form in the Universe at present, and you have no reason to believe your scenario to be true. It's a rather pathetic excuse to use to trample on an alien planet, to be honest.

Until we find intelligent alien life we really don't have a reason to assume we will anytime soon. But by your logic if we found some alien dinosaurs we should leave that world alone as it just might evolve an intelligent species in a few million years. Sorry I don't agree with that philosophy. We might call it an alien world but it's still in our universe and without another intelligent species to contest ownership, well you get the point.

 

[Gustav]

Interesting video and article and I very much agree with what he says.

I see great dangers for the human race. There have been a number of times in the past when its survival has been a question of touch and go. The Cuban missile crisis in 1963 was one of these.​

"its survival" probably entails the summer vacation home and daily gym workouts

/snort

2040: Some areas that received fallout from strikes on nuclear power plants and above-ground nuclear waste storage facilities are still uninhabitable and will remain so for some time to come. Genetic defects are found in as much as a few percent of the population born in the northern hemisphere after the war; however, most are not noticeable or are not handicapping. The more profound physical deficiencies are due to malnutrition. Some of the surviving nations have emerged by now as major powers, including Australia, New Zealand, China, Argentina, and Brazil. (link)
​

 

[phlogistician]

Sorry I don't agree with that philosophy.

Well, the good news is that it is just philosophy, because I seriously doubt we're ever going to be able to move enough people and resources from Earth into space to sustain a population until they reach a habitable planet.

We might call it an alien world but it's still in our universe

You think humans own the Universe now? I see your problem.

 

[keith1]

Stephen Hawking says all we have to do is survive another two hundred years and the human race will be saved, because by that point human settlements in space will already be well-established.

Yes, one can gauge the level and speed of progression of human advancement of the last two hundred years, and make a rough estimate of the next two hundred, if allowed such continued levels of endeavor (not that that will be the case, or also, not to say that that advancement couldn't be realistically ten-fold the estimate):

--Off-Earth cities, having space-life culture experiences, and technical advancements (advancements only realized and attained, in an Off-Earth environment status).

--A fuller understanding of space-time dynamics, opening new branches of science, not realizable by current Earthbound status (perhaps an alternate mode and direction of travel, and superior of near-galactic exploration (beyond current near-universe exploration/migration thought expectations).

 

[keith1]

Unless humans take care of this planet there's not going to be any humans left to travel anywhere or return to a home. Humans are destroying this planet at an alarming rate so by traveling somewhere else will only lead to another planet that they will screw up as well. Unless humans learn to take care of what they already have they should never travel anywhere just to do the same destruction over and over .

Earthlings can't say they can care for a planet, by being captive on it's surface (Lest to say, they have not yet, after much time, effort, and attempts--This is why one cannot rely on placating those concerns).

 

[cosmictraveler]

keith1
Earthlings can't say they can care for a planet, by being captive on it's surface

Why not? People that live in a jail cell take care of it or else it would become a place where they couldn't live.

 

[KilljoyKlown]

Well, the good news is that it is just philosophy, because I seriously doubt we're ever going to be able to move enough people and resources from Earth into space to sustain a population until they reach a habitable planet.

Well you seem to want to treat humans as some kind of disease on the world and that the best possible outcome is to contain it to the Earth. But if that's the case it will only take a few humans to infect any other world.

You think humans own the Universe now? I see your problem.

I don't think we own anything. However we do live in the universe and if were smart enough to expand to many worlds and that's doing what's in our nature to do, then it's all natural and we are going to do it regardless of what you think is right.

 

[cosmictraveler]

Well you seem to want to treat humans as some kind of disease on the world and that the best possible outcome is to contain it to the Earth. But if that's the case it will only take a few humans to infect any other world.

If you examine exactly what humans do here on Earth, they do seem more like what a virus would be more so than an organism that can actually see that it is making many problems for itself and not taking any steps in trying to resolve those other than making money with a few things that have some impact but not enough to turn the tides of destruction upon themselves. Even viruses don't destroy themselves but mutate into other types of viruses that can survive in a hostile environment. So in a sense they are even worse than a virus and keep multiplying out of control destriying that which keeps them alive.

 

[KilljoyKlown]

If you examine exactly what humans do here on Earth, they do seem more like what a virus would be more so than an organism that can actually see that it is making many problems for itself and not taking any steps in trying to resolve those other than making money with a few things that have some impact but not enough to turn the tides of destruction upon themselves. Even viruses don't destroy themselves but mutate into other types of viruses that can survive in a hostile environment. So in a sense they are even worse than a virus and keep multiplying out of control destriying that which keeps them alive.

When a disease organism kills it's host it usually dies also. Not a very good evolutionary strategy for any organism. So if the human race is like that it needs to spread and infect other worlds before it's to late. I can't say I'm in favor of that theory, but if that is in fact our true nature, I say go for it.

 

[keith1]

Why not? People that live in a jail cell take care of it or else it would become a place where they couldn't live.

You remind me of the Papillon (1973) movie where Dustin Hoffman (with coke-bottle glasses) is happy to grow the vegetables on Devil's Island, while Steve McQueen calculates the waves and constructs his escape pod. Both help and protect each other to achieve their goals. They are two different kinds of people, but none-the-less...understanding friends.

 

[phlogistician]

Well you seem to want to treat humans as some kind of disease on the world

Nope. Keep up. I don't have a problem with humans as long as they don't go fuck up another planet.

and that the best possible outcome is to contain it to the Earth.

Again no, I have no problem with humans exploring space.

But if that's the case it will only take a few humans to infect any other world.

It's a pointless discussion anyway,... we don't even know of a habitable planet, and still have no means of detectng one.

I don't think we own anything.

You are now contradicting yourself, you said:

We might call it an alien world but it's still in our universe

(emphasis mine)

That means you think humans own the Universe! If you didn't mean to say that, you need to choose your words more carefully. Are you retracting this statement?

However we do live in the universe and if were smart enough to expand to many worlds and that's doing what's in our nature to do, then it's all natural and we are going to do it regardless of what you think is right.

Who is 'we' spaceman? And no you aren't going to achieve this, it's pop-sci BS.

 

[KilljoyKlown]

Nope. Keep up. I don't have a problem with humans as long as they don't go fuck up another planet.

You made it sound like humans couldn't do anything else, like they'll fuck up anything they touch.

Again no, I have no problem with humans exploring space.

Good to know.

It's a pointless discussion anyway,... we don't even know of a habitable planet, and still have no means of detectng one.

That's what I thought too. However you were expressing an anti-human attitude that I felt needed a response.

You are now contradicting yourself, you said:

(emphasis mine)

That means you think humans own the Universe! If you didn't mean to say that, you need to choose your words more carefully. Are you retracting this statement?

I used the word "our" as in this is our world because we live here and we live in the universe.

Who is 'we' spaceman? And no you aren't going to achieve this, it's pop-sci BS.

Maybe yes and maybe no. From our current point of view some things appear to be very improbable which is not the same as impossible. Anyway 200 years into the future is a lot of time for both good and bad shit to happen. The current technological society we have looks like a house of cards to me and I don't think it will take much stress without collapsing. The polls melting and all the beach front property becoming submerged won't be much fun for everybody on the planet, and using up the oil isn't just an energy issue, we also make a lot of products out of it that will be hard to live without.

 

[cosmictraveler]

and using up the oil isn't just an energy issue, we also make a lot of products out of it that will be hard to live without.

We humans have lived thousands of years without oil I'd think that they can survive once again if there was none to use. Adaptation is something that humans seem to be very good at don't ya think? :shrug: