Across the Universe?
Pages
| Author | Topic: Across the Universe? |
|---|---|
|
Shaper
Member # 32
|
written Monday, November 12 2007 14:21
Profile
We once thought that the very small scale had no reason to be a special case. We were wrong then. Maybe we are wrong now... [ Monday, November 12, 2007 14:22: Message edited by: Lt. Sullust ] -------------------- Lt. Sullust Quaere verum Posts: 2462 | Registered: Wednesday, October 3 2001 07:00 |
|
Warrior
Member # 5310
|
written Monday, November 12 2007 14:52
Profile
I think the largest obstacle to the colonization of other planets is transportation. According to an article I read it takes, if I understand it correctly, around six months to get to Mars. It also says it can get down to three soon. I actually thought it took years to get there. Maybe, thirty years from now, people will live on Mars. I´m quite sure aforementioned biological problems will be solved then, not that I´m an expert in those things. [ Monday, November 12, 2007 14:54: Message edited by: Tramist ] Posts: 57 | Registered: Monday, December 20 2004 08:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Monday, November 12 2007 21:58
Profile
Homepage
Thirty years is excessively optimistic. Centuries, maybe. Decades, almost certainly not. And hey — Mars is only a few light-minutes away, so the "several months" thing just depends on how fast you travel. :P -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 8030
|
written Monday, November 12 2007 22:32
Profile
Homepage
A colonist on Mars would be depressed, imagine living in a dome for the rest of your life. -------------------- "On the earth, nations will be in anguish and perplexity at the roaring and the tossing of the sea" Luke 21:25 Posts: 1384 | Registered: Tuesday, February 6 2007 08:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 4248
|
written Tuesday, November 13 2007 02:19
Profile
quote:I am dead serious. However, consider for a moment what "all else" actually means. I've read studies which claim that the growth of human population will naturally come to halt around nine billion, and after we reach that point there are dozens of peacefull ways to reduce the amount of humans to a more feasible level. It might take decades or even centuries to get the population to about two billion I consider ideal, but I am sure we could do it without blowing anything up. Of course, there are ways to maintain a population of nine billion in the long run, but currently I think that reducing the amount of people is a better overall solution. And easier, too. -------------------- Life is a neverending carneval where everyone has multiple costumes. I just hope mine are pleasing to the eye. Posts: 617 | Registered: Tuesday, April 13 2004 07:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 32
|
written Tuesday, November 13 2007 03:13
Profile
If we reach 9 billion, our expansion may halt; however, along the way we'll have probably caused just about everything else on the planet to go extinct... -------------------- Lt. Sullust Quaere verum Posts: 2462 | Registered: Wednesday, October 3 2001 07:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 3442
|
written Tuesday, November 13 2007 03:35
Profile
Homepage
quote:I dunno - I don't imagine there to be too many chavs on Mars... Besides, this is a good film. And we all know that life imitates art. Right? -------------------- Nikki's Nook - pretty, pretty? Posts: 2864 | Registered: Monday, September 8 2003 07:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 4248
|
written Tuesday, November 13 2007 05:06
Profile
quote:Well, there are already 6.6 billion of us on this globe. The extra 2.4 billion may cause some more damage, but I don't think it will be that significant if we manage to otherwise reduce environmental destruction in the meantime. Besides, at the current expansion rate, I recall, reaching 9 billion will only take four decades or so... [ Tuesday, November 13, 2007 05:08: Message edited by: Frozen Feet ] -------------------- Life is a neverending carneval where everyone has multiple costumes. I just hope mine are pleasing to the eye. Posts: 617 | Registered: Tuesday, April 13 2004 07:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Tuesday, November 13 2007 07:46
Profile
Homepage
Malthus wrote before we had a good understanding of the demographic transition. Population growth will level off. While we're at it, human destruction of the environment will also level off and then decrease as greener technologies are developed. The problem is that we're not sure how long it will be before those two things occur, and we may have done serious damage by then. -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
Warrior
Member # 5310
|
written Tuesday, November 13 2007 15:55
Profile
I don´t think that there´s a strong connection between the number of people in the world and the amount of pollution. Take Africa, with nearly 900 million people, creates only a fraction of the pollution the US creates. It´s not the amount of people in the world that matters. It´s how these people behave that matters. Another thing that I have been thinking about, many people say Global Warming is OK because "It´s happened before". That´s true, but when it happened last there where not six billion people in the world. Many areas that may be hard hit by desertification, and thus loss of life sustaining agriculture, have millions of people living in them. I don´t know what these people can do if that happens. Posts: 57 | Registered: Monday, December 20 2004 08:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 8030
|
written Tuesday, November 13 2007 16:58
Profile
Homepage
Not only is there global warming, but now there is global dimming . Global dimming prevents sunlight from entering the atmosphere, and before we started pumping particles into the air, it was beneficial to life. Now that so many particles are airborne, enough sunlight has been deflected to cause a noticeable decrease in the evaporation rate. Factoring in global dimming, some scientists predicts that Florida, Louisiana, and many parts of coastal Europe will be underwater in 50 years. I think we'll suffer the consequences before third world countries enter demographic transition, and maybe before industrialized countries end demographic transition. -------------------- "On the earth, nations will be in anguish and perplexity at the roaring and the tossing of the sea" Luke 21:25 Posts: 1384 | Registered: Tuesday, February 6 2007 08:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 4248
|
written Tuesday, November 13 2007 22:01
Profile
quote:Quite recently, I ran into a person who held this opinion. My response to him was something to the effect of "Oh, so you say we don't need to worry about climate change because it might be a natural occurrence? In my opinion, that's about as sensible as watching a huge boulder rolling downhill towards you and saying 'Don't worry, it's just like the rest of them. It won't hurt me'." [ Tuesday, November 13, 2007 22:01: Message edited by: Frozen Feet ] -------------------- Life is a neverending carneval where everyone has multiple costumes. I just hope mine are pleasing to the eye. Posts: 617 | Registered: Tuesday, April 13 2004 07:00 |