Space

[Delphinki]

This Thread is actually about space. The final frontier it is called but what do we actualy know about it. It has been a mystical region where the gods lived ex. Murcury Venus Mars Pluto. To us it is a great unknown region that we are trying to explore. However the amount of money to send a satilite into space is extreamly expensive to the nation it is still done to learn about other planets and their ability to support life. The people of Earth are afraid that we will need a way to escape the Planet to another by shuttle. But should we. Our race has had wars galore and going to an uninhabited planet would send us back several hundred years. We would have to build stuff to adjust to increased or decreased gravity and impuritys in the air. Should we try to save humanity by sending them into space.

[AXOZ]

I'm very sure that, if possible, the human race will aswell populate other planets. The human race is growing all the time, and it will grow bigger and bigger and just planet earth won't hold it.

[Dean]

At 3/30/09 11:16 AM, Delphinki wrote: Should we try to save humanity by sending them into space?

What's the point in that? All we will be doing is trashing another planet!

[Gorgorothx]

At 3/30/09 11:19 AM, GodsBitch wrote:

At 3/30/09 11:16 AM, Delphinki wrote: Should we try to save humanity by sending them into space?

What's the point in that? All we will be doing is trashing another planet!

Not necessarily. By the time we have the technology to colonize other planets, our ways of alternate fuels will most likely be way more advanced

[C-Hawk]

At 3/30/09 11:16 AM, Delphinki wrote: The amount of money to send a satilite into space is extreamly expensive

The ships that (re-)discovered the Americas also cost astronomical ammounts of money at that time. Was it worth it?

to the nation

I presume you're talking about NASA. NASA has fallen behind in recent years, the ESA, JAXA and RSA are pretty much shoulder-to-shoulder with NASA right now.

[Dean]

At 3/30/09 11:27 AM, C-Hawk wrote: The ships that (re-)discovered the Americas also cost astronomical ammounts of money at that time. Was it worth it?

Depends if you're native American or not. I don't think they would have been too chuffed.

[AXOZ]

At 3/30/09 11:27 AM, C-Hawk wrote:

At 3/30/09 11:16 AM, Delphinki wrote: The amount of money to send a satilite into space is extreamly expensive

The ships that (re-)discovered the Americas also cost astronomical ammounts of money at that time. Was it worth it?

Of course it was worth it! If Columbus didn't discover America, the world would look way different now. Maybe we didn't even have electricity or cars, just because the people didn't have the wealth to develop them, because trade with the New World payed off.

[Allocer91]

Yeah, once people screw things up enough on earth with nuclear waste, using up all the natural resources, killing eachother, ect they'll probably attempt to go into space, as a sort of twilight zone mission to save humanity on another planet capable of supporting life...where im sure there is already some sort of life.

[C-Hawk]

At 3/30/09 11:32 AM, AXOZ wrote: Semi-obvious stuff.

I don't know if this will work on NewGrounds, never used "weird" punctuation on here before, but here goes. I meant to ask this:
"Was it worth it%u061F"
In case it doesnt work, this is what should have been on that question mark.

[C-Hawk]

Yeah, it didn't work. Anyway, my question was rhetorical.

[DroopyA]

The advantages of mastering space travel and planatary colonization far outweighs the advantages of not doing so.

After all, we could use the new sources of natural resources as well as the room to expand our population.

I would think, our civilization is doomed if we don't.

[Delphinki]

I don't believe you understood my question. What i was presuming was that the Earth will be destroyed by the sun in several billion years. I know that the technology will be advanced in the future, but i was thinking that we should try to find and colonize planets now. Because the sun will expand and consume our solar system and it will take several generations for the ships to get out of our solar system and into another.

[Halvgoeden]

going to an uninhabited planet would send us back several hundred years.

Several hundred years back would be at the least 200 years...that's 1809. If we had the technology to colonize another planet (or moon), although undoubtedly we would have decreased use of our technologies in those colonies, we would be no where near 200+ years behind.

We would have to build stuff to adjust to increased or decreased gravity and [impurities] in the air.

All of this "stuff" either exists or is already in development.

Should we try to save humanity by sending them into space.

No. We should try to save humanity by figuring out how to avoid the need to colonize space.

I'm very sure that, if possible, the human race will aswell populate other planets. The human race is growing all the time, and it will grow bigger and bigger and just planet earth won't hold it.

You're suggesting that we won't die off as a species before Earth is completely full. If the human race were to reach anywhere near such a population, we would likely die of starvation, disease and viral infection, or war.

Besides, if we ever reached that point I think our goal should be to re-adjust our way of life instead of leaving the planet. It would be a lot cheaper...but oh so much harder.

What's the point in that? All we will be doing is trashing another planet!

Thank you.

No and yes. I would rather we die out than populate another planet, but I would rather we populate another planet than completely destroy Earth.

I'm in agreement with you, but believe me...Earth will be here long after we die off. That is unless we're destroyed by a meteor.

The ships that (re-)discovered the Americas also cost astronomical ammounts of money at that time. Was it worth it?

This is a different story. The ships that "discovered" the Americas were exploring, not frantically trying to find a new place to live because they had run out of room and resources.

The advantages of mastering space travel and planatary colonization far outweighs the advantages of not doing so. After all, we could use the new sources of natural resources as well as the room to expand our population. I would think, our civilization is doomed if we don't.

Our civilization is only doomed to repeat its failures if we opt for this temporary fix.

I don't believe you understood my question. What i was presuming was that the Earth will be destroyed by the sun in several billion years. I know that the technology will be advanced in the future, but i was thinking that we should try to find and colonize planets now. Because the sun will expand and consume our solar system and it will take several generations for the ships to get out of our solar system and into another.

I know it's hard to imagine, but people are not going to be around in several billion years.

Besides, people, unless we figure out how to use wormholes (which are hopeful speculation anyway) space travel and colonization would be a huge bust. There's a always the chance of finding a Mass Effect Drive, I guess.

[Delphinki]

At 3/30/09 12:38 PM, Halvgoeden wrote:

I know it's hard to imagine, but people are not going to be around in several billion years.

Not The Homo sapians that we are now but a form of Homo sapians that we will become in the future because of constant genetic drift.
Constant genetic drift means that there is always a change in our genes that adapts us slightly to our environment every time we mate. It is also called evolution.
I however don't know what we may evolve into, it may be a species that can live off of hydrogen and other flamable gasses and still survive on earth.
But people want to continue passing on there genes to the future generations. And some people will think of this evolution as a monstrosity.

[Fruh2theline]

Low I.Q families have an average of four kids.
High I.Q familes have an average of two kids.
Conlcusion:
We're not evolving we're devolving (back into monkies)

[DroopyA]

At 3/30/09 12:38 PM, Halvgoeden wrote: Our civilization is only doomed to repeat its failures if we opt for this temporary fix.

Why would it be temporary? Space is infinite and there's almost an endless supply of material out there waiting to be harvested. We'd probably never drain every rock in space of all it's valuable sources... and by the time we get close, we'd probably have devloped alternative energy sources and would no longer need to harvest these things...

Besides, I'm more worried about room. We give birth more then we die... we'll soon need to extra planetary space or it's going to get real crowded here.

And this isn't taking into account any of the scientific advancements mankind gains in trying to do these things (IE: Helpful by-products like velcro) or the things we'll learn or the new materials we'll encounter on our travels.

[Halvgoeden]

At 3/30/09 12:55 PM, Delphinki wrote: Not The Homo sapians that we are now but a form of Homo sapians that we will become in the future because of constant genetic drift.
Constant genetic drift means that there is always a change in our genes that adapts us slightly to our environment every time we mate. It is also called evolution.
I however don't know what we may evolve into, it may be a species that can live off of hydrogen and other flamable gasses and still survive on earth.
But people want to continue passing on there genes to the future generations. And some people will think of this evolution as a monstrosity.

Oh it's called evolution?

JK.

I doubt we will evolve as drastically as you predict. Oxygen is the basis of all life on Earth. If a species were to mutate into a hydrogen based species, it would find it tough to survive. So, according to survival of the fittest, they would die off.

However, we will probably mutate somwhat more over time. We will most likely not change in appearance too much, nor will our basic biological functions change. In any case, a few billion years (at least 2,000,000,000 years) is an insurmountable time period for a species that has only existed for roughly 200,000 years. All strains of humanoid DNA on Earth will probably be wiped out long before then.

[Delphinki]

At 3/30/09 01:33 PM, Halvgoeden wrote: I doubt we will evolve as drastically as you predict. Oxygen is the basis of all life on Earth. If a species were to mutate into a hydrogen based species, it would find it tough to survive. So, according to survival of the fittest, they would die off.

However, we will probably mutate somwhat more over time. We will most likely not change in appearance too much, nor will our basic biological functions change. In any case, a few billion years (at least 2,000,000,000 years) is an insurmountable time period for a species that has only existed for roughly 200,000 years. All strains of humanoid DNA on Earth will probably be wiped out long before then.

But remember we evolved from Neanderthals in less than 4 million years. The changes were in the bone and muscle structure and brain size. The length of the arms shortened. All this in less than 4 million years, just think of what could happen in 2 billion years.

[Halvgoeden]

At 3/30/09 01:43 PM, Delphinki wrote: But remember we evolved from Neanderthals in less than 4 million years. The changes were in the bone and muscle structure and brain size. The length of the arms shortened. All this in less than 4 million years, just think of what could happen in 2 billion years.

I get what you're saying, but I just don't think we will live that long regardless. Sure if we did we would be highly evolved and very different (thought still not hydrogen breathers), but we probably won't be around.

Also, @DroopyA:

Space travel is complex. Even if light-speed travel were possible, it would be very inefficient to colonize any system outside our own simply because of the time it would take to get to and from anywhere. Let's accept for a moment that you're right, though. If we did colonize a large number of planets, it wouldn't do us much good as a race. Assuming communication would be almost instant, I'll grant you governments could still maintain order, but fragmentation would be inevitable.

It would be better if we could learn to use what we have efficiently instead of getting used to the idea of "moving on to the next place." This mentality is temporary because it will always lead to the same problems: overpopulation and lack of resources ("You require more Vespene Gas"). The only smart way to deal will things would be to get our shit together here on Earth. I propose we start requiring licenses to have kids as a start.

Don't get me wrong, peeps. I love the idea of space colonization, I just don't think it's practical. I'm also a pessimist and believe the human race is doomed no matter what we do, so like a dying old man we need to start making amends and getting comfortable, because our last thousand years or so are going to suck.

[Delphinki]

At 3/30/09 01:57 PM, Halvgoeden wrote: I propose we start requiring licenses to have kids as a start.

were not allowed to put their kids in school and were fired from their job and had to go into some shady business. I don't believe it would be a very good idea for people to have licenses to have kids. The Government supporting it would be asking for a rebellion.

[Delphinki]

At 3/30/09 02:10 PM, Delphinki wrote:

At 3/30/09 01:57 PM, Halvgoeden wrote: I propose we start requiring licenses to have kids as a start.

A book by Orson Scott card called Enders Game had this. The people who broke the law were not allowed to put their kids in school and were fired from their job and had to go into some shady business. I don't believe it would be a very good idea for people to have licenses to have kids. The Government supporting it would be asking for a rebellion.

[Halvgoeden]

At 3/30/09 02:10 PM, Delphinki wrote: were not allowed to put their kids in school and were fired from their job and had to go into some shady business. I don't believe it would be a very good idea for people to have licenses to have kids. The Government supporting it would be asking for a rebellion.

Oh it's time for this discussion? Sweet.

Okay. We have licenses for marriage, driving, and operation of heavy machinery...why is a license to birth and care for a human being asking too much?

[Delphinki]

Look at the post that i put up after it, and read carefuly.

[Halvgoeden]

At 3/30/09 02:12 PM, Delphinki wrote:

At 3/30/09 02:10 PM, Delphinki wrote:

At 3/30/09 01:57 PM, Halvgoeden wrote: I propose we start requiring licenses to have kids as a start.

A book by Orson Scott card called Enders Game had this. The people who broke the law were not allowed to put their kids in school and were fired from their job and had to go into some shady business. I don't believe it would be a very good idea for people to have licenses to have kids. The Government supporting it would be asking for a rebellion.

Re-posting for you re-post:

I've never read Enders Game, though I should because I positively love science fiction. Anyway, I'm not talking about people not being able to put their kids in school. If you had kids, they would be the same as any other kids no matter what you or they did. I'm simply talking about some pre-screening process and a set number of licenses each year to control the population a little bit.

[Delphinki]

But if people needed licences to have birth then how would you regulate it and punish the ones who broke the law.

[Halvgoeden]

At 3/30/09 02:20 PM, Delphinki wrote: But if people needed licences to have birth then how would you regulate it and punish the ones who broke the law.

The same way we "regulate" abortion laws and drug laws. There is no way to force people to follow the rules with something like this. We just have to scare the shit out of them.

The more I write about this, the more harsh and ludicrous it seems to me. However, I do think there is a good compromise here that I'm not seeing. Oh wait, there it is>

Maybe people should just learn a little social responsibility and keep the number of babies they have to a minimum.

[HomicidialFrog]

I think most people who don't agree with Space Colonization are either Anti-Human, Religous hypocrites or just don't understand that Earth will fuck up.

The chances of having a Super-Nova(Our Star exploding for the more slower.) are excessivly high we're lucky Solar is a yellow star not a blue(Criticial heat levels) star if it was then that would mean we'd be dead long before now. Red stars would've been the best star to have as it's the coldest. (Also, don't be confused by the colour...Blue Star= Hot, Yellow Star (Ours)= Moderate and Red Star (Cold) people always say that Blue Stars are cold when there actually the hottest.) Anyway, on to the point...If we were to have a Super Nova and we had colonies all over space the disapearance of the Solar System and Earth would be unfortunate but in reality it wouldn't be the end of Mankind because those colonies would continue and Mankind will never fall.

Unless, of course there would be some kind of accident for the Centre of the Milkyway (HUGE BLACKHOLE.) then if we find a way to leave the Milkyway Galaxy and go to another then that would be fantastic spreading the Human Race across the Universe.

So basically it would work out like this.

Earth dies> We leave planet to say, Mars? > Expand across the Solar System> Before we have a Super-Nova put a colony on a planet OUTSIDE of the Solar System thus saving Mankind once again> Expand across the Galaxy> Galaxy get's sucked in the Centre causing a massive explosion of extreme Mass>
But before that happens we expand the Race to other Galaxys and because Space is infinite there will never be a last Galaxy.

Mankind will never end, because afterall nothing good ever happens.

And yes, I am a Nerd.

[Halvgoeden]

At 3/30/09 02:34 PM, CashClock wrote: Mankind will never end...

This is the kind of shit people say right before they get stabbed in the back by their most trusted right hand man.

Pic relevant: the ship "God Himself Couldn't Sink."

[Delphinki]

If you scare people enough they would rebel against the government making it easier for us to be conquered by some other nation. The nations would jump at the chance of new land and we would be conquered because we put in place a law that affected every human in our nation. If this law was put in place it would cause rebellion almost immediately.

Great post CashClock that was the main thought i had when creating the starting post.

[Ericho]

I don't know. I mean, no one's gone to the Moon since 1973. It seems like the world is just starting to lose fascination with traveling into space. All of the space tragedies that have been happening won't help. But yeah, I do see this sort of thing happening eventually, but probably not within my lifetime.

There was another post I made awhile back where I said I could see that in my lifetime, but I think now that I was wrong.