Saving the planet, in my huble estimation anyway.

[Ishmael]

In his own way Ehrlich was right, over population is going to doom the human specie. Just not for the reasons he and his wife outlined.

We can feed far more than we do today, especially it the 'warmest's are right. A lot more land will be available for agriculture. (Which makes one wonder what their problem is?)

Population is a problem. In my estimation the optimum carrying capacity of the planet in human life is 3 to 4 billion. Currently we're at 7.1 billion and climbing. That presents a problem. What to do with those excess 3 to 4 billion? How do you cull the litter? And where?

"Save the rain forests." "Save the Tiger." "Save the elephant." Just how is that managed when humans are converting the environment to agriculture at an astonishing rate?

"We want social justice (which ever more so seems to be being defined as money)." Fine, print all the money you want but it still won't buy you water where there is none. Won't buy you land if there is none for sale. This whole 'equality' thing is based on the notion that everyone gets the same sized slice of the pie. From an economic standpoint that is theoretically possible. But it all falls apart when you talk about land, water, "saving the elephant", and all the other unrealistic notions the idealists try to shove down our throats.

I wonder how many recall the leftist uprising in El Salvador way back when? The mantra of the left was "Land for all." Sounds good on the surface. But the facts were that El Salvador had/has the highest population density of any nation in the America's. If you divided up all the arable, livable, land it came down to 1/4 acre per person. And if the population kept growing at the current rate at the time in no time at all you wouldn't have room to take a shit. And even if you did, in no time at all everyone would be up to their ears in shit.

Agreeing with Hawking, we have to get off of this rock. And taking a page out of "The Hitchhikers Guide to the Universe" I know exactly what classes should be on those first exploratory ships.

"Take my love
take my land.
Take where I cannot stand."

Burn the earth,
Boil the seas.
You cannot take the sky from me."

Ishmael

 

[Parminderjeet]

In his own way Ehrlich was right, over population is going to doom the human specie. Just not for the reasons he and his wife outlined.

We can feed far more than we do today, especially it the 'warmest's are right. A lot more land will be available for agriculture. (Which makes one wonder what their problem is?)

Population is a problem. In my estimation the optimum carrying capacity of the planet in human life is 3 to 4 billion. Currently we're at 7.1 billion and climbing. That presents a problem. What to do with those excess 3 to 4 billion? How do you cull the litter? And where?

"Save the rain forests." "Save the Tiger." "Save the elephant." Just how is that managed when humans are converting the environment to agriculture at an astonishing rate?

"We want social justice (which ever more so seems to be being defined as money)." Fine, print all the money you want but it still won't buy you water where there is none. Won't buy you land if there is none for sale. This whole 'equality' thing is based on the notion that everyone gets the same sized slice of the pie. From an economic standpoint that is theoretically possible. But it all falls apart when you talk about land, water, "saving the elephant", and all the other unrealistic notions the idealists try to shove down our throats.

I wonder how many recall the leftist uprising in El Salvador way back when? The mantra of the left was "Land for all." Sounds good on the surface. But the facts were that El Salvador had/has the highest population density of any nation in the America's. If you divided up all the arable, livable, land it came down to 1/4 acre per person. And if the population kept growing at the current rate at the time in no time at all you wouldn't have room to take a shit. And even if you did, in no time at all everyone would be up to their ears in shit.

Agreeing with Hawking, we have to get off of this rock. And taking a page out of "The Hitchhikers Guide to the Universe" I know exactly what classes should be on those first exploratory ships.

"Take my love
take my land.
Take where I cannot stand."

Burn the earth,
Boil the seas.
You cannot take the sky from me."

Ishmael

Stopped reading after the dumb, bolded statement.

 

[Phelia]

In his own way Ehrlich was right, over population is going to doom the human specie. Just not for the reasons he and his wife outlined.

We can feed far more than we do today, especially it the 'warmest's are right. A lot more land will be available for agriculture. (Which makes one wonder what their problem is?)

Population is a problem. In my estimation the optimum carrying capacity of the planet in human life is 3 to 4 billion. Currently we're at 7.1 billion and climbing. That presents a problem. What to do with those excess 3 to 4 billion? How do you cull the litter? And where?

"Save the rain forests." "Save the Tiger." "Save the elephant." Just how is that managed when humans are converting the environment to agriculture at an astonishing rate?

"We want social justice (which ever more so seems to be being defined as money)." Fine, print all the money you want but it still won't buy you water where there is none. Won't buy you land if there is none for sale. This whole 'equality' thing is based on the notion that everyone gets the same sized slice of the pie. From an economic standpoint that is theoretically possible. But it all falls apart when you talk about land, water, "saving the elephant", and all the other unrealistic notions the idealists try to shove down our throats.

I wonder how many recall the leftist uprising in El Salvador way back when? The mantra of the left was "Land for all." Sounds good on the surface. But the facts were that El Salvador had/has the highest population density of any nation in the America's. If you divided up all the arable, livable, land it came down to 1/4 acre per person. And if the population kept growing at the current rate at the time in no time at all you wouldn't have room to take a shit. And even if you did, in no time at all everyone would be up to their ears in shit.

Agreeing with Hawking, we have to get off of this rock. And taking a page out of "The Hitchhikers Guide to the Universe" I know exactly what classes should be on those first exploratory ships.

"Take my love
take my land.
Take where I cannot stand."

Burn the earth,
Boil the seas.
You cannot take the sky from me."

Ishmael

How many boxes of wine have you had tonight?

 

[yukonnights]

I'm always amused by the "Relocate to Another Planet" solution. In reality, it will never happen because of a number of problems; 1) cost, 2) time, 3) no planet close appears realistic for colonization on a mass scale. 4) travel time... unless we can develop a hyper-drive into light speed (I doubt I'll still be around by then), and on and on. It's pie-in-the-sky

Perhaps if we used all the money that effort would take and try to get serious about our real problems...just maybe we could figure out a solution. But alas, that won't happen either because there's money to made and things to buy, no time for the small stuff like leaving our grand-kids a planet that functions

My best guess on the the solution is; The planet itself will take care of the parasite now making her ill...then she will start over again

 

[IrezumiKiss]

How many boxes of wine have you had tonight?

He's sounding a lot like a liberal dreamer with this magilla, so I'm gonna guess a range from 3 to 5.

 

[Liar]

Ah yes. Quoting Joss Whedon. The Tumblr version of intellectual depth.

In my estimation the optimum carrying capacity of the planet in human life is 3 to 4 billion.

Uh huh.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

I submit that we will turn to a massively vertical manner of living and that cities will begin to shrink as the advantages of living inside a massive structure become too attractive.



Then we will have a true divide between those who live in the cities and consume and those who live outside and produce. It will almost be like two different species.

 

[Saint Peter]

It is all about power and the controlling the power. We can grow food with lights. We can remove the salt from sea water with power. We can stay warm and charge our iphones with power.

Nukes are dirty. Coal is dirty. Solar is expensive. Wind is flakey. There will be something big in the near future. Either an old idea improved or a new one that rocks the world.

Scientists and engineers are your friends. Treat them well.

 

[JohnnySavage]

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BYjE0MDkzNDQtNjk2YS00MWFkLTk3MDMtNjkzZjYzOWJlMjU2XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNTQ1NzU4Njk@._V1_.jpg

 

[Typo Fu Master]

I'm always amused by the "Relocate to Another Planet" solution. In reality, it will never happen because of a number of problems; 1) cost, 2) time, 3) no planet close appears realistic for colonization on a mass scale. 4) travel time... unless we can develop a hyper-drive into light speed (I doubt I'll still be around by then), and on and on. It's pie-in-the-sky

Perhaps if we used all the money that effort would take and try to get serious about our real problems...just maybe we could figure out a solution. But alas, that won't happen either because there's money to made and things to buy, no time for the small stuff like leaving our grand-kids a planet that functions

My best guess on the the solution is; The planet itself will take care of the parasite now making her ill...then she will start over again

This.

I want to believe Mother Nature won't correct the problem before we do. But I know human nature.

 

[GiaCat]

Overpopulation is the reason for the mass migration of people to Europe and the US. It's like the rats jumping ship while it's burning. The problem with the 'migrate to other planets' solution is that the population bomb will explode long before cheap space travel can ever become a reality.

I would not want to be here in 100 years. All this will come to a head. I like George Carlin's quote, "The earth will shake us off like a bad case of fleas".

Arrogant meddling

 

[Nipples_Mcgee1]

In his own way Ehrlich was right, over population is going to doom the human specie. Just not for the reasons he and his wife outlined.

We can feed far more than we do today, especially it the 'warmest's are right. A lot more land will be available for agriculture. (Which makes one wonder what their problem is?)

Population is a problem. In my estimation the optimum carrying capacity of the planet in human life is 3 to 4 billion. Currently we're at 7.1 billion and climbing. That presents a problem. What to do with those excess 3 to 4 billion? How do you cull the litter? And where?

"Save the rain forests." "Save the Tiger." "Save the elephant." Just how is that managed when humans are converting the environment to agriculture at an astonishing rate?

"We want social justice (which ever more so seems to be being defined as money)." Fine, print all the money you want but it still won't buy you water where there is none. Won't buy you land if there is none for sale. This whole 'equality' thing is based on the notion that everyone gets the same sized slice of the pie. From an economic standpoint that is theoretically possible. But it all falls apart when you talk about land, water, "saving the elephant", and all the other unrealistic notions the idealists try to shove down our throats.

I wonder how many recall the leftist uprising in El Salvador way back when? The mantra of the left was "Land for all." Sounds good on the surface. But the facts were that El Salvador had/has the highest population density of any nation in the America's. If you divided up all the arable, livable, land it came down to 1/4 acre per person. And if the population kept growing at the current rate at the time in no time at all you wouldn't have room to take a shit. And even if you did, in no time at all everyone would be up to their ears in shit.

Agreeing with Hawking, we have to get off of this rock. And taking a page out of "The Hitchhikers Guide to the Universe" I know exactly what classes should be on those first exploratory ships.

"Take my love
take my land.
Take where I cannot stand."

Burn the earth,
Boil the seas.
You cannot take the sky from me."

Ishmael

Quoting for drunken stupidity. I'm all for having an interplanetary civilization, but OP is one big pile of shit.

 

[ishtat]

From the planet's point of view, human survival is of no great consequence. We have been around for 2 million years, dinosaurs for 150 million - which would seem to imply that intelligence is hardly a survival trait.

The issue is not saving the Planet but whether the planet has any use for us.

 

[magicalmoments]

Seems to me the OP should have been in the WTF thread.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

As technology advances, wealth, or should I say Capital, is accrued. As we see in the West, you hit a tipping point where children are desired less, so lower birthrates are experienced. Now for the social state, this presents a problem since most of its benefits to its "voters" are based on various versions of the classic Ponzi.

I submit that if we tend more towards Capitalism and less to the state, then population control will happen naturally. Our biggest population problem will be with the schemes of those whom desire to use government to cure the ills that stem from human nature since it creates a need to import and exploit human beings to service the obligations of the social state.

 

[adrina]

Embrace birth control and abortion. Period.

Ha. We have entire groups of people thinking we need to escape to another planet instead of cleaning up our mess. Such grand concepts of personal responsibility.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Hawking does have a point.


Clearly, it will not happen in the near future, but finding a way to establishing outposts off planet is a cerebral survival mechanism more so that it is a remedy for overpopulation. It is the product of evolution.


I already outlined why I have hope that overpopulation will not become an issue, provided we don't go back to a more primitive state of Church* and State.




* And by Church, I'm not talking just god, but of any belief system that creeps in to steal individuality.

 

[Ishmael]

Overpopulation is the reason for the mass migration of people to Europe and the US. It's like the rats jumping ship while it's burning. The problem with the 'migrate to other planets' solution is that the population bomb will explode long before cheap space travel can ever become a reality.

I would not want to be here in 100 years. All this will come to a head. I like George Carlin's quote, "The earth will shake us off like a bad case of fleas".

Arrogant meddling

From the planet's point of view, human survival is of no great consequence. We have been around for 2 million years, dinosaurs for 150 million - which would seem to imply that intelligence is hardly a survival trait.

The issue is not saving the Planet but whether the planet has any use for us.

Hawking does have a point.


Clearly, it will not happen in the near future, but finding a way to establishing outposts off planet is a cerebral survival mechanism more so that it is a remedy for overpopulation. It is the product of evolution.


I already outlined why I have hope that overpopulation will not become an issue, provided we don't go back to a more primitive state of Church* and State.




* And by Church, I'm not talking just god, but of any belief system that creeps in to steal individuality.

As Gia and TFM point out, the Earth doesn't care. It will still be here long after we're gone.

Hawking doe have a point. But then one has to consider whether we are 'saving humanity' or just a case of a virus finding a new host?

Ishmael

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

*chuckle*

 

[Colonel Hogan]

I'm always amused by the "Relocate to Another Planet" solution. In reality, it will never happen because of a number of problems; 1) cost, 2) time, 3) no planet close appears realistic for colonization on a mass scale. 4) travel time... unless we can develop a hyper-drive into light speed (I doubt I'll still be around by then), and on and on. It's pie-in-the-sky

Perhaps if we used all the money that effort would take and try to get serious about our real problems...just maybe we could figure out a solution. But alas, that won't happen either because there's money to made and things to buy, no time for the small stuff like leaving our grand-kids a planet that functions

My best guess on the the solution is; The planet itself will take care of the parasite now making her ill...then she will start over again

It is the most mind fuckingly dumbest idea that could ever be conceived in response to a specific alleged potential planetary catastrophe.

And for a fraction of the same cost at a fraction of the same time it would take to colonize an inhospitable slab of rock hundreds of millions of miles distant you could build entire cities under the 71% of the bodies of water covering the Earth's surface, as well as subterranean habitats. Huge new efficiencies in agriculture, environmental conservation, and recycling would be far more productive and save far more lives than merely attempting to transport a minuscule fraction of Earthlings to a biosphere "somewhere out there" while the vast remainder of the population is left to perish here.

Sometimes I fear the end stage of Hawking's illness may be setting in. But he's essentially out there alone on this one. For all the noise over the doomsday prophecy of climate change, you don't exactly hear a groundswell of scientific thought advocating space colonization as the best solution to this "problem."

 

[Nipples_Mcgee1]

It is the most mind fuckingly dumbest idea that could ever be conceived in response to a specific alleged potential planetary catastrophe.

And for a fraction of the same cost at a fraction of the same time it would take to colonize an inhospitable slab of rock hundreds of millions of miles distant you could build entire cities under the 71% of the bodies of water covering the Earth's surface, as well as subterranean habitats. Huge new efficiencies in agriculture, environmental conservation, and recycling would be far more productive and save far more lives than merely attempting to transport a minuscule fraction of Earthlings to a biosphere "somewhere out there" while the vast remainder of the population is left to perish here.

Sometimes I fear the end stage of Hawking's illness may be setting in. But he's essentially out there alone on this one. For all the noise over the doomsday prophecy of climate change, you don't exactly hear a groundswell of scientific thought advocating space colonization as the best solution to this "problem."

No. It is possible to imagine scenarios in which the earth is rendered uninhabitable, even regardless of the opportunity cost of artificial habitats on earth. They're not especially likely, but for long periods of time (on the order of thousands to millions of years) it does make sense to be an interplanetary species as a way of defending against existential threats.

But I agree that on the time scale of hundreds of years, it makes much more sense to be good stewards of this planet.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

No. It is possible to imagine scenarios in which the earth is rendered uninhabitable, even regardless of the opportunity cost of artificial habitats on earth. They're not especially likely, but for long periods of time (on the order of thousands to millions of years) it does make sense to be an interplanetary species as a way of defending against existential threats.

But I agree that on the time scale of hundreds of years, it makes much more sense to be good stewards of this planet.

And my point is that on an "order of thousands to millions of years" it makes no sense whatsoever to be having that discussion now. It's roughly equivalent to two microbes getting together to plan their own evolution with the objective of reinventing powered flight.

Whatever scenario you can envision that would make earth uninhabitable, my question to you would be is that scenario in any way MORE uninhabitable than any location that you can currently think of within our solar system? Because on the order of hundreds of years, that is the only place we have a ghost of a chance of going. And on the order of a thousand or millions of years, it won't be much farther, because the speed of light is not a "technical problem" to be overcome. It is a mathematical fact that defines our universe and an inescapable limitation within it.

It is an immutable LAW, and nothing we have accomplished in the millions of years of evolution on this earth, including discovering it, has altered it or suggested that it is in any way alterable.

 

[Nipples_Mcgee1]

And my point is that on an "order of thousands to millions of years" it makes no sense whatsoever to be having that discussion now. It's roughly equivalent to two microbes getting together to plan their own evolution with the objective of reinventing powered flight.

Whatever scenario you can envision that would make earth uninhabitable, my question to you would be is that scenario in any way MORE uninhabitable than any location that you can currently think of within our solar system?

As a matter of fact, yes. Now, I grant that these scenarios are exceedingly unlikely, and in some cases involve rare astrophysical events, but these are nonetheless scenarios that have been considered in the literature. However, on the timescale of millions of years, they become more relevant, just by the nature of probability, and take on an added importance if catastrophe is sudden. Besides, on these timescales (hundreds of years) there will be ample opportunity to terraform other bodies, and extract the virtually limitless resources of the solar system.

Because on the order of hundreds of years, that is the only place we have a ghost of a chance of going. And on the order of a thousand or millions of years, it won't be much farther, because the speed of light is not a "technical problem" to be overcome. It is a mathematical fact that defines our universe and an inescapable limitation within it.

It is an immutable LAW, and nothing we have accomplished in the millions of years of evolution on this earth, including discovering it, has altered it or suggested that it is in any way alterable.

If we assume some kind of interstellar effort, then on the scale of millions of years the radius of colonization could be on the order of thousands of light-years, even traveling at negligible fractions of c. I think it's somewhat foolhardy to try to make predictions about civilization that far out in time, though, but there it is.

 

[FGB]

Hawking is a fucking idiot.

Yeah.

I said it. He is also a prime example why the
intellectual elitist types are so dangerous.

This ole world is long overdue for a major die off. As to what it will be... Bugs,weapons of great mass destruction or asteroids or a combination matters little. We are responsible for this planet and it is made clear we will fail despite of all of the efforts we will make..doesn't mean we should not try...just don't be a damned fool about it.

Want to send a bunch of people into space. want to make like as hard for us as it is the third wold countries?

Have at it. The people of the world will not escape their fate.

Whenever this sort of thing comes up, I always consult mankind's instruction and prophecy manual.

We will get a dose of it all in good time so hang on to your ass and don't worry about it.

 

[magicalmoments]

Hawking is a fucking idiot.

Yeah.

I said it. He is also a prime example why the
intellectual elitist types are so dangerous.

This ole world is long overdue for a major die off. As to what it will be... Bugs,weapons of great mass destruction or asteroids or a combination matters little. We are responsible for this planet and it is made clear we will fail despite of all of the efforts we will make..doesn't mean we should not try...just don't be a damned fool about it.

Want to send a bunch of people into space. want to make like as hard for us as it is the third wold countries?

Have at it. The people of the world will not escape their fate.

Whenever this sort of thing comes up, I always consult mankind's instruction and prophecy manual.

We will get a dose of it all in good time so hang on to your ass and don't worry about it.

The first line was all I needed to read to know everything I need to know about this poster.

I suspect a wheel from Hawking's wheel chair would have a greater intellect than the poster.