5 ms·

We aren't going to populate the galaxy. We aren't even going to populate Mars. We are going to live on Earth until something cataclysmic happens, and then we wi

We aren't going to populate the galaxy. We aren't even going to populate Mars. We are going to live on Earth until something cataclysmic happens, and then we will be gone.

bpodgursky 5y ago
That's really likely to be true if you walk into the future believing it.
- OmicronCeti 5y ago
  Seems a little grandiose considering its just a comment on HN.
dheera 5y ago
I strongly disagree with this. We have several hundred million years left, and we've only been around as an intelligent civilization for what, 100K years? 200 years ago nobody would even think of flying on Earth, and yet here we are, taking it for granted that you can get almost anywhere on this planet within 24 hours for a couple thousand dollars, and within a century of inventing the car we landed a robot on freaking Mars. Now I do think that we will take charge of evolution and invent a form of life that will be our successor to withstand a much harsher range of conditions and absent from the "bugs" of current life such as cancer and heart disease, rather than our current unreliable meat bags, but we'll make it happen nonetheless. All that said -- I do want to see more attention toward terraforming Earth as well. Even with zero global warming, the sun's brightness will increase such that our oceans will boil away within 1 billion years, even though it won't actually engulf the Earth for another 4 billion. I would think it's realistic to extend the habitable period of life on Earth from ~300 million years to maybe 2 billion years with some terraforming tricks. That will buy us more time to terraform Mars or Saturn's moons in preparation for the red giant phase of the sun. Also, learning to terraform the Earth can reverse global warming, because, you know, politicians don't give a fuck about stopping it, so we should attempt to learn to reverse it as a backup plan while the political environmental efforts continue in parallel.
- margalabargala 5y ago
  It's been 241 years since the first manned unpowered flight, in a hot air balloon. Granted that's a long way from getting anywhere on the planet, but I'm skeptical that 41 years after that event no one was thinking of flying.
- OmicronCeti 5y ago
  I think the disconnect here is between potential and probable. Humanity likely has the potential for interstellar travel, but our nature will prevent it in my opinion. Homo sapiens have twice come to the edge of nuclear oblivion already (being saved only by luck essentially), and I would wager we are are speeding much faster towards nuking each other than reaching the stars.
  - dheera 5y ago
    If nuclear war breaks out, it will be sad, we will lose a lot of our population, and cities will be destroyed, but I do not think a nuclear breakout will result in the death of humanity. I cannot see a realistic war scenario in which we will destroy every habitable corner of the planet. And if we can cure cancer in the next 50 years (I think realistic), we'll have even better odds of surviving an event, as a species.
    - OmicronCeti 5y ago
      The collapse of all plant life would mean the death of humans. Nuclear winter is a well-studied and modeled phenomenon.
      - dheera 5y ago
        I don't think we would collapse all plant life. While we have the theoretical capability to destroy all plant life, I think realistically we'd end up obliterating a few cities before war would cease, and a full-on nuclear winter is unlikely.
        5y ago
f00zz 5y ago
Not with that attitude.

We aren't going to populate the galaxy. We aren't even going to populate Mars. We are going to live on Earth until something cataclysmic happens, and then we will be gone.

bpodgursky 5y ago

That's really likely to be true if you walk into the future believing it.

OmicronCeti 5y ago
Seems a little grandiose considering its just a comment on HN.

dheera 5y ago

I strongly disagree with this. We have several hundred million years left, and we've only been around as an intelligent civilization for what, 100K years? 200 years ago nobody would even think of flying on Earth, and yet here we are, taking it for granted that you can get almost anywhere on this planet within 24 hours for a couple thousand dollars, and within a century of inventing the car we landed a robot on freaking Mars. Now I do think that we will take charge of evolution and invent a form of life that will be our successor to withstand a much harsher range of conditions and absent from the "bugs" of current life such as cancer and heart disease, rather than our current unreliable meat bags, but we'll make it happen nonetheless. All that said -- I do want to see more attention toward terraforming Earth as well. Even with zero global warming, the sun's brightness will increase such that our oceans will boil away within 1 billion years, even though it won't actually engulf the Earth for another 4 billion. I would think it's realistic to extend the habitable period of life on Earth from ~300 million years to maybe 2 billion years with some terraforming tricks. That will buy us more time to terraform Mars or Saturn's moons in preparation for the red giant phase of the sun. Also, learning to terraform the Earth can reverse global warming, because, you know, politicians don't give a fuck about stopping it, so we should attempt to learn to reverse it as a backup plan while the political environmental efforts continue in parallel.

margalabargala 5y ago
It's been 241 years since the first manned unpowered flight, in a hot air balloon. Granted that's a long way from getting anywhere on the planet, but I'm skeptical that 41 years after that event no one was thinking of flying.
OmicronCeti 5y ago
I think the disconnect here is between potential and probable. Humanity likely has the potential for interstellar travel, but our nature will prevent it in my opinion. Homo sapiens have twice come to the edge of nuclear oblivion already (being saved only by luck essentially), and I would wager we are are speeding much faster towards nuking each other than reaching the stars.
- dheera 5y ago
  If nuclear war breaks out, it will be sad, we will lose a lot of our population, and cities will be destroyed, but I do not think a nuclear breakout will result in the death of humanity. I cannot see a realistic war scenario in which we will destroy every habitable corner of the planet. And if we can cure cancer in the next 50 years (I think realistic), we'll have even better odds of surviving an event, as a species.
  - OmicronCeti 5y ago
    The collapse of all plant life would mean the death of humans. Nuclear winter is a well-studied and modeled phenomenon.
    - dheera 5y ago
      I don't think we would collapse all plant life. While we have the theoretical capability to destroy all plant life, I think realistically we'd end up obliterating a few cities before war would cease, and a full-on nuclear winter is unlikely.
      - 5y ago

f00zz 5y ago

Not with that attitude.