4 ms·

It's just a matter of time before every organism on earth dies if humans do not bring them to other planets. The earth is 4.5 billion years old, and by most es

It's just a matter of time before every organism on earth dies if humans do not bring them to other planets. The earth is 4.5 billion years old, and by most estimates has only 0.6 billion years left before the sun's light is insufficient to sustain photosynthesis. Even if some life survives that, earth will eventually burn up as the sun expands. Some catastrophic event, human-caused nuclear warfare, asteroid, bioweapon could easily destroy all intelligent life on earth. If that happens it is very unlikely intelligent life will have time to evolve before the earth is destroyed. Why gamble on an event like that not happening given how close we've come? The universe is vast, why don't humans have a duty to protect life and bring it to other planets asap? It's so strange that environmentalists want to preserve natural life but steadfastly oppose colonizing other planets (the only way to actually preserve it).

dragonwriter 5y ago
> It's just a matter of time before every organism on earth dies if humans do not bring them to other planets. This sentence is equally true if you put a full stop after “dies” and delete everything following.
lostcolony 5y ago
Modern humans have been around only 200-300k years. Industrialization started 130 years ago or so. Getting off the planet in the next 600 million years is a much, much smaller concern than how we can actually keep the species going in the immediate future. While, yes, at some point we need a 'plan B' to earth, the reality is we still first need a plan A; despite how far away we are from it, we are much closer to being able to maintain equilibrium on this planet than we are to colonizing another (and if we don't fix the first in a relatively short period, but somehow manage the second, we just doom two planets anyway).
rob74 5y ago
From that angle, it sounds strange. However, if you talk about colonizing other planets, it's not "preserving natural life" anymore, it's establishing several invasive species by either creating an ecosystem where there is none or (even worse) destroying a (hypothetical) extraterrestrial ecosystem to establish one that would be useful to humans. There are definitely some people who would refuse extending their own lifespan beyond its natural limits, so it's not surprising that some have the same opinion for the species as a whole...
donkarma 5y ago
someone better top up the Sun
- Thiez 5y ago
  Actually it would be much better for us if the sun were a little smaller, and earth just a little closer to it to compensate. As the sun gets older it gives us more energy, not less. A less heavy sun would last much much longer.
lm28469 5y ago
The universe will eventually die either-way so why bother We're two centuries in the industrial revolution and everything points to the fact that we're destroying our home planet, which means two things: - 0.6 billion years is plenty of time - if we fucked up so bad on this perfect planet how likely it is that we have anywhere close to a comfortable life on a dead planet that we haven't evolved to live on ? We had the best conditions possible to start with and we destroyed a good part of it for petty things in an extremely small amount of time

dragonwriter 5y ago

> It's just a matter of time before every organism on earth dies if humans do not bring them to other planets. This sentence is equally true if you put a full stop after “dies” and delete everything following.

lostcolony 5y ago

Modern humans have been around only 200-300k years. Industrialization started 130 years ago or so. Getting off the planet in the next 600 million years is a much, much smaller concern than how we can actually keep the species going in the immediate future. While, yes, at some point we need a 'plan B' to earth, the reality is we still first need a plan A; despite how far away we are from it, we are much closer to being able to maintain equilibrium on this planet than we are to colonizing another (and if we don't fix the first in a relatively short period, but somehow manage the second, we just doom two planets anyway).

rob74 5y ago

From that angle, it sounds strange. However, if you talk about colonizing other planets, it's not "preserving natural life" anymore, it's establishing several invasive species by either creating an ecosystem where there is none or (even worse) destroying a (hypothetical) extraterrestrial ecosystem to establish one that would be useful to humans. There are definitely some people who would refuse extending their own lifespan beyond its natural limits, so it's not surprising that some have the same opinion for the species as a whole...

donkarma 5y ago

someone better top up the Sun

Thiez 5y ago
Actually it would be much better for us if the sun were a little smaller, and earth just a little closer to it to compensate. As the sun gets older it gives us more energy, not less. A less heavy sun would last much much longer.

lm28469 5y ago

The universe will eventually die either-way so why bother We're two centuries in the industrial revolution and everything points to the fact that we're destroying our home planet, which means two things: - 0.6 billion years is plenty of time - if we fucked up so bad on this perfect planet how likely it is that we have anywhere close to a comfortable life on a dead planet that we haven't evolved to live on ? We had the best conditions possible to start with and we destroyed a good part of it for petty things in an extremely small amount of time