4 ms·
I agree in part, however, sustainability requires a complex combinatorial solution as well due to it's association to the human condition related to self-intere
by biomimic 12y ago
I agree in part, however, sustainability requires a complex combinatorial solution as well due to it's association to the human condition related to self-interests (the list goes on of course), science, international distribution policy/policing, philosophical vs. technology GMO issuse etc.
We need to learn more about are species, we need to buy both time and food with something other than money.
- TeMPOraL 12y agoYou're right of course, but we won't solve our problems by just throwing away this planet and going to another (that, remember, doesn't support life by default, we need to make it do that). We need to crack sustainability anyway, and it's best to focus on it ASAP.
- biomimic 12y agoI completely agree, we need to solve for this Earth first. If we continue to ruin this earth, we don't stand a chance and even worse, we'll have a horrible intergalactic reputation.
- TeMPOraL 12y agoI actually wonder sometimes how much damage we did to ourselves by creating various popular science fiction shows. As people can't help but believe Hollywood ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Availability_heuristic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Availability_heuristic ), I wonder how many people feel subconsciously that space travel is easy, so if ruin this planet, we can just go and find another one.
- biomimic 12y agoBattlestar Galactica is not at fault here, just a future reality in some respects.
- lotsofmangos 12y agoIf any of our descendants ever have to worry about their intergalactic reputations, we will have saved life on earth many times over by deflecting large asteroids. In the long run, having a technologically spacefaring species is the only way for anything other than microscopic life to survive.