16 Feb 12
3 edits
Originally posted by sonhouseIt's pretty funny really. Those of faith, such as myself, are derided for saying God exists without proof. However, the reverse seems true here.
So for you if a tree falls in the forest there is no sound unless someone is there to hear it.
The solar system is lifeless till we find it. If there is already life on Europa, bacteria even, it doesn't exist till we see it?
I think there is some logic behind this fact, however. Those that do not believe in God assume that life just springs up naturally. Of course, when we look at other planets and do not find life, as of yet, then why not?
Conversely, I view life as a "supernatural" endevour which was primarily focused on the creation of the human species. If so, why then would God create life on Venus, for example? To what end?
I guess the commonality between the both of us is that life exists outside the earth. For you kids it is a haphazard and random naturally occuring event, but for me it is a specially directed event by a higher power.
16 Feb 12
Originally posted by whodeyAh yes, that chimerical Higher Power which somehow Is and always has Been, without any need to elucidate its origins.
For you kids it is a haphazard and random naturally occuring event, but for me it is a specially directed event by a higher power.
It is reasonable to believe that there is life on other worlds since we do know that life exists on this world. As for a god, well, in statistical terms, so far n equals zero.
17 Feb 12
Originally posted by SoothfastAnd will remain zero long after the extinction of mankind.
Ah yes, that chimerical Higher Power which somehow Is and always has Been, without any need to elucidate its origins.
It is reasonable to believe that there is life on other worlds since we do know that life exists on this world. As for a god, well, in statistical terms, so far n equals zero.
17 Feb 12
Originally posted by whodeySo despite what you said earlier in the thread, you real reason for believing what you believe is a religious one.
Conversely, I view life as a "supernatural" endevour which was primarily focused on the creation of the human species. If so, why then would God create life on Venus, for example? To what end?
I know life exists on earth. I don't know whether life exists on Mars. It is reasonable for me to think that the existence of life on Mars is at least within the range of possible existences. So I simply say I do not know.
When it comes to God however, it is a completely different scenario. I know of no existent gods. Your God as your describe him is illogical and internally inconsistent so could not possibly exist (just as living invisible pink unicorns could not exist on Mars). There is simply no reason to think that the existence of a god is within the range of possible existences.
18 Feb 12
Seriously, we have to get rid of our violence towards each other and thus unify the planet under the banner of peace.
We need to keep our imaginations alive and well...as well as our skepticism and the ultimate reality of this undertaking.
Clearly we will need far superior technology and make some other substantial scientific discoveries before we can seriously entertain the notion.
But as another poster said , in the long term , YES!!
Perhaps we need to understand the full implications of "God" and what "it" really is.
We cant keep going around in circles and beating up on each other.
I say that again not only because it makes a hell of a lot of sense but also because I dont think any advanced civilizations will make their presence known until we understand the basic laws of the universe.
Yes, there are laws to be found, but it all comes back to individuals, working hard in their area of expertise to figure out their little piece of the puzzle .
So speculation is good upto a point. We really need to unify the planet before any such undertakings will ever be taken seriously. Not to mention the huge amount of capital that will be freed up when we stop making guns,etc.
19 Feb 12
Originally posted by karoly aczelTrillions actually. Nice thought but that isn't going to happen any time soon. We may go extinct before that happens. We do need to get out of our nest though, if we want to have any hope of surviving the stuff that killed the dinosaurs. Asteroids, super volcanic activity, whatever, if any of that stuff happens, its back to cave man days for sure.
Seriously, we have to get rid of our violence towards each other and thus unify the planet under the banner of peace.
We need to keep our imaginations alive and well...as well as our skepticism and the ultimate reality of this undertaking.
Clearly we will need far superior technology and make some other substantial scientific discoveries before we ...[text shortened]... t to mention the huge amount of capital that will be freed up when we stop making guns,etc.
20 Feb 12
Originally posted by sonhouseWell, I'm not as sure.
Trillions actually. Nice thought but that isn't going to happen any time soon. We may go extinct before that happens. We do need to get out of our nest though, if we want to have any hope of surviving the stuff that killed the dinosaurs. Asteroids, super volcanic activity, whatever, if any of that stuff happens, its back to cave man days for sure.
Since the population curve started going up exponentially form around 1900, along with it intelligence a huge lessons on a global scale, it is only a matter of time before these old dinosaur ideals start dying out too and the next generations take over.
On the one hand humanity has a way of constantly sinking to the lowest level, on the other hand we have never had genrations (y,z) grow up in an age where you think globally and can back it up with the internet.
There is a book called "the Spike" which says that humanity may get to a point soon (20-30 years) where we just dont know what will happen next because of all the unknowns adding up on top of each other. More and more people not conforming to anything else thats come before.
The lesson of the cold war has awoken many people to the fact that if we had kept going the way we were that we would maybe cause an irreversible catasrophe on the planet which would mean a lose-lose scenario for all humans.
These are new and exciting times, and even if we dont make it very far in outer space, just the thoughts that are generated by people thinking along these lines will undoubtedly bring them back to addressing the problems that we still have.
Some religionists are saying that things are getting worse and worse.
I'm not so pessimistic. I think ideas like the colonization of space are important to keep our focusses alive and well directed at the immediate problems that humans face ...
20 Feb 12
1 edit
Originally posted by karoly aczelUnify the planet?
Seriously, we have to get rid of our violence towards each other and thus unify the planet under the banner of peace.
We need to keep our imaginations alive and well...as well as our skepticism and the ultimate reality of this undertaking.
Clearly we will need far superior technology and make some other substantial scientific discoveries before we t to mention the huge amount of capital that will be freed up when we stop making guns,etc.
Seriously now, if that is what it takes then we are all doomed!!
So on the one hand you say we need to unify everyone to a common cause, and on the other hand imply that what we need is superior technology. Do you see a disconnect here? How can superior technology unify the planet?
I think going to Mars or the moon would be akin to living under the ocean, only it would be much harder. How many people live under the ocean? It simply is not what we were made to be nor is it where we want to spend our lives.
Oddly enough I kinda agree on the unification theory. It is my belief that nothing could stand in our way if all of mankind was unified towards a common goal. However, inevitably mankind returns to the mire of his selfish ambitions and/or the need to wallow in the need for an adversary to combat. Our very nature is what impedes us from achieving these things.
20 Feb 12
1 edit
Originally posted by whodeyWell I did also say a number of other things. Like that we need to understand what "God" is.
Unify the planet?
Seriously now, if that is what it takes then we are all doomed!!
So on the one hand you say we need to unify everyone to a common cause, and on the other hand imply that what we need is superior technology. Do you see a disconnect here? How can superior technology unify the planet?
I think going to Mars or the moon would be akin ...[text shortened]... eed for an adversary to combat. Our very nature is what impedes us from achieving these things.
Unify the planet to a common peaceful cause, work on superior (peaceful) technology. I dont see any disconnect here.
I know it does seem as we are all doomed, as I pointed out human nature seems to go to the bottom of the pile, but the bottom of the pile could well be getting better as equality for women, less agism, racism,etc. kick in around the world almost simultaneously with the emergence of new generations . Perhaps the horror of war and pain (and other gross stuff like that) can be forgotten as a direct experience for anyone on the planet (but remembered collectively as something to avoid in the future) we can make this work.
Either way I'm going to die trying , not dwelling on the negatives of human nature.
21 Feb 12
Originally posted by karoly aczelFunny, I've always looked upon the world leaders as the bottom of the pile, not the average joe. If so, it's getting worse. 😞
Well I did also say a number of other things. Like that we need to understand what "God" is.
Unify the planet to a common peaceful cause, work on superior (peaceful) technology. I dont see any disconnect here.
I know it does seem as we are all doomed, as I pointed out human nature seems to go to the bottom of the pile, but the bottom of the pile ...[text shortened]... work.
Either way I'm going to die trying , not dwelling on the negatives of human nature.
03 Mar 12
1 edit
Originally posted by whodeyI don't know. I suspect that there will be a backlash against it in some future generation though.
As a species, is the colonization of space a huge waste of time and resources or is it vital to our interests?
When I was a kid Walt Disney had this program on TV called "Our Friend the Atom". Atomic power was pictured as this magic genie in the lamp which was going to solve so many of our energy problems.
I never dreamed at that time that a future generation would launch a protest against more nuclear power plants. The lesson made me wonder if great enthusiasm of one generation can be matched by disillusionment and protest by thier children or grandchildren.
I suspect the money and resource devoted to Outer Space will become an major dispute by a future generation. It may be hard to think of the Star Trek generation of my day as opposed.
03 Mar 12
1 edit
Originally posted by jaywillI gather you would much rather have all humans on one small planet so any number of major disasters can happen, asteroid strikes, major volcanism events, and so forth, rather than putting some of our eggs in another basket where humans survive the big ones coming up. They will come you know.
I don't know. I suspect that there will be a backlash against it in some future generation though.
When I was a kid Walt Disney had this program on TV called [b]"Our Friend the Atom". Atomic power was pictured as this magic genie in the lamp which was going to solve so many of our energy problems.
I never dreamed at that time that a future genera ...[text shortened]... future generation. It may be hard to think of the Star Trek generation of my day as opposed.[/b]
For instance, if we have a robust space program, and we notice there will be an earth strike of a major killer asteroid, by that time we would also have the technology to safely move it out of the way. Blowing one up with nukes doesn't work because instead of one big asteroid you have maybe half the original coming at you in smaller pieces so every square inch of earth gets hammered.
Of course we wouldn't have any of that capability if zealots stop the space program.
Another thing going on, if enemies get the high ground they have an automatic advantage.
So right now the US and China are on the next space race. China wants to put men on the moon and you can bet your boopie it won't be for peaceful purposes.
The Chinese can clearly see the advantages of having colonies on Mars and the moon even if zealots can't.
So good luck trying to stop the space program.
03 Mar 12
Originally posted by sonhouse
I gather you would much rather have all humans on one small planet so any number of major disasters can happen, asteroid strikes, major volcanism events, and so forth, rather than putting some of our eggs in another basket where humans survive the big ones coming up. They will come you know.
For instance, if we have a robust space program, and we notice ...[text shortened]... Mars and the moon even if zealots can't.
So good luck trying to stop the space program.
I gather you would much rather have all humans on one small planet so any number of major disasters can happen, asteroid strikes, major volcanism events, and so forth, rather than putting some of our eggs in another basket where humans survive the big ones coming up. They will come you know.
Sonhouse, I was not expressing a preference at all. I was only remarking how one generation's enthusiams can become another's skepticism.
For instance, if we have a robust space program, and we notice there will be an earth strike of a major killer asteroid, by that time we would also have the technology to safely move it out of the way.
There are earthly benefits to a space program. Maving an approaching large object out of its path, though encredible, might be one.
There was an old Russian science fiction movie where they built HUGE rocket engines on the earth and moved the earth out of the way.
Blowing one up with nukes doesn't work because instead of one big asteroid you have maybe half the original coming at you in smaller pieces so every square inch of earth gets hammered.
I think before that becomes a problem, the millions of pieces of space trace zipping at great speeds around the earth will become a problem.
Astronauts and and man-made satellites are more and more in danger of being struck like a bullet shot from space trash. They are keeping track of some of the space junk that is dangerous.
That may become an issue before a killer asteriod or meteor becomes one.
Of course we wouldn't have any of that capability if zealots stop the space program.
Some people are asking "Where are we going to store all this dangerous waste, which will be 100,000 years old before its safe ??" Are the "zealots" too ruining progress ?
Again, I was just musing on the evolution of attitudes from "Our Friend the Atom" to "No Nukes!".
Personally I am very fascinated by discoveries in outer space.
I think the Hubble Space Telescope was a great idea.
I think it was probable a version of a US spy satellite telescope turned around the other direction. But I don't know that for sure. I suspect it. lol.
Another thing going on, if enemies get the high ground they have an automatic advantage.
To project warfare into outer space is of course one of the first things a country would consider.
So right now the US and China are on the next space race. China wants to put men on the moon and you can bet your boopie it won't be for peaceful purposes.
The Chinese can clearly see the advantages of having colonies on Mars and the moon even if zealots can't.
So good luck trying to stop the space program.
Relax. I didn't say I was going to stop it.
A future generation will say "Hey, let's stop and think this through a bit. What are the benefits as compared to the costs ? "
Probably the "Star Trek" generation, my own generation, will have typical enthisiasm for going to other planets.
By the way sonhouse, want to volunteer to take a few years out of your life to travel to Mars? Maybe we can still hook you up on the Internet on the years long flight to mars. You won't be bored then.
03 Mar 12
Originally posted by jaywillWell on that last, the advancement of propulsion systems will bring that journey down to about one month, thereby mitigating the radiation problem. As it stands now, 6 month journey's to outer planets will put the astronauts at deadly risk. Right now the ISS astronauts are being found with eye problems, probably due to radiation accumulating over the long periods of time they are in orbit.I gather you would much rather have all humans on one small planet so any number of major disasters can happen, asteroid strikes, major volcanism events, and so forth, rather than putting some of our eggs in another basket where humans survive the big ones coming up. They will come you know.
Sonhouse, I was not expressing a preference at ...[text shortened]... on the Internet on the years long flight to mars. You won't be bored then.
New high power ion rockets are being developed at the gigawatt level that will get astronauts to Mars in a few weeks.
When you talk about 'space trace', are you talking about satellites de-orbiting and crashing to earth?
If so, very little of that space junk ever makes it to hit the ground, 99.99% of it burns up in the atmosphere.
I think if one asteroid gets close to the Earth, the people of the future will be a lot more generous to the various space programs around the planet.
As for the benefits, it might be better to chart the costs if we DON'T keep up the space programs.
It really doesn't matter what the common folk think about it, space programs are here to stay, if for no other reason than our enemies are hell bent on it too. Got to keep up with the Jones.
The bad news about that seems to me, is the lack of a grand agenda other than one upsmanship.
You saw that very clearly when we won the race to the moon in '69, when Nixon became president, he wasn't about to let a democrat program succeed in his administration, screw the benefits, we showed the Ruskies, now kill the program.
I had almost thought we had a real space program there.
So much for my work on Apollo at Goddard Space Flight Center.
I was offered a job at Goldstone Space Tracking center out in the desert in California, and was saddened when I saw the timing and tracking electronics having been removed and the evidence was in the new flooring where the Apollo electronics I used to work on was, all gone.