4merper4mer Posted February 3, 2020 Share Posted February 3, 2020 Humans need to use science, real objective science, in any analysis. The truth is that we don't know enough yet to be accurately predictive. We are closer than ever but how close are we really? What are the goals and do we agree on them? Is it survival of our species, survival of as many species as possible or survival of life on this specific planet even if humans die out? Our current scientific capabilities enable us to look at the past and present more clearly than the future. What we know: Climate and weather are not the same thing. Climate is determined by many things, most prominent among them the Sun, the Earth's atmosphere and the Earth's magnetosphere. Math has clearly told us, if we're willing to listen, that our planet is the only one in the universe to spawn and maintain intelligent life. The future: We can strongly predict that the sun will not last forever in a way that supports life on Earth; indeed it will one day envelope the Earth We are not sure to a fine enough degree how much CO2 is too much to maintain human life We are not sure if or when a super volcano, asteroid or other natural event could render all our arguing moot Our goals: If our goal isn't the survival of our species and as many others as possible for as long as possible then we might as well live it up here without regard for the already doomed planet. I don't have that point of view and would guess that most don't. Knowing that almost all of our technological advancement in the last century has been derived from capitalistic use of fossil fuels, why do so many want to stifle them? The universe is ours, 100% ours, if we can learn enough, quickly enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 3, 2020 Share Posted February 3, 2020 10 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said: Knowing that almost all of our technological advancement in the last century has been derived from capitalistic use of fossil fuels, why do so many want to stifle them? Who wrote this? I mean you could also say that fossil fuels were the cause of WW2. Even if it's true about our technological advances being derived from fossil fuels (is it true?) that doesn't mean we owe anything to fossil fuels, so why keep warming the planet through their use if we have alternatives? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted February 3, 2020 Share Posted February 3, 2020 4 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Who wrote this? I mean you could also say that fossil fuels were the cause of WW2. Even if it's true about our technological advances being derived from fossil fuels (is it true?) that doesn't mean we owe anything to fossil fuels, so why keep warming the planet through their use if we have alternatives? We don't have viable alternatives at this point. Not for its complete replacement. There can be and have been limited substitutions, but not replacement. If I told you that 100 more years of fossil fuel use would enable another technology.....let's just say cold fusion for kicks....would you support that? How about 1000 years? 10? 50? We don't know how long we need but we know the sun will die in about 5 billion years so tick tock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 3, 2020 Share Posted February 3, 2020 9 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said: a) We don't have viable alternatives at this point. Not for its complete replacement. There can be and have been limited substitutions, but not replacement. b) If I told you that 100 more years of fossil fuel use would enable another technology.....let's just say cold fusion for kicks....would you support that? How about 1000 years? 10? 50? We don't know how long we need but we know the sun will die in about 5 billion years so tick tock. a) We don't need complete replacement. We can--if the political will existed (it doesn't) to change over to 10% then 20% and later go all the way to 75% or more. b) I would want to know at what cost? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RochesterRob Posted February 3, 2020 Share Posted February 3, 2020 24 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said: Humans need to use science, real objective science, in any analysis. The truth is that we don't know enough yet to be accurately predictive. We are closer than ever but how close are we really? What are the goals and do we agree on them? Is it survival of our species, survival of as many species as possible or survival of life on this specific planet even if humans die out? Our current scientific capabilities enable us to look at the past and present more clearly than the future. What we know: Climate and weather are not the same thing. Climate is determined by many things, most prominent among them the Sun, the Earth's atmosphere and the Earth's magnetosphere. Math has clearly told us, if we're willing to listen, that our planet is the only one in the universe to spawn and maintain intelligent life. The future: We can strongly predict that the sun will not last forever in a way that supports life on Earth; indeed it will one day envelope the Earth We are not sure to a fine enough degree how much CO2 is too much to maintain human life We are not sure if or when a super volcano, asteroid or other natural event could render all our arguing moot Our goals: If our goal isn't the survival of our species and as many others as possible for as long as possible then we might as well live it up here without regard for the already doomed planet. I don't have that point of view and would guess that most don't. Knowing that almost all of our technological advancement in the last century has been derived from capitalistic use of fossil fuels, why do so many want to stifle them? The universe is ours, 100% ours, if we can learn enough, quickly enough. " Math has clearly told us........spawn and maintain intelligent life." I disagree with this notion. The last estimate I saw by the scientific community was there were most likely trillions of worlds in our universe. The building blocks of life namely nitrogen, hydrogen, carbon, and oxygen even if only found on a tiny percentage of those worlds still means millions of planets where those elements were combined into compounds that would in turn spawn life. Then there is the possibility of life by elements and processes currently unknown by science. One event could certainly end all advanced life on Earth but lower forms including bacteria could survive. Even relatively higher forms of life survived the Yucatan impact. It's possible humans could reappear after the next bellwether event even if it takes 10's of millions of years. The down side would be all the lessons learned by humanity in the last 5000 years would have to be re-learned as records from previous times most likely would not last 50-60-70 million years or more for the next crop of humans to use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted February 3, 2020 Share Posted February 3, 2020 1 minute ago, RochesterRob said: " Math has clearly told us........spawn and maintain intelligent life." I disagree with this notion. The last estimate I saw by the scientific community was there were most likely trillions of worlds in our universe. The building blocks of life namely nitrogen, hydrogen, carbon, and oxygen even if only found on a tiny percentage of those worlds still means millions of planets where those elements were combined into compounds that would in turn spawn life. Then there is the possibility of life by elements and processes currently unknown by science. One event could certainly end all advanced life on Earth but lower forms including bacteria could survive. Even relatively higher forms of life survived the Yucatan impact. It's possible humans could reappear after the next bellwether event even if it takes 10's of millions of years. The down side would be all the lessons learned by humanity in the last 5000 years would have to be re-learned as records from previous times most likely would not last 50-60-70 million years or more for the next crop of humans to use. That would still be this planet which is exactly what I said. There may or may not be bacterial life elsewhere but there isn't intelligent life. Some events would reset Earth's clock as you stated. Others could turn us into Venus which has no magnetosphere and a hostile environment. Venus is actually a decent candidate to have microbial life in its upper atmosphere but like the rest of the universe, no intelligent life. One event, in 5 billion years, will definitely end Earth's life. All of it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RochesterRob Posted February 3, 2020 Share Posted February 3, 2020 3 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said: That would still be this planet which is exactly what I said. There may or may not be bacterial life elsewhere but there isn't intelligent life. Some events would reset Earth's clock as you stated. Others could turn us into Venus which has no magnetosphere and a hostile environment. Venus is actually a decent candidate to have microbial life in its upper atmosphere but like the rest of the universe, no intelligent life. One event, in 5 billion years, will definitely end Earth's life. All of it. The point is that intelligent life could derive from lower forms of life that lack the fundamentals which intelligent life has but is not limited to such as having a central nervous system for example. And you flat out don't know if there is not other intelligent life in the universe. There are so many variables to that including the choice by that life form not to make contact with other life forms Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 3, 2020 Share Posted February 3, 2020 13 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said: That would still be this planet which is exactly what I said. There may or may not be bacterial life elsewhere but there isn't intelligent life. Some events would reset Earth's clock as you stated. Others could turn us into Venus which has no magnetosphere and a hostile environment. Venus is actually a decent candidate to have microbial life in its upper atmosphere but like the rest of the universe, no intelligent life. One event, in 5 billion years, will definitely end Earth's life. All of it. Have you ever experienced the wrath of a pissed off female Goddess? Uranus is going to be sore. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 3, 2020 Share Posted February 3, 2020 11 minutes ago, RochesterRob said: " Math has clearly told us........spawn and maintain intelligent life." I disagree with this notion. The last estimate I saw by the scientific community was there were most likely trillions of worlds in our universe. The building blocks of life namely nitrogen, hydrogen, carbon, and oxygen even if only found on a tiny percentage of those worlds still means millions of planets where those elements were combined into compounds that would in turn spawn life. Then there is the possibility of life by elements and processes currently unknown by science. One event could certainly end all advanced life on Earth but lower forms including bacteria could survive. Even relatively higher forms of life survived the Yucatan impact. It's possible humans could reappear after the next bellwether event even if it takes 10's of millions of years. The down side would be all the lessons learned by humanity in the last 5000 years would have to be re-learned as records from previous times most likely would not last 50-60-70 million years or more for the next crop of humans to use. The odds of probability do seem to point to the existence of life elsewhere, but no evidence yet.. But the math is even more compelling, see how not just the number of stars need counting, but the number of stars over the billions of years. Life could have started somewhere else two billion years ago on a star that no longer exists. This is the stuff I have been reading about lately, actually. So in the universe we have been a really "noisy" planet. For the last 120 years or so our radio waves have been heading out into the universe. If anyone is out there listening they should find us, if they have not already. Humble us, is looking for signs from space like that. Seeing how it took us 10,000 years or so to get this far, and that the universe is over ten billion years old, the probability that an older civilization--maybe 30,000 years old--has already found us and either doesn't care or is just observing us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted February 3, 2020 Share Posted February 3, 2020 2 minutes ago, RochesterRob said: The point is that intelligent life could derive from lower forms of life that lack the fundamentals which intelligent life has but is not limited to such as having a central nervous system for example. And you flat out don't know if there is not other intelligent life in the universe. There are so many variables to that including the choice by that life form not to make contact with other life forms This is a global warming thread and I don't want to get way off track but an objective viewpoint makes it clear that there is not other intelligent life out there. As such, I believe our ultimate goal should be to colonize the galaxy and potentially beyond, with as many species as possible, not just humans. Clearly we are millions of years from doing this but we should choose paths more likely to get us there. 4 minutes ago, Tiberius said: The odds of probability do seem to point to the existence of life elsewhere, but no evidence yet.. But the math is even more compelling, see how not just the number of stars need counting, but the number of stars over the billions of years. Life could have started somewhere else two billion years ago on a star that no longer exists. This is the stuff I have been reading about lately, actually. So in the universe we have been a really "noisy" planet. For the last 120 years or so our radio waves have been heading out into the universe. If anyone is out there listening they should find us, if they have not already. Humble us, is looking for signs from space like that. Seeing how it took us 10,000 years or so to get this far, and that the universe is over ten billion years old, the probability that an older civilization--maybe 30,000 years old--has already found us and either doesn't care or is just observing us. All of that is really interesting stuff and I'm sure you'll enjoy it but if you employ objectivity you'll realize that no one is out there. It doesn't cover all of the bases but a good starting point if you want to skip ahead to a spoiler alert is to look into the notion of Von Neumann probes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 3, 2020 Share Posted February 3, 2020 3 minutes ago, Tiberius said: The odds of probability do seem to point to the existence of life elsewhere, but no evidence yet.. But the math is even more compelling, see how not just the number of stars need counting, but the number of stars over the billions of years. Life could have started somewhere else two billion years ago on a star that no longer exists. This is the stuff I have been reading about lately, actually. So in the universe we have been a really "noisy" planet. For the last 120 years or so our radio waves have been heading out into the universe. If anyone is out there listening they should find us, if they have not already. Humble us, is looking for signs from space like that. Seeing how it took us 10,000 years or so to get this far, and that the universe is over ten billion years old, the probability that an older civilization--maybe 30,000 years old--has already found us and either doesn't care or is just observing us. If we have intelligent life out in the vast hinterlands of outer space do you actually feel ok with them reading your *****edupshit, misspellings and poor grammar? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 3, 2020 Share Posted February 3, 2020 4 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said: This is a global warming thread and I don't want to get way off track but an objective viewpoint makes it clear that there is not other intelligent life out there. As such, I believe our ultimate goal should be to colonize the galaxy and potentially beyond, with as many species as possible, not just humans. Clearly we are millions of years from doing this but we should choose paths more likely to get us there. All of that is really interesting stuff and I'm sure you'll enjoy it but if you employ objectivity you'll realize that no one is out there. It doesn't cover all of the bases but a good starting point if you want to skip ahead to a spoiler alert is to look into the notion of Von Neumann probes. You know no one is out there??? Anywhere in the galaxy? Heck, they just found a planet around one of Alpha Centuri's suns that is in the habitable zone. And that's just the closet star system. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RochesterRob Posted February 3, 2020 Share Posted February 3, 2020 1 minute ago, 4merper4mer said: This is a global warming thread and I don't want to get way off track but an objective viewpoint makes it clear that there is not other intelligent life out there. As such, I believe our ultimate goal should be to colonize the galaxy and potentially beyond, with as many species as possible, not just humans. Clearly we are millions of years from doing this but we should choose paths more likely to get us there. Tell me how you reached the conclusion that there is no other intelligent life in the universe. I have given you the possibility of what our science says is needed including the presence of basic elements and the action of things such as lightning present in an environment to combine compounds into more advanced compounds such as proposed by Fox and Miller. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 3, 2020 Share Posted February 3, 2020 Just now, 3rdnlng said: If we have intelligent life out in the vast hinterlands of outer space do you actually feel ok with them reading your *****edupshit, misspellings and poor grammar? What do you want? Go play with the blocks or coloring book or something more on your level. All the laws in the universe that apply here on earth, apply to the rest of the universe. If life can happen here, it stands to reason, it can happen elsewhere. And if we are alone, all the more reason to do the best we can to protect intelligent life by keeping this planet healthy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted February 3, 2020 Share Posted February 3, 2020 1 minute ago, RochesterRob said: Tell me how you reached the conclusion that there is no other intelligent life in the universe. I have given you the possibility of what our science says is needed including the presence of basic elements and the action of things such as lightning present in an environment to combine compounds into more advanced compounds such as proposed by Fox and Miller. By removing wishful thinking and surface scratching with known data the implications become obvious and irrefutable. I, like most others I'd guess, would prefer a galaxy teeming with intelligent life. Alas that is not the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RochesterRob Posted February 3, 2020 Share Posted February 3, 2020 5 minutes ago, Tiberius said: You know no one is out there??? Anywhere in the galaxy? Heck, they just found a planet around one of Alpha Centuri's suns that is in the habitable zone. And that's just the closet star system. Less than a week away at Warp 6. Got the course layed in yet? Not too many stars as AC is binary the last I knew. 2 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said: By removing wishful thinking and surface scratching with known data the implications become obvious and irrefutable. I, like most others I'd guess, would prefer a galaxy teeming with intelligent life. Alas that is not the case. There is very little known data for a planetary system 50-100 light years away never mind 10,000 light years distant. What data are you using? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted February 3, 2020 Share Posted February 3, 2020 Just now, RochesterRob said: Less than a week away at Warp 6. Got the course layed in yet? Not too many stars as AC is binary the last I knew. Carl Sagan said that the Orion nuclear bomb propelled (yes, this is a serious argument) spacecraft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclear_propulsion) could possibly reach the speed on 1/2 light speed and get there in like 9 years. So, a 20 year round trip? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxx Posted February 3, 2020 Share Posted February 3, 2020 4 minutes ago, RochesterRob said: ... There is very little known data for a planetary system 50-100 light years away never mind 10,000 light years distant. What data are you using? it's called, 'sitcom maths'. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RochesterRob Posted February 3, 2020 Share Posted February 3, 2020 2 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Carl Sagan said that the Orion nuclear bomb propelled (yes, this is a serious argument) spacecraft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Orion_(nuclear_propulsion) could possibly reach the speed on 1/2 light speed and get there in like 9 years. So, a 20 year round trip? Yes, I agree that propulsion systems many time fasters than the hydrogen fueled rockets used on the Saturn V are being theorized and development work being done. We could possibly see some kind of primitive warp drive before most of us die. Time will tell. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted February 3, 2020 Share Posted February 3, 2020 12 minutes ago, Tiberius said: What do you want? Go play with the blocks or coloring book or something more on your level. All the laws in the universe that apply here on earth, apply to the rest of the universe. If life can happen here, it stands to reason, it can happen elsewhere. And if we are alone, all the more reason to do the best we can to protect intelligent life by keeping this planet healthy Oh the irony. HAHA Gator, opining on intelligent life. 1 minute ago, RochesterRob said: Yes, I agree that propulsion systems many time fasters than the hydrogen fueled rockets used on the Saturn V are being theorized and development work being done. We could possibly see some kind of primitive warp drive before most of us die. Time will tell. This is what is needed: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts