Better Red but not Dead - my experience

Cobra Commander · 2005-03-08 11:42:30

Even Lord Vlork cannot summon the power of a supernova!

The Prophet most certainly can. But will it come when he calls it?

BWhite · 2005-03-08 11:55:12

Even Lord Vlork cannot summon the power of a supernova!
The Prophet most certainly can. But will it come when he calls it?

Well said.

dicktice · 2005-03-08 13:20:32

I think dk means, what I am persuaded to think as well, that humanity could very easily "miss the boat" and not make it off the Home Planet, before the capability has been frittered away.
By the way, Cindy, I remember reading and being very impressed by one of John Campbell's editorials in Astounding Stories, around 1940 perhaps, when he wrote: "Civilization is the ability to overcome Nature," and nobody seemed to differ with that at the time. He certainly wouldn't get away with that, in Analog (his new name for Astounding, by the way). But he also wrote, "Machines don't care," which I've remembered ever since, and still have all ten of my original fingers to prove it.

Palomar · 2005-03-08 13:53:19

I think dk means, what I am persuaded to think as well, that humanity could very easily "miss the boat" and not make it off the Home Planet, before the capability has been frittered away.
By the way, Cindy, I remember reading and being very impressed by one of John Campbell's editorials in Astounding Stories, around 1940 perhaps, when he wrote: "Civilization is the ability to overcome Nature," and nobody seemed to differ with that at the time. He certainly wouldn't get away with that, in Analog (his new name for Astounding, by the way). But he also wrote, "Machines don't care," which I've remembered ever since, and still have all ten of my original fingers to prove it.

*Look.

I'm pro-technology and pro-space exploration/colonization.

That should be apparent by now.

Who started the Saturn V rocket thread (celebrating it and the success of Apollo), for instance? Me.

I've started dozens of other pro-technology and pro-exploration/colonization threads as well -- including many directly related with the European Space Agency, its achievements and successes, etc.

I think the record should be clear by now as to where I stand.

Gee whiz, just barely mention that Nature might be equal (at least) to mankind or point out some negative human qualities (in the hopes of not repeating mistakes of the past) and ... well, is anyone going to brand me a "tree hugger" next?

I -agree- with "humanity could very easily 'miss the boat' and not make it off the Home Planet, before the capability has been frittered away." But what's that got to do with pointing out negative human qualities?

Dk doesn't know it because he or she is new here, so why make assumptions about my viewpoints based on just a measley handful of posts out of thousands of them?

But okay -- let's lie to ourselves (if you think that'll get us off Earth any quicker): Humans are wonderful and perfect, have never done anything wrong, have no lessons to learn. Amen.

I hope you'll understand that I don't like being thrown on the defensive more than anyone else -- and in this context it's just plain ridiculous.

And maybe Billy Graham isn't a Christian either.

--Cindy :;):

(Look out...next thing you know, I'll have to defend whether or not I'm truly an amateur astronomer! Give me a break)

Lunatic · 2005-03-08 14:06:57

I think that we should forget about the mars, and instead paraform the moon! Mars is a borning place, the moon rocks.

Rxke · 2005-03-08 14:09:38

In other news, scientists discovered that posting 7000 times in one messageboard makes you grumpy

Cobra Commander · 2005-03-08 14:11:23

Clear?

So for the record, condensing today's issues. Humans are roughly as destructive as nature, give or take. Humans do have flaws and can be malevolent. Nature works in cycles, but only if we perceive it that way, dk_ was a bit quick to jump to conclusions, and Lord Vlork cannot smite us with a super-nova, despite what he may claim.

Palomar · 2005-03-08 14:17:34

In other news, scientists discovered that posting 7000 times in one messageboard makes you grumpy

*No, no...it's not that.

It's the spectre of my upcoming birthday haunting me. It's not supposed to happen to me.

Cobra's "peeking up over the back of the sofa" emoticon, LOL. That is adorable.

Don't over-estimate how "grumpy" I might sound. I'm just trying to keep the facts straight.

--Cindy

Commodore · 2005-03-08 18:38:26

What ever we end up doing to Mars, I just hope we don't copy Earth. Make it ecologically different. No one want to travel a quater of a billion miles to see the same old stuff.

GCNRevenger · 2005-03-08 19:02:26

"The same old stuff?" There is more to see here on Earth then any one person can reasonably do in an entire lifetime (well, as long as we only have ~60-70 good years in us)... But anyway, Mars will naturally be a different place, since different things will live in its conditions then the things here on Earth probobly due to the chemical, gravity, and sunlight differences (even if we can get the temps up).

As far as if we should Terraform, that the microbes possibly on Mars deserve life equally as much humanity, or even that the dead rocks themselves deserve to be "left unmolested" is rediculous. We kill entire species all the time the microscopic scale here on Earth, why don't you weep for them? The "specist genocide" against the unseen world... is no different on Mars then it is here.

Gain what useful knowledge there is to be had from them, bottle them in LN2 and study them... but Mars is the only other world in this system that is possibly capable of open-ended human expansion with its modest gravity, sunlight, and modest supplies of all the CHONs... And humans are hard-wired to expand.

Barring the impossible discovery of intelligent life... life capable of awareness and appritiating itself... then terraforming Mars should be a long-term goal of our species.

dk_ · 2005-03-08 19:24:03

But can't forget that humans can also be incredibly destructive and self-destructive, outmatching anything Mother Nature and her other children can do.
--Cindy
Using our self-destructive history (cold war) as an excuse to not become Earth-Independent is just as detrimental to our future...
*Hi dk:
You're new here.
Please don't make assumptions about my overall points of view, because frankly you're not familiar with them.
I am PRO-space exploration/colonization. And I'm not making any "excuses" to stay Earth-bound, as most folks who have been here for years can attest to (I don't pay Mars Society dues annually for the heck of it).
We can go into space and still admit our destructive tendencies. That way we can AVOID destructive tendencies in the future, which was my original point.
Don't presume to know a stranger, okay? Especially not based on a mere 4 or 5 posts out of over 7000, over a nearly 3-year time period.
Thanks.
--Cindy

I guess by quoting you, you got the impression that I felt I knew your points of view. Sorry about that. Please don't feel like I'm debating with you, I'm just making this case for the benefit of all.

The only point I want to make in my, now 3 posts to this thread is that debating the ethics delays the process. It's like delaying a trial where the evidence is deteriorating. By debating, a verdict is being decided. Time is a factor, the longer we wait the more likely we will be guilty and "miss the boat".

The average person on the street has an idea of what happened to the dinosaurs but doesn't realize the importance in getting off Earth. If they listen, they should hear the message that most people agree that changing Mars for Human survivability is priority one, not preserving whatever is there now. If most people remain undecided the tendency will be that politicians will see this as an unclear issue. And doing nothing will remain the status quo.

Cobra Commander · 2005-03-09 06:03:34

While I'm very much pro-terraforming, the old "meteor insurance" rationale doesn't hold up as a primary motivator. Surely if we can move large numbers of people to Mars, make it Earth-like and support a significant population we should be able to divert an inbound rock?

No, we'll do it for greater reasons than a mere "backup".

Grypd · 2005-03-09 06:45:38

Meteors are not the only threat that poses for the global human civilisation.

But it is not for that reason we should go and colonize. No the real reason is it will be an escape route for people who dream of being able to go and do something worthwhile. It is not just about creating new branches of humanity but in giving humanity an escape valve, a way to let off steam.

There have always been people in society that just want to go and do something grand go to new places and make a difference and as our world gets smaller then it means these sort of people can do it.

Of course the unlimited resources does help too.

Cobra Commander · 2005-03-09 07:07:10

It is not just about creating new branches of humanity but in giving humanity an escape valve, a way to let off steam.

Precisely. Organized malcontents can just leave to the benefit of themselves and the society they separate from, they develop and tame a frontier, within a few generations their descendents have become more "mainstream" through cultural diffusion, and as the old frontier becomes a developed piece of an integrated civilization the next generation of malcontents moves on still further, carrying on the cycle.

The essence of Cobra's plan for Empire

dicktice · 2005-03-09 09:02:40

Cobra, you wrote: No, we'll do it for greater reasons than a mere "backup".

Mere backup? What greater reasons could there be?

Cobra Commander · 2005-03-09 09:10:32

Mere backup? What greater reasons could there be?

To expand our civilization, not as insurance against catastrophe but for its own sake. To increase the realm of human activity and potential.

It seems to me, and admittedly it's a rather subjective view, that finding positive reasons for colonizing and terraforming is a better approach than pushing it as a plan to have a small sample of Earth saved if the planet is destroyed. The former is forward looking and optimistic, the latter is just depressing and mired in the past.

GCNRevenger · 2005-03-10 15:13:20

I dunno, I think that the backup motive is a pretty good one...

The more complete a society on the Red Planet, the faster our species could rebound if the unthinkable happend... (super plauge, super volcano, large meteor/comet impact, etc).

We know there are events that could basically erase civilization from this planet, if not completly wipe out the species... What a tragedy that would be, if all of this... all we are, all we were, all we would ever be...

Wasn't

Cobra Commander · 2005-03-10 15:44:27

To clarify, I'm not denigrating the "backup" idea, just saying that it needn't be and shouldn't be the primary motive. We can expand outward for all sorts of reasons, the end result gives us a "backup" but to package it as "We need to Terraform Mars because something terrible might happen and kill us all", while not devoid of merit just reeks of paranoia and desperation.

I'd rather go to build something new than to preserve something old.

Edited By Cobra Commander on 1110491089

Palomar · 2005-03-10 16:24:31

I guess by quoting you, you got the impression that I felt I knew your points of view.

*Well, I'm sorry I reacted so strongly. My apologies.

Let's let bygones be bygones.

--Cindy

P.S.: If I don't chime in on this thread again it's only because terraforming isn't a favorite subject of mine.

dicktice · 2005-03-10 21:54:11

Cobra: How about this, to satisfy both wants--Space colonies as backup(s) and Mars for our future asperations. I've left out a lot of details, but that's the gist.

Cobra Commander · 2005-03-10 22:53:18

Cobra: How about this, to satisfy both wants--Space colonies as backup(s) and Mars for our future asperations. I've left out a lot of details, but that's the gist.

Mars can be both, colonizing it for our future aspirations has as a side effect the creation of a "backup", we needn't make it the prime reason. If we do it for any reason we have a backup by default, it's an effect rather than a cause.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#26 2005-03-08 11:42:30

Re: Better Red but not Dead - my experience

#27 2005-03-08 11:55:12

Re: Better Red but not Dead - my experience

#28 2005-03-08 13:20:32

Re: Better Red but not Dead - my experience

#29 2005-03-08 13:53:19

Re: Better Red but not Dead - my experience

#30 2005-03-08 14:06:57

Re: Better Red but not Dead - my experience

#31 2005-03-08 14:09:38

Re: Better Red but not Dead - my experience

#32 2005-03-08 14:11:23

Re: Better Red but not Dead - my experience

#33 2005-03-08 14:17:34

Re: Better Red but not Dead - my experience

#34 2005-03-08 18:38:26

Re: Better Red but not Dead - my experience

#35 2005-03-08 19:02:26

Re: Better Red but not Dead - my experience

#36 2005-03-08 19:24:03

Re: Better Red but not Dead - my experience

#37 2005-03-09 06:03:34

Re: Better Red but not Dead - my experience

#38 2005-03-09 06:45:38

Re: Better Red but not Dead - my experience

#39 2005-03-09 07:07:10

Re: Better Red but not Dead - my experience

#40 2005-03-09 09:02:40

Re: Better Red but not Dead - my experience

#41 2005-03-09 09:10:32

Re: Better Red but not Dead - my experience

#42 2005-03-10 15:13:20

Re: Better Red but not Dead - my experience

#43 2005-03-10 15:44:27

Re: Better Red but not Dead - my experience

#44 2005-03-10 16:24:31

Re: Better Red but not Dead - my experience

#45 2005-03-10 21:54:11

Re: Better Red but not Dead - my experience

#46 2005-03-10 22:53:18

Re: Better Red but not Dead - my experience

Board footer