It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is the 100 year starship project ethical?

page: 3
6
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 08:07 AM
link   
Totally ethical.

This type of space mission essential to the continuity of our species. If we are too afraid to take these ventures, we will forever be chained to this planet, but knowing there is impending doom (even if it is many many years down the road).




posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 08:39 AM
link   
Having lived this entire life of yours thus far floating in space on a unique spherical ship made of rock and water, I see no reason to call such a thing unethical. We are all out here in the vastness of space. What would be unethical is if the child isn't loved by its parents.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 09:53 AM
link   
Its kind of the perception of our minds isnt it, I mean on the star trek ship they had the holodeck so I imagine that would help people but nothing like the real thing of course



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 10:00 AM
link   
reply to post by AmatuerSkyWatcher
 


You can't concieve naturally in space much less have any type of enjoyable sex. Ova would have to be fertilized and implanted artificially and even then there's no guarantee the child will survive. The human body is not built to survive in microgravity. Ontop of this, there's a billion things out there that could destroy you, radiation, micrometeors, asteroids, blackholes. This is not star trek. The only space travel option we would be able to use would be folding space or using wormholes and the gravitational fields would rip you into trillions of atoms and then you couldn't even control where you went and you could end up on the otherside of the universe without any nearby inhabitable planets or you could even end up in the heart of a star and be vaporised.

The first step is developing technologies to colonise and terraform the worlds in your solar system before you can even think about going into the void and were still a long way from that.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 10:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by schuyler
Yes, it's "ethical." You've been made to live in a house or an apartment, right? You don't live out in the open under the stars. Instead, your environment is largely artificial. In the summer we go from an air conditioned house to an air conditioned car to an air conditioned office building and cringe when we have to get out in the stifling heat for a few seconds.

If this is hust a 100 year starship and you're born half way through the voyage, there's a good chance you'll be alive at the end of it. Now THAT would be something!


Never had air conditioning in anything i own so although i take your point, i slightly disagree with you. I may be wrong but i though the 100 year bit related to the length of time they have put on us colonising other parts of space, rather than the actual length of time in the actual spaceship? I may have read that wrong though.......



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 11:05 AM
link   
reply to post by AmatuerSkyWatcher
 


Excellent question and subject OP; good work.

I believe that if we had the technology to do it, we should. There are plenty of kids who are born in to poverty by abusive or addicted parents. They, too, will never know what it feels like to be normal and do normal things.

If kids were brought up on a starship then that's all they would ever have know so they wouldn't be comparing their lives to those of the kids at the park or the ones with the expensive toys/hobbies.

I say we do it. Lets all chip in and build this thing



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 11:57 AM
link   
I think it is unethical to have human colonies only on Earth. Earth has a finite life span and if we were hit by a large enough asteroid or if super-volcanoes (like Yellowstone) went off, humans would be history even sooner. This assumes you care about the human species and not just about yourself.

Based on our ancestors evolution, we would need about 1,000 to 2,000 humans to form a growing colony.

Spinning ark ships could provide artificial gravity. I'm not aware of any side-effects since your body would still "feel" 1G pulling on it. One day if the LHC ever finds the Higgs Boson we may even have real gravity manipulation.

Also, non-Earth colonies would probably not even want to go back to Earth and they would form their own culture. How may immigrants to North America said, "Hey I want to go back to Europe", maybe a few but not most.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 05:33 PM
link   
Thankyou for the insightful and thought provoking discussion, ladies and gentlemen!

Some really standout opinions on the topic, and some really differing ones too!


I don't think anyone can be right or wrong, when it comes to answering things like this, as there are too many variables at play between now and when it actually happens, and that's without knowing the full work in progress plan as it stands today, so thankyou all for indulging me, and participating.

There were certainly some very valid points made, that I had not even thought about! I hope I didn't upset too many people by playing devil's advocate (or trolling as someone put it
), I just thought about the fact that it was very possible that a human might be born and die without ever seeing the Earth, and thought that was a very interesting subject matter.


I think I might try a more sensationalist title for my next thread, to get more people involved (I was hoping for more opinions to be honest). Sensationalism does well around here I guess
.


Stars all round! (except the 2 rude people)




Regards

ASW.
edit on 11-1-2012 by AmatuerSkyWatcher because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join