BBC Future: We Must Become a Multi-Planet Species

reply to post by TrueBrit


Spot on. They wouldn't be willing to finance such a venture because they wouldn't have direct control and no matter how many dollars you have it's all neutralised in space. How long will it take to get a return on their investment?

However, if the human race is to ensure it's survival, there will be no choice eventually. But that's a problem for future generations, not the immediate one. There's too much money and only one lifetime for them to wring as much as they can from our poor Mother Earth.

With the worlds current affairs I envision something similar to the movie Elysium taking place. The wealthy and "powerful" would pick up and leave, and leave the remainder behind. Someone mentioned they would need "supporters" to do the dirty work -- they would most likely pick those off Earth, transport them to the new planet then after they are done, transport them back to Earth with little salary to survive.

Things would need to drastically change on this planet before we as a species are ready to take off and populate our solar system. As if we would succeed with how corrupt everything is nowadays -- a re-haul would be in order.

~Sovereign

reply to post by Toadmund


Look at how colonization works here on earth - those with the vision, abilities and wherewithal are the first to push back the boundaries whilst those with the money, power and influence ensure that they are the one's who reap the largest reward, just look at what happened in The Americas.

It's pretty simple really - if mankind remains solely on earth then one day mankind will die. One way or another the earth will eventually become uninhabitable.

In a recent thread here on ATS someone posted something that I personally found quite profound, a rarity these days, (I must apologise because at the moment I can't recall who it was or in which thread, I'll try to find out when I get a chance). It went something like "without wars we could be like gods" - and it's true. If we placed more emphasis on the positives and the things that unite us then the sky literally could be our limit. Instead we concentrate on the negatives and the things that separate us.
I know it's a somewhat naïve, simplistic and idealistic viewpoint, but it's true nonetheless.

reply to post by darkbake


Aren't you forgetting Something ? The Scumbags that RULE our Planet Earth would Also be making the Trip to other Worlds , and we just Know what they will Try to Do when they get There..............

reply to post by Cobaltic1978


My point is that this expansion is necessary, for both the greedy and the needy, for totally different reasons, granted, but it is a necessity and a shared one none the less. The greedy will see the need to distribute their wealth around as many locations as possible, and those who are employed by them will see the benefits of working on something as staggering as such a project. Many will be pleased to be involved, and the sheer satisfaction that will come to those who really want to be where they are, doing what they are doing, will produce some of the most uplifted and contented people that have ever been born to mankind.

If I had one single marketable skill that would be of use to such a project (theres not a lot of call for my particular specialisations where the establishment of a colony is concerned), and had the opportunity to go on such a voyage, be part of such a thing, I would be over the moon (literally in all probability).

reply to post by TrueBrit


Not for me that kind of thing, but if I was younger with no responsibilities, then it would certainly be something I would consider. I'm going to leave it to future generations to become the new pilgrims.

I'm sure you would be surprised if you knew what particular skills you have, particularly transferable ones. You seem an intelligent individual and I'm sure you would live long and prosper.

reply to post by darkbake


Space is hostile to the human. What space ship design is being proposed here? For humans to live in space for long durations they need large platforms, like Navy vessels which have gyms, places to stetch out in. They also need to be able to generate a protective magnetic shield to shield from long term exposure to cosmic rays. Without this technology level I do not see human beings getting very far in space.

Also the crafts need artificial gravity.

reply to post by Cobaltic1978


My skills base:

I fix locks, and cut keys professionally. However, Im bugger all use with plumbing or electronics, both of which would be much more useful talents for establishing civilisations on new worlds. I do not believe that a colony in its infancy would have much use for a bass player, sometime poet, or semi-professional curmudgeon either

Hey I'm a Bass player too, I'm sure entertainment will be a requirement at some stage?

Locks probably wouldn't be required so soon, but eventually.....

If humanity is to get into actual space colonization, it won't be for the quest for knowledge or the exploration of the unknown; forget those awesome Star Trek plots based on voyages merely based on the premise "to go where no man has gone before", the real world (sadly) doesn't work like that.

You don't get into space on hopes and ambitions alone. You need money. Lots of it. Much more than you're probably thinking of right now. And no one is going to back such a venture unless they can make a profit off of it. So instead of selling the potential future of humanity on the high ideals of peaceful exploration and becoming interstellar trailblazers, focus on the one thing potential investors care about: how they can make money off of it!

Asteroid mining, He3 fusion power on the Moon, zero-gravity molecular engineering, anything that can be turned into the next consumer 'must-have' product or service that they can market, embezzle, trademark or embargo to their heart's content. We don't need astronauts and scientists selling this idea to potential investors; we need pitchmen! Guys in off-the-rack suits and clip-on ties, loaded with caffeine and flop sweat as they stumble through cue card presentations, telling the millionaires that they'll double - no, TRIPLE - their initial investments within five years.

That's how we'll colonize space. Anything else will fall short.

Millionaires don't care about the survival of humanity. They don't care about exploration. They aren't interested in enlightening our understanding of science, physics or the cosmos. They're only interested in adding more zeroes and commas to their bank accounts, so we have to play to that. Then once we get into space in order to hollow-out orbiting celestial bodies and start polluting other planets so we feel right at home, colonization will naturally follow suit.

ArchAngel_X
If humanity is to get into actual space colonization, it won't be for the quest for knowledge or the exploration of the unknown; forget those awesome Star Trek plots based on voyages merely based on the premise "to go where no man has gone before", the real world (sadly) doesn't work like that.

You don't get into space on hopes and ambitions alone. You need money. Lots of it. Much more than you're probably thinking of right now. And no one is going to back such a venture unless they can make a profit off of it. So instead of selling the potential future of humanity on the high ideals of peaceful exploration and becoming interstellar trailblazers, focus on the one thing potential investors care about: how they can make money off of it!

Asteroid mining, He3 fusion power on the Moon, zero-gravity molecular engineering, anything that can be turned into the next consumer 'must-have' product or service that they can market, embezzle, trademark or embargo to their heart's content. We don't need astronauts and scientists selling this idea to potential investors; we need pitchmen! Guys in off-the-rack suits and clip-on ties, loaded with caffeine and flop sweat as they stumble through cue card presentations, telling the millionaires that they'll double - no, TRIPLE - their initial investments within five years.

That's how we'll colonize space. Anything else will fall short.

Millionaires don't care about the survival of humanity. They don't care about exploration. They aren't interested in enlightening our understanding of science, physics or the cosmos. They're only interested in adding more zeroes and commas to their bank accounts, so we have to play to that. Then once we get into space in order to hollow-out orbiting celestial bodies and start polluting other planets so we feel right at home, colonization will naturally follow suit.

Yes , you see my Point . Sad Really........M-O-N-E-Y .The ONLY PRIME DIRECTIVE

We need to get out and get away from each other. Who cares if we can or cannot get along perfectly with each other so long as we can all have our own spaces?

For a very long time, space itself will be an effective barrier like the oceans on each side of America used to be, and for that space of time, who cares if you decide to think and live one way on your bit of real estate and we choose to live another way on ours?

Maybe by the time space ceases to be an effective deterrent, we will have learned better how to get along.

As for the question of using the resources in space ... why the heck not? Why on earth would it be wrong to use the minerals from asteroids? Sometimes, I think the worries of environmentalists all exist pretty much in order to attempt to keep control of us, and if we ever got off this rock, their control would cease.

Again, this goes back to my first point - We need to get away from each other.

Not to mention, everyone sometimes forgets how much we owe to the space program technologically. We all want to develop a cleaner energy source than fossil fuels? Fine. Establish permanent colonies on a planet like Mars. There are no cheap and abundant sources of fossil fuels there. The energy questions would have to be answered. Necessity is the mother of invention, and space would force a lot of invention if we are to successfully conquer it.

Zanti Misfit

ArchAngel_X
If humanity is to get into actual space colonization, it won't be for the quest for knowledge or the exploration of the unknown; forget those awesome Star Trek plots based on voyages merely based on the premise "to go where no man has gone before", the real world (sadly) doesn't work like that.

You don't get into space on hopes and ambitions alone. You need money. Lots of it. Much more than you're probably thinking of right now. And no one is going to back such a venture unless they can make a profit off of it. So instead of selling the potential future of humanity on the high ideals of peaceful exploration and becoming interstellar trailblazers, focus on the one thing potential investors care about: how they can make money off of it!

Asteroid mining, He3 fusion power on the Moon, zero-gravity molecular engineering, anything that can be turned into the next consumer 'must-have' product or service that they can market, embezzle, trademark or embargo to their heart's content. We don't need astronauts and scientists selling this idea to potential investors; we need pitchmen! Guys in off-the-rack suits and clip-on ties, loaded with caffeine and flop sweat as they stumble through cue card presentations, telling the millionaires that they'll double - no, TRIPLE - their initial investments within five years.

That's how we'll colonize space. Anything else will fall short.

Millionaires don't care about the survival of humanity. They don't care about exploration. They aren't interested in enlightening our understanding of science, physics or the cosmos. They're only interested in adding more zeroes and commas to their bank accounts, so we have to play to that. Then once we get into space in order to hollow-out orbiting celestial bodies and start polluting other planets so we feel right at home, colonization will naturally follow suit.

Yes , you see my Point . Sad Really........M-O-N-E-Y .The ONLY PRIME DIRECTIVE

only if you can take it with you.

reply to post by Zanti Misfit


The thing with frontier life, is that people who are capable have more immediate power in any given scenario, than those who lay claim to the most wealth. Without people to forge ahead, the people you are talking about would have nothing, and have not the balls or stamina to achieve for themselves, what a genuinely capable individual would be able to achieve. For a time at least, these new colonies would be populated, in the main, by the people who built them, who would move from newly finished sections and city hubs, to new locations across a planetary surface, and begin anew.

The crews who would be working mineral reclamation in various places across that surface, would of course remain in place as long as resources can be gained from a site, and only move on once those resources were depleted. Given that some of the resources on other planets and planetoids are as of yet untapped (near as anyone can tell for sure) it is likely that for several generations, there would be no need for a mining operation to move on to pastures new for some considerable time, and those operatives living and working on rigs and platforms on new worlds would be living lives as well as working there.

Towns would inevitably spring up around these operations, because the mining crews would require places to rest, to hang their hats, to unpack their kit, to drink and socialise. Long term, there would be the need for family spaces, individual habitations, municipal services, like town halls, offices of the law, and the like. Colony creation on other worlds will NEVER be an undertaking which exclusively involves or benefits the super wealthy, because they could never achieve it alone, nor sufficiently control the number of people who would be required to make the venture profitable at all.

And again I say, the super rich are not ALL entirely stupid people. I have no doubt that some significantly well heeled people, are considering the risks of having all their wealth tied to the survival of one planet, may be something that needs addressing if the possibility arises. Making mass transit possible between planetary bodies in our solar system, will likely as not prove to be the best example of "build it, and they will come" for this reason.

So what do we do with the pesky inhabitants that may be there?

Offer them booze and shiny trinkets for land?
Kill a lot them and put the survivors on less valuable land?

Questions, Questions.

When do we build banks and get charged interest for fiat money?

reply to post by darkbake


To be honest there's not really that much that has to be said about this..except that Hoffman is absolutely right in his assessment.

Of course Humanity needs to become a multiplanet species, and sooner rather than later in order to ensure our survival, and more besides...our technological and cultural survival too.

It goes without saying there may well be sparce groups of disparate and scattered survivors of natural disasters than periodically crop up on Earth, but after such events, the obvious emphasis is on survival and not much else, for long periods of time..duing which, our technological abilities are mostly forgotten and cultural traditions are lost.

Disasters like mega volcanic eruptions (Yellowstone etc), asteroid impacts and other hammerings we get from space every X millions of years, mega tsunamis and all the rest have wiped out large segments of our population, along with it's historical record, it's technological and scientific progress and so on.

The ever present great flood stories that have a place in the oral traditions of hundreds upon hundreds of separate groups and tribes of peoples around the planet is one example of such a calamity, one which can and probably will happen again and again, and unless we take steps to mitigate such happenings, we'll be back to multi-millennia long 'survival mode' again, with the accompanying loss of our cultural and technological heritage.

A multi-planet spreading out of our species is the answer.

A calamity may well effect multiple planets, if the danger originated from space, but the more locations we inhabit, the better the odds of being missed and therefore unaffected.

I'm just fed up that we are not already a multi-planet species.

MysterX
reply to post by darkbake

 

I'm just fed up that we are not already a multi-planet species.

Indeed, so am I!

I believe that there has been ample discussion and theory work done, which ought to have lead us to at least be a presence on the Moon by now, and yet there is no base there. I believe that this is an indictment of the progress that we have made as a species, if not technologically, then certainly in terms of sociological progress. We have at our disposal, a massive wealth of knowledge, and I believe that the technology already exists to solve many of the issues which would arise during any colonisation project on the Moon. The stumbling block appears to be largely financial and political, and yet such an expansionist project is just the sort of thing that will see our species make further leaps and bounds.

I want to see three dimensional printing adapted for use in low, to zero gravity environments, I want to see ships built in space, recycling vessels scooping up man made debris around our planet, ready for colony vessels to be launched in droves, and I want to see our species grow and flourish under the action of exploration. We have the will I think, to make a great forward step in our social and scientific progress, but we are being held back by nonsense and wrong think on the part of governments among others.

Our survival in the future will rely far more on our ability to move around the cosmos, than it ever will on how easily we can kill each other, and despite that, all the resources at the moment seem focused in that deadly direction, rather than on the lofty goals that will see our aspirations realised ,and see our survival come to pass in the future.

TrueBrit
Our survival in the future will rely far more on our ability to move around the cosmos, than it ever will on how easily we can kill each other, and despite that, all the resources at the moment seem focused in that deadly direction, rather than on the lofty goals that will see our aspirations realised ,and see our survival come to pass in the future.

It's a bit like Star Trek TNG, we can't progress on such projects until we have let go of capital imperialism, as they had done. Look around the world. Some people still don't have access to drinking water, and they won't have it unless someone pays the person who controls the supply. And that is one little example, some want to privatise the very air that we breath. It stands to reason, in such a system, that space, other planets, cannot be colonised until there is a way to capitalise on that. Above and beyond that, we have great, vast landscapes of desert, that could, reasonably, be terraformed...returned to a state of productivity, instead it is being allowed to spread and expand, because it is just too long term a project for anyone to take on. The return far too distant in the future for anyone to really get behind it. You can multiply that to infinity for any off-world project.

Of course, if World Peace was declared and we all got together and combined resources for the betterment of life, then yes, we can do it, in a heart beat. But, pull the other one...it's got bells on

reply to post by KilgoreTrout


Well, true terraforming is a little way off, but there are methods being enacted in China and some areas in the middle east, which are reclaiming desertified regions bit by bit. True terraforming would require atmospheric modulation and restructuring, the creation of vast bodies of liquid water, the restarting of dormant liquid core dynamics in the centre of dead worlds, or the installation of totally artificial systems to recreate such movement, and the establishment of artificial magnetospheric systems.

However, what you say about the Star Trek element is, I feel, a bridge too far, in terms of what we can genuinely expect from society in the next thousand years, and may not be at all necessary. I believe that the threat to greed that is represented by the termination of all life on this planet, is probably enough to spawn such efforts as would be necessary. Remember if you will, that the only reason that the abandonment of currency and wealth as a goal was required in Star Trek,was to produce the utopian future depicted. However, that need not be in place in order for the actual expansion of the species to occur. This could happen without such abandonment (although we would all agree, I think, that it would be better if it happened with such a commitment than without it).

That utopian future was one of pure exploration for its own sake. While that is a goal that I would freely give up even the little that I have to see birthed, I recognise that it is improbable that humanity would ever take that up as a whole.

However, ideology need not stand in the way of the survival instinct in this particular regard, nor would it, if those with the money had a proper sense of the threat, and the lengths which must be gone to, in order to avoid it or mitigate it.

reply to post by darkbake


Per the original quoted text of this thread: Yep! You better believe that Diversity has a really deep meaning.

You are aware that word replaces the old standard of "We are all created equally?"