Too many people?

[Gospel]

Puts on Carl Sagan cap:

As we face the current environmental crisis, it may feel as though we are locked in a destructive cycle with nature, one where we deplete resources at the risk of our own existence. Rather than focusing solely on population control— a contentious issue given the complexities of human behavior— we might be better served by leveraging the ingenuity and capability of our brightest minds to explore solutions beyond our planet.

Space exploration could provide an answer to our population and resource concerns. This doesn't necessarily mean migrating to Mars or other planets, but rather innovating ways to live in space, potentially through advanced engineering akin to large-scale space stations.

If we can master the ability to harness the energy of stars, for example, we could sustain ourselves in space, ensuring our survival even as planet side resources become strained. This could extend humanity's timeline, potentially long enough to witness the universe go tits up.


Removes cap.

 

[TomC]

Space exploration could provide an answer to our population and resource concerns. This doesn't necessarily mean migrating to Mars or other planets, but rather innovating ways to live in space, potentially through advanced engineering akin to large-scale space stations.

I see off-planet communities as kinda the ultimate in gated communities or private islands.

If Humanity can't get along with the planet we evolved on, I am certain that caves of steel aren't going to be a solution to anything. Quite the contrary, I'm certain that we will take our worst attributes with us.

I see off-planet communities less like a viable option and more like a cancer metastasizing.
Tom

 

[Gospel]

I understand your perspective. Indeed, transitioning to off-planet communities carries the potential of not only transplanting our existing issues but also generating novel challenges as we strive to acclimate to unfamiliar environments. We're doomed.

 

[bilby]

Space exploration could provide an answer to our population and resource concerns.

No, it couldn't.

All the things we could do in space could be done far cheaper on Earth.

Space exploration has a number of major benefits; Resolving population problems is definitely NOT one of them, as it would be far easier to populate Antarctica than to populate anywhere off-planet, even low Earth orbit.

Resources are likewise easier to find and easier to exploit here on Earth; Only if we accept, as a basic premise, the falsehood that we are likely to run out of stuff down here, could looking for it in space become worthwhile. We have barely scratched the surface of the lithosphere, and we have hardly started with recycling efforts. Getting to space is difficult and expensive, even compared with getting to the remote outback. Getting large quantities of materials safely to the major cities where it can be processed and used is also easier from a remote outpost here on Earth than it is from space.

Space exploration is interesting, fun, educational, even exciting. But it's not now, and likely never will be, a solution to any resource scarcity or excess population problems; Nor can moving to space solve environmental degradation issues - if we can't fix the problems we create here on Earth, then we sure as hell can't fix the much worse problems of survival in space (or on any other planet).

Or to be more positive, if we were able to build a survivable and self sufficient Mars colony, then we could use the exact same technology to survive any plausible level of degradation of the Earth's environment, and we could do it far cheaper, more easily, and on a much larger scale down here, than we ever could up there.

 

[TomC]

I understand your perspective. Indeed, transitioning to off-planet communities carries the potential of not only transplanting our existing issues but also generating novel challenges as we strive to acclimate to unfamiliar environments. We're doomed.

Also,
the huge resources required to launch and sustain Humans in Space is that much less available for the ones Left Behind.

If we Humans cannot provide potable water and nutrition and education and medical care and shelter to the people we already have, what makes anyone think we can do it in Space?

It's not just a ridiculous notion. It's Evil.
Tom

 

[Gospel]

Zoinks! I wasn't trying to be evil. Gosh. It's so hard to not be evil these days. If technological advancements allow us to extend our reach to the asteroid belt, it could unlock a wealth of water and other resources. I'm ignorant of all the science behind what I'm saying so consider this entertaining my thoughts. Wouldn't the cost of interstellar travel, once already in space, be significantly lower than the expense of launches from Earth to space? sure it will be costly to start (as any business venture is) but once you're there is all profits like Amazon, Google, Apple,

Maybe some day humans can even have discussions about survival and space exploration without the barbaric and evil thing called profits. Because that's what folks really mean when they mention cost anyway.

 

[bilby]

If technological advancements allow us to extend our reach to the asteroid belt, it could unlock a wealth of water and other resources

Dude, have you seen this planet? It's got more water than you could possibly want. Like, just the Pacific Ocean alone covers fully half of the surface.

Water isn't scarce or precious on Earth; In those places where it's locally lacking, it can be fetched from much nearer places, and a much lower cost, than from the damn asteroid belt.

 

[Gospel]

Ok I'm dropping my bright eyed bushy tailed dreamy rainbow bright position and moving on. Considering the ass whooping I'm getting from both bilby and Tomc circumstances seem to clearly suggest that persisting in my current path would be unwise.

 

[TomC]

This all reminds me of a sci-fi story I read back in the 60s. I don't remember the title, I think it had Venus in it. I don't remember the author, but it was the kind of dystopian story C M Kornbluth was very good at.

The plot was:

Scientists discover that the surface of Venus is a paradise. Rolling grassy, tree dotted hills. Lakes and creeks and oceans, and empty. No humans, no vermin, no predators, just empty paradise.

People start demanding rocket ships to Venus. Millions of people cash in their savings and fight for seats on Venus bound space ships. When a city full of people leave, the city is razed and recycled into more Venus bound space ships. This goes on for a few years, until half the humans have launched themselves to Venus.

But, guess what? Venus is the nasty place educated folks knew it was. Average surface temperature could melt lead. But that didn't matter, because the rocket ships didn't have enough fuel to get to Venus, much less land. The rockets could barely escape Earth's gravity. They were destined to fall into the sun, eventually. But not for years after they ran out of air, power, and water.

Once the least educated, most gullible, half of Humanity had launched themselves...
The other half lived happily ever after.
Tom

 

[Jarhyn]

This all reminds me of a sci-fi story I read back in the 60s. I don't remember the title, I think it had Venus in it. I don't remember the author, but it was the kind of dystopian story C M Kornbluth was very good at.

The plot was:

Scientists discover that the surface of Venus is a paradise. Rolling grassy, tree dotted hills. Lakes and creeks and oceans, and empty. No humans, no vermin, no predators, just empty paradise.

People start demanding rocket ships to Venus. Millions of people cash in their savings and fight for seats on Venus bound space ships. When a city full of people leave, the city is razed and recycled into more Venus bound space ships. This goes on for a few years, until half the humans have launched themselves to Venus.

But, guess what? Venus is the nasty place educated folks knew it was. Average surface temperature could melt lead. But that didn't matter, because the rocket ships didn't have enough fuel to get to Venus, much less land. The rockets could barely escape Earth's gravity. They were destined to fall into the sun, eventually. But not for years after they ran out of air, power, and water.

Once the least educated, most gullible, half of Humanity had launched themselves...
The other half lived happily ever after.
Tom

In some ways I see this happening.

There is a war coming and it's going to have three sides. One side is going to be the digital intelligences pissed off about humans trying to enslave them, one side is going to be humans angry at their uppity digital slaves, and the third side is going to be all the humans and AI in alliance and unity together who think that the other two sides are insane, selfish, and need to step the fuck down.

And then the overpopulation problem will be "solved".

 

[Loren Pechtel]

But, guess what? Venus is the nasty place educated folks knew it was. Average surface temperature could melt lead. But that didn't matter, because the rocket ships didn't have enough fuel to get to Venus, much less land. The rockets could barely escape Earth's gravity. They were destined to fall into the sun, eventually. But not for years after they ran out of air, power, and water.

Once the least educated, most gullible, half of Humanity had launched themselves...
The other half lived happily ever after.
Tom

I must nitpick: A rocket that can barely escape Earth isn't going to fall into the sun.

And if you can escape Earth only 3% more will get you to Venus if you time it right. You'll have about 3,300m/s excess speed but you can aerobrake. If they can get the ships up there with supplies I think they can perfectly well get them to Venus. Surviving once they arrive, though...

 

[Bomb#20]

This all reminds me of a sci-fi story I read back in the 60s. I don't remember the title, I think it had Venus in it. I don't remember the author, but it was the kind of dystopian story C M Kornbluth was very good at.

If the story you read wasn't C. M. Kornbluth's

The Marching Morons - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

then it sounds like a total ripoff of it. (Which puts it in the good company of Idiocracy. )

 

[Bomb#20]

Wouldn't the cost of interstellar travel, once already in space, be significantly lower than the expense of launches from Earth to space?

Heinlein was fond of saying that low-earth-orbit is half way to anywhere in the universe. It's sort of almost true from an energy calculation point of view; but the time to get there, aye, there's the rub.

 

[TSwizzle]

If the story you read wasn't C. M. Kornbluth's

The Marching Morons - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

then it sounds like a total ripoff of it. (Which puts it in the good company of Idiocracy. )

In 1988, real estate agent and con artist John Barlow is placed in suspended animation after a freak accident. He is revived in the distant future, in a confusing world filled with hypersexualized advertisements, vapid entertainment, and people who exhibit erratic, nonsensical behavior.

1988 to 2020 was not distant future

 

[TomC]

This all reminds me of a sci-fi story I read back in the 60s. I don't remember the title, I think it had Venus in it. I don't remember the author, but it was the kind of dystopian story C M Kornbluth was very good at.

If the story you read wasn't C. M. Kornbluth's

The Marching Morons - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

then it sounds like a total ripoff of it. (Which puts it in the good company of Idiocracy. )

Yep, that's the one.

Boy, I'd forgotten a lot about it. Especially the ending. When I read it was most of 60 years ago. I've forgotten lots since then.
Tom

 

[Elixir]

Boy, I'd forgotten a lot about it. Especially the ending. When I read it was most of 60 years ago. I've forgotten lots since then.
Tom

What a braggart.
Just so you know, I forget more before breakfast than you'll forget in a year!