Quote:
Originally Posted by Doodler
Ehm, the last sentence is intended to be instructive. "We're trashing the cradle, its time to get out."
We can't even cruise on the surface of the oceans without causing major headaches for sea life (literally, read up on the new US Navy sonar project). Despite my feelings that climate change is simply something life on Earth is going to have to learn to cope with or face extinction, there are plenty of direct signs that human civilization's footprint is causing massive damage to the planet. The more we expand here, the more life we destroy. Not worth the price on our collective conscience.
In space, our worst enemy is the environment itself. At the very least, the choices we make in the means by which we'll learn to cope with its challenges won't be killing anything but ourselves should we succeed or fail. Staying here on Earth and continuing to grow is causing geometrically greater collateral damage with every passing century. Even the most ardent anti-tree hugger can see this.
|
Although you make some sense, the point is that in space we somehow do not less damage to the planet, because we live somewhere else.
All our equipment and resources, to some extend, still are derived from earth.
In fact, we need far more out there, then we need here.
That is the point I am trying to make. Unless in a very far future we can in principle have an independend existence (i.e. self sustainable existence) on some other planet, we keep depending on resources of earth.
So, the goal we set for is imho contrary to the grounds for doing it.
If we decide to and strive for the goal of doing less damage to the earth itself, for sure there are better options.
Replace fossil fuels with renewables on a massive scale, and recycle all materials we ever use.
To achieve such a long time goal, which is in my point of view essential to our survival, we would involve far more technological achievements and implement that on a far bigger scale as technologies derived from or aimed at space travel/space colonization.
What is weird / illogical is that some possible transformations (from our current wasting economy to a durable and renewable economy) are not undertaken at the basis of arguments which, when applied to space travel, would lead us to never go into space in the first place.
For example building a home which does not depend on any outside energy resource, makig use of all available energy resources in the environment, from wind to solar to biofuels to thermal energy underground, etc., and that on a massive scale, is prohibited, since the nondurable fossil energy price is still less expensive (on the short term).
While we know, the prices are going up rapidly once we enter the peak oil scenario, and can't escape from it then, so we need to take action on before hand.
Why don't we spend more resources on things of which we know they are necessary in the long run.
Please bear in mind, I am not an anti space travel fanatic. I think we should explore the universe, at least spend some of our resources on it, within reason, mostly for scientific reasons, and the technology that comes out of it and the jobs it creates, only makes that more worthwhile.
But we don't need to expect that our problems might be solved by going into space, at least not in any short timeframe, and maybe never.
Problems on earth, related to global warming and climate change, polution, the problems of poverty and social welbeing of many poor, should not stop us from doing space travel, but neither can we ground arguments for going to space on such matters.
So I am just arguing against some false grounds of doing spacetravel.
Neither would I welcome a 'privatization of space'. I think space travel, and esp. the far missions, should be undertaken on a worldwide scale based on international cooperation, and for the benefit of all mankind.
Private corporations are already very much involved in space travel, they built the space crafts and equipment. So why would there need to be private corporations utilizing space crafts or conduct their own missions?