If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(TG Daily)   NASA's head explodes with dark forebodings, too   (tgdaily.com) divider line 74
    More: Cool, NASA, outpost, equilibrium, International Space Station  
•       •       •

14605 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Sep 2012 at 12:00 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



74 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-25 04:35:20 PM
farm8.staticflickr.com

Does not agree with their foolish plan.
 
2012-09-25 05:04:30 PM

pxsteel: Um....We hit 7,000,000,000 earlier this year. We are currently at 7,041,000,000. We will hit 7.1 in July next year, 10 months from now. 2300.... we will hit 7.5 in less than 6 years from now. We will be scarring the h3ll out of 9B by the time today's newborn graduates high school.

It will take a mass extinction event to get us back to 6B.


6 billion...7 billion..whatever. It's going to go up by about half, maybe even double depending on longevity advances, then slowly drop over the next several hundred years. It isn't going to do anything even remotely like any kind of Malthusian solution.

Mr. Carpenter: Goddamn either you can't read or you're just trying to be argumentative for argument's sake.


Okay, got your number now...it's "Troll...and not a very good one". Sorry about missing that. It's been a busy morning.
 
2012-09-25 05:12:12 PM

Mr. Carpenter: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: pxsteel: Linux_Yes: and they want the taxpayer to foot the bill too. that way, the tax payer takes the risks/foots the bill, and the contract companies make any profits that come out of the research. that there is Freedom, baby! Socialists!!


they need to stick with unmanned space trips. manned is way too expensive.

Too expensive, compared to what? We are adding people to the planet at a rate of 210,000 per day. We are going to blink and there will be 9,000,000,000 of us. We better start learning how to get off this rock.

Unless we discover Stargates similar to Heinlein's "Tunnel in the Sky" (that can stay open for extended periods) we will never be able to relieve population pressure here on Earth through space travel. And even if we did, I suspect that the process of shoving 200,000 people per day (about 140 per minute) would be exceedingly cruel and casualty-prone. Not to mention the attrition rate on the virgin planets they would be sent to.

If you sit down and look at the math, however, I think you will see that the world can easily support 9 or even 20 billion people. Food? Water? These are DISTRIBUTION and POLITICAL issues. Get rid of the dictators who use food and water as weapons to control their populations and I think 99% of the problems will go away. Pollution? Technology solutions. AGW (if it exists)? Technology solutions.

The reason to get off Earth are those of racial survival. One of these days a big rock is gonna slap us.

If by "technology solutions" you mean engineering people to not need food and water, I can agree with you, but eventually we will reach a point in time where if we still have the same kind of bodied existence we do now, there simply won't be enough space on the planet for everyone. What happens if the UN's estimated (this number is statistically possible but they believe we'll all kill ourselves off before it happens) population of 125 trillion people in 2300? That number of people would requ ...


citation?
 
2012-09-25 05:20:09 PM
t1.gstatic.com
Meh.....
 
2012-09-25 05:40:53 PM

mrexcess: pxsteel: I don't worry about the end of the Earth so much... it's a big ball of rock. Pretty, but ultimately just a thing. My concern is for us. Our technological progress seems to be vastly outstripping our moral progress, which seems to be setting us up for some calamities.


Which thought leads me to question the assumptions of many people that aliens would be necessarily wise, friendly and helpful. Another reason to get off this rock.

It should scare the living crap out of you
 
2012-09-25 06:10:56 PM
ecx.images-amazon.com
 
2012-09-25 06:36:01 PM
Will we get these too?
www.forevergeek.com
 
2012-09-25 06:40:23 PM

StoneColdAtheist: pxsteel: Um....We hit 7,000,000,000 earlier this year. We are currently at 7,041,000,000. We will hit 7.1 in July next year, 10 months from now. 2300.... we will hit 7.5 in less than 6 years from now. We will be scarring the h3ll out of 9B by the time today's newborn graduates high school.

It will take a mass extinction event to get us back to 6B.

6 billion...7 billion..whatever. It's going to go up by about half, maybe even double depending on longevity advances, then slowly drop over the next several hundred years. It isn't going to do anything even remotely like any kind of Malthusian solution.


What is going to make it decline over the next several hundred years? Longevity is going to continue to increase.
 
2012-09-25 06:57:18 PM
pxsteel: 6 billion...7 billion..whatever. It's going to go up by about half, maybe even double depending on longevity advances, then slowly drop over the next several hundred years. It isn't going to do anything even remotely like any kind of Malthusian solution.

pxsteel: StoneColdAtheist: What is going to make it decline over the next several hundred years? Longevity is going to continue to increase.


Birth rates are droppping in all developed nations. In some places, like Europe, they are below replacement level (2 children per couple). Continued advancement in other nations towards higher standards of living will drive birth rates down over the next century.

Assuming, of course, that the third-world nations can get their acts together and start educating their masses and start industrializing. If that does not happen, there is always plague and starvation to keep the population under control.
 
2012-09-25 07:02:18 PM
L2 in 2022!
 
2012-09-25 07:11:09 PM

pxsteel: StoneColdAtheist: It's going to go up by about half, maybe even double depending on longevity advances, then slowly drop over the next several hundred years. It isn't going to do anything even remotely like any kind of Malthusian solution.

What is going to make it decline over the next several hundred years? Longevity is going to continue to increase.


While I agree that longevity is going to continue to increase, several 'social engineering' factors lead me to believe the global population will start to drop later this century.

First of all, I doubt longevity increases will be universal accessible, just as quality health care is not today. The wealthy will be able to afford it, while the working and idle poor will not. On a related note I believe access to longevity will emerge as the great social justice issue of the next century. In the meantime, a couple of billion of those alive today will die off.

Second, in virtually every case looked at over the past century, fertility drops dramatically as soon as more than half of children born reach their 5th birthday. Add in the effects of education and the migration off the rice paddy into the city and that simply accelerates.

Numerous countries are ALREADY below replacement rates and the steepest ongoing drops are in the poorest countries that have traditionally had high fertility rates. Add in efforts to bring birth control to those corners of the world where women don't yet have it and the decline will spread there too. In coming decades I suspect more and more young adults will simply decline to become parents.

Okay, so much for the income stream. Now lets look at the exit stream. The world's population is aging rapidly, with most of those newly elderly in developing countries where they are more likely to die.

www.imf.org

That means only a relatively small fraction of those alive today will see the year 2100, much less 2300, which means we'll be starting the era of long lifes after more people alive today are dead.

Ennui. Even after most people have access to life extension technology, many will opt out for a variety of reasons. This is the most speculative notion I put forward here, and I could be totally wrong, but when centuries of life become possible I suspect that there will be a demand for a universal right to end one's life painlessly.

Anyway, this is a fascinating subject to me, but this is enough for now...back to work! ;)
 
2012-09-25 09:24:29 PM
Considering the ISS is the most expensive thing ever created by man, 150-170 billion dollars currently, and took the cooperation of almost every significant country on earth, I dont feel confident about building a bigger badder version by the moon.

If anything, maybe they should relocate the ISS and make it fit the new mission parameters.

(Oh, and we dont even HAVE the technology anymore we originally used to put it up there and assemble it... ie the space shuttle)
 
2012-09-25 09:49:11 PM

mrexcess: pxsteel: I don't worry about the end of the Earth so much... it's a big ball of rock. Pretty, but ultimately just a thing. My concern is for us. Our technological progress seems to be vastly outstripping our moral progress, which seems to be setting us up for some calamities.


Moral progress? Surely you jest. The morals people display in public may have improved, but the morals by which the next generation will actually operate were formed in the age of reality TV, where we are all taught that in order to win, we must give in to our basest urges.

In the future we may look like Brazilians and speak Chinglish, but on the inside we'll be Gollum crooning to his Precious.

/i know i am
 
2012-09-25 09:53:29 PM

Loadmaster: pxsteel: 6 billion...7 billion..whatever. It's going to go up by about half, maybe even double depending on longevity advances, then slowly drop over the next several hundred years. It isn't going to do anything even remotely like any kind of Malthusian solution.

pxsteel: StoneColdAtheist: What is going to make it decline over the next several hundred years? Longevity is going to continue to increase.

Birth rates are droppping in all developed nations.


Birth rates are dropping on a per female basis. 2.3 to 2.1. The problem that is conviently left out is the sheer number of fertile females is higher than it has ever been. We have reached perpetuality. Despite the drop in birth rate per, the overall growth rate is increasing. 30 years ago we were only adding 185,000 per day, 15 years ago we were adding 195,000 and today we are adding 210,000+. China instituted a 1 child policy and added 3/4 off a billion.
 
2012-09-25 10:14:09 PM

pxsteel: Birth rates are dropping on a per female basis. 2.3 to 2.1. The problem that is conviently left out is the sheer number of fertile females is higher than it has ever been. We have reached perpetuality. Despite the drop in birth rate per, the overall growth rate is increasing. 30 years ago we were only adding 185,000 per day, 15 years ago we were adding 195,000 and today we are adding 210,000+. China instituted a 1 child policy and added 3/4 off a billion.


Nobody "left it out"...it's right that in plain sight on the graph I linked to. Now look to the left of that cohort. Those women aren't reproducing themselves, so within 20 years their numbers will begin dropping as fewer young women enter their child bearing years. Combine that with the inevitable further declines in fertility rates and the deaths of a few billion boomers and we're looking at real declines in global population starting later this century.
 
2012-09-25 11:34:38 PM

DECMATH: HAMMERTOE: ObiWanSpicoli: I could have given it to her but it was on loan from a friend. I'll give her whatever she wants if she is so inclined.

I bet she really meshes with your existence.

And that of your mouse Gerald, who I hear is aging well.


I don't know why I call him that.
 
2012-09-26 03:03:39 AM
The problem is that the Moon has military use. If we put people on the Moon, sooner or later they will develop a self-sufficient colony and declare independence. This is what our military fears. and the military is still very influential in NASA. We could have had a Moon colony a decade or two ago if not for this fear. And they are still talking about bypassing the Moon. (Read some science fiction, or do the calculations, and you will see how easy it is to attack the Earth from the Moon, but not vice versa.)

Private enterprise will get humans into space. We'll never make it at this rate if we rely on the government and the military with their fear of creating something they can't control.
 
2012-09-26 03:55:36 AM

Linux_Yes: and they want the taxpayer to foot the bill too. that way, the tax payer takes the risks/foots the bill, and the contract companies make any profits that come out of the research. that there is Freedom, baby! Socialists!!


they need to stick with unmanned space trips. manned is way too expensive.


Have you ever made a statement that wasn't pants on head stupid?
 
2012-09-26 06:10:41 AM

ObiWanSpicoli: DECMATH: HAMMERTOE: ObiWanSpicoli: I could have given it to her but it was on loan from a friend. I'll give her whatever she wants if she is so inclined.

I bet she really meshes with your existence.

And that of your mouse Gerald, who I hear is aging well.

I don't know why I call him that.


although I hear he is rather well behaved.
 
2012-09-26 09:09:31 AM

pxsteel: Um....We hit 7,000,000,000 earlier this year. We are currently at 7,041,000,000. We will hit 7.1 in July next year, 10 months from now. 2300.... we will hit 7.5 in less than 6 years from now. We will be scarring the h3ll out of 9B by the time today's newborn graduates high school.

It will take a mass extinction event to get us back to 6B.


Nah it won't.
It will take the most populous nations becoming 1st-world powers with modern economies.

It is well documented that populations tend to decrease as environments become more urbanized. Children become a financial liability instead of an asset, as they are in a traditional farm/agrarian area where they can supply labor and be a sort of "retirement plan" for their parents. This is already happening in China, and India is modernizing as well, and those are two of the worlds most populated nations. In the U.S. our birth rate is already behind the replacement rate; our population mostly grows by immigration. IMHO, over time, world population will eventually come to equilibrium at lower than current levels.
 
2012-09-26 11:28:48 AM

AntonChigger: pxsteel: Linux_Yes: and they want the taxpayer to foot the bill too. that way, the tax payer takes the risks/foots the bill, and the contract companies make any profits that come out of the research. that there is Freedom, baby! Socialists!!


they need to stick with unmanned space trips. manned is way too expensive.

Too expensive, compared to what? We are adding people to the planet at a rate of 210,000 per day. We are going to blink and there will be 9,000,000,000 of us. We better start learning how to get off this rock.

citation needed

At any rate, I don't disagree with you. Its going to be expensive regardless, and unmanned probes can only tell us so much.


like any apex species that outgrows its natural resources, we too will see a correction in population as food and water naturally bring our population under control. that and the violence, followed by disease that will spread from all the bodies.
 
2012-09-26 12:00:50 PM

Linux_Yes: and they want the taxpayer to foot the bill too. that way, the tax payer takes the risks/foots the bill, and the contract companies make any profits that come out of the research. that there is Freedom, baby! Socialists!!


they need to stick with unmanned space trips. manned is way too expensive.


No it isn't. Manned space travel is entirely affordable, we just have to have the will to go. If we can bomb brown people regularly, we can have manned spaceflight.
 
2012-09-26 12:04:04 PM
Also, I vote it be called Armstrong Station.
 
2012-09-27 02:50:23 AM
And now for something completely different . . .

My first thought was, "How convenient! We can't actually SEE anything on the far side of the moon. NASA could use all the billions of dollars on keg parties while telling us what a great job they are doing building the invisible (literally, unseeable) space station on the far side of the moon."

Great scam. Kind of like the newsletter the psychic will channel directly to your brain if you pay her $100. How would you know if she is or isn't sending it?

--- just idly thinking about stuff. Sure NASA would never do anything so low. ---
 
Displayed 24 of 74 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report