cgeiger@ut-ngp.UUCP (Charles S. Geiger, Esq.) (02/14/86)
Well, why? While I am very interested in astronomy and all that sort of thing, I don't understand why anyone would want to permanently migrate to another planet. There's just so much *here* to see and learn, certainly enough to last a lifetime! Most importantly, this is our home. Frankly, I hope all of you gung-ho types will get the opportunity to leave and will take advantage of it. That way all the exploiters, conquerors, or, to be charitable, "adventurous" types (what's so unadventurous about staying here and learning about your own planet?) will leave, and I can be at peace here. cheers, from charles s. geiger just a wage slave u. of texas
dave@quest.UUCP (David Messer) (02/16/86)
> Well, why? While I am very interested in astronomy and all that > sort of thing, I don't understand why anyone would want to > permanently migrate to another planet. There's just so much *here* > to see and learn, certainly enough to last a lifetime! Most > importantly, this is our home. > > Frankly, I hope all of you gung-ho types will get the opportunity > to leave and will take advantage of it. That way all the > exploiters, conquerors, or, to be charitable, "adventurous" types > (what's so unadventurous about staying here and learning about your > own planet?) will leave, and I can be at peace here. A possible letter from the 17th century: Well, why? While I am very interested in geography and all that sort of thing, I don't understand why anyone would want to permanently migrate to another country. There's just so much *here* to see and learn, certainly enough to last a lifetime! Most importantly, this is our home. Frankly, I hope all of you gung-ho types will get the opportunity to leave and will take advantage of it. That way all the exploiters, conquerors, or, to be charitable, "adventurous" types (what's so unadventurous about staying here and learning about your own country?) will leave, and I can be at peace here. -- David Messer UUCP: ...ihnp4!quest!dave ...ihnp4!encore!vaxine!spark!14!415!sysop FIDO: 14/415 (SYSOP)
rsk@pucc-j (Wombat) (02/17/86)
In article <2960@ut-ngp.UUCP> cgeiger@ut-ngp.UUCP (Charles S. Geiger, Esq.) writes: >Well, why? While I am very interested in astronomy and all that >sort of thing, I don't understand why anyone would want to >permanently migrate to another planet. There's just so much *here* >to see and learn, certainly enough to last a lifetime! Most >importantly, this is our home. > >Frankly, I hope all of you gung-ho types will get the opportunity >to leave and will take advantage of it. That way all the >exploiters, conquerors, or, to be charitable, "adventurous" types >(what's so unadventurous about staying here and learning about your >own planet?) will leave, and I can be at peace here. > >charles s. geiger >just a wage slave Your signature matches the tone of your article: no hope for the future. Flamage... I'm so incredibly exasperated at your total ignorance, your utter lack of spirit and drive, and your blindness to the limits imposed by this planet, that I don't think I can compose the point-by-point response required to adequately toast you to a crisp. This will have to do. End Flamage... The meek will inheirit the earth, or what's left of it; the rest of us, the universe. -- Rich Kulawiec pucc-j!rsk or rsk@asc.purdue.edu
amr@rti-sel.UUCP (02/18/86)
In article <2960@ut-ngp.UUCP> cgeiger@ut-ngp.UUCP (Charles S. Geiger, Esq.) writes: >Well, why? While I am very interested in astronomy and all that >sort of thing, I don't understand why anyone would want to >permanently migrate to another planet. . . I'm not really taking issue with the fact that some people who want to explore/migrate/whatever are looking for adventure, wealth, and fame. I'd just like to point out a couple of other reasons. How does long- term survival of the human race grab you? We have created a rather complex mix of technology and politics on this planet. At times our world seems dangerously close to trying to discover whether a nuclear exchange would destroy higher-order life or not. If you are not too concerned about this, have you considered what happens the day the lab blows up at Better Bacteria for Mankind Inc., and releases the stuff they have secretly been working on under a DoD grant? I for one will sleep more soundly (even on this planet!) when (if) I know that no single catastrophe will destroy mankind. That really won't happen until there are manned, permanent, self-sustaining colonies capable of developing and supporting a broad industrial base some- where besides the Earth. Concern about man's long-term survival may not be widespread, but I doubt that I am the only one with this opinion. > >Frankly, I hope all of you gung-ho types will get the opportunity >to leave and will take advantage of it. . . > . . . and I can be at peace here. Some of the people who want to get into space badly may in fact share your desire for peace (or isolation). There have always been people who prefered to live in relative solitude. These people are facing a tougher and tougher fight for their freedom on Earth as open space is devoured for the living or recreation areas for the rest of us (seen the CROWD at the average national forest recently)? For this type of person, an asteroid and the means to live on it with as little contact with others as possible might be the ultimate in "peace." -- Cheers, Alan Roberts Research Triangle Institute (decvax!mcnc!rti-sel!amr)
ice@trwrba.UUCP (Douglas L. Ice) (02/19/86)
Why does "everybody" want to leave this planet? There is no
one answer. Some, certainly, for the adventure; some just have a thing
against gravity. More importantly, it is survival. Our wonderful
planet is increasingly scrutunized, explored, and exploited. Mankind's
burgeoning population is destroying forests the size of New Hampshire
every year in Brazil alone. Hundreds of species of life are gone
forever, with more going yearly. Millions of humans die needlessly
each year. All of us wonder how long until the unthinkable mistake
of nuclear war becomes a reality.
The Malthusian dilemma is simple:
on a finite planet(and last I heard that was the only kind made),
resources are fixed, and exploitation matching the exponential
population growth only hastens their exhaustion. Resource allocation
has historically been achieved through two methods: the barbaric method
of taking what you wish from those without the ability to keep what is
(was) theirs, and the civilized method of allocting to all the basics
of survival, and dividing the rest according to the individuals'
contributions to the society. The first method has the advantage of
low overhead(no governmental structure necessary) and also there is no
need to leave the planet(indeed, without cooperation, it is
impossible), since excess humanity is merely eliminated. The second
method fosters cooperation, making space travel(as well as the many
other benefits of civilization) possible. More importantly, with
society's valuation of human life, along with the fact that no one will
allow them to be told how many children they may have, it necessitates
it. Look around you -- your portion of the earth's surface diminishes
daily with the additional burden of human flesh! There are only two
ways out: war or other catastrophe will reduce the population, or we
will push out of our embryonic stage to new worlds, where our enemies
can be kept more than a missile's throw away. Our planet is
magnificent! Why not get off her aching back! Perhaps we will never
find a planet as suitable as Earth, but would it not be better as the
human race progresses to leave the Earth beautiful, perhaps as a resort
planet, than to drag her down to ruin by short-sighted exploitation?
If you love mankind, either seek to reduce its numbers, or
allow it to expand. (That way, we can f**k up the whole Universe!)
--Doug (Sorry it's so long)animal@ihlpa.UUCP (D. Starr) (02/20/86)
> Frankly, I hope all of you gung-ho types will get the opportunity > to leave and will take advantage of it. That way all the > exploiters, conquerors, or, to be charitable, "adventurous" types > (what's so unadventurous about staying here and learning about your > own planet?) will leave, and I can be at peace here. > So you think the people who will leave this planet will be the "adventurous" types, huh? What a quaint notion. I suppose a few of them will be needed for the initial exploration, but beyond that... You can meet the people who are going to colonize space today; they're training for it already. In downtown Chicago there's this building called Water Tower Place; it's a complete self-contained world where you can live, work, be entertained, shop, eat--in fact, live out your entire life without stepping outside. It's just like a space colony. But people don't live there because they're adventurous. They live there because they're *afraid* of the outside world. They're afraid of the muggers, the rapists, the poor people, the punk kids, the wierdos, and anybody else who isn't just like them. And they've got the money to move into their own little private world, with guards and security gates and the highest of high technology to keep the Bad People out so they can feel *secure*. THESE are the people who are going to colonize space. They're training now all over the country. Just about every major city in the country has some of these self-contained worlds in it. The people in them aren't just learning how to survive in the limited environment that will be found in a space colony; they're developing the *desire* to be physically isolated from the Bad Old World and all its Bad Old People. And they have money, so their wishes may come to pass. Most of the "adventurous" people don't have that kind of money, and probably would find that kind of a life pretty boring anyway, so they'll stay here. Which is okay with me. This world is a pretty good place to have adventures, and if we can get rid to the people who would try to make it safe, secure and dull it can only get better. That might be the best argument yet for space travel. Dan Starr
kendalla@orca.UUCP (Kendall Auel) (02/24/86)
I would like to get back home.
fgd3@jc3b21.UUCP (Fabbian G. Dufoe) (03/04/86)
I am reminded of the story (probably apocryphal) of the man who, in
the 1930s, recognized the imminence of a global war. A peaceful man, he
wanted no part of it. After long and careful study he identified a place
of no strategic importance to anyone. He packed his bags and moved to
Guadalcanal.
Emigrating to a quiet asteroid won't keep you safe from the next war.
Neither will the emigration to space of the "adventurous" allow those who
remain behind to live in peace. Given the power of our present weapons we
cannot hope to contain belligerence--we must prevent it.barth@tellab1.UUCP (Barth Richards) (03/04/86)
In article <2006@orca.UUCP> kendalla@orca.UUCP (Kendall Auel) writes: >I would like to get back home. Good luck! I read about one poor zeeb who came for a week and got stranded for fifteen years. It seems the Earth is just too far from the spacelanes to hitch a lift.
jan@looking.UUCP (Jan Gray) (03/06/86)
In article <172@jc3b21.UUCP> fgd3@jc3b21.UUCP (Fabbian G. Dufoe) writes: > > I am reminded of the story (probably apocryphal) of the man who, in >the 1930s, recognized the imminence of a global war. A peaceful man, he >wanted no part of it. After long and careful study he identified a place >of no strategic importance to anyone. He packed his bags and moved to >Guadalcanal. A few years back, a family from British Columbia, fearing nuclear war, moved to the Falkland Islands... Jan Gray Looking Glass Software, Waterloo, Ont. (519) 884-7473
michaelm@3comvax.UUCP (Michael McNeil) (03/08/86)
In article <172@jc3b21.UUCP> fgd3@jc3b21.UUCP (Fabbian G. Dufoe) writes: > > I am reminded of the story (probably apocryphal) of the man who, in >the 1930s, recognized the imminence of a global war. A peaceful man, he >wanted no part of it. After long and careful study he identified a place >of no strategic importance to anyone. He packed his bags and moved to >Guadalcanal. > > Emigrating to a quiet asteroid won't keep you safe from the next war. >Neither will the emigration to space of the "adventurous" allow those who >remain behind to live in peace. Given the power of our present weapons we >cannot hope to contain belligerence--we must prevent it. I've heard that story too -- it's a good one. However, the point is not whether any given *individual* would be absolutely, or even relatively, safe out in space in the event of general war, but that it's unlikely that *everyone* would be exterminated by a major war if people lived dispersed throughout space as well as on Earth. I agree that it's highly desirable to "prevent" belligerence -- but do you have a proposal that's guaranteed to *work*? If not, you're simply spouting platitudes. Sure, preventing belligerence is a fine idea -- we just have absolutely no idea how to accomplish it. While you talk, what's to prevent one of the buttons around the world from being pushed? Nothing, that's what. And research on nuclear winter indicates we may have inadvertently constructed a doomsday machine! If the button is ever pushed, there's a very real danger that *all life on Earth* would be destroyed in the worldwide conflagration. Many people seem to think it would somehow *increase* the chances of general war if people were living out in space and therefore "safe." Apparently -- as I understand this reasoning -- Earth people would be only too willing to commit suicide themselves if they knew that people out in space might survive. I consider this most unlikely. If Earth wants to commit suicide, it will do so, regardless of the existence of space colonies. For example, it's possible, perhaps even probable, that Iraq would have used nuclear weapons by now in its war with Iran if it possessed them. Is it likely the existence of settlements in space would have influenced Iraq's decision to use them? I think not. We humans are the caretakers of the results of 4 billion years of evolutionary history of life on Earth. The danger to that huge investment of time and blood -- perhaps the only life in the universe -- is too great for us to depend on platitudes, and this extreme danger is likely to persist indefinitely into the future. I'd like us to have more baskets to put our eggs in -- rather than depending on some magical transformation of human nature to occur. (Then, and in parallel, let's work on the required transformations!) -- Michael McNeil 3Com Corporation "All disclaimers including this one apply" (415) 960-9367 ..!ucbvax!hplabs!oliveb!3comvax!michaelm There are two futures, the future of desire and the future of fate, and man's reason has never learnt to separate them. J. Desmond Bernal, 1929, *The World, the Flesh and the Devil: An Enquiry into the Three Enemies of the Rational Soul*
ronc@fai.UUCP (Ronald O. Christian) (03/10/86)
>....After long and careful study he identified a place >of no strategic importance to anyone. He packed his bags and moved to >Guadalcanal. > Emigrating to a quiet asteroid won't keep you safe from the next war. **** This is true if you still depend on Earth for supplies, but a self sufficient colony is quite a different matter. People don't realize just how big the rest of the universe is. Your comment above is like saying 'leaving the bar won't keep you safe from the barfight'. Nonsense. >Neither will the emigration to space of the "adventurous" allow those who >remain behind to live in peace. Given the power of our present weapons we >cannot hope to contain belligerence--we must prevent it. **** You seem to be saying that it's our responsibility to stay and work it out rather than move on to better conditions. I think it depends on how bad things get. Look at what's happening in our current worldly hot spots, and ask yourself: If you lived there, would you risk everything to stay, or would you leave at the first opportunity? Maybe we *can* live on Earth and somehow talk the 'powers that be' into not blowing it up or poisoning it, but there's *still* sufficient reason to try to establish colonies elsewhere. Ron -- -- Ronald O. Christian (Fujitsu America Inc., San Jose, Calif.) ihnp4!pesnta!fai!ronc Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: "If you are seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it."
djo@ptsfd.UUCP (Dan'l Oakes) (03/12/86)
In article <441@3comvax.UUCP>, michaelm@3comvax.UUCP (Michael McNeil) writes: > We humans are the caretakers of the results of 4 billion years of > evolutionary history of life on Earth. The danger to that huge > investment of time and blood -- perhaps the only life in the > universe -- is too great for us to depend on platitudes, and this > extreme danger is likely to persist indefinitely into the future. > I'd like us to have more baskets to put our eggs in -- rather than > depending on some magical transformation of human nature to occur. > (Then, and in parallel, let's work on the required transformations!) Very good point! Only, what makes us humans the sole caretakers? I think evolution, as long as we're characterizing it as a nonrandom force (as you implicitly do in your article -- otherwise "4 billion years of evolutionary history" is no more intrinisically valuable than empty space), would prefer to have more baskets than just humankind into which to put its eggs. If evolution == survivability has any intrinsic value, then one must question the value of saving the only self-exterminating species on the planet at the cost of every other product of evolution to date! Sorry to those who want messages on the shuttle program, but this kind of reasoning is so close to valid it requires some response. And lest there be doubt as to which side I'm on...I'd go, in a MINUTE!! (if they'd let me...) Dan'l Danehy-Oakes "We'll have nothing to do with the PLAIN-bellied sort!"
hagens@uwvax.UUCP (Rob Hagens) (03/13/86)
I want to get away from the apes (when they take over)...
Rob Hagens
--
Rob Hagens @ wisconsin
...!{allegra,heurikon,ihnp4,seismo,sfwin,ucbvax,uwm-evax}!uwvax!hagens
hagens@wisc-rsch.arpa
Weekend: A time between work and more work.michaelm@3comvax.UUCP (Michael McNeil) (03/15/86)
In article <707@uwvax.UUCP> hagens@uwvax.UUCP (Rob Hagens) writes: >I want to get away from the apes (when they take over)... > Rob Hagens Now that an Ameslan-trained chimp (Lucy) has been released into the wild to spread language among the wild chimps, I figure we've got maybe fifty years until they get organized. (By the way, :-) .) -- Michael McNeil 3Com Corporation "All disclaimers including this one apply" (415) 960-9367 ..!ucbvax!hplabs!oliveb!3comvax!michaelm Crazy, but not crazy enough to be true. Niels Bohr