Let Me Ask You A Question – 10/18/17

Let Me Ask You A Question – 10/18/17


Let me ask you a question:

Which do you think will happen first…the end of the world as we know it?   OR…humans colonizing another planet?  


65 thoughts on “Let Me Ask You A Question – 10/18/17

    1. I believe the climate is changing, but I think that humans believing we’ve had some great contribution to that is arrogant. The earth is changing temperatures as it always has. It goes through cycles of going very very cold and then cycles of very very hot. And it has done this for millions of years. There’s nothing humans can do to stop it and I don’t believe that there’s a whole lot that humans have done to cause it. It is a part of evolution.

  1. As far as I remember the planet has about 7 billion years left, give or take a day. We should be able to recolonise by then as technology is moving so fast. People talk of nuclear destruction, but Trump only has, what, four years left and to be quite honest the Russians were going to Nuke us not that long ago but it never happened. We’re probably more likely to run out of salt first 🙂

  2. I tend to guess that if we continue with business as usual and don’t much more quickly get off fossil fuels (which in itself some would consider the end of the world as we know it), we have somewhere in the neighborhood of 100 years to get our butts of this rock in significant numbers before the consequences of climate change damage our economic systems to the point of not having the flexibility of spare resources to go.

    1. The way that the earth cycles from periods of hot to periods of cold it would make sense that at some point the earth would wipe out all of the inhabitants and begin anew. Personally I don’t think that’s going to happen for quite some time, so I’m going with colonize another planet.

  3. With the current political regime there is no interest in furthering space exploration. And we’re trying as fast as we can to ruin our global home. Is it a “me” thinking, not caring about each other and our environment?

      1. The earth is much more resilient than we are. It’s been through a lot and as arrogant as humanity is I’m going with the earth being here for quite some time and humans not. LOL

      1. Idiots posing as leaders, playing with lives like toy soldiers, pissing in each other’s sandboxes, yet they have nuclear weapons at their disposal. Those same children are ignoring the planets warning signs, trying to cripple the organizations that protect it, and discrediting the science that proves it. I can’t believe what this planet has become, leadership and mentality-wise. Instead of progress, we’ve regressed, exponentially. I don’t like our chances with these morons in control. Frankly, it pisses me off.

      1. OK so you’re talking about destroying humanity not blowing up the entire planet so the earth doesn’t exist. I also tend not to listen to what’s going on with the world because the media wants to make it seem like any president has much more power than what they really have. Presidents don’t have enough power to just destroy the world without the backing of the other branches of the government.

      2. Hmm. I didn’t think actually blowing up the planet was part of your original question. (Although there is the whole nuclear thing that I mentioned.) As far as presidential power, I think you’d be surprised by how much damage a mentally disturbed individual can do, especially when Congress is the same party. And, when he’s supported by thousands who have already stated that they’d be willing to see certain checks and balances overturned if it made them feel safe. Case in point: there was a recent study done in which half of the Republicans who responded said they’d be willing to see the 2020 presidential election postponed due to their unwarranted fears about widespread voter fraud which has been perpetuated by Mr. Trump. Now as bad as that is, imagine what could happen if there was, God forbid, another major terrorist attack like 9/11. Throughout history people have proven they’re willing to give up their freedom out of fear.

      3. Yes but none of those things have to do with the other destruction of the planet we’re living on. How do you suppose Donald Trump is going to destroy earth? Or did you not mean to infer that he would destroy the planet?

  4. Those who make historical predictions are, almost invariably wrong. According to Marxist ideology the capitalist system should have collapsed long ago but, obviously it hasn’t. Again religious fundamentalists have been predicting the end of the world (probably ever since religion emerged). Indeed the Jehovas Witnesses have specified several dates which have all come and gone. Mark Twain is reported to have remarked that “reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated!”. Likewise one can argue that the end of civilisation/the world as we know it has been greatly exaggerated. I don’t discount the real and pressing problems such as climate change. However ther is a move away from fossil fuels (includinging in countries such as China) so there are positive signs on that front. We do, I believe have a duty to do what we can to preserve our enviornment and humanity

    1. That’s not exactly true. We are already sending technology into space. The step from unmanned to manned space travel is extremely close. It would take humans under a year to reach Mars. And if you look at the Earth purging us off the planet in the next evolutionary cycle, say 10,000 years, we should be much closer to inhabiting Mars than the destruction of the earth.

      1. Okay, I read more into the question that there was. Even then, there are still issues. There is still the question as to if it would even be possible to procreate in low/no gravity; not to mention the effects of low gravity has on our bodies. IMHO, with the way we, as a species, are trashing this planet, I don’t think we have 100 years let alone 10,000.

      2. I think the Earth is much more resilient and will be okay. Humans are arrogant on this issue imho. Nature will select us out long before the planet dies; which will be of natural causes. To think humans will kill this planet grossly diminishes the power of natural forces and evolution. We’re not that powerful nor are we that significant. lol

      3. What I am saying is that we can make the world inhospitable for us. We certainly can mess things up so bad that it would be the end of the world as we know it. To use the phrase from a movie, “life finds a way.” Life will continue long after the human species goes extinct.

        Now that I think of it, I think it would be possible that we would need to “colonize” Earth to survive.

      1. Maybe and also nothing specifically necessarily if that makes any sense. It just FEELS like we are the brink of self destruction, war. crime, environment.

      2. War I can understand. Crime is actually at a 30 year low in the U.S. Environment…I believe the Earth is much more resilient than we give credit. Plus, I believe nature will select us out before we could ever figure out a way to destroy a planet. We don’t possess the knowledge or ability to blow up a planet. lol Unless we develop a Death Star sometime soon.

      3. I wouldn’t put it passed some people with means to try to make a Death Star. Maybe it’s because of all the information outlets we have. It just feels like we live in crazy times with crazy people that makes end times seem closer than advancements.

      4. My opinion is that most people feel this way because we are inundated with every single negative story via Facebook and the internet. It is a false reality pushed by the media. The truth is crime is down and there are millions of great people on this planet. I don’t allow myself to be influenced as much by media sources.

      5. Is crime down locally, nationally, internationally? I think internationally is what would matter in this case and would be hard to confirm.
        I’m not typically a negative Nancy, but even if the negative is misproportionally represented in the media, those bad things are still occurring. There’s babies and children in the sex slave industry. There’s people driving cars into public places. There’s people gunning down crowds. Maybe not as much as the media makes us feel, but these are still major social occurances taking place.

      6. Those things have always occurred. Sex slaves have been in existence for thousands of years. Maybe the terrorism stuff is new and recent but the rest of it has been going on around the world since I was a kid, 40 plus years ago.

  5. I don’t think we will go to another planet, governments always find something else to spend the money on. Unless someone like Richard Branson times maybe 6 gets involved, I think we shall still be trying to get to Mars while the Earth is dying.

      1. I don’t believe we possess the power to actually destroy a planet. It is arrogant to think so. Can we make it inhabitable, maybe. Destroy it? No time soon.

      2. Possibly. I think the nature extremists like to paint a dire environmental image. The truth is it is incredibly arrogant of humans to believe we hold more power than nature; it is hubris. Nature will select us out long before we actually destroy the planet. imho

      3. While I agree with you to a certain extent, I don’t think we can rule out certain things such as we are to blame for the fact animals are being wiped off the face off this earth, there are less green spaces then ever before. Fracking, mining. All these things make a difference, the fact that the UK and Ireland is about to be battered again for the second time in a week by fierce storms when the last one was close to 30 years ago, I don’t think you can over rule the weather is getting worse, and maybe this is Mother Earth going, you use and abuse me, F**k off my turn.

      4. Your last statement kind of makes my point. Nature will select us out or lower our population way before we do irreversible damage. Killing animals is another topic and I agree with you. Humans are a virus.

  6. Well, technically colonizing another planet easily could “end the world as we know it” because that phrase does’t necessarily denote the world’s destruction, but a major change & let’s face it, for most of us the world is not as we knew it growing up – I remember pay phones & being super excited to visit the video store, borrowing a vcr because we could not afford one & I remember the agony of atari thumb & back when arcades where the best way for poor kids to spend all the money they could get their hands on…. the world has changed, grown up in some ways & tried to deny growing up in other ways

    1. I think it is a stretch to say colonizing another planet would end the world as we know it. It might expand the world we know, but end it? Not so sure about that. The world changing doesn’t mean the world ends. Now a massive meteor striking the ocean causing a 500 foot wave that floods North America, that would change the world as we know it. lol

      1. the question didn’t really have to do with the world ending, just the one we know, not at all the same, change is always an end as well as a beginning – I was trying to answer the question posed via the phrasing, which is apparently not the one that was meant

      2. I think you were interpreting “world as we know it” in an existential way. i was referring to the destruction of the planet; it’s a science fiction phrase. Maybe I should have been more clear.

      3. If you’re talking about the destruction of what makes the planet livable to us, we might pull that off, but I have faith we will be out among the stars before that happens. As to destroying the planet, we lack the power, even if we had enough bombs to do it & nuked every square inch of the world, the roughly spherical object we call Earth would continue, that wouldn’t even kill off all the life on the planet. We could radically change the circumstances that exist on this world, but we can’t even drag it down with us. The sun is far more likely to destroy the world, though there is a chance it will get thrown out of the system instead of being devoured during the Sol’s red giant phase, which would in effect lock Terra in ice, but not necessarily destroy it. In a totally different vein, if we consider destroying the world our civilization we’re already showing signs of “failed state” with a similar internal rot that seems to have gutted the empire of Rome & we’re already changing the environment in such a fashion that the way we build/expand cities is unsustainable by the environment to which they belong, which relates to our theories of what happened to some of the lost civilizations of South America.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: