Is the AGW/GCC movement condemning civilization to a new stone age?

  • Thread starter Thread starter James E
  • Start date Start date
J

James E

Guest
Because those who promote the fiction presented by this fiction are denying humanity the right to advance into space for the next stage of our cultural evolution are they condemning our civilization to a new stone age for the rest of eternity.

The eyes of the world now look into space, to the moon and to the planets beyond, and we have vowed that we shall not see it governed by a hostile flag of conquest, but by a banner of freedom and peace. We have vowed that we shall not see space filled with weapons of mass destruction, but with instruments of knowledge and understanding.... I do not say the we should or will go unprotected against the hostile misuse of space any more than we go unprotected against the hostile use of land or sea, but I do say that space can be explored and mastered without feeding the fires of war, without repeating the mistakes that man has made in extending his writ around this globe of ours." -- John F. Kennedy, speech at Rice University, 1962


"For the environmentalists, The Space Option is the ultimate environmental solution. For the Cornucopians, it is the technological fix that they are relying on. For the hard core space community, the obvious by-product would be the eventual exploration and settlement of the solar system. For most of humanity however, the ultimate benefit is having a realistic hope in a future with possibilities.... If our species does not soon embrace this unique opportunity with sufficient commitment, it may miss its one and only chance to do so. Humanity could soon be overwhelmed by one or more of the many challenges it now faces. The window of opportunity is closing as fast as the population is increasing.... Our future will be either a Space Age or a Stone Age." -- Arthur Woods and Marco Bernasconi, Space News, 1995



Other Quotes on the same theme with reading suggestions.

http://www.chat11.com/More_Space_Exploration_Quotes_2

http://www.chat11.com/More_Space_Exploration_Quotes_3

Archipet but what you and many others that have been convinced of the reality of the movement do not understand is that the core founders of it are completely and totally anti technology. They are the sole reason we do not have nuclear or space based solar today.
JimZ that is the intended purpose of the AGW movement, to prevent our civilization from making the full leap into space where the real future of our race awaits us. It is their intention to keep us grounded until we have consumed all the resources that will advance us into space to where unlimited resources abound.
Heretic, but space is just where we need to go for many reasons from power generation to material resources and basic materials processing. Space based industry is just the answer for every objection the Luddites have except for the real one.

http://www.nss.org/settlement/ssp/spacepower/index.html

http://www.nss.org/settlement/ColoniesInSpace/index.html

"Space, [Stine] argues, is to be the scene of a Third Industrial Revolution because there man can find virtually limitless energy and resources. Pollution as a by-product of the First and Second Industrial Revolutions disappears in the vastness of space. He pictures our present earthbound industrial system as being a closed system for ecological purposes. By developing space as a site for industry, man opens up the system and ensures his future survival--a survival holding the promise of plenty rather than scarcity." -- Barry Goldwater, Introduction to The Third Industrial Revolution by G. Harry Stine, 1975
I do not know why but when adherents of the left and green movements try to make their case the Vincent price movie linked below always comes to mind. Maybe because so many of my ancestors suffered at the hands of such!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witchfinder_General_(film
 
Sounds like you've been reading, Heinlein, Clark, and Asimov again. Long term space travel and planet hopping doesn't really seem like a realistic approach. Heinlein did come up with a so-so, solution using automated embryonic stasis...not in our lifetime.

What we are going to get is wide distinction between social divisions. Populations moving to remote areas (already occurring in Canada), and many other areas of the globe.
http://media.ifacca.org/files/CulturalDevelopmentRuralRemote.pdf
and one big social system for the masses. Inner city migration is going to cause more problems then it solves (already happening), in China and India. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migration_in_China
 
PLEASE!!! Only a closed minded, lazy, uncreative person would not see the huge oppertunities in a green future.
Hold on to your seats and enjoy the ride into a safe and healty future, here on this planet. Silly boys!!
 
Where do you come up with these ideas? Did Rush or Bush tell you such dribble? They are the ones that want to stay in the stone age by continuing to rely on outdated and limited fossil fuel resources in order to keep their friends awash in cash.
 
At last, something we can agree on! Space travel is essential to the future of mankind. Stephen Hawking has noted that we have to get beyond planet Earth.

Nothing you have said here contradicts the science of manmade climate change. Arthur C. Clarke's space elevator is getting closer to reality, constructed from carbon nanotubes. Nanotechnology is a key technology for an environmentally sustainable future. Wouldn't it be magical if we could invent a way to 'crystallise' carbon fibres straight from atmospheric CO2 or from power station exhaust fumes?

Even manned space flight is compatible with low-carbon living. The main fuels are hydrogen and oxygen, either as cryogenically liquefied gases or as peroxide. These can easily be produced from water using renewable energy. No greenhouse gases required ...

Many science fiction books are based on the premise that the next human diaspora will take us into the Galaxy. The future of planet Earth is not really affected by whether or not we succeed in achieving interstellar voyages because, even if we do, we won't be shipping billions of people out to the stars. The few who make it will be the new founding fathers - and mothers - propagating humanity into new homes, unimaginably far from here.
 
It has always been my view that those of the left and green movements have an incredible fear of the race going into space. Almost as if there is something out there waiting for them. Or could it be that they are really space aliens and feel it is their duty to keep a creative and productive humanity locked up on earth where we will not be able to compete directly with their weak blue blooded race. Even Former governor Jerry Brown had more soul and vision once than the current crop of leftists does.


"As long as there is the safety valve of unexplored frontiers, the aggressive and expletive urges of human beings can be channeled into long-term possibilities and benefits. But as those frontiers close down, and people begin to turn in upon themselves, that jeopardizes the democratic fabric itself. I don't happen to think the frontier is closed. It's just opening up in space...
The human race is going out and throughout, wherever space will permit us to go. It's only a question of when, and who, and what kind of leadership will take us there. And I, for one, don't think we ought to be looking just down here below."
-- Governor Jerry Brown, remarks at a symposium, 1977
 
This idea was very elegantly explored in a paper by J. Richard Gott:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v363/n6427/pdf/363315a0.pdf

or

Implications of the Copernican principle for our future prospects
J. Richard Gott
SUMMARY: Making only the assumption that you are a random intelligent observer, limits for the total longevity of our species of 0.2 million to 8 million years can be derived at the 95% confidence level.
Nature 363, 315 - 319 (27 May 1993), doi: 10.1038/363315a0

The bottom line of the paper is that even without the impact of climate change mitigation, statistically speaking there is a very finite window of time in which most civilizations can evolve to form galactic travel. Futurists hate Gott's argument because it is simple, nearly irrefutable unless one wants to resort to wild speculative hypotheses concerning the behavior of existing yet hidden galactic civilizations, and the implications are that we all will die here on Earth.

Personally, I think our best chance at space exploration ended in the late 60's, when Nixon decided to prolong Johnson's disastrous escalation of the war in Vietnam, thereby diverting energy and resources into an utterly pointless waste. Sort of like the Iraq War will be. So, in my opinion, if you want to point fingers at what is stopping mankind from stepping outward, directing your ire at a few well-meaning environmentalists advocating that using less energy might be a good thing is at best misguided if you ignore the effect of the saber-rattling militarists who for reasons that are never entirely laid out squander trillions of dollars, millions of lives, and gigawatts equivalent of energy playing pointless war games with real people.

But you won't read this, understand what I am saying, or care. Your mind is made up. Clearly it is the "greens" and not guys like Cheney who are holding mankind back. Gotta be. The converse position is too awful for you to contemplate.

I hate Mondays.
 
Back
Top