If the Earth were scheduled for demolition to make room for a hyperspace bypass and you had the ability to stop it, would you?

Yes.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/16/2021 08:19AM by kathleen.

No. We've had a good run. Let a better life-form populate the universe. For example: dogs.

HH =)

Yes! Space Puppies!

In reality, they'd probably be better off without humans. We really don't do a very good job of much of anything.

Au contraire. Humans are very good at two things: f**king and killing. Any aliens observing us from a wisely safe distance are no doubt awestruck by our proficiency in both activities.

We are good at fucking and fucking things up.

Sometimes I think that dogs would have made the better higher life form. Wolf clans work surprisingly well as societies.

I think three things are required of us -- a) that we not blow ourselves up, b) that we not destroy the Earth's natural habitat, and c) that we develop some respect for species that are not ourselves, and do our best not to drive them into extinction.

In Dog we trust :)

Your question gives me so many thoughts that must never be put into words.

Same for me, D&D.

The older I get, the more I tend to think no.

Wouldn't that be violating the prime directive?

Earth's only hope at this point if intelligent life were to be considering your posited possibility of succumbing to imminent domain would be to designate the orb a Historic Landmark and give it an exemption.

On what grounds would it qualify?

The planet with the worst scourge of damaging religions?
The planet that stripped oceans and rainforests in record time?
The planet with the bi-peds that couldn't stop turning on each other?


But reasons for a save?
The Elephants. For sure. The whales. Yes. Owls. Orchids. Roses. Fiddle leaf ferns. And marmosets. Oh, marmosets.
And those little rolly-polly bugs.

Eminent Domain......

Yeah that probably works too. :)

We've gone from being the apple of the Creator's eye to a cancer ruining an infinitesimally small speck of rock in an infinite cosmos. Years ago, it was something to feel alienated from your family. Now we're alienated from our very own existence.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iyq4HZZ4H50



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/16/2021 11:21AM by caffiend.

    What humans might, could maybe, sorta do is acknowledge that Life® is not sacred.

    I used to be crazy in favor of yearly testing for keeping whatever your job was, and the testing included physical metrics.  If you did pass your test, you could retake it once, and then you were out, and your choices were having someone sign to be responsible for you, or your 'tested out as worthless' butt was shipped off to "Coventry*", where what happens in Coventry stays in Coventry...

    I believe in humans!  Some of the finest people I know are human, and I'm not just saying that in a slumming sort of way. 
 
    Screw "human rights".  If you're accused of a crime, you should have the power to demand as rigorous a test as possible in which a "Truth Serum" is used to find out your truth.  Refusing to be tested should be a presumption of guilt.  Live a bad life, have bad things happen to you.

    You know how we've bred dogs to perform numerous different functions?  Let's do the same for humans.  We especially need a breed of humans that govern without regard accruing personal wealth or power.  

    Oh, yeah, I'm a dreamer!  (My biggest dream is to appreciate artists, but not worship them, which, of course, requires diminution of ego; talk about a pipe dream!)





*Coventry -noun
Cov·​en·​try | \ ˈkə-vən-trē also ˈkä- \
Definition of Coventry: a state of ostracism or exclusion
"He was sent to Coventry for actions against the State."

elderolddog Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>     What humans might, could maybe, sorta do
> is acknowledge that Life® is not sacred.

Life is cheap, and getting cheaper all the time.
(Strange that healthcare is so expensive.)

https://i0.wp.com/www.powerlineblog.com/ed-assets/2021/09/Screen-Shot-2021-09-07-at-12.03.55-PM.png?resize=1536%2C979&ssl=1

How can you judge the human race from your vantage point?

"More money does not lead to more happiness. By appealing to evolutionary proclivities, like a desire for energy-dense food and status competition, the economic and marketing forces of modern society have engineered an environment promoting decisions that maximize consumption at the long-term cost of well-being. In effect, humans have dragged a body with a long hominid history into an overfed, malnourished, sedentary, sunlight-deficient, sleep-deprived, competitive, inequitable, and socially-isolating environment with dire consequences."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3330161/

Our species has probably had some really good times in our past and we have probably done many good things in small groups. Your attempt at judgement is like taking rats in cages and judging them as a species in their depressing condition.

The question presumes a scale to judge against. But as all available scales are human-derived, I find the question circular.

The race that has produced brilliant music,art and literature tat will last into the ages is certainly worth saving.

Yes, we are. Though I get the reason why on the question. So much progress, yet so many screwing things up for the simple reason they are stupid, selfish, and readily believe the most outrageously moronic drivel ever crafted.

The question almost seems to me artificial.

Across the universe life, and then life forms, emerge spontaneously, expand until something happens that wipes them out. Meanwhile other life forms have arisen or differentiated themselves into existence and expand until their natural demise, "nature" meaning everything from cosmic cataclysm down to wayward asteroids, climate change, interspecies conflict, and microbial evolution. At the most general level that is the pattern irrespective of a form's intelligence. Viruses and bacteria follow the arc, as do dinosaurs and today's primates.

Why would humans be different? Yes, we are preternaturally intelligent albeit inadequately so in light of the challenges that the cosmos, the earth, and our own intelligence pose. Can we solve those problems? Our record so far is not impressive. And even if we do manage to overcome our immediate dangers, human life nonetheless exists at the whim of forces beyond our comprehension let alone our control.

Which brings me to the point: who exactly is going to do the "saving?" God? Perhaps. Humanity? I'm not sure. It takes one level of intelligence to understand what we are doing to ourselves and a much greater one to devise and implement remedial measures. It could be that our species is stuck in the gap between those two standards, in which case we become the stuff of Greek tragedy: the being who sees what is happening but cannot stop it. Other than the poetic irony of sentience, our fate would still resemble that of the Dodo.

Would it offend reason, as opposed to human vanity, to suggest that we are going to go the way of all life and that there is no possible "savior?"

There is no savior to civilization in my opinion. We weren't evolved for reason nor selfish domestication.

Agreed.

The question, again, is whether life or any subset thereof was created or evolved "for" anything at all. The presumption anthropomorphizes the universe, which seems unjustifiably arrogant.

Doug Adams, author of Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, was an atheist. Certainly questions of salvation are on topic. Would I save the Earth? Yes, but I'd curse up a storm doing it.

Whither nihilism. Is there a grand purpose? Was there and we kinda blew it? Can we save ourselves? If not, who is our savoir really?

My friend asked me today about the Jewish menorah and I explained about the oil that didn't run out. I mused at what a wonderful symbol it was, with light and faith brought together like that. Salvation lies within. The christ is the divine spark within every human. A miracle that transcends time and space. We were here before the Universe was and will be here after it ends. Maybe we will watch it end while dining at a fabulous restaurant at the end of the Universe.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/18/2021 12:09AM by bradley.

    I heard a guy say, to a girl, that humans only exist to reproduce...as he offered to buy her a drink.

My reason is not offended, nor, is my considerable human vanity. But. Who is going before the Grand Court of the Universe to plead on Earthlings' behalf? My vote would be Flash Gordon. He's already got an "in" with Ming.

I seriously once named a daily-visiting squirrel Flash and, to celebrate, bought the Queen album.

"Who are you?" Ming the alien overlord asks.

"Flash Gordon, Quarterback, New York Jets!"

What more is there to say?

Don't laugh. But I just got a new DVD of Flash Gordon about two months ago. Have to see it every so often. Sublimely ridiculous. Just like this thread. Thank you bradley.

Yes.
And it is a miracle we have survived 100yrs since Einstein wrote E=MC^2, with the Doomsday clock stuck dead on 100 seconds till midnight.

https://thebulletin.org/doomsday-clock/

And 10 Countries posses enough nukes to end humanity.

And ironically the self described,”Homo Sapiens Sapiens” the so called “Wise Wise Men” will be the first species to self destruct.

But the Waterbear he don’t care.
Because Waterbear will just be the 6 time champion of apocalypse survivors, and will just go on eating moss like an 8 legged piglet for another couple of orbits around the Milky Way,
500 million years,

https://www.livescience.com/moon-tardigrades-future.html

schrodingerscat Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> be the first species to self destruct.

I don't think we could be the first.

https://www.sciencefocus.com/nature/has-an-animal-ever-evolved-itself-into-extinction/

We're the only species that I know of which could consciously choose extinction for the good of all other life on earth.

But I also doubt an agreement to do it could be reached with billion upon billions of people.

Elder Berry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> schrodingerscat Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > be the first species to self destruct.
>
> I don't think we could be the first.
>
> https://www.sciencefocus.com/nature/has-an-animal-
> ever-evolved-itself-into-extinction/

They went extinct because we wiped out their sole source of food.
They didn’t blow themselves off of the face of the earth, like we have the widespread, and spreading, potential to do.
>
> We're the only species that I know of which could
> consciously choose extinction for the good of all
> other life on earth.

If all the other species had a vote, they’d probably vote us off the planet. They’d fare a lot better w/o us. We wouldn’t last long w/o bees, earthworms or Phages.


> But I also doubt an agreement to do it could be
> reached with billion upon billions of people.

The survival instinct is powerful, which might account for why we have not blown ourselves up in the past 100yrs since we did the math and figured out e=mc^2

"They went extinct because we wiped out their sole source of food."

That wasn't the point. Environments change and species die off because they adapted too well or too specific to that environment. Natural selection of species. We are probably doing the same thing to the whole planet - adapting too well and too specific on foods.

Elder Berry Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "They went extinct because we wiped out their sole
> source of food."
>
> That wasn't the point. Environments change and
> species die off because they adapted too well or
> too specific to that environment. Natural
> selection of species. We are probably doing the
> same thing to the whole planet - adapting too well
> and too specific on foods.

I don't know what your point was, but you said we wouldn't be the first species to self destruct, then used, as an example, a species we drove into extinction.

People through all human history have had to adapt to changing circumstances. Advances in sciences and technology is sometimes like a circular process. Beginning of the end or the end of the beginning. In a one step forward and one step back pattern. Sometimes one never knows why things are like they are.

I guess it is easy to ask the question if it all is worth saving if the trend is always to be like stuck and things do not seem to get any better? Found some home videos this week digitalized and uploaded on youtube, it was frames taken straight from my childhood almost 40 years ago, from a place in the town, just about a couple of kilometers from where I now sit. I recognized faces and names mentioned in the video. Heard the pitch, tone, and choice of words in the people talking. I felt things had changed but I also sensed that things were easier back then. More local and easier to take part in social activities. There was a crowd looking at a new product, light weight aluminium style, it was new back then and people were amazed by the product. They touched it and commented it. Today the product is something that is so regular that you just expect it to be on the shelf where you regularly shop.

I started my life in a secular family in one of the most atheistic countries in the world but felt an urge later in life to look for something else when life did not work. I struggled and was an naive object. Found religion. I struggled but was never really cynical from the beginning, it just grew in me with age. When I was a kid I never experienced things that I would imagine back then would be the start of my cynicism. Watching the videos from my childhood made me remember that I am certain that the conditions back then did not signal in any way that I would become the adult I became.

So we must save the human race. The kids needs us even if we as adults can not get the idea why sometimes we would spend any more constructive energy on this planet. We just have to create good rites of passage and not lose our energy on the way.

Co-incidentally, out of the blue, this morning at work someone said one of their secret wishes was to be the only person to know that a giant asteroid was going to hit the earth and end it all. Then they could tell everyone who had been making their life miserable to go to H.E.Double Hockey Sticks and be very, very nasty about it. (Might have been me concerning some clients)

What would you do if you were the only one who knew the world was about to end in two weeks to become a super space highway as bradley suggests?

I’d take an Excederin.

Haha. You are hysterical,kathleen.

The question is somewhat beside the point because extinction of all life forms on earth has, throughout its history, happened before - probably more than once. It will most assuredly happen again - if you wait long enough.

Zoom!

Zoom? Whoosh!

Thanks for the upgrade.

*!Who^osh!*

> What would you do if you were
> the only one who knew the world
> was about to end in two weeks...


    First I'd start working on a Bucket List of things to do.

    Then I'd lament that no one would believe me if I told them, except some nutters (names excluded to protect the guilty).  Included in this lamentation would be the knowledge that while anyone to whom I revealed this information would eventually know I was right, I wouldn't be able to gloat.

    But back to the first issue, the Bucket List...  In no particular order:

        1)   I'd send out some real zingers to the last known email addresses of people who "did me wrong" to let them know that on "D" date I was taking my revenge!

        2)   I've been eating healthy; screw that and bring me meat & chocolate!!!!

        3)   I'd sign whatever contract or buyer's agreement the bank or car dealership wanted so I could drive a very hot, hot car for the remaining time

        4)   I'd tell my kids and grandkids I loved them, but that's all I'd say...

        5)   I have very little debt and a lot of unused credit; while laying in bed at night, I'd max out all my cards ordering all kinds of silly stuff online, including a personal drone so I could fly almost like superman.

        6)   I'd see what I could of the earthly sites that are real sights, and each night I'd stay in the nearest presidential suite.

        7)   None of your business!



    Imagine my relief/regret if the 15th day dawned with clear skies!!!!

First of all, eating meat and chocolate is healthy.

Second, whether humans are worth saving is a wildly irrelevant question except for the lotus-eating crowd.

The question where the answer has some relevance is will humanity survive? Ironically, the answer will always be “yes” until it is “no”.

Saber-toothed cats specialized themselves into extinction a number of times but they keep reevolving because when saber teeth work, they work very well. Maybe animals capable of video game development will evolve after us. We have been spectacularly successful in the short term, even if we are a dicey long term bet.

"whether humans are worth saving is a wildly irrelevant question"

It's more of a nonsensical question. How are humans qualified to answer it?

Survival of the species is a nice head game. The religion-inventing ape figured out that God looks just like him. What are the odds?

The key to saving the whole human race is: don’t overthink it.
You look at the person sitting next to you, and know that you
want to save them, but by doing so, you have to save the damn bunch.

Easy.

Humans are worth saving for Soylent Green.