"We", I assume, being you and your pet gerbil.


Solid. You win an e-cookie for stating the obvious, but I see you're going for the formal syllogism.


And here's where we're blindsided by an unsupported premise. Maybe it's true, maybe not.

All of this, of course, forms an argument that has absolutely nothing to do with intelligent design.

As a side note, your interpretation of the second law of thermodynamics is a little off. It may just be the way you're wording it. Energy never goes anywhere, and energy exchanges can occur indefinitely with increasing entropy. Only the complexity necessarily decreases.

-Bigglesworth

P.S.- No, I'm not a teacher. I have neither the patience nor people skills.

ya i can see that so your justs a sarcastic A-hole huh?

A really smart sarcastic A-hole. Why do you think they call me an evil mastermind?

-Bigglesworth

evil yes... master mind, well as they say in Texas BULL!

I don't even think we are going to get into space because of these bull s**t wars we are having. We'll probaly be blown to crap thanks to North Korea and the terroist.

I LIKE this guy! This is a future overlord I can get behind!



We have FAR more obstacles to getting into space than just war, terrorism, and possible nuclear attack. There's the inherent danger of space, where one teensy little hull breach could spell DISASTER for your infant space colony. There's that whole problem of finding a reliable means of propulsion to get around with (jet fuel isn't going to cut it when you want to get between stars and not have to wait fifty thousand years). There's the problem of how to get the people there alive and ready to colonize (cryogenic freezing still doesn't work for some reason I can't remember. It was probably fatal though.).

And then the biggest hurdle to us getting into space (besides politicians, of course) is the question of "Is it worth it?" Sure Mars and the asteroid belt have tons of resources we could stand to gain, but we can still find those resources on Earth easily and so the enormous cost of setting up an off-world resource base somewhere just doesn't seem worth it. We could establish a space colony just to say we could, but it'd still take more money than most people are willing to commit to such a project. Unless we can find a good, pressing answer to "Why go to space?", it probably won't happen for a while.


And as for North Korea and its nukes, don't worry.





WE HAVE LASERJET!




LASERJET
LASERJET
NO ONE'S GONNA MESS WITH THE LASERJET.
LASERJET
YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!

Well we could start a colony on one of the big asteroids within the asteroid belt.

ok number one on earth we have a limmated amount of rechoses so it whont be here forever.

and the answer for why is because we can, and its there and just waiting for us.

Which would work great up to the point when another asteroid within the same belt collides with it.

ok better idea eterh a spacestation nere the belt or in obet around mars.

seconed thing to try take an astroid out of the belt and lower it to earth or mars or a space stion that mines the astroids

It would be a quandry.

Planet or base defense would depend on massive fleets to intercept any potential enemies. Any ship that survives or slips through would have the ability to devastate a colony or base from orbit.

MAD will be the order of the day and punitive reprisal will be the strategy. There will be no defensive super powers. All will be vulnerable to attack from orbit

Hopefully war will be discouraged by the difficulty in getting boots on the ground. Highly motivated agression usually involves spoils and spoils will be even more difficult in the interplanetary venue than they are on Earth these days. Causus Bellum is very limited anymore.

Bottom line: We need to get over wars before we start colonizing the galaxy.

On the point of other life on planets, my only hope is that we don't just nuke them out of existence and then take take the planet for our own, a lot of good books are on these subjects.

In one a space ship discovers a rare type race, but they are exceptionally brutal because of the current empire, do they kill them? do they rescue a few and kill the rest? or do they let them live and hope they don't come knocking a couple thousand years later? (of course the book ends up with the humans stranded on the ground) so a group of rebels finds them and this is the part that I think is something we need to look at:

They use a computer as big as a laptop, to a) teach this race to speak human (they have extremely broad vocal ranges), start a rapid development to the industrial revolution era (from mid evil) in 2 years, for these rebels.

Who gets to choose? Who gets the right to say oh they're only as smart as 2000AD humans we can pollute their water and their air? Who gets to choose what races get rapid development to space ships in years, instead of millennium? (think about it looking back if we were dumped on an earth like planet with the internet how long till we get to where we are to day? How long when you have had 1000's of professors develop a step by step, 'how to build a space ship from scratch') Who decides which species dies? Will we one day end up committing genocide because we need the land?

we will colonize the moon.

we will colonize mars.

we will colonize several moons around saturn, uranus, neptune.

we will colonize pluto.

we cannot colonize venus to hot to much pressure. Jupiter moons will be off limit to much radiation.


we might colonize mercury underground.


we will have hundreds of satellites in the system. then we will start out into the galaxy.

Limited resources? All of the resources humanity actually needs to survive (food, water, air, and shelter) are one hundred percent renewable and we don't have to go into space to get them.

And "because we can" usually doesn't fly well with the taxpayers who are forking out a large sum of their paychecks for that sort of thing, you know?

ok one thing we are human just think about that. WE ARE HUMAN.



why do you think we have NASA and the ISS?