Subject:
|
Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 18 Jun 2001 01:26:04 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1317 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Daniel Jassim writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
>
> > Do you think we'll still be around in a billion years, still human?
>
> Personally, NO, because the earth has a history of mass extinctions that
> take place every so many million years apart. So, within a billion years
> there can be any number of mass extinction events followed by the rise of
> "new" organisms to dominate the landscape. But who am I to say mankind won't
> be successful at fighting off meteors, comets or diseases that could
> otherwise cause a mass extinction? Who am I to say how far man will
> biologically evolve to the point we cannot be called "human" or at least
> "homo sapien?" My greater point, which seemed to slip through the cracks
> with Tom, is that this is our only world and we must share it.
My point is that while that is true NOW we would be foolish to let it be so
for a billion, a million, or even a thousand years longer. Manifest destiny!
Ad Astra Per Aspera. Our destiny is not to remain here, every single one of
us, for the rest of our days. Our destiny is to explore. Man is an explorer
and a creator, not just a resident.
>
> > Do you think we'll *all* still be living on this one planet at that time?
>
> Personally, I see no reason why not. In my opinion, it's a good planet with
> a long life ahead of it if we are wise and take care of it and live here as
> long as we can. But I also see no reason why someday many of us couldn't
> live elsewhere in our solar system or beyond. But my point is that anything
> that will happen for mankind begins here.
Nobody's arguing that. It certainly began here. I'm just saying that it
shouldn't end here.
> That point also slipped between
> the cracks. In my opinion, I think your negative bias toward me and Tom's
> quick temper helped inflate this issue, rather than a blatant lack of
> clarity or truly ridiculous notion on my part. Everybody is entitled to an
> opinion, I gave mine. You may do as you please.
And so I shall, now that you've recanted, or at least softened from its
emphatic certainty, your original statement. Thanks for the clarification.
(I see it as a change in meaning, but you of course may not)
++Lar
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
|
| (...) Yup! Small steps leading to bigger, and bigger steps. Think of how far we've come just in one century! At the same time, as Carl Sagan said, we are still in our stage of "global infancy" and need to get past the petty, destructive differences (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Sanctions (was: Libertarian Propaganda)
|
| (...) Personally, NO, because the earth has a history of mass extinctions that take place every so many million years apart. So, within a billion years there can be any number of mass extinction events followed by the rise of "new" organisms to (...) (23 years ago, 17-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
271 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
