Silberio Posted April 27, 2007 Author Share Posted April 27, 2007 Ah, MHO, F*ck the global heating sh*t, i dont belive on that thing, beside's, what should we worry about? we will sure have "Anti-Heat" suits untill then. and meaby we WILL reach that planet someday, somehow, somewhen... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V Posted April 27, 2007 Share Posted April 27, 2007 Uh, we're not gonna die of the heat, our water will evaporate, the gasses in the air will poison us, the plants will die, then the animals will die then we will. All this can be prevented if someone can find a good, clean, reusable way to power cars and machines instead of petroleum and oil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harwood Butcher Posted April 28, 2007 Share Posted April 28, 2007 Uh, we're not gonna die of the heat, our water will evaporate, the gasses in the air will poison us, the plants will die, then the animals will die then we will. All this can be prevented if someone can find a good, clean, reusable way to power cars and machines instead of petroleum and oil. This is going a little off topic, but scientist need to start thinking a little more on ways we could survive global warming, if it were to happen, and how we could save plants, animals and our water supply instead of trying to figure out how to stop it because if it's gonna happen...it's gonna happen. Earth II would probably be our 4th move from the Earth. First we'd go to Mars because they're currently working on machines that they could drop off on Mars that would pollute the air on Mars causing it to heat up which would allow certain algae to grow there and for water to become liquid and so on and so forth. After Mars we'd head over to I think one of Saturn's or Uranus' moons until we'd have to move some where else, which I think would be Gliese 581c A.K.A. Earth II, if we had the technology to get there by then. From what they're saying, we won't need to move to Mars for another 7 million or 7 billion years. So since that could possibly be around 100 times more time than the earth has been and we've only been around 700,000 years, according to some stone tools found in eastern England that suggest that. By then our technology could be possibly 10,000 times greater than it is now when we'd need to go to Mars. So I think we have pretty much everything covered unless something else were to happen such as a giant astorid were to hit the earth or Planet X were to come around and knock us out of orbit destroying half the earth, killing most if not all of us in the collision or if a gama ray burst were to happen. But other than that...we're fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V Posted April 28, 2007 Share Posted April 28, 2007 Well put. If only Earth II was as close to us as the moon, then we probably wouldn't have to worry so much... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harwood Butcher Posted April 28, 2007 Share Posted April 28, 2007 Well put.If only Earth II was as close to us as the moon, then we probably wouldn't have to worry so much... Actually we would have to worry because if it was as close to us as the moon is our move from Earth to "Earth II" would be pointless when the safe zone moves past earth it would take a short amount of time until it would hit us on Earth II...if it were to be as close to us as the moon is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V Posted April 28, 2007 Share Posted April 28, 2007 Well, we would have to pollute earth II as far as we have polluted this one, which actually takes time, so it would buy us time. And even then people would jump awake, realizing they should be more eco friendly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harwood Butcher Posted April 28, 2007 Share Posted April 28, 2007 (edited) Well, we would have to pollute earth II as far as we have polluted this one, which actually takes time, so it would buy us time. And even then people would jump awake, realizing they should be more eco friendly. Why would we have to pollute "Earth II"? That's a bad thing. Edited April 28, 2007 by Original GTA Master Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silberio Posted April 28, 2007 Author Share Posted April 28, 2007 same reason as we polluted Earth (I). why dont we get the Moon Colonized? (sorry if its the wrong word) we have plexiglas against meteors, and we would have a good view to earth when it gets destroyed and how much time is it 'till global waning is at "100%" kinda? also, any one know anything else about this Earth II Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harwood Butcher Posted April 28, 2007 Share Posted April 28, 2007 same reason as we polluted Earth (I). We don't have a reason for polluting the earth. I think we would find out a more sufficiant way of living that didn't cause pollution by the time we needed or had the ability to go to "Earth II". why dont we get the Moon Colonized? (sorry if its the wrong word)we have plexiglas against meteors, and we would have a good view to earth when it gets destroyed and how much time is it 'till global waning is at "100%" kinda? also, any one know anything else about this Earth II Colonizing the Moon wouldn't help us out much if the Earth got destoryed, the moon orbits the Earth. If a meteor could wipe out life on earth or Planet X were able to knock the Earth out of orbit, I don't think plexiglass would help us out much on the moon if one of those were to hit us. Well we'll be at the stage of no return by the year 1212. There really isn't much more known about Gliese 581c than what was already discussed in this topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silberio Posted May 2, 2007 Author Share Posted May 2, 2007 Wow man, you're realy smart,i realy mean it. Geez, then is there any scape from global warning? will we survive?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaz The Great Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 Well, we would have to pollute earth II as far as we have polluted this one, which actually takes time, so it would buy us time. And even then people would jump awake, realizing they should be more eco friendly. Why would we have to pollute "Earth II"? That's a bad thing. He's probably talking about if the Earth becoming unlivable is the cause of us having to leave it. Then yes, Earth II being as close as the moon would work in our advantage and we'd be fine until we poluted it to that point again, but that would take some time. Global warming is happening. We can stop it. The REAL problem is most of our population is too stupid/stubborn/lazy/uncaring to do anything about it. I, personally, have come to accept this and shall just live here until I can't anymore. Whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harwood Butcher Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 Well, we would have to pollute earth II as far as we have polluted this one, which actually takes time, so it would buy us time. And even then people would jump awake, realizing they should be more eco friendly. Why would we have to pollute "Earth II"? That's a bad thing. He's probably talking about if the Earth becoming unlivable is the cause of us having to leave it. Then yes, Earth II being as close as the moon would work in our advantage and we'd be fine until we poluted it to that point again, but that would take some time. Global warming is happening. We can stop it. The REAL problem is most of our population is too stupid/stubborn/lazy/uncaring to do anything about it. I, personally, have come to accept this and shall just live here until I can't anymore. Whatever. Yeah from Global Warming, but we're discussing "Earth II", which would be our 4th home after the earth is taken out of the safe zone, if we are to survive that long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gycu Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 One thing is certain...Earth 1 will soon be history...So we`ll need another "home"...And yes Mars is close but it`s not just like crossing the street...Maybe in 1000 years Mars will be the 2nd Earth... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrLlamaLlama Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 Let's face it, we just pissed our planet up. Unless we ALL do something MAJOR about it within the next 5 or so years, then, it wont be long until every plant is using genetic modification to survive the sheer amount of TOTAL SHIT we are pumping into our previously fresh air. That's the problem, not global warming. We, the human race, should not be trusted with another 'new' planet, should we have the technology to move to one, since we's all bollocks that one up aswell. Why dont we all just sit here and suffocate ourselves even more by continuing to be ignorant egotistical fools and shovel shit onto our planet. End of rant. Thanks for your time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaz The Great Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 Well, we would have to pollute earth II as far as we have polluted this one, which actually takes time, so it would buy us time. And even then people would jump awake, realizing they should be more eco friendly. Why would we have to pollute "Earth II"? That's a bad thing. He's probably talking about if the Earth becoming unlivable is the cause of us having to leave it. Then yes, Earth II being as close as the moon would work in our advantage and we'd be fine until we poluted it to that point again, but that would take some time. Global warming is happening. We can stop it. The REAL problem is most of our population is too stupid/stubborn/lazy/uncaring to do anything about it. I, personally, have come to accept this and shall just live here until I can't anymore. Whatever. Yeah from Global Warming, but we're discussing "Earth II", which would be our 4th home after the earth is taken out of the safe zone, if we are to survive that long. The actual discussion at that point was if "Earth II" was the same distance as the moon, in which if we had to leave Earth for the reason of global warming/pollution/etc., then yes, that would be just fine. Let's face it, we just pissed our planet up. Unless we ALL do something MAJOR about it within the next 5 or so years, then, it wont be long until every plant is using genetic modification to survive the sheer amount of TOTAL SHIT we are pumping into our previously fresh air. That's the problem, not global warming.We, the human race, should not be trusted with another 'new' planet, should we have the technology to move to one, since we's all bollocks that one up aswell. Why dont we all just sit here and suffocate ourselves even more by continuing to be ignorant egotistical fools and shovel shit onto our planet. End of rant. Thanks for your time. Well, if we were to leave Earth because we can't live here anymore, then the pollution would stop, slowly it would HAVE to revert back to the way it was. In the same sense, if we stay here and die, it would have to eventually fix itself. I sort of see us killing ourselves as a way to get RID OF US and let the Earth start over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silberio Posted May 3, 2007 Author Share Posted May 3, 2007 Sh*t, what did i do? im not included in those "people-that-pollute", and im just a Silberio, 1 single Silberio cant do much... anyways, why cant we Pollute Colonize mars? it seems to be nice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harwood Butcher Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 One thing is certain...Earth 1 will soon be history...So we`ll need another "home"...And yes Mars is close but it`s not just like crossing the street...Maybe in 1000 years Mars will be the 2nd Earth... It wont take that long until we're on Mars. It'll only take in between 100-150 years until we change Mars from it's cold lifeless state to a state much like the Earth's...a little bit before we f***ed it up, but we will need to pollute it to raise it's temperature so it could begin to sustain life. Let's face it, we just pissed our planet up. Unless we ALL do something MAJOR about it within the next 5 or so years, then, it wont be long until every plant is using genetic modification to survive the sheer amount of TOTAL SHIT we are pumping into our previously fresh air. That's the problem, not global warming.We, the human race, should not be trusted with another 'new' planet, should we have the technology to move to one, since we's all bollocks that one up aswell. Why dont we all just sit here and suffocate ourselves even more by continuing to be ignorant egotistical fools and shovel shit onto our planet. End of rant. Thanks for your time. Well the year 1212 is when we supposedly hit the point of no return. Earth will most likely be unlivable 100-200 years after that. Global Warming isn't going to wipe us out as fast as people are saying. They've been saying Global Warming was coming since the 60's and the weather has been the same since. As for us not to be trusted with a new planet, you're sort of wrong. By the time we get to another planet that could sustain life, we'll be ready to start a new eco friendly society. We're pretty much already there, but we wont be there in time to save ourselves on this planet. The actual discussion at that point was if "Earth II" was the same distance as the moon, in which if we had to leave Earth for the reason of global warming/pollution/etc., then yes, that would be just fine. Actually you were the one that started on that, I was simply saying what we needed to do in order to raise the temperature on Mars for our first move and you got Global Warming from that. Well, if we were to leave Earth because we can't live here anymore, then the pollution would stop, slowly it would HAVE to revert back to the way it was. In the same sense, if we stay here and die, it would have to eventually fix itself. I sort of see us killing ourselves as a way to get RID OF US and let the Earth start over. Like I said earlier in this post, the year 1212 is supposedly the point of no return. Meaning if we continue to pollute the Earth up until the year 1212, which is most likely going to happen, the Earth will be so messed up that it wont be able to repair it's self. When the ozone layer is completely destroyed, it'll kill all the plants, which would cause a chain reaction. But that's if this Global Warming shit is finally going to happen. Sh*t, what did i do?im not included in those "people-that-pollute", and im just a Silberio, 1 single Silberio cant do much... anyways, why cant we Pollute Colonize mars? it seems to be nice We will eventually colonize Mars if we survive this supposed Global Warming the next 100-150 years. If Global Warming is just bullshit than we wont need to move to Mars for 7 billion years or so, which would be our first move. Gliese 581c will be our 3rd or 4th move, which wont be for a very, very long time. The thing people aren't thinking about is that we're viewing Gliese 581c the way it was 20 and a half years ago and could have blown up since or some shit and even if it's still there, which it most likely is, it will be destroyed by the time we're able to get there being that it's so close to Gliese 581. I belive that Gliese 581c will be gone before our own planet is out of our solar systems safe zone. So basically...we're never getting to Gliese 581c. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gycu Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 For reaching another planet we need a space-ship that can reach the Speed Of Light ! Without reaching at least half of TSPL we are in trouble, really big trouble... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaz The Great Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 Well put.If only Earth II was as close to us as the moon, then we probably wouldn't have to worry so much... Well put.If only Earth II was as close to us as the moon, then we probably wouldn't have to worry so much... Actually we would have to worry because if it was as close to us as the moon is our move from Earth to "Earth II" would be pointless when the safe zone moves past earth it would take a short amount of time until it would hit us on Earth II...if it were to be as close to us as the moon is. Well, we would have to pollute earth II as far as we have polluted this one, which actually takes time, so it would buy us time. And even then people would jump awake, realizing they should be more eco friendly. Well, we would have to pollute earth II as far as we have polluted this one, which actually takes time, so it would buy us time. And even then people would jump awake, realizing they should be more eco friendly. Why would we have to pollute "Earth II"? That's a bad thing. The actual discussion at that point was if "Earth II" was the same distance as the moon, in which if we had to leave Earth for the reason of global warming/pollution/etc., then yes, that would be just fine. Actually you were the one that started on that, I was simply saying what we needed to do in order to raise the temperature on Mars for our first move and you got Global Warming from that. No, I was continuing off of one of your posts. Those are a chain of posts by you and the Architect. He said it would be a good thing if Earth II was the same distance away as the moon. You said it wouldn't really matter, because it wouldn't be far away enough to be safe again. HE, though, was talking about if we killed our planet by means of pollution, then going to Earth II which would be just as far as the moon wouldn't be that hard. In the post I quoted you said nothing about Mars in the least.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silberio Posted May 5, 2007 Author Share Posted May 5, 2007 But what means that to be "Far away to be safe", is there like a "Safety Distance" from globl warming? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harwood Butcher Posted May 5, 2007 Share Posted May 5, 2007 But what means that to be "Far away to be safe", is there like a "Safety Distance" from globl warming? I never said anything about the moon not being safe from global warming. I said it wasn't safe from any other disaster that could happen to the earth because of it being so close. If a meteor could hit the earth, it could very well hit the moon before and if Planet X were to hit the earth out of orbit the moon would go as well or if a Gamma Ray burst were to happen then we're screwed with that as well. My point is, is that if we make a move it should be one that will help us out a lot and not just for one little thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spaz The Great Posted May 5, 2007 Share Posted May 5, 2007 But what means that to be "Far away to be safe", is there like a "Safety Distance" from globl warming? I never said anything about the moon not being safe from global warming. I said it wasn't safe from any other disaster that could happen to the earth because of it being so close. If a meteor could hit the earth, it could very well hit the moon before and if Planet X were to hit the earth out of orbit the moon would go as well or if a Gamma Ray burst were to happen then we're screwed with that as well. My point is, is that if we make a move it should be one that will help us out a lot and not just for one little thing. I KNOW. I was pointing out that there was some misunderstandings. You were talking about a natural disaster, he was talking about global warming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harwood Butcher Posted May 5, 2007 Share Posted May 5, 2007 But what means that to be "Far away to be safe", is there like a "Safety Distance" from globl warming? I never said anything about the moon not being safe from global warming. I said it wasn't safe from any other disaster that could happen to the earth because of it being so close. If a meteor could hit the earth, it could very well hit the moon before and if Planet X were to hit the earth out of orbit the moon would go as well or if a Gamma Ray burst were to happen then we're screwed with that as well. My point is, is that if we make a move it should be one that will help us out a lot and not just for one little thing. I KNOW. I was pointing out that there was some misunderstandings. You were talking about a natural disaster, he was talking about global warming. I wasn't even talking to you, I was talking to -Silberio Da Great-. What the hell is your problem? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silberio Posted May 5, 2007 Author Share Posted May 5, 2007 Call me Silberio and please, lets dont fight, i dont like fights in normal topics, ok? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V Posted May 6, 2007 Share Posted May 6, 2007 Sh*t, what did i do?im not included in those "people-that-pollute", and im just a Silberio, 1 single Silberio cant do much... Thats the attitude that too many people have. And what does colonizing the moon mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now