Ooh, I didn't think of that! We might be able to adapt, but it would probably take time and maybe even a little mutation! I've looked into natural selection, but that is on Earth. I guess we haven't tried natural selection in space yet. But, anyway, we would have to think about that!Yes, that seems very smart, but what about the gravity difference?
do you think we could adapt?
Given that we have yet to confirm intelligent life elsewhere in the Universe, why should the human race be limited to it's home planet? Based on your ideas, one could argue that early humans should have never migrated from Mesopotamia.The reservation? Of course, the reservation is that can or should the human race be "saved" anyway? Survival of the fittest presupposes that the fittest to survive have the intelligence not to overpopulate their home planet.
Sadly, IMO, that would probably require a change, evolutionary in scale; one not likely to been seen for a multitude of generations (if ever).I would be quite happy for them to expand into the whole planet provided that they treated it (and their own species) with respect. And even beyond, ditto.
Of course, but what if we needed a backup planet?What are your reasons for colonising another planet/moon? The only reason I consider valid (with reservations) is to escape from the destruction of Earth.
This raises two points:
1. Stop destroying it ourselves.
2. Destruction by 'rogue' asteroid/body. Not likely, but insurance for survival is a strong motive in the long term. But would have to be started soon.
These are not mutually incompatible. Both are valid. (With reservations).
The first, essential, reason must be combined with ceasing suicidal overpopulation. I have been pointing out for years (in many locations) that Nature will 'reward' overpopulation with countermeasures including plagues. I never thought that I would actually live to see it.
The reservation? Of course, the reservation is that can or should the human race be "saved" anyway? Survival of the fittest presupposes that the fittest to survive have the intelligence not to overpopulate their home planet.
Yes, that is a valid point, but what if the Earth was falling torward an impending doom that was unstoppable? what planet or moon would you choose for 'Relocation' of the human race?I think there is no best planet/moon for human colonization. Instead of colonizing some other planet and exploiting it, we should work on saving our own planet.
Mars is the only option, IMO. It is extremely hazardous there but less so than the rest.Yes, that is a valid point, but what if the Earth was falling torward an impending doom that was unstoppable? what planet or moon would you choose for 'Relocation' of the human race?
"Come gather round people, wherever you roam,Sadly, IMO, that would probably require a change, evolutionary in scale; one not likely to been seen for a multitude of generations (if ever).
Well, if we have somehow managed to get over Climate Change, or if it is too late for getting over it, my choice is either the Moon or Mars, or perhaps, Europa.We all should know Kepler 425-b and Gliese 581d, and many more, but would do you think would be the best candidate? Planet? Moon?
What do you think?
My personal opinion is on Gliese 581 g.
See my post #13.One point I don't think has been mentioned. Given an emergency (asteroid strike) type situation, how much fuel -- how many ships -- are available on Earth to ferry humans to Mars (or wherever)? I think you are looking at a "two by two" into the Ark situation with many not very happy about being left behind.
Yes, I know about the sun's end-of-life expansion and hope we can exit the nuclear bomb age with minimal damage and enter the nuclear power age. I've said on other forums that it's only a matter of time before we realize nuclear power is the future. The immense amount of energy stored within the atom will not be ignored for long."I'd say nothing in this solar system is fit for colonization until we become far more advanced. Let's put the idea aside for another million years and hope we don't nuke ourselves into extinction."
There you have the future history of the human species. There are a few moons of the outer planets which have liquid water, due to heating factors such as friction, and so not relying heavily as we do on the Sun for warmth. On these moons it is possible that simple life may have developed - possibly microorganisms.
I personally believe that humans will not be around for billions of years but, just in case, we will have to allow for solar expansion. The Sun will expand almost far enough to engulf Earth, which will, however, have been long incinerated by then. Then, these moons will have been warming to greet us (sheer anthropocentric nonsense ) anyway, they will be at habitable temperatures. Unless water will have evaporated, we may find aquatic environments, with no land.
Before then, we should have taken action to avoid asteroid impacts. These may be "next week" in comparison, and a danger which we must take seriously. Our travels around the galaxy centre take us up and down through the galactic plane, and it may be that when crossing the galactic equator we are in much greater of impacts. There is evidence for a cycle of 26-30 million years when danger may be greatest.