:w00t::w00t::w00t::w00t: :mmm:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/11/091116-jupiter-moon-life-europa-fish.html
QuoteCould Jupiter Moon Harbor Fish-Size Life?
Victoria Jaggard
National Geographic News
November 16, 2009
In the oceans of a moon hundreds of millions of miles from the sun, something fishy may be alive—right now.
Below its icy crust Jupiter's moon Europa is believed to host a global ocean up to a hundred miles (160 kilometers) deep, with no land to speak of at the surface. (See "Jupiter Moon Has Violent, Hidden Oceans, Study Suggests.")
And the extraterrestrial ocean is currently being fed more than a hundred times more oxygen than previous models had suggested, according to provocative new research.
That amount of oxygen would be enough to support more than just microscopic life-forms: At least three million tons of fishlike creatures could theoretically live and breathe on Europa, said study author Richard Greenberg of the University of Arizona in Tucson.
"There's nothing saying there is life there now," said Greenberg, who presented his work last month at a meeting of the American Astronomical Society's Division for Planetary Sciences. "But we do know there are the physical conditions to support it."
In fact, based on what we know about the Jovian moon, parts of Europa's seafloor should greatly resemble the environments around Earth's deep-ocean hydrothermal vents, said deep-sea molecular ecologist Timothy Shank.
"I'd be shocked if no life existed on Europa," said Shank, of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, who was not involved in the new study.
Despite the promising new estimates, it's too early to do more than speculate about how Europan life might have evolved. A closer look—perhaps by a NASA orbiter now in development—will be needed to tell exactly how chemicals are distributed on Europa and how the moon's geologic history might have contributed to life's chances.
Europa's Shiny New Coat
Italian astronomer Galileo Galilei discovered Europa in 1610. But it wasn't until Galileo, the NASA spacecraft, reached the Jupiter system in 1995 that scientists were able to study the moon in detail.
What the Galileo probe found was so exciting that NASA deliberately crashed the spacecraft into Jupiter in 2003 to prevent the craft from contaminating one of its own discoveries: the salty, subsurface ocean on Europa.
Although the probe didn't see the ocean directly, scientists are pretty sure it's there, based on the age, composition, and structure of the moon's icy surface.
For instance, pictures of the moon's bright surface suggest it's relatively young, said the University of Arizona's Greenberg, author of Unmasking Europa: The Search for Life on Jupiter's Ocean Moon.
Europa, like the other planets and moons in our solar system, is more than four billion years old. But a relative lack of impact craters implies that the icy crust is just 50 million years old. "It's an entirely different surface now than it was at the time the dinosaurs went extinct on Earth," Greenberg said.
"Repaving" Sends Oxygen Steadily Downward?
Europa's smooth surface is marred only by dark, crisscrossing ridges that suggest the icy shell is being stretched and compressed by tidal forces.
"We're used to thinking of tides on Earth as something seen on the shore," Greenberg explained. But on a larger scale, gravity from the sun and moon constantly squishes and stretches Earth as a whole.
Europa, which is about as big as our moon, also gets tidally stretched, not by the sun but by the gravity of massive Jupiter.
The friction from all this tidal stretching probably heats Europa enough to maintain liquid water, Greenberg said—even though the Jovian moon is 483 million miles (778 million kilometers) from the sun.
The warmer ocean material may be oozing up through cracks in the ice and freezing on the surface at the same rate that older ice sinks and melts into the liquid interior.
This cycle of "repaving" would explain the young look of the surface ice—and would open the door for oxygen at the surface to permeate the subsurface ocean.
Oxygen is created when charged particles from Jupiter's magnetic field hit the ice. Given his estimates for the moon's rate of repaving, Greenberg thinks it would have taken one to two billion years for the first surface oxygen to reach the ocean below.
Time to Grow
A few million years after the ice-repaving process had started, oxygen levels in Europan seas reached their current levels—which exceed levels in Earth's oceans—Greenberg speculates.
This timeframe actually improves the chances that life as we know it took root on Europa. For starters, the most primitive life-forms need an absence of oxygen to form, Greenberg said.
"Oxygen tends to cause other molecules to come apart," he said, so genetic material such as DNA can't freely assemble with oxygen present.
"You need the delay so genetic material and structures can take shape," he said. "And then when oxygen arrives, organisms will at least have a fighting chance."
Similarly, a sudden abundance of oxygen can kill simple life-forms that aren't accustomed to the highly reactive element. But if oxygen is introduced slowly, creatures can evolve to tolerate it and even come to depend on it—a process thought to have happened on early Earth.
The Case Against Animals on Europa
Greenberg's generous estimate of oxygen in Europa's ocean—and the resulting speculation that fishlike creatures may exist there—depends on the surface repaving to have happened at a relatively stable rate, in this case, a complete renewal every 50 million years.
But planetary scientist Robert Pappalardo said the process may have been more intermittent, and therefore the oxygen level—and chance for fishlike life—lower.
"Maybe 50 million years ago it was churning away, and now it's slowed down and become much more sluggish," said Pappalardo, a senior research scientist with NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California.
For example, Pappalardo said, Europa is gravitationally locked with its neighboring moon Io, which has an eccentric orbit around Jupiter. This means Io may be pushing and pulling on Europa in extreme cycles, resulting in periods of high and low tidal friction on Europa.
Even in this scenario, oxygen could reach the seas, though maybe not in quantities that would favor complex life-forms.
Since ice behaves like a fluid over long time frames (think glaciers), he said, surface elements could be reaching Europa's ocean via solid ice.
"Picture a lava lamp: Blobs of warmer material rise, and cooler blobs sink. It's just that in ice it might take a hundred thousand years for a blob to rise."
Meanwhile, if tidal activity on Europa comes in fits and starts, that would change the rates at which heat and nutrients from the rocky mantle become available, he said.
"Say there are microbes down there," Pappalardo added. "What would it mean for their evolution if every hundred thousand years there was much more heat and chemicals? It might lead to much more hardy organisms"—but not necessarily complex life.
Life's chances on Europa would also depend on whether tidal friction heats the moon all the way to its rocky core. If the solid core is in fact warm, he said, "then you may have black smokers pouring out heat and chemicals." If not, the dissolved nutrients needed to sustain life would be much more limited.
In fact, even with vast amounts of oxygen in the water, astrobiologist Cynthia Phillips of the SETI Institute said, it's unlikely for Europa to house anything bigger than microbes, given its probable amounts of life-supporting chemical nutrients.
"While it's really exciting to think of giant squid on Europa, there's not likely to be anything there that size," Phillips said.
Wanted: Ice-Penetrating, Swimming, Sniffing Spacecraft
For some scientists, though, the idea of at least microbial life on Europa is plausible enough that researchers, including Shank of Woods Hole, are already eyeing Earth's superheated hydrothermal vents as possible analogues.
Some microbes can thrive on the gases created from the chemicals spewed out by these vents. On Europa such chemicals could be the basis of a food chain that, with oxygen in the water, might support complex life.
One day spacecraft could be sent to Europa to penetrate the ice and explore the ocean, much as remotely operated vehicles sniff Earth's deep ocean for nutrients released by unseen hydrothermal vents, Shank said.
But first scientists would have to develop sensors that can probe for DNA, RNA, and other chemical signatures of life.
A submersible sent to Europa would also have to be made smaller, lighter, and with better battery life than existing models—while still being able to drill its own way through what may be miles of ice.
Robust communications capabilities would also be essential, Shank said. "It's no good to go down there and find life and not be able to tell anyone about it."
Mission: Europa
NASA's next step in exploring Europa, however, is more likely to be an orbiter—i.e., no undersea missions—proposed as part of a joint mission with the European Space Agency.
Such a mission, while desirable, would face a number of hurdles, SETI's Phillips noted. At their closest, Jupiter and its moons are roughly 365 million miles (588 million kilometers) from Earth, so getting there can take as long as five to six years with current technology.
At that distance, there's not enough sunlight for a solar-powered probe, so the craft would need to bring its own nuclear power source, Phillips said.
There's also the constant radiation from Jupiter's magnetosphere to contend with.
"If you want to orbit Europa, the radiation is [eventually] going to fry your spacecraft," Phillips said. "Once you finally get to Europa, you can hope to orbit for a couple months if you're lucky."
Pappalardo, the study scientist for the proposed Europa mission, said NASA's planned orbiter should be robust enough to last almost a year before succumbing to radiation or other environmental pressures.
Such a mission, he added, could find concrete evidence for complex life on Europa. But, he said, that's the optimistic view.
"The conservative view would be to ask: Is there enough chemical energy for organisms of any type to thrive?" Pappalardo said.
"It's not out of the question, but first let's go see what's there."
You get excited over the weirdest stuff.
Tldr
Woodeefuckingdoo. Wake me when we can start bottling it.
Oxogyen? Really?
.... Really? Since nobody else has said it...
ALL THESE WORLDS ARE YOURS EXCEPT EUROPA. ATTEMPT NO LANDINGS THERE.
Quote from: Razgovory on November 19, 2009, 06:55:58 PM
You get excited over the weirdest stuff.
There could be complex alien life within our own solar system! How could you not be excited!
Quote from: MadBurgerMaker on November 19, 2009, 07:00:28 PM
Oxogyen? Really?
My spelling is better when I write something out by hand. -_-
Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 19, 2009, 07:02:26 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 19, 2009, 06:55:58 PM
You get excited over the weirdest stuff.
There could be complex alien life within our own solar system! How could you not be excited!
That is the worst possible thing the human species could ever find.
As Faelin intimated, it's sort of old news is it not? Arthur C. Clarke already wrote the novel.
Quote from: Josephus on November 19, 2009, 07:08:41 PM
As Faelin intimated, it's sort of old news is it not? Arthur C. Clarke already wrote the novel.
We knew the ocean was there, but we didn't think the oxygen was. We thought there was just microscopic life based around thermal vents.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 19, 2009, 07:03:53 PM
Quote from: MadBurgerMaker on November 19, 2009, 07:00:28 PM
Oxogyen? Really?
My spelling is better when I write something out by hand. -_-
I doubt that, what with your little chemo palsy grips.
We need to get there and claim it ASAP before the Japanese overfish it.
Attention, assholes:
There is no need to use so many exclamation points.
Apparently Tim has never heard of the "Great Filter".
Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 19, 2009, 07:03:53 PM
My spelling is better when I write something out by hand. -_-
Maybe you should write on your computer screen.
Also, oxygen-rich doesn't mean that there is complex life.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 19, 2009, 07:02:26 PMThere could be complex alien life within our own solar system! How could you not be excited!
Dude, there are complex alien lifeforms right here on languish. Who gives a fuck about Europa?
Quote from: Jacob on November 19, 2009, 07:24:41 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on November 19, 2009, 07:02:26 PMThere could be complex alien life within our own solar system! How could you not be excited!
Dude, there are complex alien lifeforms right here on languish. Who gives a fuck about Europa?
They're not really that complex.
Europa's future....
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.taiga.net%2Freports%2Ftraditional_fisheries%2FIcefishing1.jpg&hash=ebfb32accb04a157927979e8e5fb79c377423b25)
Though Greenpeace will probably have anti-whaling ships there first.
Quote from: Tonitrus on November 19, 2009, 09:24:17 PM
Though Greenpeace will probably have anti-whaling ships there first.
I rather doubt it. Greenpeace types don't have the moral courage for long-haul spaceflight.
Quote from: Neil on November 19, 2009, 09:27:17 PM
Quote from: Tonitrus on November 19, 2009, 09:24:17 PM
Though Greenpeace will probably have anti-whaling ships there first.
I rather doubt it. Greenpeace types don't have the moral courage for long-haul spaceflight.
Probably, but you know that if life is found, it'll be "Hands off Europa!"
Quote from: Tonitrus on November 19, 2009, 09:28:13 PM
Probably, but you know that if life is found, it'll be "Hands off Europa!"
Indeed.
Then again, in any future where man has the will and the technology to go to Europa, the Greenpeace luddites will have been purged long ago.
Quote from: Razgovory on November 19, 2009, 07:08:25 PM
That is the worst possible thing the human species could ever find.
:huh:
We're talking animals, not an alien civilization.
I think this kind of shit is awesome. Keep posting it Tim.
Concur. :)
Quote from: Berkut on November 19, 2009, 10:31:40 PM
I think this kind of shit is awesome. Keep posting it Tim.
:yes:
I find the news interesting, just timmays enthuisasm is a bit over the top
SPESS colonisation :3
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 19, 2009, 10:12:20 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 19, 2009, 07:08:25 PM
That is the worst possible thing the human species could ever find.
:huh:
We're talking animals, not an alien civilization.
No, you don't understand. Finding any non-terrestrial lifeforms that is not flying in a space ship is extremely bad. It means that life is more common. The more common life is the chances of actual extra-stellar travel decrease. The Galaxy is really, really big. It's got alot of stars many of which are much older then our Sun. How ever, you'll notice there is a lack of alien space craft bothering us on Earth. Some factor is preventing this. What this factor is isn't known. It could be that suitable planets are very rare. It could be that life is very rare or even unique. It could be that tool building species are rare. It could be that it's impossible to reliably travel between stars. As a species we have moved past most of the these factors. If the factor is that space travel is very hard or impossible then we are screwed. If the factor is that life is rare we might be in the clear. The discovery of life in outer space would reduce the number of possible factors limiting the number of spaceships in the Universe.
I think aliens would kill us a lot quicker than the Sun fading out.
Quote from: Razgovory on November 20, 2009, 01:02:46 AM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 19, 2009, 10:12:20 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 19, 2009, 07:08:25 PM
That is the worst possible thing the human species could ever find.
:huh:
We're talking animals, not an alien civilization.
No, you don't understand. Finding any non-terrestrial lifeforms that is not flying in a space ship is extremely bad. It means that life is more common. The more common life is the chances of actual extra-stellar travel decrease. The Galaxy is really, really big. It's got alot of stars many of which are much older then our Sun. How ever, you'll notice there is a lack of alien space craft bothering us on Earth. Some factor is preventing this. What this factor is isn't known. It could be that suitable planets are very rare. It could be that life is very rare or even unique. It could be that tool building species are rare. It could be that it's impossible to reliably travel between stars. As a species we have moved past most of the these factors. If the factor is that space travel is very hard or impossible then we are screwed. If the factor is that life is rare we might be in the clear. The discovery of life in outer space would reduce the number of possible factors limiting the number of spaceships in the Universe.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffreespace.volitionwatch.com%2Ftechfs%2Ffs1%2Fshivan.jpg&hash=4225a3eef85560923bfafa34abd8ec17e299e855)
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 20, 2009, 01:18:16 AM
I think aliens would kill us a lot quicker than the Sun fading out.
The question is not will aliens kill us. The question is is our species terminally tied to the Sun. Life found on Europa would indicate yes.
Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on November 20, 2009, 01:23:29 AM
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffreespace.volitionwatch.com%2Ftechfs%2Ffs1%2Fshivan.jpg&hash=4225a3eef85560923bfafa34abd8ec17e299e855)
Don't get the reference.
We'll be dead, who cares, Raz?
Quote from: garbon on November 20, 2009, 01:43:54 AM
We'll be dead, who cares, Raz?
I am civic minded. I am concerned about the propagation of the human race. As a gay I'm not sure you would understand that.
Quote from: Razgovory on November 20, 2009, 01:31:44 AM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 20, 2009, 01:18:16 AM
I think aliens would kill us a lot quicker than the Sun fading out.
The question is not will aliens kill us. The question is is our species terminally tied to the Sun. Life found on Europa would indicate yes.
And I'm saying I'd rather we die out in a few billion years than next Thursday.
I sort of agree with Raz. If we've two animal bearing bodies in the same solar system though then that really increases the odds of such worlds being more common around nearby stars. Which in turn does increases the odds of civilization.
However I wouldn't get to the same conclusion as him.a
If advanced life is common then even if space faring aliens discover we exist they've no reason to be too interested. We're just one amongst thousands of primitive races.
Or it could just be that civilization isn't too common (look at how long it took people to get that idea....especially industrial civilization)/
Quote from: Tyr on November 20, 2009, 05:34:12 AM
Or it could just be that civilization isn't too common (look at how long it took people to get that idea....especially industrial civilization)/
Uhm, compared to Earth's age, civilization just popped out in an instant.
How do we even know there aren't spaceships around already? As impressive as Google Earth is, I'm sure an interstellar civilization would be able to hide from our satellites. I don't agree that life on Europa says anything to suggest long distance space travel is impossible.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 20, 2009, 06:08:33 AM
How do we even know there aren't spaceships around already? As impressive as Google Earth is, I'm sure an interstellar civilization would be able to hide from our satellites. I don't agree that life on Europa says anything to suggest long distance space travel is impossible.
Aliens wouldn't bother hiding. They'd be meddling and manipulating us all they could.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.movingimagesource.us%2Fimages%2Farticles%2FThey-Live_2-20080813-125142-medium.jpg&hash=d5e9b51dd63c57e8a5ab83bc29b26451863fb8e5)
Oh wait....
Quote from: Razgovory on November 20, 2009, 02:24:16 AM
I am civic minded. I am concerned about the propagation of the human race.
Which of course you have been working hard at huddling in your basement bunker.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 20, 2009, 06:08:33 AM
How do we even know there aren't spaceships around already?
Prime directive :contract:
Quote from: Razgovory on November 20, 2009, 01:02:46 AM
No, you don't understand. Finding any non-terrestrial lifeforms that is not flying in a space ship is extremely bad. It means that life is more common. The more common life is the chances of actual extra-stellar travel decrease. The Galaxy is really, really big. It's got alot of stars many of which are much older then our Sun. How ever, you'll notice there is a lack of alien space craft bothering us on Earth. Some factor is preventing this. What this factor is isn't known. It could be that suitable planets are very rare. It could be that life is very rare or even unique. It could be that tool building species are rare. It could be that it's impossible to reliably travel between stars. As a species we have moved past most of the these factors. If the factor is that space travel is very hard or impossible then we are screwed. If the factor is that life is rare we might be in the clear. The discovery of life in outer space would reduce the number of possible factors limiting the number of spaceships in the Universe.
I think that attempting to draw any such conclusions based on discoveries regarding life on Europa to be rather premature. Europa is perhaps the worst possible environment for spacefaring intelligence to evolve on.
Besides, we already know that space travel is very hard.
Quote from: Tamas on November 20, 2009, 05:42:27 AM
Quote from: Tyr on November 20, 2009, 05:34:12 AM
Or it could just be that civilization isn't too common (look at how long it took people to get that idea....especially industrial civilization)/
Uhm, compared to Earth's age, civilization just popped out in an instant.
Exactly.
Quote from: Neil on November 20, 2009, 07:40:54 AM
Besides, we already know that space travel is very hard.
We'd overcome such obstacles much more easily, and quickly, if this planet wasn't divided by intra-species conflicts. All the diminishing resources of Earth could then be harnessed to lift us out of here.
This of course requires that Earth be united under one law.
G.
Quote from: Tyr on November 20, 2009, 09:03:37 AM
Exactly.
It was human level intelligence that was the stumbling block, civilization followed pretty quick.
Quote from: Grallon on November 20, 2009, 09:25:05 AM
We'd overcome such obstacles much more easily, and quickly, if this planet wasn't divided by intra-species conflicts. All the diminishing resources of Earth could then be harnessed to lift us out of here.
And go where? Earth is still the only safe place in the entire known universe for human life, a situation that will remain true for at least the next several centuries, and probably until the extinction of the species.
QuoteThis of course requires that Earth be united under one law.
Insofar as it is possible to do this, it has been done already.
Quote from: Neil on November 20, 2009, 09:40:06 AM
And go where? Earth is still the only safe place in the entire known universe for human life, a situation that will remain true for at least the next several centuries, and probably until the extinction of the species.
Safe place? At the rate we're destoying it? We need a bolt hole before it's too late and that means serious investments in space exploration.
Quote
Insofar as it is possible to do this, it has been done already.
Do not confuse the tyranny of the globalized elite with the rule of law. Although perhaps this phase of untrameled profiteering is necessary before a global legal order is put in place.
G.
Hey grallon, you looked at birth rates in developed countries lately?
Quote from: Razgovory on November 20, 2009, 02:24:16 AM
I am civic minded. I am concerned about the propagation of the human race. As a gay I'm not sure you would understand that.
Considering that you are less likely to have children than myself, no I don't get that.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 20, 2009, 09:57:12 AM
Hey grallon, you looked at birth rates in developed countries lately?
Increasing? Decreasing? What is your point?
G.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 20, 2009, 09:35:27 AM
Quote from: Tyr on November 20, 2009, 09:03:37 AM
Exactly.
It was human level intelligence that was the stumbling block, civilization followed pretty quick.
It didn't.
Civilization has been around for...what...lets be very liberal and say 10,000 years.
Modern humans meanwhile have been around for 100,000 years at least. Depending on how strictly you define human up to 2 million years.
Just because you have a planet capable of supporting life doesn't mean life will evolve.
Just because you have life doesn't mean advanced life will evolve.
Just because you have advanced life doesn't mean intelligant life will evolve.
Just because you have intelligant life doesn't mean tool users will evolve.
Just because you have tool users doesn't mean civilization will evolve.
Just because you have civilization doesn't mean industrial civilization will evolve.
Just because you have industrial civilization doesn't mean they won't kill themselves off.
Physically modern humans have been around for a while. Behavioral modernity is much newer and coincides with the first aspects of civilization (art, complex tools, etc.)
Quote from: Grallon on November 20, 2009, 09:53:32 AM
Safe place? At the rate we're destoying it? We need a bolt hole before it's too late and that means serious investments in space exploration.
Destroying it? Things are happening in the environment, but none of them threaten the planet, or even the existance of life on Earth. Even after some kind of ecological catastrophe, Earth will still be much more habitable to human life than any likely alternative. In fact, I seriously doubt that, barring atomics, human activity has the ability to make the planet uninhabitable.
QuoteDo not confuse the tyranny of the globalized elite with the rule of law. Although perhaps this phase of untrameled profiteering is necessary before a global legal order is put in place.
I understand what you're trying to say, although I don't think it's impossible. Nevertheless, the web of treaties and organizations that compose the soft international law of today do unite the world under one law. That's as far as it can go, since what people have the will to unite mankind?
Quote from: Grallon on November 20, 2009, 10:11:21 AM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 20, 2009, 09:57:12 AM
Hey grallon, you looked at birth rates in developed countries lately?
Increasing? Decreasing? What is your point?
G.
Increasing; we're nearing 7 billion, IIRC. I think the point he's making is that in terms of ecology, humans are largely parasites, and further, we're parasites that breed
fast. Fast-breeding organisms tend to starve themselves out and die off.
Quote from: DontSayBanana on November 20, 2009, 11:04:00 AM
Increasing; we're nearing 7 billion, IIRC. I think the point he's making is that in terms of ecology, humans are largely parasites, and further, we're parasites that breed fast. Fast-breeding organisms tend to starve themselves out and die off.
:frusty:
Develop
ed, not develop
ing. In Europe it's well below the replacement rate.
My point is that we'll be able to keep using this planet for the forseeable future.
Birth rates aren't particularily important. Population growth rates are.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 20, 2009, 11:08:35 AM
:frusty:
Developed, not developing. In Europe it's well below the replacement rate.
My point is that we'll be able to keep using this planet for the forseeable future.
China and India are both huge-pop developed countries with birth rates well
above the replacement rate. :contract:
Quote from: DontSayBanana on November 20, 2009, 11:12:26 AM
China and India are both huge-pop developed countries with birth rates well above the replacement rate. :contract:
No they aren't.
That's rather a stretch in both cases, to call those countries "developed." They each have a smallish educated middle class and a billion paupers living in slums or traditional villages.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 20, 2009, 11:23:36 AM
That's rather a stretch in both cases, to call those countries "developed." They each have a smallish educated middle class and a billion paupers living in slums or traditional villages.
India and China's emerging middle classes number in the tens if not the hundreds of millions. And while their standard of living isn't as high (or wasteful depending) as that of western-europeans or north-americans, it represents a significant impact that simply wasn't a factor before the beginning of globalization. And it will keep on increasing.
This planet does not have the resources to sustain a western lifestyle for everyone. Period. So either we decrease our living conditions or we decrease the population in general... Either road leads to unpalatable choices.
G.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 20, 2009, 11:23:36 AM
That's rather a stretch in both cases, to call those countries "developed." They each have a smallish educated middle class and a billion paupers living in slums or traditional villages.
I said developed, not well-developed. Regardless, you're talking about 2 billion paupers, nearly a third of the world's population, without either means or wherewithal to use contraception. In particular, India's suffering from the same kind of rural population explosion that China had issues with not so long ago, with the government trying all kinds of incentive programs to curb the birth rate.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 20, 2009, 09:35:27 AM
Quote from: Tyr on November 20, 2009, 09:03:37 AM
Exactly.
It was human level intelligence that was the stumbling block, civilization followed pretty quick.
Actually, no. Civilization has only occupied the last 5 percent or so of time since the emergence of the human-level intelligence (and that is allowing for civilization in about 8,000 BC, or about 3,000 years before anything we have found to date).
I don't think we'll ever get to a point where immigration to other planets is an effective population control measure. And even assuming we do have catastrophic environmental problems due to overpopulation(which current trends suggest will work itself out), they won't make the planet completely unlivable, they'll just cut population growth or cull the numbers at worst. So the massive spaceship won't be necessary to save humanity either.
Quote from: DontSayBanana on November 20, 2009, 11:56:40 AM
Regardless, you're talking about 2 billion paupers, nearly a third of the world's population, without either means or wherewithal to use contraception.
Not sure what the difference is between means and wherewithal, but that isn't the problem (contraception is probably available to them for free). The problem is that their culture emphasizes a high birth rate.
QuoteIn particular, India's suffering from the same kind of rural population explosion that China had issues with not so long ago, with the government trying all kinds of incentive programs to curb the birth rate.
The answer to high birth rates is the education (and most particularly education of females). Every country, as it encountered advanced medicine which dropped infant mortality and farming technology that expanded food supply, had a population explosion like that of India recently. The population growth rate of india is slowing, with (unsurprisingly) Kerala being the best-educated state and the one with the lowest population growth.
Quote from: grumbler on November 20, 2009, 12:03:39 PM
Actually, no. Civilization has only occupied the last 5 percent or so of time since the emergence of the human-level intelligence (and that is allowing for civilization in about 8,000 BC, or about 3,000 years before anything we have found to date).
That's about 1000 times the ratio for the period of human intelligence divided by life of the planet.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 20, 2009, 12:11:52 PM
I don't think we'll ever get to a point where immigration to other planets is an effective population control measure. And even assuming we do have catastrophic environmental problems due to overpopulation(which current trends suggest will work itself out), they won't make the planet completely unlivable, they'll just cut population growth or cull the numbers at worst. So the massive spaceship won't be necessary to save humanity either.
Agreed. I don't see any conceivable way in which transportation can reduce human population growth if such growth is high enough to be a problem.
And I agree that, just as the Malthusians have been wrong to date, they will continue to be wrong for the foreseeable future. The solution to our population "problem" is right in front of us.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 20, 2009, 12:19:17 PM
Quote from: grumbler on November 20, 2009, 12:03:39 PM
Actually, no. Civilization has only occupied the last 5 percent or so of time since the emergence of the human-level intelligence (and that is allowing for civilization in about 8,000 BC, or about 3,000 years before anything we have found to date).
That's about 1000 times the ratio for the period of human intelligence divided by life of the planet.
And about 1/20 the ratio of the earth's diameter to the earth's diameter.
Quote from: DontSayBanana on November 20, 2009, 11:12:26 AM
China and India are both huge-pop developed countries with birth rates well above the replacement rate. :contract:
That's not true. China and India are completely different. India's fertility rate is well above replacement level, China's is below it. China's is lower than many Western countries.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_territories_by_fertility_rate
Yeah but if you scroll back, my comment(and I believe Tamas implied it as well) was a comparison of the difficulty of intelligence evolving vs. civilization evolving from that intelligence. From an evolutionary standpoint, thinking animals are highly likely to eventually come up with civilization if they're not killed off. Development of those brains is a lot more problematic.
Quote from: DisturbedPervert on November 20, 2009, 12:24:12 PM
That's not true. China and India are completely different. India's fertility rate is well above replacement level, China's is below it. China's is lower than many Western countries.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_territories_by_fertility_rate
China is 150th of 220 in terms of birth rate[1 (http://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?v=25&l=en)], and its birth rate has increased every year since 2003[2 (http://www.indexmundi.com/china/birth_rate.html)]. India's is 87th, but it's showing signs of slowing[3 (http://www.indexmundi.com/india/birth_rate.html)].
Quote from: DontSayBanana on November 20, 2009, 12:39:23 PM
China is 150th of 220 in terms of birth rate[1 (http://www.indexmundi.com/g/r.aspx?v=25&l=en)], and its birth rate has increased every year since 2003[2 (http://www.indexmundi.com/china/birth_rate.html)]. India's is 87th, but it's showing signs of slowing[3 (http://www.indexmundi.com/india/birth_rate.html)].
Replacement level fertility rate is roughly 2.1 children per female. According to the CIA World Factbook China's rate in 2000 was 1.82, in 2008 1.77. Rates vary slightly depending on source, but they are all about at the 1.7-1.8 mark, and they are all unanimous that the rate is below replacement level, not well above. Many Western countries have roughly the same rate and few even higher.
Quote from: Razgovory on November 20, 2009, 01:02:46 AM
No, you don't understand. Finding any non-terrestrial lifeforms that is not flying in a space ship is extremely bad. It means that life is more common. The more common life is the chances of actual extra-stellar travel decrease. The Galaxy is really, really big. It's got alot of stars many of which are much older then our Sun. How ever, you'll notice there is a lack of alien space craft bothering us on Earth. Some factor is preventing this. What this factor is isn't known. It could be that suitable planets are very rare. It could be that life is very rare or even unique. It could be that tool building species are rare. It could be that it's impossible to reliably travel between stars. As a species we have moved past most of the these factors. If the factor is that space travel is very hard or impossible then we are screwed. If the factor is that life is rare we might be in the clear. The discovery of life in outer space would reduce the number of possible factors limiting the number of spaceships in the Universe.
I dont think people really understand how just mindblowingly large the universe is. There are millions of
galaxies...MILLIONS. There are hundreds of billions of
stars!
In addition to how large the universe is, that sheer distances between us and even the closest star is unimaginable for us really. 39,900,000,000,000 Km to the closest star....4.35 light years. LIGHT YEARS. We can't go anywhere near the speed of light, and wont be able to for....ever?
The sheer distances involved are why we haven't met other life. It's pretty much impossible that life hasn't evolved elsewhere throughout the galaxy, let alone universe. Just by the sheer numbers of stars and planets involved. Life on our planet is far from unique.
Human civilization must dominate this galaxy, now and always.
Quote from: Berkut on November 19, 2009, 10:31:40 PM
I think this kind of shit is awesome. Keep posting it Tim.
Agreed. :)
Why are scientists looking for life on other planets anyway? Is the life on earth not good enough for them?
Quote from: DGuller on November 20, 2009, 02:50:27 PM
Why are scientists looking for life on other planets anyway? Is the life on earth not good enough for them?
Green space babes are awesome. Or so TV teaches us.
Quote from: DGuller on November 20, 2009, 02:50:27 PM
Why are scientists looking for life on other planets anyway? Is the life on earth not good enough for them?
We need a place to fling Tim at .99c.
Quote from: DGuller on November 20, 2009, 02:50:27 PM
Why are scientists looking for life on other planets anyway? Is the life on earth not good enough for them?
I think the problem is that we haven't really found intelligent life on Earth either.
Quote from: DontSayBanana on November 20, 2009, 11:56:40 AM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 20, 2009, 11:23:36 AM
That's rather a stretch in both cases, to call those countries "developed." They each have a smallish educated middle class and a billion paupers living in slums or traditional villages.
I said developed, not well-developed. Regardless, you're talking about 2 billion paupers, nearly a third of the world's population, without either means or wherewithal to use contraception. In particular, India's suffering from the same kind of rural population explosion that China had issues with not so long ago, with the government trying all kinds of incentive programs to curb the birth rate.
and yet birth rates have fallen all over the world barring just a few exceptions. I'm not sure but I think the economist had a special report on it a while back.
Quote from: grumbler on November 20, 2009, 12:03:39 PM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 20, 2009, 09:35:27 AM
Quote from: Tyr on November 20, 2009, 09:03:37 AM
Exactly.
It was human level intelligence that was the stumbling block, civilization followed pretty quick.
Actually, no. Civilization has only occupied the last 5 percent or so of time since the emergence of the human-level intelligence (and that is allowing for civilization in about 8,000 BC, or about 3,000 years before anything we have found to date).
8000BC is stretching it a bit but 7000-6000BC is a good time for the beginning of civ. It is after all the time in which çatal hüyük existed, and that one lasted for about a 1000 years
Quote from: DisturbedPervert on November 20, 2009, 01:00:31 PM
Replacement level fertility rate is roughly 2.1 children per female. According to the CIA World Factbook China's rate in 2000 was 1.82, in 2008 1.77. Rates vary slightly depending on source, but they are all about at the 1.7-1.8 mark, and they are all unanimous that the rate is below replacement level, not well above. Many Western countries have roughly the same rate and few even higher.
The problem with China's numbers (that I've read, anyway) are that some of the areas are so remote they can't get reliable numbers on births. TFR 's only as reliable as the birth reporting and personal history records in a given country.
If human-like intelligence develops in the oceans instead it is hard to build a civilization.
Quote from: Malthus on November 20, 2009, 02:51:26 PM
Quote from: DGuller on November 20, 2009, 02:50:27 PM
Why are scientists looking for life on other planets anyway? Is the life on earth not good enough for them?
Green space babes are awesome. Or so TV teaches us.
Or blue.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv200%2Ftxkarenr%2FTwileks.bmp&hash=943072375b0793f46399eb107e0e5b89cff0dd25)