en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pale_Blue_Dot

Carl Sagan: Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every 'superstar,' every 'supreme leader,' every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there - on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.

The Earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena. Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that, in glory and triumph, they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot. Think of the endless cruelties visited by the inhabitants of one corner of this pixel on the scarcely distinguishable inhabitants of some other corner, how frequent their misunderstandings, how eager they are to kill one another, how fervent their hatreds.

Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the Universe, are challenged by this point of pale light. Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity, in all this vastness, there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves.

The Earth is the only world known so far to harbor life. There is nowhere else, at least in the near future, to which our species could migrate. Visit, yes. Settle, not yet. Like it or not, for the moment the Earth is where we make our stand.

It has been said that astronomy is a humbling and character-building experience. There is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny world. To me, it underscores our responsibility to deal more kindly with one another, and to preserve and cherish the pale blue dot, the only home we've ever known.

@barn: no big words

(.).) BOOBS!!

choco said...

where does all the $hit go?

That would be the brown streak to the right

Bob Brown put it pretty good today on his Press club lunceon, if only all others

were so straight talking, our world would be much much better . Even the

"Gay" debate has merit, as that hookup produces no exta mouths

In the '60s John Brunner wrote a novel entitled "Stand On Zanzibar". The title is a reference to being able to fit 7 billion humans on the island of Zanzibar if they all stood close together

From Wikipedia ...
"Its title refers to an early twentieth century claim that the world's population could fit onto the Isle of Wight (area 381 km?) if they were all standing upright. Brunner remarked that the growing world population now required a larger island-the 3.5 billion people living in 1968 could stand together on the Isle of Man (area 572 km?), while the 7 billion people whom he projected would be alive in 2010 would need to stand on Zanzibar (area 1554 km?). Throughout the book, the image of the entire human race standing shoulder-to-shoulder on a small island is a metaphor for a crowded world where each person feels hemmed in by a prison made not of metal bars, but of other human beings. By the end of the book, some of that crowd is (metaphorically) knee deep in the Indian Ocean surrounding the island."

From that, I guess that the entire world's population would even have sleeping room on Tassie (26,410 sqmiles - Zanzibar 950 sqmiles)). My point being that the Earth is far far from being overcrowded - just some spots on the Earth are becoming pretty crowded.

As for feeding them all; more than enough food is produced globally to feed the entire global population. This (http://www.gulf-daily-news.com/NewsDetails.aspx?storyid=308830) is an interesting read on the problem. There's plenty of literature on the topic, but in a nutshell it mostly highlights the fact that the rich countries waste more than they use while the poor countries starve. It is interesting to note, however, that both China and India (the 2 most populous countries on Earth) are experiencing obesity problems more than hunger problems. This fact holds true for the Earth as a whole.

We need to be less greedy and learn to share the riches that we have - and, no, I'm definitely not a leftie. Ask loggie .

ps The fact that we've not found even 1 other planet suitable to support Earthly life suggests to me that we are indeed in a very VERY "... privileged position in the Universe."

dinsdale said...

In the '60s John Brunner wrote a novel entitled "Stand On Zanzibar". The title is a reference to being able to fit 7 billion humans on the island of Zanzibar if they all stood close together

From Wikipedia ...
"Its title refers to an early twentieth century claim that the world's population could fit onto the Isle of Wight (area 381 km?) if they were all standing upright. Brunner remarked that the growing world population now required a larger island-the 3.5 billion people living in 1968 could stand together on the Isle of Man (area 572 km?), while the 7 billion people whom he projected would be alive in 2010 would need to stand on Zanzibar (area 1554 km?). Throughout the book, the image of the entire human race standing shoulder-to-shoulder on a small island is a metaphor for a crowded world where each person feels hemmed in by a prison made not of metal bars, but of other human beings. By the end of the book, some of that crowd is (metaphorically) knee deep in the Indian Ocean surrounding the island."

From that, I guess that the entire world's population would even have sleeping room on Tassie (26,410 sqmiles - Zanzibar 950 sqmiles)). My point being that the Earth is far far from being overcrowded - just some spots on the Earth are becoming pretty crowded.

As for feeding them all; more than enough food is produced globally to feed the entire global population. This (http://www.gulf-daily-news.com/NewsDetails.aspx?storyid=308830) is an interesting read on the problem. There's plenty of literature on the topic, but in a nutshell it mostly highlights the fact that the rich countries waste more than they use while the poor countries starve. It is interesting to note, however, that both China and India (the 2 most populous countries on Earth) are experiencing obesity problems more than hunger problems. This fact holds true for the Earth as a whole.

We need to be less greedy and learn to share the riches that we have - and, no, I'm definitely not a leftie. Ask loggie .

ps The fact that we've not found even 1 other planet suitable to support Earthly life suggests to me that we are indeed in a very VERY "... privileged position in the Universe."

AHHH dinsdale, the old argument that the whole population could fit in X area is a total fallacy, it's an argument from ignorance.. You will not hear any well educated demographer, biologist or geologist make that argument.... You might as well argue that "God gave us everything we will ever need, he won't let us down!!"

At no point in the earths history have there been more malnourished and starving mammals than current levels.. We have 7 billion people and we already can't feed them.

We are currently outstripped the earths carrying capacity by 130%... We have converted most of the usable land for agriculture and housing.. And we are rapidly loosing this fertile land to desertification..

We have tapped into all major water basins (many of them filed in the last ice age).. And we have tapped into every single easily accessible oil reserve, nobody drilled in the Gulf 50 years ago.. Peak oil is around the corner, if not already.... It takes about 2L of petrol to get one crayfish to the dock, we are using petrol to feed the word..

We have almost fished the oceans past sustainable levels.. And our antibiotics and vaccines are quickly becoming redundant their targets are evolving at break neck speed...

And, to make things worse, a large majority of the worlds poor and striving towards the middle class, India and China will soon dwarf the West for per-capita consumption levels...

The human population growth over the last 200 years has been more bacterial than primate, and it will crash just like bacteria.. It's been calculated that about 2.5 billion people could live sustainably on earth at a modest european lifestyle..


One look at population growth and it's pretty obvious to anyone familiar with population models that we are heading for a crash, it's just a matter of what catches us first, microbes? Starvation? resource war?..

Note the log-Y axis..



Edit* Long words are good when used by people like Sagan! Here is the youtube version..

dinsdale said...

ps The fact that we've not found even 1 other planet suitable to support Earthly life suggests to me that we are indeed in a very VERY "... privileged position in the Universe."

We don't (yet) possess the technology to be able to detect such a thing without an incredibly good stroke of luck. But we are finding literally hundreds of planets and the rate of discovery increases. The planets fill the entire gamut from huge things down to the smallest that we can currently detect. So there's no basis for assuming we won't discover planets capable of bearing life and that they'll be fairly common. Couple that with the expectation that there are one and possibly two moons right here in the solar system which may contain liquid water and so be capable of bearing life.

All of which goes once again to reinforce the observation repeatedly found in astronomy since the days of Galileo - that this ol' rock is nothing special at all. We live in a bog standard boring corner of a plain galaxy in a dead ordinary corner of the universe. We're less significant than a wart on a microbes bum living on the hair of a flea.

SomeOtherGuy said...
All of which goes once again to reinforce the observation repeatedly found in astronomy since the days of Galileo - that this ol' rock is nothing special at all. We live in a bog standard boring corner of a plain galaxy in a dead ordinary corner of the universe. We're less significant than a wart on a microbes bum living on the hair of a flea.

But that yells loudly that our rock is particularly special. It's anything but a "... bog standard boring corner of a plain galaxy in a dead ordinary corner of the universe." It's the ONLY place we've found so far on which we can survive. That doesn't preclude the possibility that another might be found, but ALL our best efforts thus far tell us that this is the MOST special speck in the universe - if you're a human that is. Even if another is found, or 2 or 10, in the context of the known universe that's 1, 2 or 10 exceptionally special specks in ALL the universe.

Whilst water has possibly been detected on a couple of moons in our solar system they are decidedly hostile towards human life. No possible way could humans, as we know them, could live there.

SomeOtherGuy said...
No. It says that just 'cause we can't see them, doesn't mean they're not there. All our knowledge and experience tells us that they probably ARE there. Our best efforts don't come into it - you're saying that because we can't see electrons, they're not there. Well you damn well better hope they ARE there because SOMETHING just transmitted these words from my computer to yours and it wasn't my mojo, I can tell you.

Where do you get that from?? 100% of our experience, so far, tells us that they're NOT there! That's a cool 100%! As I said though, that doesn't preclude the possibility of find 1/some. Thus far, however, 100% of our experience says an emphatic, "NO!"

Because we haven't found 1 yet 100% of our knowledge follows likewise. However, speculation, educated guesses, theories, ideas. extrapolation what-ever you wish to call it, suggests that we might find 1 (or more). Some would say probably will find 1/some more. I won't argue with that, though my position for now is in the -ve (that's simply personal opinion).

Electrons are a far cry from inhabitable planets. We can conduct actual science to confirm the existence of electrons. That is, we can speculate a theory, calculate a hypothesis and conduct an experiment, with observable outcomes. (And if you want to have a little dig for yourself you'll find that scientists are still unclear as to what "electrons" actually are. One thing we know they're not is particles like in the classical school lab models. A bit like light in that respect - no-one yet knows exactly what it is, but we know a lot about how it behaves.)

SomeOtherGuy said...
No possible way humans could live on moons is now pleading special cases. For a start, we probably could if we thought about it but that's another argument. If you want to argue that we won't find HUMANS anywhere else in the universe well... duh. Humans are an end product of an evolutionary system that happened here on this rock. Other rocks would have different circumstances and different outcomes.

For a start, even if there is water there's nothing else to help us survive. What about the temperatures on these moons. (I'd have to find the resources I've read in the past to remind myself of which ones they are and I'm not fussed to do that now. I think at least 1 of them was a moon of Uranus.) As things sit right now there is no other known body in our solar system or in the known universe which will support human life. Not fussed about speculation of other life-forms. This is about the uniqueness of our little rock, as it pertains to us.

ps The bolding is about emphasis, not yelling at you. It's good to debate a topic without having to stave off the ad hominem rubbish - thanx

Ian K said...

By "intelligent life" you probably mean technology supported by a dexterous and moderately intelligent organism. Time and space is so immense that statistically technology (and its symbiotic organism) should spring up here and there every now and then.

I'd propose that an immutable law of the system of things is that "intelligent life" always self destructs before galactic travel is invented. Don't worry about ET visitors, they're out there but they come and go, here today gone tomorrow, a flash in time and space.

To me that's an acceptable theory, but only a theory. Not one I'd subscribe to, but most certainly as valid as any. I must admit that I find it quite exciting following some of the more bleeding edge exploration happening now-a-days, but I hate the way people (the press mainly) take the inch and fabricate a mile. There are many theories out there in this area of science, but so far, not a lot of rock hard knowledge.

dinsdale said...

Ian K said...

By "intelligent life" you probably mean technology supported by a dexterous and moderately intelligent organism. Time and space is so immense that statistically technology (and its symbiotic organism) should spring up here and there every now and then.

I'd propose that an immutable law of the system of things is that "intelligent life" always self destructs before galactic travel is invented. Don't worry about ET visitors, they're out there but they come and go, here today gone tomorrow, a flash in time and space.

To me that's an acceptable theory, but only a theory. Not one I'd subscribe to, but most certainly as valid as any. I must admit that I find it quite exciting following some of the more bleeding edge exploration happening now-a-days, but I hate the way people (the press mainly) take the inch and fabricate a mile. There are many theories out there in this area of science, but so far, not a lot of rock hard knowledge.

theres some good stuff floating around lately about bending time and how it happens now. like when people orbit earth and lose or gain minutes. time is presence of motion and forces in the universe. not only a dimension. thats a heavy thought. imagine if you could get a hold of it and twist, bend and turn it.
now if you could do that, then travel will have no limit. THAT is what has changed me from a huge skeptic to someone that thinks it just might be possible to have those little green men. not sold on it, but it is something to think about.

doggie said...

(.).) BOOBS!!

+ 1

This needs a thread of its own.

theDoctor said...
....not for much longer
agenda 21

Just had a Google. Interesting!

This is already happening. It's the Greens/Labor policy statement in a nutshell

elbeau said...
Thank you for this. If the infrastructure of a locale is sound (IE the trains work and
the roads are fixed) and the government is not too corrupt (IE they spend the money
on the people instead of themselves) then the higher the population,the higher the
standard of living. eg New York, Singapore, Monaco (the most populated place per
square foot on earth). Latterly of course China and India with booming populations
are becoming world powers. The other extreme is Greece with a dwindling population
that is turning into a 3rd world country. And yes there is enough for everyone. If you
doubt this then Google how much Australians alone waste in food each year.

Not a rhetorical query: Which leads and which follows; the population decrease or the slide into chaos? They do appear to go hand in hand.

dinsdale said...

This needs a thread of its own.

theDoctor said...
....not for much longer
agenda 21

Sounds like Bob Brown wants to get in on the ground floor of agenda 21

elbeau said...
Populations world wide tend to regulate themselves with prosperity.

Ah ha! That's the answer to the question I asked you earlier. I thought I'd read something like that.