17-02-2003 03:42									#31
	Inflate your Upload Space

Osweld: I agree with you very much about the responsibility, but the only ones that we are responsible to are our children, noone else.

	17-02-2003 04:22									#32
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by SlowwHand No, Boris. It's not a dodge. You don't believe in God, I do. You don't think that life is possible, I do. That's all I'm saying.

I don't see why belief in God would effect your opinion. In fact, I'd think it would bolster it. Christian doctrine stipulates that God created mankind as his "chosen" and that the natural world(s) were man's to do with as he pleased. Why would moving to Mars to colonize it be any different than founding a new city up the river? Why would God object to such a thing?

I never said life was impossible, just highly improbable. And if there is any life, it is going to be of the kind that we don't have a problem with disposing of as we see fit for our own ends (microbes).

quote: Not neccisarily. But I'd agree with that, too.

Yeah, that gets a big ol' too. It's pretty hard to take the "we should never have come down from the trees!" set seriously.

quote: The universe is constantly changing, in ways far beyond human perception or comprehension. Earth once had no life, it now has life, and it will eventually have no life again. It will eventually deteriorate, and it's matter will form new stars, galaxies, planets, and new life. Terraforming and colonizing planets interferes with the workings of the universe. It is the galactic equivelant of cutting down rainforests and paving over swamps.

We are a part of that universe, so whatever we do is also a part of the way the universe changes. I don't see why the fact that the universe changes should preclude our taking steps to better mankind and perhaps even save it. And just because Mars may have potential for new evolving it's own advanced form of life is meaningless. Bubonic plague may have been able to develop into an advanced form of life. Should we then not try to rid ourselves of it, out of sympathy for it's potential to be something more advanced in, oh, 2 billion years?

quote: Boris: You're being a little strident in your posts. Again, this is meant to be an opinion survey thread, not a debating thread. That's why it's a poll.

Sloww started it. At any rate, you can't expect to bring up an ethical question and then not have debate over it. Voicing opinions on ethics will always lead to debate over it.

	17-02-2003 04:28									#33
	Support Apolyton

Very strongly in favor of making Mars a place for human settlement if possible. Nobody would be harmed by colonizing Mars because there is no sentient life there, and the potential to better mankind by doing it is great.

	17-02-2003 04:35									#34
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Boris Godunov We are a part of that universe, so whatever we do is also a part of the way the universe changes. I don't see why the fact that the universe changes should preclude our taking steps to better mankind and perhaps even save it.

That is true, it can be said that whatever we do is natural because we come from nature... but the very fact that we have that word in our vocabulary is evidence we are not a part of the natural working of things, since we have to coin a term to distinguish our selves from it. Humans no longer play by nature's rules, we try to change and control them. And we're not very good at it, either.

But still, I agree with you that ultimately what we do is insignifigant and nature will always have it's way no matter what. I just don't think it's ethical to fight nature.

quote: And just because Mars may have potential for new evolving it's own advanced form of life is meaningless. Bubonic plague may have been able to develop into an advanced form of life. Should we then not try to rid ourselves of it, out of sympathy for it's potential to be something more advanced in, oh, 2 billion years?

It's not the potential of life that bothers me, it's just the interfering of the process, especially when we are not capable of understanding it.

	17-02-2003 04:36									#35
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Why not just terraform the moon? That could be a reasonable compromise between the pro and anti Martians.

	17-02-2003 04:43									#36
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by monkspider Why not just terraform the moon? That could be a reasonable compromise between the pro and anti Martians.

Doing so could have some bad ramifications for Earth, considering the moon's proximity. Plus, as I read it, it would actually be easier to terraform Mars, as the conditions are already better.

Osweld:

Just because we've developed a linguistic term for nature does not make us independent of it. Countless things "in nature" manipulate the natural world around them for their own benefit, such as beavers building a dam. Changing the world in which we exist isn't in anyway removing us from a "natural" state.

quote: But still, I agree with you that ultimately what we do is insignifigant and nature will always have it's way no matter what. I just don't think it's ethical to fight nature.

So I take it you won't take any medications? That would be fighting nature, after all. No antibiotics should you get an infection? No surgery for a ruptured appendix?

Come on...your definition of "fighting nature" is pretty extreme. Adaptation and survival would be impossible under such terms. Every living thing manipulates its environment to suit it!

quote: It's not the potential of life that bothers me, it's just the interfering of the process, especially when we are not capable of understanding it.

The same could be said for almost anything. But in this instance, I think we could have pretty reasonable assurances of what the outcome would be.

	17-02-2003 05:21									#37
	Got spare money?

Humans kill humans. Natural. Acceptable?

	17-02-2003 05:41									#38
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by monkspider Why not just terraform the moon? That could be a reasonable compromise between the pro and anti Martians.

The moon is just a sphere of rock with no atmosphere on it.

	17-02-2003 05:44									#39
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

One celled organisms don't have rights. Think about the next time you chew your steaks!
I'm not particularly concerned about the rights of organisms living on mars right now - the only argument over terraforming mars that I could forsee would be one of the ethics of aesthetics. If we do terraform mars, what will people of the future think of us? "Oh, you should have seen Mars as it used to be - beautiful untouched red rock, stretching for miles all 'round!". People lament the loss of beautiful American wildlife to farms, cities and suburbs - imagine how they would lament the loss of a planet!

	17-02-2003 05:51									#40
	Put an end to popups!

Already lamenting Earth. Go for the exacta.

	17-02-2003 06:04									#41
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Boris Godunov Osweld: Just because we've developed a linguistic term for nature does not make us independent of it. Countless things "in nature" manipulate the natural world around them for their own benefit, such as beavers building a dam. Changing the world in which we exist isn't in anyway removing us from a "natural" state.

Beavers slowly evolved along with their environment, and their dams are a neccisary part of the eco-system. They do not adapt nature to their needs, they evolved alongside nature, adapting to nature aswell as adapting it to them.

Humans change things far too much and far too quickly, often in ways that are not natural, and without a thought to their surroundings.

quote: So I take it you won't take any medications? That would be fighting nature, after all. No antibiotics should you get an infection? No surgery for a ruptured appendix?

Only in very severe circumstances. But you seem to be forgeting that I'm a part of the "we should never have come down from the trees!" set.

quote: The same could be said for almost anything. But in this instance, I think we could have pretty reasonable assurances of what the outcome would be.

I don't think so. The human species could be extinct before the ramifications even begin to take place.

	17-02-2003 06:05									#42
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

How is this different from moving to let's say deserted island and making it your own? And the island has more life too. Taming horses or having pet dogs is much more unethical than terraforming some planet that has some microbes.

	17-02-2003 06:09									#43
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: They do not adapt nature to their needs, they evolved alongside nature, adapting to nature aswell as adapting it to them.

Exactly same with humans. Edit: To make this clear, if what you say is right, it's right for humans and beavers, or it's wrong for both of us.

	17-02-2003 06:10									#44
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Lets terraform Iraq for the Martians by making the land radioactive.

	17-02-2003 06:21									#45
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by tinyp3nis Exactly same with humans.

Yes, except for the last 50 thousand years or so. Evolution does not - can not - happen in the span of a human life. The world has probably changed more in the past thousand years then in a hundred thousand (or more) before it because of human activity. There is no way that eco-systems can keep up with that rate of change and adapt... unless you call dying off adapting.

Also, humans have not been adapting to nature at all in the past few thousand years, quite the opposite - we have been trying to adapt nature to us at all costs.


But we're geting off-topic here.

	17-02-2003 06:46									#46
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Evolution made us this way, not us. The beaver also destroys, the humans with more efficency. Same thing, accept it

	17-02-2003 06:53									#47
	Increase Your PM Length

Human beings have never stopped to think about ethics and the environment on Earth, why would Mars be any different?

	17-02-2003 06:54									#48
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by tinyp3nis Evolution made us this way, not us. The beaver also destroys, the humans with more efficency. Same thing, accept it

Beavers do not destroy, they just play their part. Beavers do not chew down entire forests for abstract and self-made concepts such as currency. They do not create machinery and technology, or completely deplete their enviroment in order to live in extreme decadence and luxury. They do not change their role in the environment every 50 years. They do not build ships and airplanes and transport the world's life to all corners of the world. The list goes on...

No, all beavers do is play the part they have for hundreds of thousands of years. The part that their eco-system relies on them playing.

	17-02-2003 07:00									#49
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Osweld Beavers do not destroy,

	17-02-2003 07:01									#50
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by tinyp3nis

Very insightful.

	17-02-2003 07:05									#51
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Osweld Very insightful.

What I am supposed to say something that is simply not true?

	17-02-2003 07:14									#52
	Remove this text

In a very simple-minded sense, beavers do "destroy", but it is a fact that an environment must have a certain level of death and destruction to function. Take for example forest fires and prairie fires - these have existed for hundreds of thousands of years. They 'destroy' overgrown areas and dead wood to make room for new things to live and grow in.

"Evolution does not - can not - happen in the span of a human life."
Yes it does! That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard! Take, for example, diseases - many of those have evolved to adapt to our medecines, and within the span of a human lifetime!

	17-02-2003 07:16									#53
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by tinyp3nis What I am supposed to say something that is simply not true?

You took it completely out of context. You only quoted the first three words of my post for gods sake. Yes, beavers do "destroy" - they cut down trees to make their homes. But that is a part of the eco-system. The environment is built around it, it is an intrical part of life in their eco-system. It is something that the entire eco-system has evolved with. They do not, as I said, cut down trees for abstract and self-made concepts like humans do, nor do they cut down every freakin' tree in the forest. and they don't go sailing around the world and contaminating other ecosystems. and, as I said in my previous posts, there is a whole hell of alot of things they don't do.

You would have to be insane to think that beavers and humans are comparable in the way they effect the world.



And I have a feeling that maybe you are some how failing to understand the entire concept of this arument and think that I am speaking out against merely cutting down trees and killing things. I am not. Death is a part of life. I am talking about how humans do not behave naturaly.

	17-02-2003 07:28									#54
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by monolith94 "Evolution does not - can not - happen in the span of a human life." Yes it does! That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard! Take, for example, diseases - many of those have evolved to adapt to our medecines, and within the span of a human lifetime!

Well yes, that's because they have much shorter life spans then humans. It still takes millions of generations (I really have no idea how many) for diseases to adapt, and that is the point I was making. Eco-systems evolve at the same sort of rate.

	17-02-2003 07:30									#55
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Osweld You took it completely out of context. You only quoted the first three words of my post for gods sake. Yes, beavers do "destroy" - they cut down trees to make their homes. But that is a part of the eco-system. The environment is built around it, it is an intrical part of life in their eco-system. It is something that the entire eco-system has evolved with. They do not, as I said, cut down trees for abstract and self-made concepts like humans do, nor do they cut down every freakin' tree in the forest. and they don't go sailing around the world and contaminating other ecosystems. and, as I said in my previous posts, there is a whole hell of alot of things they don't do. You would have to be insane to think that beavers and humans are comparable in the way they effect the world. And I have a feeling that maybe you are some how failing to understand the entire concept of this arument and think that I am speaking out against merely cutting down trees and killing things. I am not. Death is a part of life. I am talking about how humans do not behave naturaly.

Just like I said earlier, humans destroy more. Oh boy.

quote: You would have to be insane to think that beavers and humans are comparable in the way they effect the world.

I'm insane. Not equal however, but comparable yes.
Btw every lifeform is just not a part of the system, it also defines it, and changes it. Modern human just much more than others.

	17-02-2003 07:49									#56
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by tinyp3nis Just like I said earlier, humans destroy more. Oh boy.

The point you seem to be mising is that a beaver's destruction brings life to the eco-system. Whereas our destruction is greatly fueled by abstract and self-made concepts and does not bring life to eco-systems - we take all the life out of environments, cutting down every single tree and killing every single animal to fuel an incessive need for decadence and luxury.


When a beaver cuts down a tree to make a dam it is making a space for a new tree to grow and as the trees in their dam decay, the nutrients of the trees go into the water and feed new life, it is contributing to the eco-system in countless other ways that I can not even begin to imagine.

When we slash and burn a forest or pave over a swamp, we are giving nothing back to the environment, we are only fueling our own development and never-ending demand for resources, which only runs out quicker the more we use.

	17-02-2003 08:13									#57
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Use the Beavers to Terraform Mars then.

Beavers dams aren't permament, a good snow winter
and a quick thaw, dams' gone.

	17-02-2003 08:17									#58
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

I feel that it would be unethical to not terraform Mars.

Assuming there are simple organisms on Mars, these poor buggers have no future. The atmosphere of Mars is slowly being reduced by the sun. Without intervention, they will more than likely die out completely, or remain as simple organisms without the chance to evolve into higher forms.

In the (more likely) case that there is no life on Mars, what good is a prestine chunk of rock? Let life put it to use.

As intelligent life, it is our duty to spread life where we can. We have the knowledge and ability to start terraforming Mars, and we should.

	17-02-2003 08:24									#59
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: The point you seem to be mising is that a beaver's destruction brings life to the eco-system. Whereas our destruction is greatly fueled by abstract and self-made concepts and does not bring life to eco-systems - we take all the life out of environments, cutting down every single tree and killing every single animal to fuel an incessive need for decadence and luxury.

We are plenty. I'd like to see what billions of beavers (or even better some big predator) would do, too bad they are not as succesfull. It would be a total mess even without abstract and self-made concepts.
System produced the "flaw" so the eco-system is flawed when it let's something like this (us) happen.

Not to mention the fact that above what you said is not true, atleast not here in Finland. We do take care of our forests, and animals too. I don't mind humans mixing the system a bit, about goddamn time someone brings some sense into this chaos. Humans have not yet done that on large scale, but we have the potential. The thing that makes us different from animals is that we could/might destroy the eco-system, but untill that day we are just a part of it, a big one. When human race takes other lifeforms into consideration, it's good but also unnatural. The only species with brains like these cannot really act natural, if "natural" is the same that the rest of the eco-system does.

quote: When a beaver cuts down a tree to make a dam it is making a space for a new tree to grow and as the trees in their dam decay, the nutrients of the trees go into the water and feed new life, it is contributing to the eco-system in countless other ways that I can not even begin to imagine.

quote: When we slash and burn a forest or pave over a swamp, we are giving nothing back to the environment, we are only fueling our own development and never-ending demand for resources, which only runs out quicker the more we use.

Only the same thing what the beaver gives back, space for new life.

	17-02-2003 08:25									#60
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

I wouldn't think it as much a question of ethics as one of understanding. It has taken mankind a long while to accumulate a degree of comprehension of the way the Earth works. Even this is incomplete.
Without the degree of variation in the Martian environment and given that Mars is substantially smaller it shouldn't take anywhere near as long to come to a similar understanding of how the planet works, but it'll still be a fair way off.