Life on Venus???

We are the Borg.
User avatar
MRC_Hans
Posts: 519
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Denmark

Post by MRC_Hans » Mon Jun 14, 2004 6:39 pm

Luciana wrote:
MRC_Hans wrote: Depends on how you define intelligence. Several kinds of apes and whales are intelligent. Within a number of definitions, there are several other intelligent life forms right here on Earth. The crucial question is: HOW intelligent?

Hans
Ok, let's settle with any intelligence. Puppy intelligence, parrot intelligence. Is there any possibility of such intelligent life in the solar system?
Mmm, on planets no, but on some of the moons, well, possible. There might also be life on Jupiter, but the prospect of ever getting there is not promising.

Hans
[i]Fly pretty, anyone can fly safe...[/i]

User avatar
SquishyDave
Posts: 1273
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 3:24 am
Location: Canberra, Australia

Post by SquishyDave » Tue Jun 15, 2004 4:19 am

I say we should only be careful not to kill anything we may find useful in future. So if there are bacteria in the venusion clouds, but after extensive study they are deemed to do nothing for us, I say kill them all if it means we can colonize venus. That doesn't sound very green, but it's just bacteria. But what if we extend the question to something bigger, lets just say we find animals living on mars that look exactly like furbies, or something equally sickenly cute. We are unable to keep them as pets as they need a martian atmosphere to live, but then we find out we can turn mars into a little earth with wonderful new science X.

Do we wipe out the entire species of furby look-a-likes simply to further the human race? I say hell yes. We would undoubtly keep some in a dome somewhere so people could visit and see them, so they wouldn't be totally extinct, but I can't see any reason to save this species habitat when destroying it means so much for the human race. (potential medicine proviso here)

The way I see it is, the only responsibility we have is to the human race and our ideals. So if logging the shit out of our planet is bad for humans, take it easy on the logging, if moderate logging gives us lots of perk, and no long term problems, go nuts. If humans want to save a species from extinction for no reason other than we like that species, go nuts, save the species, it will make us feel better, which is good for us. If every single life form on another planets dying means we can colonise that planet, go nuts, we can't use it anyway (new medicine proviso is always in effect here though, we need to remember that). I feel this attitude is very green, because shitting in our drinking water is bad for us, but at the same time it allows us to progress. That being said the worlds energy exchange system, including all the plants and animals is extremely complex, with untold potentiol for live saving medications, and we don't always know how changes will effect us, so we should tread lightly for now.

I think most people think this way now, they want to save animals and trees because they think the planet will be unable to support human life if we kill off too many things, and they think tigers are pretty so they want to see them stick around. Serving humanities needs, both physical and ethereal, at every turn it seems.
Squishy doesn't irritate the hell out of me. - [url=http://www.skepticalcommunity.com/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=10266]Quester_X[/url]
We tend to scoff at the beliefs of the ancients. But we can't scoff at them personally, to their faces, and this is what annoys me.