>>12836573>Define sustainable.I use the common definition. Things like carbon footprint, pollution that causes positive feedback loops are both examples of things considered when talking about sustainability.
> In space lies our futureHuman species are not suited for space. Some other posthumanist form of sapient life can adapt much better and doesn't have to have a soft body that needs to be fed with earth-grown food and easily dies from radiation. Natural selection will do the rest.
>Space is a radioactive vaccumwasn't talking about space at all. You can't just send stuff into space by kicking it with your foot.
>For the next century, yes. But then mass drivers, space lifts, orbital rings and sky hooks can be powered from space. Beyond the earth and its biosphere.Ah yes, all that wondrous technology that has to be invented, designed, and built first. But just you wait guys, it's coming. How much resources will it take to build all your bullshit?
>We would control the earth you clearly overestimate the importance of human individuals in the modern globalized world. Who "we"? We are nothing but cogs in the machine at this point and once there is no use for us, the system will happily replace us with a better alternative that doesn't get depressed or lazy.
>There is no intrinsic value in enviroment or nature.I'm not saying there is. Humans as a species evolved in nature. Subjecting them to these transformative events you're describing is cruel.
>In those things no voyages of discovery can be madeIf that's what gives your life meaning, well then good for you. I can try doing without surrogate activities in the meantime.
>Only surivial against an equilibrium. So an instability. Really smart to destabilize everything, huh?
>From this point onward, the fate of the universe will not be a matter of chance, but of conscious choice.Sure, but ask yourself whether this consciousness will be homo sapiens or something entirely different.
