What became of what was left of Earth-that-was?

POSTED BY: Caitlyn
UPDATED: Thursday, May 20, 2004 04:13
VIEWED: 14263
PAGE 3 of 5

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT PAGE

DRAKON

Wednesday, January 21, 2004 11:43 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by BarneyT:

I could believe that there are still people living on 'Earth-that-was' - there are different levels of Earth being used up, and even if the governments of the day decided that there had to be an exodus for the survival of mankind, I figure there's bound to be a few who insisted on staying behind, and it's possible that they've been able to replenish the world.

This has bugged me every since I have heard it. How do you "use up" a PLANET??? Planets are huge, very big things. And besides a few hundred tons of space vehicles, everything this planet started with is still here. Changed around, in form, mixed with different stuff and all. But the same stuff that was here when humanity started is still here now.

As a matter of fact, every year a few tons of space debris enters the Earth's atmosphere and becomes part of this planet. We actually have been gaining material, not losing it.

Now, pollution can be a problem. But what pollution really is, is stuff we just don't know what to make out of. The stuff is not the problem in and of itself, its the way that particular stuff is arraigned and organized.

Quote:

Of course, the whole planet could have blown to smithereens in an asteroid crash...

The puppet show in "Heart of Gold" indicates that the exodus took place over the period of a century.

"Wash, where is my damn spaceship?"

DRAKON

Wednesday, January 21, 2004 11:59 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by ManiacNumberOne:
If using up the earth means the same thing in the future as it does now, then 500 years from now, in Joss' 'verse, earth-that-was (etw) most prolly ran out of natural resources.
Like fossil fuels that can't be easily renewed in a quick time period, air (possibly due to deforestation) and viable soil due to overuse. We could easily have turned etw into a barren semi-lifeless rock, and we still could.

I don't buy it. Unless you export that stuff offworld, its still here, just changed in form. You got Diesel exhaust instead of crude oil. But a major component of fossil fuel combustion is CO2. Which plants need to breath.

Except for people that never take a dump, things pass through the body, rather than stop there. Excrement is fertilizer. (Yes, it needs to be sterilized before use, but that is a trivial technical problem.)

What I am trying to say is that all these technical processes don't really use the stuff. Energy is extracted, but even that goes nowhere for the most part. And as long as the sun shines, you still got more energy coming into the planet all the time.

Another hypothesis is that it was all a marketing ploy. "Quick, the Earth is gonna die on us, everyone abandon planet. And come to beautiful Ariel/Shinon/etc. for a new life. Either that or stay here and die!"

"Wash, where is my damn spaceship?"

BADGERSGIRL

Wednesday, January 21, 2004 12:20 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Drakon:

This has bugged me every since I have heard it. How do you "use up" a PLANET??? Planets are huge, very big things. And besides a few hundred tons of space vehicles, everything this planet started with is still here. Changed around, in form, mixed with different stuff and all. But the same stuff that was here when humanity started is still here now.

I disagree, I think you can use up a natural resource. I know in farming, you can use land until it has no usefulness anymore. That's why they rotate crops - to keep the land viable longer.

Quote:
As a matter of fact, every year a few tons of space debris enters the Earth's atmosphere and becomes part of this planet. We actually have been gaining material, not losing it.

What does that matter, if the material isn't usable?

Quote:
Now, pollution can be a problem. But what pollution really is, is stuff we just don't know what to make out of. The stuff is not the problem in and of itself, its the way that particular stuff is arraigned and organized.

I'm sorry if I sound like an idiot, but isn't that a little like saying, "Cancer isn't incurable, we just haven't found a cure."? Fine, but that doesn't help the people who are dying. It may be possible to find new ways to access these "used up" resources, but if no one has figured out how, then what's the point? It could be a thousand times easier to find ways to access untouched resources on other planets than to bring back what we've used up.

JMO!

And, of course, there's the problem of population, which is the genesis of the resource problem. Even if you could find a way to re-use everything, it doesn't help if there just plain old isn't enough to go around.

"I like her" - Badger

DRAKON

Wednesday, January 21, 2004 1:49 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by BadgersGirl:

I disagree, I think you can use up a natural resource. I know in farming, you can use land until it has no usefulness anymore. That's why they rotate crops - to keep the land viable longer.

Umm.. think about this a second. Yes rotating crops return nutrients back to the land. Which means you can't "use up" the land, unless you don't rotate crops.

And even then, fertilizer goes a long way.

Quote:

I'm sorry if I sound like an idiot, but isn't that a little like saying, "Cancer isn't incurable, we just haven't found a cure."? Fine, but that doesn't help the people who are dying. It may be possible to find new ways to access these "used up" resources, but if no one has figured out how, then what's the point? It could be a thousand times easier to find ways to access untouched resources on other planets than to bring back what we've used up.

Good point. What I was trying to explain is that the stuff we "use up" ain't going anywhere. So we can do things like mine raw minerals, or dig through our own trash. And in a lot of cases, it may very well be easier, and cheaper to recycle, rather than mine new stuff, or go to another planet to get it.

The key word missing is "Yet" We may not know how to utilize a lot of this stuff yet, but that does not mean we never will. In fact there are plenty of research projects working on this very subject, some of which has been very effective at reducing pollution in many forms and recovering the material.

JMO!

Quote:

And, of course, there's the problem of population, which is the genesis of the resource problem. Even if you could find a way to re-use everything, it doesn't help if there just plain old isn't enough to go around.

Another good point, but I don't think it is realistic. It appears that the more advanced technically a culture becomes, the less population it creates. More people find other things to do with their spare time, and can do them, rather than stay home and make babies.

Europeans are already reproducing at below replacement rates, and if it were not for immigration, would be showing a decline in population overall. A lot of the third world countries still have yet to adjust to advances in medical technology, with its accompanying decrease in infant mortality rates. Which is why you see exploding populations in the third world.

Besides which, have you ever been to Fremont? Not long ago, someone figured out that if you took the entire 6 billion plus population of this here planet, and packed them in at the same density as Fremont California, you could fill all of Europe, leave most of what is now Russia west of the Urals, along with Africa, Asia, and the Americas completely uninhabited.

Fremont is a bedroom community in the southern end of the San Fransisco bay area. We are talking single family, suburbia style living, with a few light industries. There is a automotive plant and some of the Silicon Valley tech industry headquarters there as well.

So we got a LOOOONNNNGGG way to go before overpopulation becomes a problem. And if we can elevate the technology level for everyone, we might even have that problem.

"Wash, where is my damn spaceship?"

CAITLYN

Thursday, January 22, 2004 4:11 AM

Lots of theories, but none unconvince me that something's still in orbit of Sol where the third planet should be. Earth-that-was still is in some way or another.

Bet we'd have found out what if the show would have gone on a bit longer.

"Hamsters is nice"

NOOCYTE

Thursday, January 22, 2004 6:50 AM

Quote:

Lots of theories, but none unconvince me that something's still in orbit of Sol where the third planet should be. Earth-that-was still is in some way or another.

Bet we'd have found out what if the show would have gone on a bit longer.

Not so sure this is the case. I could see Joss keeping the "we are all equally rootless, cut off from our point of origin, and making meaning on the fly as best we can" motiff going on for good (rather like Frank Herbert did in the Dune series), to good effect.

Much as I'm a sucker for the "adoptive kids quest for biological parents and find something they didn't expect" theme, there's something eerily, existentially resonant about ETW being lost forever (in the sense of "can't go home;" of course they know where it is).

Slight thread hijack, via Dune : Did anyone notice in "The Mesage" that the Buddha during the battle flashback was pointing his hand upward? The Buddha is traditionally depicted with his hand touching the earth, whose spirit he invoked to ward off the distracting demons, prior to Enlightenment. Could this be an extraordinarily subtle reference to the mythological dimensions of SPACE TRAVEL to a culture of planetary emigration? Am I thinking too much?

[/thread hijack]

Keep (mindfully) flyin'!

Department of Redundancy Department

RONALDRAYGUN

Thursday, January 22, 2004 7:06 AM

If they use another old, lame, overused cliche like "We polluted the earth and ruined the Ozone layer", or "We cut down all the trees and the ice caps melted and the seas rose". I swear I will burn my box set and never utter the word Firefly again. I never watched Highlander again after they used that idiotic plot device.

Whew! I feel better now!

Yep. That went well.

HAPLO721

Thursday, January 22, 2004 7:09 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Noocyte:
(shades of Magrathea or Za H'Dum [sp?])!

Z'ha'dum. A friend got me hooked on B5 recently. Great show, but no substitute for my gorram Firefly!

Early: You ever been raped, Kaylee?
Kaylee: You know, it's funny you should mention that... ever heard of the Fox network?

GUNRUNNER

Thursday, January 22, 2004 8:02 AM

I saw a show on PBS about how the Earth's magnetic field is slowly deterating due to the changes of polarity in the core. When in a few hundered (thousand?) years Earth will have less protection from radation from the Sun.

One thing that I found partculy intresting is that there is evdince of the Earth's polls reversing so quickly that some lava flows wernt even hard when the polls reversed several times.

I can see the many factions of Earth fighting over the smaller zones of habaitly that would come with a magnetic field that is in flux. Just imagian that one half to three quarters of the world was exposed to higher levels of radation, and that save zones constantly moved.

Oh well just and idea I thoght I'd float.

BADGERSGIRL

Saturday, January 24, 2004 7:11 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Drakon:

Umm.. think about this a second.

Ooowww, don't ask me to do that.

I'm going to have to bow to your superior knowledge here. I'm not saying I agree with you, mind you, only that I lack the mental resources to effectively argue the point.

"I like her" - Badger

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT PAGE