Comments on: Watch the Skies in the Year 52,007 A.D.

By: stevekj

stevekj — Tue, 06 Oct 2015 14:40:06 +0000

Almost ten years later and it still hasn’t been launched. Might as well just leave it on the ground and wait 50,000 years for someone to dig it up :(

By: oscar

oscar — Sat, 30 Aug 2014 08:00:35 +0000

The sphere should come with a can opener and simple instructions on how to use it in case we should breed ourselves back into the ape!

By: kc-guy

kc-guy — Sun, 15 Mar 2009 10:41:17 +0000

to Alex#49:
Yes!

A satellite planned to crash to the earth…will Taco Bell set up a target in the ocean giving away free tacos if it lands there? (Mir)

And if it lands in Australia, will the local government fine the EU for littering? (Skylab)

By: Alex Gialias

Alex Gialias — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 11:34:22 +0000

I for one welcome our new spherical overlord.

By: stholas

stholas — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 20:05:25 +0000

People, man evolved from the proconsul, not the monkey. Though it is fanciful to say we evolved from monkeys, and yes, we’re definitely related at some level, we did not evolve from monkeys per se. Though ever since we went ahead and cast God in our image, it feels more and more like it is the monkey that is the higher evolved of the two species.

By: Mirage_GSM

Mirage_GSM — Wed, 28 May 2008 14:49:46 +0000

[quote]leafy said: “…if global warming continues, which it will, … and there will be a vast amount of toxic gases released from the ice caps as they melt (methane, co2) so it will be interesting to see if we make it that long”[/quote]
Now where did you get the idea that either Methane or CO2 are toxic? The poles were free of ice for most of earths history, so all gasses that might be frozen there today were at one time free in the atmosphere. Didn’t bother most lifeforms one bit.
[quote]leafy said: ” …not even taking into consideration there will be many more world wars fought over the last remaining energy reserves, as nuclear energy is the next step, but it too wont last forever!! humans are slowly destroying our earth and using up every last energy source we have…”[/quote]
Last energy reserves… Well that depends on how we handle things. Modern countries are able to fill about 20% of their energy needs from renewable sources. Some fields like solar power have great potentials for increased efficieny in the near future. I think it is perfectly possible to raise the quota significantly before fossil and atomic fuels run out.
If they don’t reach 100% by then, it doesn’t mean the end of humanity. Energy will get more expensive. Maybe not everyone will be able to afford his own car or think twice about turning the heating to full power, but that won’t make mankind extinct.
Neither would atomic war. It would kill a jolly lot of people, but mainly in the population centres or strategic targets. There would be plenty of survivors.

By: HiEv

HiEv — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 11:32:47 +0000

[quote]Chilehead said: “Do you really think that the historical pace of evolution will still apply during this time period? I don’t, and I think it has already been stopped.”[/quote]
I’ve gotta say, I agreed with most of what you said after this, but this part is just wrong. You can’t stop evolution unless you have a species of all 100% identical clones. Selection pressures may change from one feature to another, like eyesight not being as important since glasses were invented, but that just means that other traits become more important, like being tall or having big breasts. Humanity would still evolve, though as you later intimated, once genes are better understood we may have nearly unlimited potential for human controlled evolution in quite a short time.

[quote]AKALucifer said: “On the subject of humans evolving (It has come up) Can we evolve? Seeing as most people only have children with 1 or 2 different people nowadays can evolution still function?”[/quote]
Evolution keeps working as long as the species continues to reproduce. If some individuals have no offspring, or more offspring, or their offspring all get killed off before reproducing, then that will affect the evolution of the species.

[quote]Drazzy said: “Every human evolves in his/her lifetime[…]”[/quote]
Equivocation is dishonest debate. The definition of “evolution” you’re using there is not the definition of “evolution” we are discussing here. We are talking about the gradual change of a species’ DNA over many generations, not about “personal growth.”

[quote]Drazzy said: “50% of a humans adapted DNA goes into their child.”[/quote]
Right, but how much a person learned in their lifetime does not affect the DNA that is passed on to their kids. (Which seems to be what you’re implying.)

[quote]Drazzy said: “it was only 50,000 ago that the human race was nothing more than monkeys with sharpened rocks.

Only a few hundred years ago, the adult human was as short as a modern day child.”[/quote]
It’s rather ironic that you had the nerve to accuse someone else of being “wrong” and saying their “facts on evolution are distorted” and then followed it up with that nonsense. No, humans did not evolve from monkeys (they came from an ape ancestor,) modern humans appeared about 200,000 years ago (far longer than 50,000 years ago,) and adult human height in the US hasn’t changed much in over 50 years, mainly because the change in height in recent history is primarily due to improvements in diet and health, not genetics.

[quote]Loki said: “Er… I disagree with the common ancestry thing, if it were true, apes would have been devolved >_>;”[/quote]
Uh… Huh? As orc_jr explained earlier, “devolved” is pretty much a nonsense term in this context. Evolution is a change in the genetic makeup of a species in response to the species’ environment and the available options for evolution. Evolution is not a process with a goal or a fixed “this is a good/bad change” system. A trait that could save a species in one environment could doom it in another. To put it simply, a species can’t “devolve” due to evolution, because that’s a contradiction in terms. Old traits may resurface if they once again become useful to a species, but that would be re-evolution, not de-evolution.

[quote]Loki said: “I have to note that biblical depictions on age date people living in multiples of a thousand years.”[/quote]
Umm… No.
A) The oldest age of someone listed in the Bible is Methuselah, at 969 years old (Genesis 5:27.) That’s not “multiples of a thousand years.”
B) Archaeological records do not support the claims of the Bible, in that few ancient human remains are aged over 30 years old, which suggests that humans actually had shorter lifespans in the past, not longer ones.
C) The Bible also reports the existence of talking bushes, a boat capable of fitting 2 (or 7) each of several billion species, and that no animal ate meat prior to the flood. Not what I’d call a reliable source.

[quote]JustAnotherName said: “Revelation 11:18b (b means the latter part of the scripture but of course you can read all of verse 18)” …and to bring to ruin those ruining the earth.”
[…]
How could the Bible writer EVER know we could get this far.”[/quote]
Easy. It’s a very general prediction that could be interpreted to fit any era that ever has been or ever will be. Simply having the wrong religious groups in charge of most of the planet could be interpreted as “ruining the Earth.” There is nothing in it that line that is specific enough to mean what you are interpreting it to mean, and mean that alone. Part of the trick to being a good prophet is keeping your predictions vague, probable, and/or open to interpretation, and that one does all of the above.

[quote]me09 said: “Oh, lets leave a message for our grandchildren! For god’s sake, that’s like trying to discover which caveman was MY grandfather!”[/quote]
Actually, if you have kids, and your kids have kids, etc… there’s a good chance that in 50,000 years all of humanity will be your ever-so-great-grandchildren! :-)

By: Alx_xlA

Alx_xlA — Wed, 03 Oct 2007 00:30:34 +0000

[quote]orc_jr said: “it doesn’t matter whether humans will still exist in 50,000 years because in a handful of generations we’ll forget we ever launched this thing and pluck it out of orbit to see what it is, then we’ll really feel like jerks.”[/quote]

Oh, cruel irony…

[quote]orc_jr said: “semantics though it may be, no proponent of evolution has ever once stated that humans descended from monkeys. it is more accurate to say that it is believed that humans and apes share a common ancestor.”[/quote]

Well, where did the common ancestor come from? It wasn’t squirrels, let me tell you…

By: Aero

Aero — Fri, 29 Dec 2006 06:45:31 +0000

Interesting.... Anyone here a creationist?

By: me09

me09 — Wed, 20 Dec 2006 03:36:38 +0000

Oh, lets leave a message for our grandchildren! For god's sake, that's like trying to discover which caveman was MY grandfather!