Dinosaurs

It's Dr. Michio Kaku. I've read a couple of his books. They are amazing! As for overpopulation, it won't be too long before we begin expanding into the rest of our solar system and galaxy. Plenty of room there.

But what if we dont? lol

chocotricks wrote:

But what if we dont? lol

well need a war

The problem is not space choco, it's our limited resources that make such a large population a problem. Controlling nature will give us a near unlimited amount of resources so we will finally be able to sustain the world's growing population.

NiteKrawler wrote:

I never said any known society has advanced to type 1.

Precisely, the Kardashev scale is all theoretical with no physical data to back any of it up. None of these so-called type 1 civs have ever existed, so therefor we can't definitively say what one would be capable of.

Quote :

Also, my atheistic worldview has nothing to do with my position on scientific advancement. However, I would argue that one of the downsides to your conservative worldview is that you are constantly opposed to progress. You do realize that there were a ton of people like you who feared scientific progress in the past as well. Things like unraveling the mystery of DNA, mapping the human genome, stem cell research (which is still highly feared), etc. In fact, the fear of stem cell research will result in ruined lives and death because of how much it is slowing progress in that very promising area.

I don't fear scientific progress as a whole, just that which could lead to the destruction of life on earth and/or the earth as a whole. Just because you can build the Alpha-Omega Bomb, doesn't mean you should. I'm all for stem cell research and the possibilities it holds.

No civilization that we know of has achieved it. It isn't theoretical. We know that if we survive long enough, that these types of civilizations are possible. We merely need the technology. As for scientific progress goes, we already have everything we need to destroy all life on earth. Happily, we have refrained from doing it thus far. Though North Korea seems to be biting at the bit for first blood lately...

If they go before us that would not be good on our part.

NiteKrawler wrote:

No civilization that we know of has achieved it. It isn't theoretical. We know that if we survive long enough, that these types of civilizations are possible. We merely need the technology.

They say the same thing about faster-than-light and time travel. But if you can't put up any hard data to back it up, it's still theoretical.

Quote :

As for scientific progress goes, we already have everything we need to destroy all life on earth. Happily, we have refrained from doing it thus far.

That doesn't mean building even deadlier and more destructive weapons needs to be done.

Ghost Leader wrote:

NiteKrawler wrote:

No civilization that we know of has achieved it. It isn't theoretical. We know that if we survive long enough, that these types of civilizations are possible. We merely need the technology.

They say the same thing about faster-than-light and time travel. But if you can't put up any hard data to back it up, it's still theoretical.

No, they don't. Faster than light travel is impossible. The speed of light is the universal constant. It cannot be breached. Science in no way says that it is possible. Science does, however, leave open the possibility of circumventing this problem through the use of a worm hole or some other method, like the use of dark energy or matter to pull space and time toward you. This is all theoretical though and no one is sure if it is possible. The same goes for time travel, with one exception. It is entirely possible to travel into the future...in a way. If you are near enough to something with enough mass, you will travel more slowly in time than anything near something smaller. So if you orbit something with the right mass, you might orbit it for 2 years, and then come back to earth and it will actually be 4 years later. That is fact.

Saying that we will have control of the weather is the same as saying that we will grow human hearts in labs and be able to put them into patients with heart conditions. It is entirely possible, we just don't have the technology yet.

We can argue back and forth all day, but unless you can provide an example of it being done as proof that it's possible, it remains theoretical until it's actually done.

You don't need to see something done to prove it is real or possible. We know the orbital period of Pluto, but we have never seen it make a full orbit yet.

A celestial body's orbital period can be mathematically charted based on various factors (how else could the ancient Greeks plot when things like comets and eclipses would occur?), hence it can be proven with hard data. You can't provide one single shred of such proof to back up the Kardashev scale, otherwise you already would have by now.

Indeed. Maybe I am just something of a scientific optimist. I am not a physicist at any rate.

I have a degree in Theoretical Physics. You can call me Doctor Spike. Btw I've heard that Pluto isn't officially a planet anymore. But I don't care, I still consider it the 9th.

Spike Reaver wrote:

Btw I've heard that Pluto isn't officially a planet anymore.

Good riddance. I bet the planet was fat and obnoxious too.

Mass Distraction wrote:

Spike Reaver wrote:

Btw I've heard that Pluto isn't officially a planet anymore.

Good riddance. I bet the planet was fat and obnoxious too.

Pluto isn't a planet anymore because of an actual report stating that Chuck Norris didn't think pluto was big enough...so he threatened to sue NASA.

NiteKrawler wrote:

Indeed. Maybe I am just something of a scientific optimist. I am not a physicist at any rate.

Being optimistic is fine, but optimism alone doesn't validate the theoretically possible.

Ghost Leader wrote:

NiteKrawler wrote:

Indeed. Maybe I am just something of a scientific optimist. I am not a physicist at any rate.

Being optimistic is fine, but optimism alone doesn't validate the theoretically possible.

I'd just suggest reading Physics of the Future.

I guess this is what the OP needs.

Look familiar?

That picture actually reminds me of a cartoon show were people rode battle-clad dinosaurs. Can't remember the name, though.

NiteKrawler wrote:

Ghost Leader wrote:

NiteKrawler wrote:

Indeed. Maybe I am just something of a scientific optimist. I am not a physicist at any rate.

Being optimistic is fine, but optimism alone doesn't validate the theoretically possible.

I'd just suggest reading Physics of the Future.

Okay, use your optimism to conjure up one of these weather-controlling devices, a starship that can travel from earth to the Andromeda galaxy and back in a week's time, a sports car with an engine of at least 600 hp powered entirely by tomato juice, and (for me personally) a ray gun that can do this.

Do that, and your optimism will then be able to prove the theoretically possible.

Mass Distraction wrote:

That picture actually reminds me of a cartoon show were people rode battle-clad dinosaurs. Can't remember the name, though.

Sounds familiar, but I can't think of it either. A toyline was also made from it, IIRC.

Nope. It's Turok 1.

Ghost Leader wrote:

NiteKrawler wrote:

Ghost Leader wrote:

NiteKrawler wrote:

Indeed. Maybe I am just something of a scientific optimist. I am not a physicist at any rate.

Being optimistic is fine, but optimism alone doesn't validate the theoretically possible.

I'd just suggest reading Physics of the Future.

Okay, use your optimism to conjure up one of these weather-controlling devices, a starship that can travel from earth to the Andromeda galaxy and back in a week's time, a sports car with an engine of at least 600 hp powered entirely by tomato juice, and (for me personally) a ray gun that can do this.

Do that, and your optimism will then be able to prove the theoretically possible.

I wasn't going to say anything more, but since you've pushed the matter: http://m.rbth.ru/articles/2009/03/25/250309_weather.html

Obviously it isn't just optimism on my part. Your lack of knowledge of current scientific advancement is just as weak defending your stance as my supposed mere optimism is for mine. Arguing that weather control is only theoretical is like saying that autonomous personal vehicles are only theoretical. Seriously, read the books on the subject like I have before being so adamant about your stance.

Ghost Leader wrote:

Mass Distraction wrote:

That picture actually reminds me of a cartoon show were people rode battle-clad dinosaurs. Can't remember the name, though.

Sounds familiar, but I can't think of it either. A toyline was also made from it, IIRC.

I was at a flea market today and actually saw a VHS of that series. It was Dino-Riders.