Backwards or forwards? - Page 6

Lestat · #51 11-05-2007, 07:05 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So far, no species has survived forever.

[/ QUOTE ]

This statement is meaningless.

Many species have survived many millions of years. 3000 years is a tiny timespan, relatively speaking.

[/ QUOTE ]

Perhaps. But our capacity for destruction (in one form or another), to this planet is unequaled and unprecendented.

With our rate of advancement, 3000 years is more than enough time for us to wipe ourselves out. Our technological advances in just the past few years has exponententially superceded the past 100,000 years.

The key is whether or not we're intelligent enough to survive our own destruction. Cataclysmic destruction in one form or another will come within the next few hundred years minimum. It wouldn't suprise me if it was even in our lifetime.

drzen · #52 11-05-2007, 07:10 PM

[ QUOTE ]
It took me a while to think of an answer to this post. I'm very curious about the future, but if I go forward I might miss the Rapture

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you're pretty safe there.

vhawk01 · #53 11-05-2007, 10:35 PM

[ QUOTE ]
It took me a while to think of an answer to this post. I'm very curious about the future, but if I go forward I might miss the Rapture besides I'm one of Jerry's Kids when it comes to technology so in the future if I can understand anything I'll still almost definitely be obsolete. I may appear as a Neanderthal to them so they will cage me and study me and I may be unable to return back in time if I'm imprisoned.

So I opt to go backwards in time to the year 30 A.D. I plan on having some drapes tailored into that era's garments and buying a veil. I will smuggle along the highest quality video camera I can find and follow Jesus for 3 years up until 10 minutes after the Last Supper. That way I can bring back pictures and put an end to these crazy debates once and for all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rResKXjKqjQ

[/ QUOTE ]

No one would be more horrified and upset at this plan than a true Christian.

vhawk01 · #54 11-05-2007, 10:36 PM

[ QUOTE ]
go forward 3000 years ldo. u have to realize that you would only be an idiot in the future for like 10 years then u would learn how to live in the new society. just realize, every new baby born is an "idiot" when they are really young, but by the time they are in their 20s most won't be.

also going back in time would change alot of the stuff that happened. Just you being in the world then the butterfly effect states that you would not be able to predict everything u think u might be able to now

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you'd be pretty useless and stupid 3000 years in the future, permanently, but so what? I'm not going there to teach biology.

FortunaMaximus · #55 11-06-2007, 11:54 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I think you'd be pretty useless and stupid 3000 years in the future, permanently, but so what? I'm not going there to teach biology.

[/ QUOTE ]

People in this thread underestimate just how much knowledge there is yet to be gained. There ain't much. Travel faster, build faster, use less labor. I'm not sure what kind of awesomeness you'd expect only 3k years forward.

I tend to agree that this species' likelihood of being around then is quite low. Evolution seems to be accelerating and h. sapiens certainly won't be h. sapiens then.

As for what I'd choose? [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img] I'd decide when given the opportunity and it'd be suitably random.

PLOlover · #56 11-06-2007, 04:12 PM

[ QUOTE ]
People in this thread underestimate just how much knowledge there is yet to be gained.

[/ QUOTE ]

wow, nanotech and gene tech are only 10-20 years old really.

FortunaMaximus · #57 11-06-2007, 04:34 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
People in this thread underestimate just how much knowledge there is yet to be gained.

[/ QUOTE ]

wow, nanotech and gene tech are only 10-20 years old really.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, we're increasingly aware of and helping our evolution along. But the stumbling blocks are pretty sparse. You've got the immortality vector, the ability to traverse interstellar distances at very fast speeds (then FTL), and in hand with that, colonization.

After that, instanteous transfer between solar systems, then galaxies. It's just a matter of scale. It's a huge, huge mass of knowledge to plumb, to be sure, but in the end, it's just that.

The elements and Universe existed before h. sapiens. In a way, we're just shifting what's already there to expand and make our awareness more complex and interesting. What shape and form it takes? How big a dance floor do 6 billion humans need? How about 6 quadrillion? 6 googols?

Understanding that lets me say with certainity I'd take the random choice.

FortunaMaximus · #58 11-06-2007, 04:37 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Would not go.

[/ QUOTE ]

I like this answer though. Ennui still has motion. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

vhawk01 · #59 11-06-2007, 04:40 PM

I was honestly hoping for a Fortuna post in this thread from the first time I read OP.

FortunaMaximus · #60 11-06-2007, 05:31 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I was honestly hoping for a Fortuna post in this thread from the first time I read OP.

[/ QUOTE ]

<wry grin> Thanks.

It's a null question, imo. But going forward 3k years would be safer. It depends on your perception of risk and your ability to hold rationality in radically different situations.

Reductio ad absurdum, neh?