Where We Can Move When We’re Done Destroying Earth

Posted by | June 2, 2015 12:00 | Filed under: Planet Pot Luck Top Stories


Once we’ve used up this planet, is there a planet B?

Planet-hunting for Earth-alternatives is now in full swing, says Professor Sara Seager, an astrophysicist and planetary scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. “We already know about thousands of planets orbiting stars other than the sun, we call them ‘exoplanets,'” she told me via Skype from California. “And I believe there’s definitely a ‘planet B’ out there somewhere, we just have to find it. And right now, myself and others around the world are building the next-generation of telescopes so that we’ll have the capability of finding and identifying another Earth.”

In the video [below], you can watch Seager detail three recently discovered exoplanets that have each generated a lot of excitement in the scientific community. These planets orbit their stars in the so-called “Goldilocks” zone. They are not too close to, and not too far away from, their respective stars. That means they are—potentially—hospitable to life. Among Seager’s favorites is the Earth-sized Kepler 186-f, but it’s over 500 light-years away, so humans probably won’t be going there. Closer possibilities include HD 40307-g, a large planet in a solar system with as many as six planets.

So will human explorers ever really make it to an exoplanet?

“I really think somehow, some day, someone will find a way to get there,” Seager said. “But it’s definitely not the solution to the problems on our planet right now.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtGAXsP8ev4

 

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2015 Liberaland
By: Alan

Alan Colmes is the publisher of Liberaland.

52 responses to Where We Can Move When We’re Done Destroying Earth

  1. mea_mark June 2nd, 2015 at 12:16

    Wouldn’t it be easier to fix the one we are on and figure out a way to live on it in a sustainable way?

    • fahvel June 2nd, 2015 at 12:21

      duh – who’da thought of that when they get $ for bullshit research and theory.

    • crc3 June 2nd, 2015 at 12:29

      It would but unfortunately there are far too many humans on this planet that are motivated only by greed and a lust for power. They live for only today with no interest in the future. Damage from climate change is pretty much irreversible at this point and with increasing growing tensions (terrorism and military buildups) we are doomed because of endless wars and bickering. Eventually it is all going to come to a crashing halt when it all goes nuclear (I predict within the next twenty to thirty years)…

      • Dwendt44 June 2nd, 2015 at 15:02

        Water is getting scarce in many places around the world. One of the ‘dry holes’ is the Middle East right where the tension is the greatest.
        As it is, one large agricultural disaster, and watch out.
        Overpopulation will take us out long before the sun toasts this planet to a cinder.

        • mea_mark June 2nd, 2015 at 19:53

          We really need to throw out the part of the bible where God said be fruitful and multiply. I really think that might be Satan’s quote now. What better way to bring human suffering than to encourage overbreeding and the resultant struggle for resources.

          • Fred the Turtle Tamer June 2nd, 2015 at 19:59

            According to some branches of Gnosticism, the god of the old testament was a false god, and Lucifer – which literally means “light bringer” – was the real god that Jesus speaks of in the new testament. According to this idea, the story of Eve and the apple is the true God bringing Gnosis to humanity.

            • mea_mark June 2nd, 2015 at 20:02

              God and Lucifer are just two sides of the same coin. It really all depends on what side you are looking at.

              I like the books of Enoch, they are interesting. Nothing like going back as far as you can.

              • bpollen June 3rd, 2015 at 03:53

                Don’t you know there ain’t no devil, there’s just God when he’s drunk.

                – Tom Waits

          • crc3 June 3rd, 2015 at 09:56

            The birth vs death ratio reveals so much and the news is catastrophic:

            131.4 million births per year – 55.3 million people die each year

            360,000 births per day – 151,600 people die each day

            15,000 births each hour – 6316 people die each hour

            250 births each minute – 105 people die each minute

            We are well beyond a disaster in the making. Humans will eventually use up all resources (many gone already) and there is no possibility of a reversal. Wars will be born out of panic and fear where even the wealthy will have no safe haven…

            • greenfloyd June 4th, 2015 at 23:36

              I’m not so sure the numbers spell doom for the human race, or that the planet can’t sustain these numbers. I have long suspected we have plenty of resources to meet everyone’s basic needs. IMO it’s the distribution of those resources that needs adjustment. To paraphrase how Spock might have put it, “The needs of the many outweigh the greed of a few!”

    • zlop June 3rd, 2015 at 00:50

      “live on it in a sustainable way?”
      Sustained misery is the goal of Agenda 21

  2. RRRow June 2nd, 2015 at 12:28

    The Sun is going to burn out in a billion years…. let’s start worrying about that too.

  3. crc3 June 2nd, 2015 at 12:44

    Currently we have no means to reach a habitable planet and colonize because of the tremendous distances involved. We have no propulsion systems that can get us to any location in one’s lifetime unless it’s through some black hole (strictly a theory) or we can travel faster than light speed (another theory). We should have landed on Mars and colonized years ago but because of the MIC and it’s endless wars we haven’t. We are self destructive animals and live like there is no tomorrow. It’s a shame because we had so much potential to do good things but failed miserably…

    • zlop June 3rd, 2015 at 00:49

      On Mars, it is easiest to construct a self-sustainable outpost,
      Perhaps, within this century? Other options, might take thousands of years.

  4. anothertoothpick June 2nd, 2015 at 12:54

    What about Uranus? Can we make it to Uranus?

    It looks like a nice place…and has a very cool name.

  5. oldfart June 2nd, 2015 at 13:23

    Our sun gets the final word in a couple of billion years so one way or the other
    it’ll be time to get the hell out of dodge.

  6. Hirightnow June 2nd, 2015 at 15:27

    Head out with prefabs and construction equipment and start colonizing those asteroids!

    • burqa June 2nd, 2015 at 17:28

      Having mastered modular housing construction as well as open wall and components, I would not hold out any hope that trying the same on another planet will work out very well.

    • mea_mark June 2nd, 2015 at 19:56

      Time to hollow out some asteroids and build some condos.

      • Hirightnow June 3rd, 2015 at 09:08

        All we need is a solar mirror or some high-powered lasers, a few rocket engines, and 50,000 gallons of water!

  7. arc99 June 2nd, 2015 at 15:46

    Einstein concluded that it is impossible to travel faster than the speed of light. Based on the laws of physics as we understand them, the Star Trek fantasy of traveling from earth to Vulcan in about 45 minutes is indeed a fantasy.

    However, I did hear of an experiment conducted by NASA which has the beginnings of a theory to argue that Einstein was wrong.

    Whether or not this phenomenon can be harnessed to drive a ship weighing several hundred tons to Alpha Centauri and back over the weekend, remains to be seen.

    Live long and prosper…

    http://www.techtimes.com/articles/49360/20150428/nasa-may-have-accidentally-discovered-faster-than-light-travel.htm

    NASA May Have Accidentally Discovered Faster-Than-Light Travel

    • burqa June 2nd, 2015 at 17:41

      I’m sure MastermindObewon will have some interesting, well-informed things to say on the topic.
      I think the premise of the OP is in error.
      I presume Alan refers to problems and issues we have now such as pollution, climate change and the chances of nuclear annihilation. Space travel to other planets by large numbers of people – in this case billions of migrants, is so far in the future that by then we will have long solved or failed to solve the issues we have now.
      Me, I’m optimistic. I think we and succeeding generations will find solutions and things will work out for the better. It seems to be a common characteristic of older people to be tempted to be more pessimistic.

      There is a pattern to this.
      Shoot, check out history from the thirties and take a look at how what we now refer to as the “Greatest Generation” was regarded. Before World War II, they were described as soft, spoiled, self-centered and unmotivated. The older generation could be quite pessimistic about them, believing they didn’t have what it takes to meet major challenges.
      The same was said about my generation – Baby Boomers. Now that we’re getting older and the Gen-X-ers are coming along, the same kinds of things can be found said by the older generation.
      I am confident succeeding generations will somehow figure out ways to deal with what we now see as intractable problems. I don’t know how, but I’m sure they’ll do just fine.

      • CB June 2nd, 2015 at 20:00

        I find the baby boomers to be far more spoiled and childish than the Gen-X-ers.

        Don’t they make up the Teabagger brigade?

        Anyway, I think the point was that humans don’t get another planet if we ruin this one. We have to take care of what we’ve got.

        • mea_mark June 2nd, 2015 at 20:07

          Baby boomers grew up in a reality of seemingly unlimited resources. Sadly they were wrong. Gen-X doesn’t think things are unlimited and therein lies their strength.

        • burqa June 2nd, 2015 at 20:49

          They were so spoiled that they turned out in massive numbers to get us out of Vietnam. Those who fought there fought very well, even though they were slagged as being weak and soft at the time.*
          They marched for civil rights and continued the fight to integrate our society.
          Then those childish Boomers went and provided the armies of foot soldiers who fought for women’s liberation.
          The environmental movement took off due to the interest of those childish Boomers and today our cities are no longer perpetually shaded by big ugly brown clouds of smog.
          Today those spoiled and childish Boomers are leading the fight for gay rights.

          Yeah, some of them are Teabaggers. So what? There are and will continue to be a significant percentage of Gen-X with conservative political views. This is human nature. Every generation will have members splayed across the political spectrum.

          * Back during the Vietnam War, I well remember the way the Boomers were slimed. A mentor to me at the time was a fairly conservative Marine general who led them in combat. He had twice been recommended for the Medal of Honor in World War II, had earned the Silver Star, Bronze Star with combat V and a couple of Purple Hearts to go with dozens of other medals that were a major reason Silent Lew Walt was a legend in his time. When others tried to disparage the Boomers, he stood up for them in a way that inspires me to this day.
          His faith and optimism in the young people of the day could not be shaken. I have the same faith in my fellow Americans in the younger generations.
          I read a lot of history and this reinforces my certainty they will do just fine, thank you.

          • CB June 3rd, 2015 at 00:37

            lol! Sure some baby boomers fought in Vietnam, marched for civil rights and founded the environmental movement.

            …and some dodged the draft whilst simultaneously pushing the war, lobbied for ever more pollution and segregation and today can be seen at Teabagger rallies across the nation demanding other people be stripped of health care and equal treatment in marriage law.

            I am well-aware there are many people in that generation who continue to work for climate justice and many other noble causes.

            …but the faces than represent the generation on the TV are snarling, delusional, treasonous bigots… It really is difficult to think of a segment of society more childish than the Teabaggers.

            • burqa June 3rd, 2015 at 18:34

              CB: “lol! Sure some baby boomers fought in Vietnam, marched for civil rights and founded the environmental movement.”

              Yes.

              I was there and saw it all.

              Take them out of each of those movements and very few people would be left.

              CB: “…and some dodged the draft whilst simultaneously pushing the war, lobbied for ever more pollution and segregation and today can be seen at Teabagger rallies across the nation demandingother people be stripped of health care and equal treatment in marriage law.”

              Of course. It is quite silly to imagine an entire generation of many millions of people all think alike, but that is the notion your argument appears to be built upon.

              CB: “…but the faces that represent the generation on the TV are snarling, delusional, treasonous bigots…”

              Then you need to change the TV programs you watch. There are plenty of boomers on TV who do not resemble your stereotype, including Alan Colmes, who owns this site.
              There are plenty of Gen-X-ers in the Tea Party, and if you knew your history you would understand that the Tea Party is just the latest in a string of far-Right fringe groups, none of which could be said to be representative of an entire generation.
              One hopes that Gen-X-ers have been taught better logic and would better understand human nature than what I see in your overly simplistic stereotypical generalizations that crumble to powder under the slightest examination.

              • CB June 3rd, 2015 at 19:28

                “There are plenty of boomers on TV who do not resemble your stereotype, including Alan Colmes”

                I’m not actually so much of a fan!

                …not to be rude in his house.

                I think he let the neofascists on Fox News use him far too long as an example of a liberal who won’t fight back… of someone who won’t state the simple truth that the “opposition” isn’t opposition at all, but mentally ill.

                Arguments are fine, but without basic facts in common, there’s just no point.

                Perhaps that’s why he left, I dunno.

                The demographics of the emotionally regressed people who refuse to acknowledge the dangers of climate change point squarely to the boomers, not to gen-X or the millennials. That’s just a fact:

                “An overwhelming majority of voters under 35 understand the threat of climate change and already see the harmful effects of it, or expect to in their lifetime.”

                http://www.lcv.org/issues/polling/recent-polling-on-youth.pdf

                • burqa June 3rd, 2015 at 20:50

                  You do not have to like Alan in order to see that he does not fit your bogus stereotype, which is:

                  “…but the faces that represent the generation on the TV are snarling, delusional, treasonous bigots…”

                  Could you describe the sort of thinking behind such a notion – thinking you have to like someone before being able to see what sort of demeanor they have?

                  Your climate change point is equally bogus, in that you don’t give the percentages of boomers who support it.
                  You also fail to understand the basics of analysis, which require one to take a look at all the data instead of taking a portion of it on one issue. This is illogical thinking.
                  Concern for the environment has always been a major concern of boomer. Our track record is longer and has more notable achievements than Gen-Xers or millennials, sorry.

                  If you are representative of Gen-X-ers or millennials, you may be unwittingly making another point about boomers and/or those generations. If you are typical, then you may be proving that boomers have done a poor job of educating succeeding generations on how to construct a logical argument.
                  OR it could be a failure on their part to learn.
                  Given the sensitivity boomers always had to shallow stereotypes gained in our involvement in the civil rights, women’s liberation and gay rights movements, the second conclusion seems more likely.

                  • CB June 3rd, 2015 at 23:10

                    “Could you describe the sort of thinking behind such a notion – thinking you have to like someone before being able to see what sort of demeanor they have?”

                    No. I don’t think that.

                    “you don’t give the percentages of boomers who support it.”

                    That’s actually a fair point, and I stand corrected:

                    “As in 2011, Americans aged 55 to 64 compose a distinct group that may be a sweet spot for climate concern and action. Threats to the environment rank higher among their competing priorities, and they are less likely (21%) than most (31%) to think we should learn to live with climate change, not try to stop it.”

                    ecoamerica.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/eA_American_Climate_Values_2014_Psychographic_and_Demographic_Insights.pdf

                    I was extrapolating from voting patterns in which Republicans skew older.

                    “Our track record is longer and has more notable achievements than Gen-Xers or millennials”

                    lol! Well, yeah, would do. You’ve been around longer. Give it time! I actually really liked the Occupy movement. I was disheartened no demands came out of it. A reinstatement of a strong, progressive inheritance tax would have been a start…

                    • burqa June 4th, 2015 at 22:27

                      Nice reply.
                      On the last point, yeah, I knew when I was typing it that I was cheating.
                      I’ll readily admit a lot of the Pee Party are boomers. I wish it were not so.
                      I’m an old fart and remember, going back to the 60s, older people criticizing the younger generation, usually saying they are soft and less capable because they haven’t gone through tough times, etc.
                      Also in the 60s I saw Silent Lew Walt, a legend in his own time for battlefield heroism in World War II where he was twice nominated for the Medal of Honor, stand up for the younger generation. It was a moving experience. This salty Old Breed Marine commanded all Marine troops and a bunch of Army in Vietnam and spoke highly of them. Further, he never lost faith in them or America and I learned that attitude from him. You can hear the same thing in Reagan’s farewell speech.
                      I think this is the important thing. I am confident the Gen-X-ers, Millennials and those to follow will do just fine. They will find solutions to problems that seem intractable now. Thanks to them, America will continue getting better.

                      I read a lot of history and have read about how what we call The Greatest Generation were clubbed by the older generation in their time. Before World War II they were described as being soft, self-absorbed and incapable. The critics were wrong.
                      That kind of talk can be found in history going back to the ancient Greeks, if not further back than that. I’ve read it. I’ve read those sentiments expressed in Roman times.
                      It’s bunk.

                    • greenfloyd June 4th, 2015 at 23:55

                      I think the biggest challenge Americans face in the next 50 to 100 years will be the transition from present-day, unsustainable war-based economy. Somehow we need to find a way to take all that wasted energy, both human and material, redirect it toward more constructive things like infrastructure, medicine and the arts. If we can convince the Chinese, Russians and other major players on the world stage to go along, then, we might even become a species worthy of “first-contact?”

                    • burqa June 5th, 2015 at 22:26

                      You make good points. You do that a lot.
                      I would add a couple of issues.
                      One is how to power transportation. We may figure out ways to go all-electric or hydrogen or find ways to have some other power source to inexpensively move people around. I think we need an initiative to decide on one way to go, decide on just one and then implement it.
                      The other is robot technology and other technical advances have put a lot of people out of work. I recall a company called Eastman Kodak that used to employ tens of thousands of people. As machines and other technology replace human workers, we need to find new ways for large numbers of people to work.
                      Somewhere else I mentioned I mastered component plant and modular construction. I did. Manufactured housing has a lot of potential, but it pays a lot less than what carpenters make in the field stick-building houses.
                      We are wasting a tremendous amount of energy heating and cooling residences because our building codes allow it. Geo-thermal is a no-brainer, and so are many other features that should be required. Plus, modern houses are not designed to function with the environment, but in spite of it. Modern houses are less healthy, more expensive and last far fewer years than they should. People hermetically seal themselves in and go years without raising a window. Airflow within is constricted, making them even more expensive to heat and cool.
                      Old houses, on the other hand, have features that function more in harmony with the environment. They are built under mature trees to shade them, they have high ceilings, transoms and layouts that permit air to flow more easily. I live in an old farmhouse and usually need to turn on a fan or two about a half dozen times in the summer, otherwise it is comfortable.

                      I am confident future generations will figure these things out and that better days are coming. Some of their solutions will be things we can not imagine now.

                    • greenfloyd June 6th, 2015 at 01:09

                      I agree and share your optimism about future generations coming together, overcoming the considerable obstacles they inherit and those yet unforeseen.

                      Obama has given us a great start to building a Liberal future for America that could prevail for generations. Yet it’s a fragile start. It will require keen minds, smart players and a firm hand to sustain and hopefully build upon his considerable legacy as both a President, a Democrat and a “Trekkie!”

                    • burqa June 6th, 2015 at 03:30

                      I think you’re right.
                      Here we are, producing far more energy than we imagined 15 or 20 years ago.
                      Good one on Obama, too.
                      One thing I am fond of saying is there is one thing we can predict about the future, and that is there will be surprises coming we can’t imagine now.

                      One thing that seems to have promise is fusion reactors. If we could get rid of nuke waste I would be willing to look more at nuclear power, and I am told that regular nuclear waste could be burned up in a fusion reactor. If so, that would be great news.
                      The problem, or one of them, was described in a letter to the editor of the Washington Post I saw a couple years ago. The writer was a nuke scientist or engineer, and he daid when he was in school in the mid-70s they were saying fusion was 20 years away. Then he went to work for the Dept. of Energy and the issue came up in the 80s and they said fusion was 20 years away and then there was something around the turn of the century and they were saying fusion was 20 years away and that’s what they are supposedly saying now….

                    • greenfloyd June 6th, 2015 at 22:28

                      I’ve also heard the same thing about “fusion” for many years. It holds a great deal of promise for helping end our reliance on things like coal or oil… which might explain the delay!? If you get my drift, and I believe you probably do.

  8. robert June 2nd, 2015 at 19:11

    too much of our trash on the moon Maybe that’s why mars is so appealing

    NASA’s typical method of mission conclusion involves, inevitably,
    leaving debris strewn on planets across our solar system. And it means
    that the moon, in particular, currently hosts nearly 400,000 pounds of man-made material.
    In epic terms, the lunar surface bears human footprints that are as
    figurative as they are literal, objects of earthly origin that have
    found their final resting place in the most otherworldly mausoleum
    imaginable. In less epic terms: We regularly leave trash on the moon.

    http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/12/the-trash-weve-left-on-the-moon/266465/

  9. zlop June 3rd, 2015 at 00:43

    “so-called “Goldilocks” zone” myth does mot take into account that ,
    warm surfaces could exist, with a wide range of pressure and radiation combinations.
    Limitation is that, at very high pressures, the atmosphere becomes a supercritical fluid.

  10. Obewon June 3rd, 2015 at 01:09

    NASA unveils its futuristic Alcubierre warp drive starship – called Enterprise! This NASA Advanced Propulsion Labs redesign is powered by a 3 meter sphere of fuel, replacing the prior Jupiter sized fuel mass. http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/184143-nasa-unveils-its-futuristic-warp-drive-starship-called-enterprise-of-course

  11. zlop June 3rd, 2015 at 01:20

    What are the possibilities of life on intergalactic planets?
    Upper atmosphere could be He³ . .. .. lapsing to Hydrogen and other gases.

    • crc3 June 3rd, 2015 at 11:02

      I think that ANYTHING is possible in the universe we know but there could also be other universes we don’t know about. It boggles the mind when you think about the possibilities…

      • zlop June 3rd, 2015 at 13:03

        “I think that ANYTHING is possible in the universe we know”?
        There are mathematical solutions from suppositions, which have not been observed.

        From what we do know; He³ has half an atmosphere pressure at the 2.72K
        microwave background. What are the possibilities, lapsing to warmer below?

  12. bpollen June 3rd, 2015 at 03:55

    If only they could find Nibiru…

    • mea_mark June 3rd, 2015 at 10:20

      It/they will probably find us first.

      • bpollen June 3rd, 2015 at 15:34

        And determine that we are void of intelligent life…

  13. crc3 June 3rd, 2015 at 10:59

    In the vast universe I think anything is possible. We know very little about the possibilities out there (only theories and speculation). We are cavemen in comparison to today’s species when it come to the universe. As we continue to explore we are going to be surprised if not shocked when we discover things we never thought possible. Are there other life forms in the universe? You bet there are and they range from the most primitive to the most highly advanced life forms. I also believe we have been visited and we are being observed. Where are these life forms? God only knows!

Leave a Reply