http://www.space.com/adastra/adastra_dondavis_060320.html

The Don Davis AdAstra article is excellent. Its only shortcoming
is that it fails to be truly alarming and is unlikely to spur a great
deal of interest or action. Many of the points he makes are worthy
of separate articles [even books], and should be persued in a
more persuasive fashion.
One thing I would like to point out: The population of the
Earth has doubled in my lifetime and is expected to more than
double again in the lifetime of my grandchildren. It is doubtful
that the Earth can sustain even the increase of another generation,
with genocidal wars a virtual certainty, but regardless of arguments
to the contrary, our quality of life will dwindle to the point where
the beauty of nature will only be available to the Rich. [for the rest
of us, well, the only greenery available will probably be in shades of
Soylent Green ;-[ . [sorry,...]
My retirement property is in one of the least populated areas of
VA yet in the past ten yrs. new housing has been popping up at
an alarming rate with corresponding destruction of field and forest.
Believe me, in all of human history there has never been a more
urgent need to rouse the ignorant and apathetic to an understanding
of their plight.

P.S. What diameter cylinder do you suppose could be built from
this new material..?

http://ttp.northwestern.edu/abstracts/viewabs.php?id=316&cat

> http://www.space.com/adastra/adastra_dondavis_060320.html

It is indeed a good article; and an excellent article against zero growth
advocates like Dr Bartlet
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-QA2rkpBSY

It's an interesting (8 part) presentation with some useful information. But
he makes the classical mistake...

ANTIcarrot.

ANTIcarrot [in D.1820 1b]

said in reference to:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-QA2rkpBSY

It's an interesting (8 part) presentation with some useful
information. But he makes the classical mistake...

Some of us may have missed that class, how about
naming the particular "mistake" you have in mind.

> From: Bob Hardman
> Some of us may have missed that class, how about
> naming the particular "mistake" you have in mind.

Erm... The obvious one? The assumption that we are strictly confined to the
resources of Earth. You do know this is a space settlement list, right? ;)

Plus the underlying assumption that they alone have access to the sum total
of all knowledge humans will ever have; and hence that quick and simply
solutions (Bussard Fusion, SPSS, space settlement, etc) are not merely
unlikely but completely impossible. They don't usually say so, but the
phrase "If there's an alternative, I certainly can't imagine it" usually
rears it's ugly head. A phrase which occurs with disturbing regularity in
creationist literature, and other forms of ignorant dogma.

Zero local growth is usually (but not always) a good idea. But zero
sum-total growth is simply not needed; or at least won't be for a few
thousand years.

ANTIcarrot.

On 8/4/07, ANTIcarrot wrote:
(...)
> Zero local growth is usually (but not always) a good idea. But zero
> sum-total growth is simply not needed; or at least won't be for a few
> thousand years.
(...)

Plus nobody wants zero growth. Pick any country with zero growth and
you will see people screaming against economic stagnation and wanting
to throw the government. It is just a politically unfeasible idea in
practice. (More than nuclear pulse spaceships taking off from Earth.
:)