> > --without laying waste to planet Earth.
>
> Perhaps planet Earth started out a waste, and people work to make it less of a waste. Do you want planet Earth fully depopulated of people?

Mostly depopulated would work. Leave life, undisturbed tribes, and some biologists behind, depopulate the rest off planet.

Once an industrial base is established off world, why keep screwing up the diamond in the rough that is Earth? Life is likely common, complex intelligent life is likely exceedingly rare and currently we only have one planet in the universe that we know has it.
Brooks

On 6/6/12 7:51 AM, brooksn wrote:

> Mostly depopulated would work. Leave life, undisturbed tribes, and some
> biologists behind, depopulate the rest off planet.
>
> Once an industrial base is established off world, why keep screwing up
> the diamond in the rough that is Earth? Life is likely common, complex
> intelligent life is likely exceedingly rare and currently we only have
> one planet in the universe that we know has it.

I agree fully. Ideally, Earth should become a nature preserve, visited
but not inhabited by humans (or posthumans).

I'm quite skeptical that this will ever happen, but that's the ideal.

Best,
- Joe

Absolutely! Once we can get our industrial base off planet we can start putting resources into REPAIRING the damage weve done in our adolescence. Things will never get better on Earth until we STOP taking from her, and start GIVING BACK, resources, energy, whatevers necessary to correct the biospere and then leave it alone so it can return to its wild ways. Who can say how many more species Earth may yet bear?

From: Joe Strout
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2012 9:54 AM
To: spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com
Cc: brooksn
Subject: Re: [spacesettlers] Evacuate Earth? Yes

On 6/6/12 7:51 AM, brooksn wrote:

> Mostly depopulated would work. Leave life, undisturbed tribes, and some
> biologists behind, depopulate the rest off planet.
>
> Once an industrial base is established off world, why keep screwing up
> the diamond in the rough that is Earth? Life is likely common, complex
> intelligent life is likely exceedingly rare and currently we only have
> one planet in the universe that we know has it.

I agree fully. Ideally, Earth should become a nature preserve, visited
but not inhabited by humans (or posthumans).

I'm quite skeptical that this will ever happen, but that's the ideal.

Best,
- Joe

I've played around with the idea of a future Earth with less than a billion residents, most using clean green technologies (like powersats). There would be a few million deliberate primitives, and several million tourists would be here at any given time. Most of the planet would be either wildlife preserve or historical park.

The Solar System, OTOH, would have a population of forty billion.

On 6/14/12 6:31 AM, sailor.barsoom wrote:

> I've played around with the idea of a future Earth with less than a
> billion residents, most using clean green technologies (like powersats).
> There would be a few million deliberate primitives, and several million
> tourists would be here at any given time. Most of the planet would be
> either wildlife preserve or historical park.

Sounds good to me. And might be achievable.

> The Solar System, OTOH, would have a population of forty billion.

Here I think you're aiming too low. Well, OK, I'll call it a good
start; but ultimately I expect the population of the Sol system to
number in the trillions.

Best,
- Joe

--- In spacesettlers, Joe Strout wrote:

> On 6/14/12 6:31 AM, sailor.barsoom wrote:

>> I've played around with the idea of a future Earth with less
>> than a billion residents, most using clean green technologies
>> (like powersats). There would be a few million deliberate
>> primitives, and several million tourists would be here at any
>> given time. Most of the planet would be either wildlife
>> preserve or historical park.

> Sounds good to me. And might be achievable.

I like to think so. I was aiming at about four, maybe five hundred years from now.

>> The Solar System, OTOH, would have a population of forty
>> billion.

> Here I think you're aiming too low. Well, OK, I'll call it a
> good start; but ultimately I expect the population of the Sol
> system to number in the trillions.

No reason it couldn't. I assumed that with a universally high standard of living population growth would be slow, so that in a mere half-millennium even forty billion might be an overestimate. But eventually trillions? Sure, no reason why not.

> Best,
> - Joe

Best I Can Manage,
- Sailor Barsoom

> >> The Solar System, OTOH, would have a population of forty
> >> billion.
>
> > Here I think you're aiming too low. Well, OK, I'll call it a
> > good start; but ultimately I expect the population of the Sol
> > system to number in the trillions.
>
> No reason it couldn't. I assumed that with a universally high standard of living population growth would be slow, so that in a mere half-millennium even forty billion might be an overestimate. But eventually trillions? Sure, no reason why not.
>
> > Best,
> > - Joe
>
> Best I Can Manage,
> - Sailor Barsoom

I agree the higher standard of living will likely slow growth down, we may need programs to increase birth rates. There is a carrying capacity for the solar system, but it's likely really huge. Also if we don't wish to convert all matter in the solar system into hollow habitats, there will probably be a preference to leave large rocky bodies largely intact beyond terraforming. Asteroids, comets and small moons would seem like fair game though. As well as maybe even super earthing the ice giants. :)

Best in snow,
Brooks

PS Of course as we expand into stable industrial strength off world colonies, getting out of the solar system becomes more feasible as well.

On 6/15/12 5:51 AM, brooksn wrote:

> I agree the higher standard of living will likely slow growth down, we
> may need programs to increase birth rates.

That won't be necessary; natural selection will take care of it. People
are all different, and some prefer to have more kids than others. In
the absence of serious resource limits, those who prefer to have more
will quickly outnumber those who don't. (This will be even more true
once aging is cured.)

> There is a carrying capacity
> for the solar system, but it's likely really huge. Also if we don't wish
> to convert all matter in the solar system into hollow habitats, there
> will probably be a preference to leave large rocky bodies largely intact
> beyond terraforming. Asteroids, comets and small moons would seem like
> fair game though. As well as maybe even super earthing the ice giants. :)

Agreed. And don't forget the Kuiper belt, which is huge and full of
useful stuff.

> PS Of course as we expand into stable industrial strength off world
> colonies, getting out of the solar system becomes more feasible as well.

Right, if we don't kill ourselves off, that seems pretty much inevitable.

But, for an interesting treatment of how social structure might delay
that step for a while, read the Golden Age series by John Wright.

Best,
- Joe

I like either estimate, and Earth as a park/ anthropology experiment hits the mark Precisely!

From: sailor.barsoom
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2012 1:57 PM
To: spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [spacesettlers] Re: Evacuate Earth? Yes

--- In spacesettlers, Joe Strout wrote:

> On 6/14/12 6:31 AM, sailor.barsoom wrote:

>> I've played around with the idea of a future Earth with less
>> than a billion residents, most using clean green technologies
>> (like powersats). There would be a few million deliberate
>> primitives, and several million tourists would be here at any
>> given time. Most of the planet would be either wildlife
>> preserve or historical park.

> Sounds good to me. And might be achievable.

I like to think so. I was aiming at about four, maybe five hundred years from now.

>> The Solar System, OTOH, would have a population of forty
>> billion.

> Here I think you're aiming too low. Well, OK, I'll call it a
> good start; but ultimately I expect the population of the Sol
> system to number in the trillions.

No reason it couldn't. I assumed that with a universally high standard of living population growth would be slow, so that in a mere half-millennium even forty billion might be an overestimate. But eventually trillions? Sure, no reason why not.

> Best,
> - Joe

Best I Can Manage,
- Sailor Barsoom

Mormons take over the galaxy!

Globular clusters with their stars moved around, to look like Donny
Osmond.

--- In spacesettlers@yahoogroups.com, Joe Strout wrote: