Stephen Hawking Says He Is Convinced That Humans Need To Leave Earth (sciencealert.com)

Reader dryriver writes: Back in May, renowned physicist Stephen Hawking made yet another doomsday prediction. He said that humanity has 100 years left on Earth, which knocked 900 years off the prediction he made in November 2016, which had given humanity 1,000 years left. With his new estimate, Hawking suggested the only way to prolong humanity's existence is for us to find a new home, on another planet (alternative source). Speaking at the Starmus Festival in Trondheim, Norway on Tuesday, Hawking reiterated his point: "If humanity is to continue for another million years, our future lies in boldly going where no one else has gone before," he explained, according to the BBC. Specifically, Hawking said that we should aim for another Moon landing by 2020, and work to build a lunar base in the next 30 years -- projects that could help prepare us to send human beings to Mars by 2025. "We are running out of space and the only places to go to are other worlds. It is time to explore other solar systems. Spreading out may be the only thing that saves us from ourselves. I am convinced that humans need to leave Earth," Hawking added.

Comments

Re:However bad he thinks Earth is

[ShanghaiBill]

How do we improve things when Americans continue to vote congenital idiots in Congress and the White House ?

The first thing to do is to stop expecting politicians to solve your problems. Change will come from technological improvements, not political speeches.

Re:However bad he thinks Earth is

[Bender0x7D1]

You contradict yourself. First you say:

You are under the mistaken impression that unaided humans can live on Earth. This is not true. There is nowhere on this planet that I could drop you, sans technology (remember; clothing is technology) or any knowledge of the local environment, and reasonably expect you to still be alive in a few months. The only way humans can survive anywhere on Earth is through the application of specialized knowledge and tools.

Then you almost immediately walk back your argument with:

There are some regions where the tools and knowledge required are fairly minimal, where temperature swings are mild, food is easy to identify and obtain, and there aren't too many dangerous plants or animals. But much of the human population today lives in regions where the required tooling and knowledge for survival is quite extensive.

Well, of course we can't support our current population without technology - we needed the technology BEFORE we could grow our population to its current state.

However, that has nothing to do with your initial claim that humans can't manage to live anywhere on Earth without some kind of initial technology. What you really mean is, "There isn't space on Earth where 7 billion people can live without advanced technology."