20 March 2009

Colonizing Other Planets

This is a letter to the editor from The Olympian newspaper. I feel strongly about this issue and agree with the author, that it is wrong to invest so heavily in space exploration, when we are causing harm to this planet that we depend on...
Catch the next rocket to inhabitable planet

A recent headlines read, "Rocket ship blasts into space. It looked like a new star being born."

The purpose of this event was to place a telescope into orbit and that wonderful invention will seek out other planets that could be like our Earth.

The article doesn't list the cost to the taxpayers for this wonderful event, but I can't help but wonder about the thousands of people recently out of a job, people without homes or food, and those who wonder about how to pay for the next meal or medical coverage.

I wonder if they are as confused as I when I note that we don't seem to be able to take care of the world that we have, so why are we (you and I) spending a few million dollars looking for another Earth?

Wait, maybe I know the answer.

This world is in some deep trouble. If another fresh, clean world is found, then all of the people that still have the most bucks can grab a rocket and head on over to the new digs.

Robert Robinson, Olympia



  1. I'm in favor of colonizing another planet if only because it would be a mechanism to ship Dubya, Cheney and their ilk away from here. In fact, let's encourage ALL the warmongers to make the trip too. That way, we an begin the process of turning earth into a peaceful planet and they can have their wars somewhere else. :)

  2. I am reminded of a Grateful Dead song that I remember hearing Jerry Garcia singing, "If I had my way, I would tear this whole world in two," which was a reference to this topic...

    I hear what you're saying about shipping them off. But I am concerned that this problem is more than just physical. My feeling is that this is a deep emotional and spiritual problem, and that the solution involves changing out culture, so that the likes of Cheney, Rumsfeld, Bush, et al. can find no purchase within the socio-political-economic reality upon which to launch their destructive schemes...

    I am concerned that they, as individuals, are not the problem so much as a society that allows them to do what they do...

    (Even if we were to ship them off into space, what's to ensure that others like them wouldn't come along to take their places...)

    As always, thank you for commenting Trey, I appreciate your thoughts and sentiments!

  3. "Warmongers" "Dubya" Yup, lots of healing and reconciliation going on here. Peace and equality are great as long as it doesn't involve people who don't think like you.

    Nothing wrong with space exploration. It is the nature of people to explore and seek new frontiers. Space is what is next. Who knows what great scientific advances will come from the research and study for space travel and colonization?

    We will be poorer as a species if our instinct to travel and literally reach for the stars is withheld.

  4. Security-Six,
    A warmonger is someone who advocates for or tries to bring about war. Former president Bush II fits that definition to a T. So, I don't see how calling a spade a spade even intersects with "healing and reconciliation". It would be just like stating the sky is blue and you'd get all defensive and huffy about it.

  5. security-six. I have nothing against space travel and exploration - so long as we are sure not to spread destructive tendencies beyond the reach of this current sphere. If we go to other planets in quest of domination - which would be likely given the current quest for domination that exists amongst human societies on this planet - then that is not right.

    It's not right to go into space until we have first fixed problems relating to poverty, racism, and environmental/social degradation (et al.).

  6. Warmongering isn't always bad. Take for instance Afghanistan. We were attacked by terrorists backed by the Taliban government. Going in to take out the attacker is justifiable self defense. (I know, I know, inside job, conspiracy, tinfoil hat, etc, etc, etc... BUT JUST PRETEND for a minute maybe that a bunch of pissed off muslims blew up the WTC instead of some shadowy government group, wouldn't that be self defense and justifiable then?)