How would the US Space Force factor into a future Stargate series?

[Xaeden]

Wouldn't an attempt to terraform the Sahara raise similar concerns?

They were raised... by me... in this thread. And also in the various scientific sources I cited.

[SoulReaver]

There is a great deal of concern these days about "climate change". Wouldn't an attempt to terraform the Sahara raise similar concerns?

""climate change""?

also call a spade a spade it still is & always was about the climate warming (I wouldn't mind a cold trend tbh)

[Platschu]

It would be a positive climate change if they could make new oasises with drilling up water from under the sand. They could also build plenty of desalting factories near the sea. And they should really try to plant more bushed and trees on the savannah as the Green Line Project proposed. I believe it should be paid by the WWF.

Even these poor countries could sell some area for mass solar energy parks. But the question remains, if we have got oil and coal for the next 100-200 years, then why would anything change? It is sad reality that they would make "accidentally" destroy those plants before they could make lots of green energy.

The climate change is coming anyway if the ice melts in Syberia and the used to be frozen methane gas will end in the athmosphere as it will accelerate the warming even more and more. Sahara and all deserts will spread even more aroudn the Tropic of Cancer. They have even measured 20C on Antarctic, so the water level can increase. Unbelievable.

[Annoyed]

]It would be a positive climate change[/B] if they could make new oasises with drilling up water from under the sand. They could also build plenty of desalting factories near the sea. And they should really try to plant more bushed and trees on the savannah as the Green Line Project proposed. I believe it should be paid by the WWF.

Even these poor countries could sell some area for mass solar energy parks. But the question remains, if we have got oil and coal for the next 100-200 years, then why would anything change? It is sad reality that they would make "accidentally" destroy those plants before they could make lots of green energy.

The climate change is coming anyway if the ice melts in Syberia and the used to be frozen methane gas will end in the athmosphere as it will accelerate the warming even more and more. Sahara and all deserts will spread even more aroudn the Tropic of Cancer. They have even measured 20C on Antarctic, so the water level can increase. Unbelievable.

Positive for who?

https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/...ra-desert.html

[Platschu]

Humanity. Soon it or later the civilizations will fight for water and every land. Maybe even countries won't exist in the future or they will conquer each other, who knows? But if the overpopulation will spread so rapidly then every ecological habitats will be occupied (like cities under the seas or floating on the surface) in the next centuries. And they have to raise food somewhere as well. But anyway this is just an utopia and a big what if situation.

[SoulReaver]

ultimately that's what the Space Farce is for & why it was brought to you by the same lot who encourage overpopulation in the first place: when world population becomes unmanageable & its ecosystem messed up, find more planets with fresh viable ecosystems to mess them up too

[Annoyed]

ultimately that's what the Space Farce is for & why it was brought to you by the same lot who encourage overpopulation in the first place: when world population becomes unmanageable & its ecosystem messed up, find more planets with fresh viable ecosystems to mess them up too

Almost by definition, being able to migrate to another planet or planets requires FTL travel. The ability to harness energy on the scale that would require would almost certainly render our modern day issues moot. How many of our modern problems are at their root caused by energy scarcity?

[SoulReaver]

Almost by definition, being able to migrate to another planet or planets requires FTL travel. The ability to harness energy on the scale that would require would almost certainly render our modern day issues moot. How many of our modern problems are at their root caused by energy scarcity?

I guess most probs

but pollution itself is a problem even if you've unlimited energy & unlimited resources what good is it if you're seriously sick
mess up the ecosystem & you mess with yourself cause you're part of it

nb. overpopulation itself also a problem there's this experiment where they put rats in a cage & they increase the number of rats (same cage) while making sure they've always enough to eat
when the number reaches a critical point guess what the rats do

[Platschu]

They have written down planets so easily in the Stargate lore. Humanity would be more than happy to find just one tiny habitable planet, but as soon as they have seen a not so nice climate then that location was worthless for SGC. You know the stargate+DHD can be moved to a better location... I know it is just a tv show and they save the day and then return, just I generally didn't like this attitude. Hundreds of planets exist in the lore, but Earth has done maybe 5-10 offworld bases. But SG-1 was about exploration, so maybe a new spinoff can talk about mass colonization if the gate could be revealed. But then what? Who will authorize who can cross? Who will be in charge? Why would they let any hostile nation go through the gate? Or will the Chines and Russian fly now to other planets? I believe the US Space Force could play a role in this as what if they lure some enemies to Earth?

[Annoyed]

but pollution itself is a problem even if you've unlimited energy & unlimited resources what good is it if you're seriously sick
mess up the ecosystem & you mess with yourself cause you're part of it

The fictional power sources we see in SciFi that we would need are all "clean", so there wouldn't be an environmental impact, would there?

nb. overpopulation itself also a problem there's this experiment where they put rats in a cage & they increase the number of rats (same cage) while making sure they've always enough to eat
when the number reaches a critical point guess what the rats do

Die.

[SoulReaver]

The fictional power sources we see in SciFi that we would need are all "clean", so there wouldn't be an environmental impact, would there?

pure scifi/wishful thinking at this point
unless some alien both advanced & benevolent enough (Vulcans?) are willing to just give it to us what do you think it'd take to reach that point in the 1st place?

in our efforts to get there we'll have kcufed up the planet long before then (and ourselves with it)

Die.

while making sure they've always enough to eat

[Xaeden]

Almost by definition, being able to migrate to another planet or planets requires FTL travel. The ability to harness energy on the scale that would require would almost certainly render our modern day issues moot. How many of our modern problems are at their root caused by energy scarcity?

The nearest solar system (Alpha Centauri) is 4.37 light years away. With our current level of technology it will take thousands of years to reach it, but it's not outside the bounds of reality that we could build spaceships that travel at a quarter or even half the speed of light. In the second case, that would make the trip a comfortable 8-9 years.

I agree, though, that the technology to reach habitable exoplanets is too far out of our reach to be a solution to climate change. Just developing engines that can fly that fast will take a lot of time and resources. Once accomplished, there's a very low probability that there will be a planet that can support life in Alpha Centauri, let alone anywhere close to us. That means humans would either have to spend thousands of years terraforming uninhabited planets or they'd have to spend who knows how long searching for and traveling to a habitable planet.

To complicate matters further, long range confirmation that a planet could support human life is not sufficient evidence to send colonizers. We'd need to first send probes, wait for a response, and then decide if we should send people there. If a planet is 200 light years away and we can travel at half the speed of light, that's 400 years travel time for the probes, 200 years for a return message to get back to us, and another 400 years for a human crewed ship to make the journey. Advances in engine technology over 500 years may make it a little faster for the colony ship, but it's still a long endeavor from start to finish, and this doesn't account for the time it will take to develop the probe's engines in the first place.

When people tout the idea of colonizing other planets as a backup plan, they're usually talking about creating habitats on planets/moons in our solar system and beginning a terraforming project that could enable future generations (thousands of years from now) to venture outdoors in some fashion.

[Annoyed]

pure scifi/wishful thinking at this point
unless some alien both advanced & benevolent enough (Vulcans?) are willing to just give it to us what do you think it'd take to reach that point in the 1st place?

Of course, as of now, it's wishful thinking. So was travel at the speed of sound 100 years ago. And how long it takes to develop something depends on how much effort we put into developing it.

[Annoyed]

The nearest solar system (Alpha Centauri) is 4.37 light years away. With our current level of technology it will take hundreds of years to reach it, but it's not outside the bounds of reality that we could build spaceships that travel at a quarter or even half the speed of light. In the second case, that would make the trip a comfortable 8-9 years.

I agree, though, that the technology to reach habitable exoplanets is too far out of our reach to be a solution to climate change. Just developing engines that can fly that fast will take a lot of time and resources. Once accomplished, there's a very low probability that there will be a planet that can support life in Alpha Centauri, let alone anywhere close to us. That means humans would either have to spend thousands of years terraforming uninhabited planets or they'd have to spend who knows how long searching for and traveling to a habitable planet.

To complicate matters further, long range confirmation that a planet could support human life is not sufficient evidence to send colonizers. We'd need to first send probes, wait for a response, and then decide if we should send people there. If a planet is 200 light years away and we can travel at half the speed of light, that's 400 years travel time for the probes, 200 years for a return message to get back to us, and another 400 years for a human crewed ship to make the journey. Advances in engine technology over 500 years may make it a little faster for the colony ship, but it's still a long endeavor from start to finish, and this doesn't account for the time it will take to develop the probe's engines in the first place.

When people tout the idea of colonizing other planets as a backup plan, they're usually talking about creating habitats on planets/moons in our solar system and beginning a terraforming project that could enable future generations (thousands of years from now) to venture outdoors in some fashion.

Unless we destroy ourselves via war, I think it's inevitable that we will eventually be able to break the FTL barrier. What I'm saying is that the if we can develop that, we will have also solved the problems we have, which are largely caused by scarcity of resources.

[SoulReaver]

And how long it takes to develop something depends on how much effort we put into developing it.

and what sort of effort
and the side effects of that effort