In yesterday’s post, I claimed humans will never colonize the solar system or explore the galaxy. Whenever I express this doubt, I often get one excellent counterargument. This time, it came from P. F. Nel on my Facebook page.

I’d still read science fiction, but if I knew for an absolute fact that space exploration is going nowhere further than Mars and Venus, I’d probably prefer earthbound SF, where there is still enormous potential for imaginative futures.

But how are we ever going to know that “for an absolute fact”? The human race is only 300,000 years old. If we survive, what will the world look like a million years in the future? What about two million? I don’t think we can predict our technological future. Just look at those amusing predictions for the 21st century, made a hundred or more years ago. They’re nothing like the world of today.

So I can’t see how we can ever rule out interplanetary settlements or even interstellar trips. We still have millions of people who believe that nobody ever landed on the moon. We may be far wrong about how long things might take, but never say never.

This is a good argument, one I can’t counter. This argument is similar to those for God, Heaven, and the afterlife. Yes, these things are possible, but are they likely? It doesn’t hurt to believe in them as long as you don’t sacrifice anything in the here and now, in this existence.

We can never say anything for sure. Science is never 100% definite. We might invent some gizmo that takes us to the stars, but my main point yesterday was whether we’ll want to go if we could.

I can’t believe anyone who carefully considers the conditions on the planets and moons in our solar system would choose to live anywhere other than the Earth. But what if we discover Earth-like worlds orbiting distant stars? Would you really go if the trip lasted five to ten years? Would you go knowing that only your descendants would arrive? If you say yes, I think you need to psychoanalyze your motives. I would say science fiction has brainwashed you, and you need to think long and hard about your desires.

Let’s say we discover an FTL drive that can take us anywhere in the galaxy as fast as a plane trip from New York to Los Angeles. And you could pick destinations that are very Earth-like. Before you go, I suggest reading Aurora by Kim Stanley Robinson. Our bodies are ecologies of bacteria, fungi, and viruses. It took our species millions of years of evolution to coexist with those tiny creatures. If you step onto a planet where the air is breathable and the temperature is comfortable, do you think your microbiome will survive the onslaught of your destination’s biome?

There is something else to consider. Why do you want to leave Earth? It’s a world that took billions of years of customization just for your body. Why would you risk your only body to a world that wasn’t designed for it?

Furthermore, what motivates you? Adventure? Boredom? Oppression? Dislike of people? Political freedom? If you’re dreaming of traveling to other planets, isn’t it because of reading or watching science fiction? Has it given us a truly good reason to leave Earth?

Up till now, I’ve only been questioning our desire to colonize the galaxy. Let’s explore the real question: can we do it, given enough time? Like Piet said, what is possible in a million years?

The potential of technology seems infinite. Is it? What if Einstein is flat out right, and nothing can travel faster than light? That won’t stop us. If we could travel at near light speeds, we could eventually go anywhere in the galaxy. Hopping from star to star, in five to ten-year jaunts, people could endure that. But we’re back to my first argument. Is there anywhere we want to go? 

Ethically, we shouldn’t visit any planet that has evolved life. Why steal someone else’s existential potential? We’re not very ethical, are we? Humanity has consumed the planet Earth like a cancer. Shouldn’t we evolve spiritually before we start spreading across the galaxy? Remember The Day the Earth Stood Still? If aliens exist, they would do well to stop us. If we were truly moral beings, we’d do well to stop ourselves.

After the Soviet Union collapsed, we had a couple of decades where it looked like we might finally get our act together and become a peaceful species. Globalization and cooperation grew. We even realized we were destroying our environment by using fossil fuels. Humanity could have done something. We didn’t. We went back to nationalism and strong men rule. We’re deevolving.

Yes, there are people rich enough now to build their own space programs. But doesn’t that say something when the richest among us choose to use their wealth to feed their egos rather than help the species?

Taxpayers and politicians stopped supporting the space program after Apollo 11 because they thought the money could be better spent elsewhere. Did we? We’ve spent trillions on weapons and war that could have colonized the Moon and Mars. But we didn’t. Why? The driving force of our species is greed. We compete with each other to consume more.

We can’t even stop ourselves from turning the paradise of planet Earth into the hell of planet Venus. Can we really survive another million years?

Poul Anderson often claimed in his science fiction stories that the human race was best suited to handle feudalism. In a recent article in The Atlantic, “Rod Dreher Thinks the Enlightenment was a Mistake,” a radical-right philosopher makes a similar case. Dreher believes humanity was better off before science, when religion and faith dominated. Ignoring the fact that before the Enlightenment, the vast majority of people were ignorant peasants, serfs, and slaves, is feudalism the highest level of order humanity can handle? That doesn’t say much about our species.

Let’s face it, if the Singularity produces AI minds greater than ours, maybe there’s a reason. Maybe Homo Sapiens have evolved as far as they can. That doesn’t mean AIs have to wipe us out. Here’s the thing: intelligent machines are perfectly suited for living everywhere in the solar system and beyond. They can “live” long enough to travel to the stars.

What about Fermi’s Paradox? Maybe it’s logical that we haven’t heard from anyone else if biology is the limitation. So, why haven’t we heard from intelligent machines? Maybe they are ethical enough not interfere with biological beings? Maybe they only talk to other intelligent machines. If the singularity occurs in the next few years, it should only take another decade or two for machines to evolve into space-faring beings. Maybe our AI minds will be contacted by alien AI minds.

As an old man, my doubt about humans colonizing Mars and the galaxy comes from two reasons. First, I don’t think anyone will want to live on Mars, and second, I believe our current global civilization is doomed. And I doubt we’ll leave enough natural resources for a future global civilization to prosper as we did.

We can only guess what AI minds will do. Who knows, maybe they will help us achieve a Star Trek future. Or maybe they will convince us to take care of Earth. But if we couldn’t do right on our own, could we become better with them? Or will humanity become a cargo cult waiting for the flying saucers to save us? 

James Wallace Harris