3 Choices, pick one:

[Elite Engineer]

An advanced alien species visits Earth. Upon examination of our species and speaking with world leaders, they say they will offer Earth one of three choices to which

they will help, and make our request a reality. 

The choices: 

1.) -End Global Warming

2.) -Colonize Mars with 1 week transport, full living facilities, food, etc. 

3.) -Cure all diseases on Earth

 

choose one and explain why for your choice

[Sensei]

45 minutes ago, Elite Engineer said:

3.) -Cure all diseases on Earth

The largest disease on the Earth, is stupidity..

The largest danger is stupidity (madness?) of influential political leader..

Edited December 8, 2017 by Sensei

[Phi for All]

I don't like the choices (I'd prefer to learn something advanced), but if we chose 2) for our whole species, wouldn't it accomplish 1) and 3) as well? Then we could go back in a few centuries. Just sayin'. 

[pzkpfw]

Exactly how would 1 be accomplished? That would affect whether it's a good choice.

[Prometheus]

None, thank you alien friend. We'll never learn for ourselves otherwise. How about comparing notes on maths and art?

[Sensei]

11 minutes ago, pzkpfw said:

Exactly how would 1 be accomplished?

I suppose so, filtering out atmosphere from excess of CO₂ and CH₄, to the level prior industrialization.. Fixing level of O₃.. etc. etc.

But after that some oil & gas & coal lobbyist would persuade governments that it's great idea to burn them again..

 

 

Edited December 9, 2017 by Sensei

[pzkpfw]

25 minutes ago, Sensei said:

I suppose so, filtering out atmosphere from excess of CO₂ and CH₄, to the level prior industrialization.. Fixing level of O₃.. etc. etc.

But after that some oil & gas & coal lobbyist would persuade governments that it's great idea to burn them again..

 

 

I was thinking not just how we'd screw it all up again afterwards, but how these hypothetical aliens dealt with the issues of now. As in, would they kill 50% of us, and force the survivors to live a pre-industrial agrarian life. Would we choose option 1 then?

[Sensei]

8 minutes ago, pzkpfw said:

I was thinking not just how we'd screw it all up again afterwards, but how these hypothetical aliens dealt with the issues of now. As in, would they kill 50% of us, and force the survivors to live a pre-industrial agrarian life. Would we choose option 1 then?

Getting rid off entire CO₂ from atmosphere would obviously disallow plants to grow, quickly killing plant eating animals, but I was thinking about just reducing CO₂ level to what was f.e. 200 years ago.

Yeah, term "End Global Warming" might be simply interpreted as "kill the all humans". Effect almost the same..

 

Edited December 9, 2017 by Sensei

[koti]

Theres so much more they could offer providing that they’re so advanced that global warming and all the diseases are just a click away for them. I’m afraid that your choice scenario Elite is extremely utopian but if you put me against the wall I choose GUT if it exists and if it does’t, let me understand why. Thats my choice

Edited December 9, 2017 by koti

[Elite Engineer]

5 hours ago, Phi for All said:

I don't like the choices (I'd prefer to learn something advanced), but if we chose 2) for our whole species, wouldn't it accomplish 1) and 3) as well? Then we could go back in a few centuries. Just sayin'. 

How would moving Earth's population to Mars end disease? What about genetic drift? Bacteria would be mutating as well to different virulent strains. 

4 hours ago, pzkpfw said:

Exactly how would 1 be accomplished? That would affect whether it's a good choice.

The questions is geared towards the justification of the choice, for the benefit of the population, not the mechanism by which it operates. 

Assume each choice has no negative consequences in it's implementation (i.e. reduce global warming by executing 90% of the population). 

5 hours ago, Sensei said:

The largest disease on the Earth, is stupidity..

The largest danger is stupidity (madness?) of influential political leader..

This comment is too edgy for me. Seriously, let's have a conversation on the choices, and which (you, us, and I) think would benefit humanity the best. 

[OldChemE]

I don't like the choices.  But.... if a choice had to be made I would go with #2.  Choices 1 and 3 are very risky.  What if the Alien idea of curing global warming turned earth into an ice-ball?  And # 3????  Think of what curing all disease would do to average life expectancy and global overcrowding.  Disease can be very bad-- but it is nevertheless an essential element of the balance of nature.

[Elite Engineer]

36 minutes ago, OldChemE said:

 What if the Alien idea of curing global warming turned earth into an ice-ball?  And # 3????  Think of what curing all disease would do to average life expectancy and global overcrowding. 

I mentioned this is my replies above. Assume all solutions applied have no negative consequences. 

[Phi for All]

10 hours ago, Elite Engineer said:

How would moving Earth's population to Mars end disease?

You said "cure all diseases on Earth". We wouldn't be here. It's a technicality, but as I said, I didn't much care for the choices. 

Since you've now specified that achieving 1) will be done without negative consequences (like simply doing away with humans), I'd choose that. The more I think about it, whatever processes they used, we'd still be able to observe them and learn from them. If it's truly an end to global warming, it would also necessarily include a sustainable replacement technology (or an advanced infrastructure using existing sustainable technology), so again we get more learning experiences.

[Sensei]

9 hours ago, Elite Engineer said:

Assume all solutions applied have no negative consequences. 

But certainly they have negative consequences.

1) fixed levels of CO₂ and CH₄ and other global warming gases in atmosphere, will decrease pressure on moving to renewable energy sources. Lobbyist will persuade governments to continue using coal, oil & gas (they are getting paycheck for this task after all), and global warming will be again, but delayed one or couple hundred years later, again.

2) if "average human" (only 16-20% of humans live in western countries, only percent of them with decent education) will be taken to Mars, without any additional requests (books, computers, access to knowledge, communication, equipment, astronaut suits, tools, etc. etc.) and leaved there in the box.. Such average human (knowing nothing about science, with really poor general knowledge), will be locked there unable to explore Mars, unable to transform planet by his/her own hands any further without knowledge, equipment and tools.. And you will have soon overpopulation on the Mars..

3) lack of diseases on the Earth ("of human body caused by microorganisms") = overpopulation at an accelerated rate.. 

Edited December 9, 2017 by Sensei

[Sensei]

What I wanted to say (in #2 post, my initial edgy comment), the all three things, actually four things, must be done simultaneously, without just picking up one favourite.

Fight with global warming (by moving to renewable energy sources, actively filtering green house gases, stopping devastation of environment, resurrection of natural environment by making new forests, filtering oceans from trash, etc. etc.). Get rid of oil & gas, coal,. gun lobbyist once and for all.

Acceleration of discovery of cosmos, and massive, every day, launches of spaceships and rockets, building space stations far away the Earth, also on the Moon, and Mars, other planet's natural satellites, etc. etc.

Fight with disease is forever going task, as new one will appear due to mutations, dangerous to the all living organisms.

And probably the most important thing (because only the smart people will be able to achieve the above three tasks), free high quality education for everybody. Free to not exclude poor people from the knowledge.

 

Edited December 10, 2017 by Sensei