Asklemmy

43965 readers

1810 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
[email protected]: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

If we discover the means to travel faster than light, but researching and developing the technology means that the Earth is destroyed in just a few decades, should the technology still be pursued? (self.asklemmy)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by ArchmageAzor to c/[email protected]

83 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Edit: A bunch of yall don't seem to grasp the concept of a theoretical question

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] pixxelkick 2 points 1 year ago

Depends what you mean by "destroy"

If you mean "make it uninhabitable for humans" ya sure, absolutely. It would mean we finally get off this rock and can leave it be. Earth will be fine without us and will soon enough (on the scale of time periods) return to business as usual.

Humans can move on like the parasites we are to new hosts, to extract and refuel and consume.

Starcraft tried to imply it was humans vs the zerg but we all have to accept the simple fact of the matter... we ARE the zerg