WBurkhart90 t1_j6dvpjh wrote

Not really, especially if we have the ability to expand beyond our world and form livable conditions elsewhere. Rules could be composed such as being able to see through the eyes of drones or other robotics while our physical body is kept safe in underground facilities. You put so many limits on what we could do and that's forming the foundation of your flawed reasoning.

You use the catchphrase death defines life as if it's scientific staple because it sounds good. But catchy phrases don't dictate reality, and the real truth is that you have no idea how it would actually play our. You are guessing. Yet you state it as matter of fact.

Humans have shown tremendous resilience towards adversity. Adversity and necessity have driven us to do extraordinary things scientifically, things that would seem like magic to humans living hundreds of years ago.

So I don't take your quote of death defining the value of life. In fact the majority of the world is religious who believe that death is just the beginning and that the afterlife defines life. Yet the world keeps spinning and people keep going with renewed vigor constantly.

Edit because I get upset about crap like this. Human beings are a huge contributor to imbalance to nature. But steps are being taken to help that imbalance, with things like lab grown meats and combating climate change. The future is not limited because you say so. We can actually make it a goal to sustain and maintain balance better than anything else out there. Intervening in moments where species are nearly extinct, providing care and shelter and everything else under the sun. I'm sorry but you aren't seeing any type of big picture possibilities and just harping on your small scope lens you read about in news feeds everyday. If you stop and take a step back and look at it in a wider lens you could see that humanity living much longer really is actually for the better of nature and not the other way around.


WBurkhart90 t1_j6an9eo wrote

How so? You know the farthest reaches of what science can do? Please educate me all knowing master. Because you have no clue and just talking out of your butt. Top of their field scientists don't even know the farthest reaches of scientific possibility, it's daily being expanded and more understood. But yet you say it's common sense what science can and can't do. That's the most obvious example of ignorance I have ever been a part of.


WBurkhart90 t1_j6amsmc wrote

Actually I don't know that and that's the only honest answer. To say you know it won't happen is intellectually dishonest. You're comparing a human beings possibilities to the possibilities of science. Unequivocable strawman you're propping up there.

The biggest difference, we have barely scratched the surface of discovery for science, so we literally have no clue how much we can manipulate or innovate. How dare you set limits like you are on science. Scientists have already theorized the possibility of creating synthetic universes, or multi-dimensional reality. I'm sorry you put limits on this world, but your ignorance doesn't set real limits.


WBurkhart90 t1_j6alrx6 wrote

But that's only because we have limited understanding of the universe. I agree it's likely that we will not be able to avoid the heat death. But I find it dishonest to say it's impossible to avoid.

Imagine we could create a brand new universe in a lab and somehow transport ourselves into it. We could do this an infinite amount of times. Who knows, and that's my point. We have limited knowledge of what's actually possible in this existence, yet people constantly let the "impossibilities" define what's true and what's not.


WBurkhart90 t1_j68ztk9 wrote

I'm sorry but I can't stand arrogant truth statements like this. Do you know every single possible discovery that's possible in our existence? You don't. You can say things like reasonably speaking, sure, but making fact statements in the dark is irresponsible and intellectually dishonest.

You don't know what we can create, discover, or innovate. What if we could create a new universe that we can enter that is still in it's youth far from a heat death. This is just the most basic idea I could think of in moments writing this sentence. I'm sure you'll say that's not possible, because again you have all knowable knowledge in the entire universe.


WBurkhart90 t1_j67d5lh wrote

Even that is debatable. But yeah I can see where you're coming from. I do see humans uncovering anti-aging discoveries that could potentially end age-related death entirely.

It's far-fetched, sure. But I don't think death is a guarantee forever.