I think any serious colonization of Mars is between 100 and 300 years off (barring disasters). I don't think it will happen until after there is significant mining and manufacturing on the Moon or asteroids. I also think some kind of fission or fusion based propulsion will need to be developed before people go there with enough equipment to stay.

But the problem with thinking of Mars (or anywhere else) as a fallback planet, besides the lack of oxygen, magnetosphere, air pressure, food and liquid water is that it overlooks the obvious. Wherever we go, we’ll take our territorial selves with us. How long before the Chinese Mars Colony's terraforming policy starts screwing with the Western Mars colony's terraforming plan and vice-versa? Either we’re capable of dealing with the challenges posed by our own foibles or we’re not. Perhaps the reason we haven’t met any alien civilizations is that those which survive long term aren’t the type to go zipping around the galaxy. Maybe they’ve stayed quietly at home, tending their own garden and living within their means.

Good point.
Maybe get rid of 'nations', and finally unite to defend the earth against asteroids, and 'conquer' space.
"But someone HAS to dominate the others", says the Chief ape, sorry, i mean strategic advisor.

Let IS have the moon, as it is now :03:

Yeah, but you know how it is with us humans. You can have my tribal pride when you pry it from my cold, dead ego. :D

Maybe we will be invaded by an advanced alien rase that sees potential in us that can't be fully realised a slong as we have our petty wars and will subjugate us wih benelovlant rule. And unicorns will eat rainbows.

The topic: European immigrant/refugee problem.

Responses to said topic: Looking back I see; Don't bother me, blame Bush, something to do with potatoes, talk of power vacuums, donations for a loud hailer, a few laughs and funny emoticons, mocking posts, don't trust politicians, guilt trips, photos of dead children, and suggetions what someone else should do to solve said problem.


thats really good.

Rockstar, I love your thread summaries. Need more of them.:yep:

I look at the picture of the little boy and my heart is filled with sadness and compassion. But that's not any different than when I see a picture of a junkie or an auto accident victim. The key is to find a solution that does not upend your society. These people need help. But are you going to allow as many as want to come in? Why not? How do you draw the line, say, "Yes, you can come in, no, you cannot" ? Let them all in, and millions will come. You better realize, they are fleeing a region where they make up the whole population, and they didn't seem to manage well there. Now they want in your country. Maybe it will work out, I hope so. How many of you are willing to give up 10, 15, 20% of your paycheck (or guvmint welfare) to provide for millions of immigrants? And compete for jobs with people who will gladly work for less than you. It's easy to be compassionate when you expect the rich fatcats to finance everything. I am not trying to be mean, just realistic.

Fiction is always fun to read

Knowledge available about asylum seekers in the EU:

"Before we enter the discussion about responsibility sharing of asylum seekers in the EU we need to take stock of where we are in terms of the knowledge available about asylum seekers in the EU.

In 2014 there were a total of 624,000 (first) applications for asylum made in the 28 EU Member States.

In 2013, according to FRONTEX more than 320 million third country nationals entered the EU (but of course the vast majority of them did not apply for asylum).

For the 1st quarter of 2015, 185,000 (first) asylum applications were made in the EU.
Of them:
4% were made in the UK
8% were made in France
39.6% were made in Germany
1.4% were made in Greece (Sweden with a smaller population size had 6.3% of the total)
8.2% were made in Italy.

Over half of the total asylum seekers in the EU came from one of three countries: Syria, Kosovo or Afghanistan.

94% of Syrian asylum applications made in the EU were granted in 2014. In the same year 90% of Eritrean applications were successful and 88% of Iraqi applications. In the same period, 66% of Afghan applications succeeded.

On 10 August 2015 the European Commission approved financial allocations for asylum (also migration and integration) for some of the front line states for the period 2014 – 2020 as follows:
Cyprus: 32 million euro
Greece: 259 million euro
Italy: 310 million euro
Spain: 257 million euro Sweden 118.5 million euro.

According to the European Commission approximately 3% of asylum seekers are ever actually subject to a Dublin III return to a Member State other than the one where the asylum seeker actually wants his or her claim to be determined. What is the problem with allocation of responsibility for asylum seekers in the European Union? First, the statistics make it obvious that most asylum seekers do not apply for asylum in the Member States with external borders even though according to the images which the press in Europe provides bout asylum seekers one would think they all arrive by boat through the Mediterranean. This, by definition, would mean that they arrive in border states, not where they apply for asylum – primarily in land states. Why do asylum seekers not stay in the border states, why do they go to such extreme lengths, travelling in all sorts of clandestine manners to get to other Member States, such as Germany, to apply for asylum? The answer is quite simple – in 2011 the European Court of Human Rights found that returning an asylum seeker to Greece would constitute inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment because of the unspeakably horrible reception conditions there. The situation has not improved sufficiently for asylum seekers to be returned to Greece even now notwithstanding the Commission making very substantial amounts of funding available for assistance and the activities of EASO (European Asylum Support Office) in providing support for Greece. The Court of Justice of the European Union came to a similar conclusion regarding reception conditions in Greece in 2012 and that the conditions in Italy for the reception of families with children were such as to constitute an obstacle to their return there.. "
(Guild, Elspeth: Responsibility Sharing of Asylum Seekers in the EU: Good Quality First Reception is the Key, VerfBlog, 2015/8/26)
http://www.verfassungsblog.de/respon...on-is-the-key/

Still surprised?

Different times.

And what scorn? I'm just asking, how are we going to manage this?

Weren't a large part of the Mayflower pilgrims in search of new lands because there wasn't enough persecution back at home?

And I was just getting used to Skybird not being around.

First of all, "Why is Germany so attractive to immigration"?

On the news I see these poor people leaving Turkey ... how did they get there from Syria or else where?

Then they have to cross the sea to Greece and walk for two weeks to Hungry.

If they make it to Germany ... what then? Do they have relatives already there to take them in? How do they eat? How do they live?

Nature abhors a vaccum

Syria has a border to Turkey. They can just walk over.

They register as asylum seekers and are then transfered to one of the (now hopelessly overcrowded) first entry camps. Once the formalities have been processed there they get assigned to one of the regular asylum seeker facilities.