- Registration time
- Last login
- Online time
- 238 Hour
- Reading permission
lostalien Post time: 2012-4-27 22:42
I am glad someone here thinks along the same lines as I do :)
Therefore, it can be understood, that to ensure the continuity of existence, the preservation of life must be the primary objective of all living things, But wait! There is an inherent paradox here: for example, the supernova is a potential life-destroyer and is also, at the same time and equally, a fundamental prerequisite in manufacturing those elements from which life is built - particularly carbon. The Universe has to provide `release mechanisms of entropy` - to `let off steam`, as it were - and the suppression of supernovae would be both unnatural and counter-productive. Life must weave it`s course along a very fine line between, on the one hand, seizing opportunities to grow, and on the other hand, becoming deft in evasive techniques. In a scenario where life is directly in the firing line of destructive force, and too close for comfort to the apocalyptic event, then without the use of interstellar travel technologies, it`s doom is surely certain.
Or is it? Perhaps there are times when the benevolent helping hand could resolve the dilemma. If only someone, something, somewhere, had sky-hooks...
People. Do you have the courage? Or are you so concerned in perpetuating your own silly little extinction event that the whole world shrunk to dimensions of infinitesimal smallness, that one fine day, you all just popped out of existence, and for all eternity?
This is a didactic exposition which will show to future species in future worlds, that the consequences of extinction events - adaptive radiations - contribute to punctuated, yet ever larger increases in biodiversity, and that the cause of these events, be they supernovae, bolide impacts, or destructive species, shall all, in the course of time, be reduced to dust and scattered in random fashion by the winds of change.