General Comment from a first time visitor (Kira) and response by George Drake

[Editor’s note] Kira, a first time visitor to my web page at and representative of the younger generation (she’s 19) left this comment/question.

I just took a look at your site and am left with a question I
would love to hear a response to: if, in fact, “it’s not about us,” then
why should we, with selfish intentions, take over a second planet? Who
is to say we won’t help to destroy another one?

My response to her included:

“I’m frustrated by how impenetrable I’ve found the younger generation to be for the old geezer I am and the message I’m trying to convey. Not to mention how the means of my getting motivated effects so many of all generations.

The “won’t we destroy another planet” question is a standard reaction. I answer it in more detail in my book, . . . but I’ll outline a response below in any case. . . .

The question, “why should we, with selfish intentions, take over a second planet?” is also addressed there, but probably less thoroughly. The shortest version is that humans are humans. I’m not sure exactly why we can’t seem to get beyond it, but the fact is that, if we don’t see what’s in it for us, we just don’t do it. Nobody’s going to get excited about getting a viable community of green algae going on Mars before we do our own planet in. Not if that’s the end goal.

Well, maybe nobody but me, and I have some second thoughts on it myself (I’m currently working on a second volume and just finished addressing this subject–I’d enclose it, but this reply will be too long in the first place, I’m sure).

An elaboration on the “Won’t we just f-word up another world” problem:
We might, in maybe a hundred millennia or so. After, I might note, we’ve brought life to it. And, by then, Homo sapiens will have evolved to an entirely different species, with unpredictable characteristics. What to do if we find life on Mars is another question altogether (see the book). As I see it, our problem is more immediate, and distinctly more significant than what is going to happen to humans or what humans may do in future generations on a different world.
Our problem is not, as so many see it, whether humans survive–or, even more crassly, whether we have an easy go of it. It’s whether Gaia survives. Survives at all. I hope and pray that, somehow, people will realize that our first loyalty–far before our loyalty to Homo sapiens–is to Gaia, the Earth-based Lifeforce. She is first and foremost. Without Her, there are no Homo sapiens.

Thank you, Kira, for looking at the site and responding. “

Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *