The Earth is Doomed: Where Will We Live?

In this hypothetical scenario, Earth is facing an unavoidable doomsday, and humans need to escape. But where do we go? Proxima Centauri b, the closest habitable exoplanet, might seem like a good option, but it has its issues. Join us as we explore the challenges of settling on this potentially habitable planet, from extreme temperature differences to the dangers of radiation.

[@AcornElectron]

Nowhere, everyone dies. Happy tomorrow 😊

[@antiisocial]

So Soylent was the original Paleo diet.

[@flecx9767]

Thx for the happy outlook ☺️

[@chaddilingus]

Beautiful

[@bigcity2085]

We don't get off this rock, unless someone gives us a ride. Galactic Uber.

[@williek08472]

Just this once, everybody lives!

[@jcdock]

The earth isn't doomed, our ability to live on it is

[@TheUrbanSpartacuz]

No, Earth is certainly doomed. Eventually our star, the Sun, will reach its end and while it is not large enough to cause a supernova it is estimated that between its red giant phase and white dwarf transition it will expand so much that it will engulf Mercury, Venus and Earth completely, disintegrating the planets. Granted, this is billions of years into the future but our home planet has an expiration date. Sadly.

[@andromidius]

There is another option. Take the space station concept, turn it into a sealed habitat on a planet or moon with decent enough gravity. It would still suck, but at least we'd have gravity.

[@tomcollins5112]

No, you would not want to live there, wherever it is. The only option is to protect the planet we are on and clean up the mess we've made. We are stuck here. That likely means large sums of money spent on environmental protection and high taxes on the rich. Sorry you couldn't be rich forever.

[@trex2621]

@@tomcollins5112 When rich are taxed out of existence? who will be next?

[@trex2621]

Sealed habitat on uninhabitable planet has its own issues. But we don't need any new materials or any new science (although it would help) to start building O'Neill cylinders of 800 km2 Island Three can have earth-like gravity and atmospheric pressure (although O'Neill had half) is so massive, that its hull and atmosphere can protect completely from cosmic rays. We need just some engineering done. For robots, harvesting asteroids and/or moon for materials etc. Lot of work, but with potential of supporting trillions of times of current Earth population.

[@tomcollins5112]

@@trex2621 You're always going to have "rich" and poor people, but extravagant wealth should become a thing of the past. It's too expensive to create and the world is becoming too much of a mess.

[@differentfins]

@@tomcollins5112 This is hypothetical, assuming our solar system is destroyed. Also, you are right we should take care of our earth BUT it is already doomed. Even if we turn it into the planet on Avatar where we live in a perfect symbiotic relationship with nature the Earth's clock is ticking. In approximately 5 billion years the sun will expand and consume our planet. Not our problem but if life is to continue we may just be living a space station. By then maybe our descendants have evolved to be boneless and capable of living without gravity. That is a long time from now.

[@jsinope2786]

Simon makes me cry myself to sleep… again.

[@mattball420]

All those exo planets are largely estimated to be the way we think they are, imagine travelling 4 light years to realize it was a bad estimate lol

[@JamesFromTexas]

I think we'd have better estimates, if not actual data, by the time we figure out interstellar travel. If it ever comes to that, our technology would seem like magic compared to what we have now.

[@bobbybaker8552]

In Star Trek, early interstellar flights would rely on the crew being frozen in stasis so that no aging or negative health effects would befall them (ie. Kahn)

[@timc333]

Ever wonder why you don't hear more about cryogenics ? It is because it is a failed technology , we as a species decided to try the process to see if we could work against nature and artificially create immortal Human life , we ended up with big freezers in non descript sometimes abandoned warehouses , that drip the very Human essence all over the floor creating a slippery waxy residue , that we still have not figured out how to revive . Thank You Gene Roddenberry for the idealistic thought but " It's dead , Jim " .

[@scottabc72]

Technology doesnt exist for safe long term freezing/hibernation. But its much more feasible to develop than say warp drives

[@The_Phoenix_Saga]

@@scottabc72 However the distances expected to travel greatly increase the likelihood of catastrophe. I mean a single lightyear is the equivalent to just shy of 6 trillion miles. Imagine just what could go wrong in that time and what just couldn't be accounted for.

[@thejudgmentalcat]

I couldn't live on Billy, my back can't handle any more gravity 😂

[@JamesFromTexas]

Same! And my knees. My body objects from the current gravitational force, can't imagine anything worse.

[@ignitionfrn2223]

1:30 - Chapter 1 - The closest option 5:35 - Chapter 2 - The closest match 9:20 - Chapter 3 - Nowhere in particular 11:50 - Chapter 4 - Wrap up

[@terryenby2304]

I’m hopeful we can eventually solve these issues, but probably not in my generation or even my kids lifespans.

[@SomeAustrianPainter]

🤡🤡🤡

[@cann5565]

It's a nice thought but we aren't even a level 1 civilization yet so....if we don't wipe ourselves out or something else does, maybe 30,000 years from now.

[@themotorcyclemasswhole]

I’ve already sold your kids to alien farmers. Options closed, so don’t trouble yourself with it.

[@nickrigopoulos589]

Out of your other 137 channels, this one is my fav. Cool stuff.

[@adrianwebster6923]

The habitable zone doesnt mean a whole lot. Both Mars and Venus are technically in the zone but arent really habitable yet.

[@skyless_moon]

Mars probably was habitable in the past, and there's earth too. Thats 2/3

[@totalermist]

@@skyless_moon So was Venus. Its current state could be as young as a couple of hundred million years.

[@joeyr7294]

The editing on this channel always makes me chuckle a little lol nicely done! Thanks for the content as always Simon and Co.🍻

[@ThatWriterKevin]

You're welcome!

[@joeyr7294]

@@ThatWriterKevin Be careful with the "internet mysteries" Simon may chain you to a radiator in the basement as well! Very well done and maybe my favorite vids, but it's a tough contest with the rest of Simon's empire.

[@Vastin]

It seems like orbital cities are probably the only viable option in most future scenarios. While they do require a lot of tech we don't have right now, most of that technology looks like a REASONABLE extrapolation of our current tech. O'Neal cylinders deal with the gravity problem decently, and with sufficient mass they can also deal with radiation. They are pretty big engineering challenges, but they don't appear to require anything exotic beyond some decent materials improvements, and enough advancement in automation that we can bootstrap a substantial asteroid/moon mining economy to get the materials to actually construct stations large enough for our needs (they have to be pretty damn big). Mix in some genetic engineering of humanity and the hundreds of other life forms we'd transfer into these habitats to deal with some of the other problematic aspects of living in space (psychological and physiological), and an improved understanding of cyclic organic environments to build something approaching closed-loop environmental systems, and the concept doesn't look outlandish at all compared to the technology needed for interstellar travel and terraforming. Both of those would require all of these technologies but taken to far greater levels - one that may simply be impossible. The physics needed to move spacecraft at anything greater than 0.01c get pretty exotic (antimatter, ultra-high efficiency fusion), while terraforming requires industry on a scale that would utterly dwarf the idea of building cities in space, on top of an incredible understanding of ecological systems. You could build thousands if not millions of such cities for the same effort as terraforming Mars to be 'Earth like'.

[@waynedieckmann9840]

The asteroid belt looks good. Reminds me of kids at Venezuela city dumps going through rubbish just to survive. A humble moment for humanity.

[@usonumabeach300]

Deep subterranean cities might be able to pull it off, but reproduction rates would need to be strictly regulated.

[@waynedieckmann9840]

@@usonumabeach300 nope. Remember there is no earth in this hypothesis. Did you watch the video?

[@rubiconnn]

@@cancermcaids7688 Carbon nanotubes ARE futuristic materials. There's little chance that we will be able to manufacture them in usable quantities in our lifetime.

[@watcherit1311]

But Mars can still be used as a foundation for a "ground based" space station. In addition to "on site" gravity that would also provide minerals, more space (including underground shielding), and would be much more Earth-like psychological experience compared to constantly floating in space. As a bonus, finding a Mars-2 alternatives should be quite easy even with existing technologies.

[@Jayjay-qe6um]

"As on world commander, I have been charged with a greater mission. Earth is dying. Our task here is to tame this frontier. Nothing less than to make Pandora the new home for humanity. But before we can do that, we need to pacify the hostiles." -- General Frances Ardmore, Avatar: The Way of Water

[@starshipsn-9513]

The O'Neill cylinder, stanford torus and Bernal sphere: allow us to introduce ourselves

[@oldman0995]

I worked for a company founded by Dr O’Neill and was fortunate enough to meet him and get an autographed copy of his book

[@phantomechelon3628]

But the money and resources required to build those would need global co-operation. Humanity is still dumb and stubborn enough that we'd rather argue, fight and face extinction than work together on projects like those.

[@phild8041]

I would choose Risa as my next place to live. TNG rules

[@whoshotdk]

If fictional planets are allowed, then I’ll take an Earth Mk II from the engineers at Magrathea. Except my house would be made of gold.

[@alexwoolridge94aw]

Yea, Venus is technically in our sun's habitable zone too

[@Kahrahnus]

Editing is getting better and better - great job 😊

[@ArneBab]

Thank you for the concise wrapup!

[@T3vearris]

The only part about not escaping this rock that bums me out is that I will be long gone by the time it's necessary. So, we don't even get to see the end. We just exist with the knowledge of the boring middle part we inhabit.

[@Thurgosh_OG]

Could all end much sooner in Nuclear armageddon, if the current situations in Europe and Asia, don't calm down.

[@dreamchasergarage690]

While I can see where doubling a person's weight is not a deal breaker I do think that twice the gravity would likely create big problems for the heart to pump blood. Although if we have the tech to get to Kepler 452b then we would likely also have the ability to modify our biology to suit the new home.

[@FallenRingbearer]

I've also wondered if the planet is bigger but has comparable mass, wouldn't the make it less dense. Like would it be noticeably "spongier"?

[@nickpook442]

Simon recently did a video on nano-bots multiplying at an exponential rate and destroying the Earth. (Can’t remember which channel it was on, sorry.) I’m starting to worry that his channels will multiply at such a rate that they’ll have the same effect.

[@timc333]

I want a 3D printer so that I can print up robots that can create more 3D printers to create more robots , to create more 3D printers to create more robots , to create more 3D printers to create more robots to create more 3d printers to create more robots Who will take over all the toasters in the world and proceed to toas me the perfect piece of toasted bread . Did the video go a little like this ?

[@sandybarnes887]

Maybe it was the Grey Goo episode on The Science Of Science Fiction channel?

[@nickpook442]

@@sandybarnes887 Yes, you are correct. It is titled ‘Grey Goo: The Disturbing Way Our Civilisation Could End.’I scanned through the titles for ‘Nano-Bots’ but of course didn’t find it!

[@ZeroKage69]

imagine being the people in the ISS and the earth gets wrecked by an asteroid but you're still up there. I wonder if they have a way to get back down even if there was no one left on earth to communicate with. I can probably look that up.

[@NnH_Kairyu]

We'd just end up Quarians, from Mass Effect. Making more ships as we go harvesting resources from planets. Living as a space-faring species in "flotillas".

[@Montie-Adkins]

In 1992 The Indiana Institute of technology showed that the technology of the time could build an airship over a mile long, in a flat egg shape. Today though currently not in business Bigelow has shown inflatable structures can be put in space. Then there is the Orbital Assembly Corporation planning to put a large rotating station in orbit using what look like their own version of Bigelow modules. And since the 70's, designers have shown we can make large structures in space. We need never go anywhere, we just need to build better in orbit.

[@cc-dtv]

New month, new factboi channel

[@Nathan-vt1jz]

A space station/ship that uses centrifugal force for gravity is a decent option. If there are asteroids around you could mine materials and fuel for more.

[@timc333]

The most scary part of this video is the fact of how everyone is talking about our deaths and end of Earth scenario's any more and that is the best direct proof of a fully dystopian society , we are only closer to yet another Human atrocity , then we will all settle down again for a hundred years or so . This time we actually may get to harm ourselves though , so Humanity certainly will never be the same again , we already crossed that threshold , enjoy the show , not worth trying to fight it , society is gonna come and get us all . Que the doom and gloom music in your head right now .

[@adamwu4565]

One should point out, with respect to Proxima Centauri b, that if we grant the technology needed to send a spaceship (or fleet) there, carrying human crew numbers totalling in the millions, as would be needed for any "evacuation of Earth" scenario, traveling at speeds up to 20% that of light, then the very same life support technologies we would need to be able to build on those ships to keep the people alive for the journey there would be more than sufficient for dealing with any of the challenges to habitability that the planet might have once we get there, such as its tidal lock, higher radiation rate, and the flare activity of the star, etc. It would be technologically more costly to make Proxima Centauri b livable for the human colonists, and probably life there would never be quite as pleasant for them as life on Earth could be, but these drawbacks may well be offset by the advantages, cost wise, of the proximity.

[@SmartAss4123]

easier said than done

[@SmartAss4123]

@@cancermcaids7688Its not about nay saying. Its about getting the practical and actual implementation down. Space travel is well beyond our capability until we have multiple massive technologies. Gravity challenges, human lifespans, radiation shielding, fuel usage, speed, time, food and water recycling, human side effects in long durations off planet, etc... It's immensely irresponsible to just say "innovation" It took humanity thousands of years before we got in flight travel and basic technology advanced enough to even look into space with real detail. It's not going to be anytime soon. And that's if it is even physically possible to solve the challenges that come with space travel and space effects. There is a finite limit to a lot of things in the universe. That applies to speed, and basic survival of organic creatures like us that depend on very specific environments to survive. Some of that may not be possible and not many people want to take into account the limitiations of the universe itself has. And all that has to happen before we 1. Run out of resources on Earth to achieve it. 2. Kill off the planets habitability. or 3. Die to natural world, or spacitial events of mass extinction. Much as we like to pretend we control nature, the truth is we've just been very lucky that we've had a very long duration of relative consistent weather and few major events that could wipe out the planet.

[@ThatWriterKevin]

@@SmartAss4123 I mean, yes and no. There is more radiation in space than on Earth, but there's even more radiation on Proxima Centauri B so the same systems may not be enough. Building self contained environmental controls on an airtight ship is also very different than environmental controls on an entire, open air planet.

[@backcountry164]

​@Kevin Jennings You wouldn't be in the open air on a radiation saturated planet. You'd be deep underground.

[@stevensmith797]

we are not that far away from space stations with spin gravity , we have the materials strong enough , it comes down to costs to build , and life support systems , but solvable . If it came to it , think we would try , but only a few of earths pop would ever leave , far to many of us for some kind of mass escape

[@wowplayer160]

By far the best channel, Simon.

[@tiredofthebs9]

Looks like we need Earth.

[@joelb8653]

Larry Niven solved all those problems with ringworld. 😅

[@thistledownsname]

Sidonia is a nice generation-ship. When not being attacked by aliens.

[@troloinkto]

Luckily, we haven't detected any gauna, so it could work, either that or a Space colony would do the trick

[@davidheckt3398]

Inhabiting any planet around a red dwarf would in many cases be a bad idea. Red dwarfs generally tend to be far more unstable. Producing many magnitudes of order larger and energetic solar flares. Flares that earths magnetic field wouldn't be a to withstand. A habitable planet capable of providing a stronger enough magnet field would have to be either denser or larger with a solid surface. Unfortunately increasing its gravity... 🤔😜

[@gregoriancatmonk6904]

If you are talking something like climate change I think a large cluster of O'Neill Cylinders in orbit would be our best bet. It would be close enough to earth to still use some of its resources and not actually living on the surface of the planet may eventually allow the planet to recover a bit.

[@DarkWarchieff]

Hollow out asteroids is what I would go for.

[@user-td3du7jk2x]

At the moment, everyone is basically screwed. There is no way off of the Planet regardles as to if there is a place to go to in the first place. And you can blame NASA for this too.

[@mattball420]

Need to find a planet thats similar to earth, with a good size and age star, in the habitable zone, not tidally locked, in a stable solar system preferably with planets that shield us like jupiter, has to have water, a sattelite similar to the moon, a funtioning spinning core/magnetic field etc

[@Hyrum_Critchlow]

I love all the goofy animations

[@Chris_da_fro]

There is no way to move people off of earth and sustain life somewhere else, period. This is it people

[@multiyapples]

Well this should be fun.

[@animn7386]

If we can wait for the sun to expand there's a good chance some of the moons of the other planets will become a lot like Earth so theres that

[@Thurgosh_OG]

Io perhaps?

[@animn7386]

@@Thurgosh_OG Perhaps Europa and Enceladus as well?

[@YochevedDesigns]

I've watched Babylon 5. Going to Centauri will not end well!

[@loroc00]

i would like to see a video about a tingworld it is a inresting concept i belive

[@stuartupton5502]

Kevin, My dude. You write some awesome scripts, but sometimes though you can miss some pretty obvious points. If humanity were faced with this kind of problem, The only option would be to build an automated ship with some kind of intelligence, It'd have to be smart, Then fill the ship with human embryos and as samples of as many of earths life as possible and send that on a 100000 year ride that eventually ends up back at earth. Why find a new planet when we already have a good one right here? The advantage of this method is you arent limited to earth if it doesnt work out, All the ship needs to do is boost out of earths gravity, Do a couple gravity assists to get some speed, and yeet itself out to option #2.

[@jenshep1720]

thing is, even if we terraformed mars and only earth was destroyed, that would still be enough to screw us in the long run, because taking an entire planet out of the solar system would completely mess up the alignments of all the planets gravitywise. who knows how that would all change, the asteroid belt might be pulled towards the planets creating a hailstorm of deadly meteors, or mars could be knocked out of its orbit, its not good either way.

[@pamelamays4186]

Me, Imma move into the Blazement. Save me some of those "special" basement mushrooms Danny, Kevin, etc🍄😵‍💫

[@ThatWriterKevin]

Sadly, the Blazement is also contained on Earth

[@JamesFromTexas]

I would hope that by the time we've got interstellar travel figured out, we'd have obesity fixed.

[@MrNH718]

Use the Quarians from Mass Effect as an example. Everybody just live on ships.

[@MrNH718]

@Cancer McAids I never watched that show. The Quarians have no planet to call home and their entire race lives on giant spaceships that travel space together as a fleet.

[@olencone4005]

@@MrNH718 It's basically the same thing -- in Battlestar Galactica, the Cylons destroy the worlds of humans, forcing them to flee aboard a fleet of refugee ships to what is now a mythical homeworld called Earth.

[@MrNH718]

@@olencone4005 interesting. I heard it was a good show for its time. You recommended watching it today?

[@olencone4005]

@@MrNH718 The original from the 70's is pretty dated visually, but it's still a fun watch if you don't mind that. Even with the dated sets and FX, the storytelling is still pretty good imho! The remake they did in the early 2000's still holds up well, but it was a bit more soap opera-ish, with more character-driven drama -- should still be a pretty good watch tho! Everyone has a different preference, so I'd suggest just watching a couple episodes and seeing if it's to your liking :)

[@donsandsii4642]

1800 years is enough time for a planet not to exsist

[@bigcity2085]

Good point...when all you see is light speed; you're essential deaf and blind. Which makes the Fermi paradox...silly.

[@coolsenjoyer]

​@@bigcity2085 Yeah it's pretty silly but not really for our detection ability reason. Its more about the assumption that since the universe is about 10 billion years older than our solar system and if intelligent life was common, surely someone would've colonized the entire Milky Way by now, including our solar system, since it would only take about 10 million years for a civilization capable of travelling at even just 10% of lightspeed.

[@Sciencestuff-iv8yz]

Now, if it is so far away, how do they ship those book cases to Ikea?

[@andreweaston1779]

How many channels can one man have?!

[@zachaliles]

Yes.

[@ThatWriterKevin]

Legally, or successfully?

[@olencone4005]

Do you count an army of clones as "one man?" :P

[@sandybarnes887]

14

[@bigcity2085]

Sometimes, you just need a ride....from someone who knows how to travel, better than you do.

[@thewb8329]

Make the most of Now, that’s all we have.

[@trolly4233]

You assume we would react in time to respond to such a situation…

[@gollem148]

I hope your fingers alright Simon.

[@1953bassman]

One consideration for colonizing another planet hasn't been mentioned. Let's say we find an exoplanet that has almost everything we need. Almost the same size as Earth, in the habitable zone, it has an atmosphere similar to ours and a magnetosphere good enough to protect us. And we are able to solve the problems of getting there, such as having enough food and water and artificial gravity. We arrive there after a long journey to discover the planet is already populated by a diverse array of life including at least one intelligent species. What would we do? Go ahead and colonize it, indigenous species or not? Turn around and head back to Earth after some exploration and maybe greeting the inhabitants? After such a massive endeavor to travel to another planet would we easily accept not being able to occupy the world and make it our own?

[@okidokidraws]

Proxima Centauri B is a Flare star so its probably been drained of life

[@vapandrei]

Oh, Simon, that grampa geezer sweater sgain?

[@arrakeenmerchant]

The sound is really low relative to your other videos

[@ruspj]

suprised there wasnt something allong the lines of oneil cylinders mentioned as part of living in space at the end. gravity can be prety much replaced by simply spinning. they wouldnt require any new technology we dont already have just an insane amount of of construction in space

[@Cantripping]

Here's the issue. Even if we find a planet that is the right size (so gravity won't fuck you up) has a good magnetosphere (so radiation won't fry you) has all the elements we need to survive and that is reachable in a reasonable span of time... *Still* no guarantee that it is habitable at all. The earth was hostile to life for most of its existence, it stands to reason other planets would as well, even if the other factors are in place. Considering most plants are barren rocky worlds with supervolcanoes, ice ages and other such life-ending environments, the elements of life supporting factors being present does not guarantee a given planet actually suppoets life.

[@nessc5825]

As a bit of morbid optimism, I’m glad that at least I’m likely to be dead before the need for a new planet is. Because omg do we have problems, not the budgets to figure them out, but alllll the problems

[@matthewwriter9539]

Death comes for us all... except me. In 2006 I was hit by a car, I should have died, however I beat Death in an ancient Babylonian game, the Grimm Reaper escorted me back to life and told me that now I would never die, also that I was the first person to ever win this prize.

[@ionutungureanu2309]

See you on the other side mate! You will be surprise to see that Grimm Reaper have some rules to respect....😅😅😅

[@preppertrucker5736]

Barnards Star in an O’Neil cylinder powered by project Orión…. Seen in on KZbin right here 😂😂

[@Kahrahnus]

I heard the mid atmosphere of of Venus was the best and closest off earth environment - temperature mild, gravity good - might be hogwash but I would like to know

[@brendanvenimore378]

Hey Simon, read a book called Rendezvous with Rama, and extrapolate......

[@denisecorzette1676]

👋 Hi Simon

[@tispre]

it would just be easier to build floating cities in Venus's atmosphere. "easier"

[@NoBullOxGaming]

you wouldn't take everyone, plenty would get left behind

[@erikkornfeld785]

Well, Simon, you better hope we figure this issue out. If you're going to be immortal then one day you will see the Earth be destroyed.

[@Lowebrow]

Grandma's house we go. Smells good and she makes the best cookies!

[@StonerSmurfin]

I don't think we will be able to live on another planet, even if there is breathable air. We were born of this planet and all of it's microbiology and the microbiology of another planet could be dangerous or even deadly to us.

[@theawesomeman9821]

I agree

[@serialman1]

Oh a new Simon chanel

[@shannonparkhill5557]

Video upload is broken. I can't watch it past about 2:51, and I've tried for two days now.

[@marco77ar]

Why is the earth doomed....Earth will still be here, minus us. Crazy thing is after we're gone, the earth will repair itself, in a matter of 3,4 decades...

[@Predator2257]

Well, IF the concepts of hyper sleep and a ship that is automated with the protection and life sustaining proticalls could be developed, that could be bossible.

[@muddikissez22]

If ya wanna see a show about civilization living aboard a space ship for generations, check out The 100.

[@gregmarkel2836]

We could never get off a planet bigger then earth though

[@waynedieckmann9840]

If you don't know if Billy is tidally locked. How do you know how fast it rotates, if at all?

[@ThatWriterKevin]

We know how fast it rotates around its star (orbits), hence the number of Earth days in a year. We do not know how fast it rotates around its axis, though it is unlikely to be tidally locked.

[@ElladanKenet]

Hears an idea that I think bears merit: We don't leave at all. Instead, we go the Matrix route of building underground cities and learning to live down there. Transporting air, food, and water below ground is MUCH easier than getting it into space. There's plenty of room, so long as we dig. We wouldn't have to worry too much about air and water, because we can recycle it as long as we have a ready supply to begin with, and we're pretty good at building greenhouses, so figuring out how to grow all of the food we need via hydroponics, as well as stuff like trees even, is very attainable. In fact, I'm pretty sure we could readily do that if we wanted to. We've already got a decent bit of practice with it, in regards to Cold War Doomsday shelters. Some of those are self-sufficient for years at a time, and that was with 60s-level technology.

[@bigcity2085]

Maybe we just..."Save the Surface "...( we could trick all the global warming deniers , if we just change the name !) - Brilliant ! ....Then everyone just turns in their nukes and ....aah jeez, might as well start digging tomorrow. There's a bizarre old book about going underground called "Level 7". Doesn't sound fun. Actually Finland has huge underground shelters; they can hold more than their population in some places. Leave your pets at the door ,though.

[@Thurgosh_OG]

Only works if the Earth isn't about to be destroyed by a giant asteroid or rogue planet. Going underground won't help there.

[@kennichols3992]

O'Neill cylinders. D'oh!

[@GiuseppeAndrewsReturns]

we can live without planets planets are an experience we can live in whatever experience we imagine ourselves within no cookie, no crumbs

[@everydayfun9531]

Lets just move to a new earth at this point since this earth's unlivable.

[@jamesspencer1997]

Been watching videos about the kardashev scale, were still no were close to moving to the first level that requires mastering the resources of our own planet and the problems that confront us are more than just tech our society as a whole has to change and in truth is the biggest hurdle.

[@Enjoymentboy]

I'm surprised that every time this scenario comes up a glaringly simple options seems to be ignored or forgotten. Why the need to find another planet? Just because this one might be heading for the crapper (might???) doesn't mean the only way to survive is to jet off to another world. We are actually technically capable right now of just building generation ships or stations in our own solar system with the materials we have now. Sure, it'd be a massively difficult undertaking but one I am certain would be vastly simpler, quicker and cheaper than shooting ourselves off into the void. We could, in theory send crews out to the asteroid belt to begin to harvest materials and then send other crews out to begin to use those materials to build stuff. We would then send more crews out to use the stuff that was built to build bigger stuff and then more crews out to begin assembling all the bigger stuff into actual things. Sure, it's a pretty generic description but then again if you don't get what I'm saying then chances are you're not on the short list to be saved. Realistically we don't need to bother saving the whole planet, just a few million of us. The ones who can, and will, actively contribute without demanding more than their fair share of who will insist on imposing their views on everyone else simply because of reasons. A few million people building together would be able to construct a massive structure that could support tens of millions. Those following generations could build more and larger and we would just keep going. The two critical keys would be electricity production and the will to get rid of those who take more than they give. Altruism would be a very delicate balance between kindness and survivability and if my ability to survive is negatively impacted by you then only one of us will get our way.

[@Kahrahnus]

Thought provoking if.not a grim reality we may face - what about underground? Curious of your opinion

[@ZER0--]

I've noticed a change in the editing. There's a lot more graphics, and it really works well.

[@gregorycotter6461]

Lets move to that Kepler planet and embrace the heavier gravity, harsh environment and rename it Salusa Secundus. And in 100 generations we will be Sardaukar.

[@DJL78]

Speed reading Simon?

[@mauri7959]

You're telling me he has yet another channel?

[@ralphcopas]

Easy we will move in with you in that hour

[@james8449100]

City lights or WMD silos

[@bobbyg8474]

The twinky soundeffects every time a new graphic pops in or out need to be dropped - they detract from the narrative which is the whole reason we come to these channels.

[@HyperFocusMarshmallow]

Imagine the mess of giving birth in 0g.

[@ThatWriterKevin]

Procreating in 0g is enough of a visual, I don't want to even think about the actual birth.

[@Thurgosh_OG]

@@ThatWriterKevin Given that water births are a popular thing, an enclosed tank for space births would be needed, then the water drained and filtered for other uses.

[@mho...]

"DoOOooooOOOOoooM" -Gir

[@usonumabeach300]

Neutrino storms! Supernovae within a thousand light years, the collapsing of our Sun, a black dwarf star floating out there like the Nemesis hypothesis...

[@Marley.Rose.]

Wait when did Simon make this channel

[@Yupppi]

I just started thinking after opening this video, we probably don't have enough fuel to send people to space in general, right? To think how much fuel is needed to shoot like 3-4 astronauts out there and how massive the ship is in comparison to the personnel on it. Compared to a car for example. So imagine having those ratios applied to all people on the planet. Some people better start considering slowing down climate change after all.

[@Thurgosh_OG]

Space Elevators could be used but lets be real here, only the rich and powerful would get to go.

[@Novosadjanin82]

Even if we travel 25% of light it would take longer than 16 years. We cant accelerate instantly to that speed and we can't go from 75,000km/s to 0 instantly. It will take equal amount of to reach that speed and decelerate to 0....