Yes...you are correct....I either did my distance-math backwards, or missed a button entering the distance to the moon into my calculator...it's been a really bad week for my back and lots of meds have been needed, which impairs my math skills. My mistake there...and I've retracted that....and I apologize.
Doing the math correctly, I see you ARE right that it's about 400 times the distance.
But they (and so you) are wrong that it's 400 times the "size". You are right that the radiuses/diameters are a ratio of 400-1. That's different from size, even 2d size.
It may seem semantical, but to me it's an important distinction. This is what I took issue with mostly, since I was CERTAIN the actual "size" (in 3D) is no where near a ratio of 400-1, but closer to 64 million -1. Even in 2D it's nothing like 400-1.

Also, I'm not intentionally ignoring your point, it is an interesting fact that the ratios are close, but only coincidental IMO, certainly not 'proof' of anything supernatural.
EDIT: even if they were a perfect ratio, it would only suggest a physical law of motion we don't know or fully understand yet.
I would be interested to see a list of other planets and their moons to see if any other planet/moon (or combination of moons) in our solar system shows the same ratios. Neither answer would make me think anything supernatural however, it's just not that kind of question in my eyes.

capitalism only really functions well (with regulation) in a world where resources are limited and a lot of manpower is needed to get things done. Thanks to technology, it's only a matter of time before resources are so easy to come by and manufacture into needed things that the supply and demand model will be obsolete.

I suspect that within 100 years, if not sooner, manual labor will be a thing of the past...unless you're an artist or something. Robots will be able to do virtually everything..and better than humans are capable of.

The only people who will still need to have jobs are engineers and maybe technicians, but even then, eventually robots will be able to repair themselves so maybe not even technicians will be needed. Hell, given enough time, nurses and many health care jobs won't be needed anymore because basic healthcare could be delegated to robots.

It's just a matter of time. We're already starting to see the effects of automation in the workforce, we just don't need as many people to get things done. Hell even technical jobs aren't safe because as computers get better and better, They'll be able to analyze certain things better than humans.

The question just becomes what do you do about it? A whole new economic model will be needed. Because we'll eventually be living in the world where unless you're in the academic top tier, you're just not going to be needed in the workforce. At the same time, again, because of technology, we're going to have the ability to feed and clothe AND shelter you for a minimal amount of effort so the prospect of being able to being born, living, and dying without ever NEEDING to work is a real possibility in the not so distant future.

Isn't that what you would call...a utopia? You want freedom? there it is. You'll be able to spend your time doing what you WANT to do instead of what you HAVE to do just to survive. I suspect at some point, there will have to be SOME procreation laws put into place to keep the population growth in check. But hell, even that won't be so bad once we have the ability to colonize other planets.

People will still work, they'll just do it because they want to do it, but they'll be jobs where they're not a necessity or anything. even in an age where a replicator can make all your food, people will still want to cook, or do other artisan style jobs.

But hey, we'll still need defense, gotta blow up or deflect any stray asteroid that comes near us. or just send a bunch of robots up to mine the rock to smitherines so we can use the resources to build our mighty space fleet and our other grand works That Dyson Sphere won't build itself after all

In other words, the human race....has won. isn't that a good thing?

From reading some of the comments, it would appear that many people still do not understand basic math.

Over population is a problem. It is real and it will self correct one way or another. Science can't save us (short of moving us all to a digital existence), and we will hit critical population density long before we achieve the kind of technological sophistication to allow us to colonise other planets (singularity notwithstanding).

Basically, there are three possible outcomes:
1. We voluntarily stop having so many kids and we certainly stop celebrating ridiculously huge families like those fucking morons on "18 and counting" or whatever the fuck it's called. This is the best case scenario, and IMHO, the most unlikely

2. Wide scale population control. One child policies, etc. unpleasant but still less unpleasant than...

3. We do nothing and the problem corrects itself. And when I say corrects itself, I mean global hunger on a scale not seen since the last ice age; massive pandemics or just plain ol' killing the fuck out of each other.

This is isn't some airy fairy, mother Gaia, hippy nonsense, it's simple math.

On the plus side, we'll almost certainly have made the planet nigh uninhabitable for ourselves by then anyway.

First, calling David Suzuki "Colonel Sanders" is embarrassing to the entire human race.

Also, to the suggestion in the comments above that 'technology will save us', ..one of the major points of the video is that it buys us 'two minutes'. It has, and it won't keep buying us comparable time. Actually, part of 'science saving us' is this video itself. Population models, and everything we know about life on this planet tell us that we need to radically change how we do things, or widespread famine, war, and environmental and social destruction are inevitable. If you want science to save us, you need to start listening to it.

..and about colonizing other planets. There is no planet we could ever get to, EVER, that would, in its current condition, support a human colony. We can't seem to turn around a one degree change in Earth's global temperature. It is not rational to assume that we could make another planet suitable for human life.

@Sniper007

Colonisation of other planets, if it happens, will not ease overpopulation on Earth. Assuming it's actually done with humans rather than, say bacteria which are so much easier to transport; it must involve small seed populations of colonists, not firing billions of people off into space. Where do you imagine the energy required would come from? As it stands in 2014 we can barely move a handful of people into low earth orbit, a few hundred kilometres away.

Think about the logistics of transporting and housing all these billions of colonists in a hostile environment. Making the environment itself habitable is an even greater challenge; we can't even seem to fix the one we have on Earth, the one we spent billions of years evolving to suit.

The expansion of the universe, meanwhile, is always giving us less material to work with and perpetually moving it further away.

@SDGundamX

Relying on technology to solve overpopulation is like refusing to stop smoking because by the time you get cancer science will have found a cure.

Scientific advancement is not a given. It doesn't progress at a guaranteed rate and it isn't a genie that will automatically offer a salve to every need. Or, to coin a cliche, "Where's my jetpack?"

Luckily however, in the instant case scientists have offered an easy solution to overpopulation: Stop having so many children.

@RedSky

Poverty reduction without population reduction - reduction, not stabilisation - is catastrophic. The current global population of ~7.2 billion is only survivable, never mind sustainable, because most of those billions are impoverished peasants who barely consume any resources at all. Elevating the poor to a rich, westernesque lifestyle multiplies the effects of overpopulation tremendously, even if it slightly slows population growth in absolute terms.

Rosling doesn't seem to understand the actual problem, and his predictions are at any rate, horrifyingly optimistic.

We need to be shooting for a global population in the range of 100 million - 1 billion. Any substantially higher number than that is an apocalypse waiting to happen.

Overpopulation is, always has been, and always will be, an issue of quality not quantity. We will colonize other planets, once the people on this one get their acts together. Last time I checked, the known universe is expanding faster than the human race can colonize it. I see nothing that changes that pattern.

the christian directive of "be fruitful and multiply" was fine when humanity didn't number in the billions, but now it's hurting us. Now if we actually had the ability to colonize other planets, it wouldn't be as big a deal, but I figure its only a matter of time before more nations enact laws prohibiting large families

Look MilkmanDan, it was not the intention to offend you in particular, we merely leapt like a robot at an opportunity to snub a nose at rules-of-engagement relative to rules in-general and some of the more didactic pet-peeves some but not all have with regards to what we personally regard as insignificant, but that some folks seem to get bent-sideways about and begin these tiresome pedantic, didactic dull-ass comment threads.

Who cares if it's tagged incorrectly, who cares if it's marked long when it's really short? Who cares obviously some folks do and it bothers the shit outta them. There is no 'why', simply the questions of how what, when and who had a part in creating these inconsequential concerns in some people that it matters at all?

That you wanted to down-vote a comment suggests perhaps someone thought someone else was crude, mean, rude, or too direct or forward in their protest. We can live with that, as well as the supercilious reasoning for your not voting this video up, in our LTHO.

At the end of the day, you got yer cute kitty dragging someone's be-bootied -with-shoe-cover foot being dragged up close-in to a mischievous, playful cat's clawing with head-banging glee, and it's AS cute, as that slammin' chick's back-side in the screen-shot, unless you are from some other planet where rippin' asses don't stir your loins a bit, be you male or female, gay, straight or otherwise.

Glad you dug the misdirection as much as myself an we thank you for your sincere feedback.

Personally, I vote shit up based on the fact that the original submitter enjoyed the video enough to embed it, and at the end of the day it makes folks happy about contributing to the site and therefore the entire sift community benefits.

What really IS an affirmative vote anyway, but a gesture of goodwill and kindness directed outward from the wealth of consideration one has for oneself?

Do unto others, then run away as fast as you can...to paraphrase the rule.

Oh and the ass-wiping analogy was meant for all the OCD retentive types, the kind of people where everything has to be just-so or their fucking heads will explode....perhaps I should check a mirror??

ad hominem will get you everywhere... while I play the tiniest violin for you and Dr. deGrasse-Tyson...

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^Trancecoach:
Very quaint. Too bad life doesn't work that way.
Like, at all.>> ^Yogi:
>> ^Trancecoach:
Still -- we got plenty of problems on this planet to work out before we continue exporting our junk, waste, and pollution to other planets and the intervening spaces. Seems like we need to get our own house in order before we start pouring the foundation for a new one...

What if our galvanizing our educational system as a result of our space exploration leads to changes in how we power everything? What Neil is talking about is changing everything, a small push that leads to a dramatic shift in everything. Suddenly because we put our minds to it and it's necessary for space travel we have Cold Fusion. We have weather machines, we have clean waste disposal. A world where technology and science works towards a specific goal but has a multitude of other effects.
You can basically draw any sort of technological advances we've had in the 20th century and point it towards our government and NASA working towards something else. Why don't we try doing it again...seriously it doesn't even cost that much as he points out.


It did work that way is what I and Mr. deGrasse-Tyson is saying. Please though dismiss any counter idea by calling it "quaint" doesn't make you seem like a douchebag at all.

>> ^Trancecoach:

Very quaint. Too bad life doesn't work that way.
Like, at all.>> ^Yogi:
>> ^Trancecoach:
Still -- we got plenty of problems on this planet to work out before we continue exporting our junk, waste, and pollution to other planets and the intervening spaces. Seems like we need to get our own house in order before we start pouring the foundation for a new one...

What if our galvanizing our educational system as a result of our space exploration leads to changes in how we power everything? What Neil is talking about is changing everything, a small push that leads to a dramatic shift in everything. Suddenly because we put our minds to it and it's necessary for space travel we have Cold Fusion. We have weather machines, we have clean waste disposal. A world where technology and science works towards a specific goal but has a multitude of other effects.
You can basically draw any sort of technological advances we've had in the 20th century and point it towards our government and NASA working towards something else. Why don't we try doing it again...seriously it doesn't even cost that much as he points out.



It did work that way is what I and Mr. deGrasse-Tyson is saying. Please though dismiss any counter idea by calling it "quaint" doesn't make you seem like a douchebag at all.

Very quaint. Too bad life doesn't work that way.

Like, at all.>> ^Yogi:

>> ^Trancecoach:
Still -- we got plenty of problems on this planet to work out before we continue exporting our junk, waste, and pollution to other planets and the intervening spaces. Seems like we need to get our own house in order before we start pouring the foundation for a new one...

What if our galvanizing our educational system as a result of our space exploration leads to changes in how we power everything? What Neil is talking about is changing everything, a small push that leads to a dramatic shift in everything. Suddenly because we put our minds to it and it's necessary for space travel we have Cold Fusion. We have weather machines, we have clean waste disposal. A world where technology and science works towards a specific goal but has a multitude of other effects.
You can basically draw any sort of technological advances we've had in the 20th century and point it towards our government and NASA working towards something else. Why don't we try doing it again...seriously it doesn't even cost that much as he points out.

>> ^Trancecoach:

Still -- we got plenty of problems on this planet to work out before we continue exporting our junk, waste, and pollution to other planets and the intervening spaces. Seems like we need to get our own house in order before we start pouring the foundation for a new one...


What if our galvanizing our educational system as a result of our space exploration leads to changes in how we power everything? What Neil is talking about is changing everything, a small push that leads to a dramatic shift in everything. Suddenly because we put our minds to it and it's necessary for space travel we have Cold Fusion. We have weather machines, we have clean waste disposal. A world where technology and science works towards a specific goal but has a multitude of other effects.

You can basically draw any sort of technological advances we've had in the 20th century and point it towards our government and NASA working towards something else. Why don't we try doing it again...seriously it doesn't even cost that much as he points out.

Still -- we got plenty of problems on this planet to work out before we continue exporting our junk, waste, and pollution to other planets and the intervening spaces. Seems like we need to get our own house in order before we start pouring the foundation for a new one...

>> ^westy:

>> ^EvilDeathBee:
Why haven't we reached Mars yet, damnit!

because its a totally waist of time and effort sending humans to planets that are shit for human existence.
Robots are the only thing that should be sent to mars and the moon , it would be far more efficient and cost affective to do that than to send people.
It would make more sense for people to try and colonise the earth sea floor as this is likely going to be far more sustainable and practical if there was a cataclysmic event and the development of that over 60-200 years would develop the technology to allow future space travel.
Until we have some sort of technology to move through space faster than the speed of light which obviously is unlikely then I don't see any point in colonising other planets with anything other than a robotic presence.


*rolleyes* one of those people, eh?

>> ^EvilDeathBee:

Why haven't we reached Mars yet, damnit!


because its a totally waist of time and effort sending humans to planets that are shit for human existence.

Robots are the only thing that should be sent to mars and the moon , it would be far more efficient and cost affective to do that than to send people.

It would make more sense for people to try and colonise the earth sea floor as this is likely going to be far more sustainable and practical if there was a cataclysmic event and the development of that over 60-200 years would develop the technology to allow future space travel.

Until we have some sort of technology to move through space faster than the speed of light which obviously is unlikely then I don't see any point in colonising other planets with anything other than a robotic presence.

I do however think manned orbital space travel is something we have to develop right away and make possible right away for most people. We could also use it to send twats up into space and let them see how pathetic they are and how small earth and they are in the vast scheme of things with any luck that might make the world a more peaceful place to live in.