(...)

I know what you're saying, Rukia, but the correct train of thought is actually the opposite. We're not (or at least I am not) stating that animals need light to live - the fact there was light is what allows evolution to make use of such feature. However, you need to take into account the fact that, although evolution is possible on such circumstances, the process of evolution cannot be forced or rushed. Therefore, even if evolution allowed those worms (and some kinds of bat and some kinds of deep-sea fish as well) to live without light, light is necessary for human life as it is.

This was my standpoint all along. Of course, when you want to mention a settlement so humans can live on these planets, you need to take into consideration the factors needed to allow human life. Those planets are too far away (most of the planets are made of gaseous matter, most of them do not have an atmosphere, and those that have an atmosphere usually do not have oxygen, or water...) and thus, expecting to search for planets on which life is possible to colonize them is just Sci-Fi material. The researches scientists do is purely out of curiosity about other life forms, exactly what Rurudo stated on his first premise.

One thing that has sprung to mind is: If we are not looking for any planets that allow us to live on , then how on earth are we not out of our mind? Hm? I really don't get it. If we know the earth will soon be destroyed, shouldn't we be searching for other planets, such as the moon? Oh for that matter, even though I may be wrong, haven't rumors about the moon containing everything that's needed for the human life started spreading? o.o Oh by the way, take me for an idiot or somewhere, but doesn't evolution measure up to cloning? Because if so, assuming you get what I mean, we have already made evolution possible. Now, all the same, I am not entirely sure whether Dolly (the first sheep cloned by humans) was able to give birth to offsprings, but if we created her, then I believe there weren't any mistakes made during the cloning, resulting in Dolly capable of giving birth to offsprings, which means that evolution CAN be rushed AND forced.

(...)
One thing that has sprung to mind is: If we are not looking for any planets that allow us to live on , then how on earth are we not out of our mind? Hm? I really don't get it. If we know the earth will soon be destroyed, shouldn't we be searching for other planets, such as the moon? Oh for that matter, even though I may be wrong, haven't rumors about the moon containing everything that's needed for the human life started spreading? o.o Oh by the way, take me for an idiot or somewhere, but doesn't evolution measure up to cloning? Because if so, assuming you get what I mean, we have already made evolution possible. Now, all the same, I am not entirely sure whether Dolly (the first sheep cloned by humans) was able to give birth to offsprings, but if we created her, then I believe there weren't any mistakes made during the cloning, resulting in Dolly capable of giving birth to offsprings, which means that evolution CAN be rushed AND forced.

Well, let me answer your points like Jack The Ripper. Let's go by parts. xD

1 - Actually, the Earth will not be soon destroyed. Although the numbers about global warming and other climatic effects are enormous, those numbers are mere estimations and prone to mistakes. Several predictions were already disproven as farfecthed and even the trend of global warming we currently see was proven as normal (such phenomenon happened also on the "ancient" times, causing the end of the Ice Age).

2 - The moon does not have the most important factors needed for human survival. For starters, the Moon does not have atmosphere. There is no water as well and the temperatures vary from extremely hot to extremely cold, both limits being unbearable to human beings. Those three VERY important factors already removes the Moon from the "living" human list.

3 - Actually, evolution is not sped up by cloning. Evolution is gradual and reliant on external factor exposure. Think about evolution like... tanning. If you are put on a solar exposure for several days, constantly, you will develop a tan. The same "scheme" happens with evolution, albeit it is MUCH MORE slow. Also, evolution is a product of SEXUATED reproduction - you might know this concept as "survival of the fittest". Upon facing a heterogenic population, the ones that are more adapted to the environment (that is, the fittest ones) will survive, conducting the evolutionary trait to his descendants.

However, upon cloning someone, the form of reproduction will be merely assexuated, thus, disallowing evolution from happening. It's the exact opposite from what you've said. Just to finish it off, Dolly wasn't able to give birth to offsprings and died rather early. xD

Dunno but Western world is in deep shit compared to what it is now.

I think there will be a massive economic fall, and through that fall, war, and chaos, and then one global power will become the most powerful, because of how poor everything else is.

2050 hmmm I feel danshiovue as if ive been there already

Not confident enough to give a definitive answer on this subject but with the high rate of advancements in science and technology in a 100years time the possibility of terraforming mars may become very real. Think of how far we've come in the in the short time since religion lost its grasp over the world...

@Taylor you say you could live without light but it is an essential component of human life.

TBH i'm more in favor of an Apocalyptic event which will essentially hit the reset button on this planet

@sammy it's deja-vu not danshiovue lol

Not confident enough to give a definitive answer on this subject but with the high rate of advancements in science and technology in a 100years time the possibility of terraforming mars may become very real. Think of how far we've come in the in the short time since religion lost its grasp over the world...

@Taylor you say you could live without light but i'm pretty dead certain it is an essential component of human life, for photosynthesis (oxygen/vegetation reasons).

TBH i'm more in favor of an Apocalyptic event which will essentially hit the reset button on this planet

@sammy it's deja-vu not danshiovue lol

Well, we only need the Oxygen, not the light, the light is just a by product of one necisarry element, and used in the most common method of production of another necisarry element. However, one of these elements (heat) is easily synthesised, and the other only occured due to evolution and can also probably be synthesised (Oxygen)

I just hope that we've reached the technological singularity. If we haven't reached that then the next best thing has to be virtual reality.

Lol
Ok Karab, I'm just going to hit you with some bullet points then:
- Without sunlight all (to my knowledge or at least the vast majority) of vegetaion would cease to exist wiping out the food chain and ultimately human life
- Light increases levels of cerotonin preventing depression
- No vitamin D would mean children would develop rickets (bone under-development)
-Without sunlight humans will cease eyes as there would be no need for them and with our under developed senses we would easily fall prey to other animals or even just eat posionous fruits e.t.c
- Everything about the way we live now would collapse; transport, education, work, order e.t.c
-Without Heat supplied by the sun Earths atmosphere would fall to below freezing in just a few days
-weather
-Ocean current would stop wiping out nearly all sea life
- no sunlight would mean no sun =
a) planet falls out of orbit crashes into moon everyone dies
b) sucked into the blackhole
c) before the black hole happens the sun would expand into a giant red star vaporising us all anyway)
- Humans would devolve into something beyond my imagination and wouldn't even be classified as a human by todays standards
- You get the idea... i could go on

We are who we are today because we have evolved to prosper (for lack of a better word) from external factors to be as efficient as possible to our surroundings.

I assume someone is reading this thinking about typing a response with 'artificial' this and that but that is not sustainable unless operating at a 100% rate of efficiency and for anyone who's an engineer would know this just wouldn't be possible. not to mention the sheer scale of implementing this to over 7bn people on this planet is crazy

I believe that one of the most important things for humanity in the future is the evolution of our consciousness. If we simply stay as we are, and our technology keeps evolving and evolving, then it may be possible that the entire world will be overtaken by our own greed, anger and overall nastier range of human emotions and impulses.

So in a sense, I believe the next few years will be a sort of mass awakening, and that the world leaders will slowly... perhaps quite slowly, but slowly and steadily become more and more conscious, and more and more wise. The leaders will be wise, because the people will also be wise.

Technology, and so on, isn't really the key to our progress, but our own individual education and personal evolution. With those in hand, we can go forth into a brighter future.

We'll probably have a monitored internet, censorship, more gated communities, the end of nuclear energy, the beginning of a full adaption to solar power, internet forms of education for Grade school, and a removal of the current train system to create speed rails.

We probably won't have robots (in the android sense, we already have robots that aren't humanistic), some uber nuclear fallout, diesel as a fuel supply, and fireworks.

I know it's nothing exciting, but I've always tended to be a realist. We are advancing quickly, but our advancements are just improvements of old ideas. I don't think we'll see android-like robots that are fully functional and aren't clunky until at least 2080, maybe even not until the 22nd century.