When do you think we will have flying cars?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redshepherd

Technically, we already have them... but more like a flying jetski

http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/24/tech...ge-flying-car/

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/24/t...logy.html?_r=0

---

lol that's a flying boat! errr flying jetski. it only operates on water. lol i'm not a fish and don't live on water!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JodanOrNoDan

Quite apocalyptic in Pittsburgh today are we? Let me give you something to cheer you up a bit. We are far, far better off than we were thirty or forty years ago. The air is cleaner, the water is cleaner. I remember black smoke billowing out of cars and plants when I was young. I don't see anything to that scale any more. I got 8mpg in my first car. I now get 40mpg. In my young adult life I was woken often for alerts simulating all out nuclear war with the Soviet Union. I was in Germany when the wall between East and West Germany came down. There is no more Soviet Union bent on world domination. The problems now are minor league compared to then. If you really want to worry about something worry about the human race's reliance on technology. Worry about population densities. Most people wouldn't make it thirty days if the power went out. Technology is making people stupid, lazy and reliant on the system. That is a far greater and more realistic danger than what you guys are worried about.

---

that's kinda true. i almost died when i broke my cell phone and i wouldn't last long after i run out of food/water in a zombie apocalypse.

You're correct, the local environmental conditions are superior to how they had been. Currently the number of visibly toxic cities is much lower than it once was. We have made huge strives. The human population has also almost doubled since 1960/1970, which mrans each persons seemingly minor actions will have a much larger effect than before. While we do have greatly superior ways of generating electricity, steal, heat, etc than we once did, we also consume a much larger amount of these resources than we once did.

So while we may well have dropped the amount of toxic chemicals and greenhouse gases we are pumping into the environment, it really hasn't been drastic enough to allow the globe to heal.

Again, I view the situation as less than 100 years, we may have it pretty nice for the first 50 years of that, but the escalation will ultimately be severe unless things are done to mitigate the problem within that span, and that's the problem, not reducing the escalation of the problem, that we need to handle much sooner, and need to do to a much greater degree than we have.

Edit: Also correct, it is likely we will find a way to solve the problem within that span of time. But we may not handle the problem in time. We'll see.

But I still don't think we'll end up with flying cars

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redshepherd

I agree! I'm sure that in the 1920's~1960's, people thought that the world would end within the next 50 years. And then look what happened. :P

Most people don't know how bad pollution had gotten decades ago. Have you guys heard of the Great Smog of London? Thousands of people died from pollution within a few days. We're much better off now, and technology has improved a lot! Every generation has its problems, and they get solved. Not that they will always be solved, but we're not getting *worse* in every aspect, like young people make it out to be.

The world just had a couple decades of peace and quiet before things started happening again recently, so we're taking it like the world is ending again. Just like it has a bunch of times throughout history.

(pretending I'm not a young person too LOL)

---

Red, you are awesome. You just broke so many profiles I am amazed. Keep being the master of your own mind and keep studying history. People like you are the ones that end up being successful at whatever they choose to do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oxylepy

You're correct, the local environmental conditions are superior to how they had been. Currently the number of visibly toxic cities is much lower than it once was. We have made huge strives. The human population has also almost doubled since 1960/1970, which mrans each persons seemingly minor actions will have a much larger effect than before. While we do have greatly superior ways of generating electricity, steal, heat, etc than we once did, we also consume a much larger amount of these resources than we once did.

So while we may well have dropped the amount of toxic chemicals and greenhouse gases we are pumping into the environment, it really hasn't been drastic enough to allow the globe to heal.

Again, I view the situation as less than 100 years, we may have it pretty nice for the first 50 years of that, but the escalation will ultimately be severe unless things are done to mitigate the problem within that span, and that's the problem, not reducing the escalation of the problem, that we need to handle much sooner, and need to do to a much greater degree than we have.

Edit: Also correct, it is likely we will find a way to solve the problem within that span of time. But we may not handle the problem in time. We'll see.

But I still don't think we'll end up with flying cars

---

But the flying cars would help solve the problem. The population would plummet.

Wow this thread took a fun topic and seriously made the future look bleak.

As for flying cars, I saw an interesting interview with Elon Musk where his idea is to have an underground tunnel system where your car is transported to a different location on a kind of rail system. As he puts it, would you feel safe with a bunch of cars flying over your head all the time? What happens when a car stalls?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JodanOrNoDan

But the flying cars would help solve the problem. The population would plummet.

---

And yet the world leaders would still be insane.
I feel that if we could make it in the long run if we pot our differences aside and put the needs of the planet in front of the needs of mankind.

And just to say it I really do hope to see a true flying car

i dont think flying cars are going to happen anytime soon, everyone is looking at selfdriving cars. Once humans are removed from the driving situation their should be less traffic and accidents.


Civilization might drastically change but life seems to continue on, i think some humans would survive into the future.

So are we talking hover cars that stay a foot or so off the ground or cross country in a couple hours wave at the airplane type?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StillBP

And yet the world leaders would still be insane.
I feel that if we could make it in the long run if we pot our differences aside and put the needs of the planet in front of the needs of mankind.

And just to say it I really do hope to see a true flying car

---

It is my belief that the ones actually most qualified to be world leaders are the ones that do not want the job.

For those that believe in a planet first philosophy ... What is best for the planet may not be what is best for human kind. If humans truly cared about the condition of the planet they would live like the American Indian did years ago, or maybe like the Amish. The problem with this is innovation comes to a halt and we would not survive the next mass extinction event. Also, I know from direct experience, that most people that push a people last agenda tend to be the ones least likely to survive when the going gets tough. The human race thrives on conflict and competition in all its forms. It is what has taken us from living in caves to walking on the moon. The only way we would ever put aside all our differences would be to function like a mindless collective and every attempt at that type of social experiment has failed miserably. Technology is also a double edged sword. We need it if we are going to ever get off this rock but becoming reliant on it and allowing it to be used for the few to control the many is very dangerous.

I believe in balance. Too hard a swing in one direction always results in a equally hard correction to the other side. Study history in actual books. You are going to find that something sounding good does not necessarily make it so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StillBP

This I must agree with except that you forgot to add that 98% of the world leaders are clinically insane

---

In that case, how did they became leaders?:)