Anthony Cerrato  wrote in news:btca32$62t$1
{at}darwin.ediacara.org:

> 
> "Michael Ragland"  wrote in message
> news:btaau3$2kb9$1{at}darwin.ediacara.org...
 
>> We're the "top dog" on earth. It's highly unlikely there
> will be any
>> other species which pushes us out unless it happens to be
> some
>> genetically engineered virus. So that leaves us in the
> unique position
>> of pushing ourselves out through genetic engineering. Can
> any one
>> seriously doubt that once we have the science and
> knowledge we will be
>> able to create more successful genotypes?
> 
> No doubt, but each new species will _mostly_ be for a very
> specific niche I think--"recreational" species (really,
> individuals) will be around, but only a small minority.
> There will be a big demand for a gilled "fishy" species to
> live in various planetary oceans, and lotsa species designed
> for heavier gravity and exotic atmosphere planets having all
> sorts of ecosysytems (and possibly their own exotic alien
> lifeforms)--major terraforming of most planets will be too
> difficult and expensive for the future
> intersteller "human" diaspora in comparison to gene
> tinkering. :)         ...tonyC

An interesting prediction. I was going to argue that we would be likely 
to more fully exploit the energy resources of the sun by something like a 
Dyson Sphere or a Ringworld (if you are familiar with Larry Niven's 
novel), while avoiding tinkering too much with our genetics. From an 
economic standpoint you may well be right about genetic engineering vs. 
terraforming. I wonder whether economics will overcome the psychological 
conservatism currently seen in the limits on research on embryonic stem 
cells and the opposition to GM foods?

Yours,

Bill Morse
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 1/7/04 6:53:23 AM