I mean I’d like the planet to continue to support life.

There have been periods in the distant past where the planet came very close to losing all life above the level of bacteria, or maybe tardigrades! There was ‘snowball Earth’, when the snowcaps increased dramatically, and expanded almost to the equator! There have been a number of massive die-offs where 90%+ of the planets life pretty much vanished, but came back in new and different forms.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction_event

I don’t give a damn what Prof Cox said
Haven’t actually listed to what Prof Cox says but well
Prof Cox and your big brained knowledge!

Just so you don’t have to waste your time actually listening to what Prof Cox said, he didn’t say there is no life elsewhere in the universe.

Why would they need FTL travel? Why the hurry?

Why can’t they travel for thousands of years?

How could they do that! They would need either some sort of hibernation system, that could protect and nurture the sleeping crew for eons, or use vast colony ships where the crew have families and continually produce new crew, but that would require remarkably sophisticated systems for maintaining the health of the occupants, as it would, by definition, be a completely closed-circuit system. There are any number of SF stories involving such concepts, probably one of the most extreme is the Puppeteer system in Larry Niven’s books, where their entire home system of a number of identical sized planets are equally spaced in orbit around their sun, and the sun has been turned into a propulsion unit, and is being flown out of the galaxy! Great concept, that.
There are a number of reasons we can’t detect any signs of life from other systems, the first, as Coxy says, is that many, many solar systems just aren’t suitable for either developing and/or sustaining life, at least in a sophisticated form.
The others could be that really sophisticated civilisations have got to the point where their home systems have stopped being wasteful of the energy from the solar body, and are either using Dyson spheres, or have surrounded the star with a spherical cloud of processors, ‘computronium’, to quote one writer, and uploaded themselves into the cloud itself. That cloud could also be a Matrioska system, an expanding series of shells, each one using the waste heat being radiated out by the inner shells.
Not that I read much SF, you understand… 😆
An update on the layout of the Puppeteer system, which is a Klemperer Rosette:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klemperer_rosette
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierson%27s_Puppeteers

@p7eaven

In general, humans perceive increased biodiversity as better because it gets closer to how things were in the beforetimes, before we started messing with it. But that’s not universally good for everything. The reintroduction of wolves to Yellowstone is a resounding success for biodiversity, but not so much for the deer. Which is the same reason the wolves were eradicated in the first place – the humans didn’t want the predation.

I still think the drive to restore ecosystems and increase biodiversity is purely a sentimental drive from humans. That’s not to denigrate it, though – it’s a sentiment I share 100%. But none of it still matters in a purely objective sense. That raises the question of how useful absolute objectivity is in this context.

The other question is that even if FTL travel is possible, how much faster than light would it be? If intelligent civilisations are spaced ten thousand Ly apart on average, if they can simply travel at 2c then it’s still a 5 thousand year prospect. Unless they are extraordinarily long lived it’d still be a fairly unattractive proposition to them for the same reasons it is to us.

Why humans need to continue

So Prof Cox doesn’t know anything but you know you will be reborn. Think I know which person I will be listening to.

His guess of what is out there especially the future is as good as mine.
I could end up being reborn as alien, LOL! (prefer Predator like).
Scientific logic dictates that you turn to dust in this lifetime. End. Future of mankind or earth has nothing to do with you in scientific term because you cease to exist. Therefore, you should not be concerned about the future.

For me, the stake is higher than you because I have to contemplate on being reborn again in some life form whatever. The logic is that I should be more concerned about the future earth as I might have to go through the same rubbish life again, perhaps in other universe or galaxy whatever, while your concept of turning in dust upon expiry of life simply stop in this lifetime. Whatever future has installed for earth there is nothing that should concern you because you have no more existence.

Hence, the person that should be concerned is me as I might have to come back again to this messy place caused by mankind. For those with scientific logic such concerns is illogical.

Therefore, you should not get stress up in whatever is remain in life and enjoy whatever left because this is the last of your existence. Your only concern now should be when the moment of death come, just pray that it will be a peaceful one with the memory of joy in life. Then you turn to dust once cremated (saves space is the logic and burying people is just taking up more real estate).

P/s: if I have the scientific mind, I would probably enjoy myself with no limit. Eat all the shark fins soup I can get my hand on. Eat all the best food in the world that I can afford. Do whatever that my body can take and enjoy myself to the hilt that I can get away with. Why should I be sad or moral when I know this is my last existence? Why should I care about what mankind or earth should be in future? Sort that and enjoy as much as I can get away with.

Machine has no moral nor feeling as it just consumes everything in it’s path.

Oh ya as one of my engineering friend once said he only needs to survive his retirement until his life expires without hardship (he is loaded!). Enjoy his remaining life without pain while the rest he does not care.

I asked him to will his property to me because logic states that he will have no used for whatever left (property, money etc) after his death. Moral question should not be his concerned but logic states that I am his friend and perhaps expires later than him, so I should continue the enjoyment … somehow he hesitates for some reasons LOL!

@chewkw. I admire your logic. It makes sense to me as let’s be honest once your dead you don’t need or care about anything

Why would they need FTL travel? Why the hurry?

Why can’t they travel for thousands of years?

How could they do that! They would need either some sort of hibernation system, that could protect and nurture the sleeping crew for eons, or use vast colony ships where the crew have families and continually produce new crew, but that would require remarkably sophisticated systems for maintaining the health of the occupants, as it would, by definition, be a completely closed-circuit system.

I think you are thinking of human experiences and limitations and applying it to all the possible trillions of alien civilizations.

We would they need some sort of hibernation? We have organisms on Earth that are thousands of years of old. There is no reason to assume that lifeforms can’t simply live indefinitely by simply replacing/regenerating whatever it is that needs replacing. Or simply never needs replacing.

but that would require remarkably sophisticated systems for maintaining the health of the occupants, as it would, by definition, be a completely closed-circuit system.

What if this “completely closed-circuit system” was the size of Mars, or even bigger? What if they are tiny? What if 10 years to us was 1 hour to them?

What if their civilization started 2 billion years ago? Which is perfectly feasible, planets have been around longer than that.

Humans developed powered machines ( other than by wind and water) about 300 years ago. During that period development has never stood still, ever. From a steam engine that was able to pump water out of coal mines to advanced military aircraft.

What if an alien civilization has been developing technology for 50 million years?

The survival of the human race isn’t imperitave in the grand scheme of things. The universe doesn’t really care.

However, knowingly damaging the environment that supports us is illogical to any species intelligent enough to understand that, no matter how slow the decline.

The whole thing comes down to some really basic discipline, and I’d argue many of the changes we need to make to avert climate change would actually improve many lives. It’s the equivalent of not eating chocolate all day, every day, just because you like chocolate, but on a societal level. And that’s exactly where we’re at now, over-indulging in everything just because we can, without any consideration for the consequences or the effects it has on our daily lives. The question is whether we carry on like junkies, or apply at least enough discipline to create an environment where we can thrive. I’d like to think we’re smart enough to choose the latter.

… over-indulging in everything just because we can, without any consideration for the consequences or the effects it has on our daily lives.

^^^ the problem is disposable products which do not last and can’t be repaired but require constant consumption / use of raw materials.