I wanted to see if I could get some conversation going. As a citizen of Asgardia I have been doing what I can to expand my mind, advocate in any way I can, and explore possibilities. I am a member of the planetary society for that very purpose. As such I like to see how others think.  For today’s post I am going to talk about the concept of terraforming. When we achieve living in space we will also want to settle on other worlds. Many worlds will not be able to support human life, so it seems logical to adjust that environment to fit our needs, right? But if we change an entire world to fit us wouldn’t we be also disrupting and in a sense destroying the natural beauty that is already on the planet. So the question I propose to get those neurons firing is this, when we move to new worlds, should we change them to meet our needs? Or should we preserve the environments and learn to live within that environment?  Take mars for example. We could change it to be like earth, or we could keep it as it is in all its beauty. Both come with massive challenges, one would be things from manipulating atmospheres to creating electromagnetic fields on massive scales to protect from cosmic radiation. The other would to build and maintain shelters and produce all we need in said shelter.  One day we will be able to do either, and either will work, so tell me, which do you think we should do?

I do hope all my fellow Asgardians have been well in the time I’ve been away. I had gotten an injury at my place of employment and have been dealing with not having funds and suddenly being disabled for about a year now. Depression got the better of me for a while, but lately I have been wanting to reconnect with people.

I've been searching the Asgardian membership for people local to me, and requesting to be their friend. In so doing, I noticed that most people have no friends, and are not a member of any groups. This indicates to me that there seems to be a lack of interest in working to further Asgardia's goals. Let's get together and discuss what we can do to help.

I have two favorite authors. The first is Robert A Heinlein, because most, if not all, of his books have elements of polyamory in them. Most people would say their favorite book of his is Stranger in a Strange Land. Not me, though it is indeed a great book, as are pretty much all of his books. My favorite book of his is The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress, because in it he describes multiple types of plural relationships, including my favorite, a Line Marriage, which he describes in great detail. The Second is Issac Asimov. I can't say I have a favorite book of his, because they are all tied together. Heinlein's books are tied together to a great extent, but not to the same extent as Asimov's. When you are reading Asimov's books you often think they are standalone books, but at some point you realize they are all connected, so you need to pay attention to details when you are reading them. You should also look up the order in which they should be read according to his timeline. I do have a favorite character of his, though. The pass for human anywhere/anytime robot who keeps popping up in the books which takes place over a period of thousands of years. He appears early on in the robot series as not being very human like, but he keeps upgrading himself throughout the books until he appears to be very human.

When I joined Asgardia couple of days ago, I misread something that that led me to believe I had joined just in time to help make changes to the constitution. I misread the date, so I was a year too late. But I had already started, and decided to turn it into a blog post. If terms like moral, immoral, and morality are going to be included in the Constitution (as they are), then those terms should be clearly defined in relation to the Constitution, since they are generally subjective terms. What is moral for one person or group, can be immoral for another person or group. I propose removing such subjective terms from the Constitution altogether. It can’t be that hard to come up with better wording. The following was an immediate glaring omission from the constitution I noticed, so I added the second half of the sentence. Chapter 1 11 Asgardia is a non-religious nation of free Spirit, science and internationalism. However, every Asgardian can freely practise any religion of planet Earth, providing that such practice does not interfere with the rights of any other person. (The spelling of practise also needs to be corrected) Nudity is the natural state of humankind, the same as all animals. In certain instances, it is advantageous to wear clothes, which is why we invented them. Some people, for various reasons, have decided that wearing clothes in public should always be practiced, and that it is immoral for anyone not to wear them. That attitude infringes on the right of other people to be nude. Conversely, nudists attitude, of them deserving to be nude anytime they want to, would infringe on the right of textile folks to not be exposed to nudity. A solution to this would be to either have different Asgardian localities for each group, or to have different areas within the same locality for each group. In either case, when in the area of the other group, a person should abide by that groups rules. Nudists should wear clothes when in textile areas, and textile folks should expect to encounter nude people, when in nudist areas. In their own domicile people should be able to dress, or not, as they see fit. These rights should be encoded either in the constitution, or other laws. There are many different types of relationships. Monogamy is by no means the only one, and even it contains different types of relationships. Consensual Non Monogamy (CNM) and Polyamory (a subset of CNM) are two types of relationships that are rapidly growing in popularity. It is my contention that government should have nothing whatsoever to do with peoples choice of relationship style. People should be treated by government as individuals. That includes regarding taxes, welfare, and in any other way that government deals with people. I think this should also be encoded in the constitution or other laws. I look forward to reading others thoughts about my ideas, as well as what other ideas they might have.

When I joined Asgardia couple of days ago, I misread something that that led me to believe I had joined just in time to help make changes to the constitution. I misread the date, so I was a year too late. But I had already started, and decided to turn it into a blog post. If terms like moral, immoral, and morality are going to be included in the Constitution (as they are), then those terms should be clearly defined in relation to the Constitution, since they are generally subjective terms. What is moral for one person or group, can be immoral for another person or group. I propose removing such subjective terms from the Constitution altogether. It can’t be that hard to come up with better wording. The following was an immediate glaring omission from the constitution I noticed, so I added the second half of the sentence. Chapter 1 11 Asgardia is a non-religious nation of free Spirit, science and internationalism. However, every Asgardian can freely practise any religion of planet Earth, providing that such practice does not interfere with the rights of any other person. (The spelling of practise also needs to be corrected) Nudity is the natural state of humankind, the same as all animals. In certain instances, it is advantageous to wear clothes, which is why we invented them. Some people, for various reasons, have decided that wearing clothes in public should always be practiced, and that it is immoral for anyone not to wear them. That attitude infringes on the right of other people to be nude. Conversely, nudists attitude, of them deserving to be nude anytime they want to, would infringe on the right of textile folks to not be exposed to nudity. A solution to this would be to either have different Asgardian localities for each group, or to have different areas within the same locality for each group. In either case, when in the area of the other group, a person should abide by that groups rules. Nudists should wear clothes when in textile areas, and textile folks should expect to encounter nude people, when in nudist areas. In their own domicile people should be able to dress, or not, as they see fit. These rights should be encoded either in the constitution, or other laws. There are many different types of relationships. Monogamy is by no means the only one, and even it contains different types of relationships. Consensual Non Monogamy (CNM) and Polyamory (a subset of CNM) are two types of relationships that are rapidly growing in popularity. It is my contention that government should have nothing whatsoever to do with peoples choice of relationship style. People should be treated by government as individuals. That includes regarding taxes, welfare, and in any other way that government deals with people. I think this should also be encoded in the constitution or other laws. I look forward to reading others thoughts about my ideas, as well as what other ideas they might have.

I keep reading about: a joint human/alien base at the South Pole; human ships based on Alien Technology; bases on Luna and Mars! Can anyone provide solid information, or cast any light on these subjects for me?

The ESPYS is a Sports and Entertainment award ceremony that honors athletes and coaches for their outstanding achievements in their respective athletics disciplines. We will be hosting an afterparty for this event at the renowned LA Reserve in Los Angeles California. The event starts at 10PM PST. Please use this event to invite potential new members to our Great Space Nation. For Reservations and tickets please follow this link below. If you have any special considerations please email us at info@curbcoventures.com. We look forward to seeing you all.  Please dress to impress!! For access to the tickets please email us. https://www.eventbrite.com/e/espys-after-party-tickets-646320821977

As some of you know I really enjoy exploring new things and trying to learn all I can, lately I have been wondering about sustainability in space, which has lead me to researching bio domes here on earth. In a previous post I had mentioned the idea of building a training center under the ocean to simulate the disconnect we would experience in space, however the funds for such an endeavor would take me quite a while to acquire, so to begin the process I believe bio domes could be a logical leaping point, and would provide adequate knowledge for possible habitats on other worlds. Hopefully I will having something soon to show everyone here.