Since Halo: CE humanity looks like to have a tecnology of the 21 century, and really there no way humanity survived the war with the coveneant, and everything shows that humanity is such weak, such as weapons, ships, equipament and and lot else, so i’m propose to create a more future vision of humanity in halo 5:guardians improving most of the campaing scenarios and human civilization improvement’s.
I could make a better list than that.
-Ship and vehicle deisgn is hilarious and impractical, with Frigates having an obvious weak point in the superstructure and the land vhhicles being laughably underarmoured. Why are human bridges on the outside of a ship? A well-placed hit can render a ship useless.
-We have fully functioning railguns and laser weapons now. Why does the MA-series rifle still fire a NATO round? Why has it got no Iron sights? By Halo’s period, I would expect railguns and coilguns to be a stanadrd technology rather than one-offs in the forms of the M99 and ARC-920.
-Medical technology should be increasing human life into the late hundreds at that point- having a 90 year old ‘ancient’ is once again a laughable downgrade. Why is cryogenics not a business for reviving near-dead humans or allowing people to be placed in stasis to be awakened in the future?
-The culture of human civilisation is incredibly unrealistic, but given the context of RL expenses, understanable. 600 years ago, we didn’t speak english (At least in Britain), we spoke Old English, and trying to read soemthing from shakespeare is very difficult. In an ideal world, I would expect humans to not only speak a language that reflects 600 years of human development, but thousands of languages; the UNSC has over 800 worlds, and I find it hard to believe they all speak english and all more or less have the same culture. Cities should be a mish-mash of old and new structures; if you visit any city in England, you can see the conflict between older, more stylised architectural designs and newer, modern designs.
> 2533274904944768;2:
> I could make a better list than that.
>
> -Ship and vehicle deisgn is hilarious and impractical, with Frigates having an obvious weak point in the superstructure and the land vhhicles being laughably underarmoured. Why are human bridges on the outside of a ship? A well-placed hit can render a ship useless.
>
> -We have fully functioning railguns and laser weapons now. Why does the MA-series rifle still fire a NATO round? Why has it got no Iron sights? By Halo’s period, I would expect railguns and coilguns to be a stanadrd technology rather than one-offs in the forms of the M99 and ARC-920.
>
> -Medical technology should be increasing human life into the late hundreds at that point- having a 90 year old ‘ancient’ is once again a laughable downgrade. Why is cryogenics not a business for reviving near-dead humans or allowing people to be placed in stasis to be awakened in the future?
>
> -The culture of human civilisation is incredibly unrealistic, but given the context of RL expenses, understanable. 600 years ago, we didn’t speak english (At least in Britain), we spoke Old English, and trying to read soemthing from shakespeare is very difficult. In an ideal world, I would expect humans to not only speak a language that reflects 600 years of human development, but thousands of languages; the UNSC has over 800 worlds, and I find it hard to believe they all speak english and all more or less have the same culture. Cities should be a mish-mash of old and new structures; if you visit any city in England, you can see the conflict between older, more stylised architectural designs and newer, modern designs.
I agree with several of your points besides the life-span and culture. It is possible that there is just a limit with age and you cannot possibly live any farther without full brain transplants (which isn’t possible due to having someone else’s conscious). But who knows?
Also- 600 years ago we didn’t have communication, everyone was split apart, so people could change languages faster and then teach others. Now, most of the internet-faring people all learn together. It takes more time to change the culture of millions of people (like the internet today) compared to a few hundred people (like some old villages that don’t see the outside world).
> 2533274877056440;3:
> > 2533274904944768;2:
> > I could make a better list than that.
> >
> > -Ship and vehicle deisgn is hilarious and impractical, with Frigates having an obvious weak point in the superstructure and the land vhhicles being laughably underarmoured. Why are human bridges on the outside of a ship? A well-placed hit can render a ship useless.
> >
> > -We have fully functioning railguns and laser weapons now. Why does the MA-series rifle still fire a NATO round? Why has it got no Iron sights? By Halo’s period, I would expect railguns and coilguns to be a stanadrd technology rather than one-offs in the forms of the M99 and ARC-920.
> >
> > -Medical technology should be increasing human life into the late hundreds at that point- having a 90 year old ‘ancient’ is once again a laughable downgrade. Why is cryogenics not a business for reviving near-dead humans or allowing people to be placed in stasis to be awakened in the future?
> >
> > -The culture of human civilisation is incredibly unrealistic, but given the context of RL expenses, understanable. 600 years ago, we didn’t speak english (At least in Britain), we spoke Old English, and trying to read soemthing from shakespeare is very difficult. In an ideal world, I would expect humans to not only speak a language that reflects 600 years of human development, but thousands of languages; the UNSC has over 800 worlds, and I find it hard to believe they all speak english and all more or less have the same culture. Cities should be a mish-mash of old and new structures; if you visit any city in England, you can see the conflict between older, more stylised architectural designs and newer, modern designs.
>
>
> I agree with several of your points besides the life-span and culture. It is possible that there is just a limit with age and you cannot possibly live any farther without full brain transplants (which isn’t possible due to having someone else’s conscious). But who knows?
> Also- 600 years ago we didn’t have communication, everyone was split apart, so people could change languages faster and then teach others. Now, most of the internet-faring people all learn together. It takes more time to change the culture of millions of people (like the internet today) compared to a few hundred people (like some old villages that don’t see the outside world).
not only that, in halo they have different accents, different languages as well, remember halo reach farmers used a different language when speaking, and now a days there are translators, other than that maybe the UNSC uses english as the main language for any soldier to communicate with eachother, its not like the other cultures seized to exist, i bet european, asian, african and america have differed cultures, we’ew talking about a society with the ability to terraform other planets, so remodeling an old city shouldnt be that easy, still you never go to any city wich has a capability of being old, since you often go to new mombasa, new alexandria, new phoenix, we havent seen sydney wich is a very important city in the halo lore, and the colonies simply have the same kind of city since they were colonized between 2400 and 2500, they all seem to have the same culture, the same as right now there are a gigantic majority of cristians there might be a gigantic amount of people of the same culture, still a civilization as advanced as huumanity in halo is mostly atheist, in the books there are some times there are mentions of different cultures, but when you are on the military you are on service, you have to follow a protocol, and in the games we havent visited civilian life outside of the conflicts so we dont have a clear view about it.
[deleted]
Uh, if the UNSC went to war with today’s standards, excluding starships, and by just using ground/air vehicles and their weapons, they’d wipe the floor with us…and you’ve got to remember that during the 22nd, 24th, and 25th centuries, humanity went to war at major lengths. Also, because they started colonizing planets, all the money was put into space advancement, not militaristic advancement. And a good way to look at Humanity’s technological evolution and downfall, or at least to me cause it’s my own fan made theory(message me if you disagree and want to talk about it), is to play through some(not all) Call of Duty games. Also, another way to look at humanities slow militaristic evolution, would be that maybe The Librarian didn’t want us to evolve really fast cause Ancient Humanity apparently did and they caused some issues.
> 2533274877056440;3:
> I agree with several of your points besides the life-span and culture. It is possible that there is just a limit with age and you cannot possibly live any farther without full brain transplants (which isn’t possible due to having someone else’s conscious). But who knows?
Age is caused by a combination of chemical changes in the body that cause organ failure when they reach a critical point. Some examples I think I can remember are cells reaching the Hayflick limit (Being unable to perform further cell division due to running out of a certain protein at the ends of the DNA), diminished DNA repair mechanisms, and reactive chemical “rubbish” inside and outside the cells causing structural damage. There’s nothing mysterious about it and nothing suggests that a defeatist attitude towards ageing should be adopted.
We know that the UNSC can flash clone entire organs and replace failing ones with them. That should lengthen people’s lifespans beyond 90 by quite a bit due to replacing the organs that are failing from age related diseases, and wear and tear. The UNSC also possesses - or should possess - advanced cybernetics. Replacing organs with more robust and more efficient mechanical versions should be feasible, yet just isn’t done. There’s a handful of people living today with no heartbeat and instead use a continuous flow device to keep their blood circulating.
The average lifespan for the UNSC is barely better than today’s - that’s a silly thing to have a science-fiction universe like Halo’s state when today’s lifespan is a statistic being influenced by diseases that the UNSC should be able to easily treat, like cancer and heart disease. It’s also influenced by a prior generation who grew up in an overall unhealthier environment - less sophisticated and accessible healthcare, less safe working environments, public smoking, leaded fuels and paints, asbestos exposure, coal mining and coal fires, etc. The UNSC presumably has none of these, yet looking at their 80-90 life expectancy you’d think that they were still dying from the same diseases and the same long term exposures to certain environmental hazards.
For the UNSC, ageing should kind of be a thing of the past. The advancements in multiple fields like medicine, nanotechnology, biotechnology and information technology should have done away with it.
To add to Baconshelf’s list, which I agree with, I also kind of have an issue with how unremarkable the UNSC’s AI’s are. They don’t really seem to contribute to humanity’s technological advancement. Despite having far superior data processing capabilities, number crunching and memory retention/recollection they don’t seem particularly creative or intelligent, and their abstract thinking skills don’t seem any better than a human’s. I haven’t seen nor heard of any AI’s actually creating something themselves from human technology. If a human can create something, or solve a scientific problem, then an AI should be able to do so to a far better degree. They can be aware of far more data than a human mind and therefore draw conclusions and notice trends in truly tremendous volumes of data that a human simply would never see. Some people say that we could have a cure for cancer hidden across the millions of scientific studies done on the disease - hidden across the billions of data points and thousands of disparate databases round the world. However no human can interface with all that data at once to see the cure emerge from it. An AI could.
If a human mind came up with the AI creation process, then the UNSC’s AI’s should come up with a better way of doing it in order to make better, more stable AI’s. They’d have a pretty strong motivation for doing that given that they only live for 7 years. A human mind cannot grapple with the 12 dimensional geometry of slipspace and its causality violating tricks, but the AI’s should be more successful in doing that and hence should drive slipspace technology beyond the limitations of the human mind’s ability to comprehend it and the mathematics involved. Instead of revolutionising human civilisation, AI’s instead became glorified trashcan collectors and combine harvester controllers. Even their application in naval combat is far undercutting their potential capabilities and applications.
> 2533274904944768;2:
> I could make a better list than that.
>
> -Ship and vehicle deisgn is hilarious and impractical, with Frigates having an obvious weak point in the superstructure and the land vehicles being laughably underarmoured. Why are human bridges on the outside of a ship? A well-placed hit can render a ship useless.
>
> -We have fully functioning railguns and laser weapons now. Why does the MA-series rifle still fire a NATO round? Why has it got no Iron sights? By Halo’s period, I would expect railguns and coilguns to be a stanadrd technology rather than one-offs in the forms of the M99 and ARC-920.
>
> -Medical technology should be increasing human life into the late hundreds at that point- having a 90 year old ‘ancient’ is once again a laughable downgrade. Why is cryogenics not a business for reviving near-dead humans or allowing people to be placed in stasis to be awakened in the future?
>
> -The culture of human civilisation is incredibly unrealistic, but given the context of RL expenses, understanable. 600 years ago, we didn’t speak english (At least in Britain), we spoke Old English, and trying to read soemthing from shakespeare is very difficult. In an ideal world, I would expect humans to not only speak a language that reflects 600 years of human development, but thousands of languages; the UNSC has over 800 worlds, and I find it hard to believe they all speak english and all more or less have the same culture. Cities should be a mish-mash of old and new structures; if you visit any city in England, you can see the conflict between older, more stylised architectural designs and newer, modern designs.
Funny guy:
Ship design is hilarious? I don’t think you’ve seen much sci fi ship design. We can see that 343i is making new UNSC ships without obvious flaws like having the bridge on the outside of the hull. Case in point Infinity. Land vehicles are “laughably underarmored?” The M808B Scorpion is made of ceramic titanium plate that can take 2 hits from the Wraith and how can we forget the gorgeous Grizzly that takes Covenant naval assets to destroy. The Warthog does employ an open carriage design, but is a proven concept that works for what it is designed.
It’s perfectly reasonable to question why the UNSC fires NATO rounds, but the MA5 series was supposed to be replaced as the mainline rifle by the Battle Rifle, but the war changed things. Also you cry for futuristic, but want iron sights? We all know that the MA5 has pop up iron sights and smart links to the wearers HUD (even Marines). Railguns would be nice for heavy weapons, but rifles don’t make good for suppressing fire due to the technology employed.
It’s well known that the UNSC has wonderful medical technology. Halsey brought back either Kelly or Linda from the dead with less than ideal conditions. We know Paragonsky would be a dinosaur in our current age of tech, but is still in service. Somethings you can’t change which includes age.
We see colonies like Madrigal: http://www.halopedia.org/Madrigal which were of Hispanic descent. Other colonies were noted to be primarily different ethnicities which we can see in the high variety of city/planet names.
> 2533274922786629;8:
> > 2533274904944768;2:
> > I could make a better list than that.
> >
> > -Ship and vehicle deisgn is hilarious and impractical, with Frigates having an obvious weak point in the superstructure and the land vehicles being laughably underarmoured. Why are human bridges on the outside of a ship? A well-placed hit can render a ship useless.
> >
> > -We have fully functioning railguns and laser weapons now. Why does the MA-series rifle still fire a NATO round? Why has it got no Iron sights? By Halo’s period, I would expect railguns and coilguns to be a stanadrd technology rather than one-offs in the forms of the M99 and ARC-920.
> >
> > -Medical technology should be increasing human life into the late hundreds at that point- having a 90 year old ‘ancient’ is once again a laughable downgrade. Why is cryogenics not a business for reviving near-dead humans or allowing people to be placed in stasis to be awakened in the future?
> >
> > -The culture of human civilisation is incredibly unrealistic, but given the context of RL expenses, understanable. 600 years ago, we didn’t speak english (At least in Britain), we spoke Old English, and trying to read soemthing from shakespeare is very difficult. In an ideal world, I would expect humans to not only speak a language that reflects 600 years of human development, but thousands of languages; the UNSC has over 800 worlds, and I find it hard to believe they all speak english and all more or less have the same culture. Cities should be a mish-mash of old and new structures; if you visit any city in England, you can see the conflict between older, more stylised architectural designs and newer, modern designs.
>
>
>
> Funny guy:
> Ship design is hilarious? I don’t think you’ve seen much sci fi ship design. We can see that 343i is making new UNSC ships without obvious flaws like having the bridge on the outside of the hull. Case in point Infinity. Land vehicles are “laughably underarmored?” The M808B Scorpion is made of ceramic titanium plate that can take 2 hits from the Wraith and how can we forget the gorgeous Grizzly that takes Covenant naval assets to destroy. The Warthog does employ an open carriage design, but is a proven concept that works for what it is designed.
Infinity’s bridge is on the front/outside of the ship.
I think humanity’s achievements and scientific progress the way it is established in the games makes perfect sense, if this was, you know, not five hundred and fifty years in the future. Maybe a simple two hundred and I’d let everything slide, but five hundred freaking years?
Now here’s a theory. Five hundred years under the arm of the UNSC may have stagnated scientific progress and quality of life a bit? Because our military government has destroyed all market competition and monopolized all centers of innovation, technology is sufficient to get us around and make us procreate faster, but nothing else. After all, that’s all the UNSC needs to function. 500 years of monopolies and stagnation is unsustainable, of course. We can already tell humanity was in decline when the Covenant struck, what with the Insurrectionists and all. It was just that we had five hundred years to stick our grubby human paws everywhere that kept us alive until 2552. The Covenant were trying to unravel five hundred years of human expansionism (and doing an exquisite job at it.)
Maybe now that it’s 2558 - now that the war is over, we’ve come in contact with all these new alien races, we’re coming close to unlocking the mysteries of the Forerunners, and we’re rebuilding and possibly entering an arms race with the Elites, we might see the oppressive arm of the UNSC unravel, and humanity might enter a second Renaissance, especially if Halsey finds the other half of the Janus key and humans attain the Mantle.
But idk. 
> 2533274907934539;9:
> > 2533274922786629;8:
> > > 2533274904944768;2:
> > > I could make a better list than that.
> > >
> > > -Ship and vehicle deisgn is hilarious and impractical, with Frigates having an obvious weak point in the superstructure and the land vehicles being laughably underarmoured. Why are human bridges on the outside of a ship? A well-placed hit can render a ship useless.
> > >
> > > -We have fully functioning railguns and laser weapons now. Why does the MA-series rifle still fire a NATO round? Why has it got no Iron sights? By Halo’s period, I would expect railguns and coilguns to be a stanadrd technology rather than one-offs in the forms of the M99 and ARC-920.
> > >
> > > -Medical technology should be increasing human life into the late hundreds at that point- having a 90 year old ‘ancient’ is once again a laughable downgrade. Why is cryogenics not a business for reviving near-dead humans or allowing people to be placed in stasis to be awakened in the future?
> > >
> > > -The culture of human civilisation is incredibly unrealistic, but given the context of RL expenses, understanable. 600 years ago, we didn’t speak english (At least in Britain), we spoke Old English, and trying to read soemthing from shakespeare is very difficult. In an ideal world, I would expect humans to not only speak a language that reflects 600 years of human development, but thousands of languages; the UNSC has over 800 worlds, and I find it hard to believe they all speak english and all more or less have the same culture. Cities should be a mish-mash of old and new structures; if you visit any city in England, you can see the conflict between older, more stylised architectural designs and newer, modern designs.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Funny guy:
> > Ship design is hilarious? I don’t think you’ve seen much sci fi ship design. We can see that 343i is making new UNSC ships without obvious flaws like having the bridge on the outside of the hull. Case in point Infinity. Land vehicles are “laughably underarmored?” The M808B Scorpion is made of ceramic titanium plate that can take 2 hits from the Wraith and how can we forget the gorgeous Grizzly that takes Covenant naval assets to destroy. The Warthog does employ an open carriage design, but is a proven concept that works for what it is designed.
>
>
> Infinity’s bridge is on the front/outside of the ship.
I still don’t see how tbh, but I guess your right. Even if it is behind energy shields and large amounts of Titanium A3 plate.
The ships are fine, the bridges are tucked away, the frigate, we dont even know were the bridge is it’s either at the top or in between the fork things. I remember somewhere it was a observatory at the top. Infinity’s bridge is in the front under a large canopy plus forerunner shielding
Hey man don’t under estimate humanity!
While I agree on certain points like the recently-revealed human average lifespan being out of place in light of the UNSC’s established technology, it should also be noted that some of the technological anachronisms are like that on purpose. If the UNSC were “realistic”, most of the Halo games wouldn’t have happened because there would be no need for a Master Chief - or Spartans for that matter. AI-controlled self-replicating drone swarms would handle all warfare while humans sat around chilling in virtual reality. Halo’s setting was purposefully built to be an homage for Aliens and other classic sci-fi, not a realistic vision of the future 500 years from now.
To paraphrase Joe Staten (who was paraphrasing Robt McLees), around 300 years from now we got to the point where a weapon is a glass of water. When you drink it, all your enemies die. Then everyone decided that was boring and went back to all the cool stuff.
That’s not to say I wouldn’t like seeing more advanced technologies being introduced to the setting. Given that we know the UNSC has perfect organ-cloning technology, the 80-90 year lifespan thing makes no sense, unless that count includes all the fatalities over the last three decades of warfare. Most writers also seem to forget that UNSC captains have neural-integrated mind-machine interfaces in their heads that they can use to send and receive information; I’d love to see this aspect explored more.
> 2533274993843450;12:
> The ships are fine, the bridges are tucked away, the frigate, we dont even know were the bridge is it’s either at the top or in between the fork things. I remember somewhere it was a observatory at the top. Infinity’s bridge is in the front under a large canopy plus forerunner shielding
It still wouldn’t be difficult to aim for and hit the bridges. Infinity’s in a better spot than most, but ships like the Frigates are quite exposed. If the enemy learns where the bridges are, especially if they have guidable weaponry like plasma, then they could quickly decapitate most of the fleet with a well placed shot or two.
Meanwhile, the Covenant has their bridges tucked away deep in the center of the ship.
For those saying that the lifespan is the same as today’s or what not, here’s an explanation as to why that might be. First of all, I don’t think the lifespan is exactly the same, and that the average lifespan for a human during the 26th century would be around 90s to 110s. I mean the guys who invented the Shaw-Fujikawa slipspace engine(yeah I know thats their names) lived to be well over 100. Today’s average lifespan is 70s to 80s, so that’s still a leap forward. But not very significant. But why not make the lifespan greater? You’ve got to put in morality factors into the equation. Perhaps the UEG denied greater advancement in that field due to moral issues. I mean, we all see that religion plays a major role in civilian life in the Halo universe. Granted, the only religion we see in halo is Christianity, so perhaps in the Halo universe, that has become the dominant religion or something. Anything like that can happen, especially when the spread of values and morals are spread out to other planets. Anyways, I digress. My point is that perhaps because of religious views and morals and beliefs, the belief of making Humans live a long long time could have been a big no no, therefore influencing the UEG to pass certain acts and regulations(such as the Mortal Dictata) that denies advancement in aging to a significant degree. And the reason why people live longer in the 26th century is because of advancements in the medical field. As stated in canon before, humans don’t have to worry about diseases that much anymore, like cancer or -Yoink!-. Those are solved, therefore increasing the lifespan of people. But diseases like Parkinson’s syndrom and Borens syndrome and all the negative side effects of the Spartan-II augmentations still haven’t been fixed, which is fine cause there are certain diseases that you just cannot cure(like the flood!).
> 2533274919463107;16:
> First of all, I don’t think the lifespan is exactly the same, and that the average lifespan for a human during the 26th century would be around 90s to 110s. I mean the guys who invented the Shaw-Fujikawa slipspace engine(yeah I know thats their names) lived to be well over 100. Today’s average lifespan is 70s to 80s, so that’s still a leap forward. But not very significant.
It was stated in the Halo Universe section for humans that the average lifespan was 80-90. So Shaw and Fujikawa were statistical anomalies. Compare the lifepsan in the UNSC to that of several countries today: 34 countries today have an overall life expectancy 80 or above. The thing to consider is that these countries achieve that despite having not cured things like cancer, heart disease, HIV or debilitating genetic diseases.
Life expectancy is a general indicator of the quality of life, so given that the UNSC lies basically within the region of several countries today it looks like the quality of life, 500 years in the future, has not changed. That doesn’t make sense because:
-
The quality of the air they breathe is better than ours, because they don’t burn fossil fuels to power their motors or their power stations. I would also expect that carbon-capture technology has almost fully eliminated emissions from any areas where they still do, as well as adequate emission reduction for other forms of air pollution. If people want to go on and on about how the UNSC’s military technology is so far behind because they focused on improving civilian and infrastructure technology then where is all of it and why is it not having any impact on the quality of life?
-
They should have a better diet than us, because advances in synthetic biology and genetic modification can produce crops that have higher nutritional value with less undesirable contents. If they can flash clone organs then doing the same process for meat products that you would normally get from slaughtered livestock should be feasible, and again implementing genetic modification can produce meat products that are healthier. Given that they are still dying at the same age as people in first world countries that do not have access to such food, the UNSC cannot posses it.
-
They can supposedly flash clone whole organs, so when you have age related liver failure or heart failure, you can get a new one derived straight from you own DNA. Admiral Cole had his heart replaced after two heart attacks, his liver replaced after cirrhosis and had his endocrine system replaced. The ability to have failing body parts replaced due to age is for some reason not done.
-
Presumably, no one is dying from cancer, heart disease, organ failure or genetic diseases so that should raise their statistic above modern day first world nations.
> Anyways, I digress. My point is that perhaps because of religious views and morals and beliefs, the belief of making Humans live a long long time could have been a big no no, therefore influencing the UEG to pass certain acts and regulations(such as the Mortal Dictata) that denies advancement in aging to a significant degree.
Prohibition of life extension technologies will never work, especially if they are based on religious dogma and subjective standards of morality.
It would be profoundly immoral to ban development and application of such technologies based on a religion, or someone’s subjective morals and beliefs (Basically their damn opinion). Not everyone subscribes to those beliefs or that faith, so why should these people be forced to live under them if they want to have a certain treatment done to themselves to make them live longer? For the UNSC to do that would be for human civilization to do a heel turn on centuries of social development and go back to the ways of legislating based on dogma and superstition, and turning away from scientific and evidence based approaches all the while ignoring people’s choice in the matter. Life extension technology would not be mandatory, it would be opt-in. If you legislate based on one faith, then you will open the doors for other faiths and beliefs to get their policies in, and it will start a whole s**tstorm in a culturally diverse and previously secular society when you promote one set of arbitrary beliefs over others (It’s why the separation of Church and State exists).
Also, banning such technologies is fraught with totally arbitrary and subjective standards, and naturalistic fallacies. If one is to ban life extension technologies, then which ones do you ban? Cancer treatments extend the lifespan. So does receiving any form of modern day healthcare and pharmaceuticals. If we don’t want to be artificially tampering with human lifespan, then one is left with having to explain what all of that modern healthcare stuff is all about. Inevitably someone will probably say that the natural lifespan shouldn’t be touched, but again we’ve been changing that ourselves already. It’s also a fallacy; it depends on your country, but in the UK saying that “being gay is just not natural” isn’t going to get you much support in repealing gay marriage laws.
The fact that it can be seen that a belief doesn’t hold across different cultures and nations means that the UNSC banning the practice not only has to be met with approval across all the nations, faiths and cultures of Earth (Doubtful), but then it also has to be accepted across all of humanity’s colonies. Trying to police that isn’t going to be possible, and all it takes is for one colony to refuse. Then the UNSC is left looking like -Yoink- who either have to enforce their policy or look inept, and enforcing such a repressive, anti-scientific, anti-secular and unreasonable policy would generate a lot of public discontent. If the failure to keep recreational drugs off the streets, or the failure to shut down illegal -Yoink!- clinics in countries where -Yoink!- is illegal, is any indicator then people will go to the black market, including the very wealthy and powerful. Of course, wherever the black market is involved there is no regulation for health and safety and no protection for consumers. So the UNSC will waste hundreds of billions trying to police a pointless policy across interstellar space, and end up with people receiving these treatments, some being harmed by them and needing treatment, others being successful. That then leads to questions of how that will change human society if there’s a growing number of people living for several hundred years, and how to deal with this (And I think a lot of people would go for them. The uncertainty and fear faced when someone is on their deathbed can be pretty powerful).
It’s got the potential to be a huge industry that the UNSC could make many billions off of in corporate tax. Any colony that refuses this draconian law would benefit from the industry and biotechnology firms trading on their soil, as well as the migrants who would want to live there so that they can receive such treatments.
Prohibition isn’t the explanation for the lack of age defying in the UNSC I feel. The same goes for the lack of genetic augmentation, cybernetics and other transhuman technologies.
> 2533274919463107;16:
> Today’s average lifespan is 70s to 80s, so that’s still a leap forward. But not very significant. But why not make the lifespan greater? You’ve got to put in morality factors into the equation. Perhaps the UEG denied greater advancement in that field due to moral issues.
There is nothing moral about dying young.
> 2533274919463107;16:
> I mean, we all see that religion plays a major role in civilian life in the Halo universe.
The day that religion is no longer the whipping boy of science fiction will be a good day.
> 2533274919463107;16:
> Granted, the only religion we see in halo is Christianity, so perhaps in the Halo universe, that has become the dominant religion or something.
You’re forgetting the religious belief mentioned in Stomping on the Heels of a Fuss. One of the prisoners was a man who kick-started a religion and disappeared in such a way that his believers thought he’d transcended. Except he was living high off the money he’d cajoled from the faithful, and killed the protagonist so that the deception could continue.
Like I said, whipping boy.
> 2533274919463107;16:
> Anything like that can happen, especially when the spread of values and morals are spread out to other planets.
In every case we have seen on earth, expansion to new frontiers does not shore up old values and institutions. North America, for example, is not ruled by a distant monarchy.
> 2533274919463107;16:
> Anyways, I digress. My point is that perhaps because of religious views and morals and beliefs, the belief of making Humans live a long long time could have been a big no no, therefore influencing the UEG to pass certain acts and regulations(such as the Mortal Dictata) that denies advancement in aging to a significant degree.
You still have yet to show which religions would have prohibitions against living longer, or how they’d last longer than a few generations after the technology became available.
> 2533274919463107;16:
> But diseases like Parkinson’s syndrom and Borens syndrome and all the negative side effects of the Spartan-II augmentations still haven’t been fixed, which is fine cause there are certain diseases that you just cannot cure(like the flood!).
I never knew that Parkinson’s Syndrome is actually a virulent eldritch abomination that routinely breaks the physical laws of the universe to infect someone.
I learned something today.
> 2533274843421039;18:
> > 2533274919463107;16:
> > Anything like that can happen, especially when the spread of values and morals are spread out to other planets.
>
>
> In every case we have seen on earth, expansion to new frontiers does not shore up old values and institutions. North America, for example, is not ruled by a distant monarchy.
O Canada! Maybe?
Well, kinda sorta…
> 2533274835068816;17:
> It was stated in the Halo Universe section for humans that the average lifespan was 80-90. So Shaw and Fujikawa were statistical anomalies. Compare the lifepsan in the UNSC to that of several countries today: 34 countries today have an overall life expectancy 80 or above. The thing to consider is that these countries achieve that despite having not cured things like cancer, heart disease, HIV or debilitating genetic diseases.
>
> Life expectancy is a general indicator of the quality of life, so given that the UNSC lies basically within the region of several countries today it looks like the quality of life, 500 years in the future, has not changed. That doesn’t make sense because:
>
> - The quality of the air they breathe is better than ours, because they don’t burn fossil fuels to power their motors or their power stations. I would also expect that carbon-capture technology has almost fully eliminated emissions from any areas where they still do, as well as adequate emission reduction for other forms of air pollution. If people want to go on and on about how the UNSC’s military technology is so far behind because they focused on improving civilian and infrastructure technology then where is all of it and why is it not having any impact on the quality of life?
>
> - They should have a better diet than us, because advances in synthetic biology and genetic modification can produce crops that have higher nutritional value with less undesirable contents. If they can flash clone organs then doing the same process for meat products that you would normally get from slaughtered livestock should be feasible, and again implementing genetic modification can produce meat products that are healthier. Given that they are still dying at the same age as people in first world countries that do not have access to such food, the UNSC cannot posses it.
>
> - They can supposedly flash clone whole organs, so when you have age related liver failure or heart failure, you can get a new one derived straight from you own DNA. Admiral Cole had his heart replaced after two heart attacks, his liver replaced after cirrhosis and had his endocrine system replaced. The ability to have failing body parts replaced due to age is for some reason not done.
>
> - Presumably, no one is dying from cancer, heart disease, organ failure or genetic diseases so that should raise their statistic above modern day first world nations.
> 2533274835068816;17:
> Prohibition of life extension technologies will never work, especially if they are based on religious dogma and subjective standards of morality.
>
> It would be profoundly immoral to ban development and application of such technologies based on a religion, or someone’s subjective morals and beliefs (Basically their damn opinion). Not everyone subscribes to those beliefs or that faith, so why should these people be forced to live under them if they want to have a certain treatment done to themselves to make them live longer? For the UNSC to do that would be for human civilization to do a heel turn on centuries of social development and go back to the ways of legislating based on dogma and superstition, and turning away from scientific and evidence based approaches all the while ignoring people’s choice in the matter. Life extension technology would not be mandatory, it would be opt-in. If you legislate based on one faith, then you will open the doors for other faiths and beliefs to get their policies in, and it will start a whole s**tstorm in a culturally diverse and previously secular society when you promote one set of arbitrary beliefs over others (It’s why the separation of Church and State exists).
>
> Also, banning such technologies is fraught with totally arbitrary and subjective standards, and naturalistic fallacies. If one is to ban life extension technologies, then which ones do you ban? Cancer treatments extend the lifespan. So does receiving any form of modern day healthcare and pharmaceuticals. If we don’t want to be artificially tampering with human lifespan, then one is left with having to explain what all of that modern healthcare stuff is all about. Inevitably someone will probably say that the natural lifespan shouldn’t be touched, but again we’ve been changing that ourselves already. It’s also a fallacy; it depends on your country, but in the UK saying that “being gay is just not natural” isn’t going to get you much support in repealing gay marriage laws.
>
> The fact that it can be seen that a belief doesn’t hold across different cultures and nations means that the UNSC banning the practice not only has to be met with approval across all the nations, faiths and cultures of Earth (Doubtful), but then it also has to be accepted across all of humanity’s colonies. Trying to police that isn’t going to be possible, and all it takes is for one colony to refuse. Then the UNSC is left looking like -Yoink- who either have to enforce their policy or look inept, and enforcing such a repressive, anti-scientific, anti-secular and unreasonable policy would generate a lot of public discontent. If the failure to keep recreational drugs off the streets, or the failure to shut down illegal -Yoink!- clinics in countries where -Yoink!- is illegal, is any indicator then people will go to the black market, including the very wealthy and powerful. Of course, wherever the black market is involved there is no regulation for health and safety and no protection for consumers. So the UNSC will waste hundreds of billions trying to police a pointless policy across interstellar space, and end up with people receiving these treatments, some being harmed by them and needing treatment, others being successful. That then leads to questions of how that will change human society if there’s a growing number of people living for several hundred years, and how to deal with this (And I think a lot of people would go for them. The uncertainty and fear faced when someone is on their deathbed can be pretty powerful).
>
> It’s got the potential to be a huge industry that the UNSC could make many billions off of in corporate tax. Any colony that refuses this draconian law would benefit from the industry and biotechnology firms trading on their soil, as well as the migrants who would want to live there so that they can receive such treatments.
>
> Prohibition isn’t the explanation for the lack of age defying in the UNSC I feel. The same goes for the lack of genetic augmentation, cybernetics and other transhuman technologies.
Ok, after reading your counter-argument, I agree then with what you say and throw out what I said. Not the best explanation theory Ive come up with. So, to put those factors you said in mind, and to offer an explanation as to why the average lifespan is like today’s, is probably because(in the Halo universe, cause in real life it is possible) the Librarian tampered with Humanities genes(we know she did this, but we dont know how much of her influence has impacted our biology) to have them stay within the natural age limit, thus making it impossible for the UNSC or ONI to find a way to extend lifespan until Humanity was ready to obtain the Mantle of Responsibility and protect the Galaxy, in which they would be as advanced or more advanced than the Forerunners. It all goes back to what exactly the Librarian did to Humanity, in which we only know small portions of what she did.