Members Jeff Leites Posted August 3, 2009 Members Share Posted August 3, 2009 I just don't get it. We'll probably kill a bunch of astronauts in the process, and it will cost billions and billions of taxpayer dollars. It's too big a price to pay to do something, just because we can (or will be able to) do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Billster Posted August 3, 2009 Members Share Posted August 3, 2009 No, they'll just divert the funds to the secret shadow government and stage a phony Mars landing with grainy video from the Gobi desert [/tinfoilhat] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members meccajay Posted August 3, 2009 Members Share Posted August 3, 2009 Probes and robots. The end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jeff da Weasel Posted August 3, 2009 Members Share Posted August 3, 2009 I just don't see don't get it.We'll probably kill a bunch of astronauts in the process, and it will cost billions and billions of taxpayer dollars. Exploration has been part of the human psyche since we were humans. There's always been a desire to see what's over the horizon. At some point, through any one or combination of many factors, Earth will no longer be a suitable place for life. At what point should we start the very beginning steps of seeing if/how humans can exist someplace else? Should we wait until disaster is imminent, or should we take risks now in hopes that we learn something that future generations can build upon? All astronauts know they can die on any mission, including "simple" visits to our little orbiting space station. To be among the first humans to set foot on another planet would make the risk highly worthwhile to a certain type of person. I applaud all of these efforts, regardless of people's ability to understand their value. It's very easy to be short-sighted about stuff that really won't have a big impact on any of us in our lifetimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TimOBrien Posted August 3, 2009 Members Share Posted August 3, 2009 I just don't see don't get it. We'll probably kill a bunch of astronauts in the process, and it will cost billions and billions of taxpayer dollars. It's too big a price to pay to do something, just because we can (or will be able to) do it. Same thing a bunch of people said in Spain back in 1490 when that crazy Italian wanted to sail for India the wrong way toward the edge guarded by dragons. You DO know they laugh at Flat Earthers now???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members halfnote Posted August 3, 2009 Members Share Posted August 3, 2009 The idea that Earth will someday be inhospitable to life has been used to support space exploration for a while now but I'd like to point out a few flaws with that notion:(1) It's already somewhat inhospitable; disaster is always imminent, mostly by our own design.(2) By the time that it truly approaches unlivabilty, many millions or even billions of years form now, humans will prolly have died off.(3) Getting anywhere that offers a better opportunity would involve getting not just to another planet but an entirely different part of the universe. Rather than point out how little we even know about where such a place might be, much less how to get there, I'll just procede to...(3) The idea smacks of "use it up & leave the mess", a characteristic that will make us pariahs to any life that we might encounter.(4) Creating a place where we can demonstrate an ability to foster cooperative life here is, whether some agree or not, really a prerequisite to our being able to successfully reach such a goal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jeff da Weasel Posted August 3, 2009 Members Share Posted August 3, 2009 (3) The idea smacks of "use it up & leave the mess", a characteristic that will make us pariahs to any life that we might encounter. No, no, no. I don't mean any silly human-caused environmental stuff. The Earth will be fine with most of that. I mean changes in the local environment (i.e., our solar system) that regardless of what people (or people's evolutionary descendants) do, the Earth will not be a place on which life can exist. - The sun going red giant.- Huge space rocks smashing into us, unavoidably.- Gamma ray bursts that can sterilize the whole place in seconds. Someone, someday, will be thankful that we started putting together some ideas on how to deal with this stuff back here in this archaic time period. Our first trip to another planet is a tiny step, but don't all journeys begin with a step? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members halfnote Posted August 3, 2009 Members Share Posted August 3, 2009 I dig, Jeff. My point is that the plan to leave Earth (& we can look back a little to way this idea was floated during the Reagan era, smack of "use it & move on" with out making attempts to replenish.You know, kinda how we've done so strikingly in settling N America, or in fact, many parts of our world in the past...N Afirca wasn't always a desert.Environmentally, we humans have a terrible inability to percieve the actuality of our interaction with the world. By that I don't mean just becoming aware that we have an effect but becoming aware of how that interaction actually works, functionally.Going all cosmicologic for a moment, the universe might not allow us to export ourselves. As far as the other part, the inevitable devolution of the solar system, that will be so far in the future that we'll prolly have already died out...or maybe eveolved into another type of life entirely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jeff da Weasel Posted August 3, 2009 Members Share Posted August 3, 2009 I dig, Jeff. My point is that the plan to leave Earth (& we can look back a little to way this idea was floated during the Reagan era, smack of "use it & move on" with out making attempts to replenish. You know, kinda how we've done so strikingly in settling N America, or in fact, many parts of our world in the past...N Afirca wasn't always a desert. Sure. We should make the best of what we have. Totally with ya there. As far as the other part, the inevitable devolution of the solar system, that will be so far in the future that we'll prolly have already died out...or maybe eveolved into another type of life entirely. I hope so. But still, we can help those beings, whatever they are, with our advancements now. I guarantee we continue to benefit from the efforts of a few smart Australopithecines who went above and beyond what their society expected of them as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members elsongs Posted August 3, 2009 Members Share Posted August 3, 2009 I just don't see don't get it. We'll probably kill a bunch of astronauts in the process, and it will cost billions and billions of taxpayer dollars. It's too big a price to pay to do something, just because we can (or will be able to) do it. See, think about it, if NASA really did fake the Moon landing, they would have faked a Mars landing years ago. Should we aim to go to Mars? By all means! Is it a high priority right now? No way. We'll get there eventually, when the time is right, the money is flowing and technology is in place, but we're not quite ready yet. Being that there is no longer a Cold War/Space Race, this effort will be done as a cooperative effort in the name of humankind rather than for national pride. But there is no rush. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members halfnote Posted August 3, 2009 Members Share Posted August 3, 2009 Sure. We should make the best of what we have. Totally with ya there. I hope so. But still, we can help those beings, whatever they are, with our advancements now. I guarantee we continue to benefit from the efforts of a few smart Australopithecines who went above and beyond what their society expected of them as well. "Constantly better" is a great slogan. Worked for the Beatles; works for me. Go for the infradig position though, Jeff. Sometimes the very idea of escaping keeps us from making the real effort to turn a situation around. Magical as it might sound to some, the effort to turn a situation around sometimes it what gives us the key to escpe. Perhaps what would be key to developing a way to get off this planet would come from efforts to solve our problems here. We never know where the tipping point will be. Consider what elsongs just said about priorities & funding. It might be that if we solved our problems here & learned how to really cooperate & encourage life overall, we'd have the all the resources we might need to develop an escape method ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John Bartus Posted August 3, 2009 Members Share Posted August 3, 2009 While there have been great successes in sending "probes and robots" to Mars, there have been spectacular and costly failures as well. People can solve problems that machines still can't, and can much better assess a situation to determine the best outcome. Having a human presence on Mars would be infinitely preferable to trying to explore with a radio-controlled robot. The potential loss of life will never be a deterrent to scientists and explorers who wish to expand our knowledge base and try to make life better here on Earth (the space program of the 1960s yielded so many tech benefits that we take for granted today). The cost to go to Mars would be a fraction of what we waste in other areas, would provide new technological advances, and perhaps might serve to unite people around our planet. Besides, loads of people have died in plane crashes, but no one seriously calls for the end of air travel. My $0.02. YMMV, especially if we continue missing these planetary proximity windows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil O'Keefe Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 I am absolutely in favor of funding NASA and space exploration. Leaving aside Jeff's comments on long term survival of the human race, I think there are other benefits for mankind that stem from this exploration and research, and not all of it is long-term in terms of the payoff. As far as the risks go, we all take risks each and every day, and you can get killed walking across the street. Yes, the challenges and risks are great, but IMO, so are the rewards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Bookumdano2 Posted August 3, 2009 Members Share Posted August 3, 2009 Tape is better than dawMac is better than pcI can't bet my bass tracks to stand out in the mixI don't like my bossMy car doesn't qualify for the clunker program All these biggie issues in day to day life. Should we go to Mars? Or beyond? Here we are- http://www.saturntoday.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=21201 What do YOU think? I say, it is imperative. This little blue dot will be gone soon enough.We have to move forward and outward into the stars. If mankind would put a zillionth of its focus on the big picture, we'd all be ashamed at focusing on things like pc vs Mac and what happened on that freakin' weird Bacholorette show last week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted August 3, 2009 Members Share Posted August 3, 2009 I am absolutely in favor of funding NASA and space exploration. Leaving aside Jeff's comments on long term survival of the human race, I think there are other benefits for mankind that stem from this exploration and research, and not all of it is long-term in terms of the payoff. As far as the risks go, we all take risks each and every day, and you can get killed walking across the street. Yes, the challenges and risks are great, but IMO, so are the rewards. I agree with this and favor space exploration for a variety of reasons. I'm just not sure that right now would be the time to do this!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jeff da Weasel Posted August 3, 2009 Members Share Posted August 3, 2009 But there is no rush. None at all. I didn't say, "Let's go tomorrow!" But sometime, hopefully in the next few hundred years or whenever, we should go. It seems like the right thing to do. We'll probably jump the gun and go earlier anyway, but I don't have any compelling need to have it be within my lifetime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members audioicon Posted August 3, 2009 Members Share Posted August 3, 2009 I just don't get it. We'll probably kill a bunch of astronauts in the process, and it will cost billions and billions of taxpayer dollars. It's too big a price to pay to do something, just because we can (or will be able to) do it. In my opinion going to Mars should be left with the private sector not the government. People are getting layoff letters, many people still don't have health insurance or basic food supplies to feed their families. While others pretend that these problems don't exist by sticking their heads in a tuba. Until you can fix these problems here, why waste money for something that has no immediate practical benefit to human being. People are suffering, loosing jobs, no money to pay for health care. Are these problems any priority to you or this country? AI Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members vintagevibes Posted August 3, 2009 Members Share Posted August 3, 2009 Putting robots there is not the same as putting human consciousness there. You cannot judge the value of that by immediate monetary expenditure or return. For some people value is always associated with money IMO this is profoundly ignorant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Philter Posted August 3, 2009 Members Share Posted August 3, 2009 It will never happen. That's my prediction. I also predict that within 20 years or so the idea that it could happen will seem quaint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Jeff da Weasel Posted August 3, 2009 Members Share Posted August 3, 2009 It will never happen. Never is a looooooooooooooong time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members meccajay Posted August 3, 2009 Members Share Posted August 3, 2009 While there have been great successes in sending "probes and robots" to Mars, there have been spectacular and costly failures as well. People can solve problems that machines still can't, and can much better assess a situation to determine the best outcome. Having a human presence on Mars would be infinitely preferable to trying to explore with a radio-controlled robot.. I agree, but for now, probes and robots. The main reason is the window for such a manned trip is very small before life support and re-entry issues demand an immediate return to earth. They get there, check things out, collect a few things, return home. That's about as far as we can go in space currently.. Once we get robotics up to snuff(billions more in research). Then we could surely put a team of robotic "scientists" up there, and leave them there to happily explore and report. Within the next 15-20 years another robotic team could even start building bases or even safe housing for future manned missions...All the while being monitored/directed in real-time(human conciousness). Were not talking about autonomous bots, just remote operated from earth, much like our Predator UAV program. It's possible. And not in some transformers/terminator fantasy. The advantage, is while we train the astronauts and refine our travel systems, those teams are up there working. While we shore up the heat/cold tolerences on our crafts...there working. While we elect presidents and secure more funding. There's still working! My thinking is that it will take a huge step forward technologically before we have command of space. This is why I posted in the other sace thread about putting robotics to work in our oceans to help us make that leap...think of that what you will. Right now were just not there yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted August 3, 2009 Members Share Posted August 3, 2009 Never is a looooooooooooooong time. "Never" is almost how long I waited to have someone smog my car this morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members UstadKhanAli Posted August 3, 2009 Members Share Posted August 3, 2009 I agree, but for now, probes and robots. Just to clarify, we are talking about Mars landings, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bp Posted August 3, 2009 Members Share Posted August 3, 2009 Tape is better than dawMac is better than pcI can't bet my bass tracks to stand out in the mixI don't like my bossMy car doesn't qualify for the clunker programAll these biggie issues in day to day life.Should we go to Mars? Or beyond?Here we are-http://www.saturntoday.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=21201What do YOU think?I say, it is imperative.This little blue dot will be gone soon enough.We have to move forward and outward into the stars.If mankind would put a zillionth of its focus on the big picture, we'd all be ashamed at focusing on things like pc vs Mac and what happened on that freakin' weird Bacholorette show last week. You forgot Jon vs. Kate. I'm all in favor of them being the first ones sent to Mars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members bp Posted August 3, 2009 Members Share Posted August 3, 2009 I agree with this and favor space exploration for a variety of reasons. I'm just not sure that right now would be the time to do this!!! Developing the tech that would be needed to get to Mars is something that should be done now. The benefits and discoveries will be useful in many areas here on Earth. Just think of what the tech impact has been from the moon program, the computer you're viewing this on being a small example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.