Re: Back to the moon? When?

simberg.interglobal@xxxxxxxxx (Rand Simberg) wrote:

:On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 06:26:33 -0800 (PST), in a place far, far away,
:Quadibloc <jsavard@xxxxxxxxx> made the phosphor on my monitor glow in
:such a way as to indicate that:
:
:>On Nov 9, 12:12 pm, John Schilling <schil...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
:>
:>> The point is, A: human lives are *meant* to be risked, on account of
:>> they are each and every one of them guaranteed to be lost whether you
:>> risk them or not, and B: humans are roughly a thousand times better
:>> than the best contemporary robots at doing the sort of things space
:>> scientists care about (and better still at doing the sorts of things
:>> politicians care about), so sending them off to do space science and
:>> whatnot is a really amazingly good way to risk a human life.
:>
:>It's bad enough that, yes, humans will eventually die of old age. But
:>every death of an innocent human being is a tragedy of such immense
:>proportions that it is not at all true to say that human lives are
:>"meant to be risked". Only the most serious reasons should lead us to
:>do such a terrible thing.
:>
:>Of course, there's nothing wrong with your second point - and yes,
:>since people will accomplish more in studying Mars than machines will,
:>of course it would be legitimate for people to want to go there. At
:>some risk to their lives.
:>
:>Spending absurdly high amounts of money to reduce risks in ways that
:>don't even work is not what I recommend. But the opposite temptation
:>of rushing and cutting corners is always present as well.
:>
:>The approach to risk in space should be one that leaves no ambiguity,
:>but instead makes it resoundingly clear:
:>
:>- the astronauts themselves are brave individuals who were willing to
:>face the hazards of space, and
:>
:>- we, on the ground, did everything we could as best we could to get
:>them back safely.
:
:Then space will remain forever unaffordable.
:

As will life on Earth, if we apply the same rule here.


--
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to
live in the real world." -- Mary Shafer, NASA Dryden
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT: Scott Ridder on Fallujah
    ... >> What drives them is the love they have for their leaders, ... >of American lives and a ... decreased the risk of a second one? ... "disgruntled" and taken the bombing of a marine barracks in stride, ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: Public Apology to Bill from John P. re: Military Service
    ... they can be admired for volunteering to be in such a position. ... That's been said before -- they risk their lives to some extent ... their lives to some extent just by enlisting, ...
    (talk.politics.guns)
  • Re: Blaming the victim? was: Re: from jms: too damned much stuff
    ... > Amy Guskin wrote: ... >> operative, risk the lives of her contacts, ruin the time and money invested ... >> the lives of the contacts, agents, and operatives who used and worked with ...
    (rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.moderated)
  • Re: OT - cannabis email
    ... lives in Carterton, Oxfordshire, I have watched the video's on how it ... people who couldn't roll joints if they tried (an ex-teacher and an ... do and I would risk a criminal record do it all again in a heartbeat. ...
    (uk.media.tv.misc)
  • Re: Way off topic question
    ... >>>"Chickened out" has a very unpleasant negative connotation. ... They usually continue to avoid adversity,>> responsibility and risk rather than learn to cope with it and deal>> with it. ... They remain whiners all their lives. ... >> Even in Nam, very few good combat engineer mechanics got zapped, though some avoided that by competent use of>> weapons and field-expedient demo inventions when necessary. ...
    (rec.crafts.metalworking)
Loading