Re: Barack Obama Pits Space Explorers Against School Children
- From: Ian Parker <ianparker2@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2007 08:42:28 -0800 (PST)
On 3 Dec, 14:56, Quadibloc <jsav...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Dec 3, 4:14 am, Ian Parker <ianpark...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
This is the form in which space will increasingly have to
be packaged.
As it happens, I've addressed this in another thread I've started.
I feel that the main rationale for space won't be in direct benefits
to Earth. Nuclear power plants are far more cost-effective than solar
power satellites. Dealing with asteroids is important, but in itself
won't require an ambitious manned space exploration effort.
Instead, although in the long term Earth could benefit directly, the
main reason to put people in space is so that humanity - and the
valuable achievements of humanity - could survive even if problems
developed on Earth. And problems will develop on Earth, since there is
no sign that population growth is being checked.
And that is going to be hard to sell to the man in the street.
John Savard
I think I have dealt with that in another thread. I think personally
there is something to be said for a spike in the steering wheel.
Politicians and generals would take bigger risks if they felt they had
a bolt hole.
Most of the extistential risks are man made and the way to combat them
is to put in plave the appropriate controls, including controls on the
military.
Einar was wittering on about religious groups setting up space
colonies. Look at Iraq, death squads target people who say thier
prayers in the wrong way. I replied that the only people who should go
to a space colony are those who have been persecuted. They will
understand and not want a repetition. I mentioned the whore(s) of
Babylon who inhabit Syrian night clubs and don't pay 15% to Assad.
If you are not careful you will find that space colonies actually
increase the existential risk, not reduce it.
BTW - Perhaps one experiment that could be done on the ISS would be to
see how weightlessness affects sex. The thought occured to me as I was
writing this. - The whore of Babylon!
I think that at the moment SSP is too expensive and other technologies
are cheaper. This might change when we started using the resources in
space. Space colonies can't be built either without the resources of
space. There is however no compelling reason against SSP. Colonies are
another matter. They are dangerous in their own right.
As I have pointed out uselful technology will emerge from the
intermediate stages.
- Ian Parker
- Ian Parker
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Barack Obama Pits Space Explorers Against School Children
- From: Quadibloc
- Re: Barack Obama Pits Space Explorers Against School Children
- References:
- Barack Obama Pits Space Explorers Against School Children
- From: Mark R. Whittington
- Re: Barack Obama Pits Space Explorers Against School Children
- From: Quadibloc
- Re: Barack Obama Pits Space Explorers Against School Children
- From: Ian Parker
- Re: Barack Obama Pits Space Explorers Against School Children
- From: Quadibloc
- Barack Obama Pits Space Explorers Against School Children
- Prev by Date: Re: Price creep at SpaceX?
- Next by Date: Re: Barack Obama Pits Space Explorers Against School Children
- Previous by thread: Re: Barack Obama Pits Space Explorers Against School Children
- Next by thread: Re: Barack Obama Pits Space Explorers Against School Children
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|