Re: Barack Obama Pits Space Explorers Against School Children

On 3 Dec, 18:26, Quadibloc <jsav...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Dec 3, 9:42 am, Ian Parker <ianpark...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

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.

But that idea makes no sense. How do you put in place controls that
control Iran and control al-Qaeda? What this sort of proposal means in
practice is that the world's democracies place one-sided controls on
their own militaries, which leads to an *increased* risk of a
nightmare world where the other side wins, and freedom is destroyed.

The first thing you do to control Al Qaeda is to stop feeding it.
There is abundant evidence that the US supported OBL during the Afghan
- Soviet war. There is also disquierting evidence of support for the
KLA Kosovo Liberation Army which was supported by OBL.

I have mentioned ad nauseum the lies associated with Iraq and the
Middle East generally. There are lies associated with terror too. If
an existentially danderous weapon is built it will be built by the
United States or some other major power. The US with 50% of global
defense expenditure is very much setting the pace. People like the
Russians and Chinese are followers.

Hydogen Peroxide is unstable. People in this group have in fact
suggested using it as rocket fuel. Can anyone explain to me how anyone
with any pretensions of building an existentially dangerous weapon can
possibly go into their kitchen and distill H2O2 in an ordinary pan.
Lies, lies, lies. Saddam Hussein had WMD, Syria is danderous. Now the
CIA realises that the Staights of Hormuz would be blocked in the event
of a war with Iran and they are chaging their tune. You see a $200
barrel + petrol ratoning would be even more difficult to sell than
space clonies. They are now changing their lie accordingly.

Yes, the risks are "man-made". But we're not prepared to control the
growth of world population. Terrorists and foreign governments aren't
under our control. So, limiting the options available to the people
trying to solve the problems, when you can't control the people
causing them, doesn't help matters.

If you are not careful you will find that space colonies actually
increase the existential risk, not reduce it.

They may increase the risk to Earth slightly, but the overall risk to
humanity as a whole, once the colonies are independent of Earth, is
clearly lowered. But my expectation is, instead, that once the enemies
of freedom are faced with the reality that the total destruction of
freedom is beyond their power, they will be demoralized, rather than
redoubling their efforts. And because all our eggs are not in one
basket, the West's leaders can take a calmer and more determined
approach to threats.

Since I see al-Qaeda, Sudan, China, and so on as being *all* the
problem, and George W. Bush as part of the solution, not the problem,
naturally I don't find that sort of option as likely to be helpful.

They have no real power. The US does. The way ti stop China is by
international agreement. GWB is the prime problem. He lied his way
into office by smearing his opponents and has consistently lied and
mismanaged the situation.

My friend. A space colony is going to be impossible to sell. Would you
prefer to listen to someone who advocatred space colonies or to
someone with a deep understanding of the Middle East who offered
constructive solutions.

In the Moiddle East as I see it religion is the main problem. The US
should be building its relations with secular rulers like Assad, not
supporting Saudi Arabia. GWB ddoes not understand the ME. He has a
propaganist position that he half believes himself. No, he is simply
drifting from crisis to crisis.

Space colonies will require the resources of space in any case. If I
had these resources at my disposal a colony would NOT be the first
thing I would do. I would go for solar power, build a sunshield to
protect against global warming and I would do research on weather
control. Can the formation and path of hurricanes and typhons be
controlled?


- Ian Parker
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Super fast assembly and launch...
    ... that shows total disregard for safe operating procedure. ... This is the way moronic clubs ... There is risk inherent in everything we do - One assumes they did this with an airframe they had checked very carefully, and then practised getting it right, many times. ... As an exercise - consider whether there really was no control check. ...
    (rec.aviation.soaring)
  • Re: Purrs for Yoda
    ... The vet didn't ask me for a choice, ... the anesthesia risk and method. ... the biggest risk control is to leave him "under" for the shortest ... mentioned pain control *prior* to surgery ...
    (rec.pets.cats.anecdotes)
  • Re: Firewall security: Re: Problems with simple Samba file share
    ... > Peter T. Breuer wrote: ... Probability is risk "without taking into account a varying damage ... > and during that time I believe there have been two house fires. ... and need to control it at the IP level becuase you can't do it ...
    (comp.os.linux.misc)
  • Re: More power to the police in high speed pursuit
    ... control by the authorities for all. ... It puts the officer's life at risk ... There are two forms of speed limits. ... broken a law, hopefully a deterrent to further disobedience. ...
    (rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang)
  • Re: secret codes embedded in your printer output...
    ... >In every society you have those who exercise power and they generally ... introduce any law they wish with few constraints. ... and where there is no solid constitution and BoR to supervise them. ... >But I think there is an agenda to exert more and more control over ...
    (uk.politics.misc)