View Single Post
  #197  
Old February 23rd 09, 08:57 PM posted to sci.astro,sci.space.policy,sci.physics,sci.skeptic
Robert Collins
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21
Default Americans - Insane in the Membrane

On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 04:42:22AM -0800, Ian Parker wrote:
On 23 Feb, 12:03, jmfbahciv jmfbahciv@aol wrote:
Deirdre Sholto Douglas wrote:

jmfbahciv wrote:


That's really too bad. *You could have had a really interesting
thread here yakking with Ms. Douglas.


I don't think that was ever an option with Ian...he
makes outrageous statements...a veritable tsunami
of prose...but when it's pointed out to him that said
statements are flawed, instead of defending or sup-
porting his claims scientifically, he takes off on an
obfuscating tangent and/or attacks the person
challenging him.


IMHO, the only thing interesting here is his conceit
of himself.


Some inane posts produce interesting discussions because other
readers get curious and start posting, leaving the ahem
think-challenged behind.

The real interest in this, I mean to sensible poaters not the "beni Al-
kalb", is in terms of the Singularity University. What it is doing,
why NASA is involved, why Google is involved. Can the SU advance
technology?

The SU is offerering short graduate courses. No doubt these are going
to be open for NASA/Google employees. I have one coment that anyone
reading this thread will have.

If I work for Google what I will learn at the SU will be respected and
put into practice in some way or other. No real doubt about that. I
though I work for NASA will a layer or "bin(t) Al-kalb" moronity make
it a black mark against me? This to me is a real question. Another
real question in the wider political arena is the loyalty that Obama
can command in the military. You see I don't think all this fact is
directed exclusively to me.

Obama has produced a "stimulus package" and has talked at the same
time about narrowing the budget deficit (about 10% of GDP currently)

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/92d8a656-d...nclick_check=1
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...t-1629344.html

Where is the money coming from? Taxes on wealthy, closing of hedge
fund loopholes etc. etc. No my friend there is only one large untapped
source and that is MILITARY SPENDING. He has not spelled it out in as
many words, but that is as inevitable as night follows day.

Will the SU produce really useful results? I am sure it will in a
number of areas. NASA must have a "schwerpunkt" a point of reference,
a main program. I think the "schwerpunkt" should perhaps be the mining
of asteroids. Platinum is BTW "schwer" with a density of 21.46. Google
by contrast has as its main interest in the application of AI for
searching. Recently one of the Google team has married someone who
owns a biotech company. Thus although the Google interest is in
searching they now have a much wider interest of DNA, DNA therapies
etc.

I think it is important for us to take a look at where everyone is
coming from. We can see the Google motive, the motive of the new NASA
management. What I can't see is where the military are coming from.
The only thing I can think of is that the gravy train both for the
military and for manned spaceflight is about to dry up.


Yes, well the military are doing what ever is best for the security of
the nation and a little thing like lack of funding isn't going to get
in the way of that there mission. We should welcome the military to
the science of space exploration and encourage their participation in
this historic moment. Space is the future, where partisan infighting
is to be discouraged in favor of enlightened co-operation among equals.

I will repeat. A manned trip to Mars WITH PRESENT DAY TECHNOLOGY is
the craziest scheme out.


You clearly have absolutely no idea what your're talking about. I
should have seen it before, but you seemed genuinely annoying and so I
did not think to question your sincerity of dumbasssery.

Manned space missions to the planets are absolutely vital to the long-
term success of space exploration. Sure, you can say that robots will
do it cheaper and with less risk to human life, and all the rest. Or
that manned expeditions are too expensive to the nation's economy, and
that free enterprise might one day make up the lack. However you
frame the argument against manned expeditions it will still be
invalid.

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong.

A human presence on Mars is easily attainable with present day
technology. The only major obstacle to that enterprise is the
question of who will pay for it. Other than that there's only
politics in the way of the idea.

The unstated reasons why you seem so dead set against manned space
exploration are a mystery.


Robert Collins