Why Colonize Space?

: "Giga" "Giga" just(removetheseandaddmatthe
: There are always ignorant unimaganative people, don't worry.

The people who are analogous to the present day people you are complaining
about (ie, the ones attempting to inject some rationality into your
enthuseasm), are the ones who knew the world was roughly spherical.
So your analogy is fundamentally flawed.

: There are always ignorant unimaganative people, don't worry.

There are also enthuseastic people who imagine things that aren't there.
And no, the claim that, like Colombus who imagined something that wasn't
there (namely, a short route to India and spices), something else would
serendipitously crop up along the way, doesn't help your case.

: The horse is exactly the same problem. It has not been demonstarted
: so it is impossible.

So you don't understand that nobody said it was impossible. Shrug.


Wayne Throop http://sheol.org/throopw

On Jul 20, 6:51 pm, "G. L. Bradford" wrote:
"Immortalista" wrote in message

...

Today I was reading some opinions of people who believe that there is
no reason for humans to leave earth. Are all arguments for moving into
space and onto other bodies in space really that weak and irrelevant?

=====================

Weak and irrelevant only to those who don't mind at all being pinned to
this Earth, held down, controlled, tyrannized and enslaved. There are the
Frontier's People (inlcuding me who is simply a frontier
colonialist....willing to help further any way to "Let the people go!") and
then there are the Corral's Sheeple.

Ways mostly involving Other People's Money, or convincing other people
to part with their money.

Space colonization doesn't need government effort, or a cool new
resource, it needs a new P.T. Barnum. The space colonization shills
are simply incompetent con artists.


Eric Tolle

On Jul 23, 8:41 am, David Johnston wrote:
On Thu, 23 Jul 2009 14:10:46 +0100, "Giga" "Giga"



just(removetheseandaddmatthe wrote:

Well known, pah! There were a few people with rational arguments for such
who were laughed at by the sheep like interlletuals of their time. People
much like those today who beleive faster than light travel can never be
acheived IMHO.

Your opinion is wrong. So's your history. There was no intellectual
consensus at the time that the Earth was flat and had an edge. That's
an historical myth.

It's no surprise that space colonization proponents lie like rugs.
What is surprising is that they've yet to provide a GOOD lier.
Evidently the P.T. Barnums and pyramid schemers of the world don't see
any real profit in the space biz. And if they can't see a way to make
a profit off of space colonization, I don't think anybody can.


Eric Tolle

Giga wrote

Nope, just a few loons at most.

You cannot call astronauts a 'few loons'

They arent COLONISING a damned thing.

What about ISS?

Thats no colony, no spouses, no kids, no food production,
no shools, no football games etc etc etc.

these are some of the most highly trained,

Yes.

intelligent

Mindlessly silly.

Hardly, many have doctorates.

Thats no indication of intelligence. I know plenty of fools with PhDs.

and brave people around.

Or stupid.

Any of them would jump at the chance I'm sure.

I bet **** all of them would in fact.

I'll take that bet, though I know it is not serious and just a pathetic attempt to eek out a weak position with a lie.

Getting desperate now.

I bet even Aldrin wouldnt be volunteering for a one way trip to Mars either.

Why don't yopu ask him.

I wouldnt believe the answer. I would only believe the action,
him heading off on a one way trip to mars. Taint gunna happen.

When some kind of working settlement has been started by such souls

They have no souls, just a couple of soles.

other lesser ones will follow,

I bet **** all would actually be that stupid.

Same as above.

Same as above.

until maybe such as me may as well.

I doubt it when you realise the downsides.

You may say that I lie but I do not.

I didnt say you lied, I just dont believe that when it came to
the crunch we would see you off colonising a damned thing.

Your 'wife' and kids in spades.

On Jul 23, 6:20 am, "Giga" "Giga" just(removetheseandaddmatthe end)
wrote:
"William December Starr" wrote in ...

In article ,
"Giga" "Giga" just(removetheseandaddmatthe said:

That to me would just the adequate life. Space could potentially
give us the resources for everyone to have their own planet!

I'm not sure that I have ever in my life seen more of a load placed
on a single word than what you just hung on that "potentially."

-- wds

: ) (true) but that is what its all about for me. Its all there just waiting
for us, shame to just settle for just one planet.

You haven't even bothered to colonize all of this one planet!

COME! COLONIZE THE ANTARCTIC OCEAN! COLONIZE THE OCEAN BOTTOM! THE
RICHES OF THE ATLANTIC TRENCH ARE WAITING FOR YOU! POTENTIALLY WE CAN
MAKE EVERY COLONIST RICH ENOUGH TO HAVE HIS OWN ISLAND!

Show me you have enough gumption to do THAT, and then I'll believe
your babble about being a big, daring colonist with foresight. But if
you aren't even willing to colonize a floating platform south of the
Cape of Good Hope, then all your rhetoric is just so much bull****.


Eric Tolle

Giga wrote

The rather simple robots sent to Mars so far seem to have done much better than OK in doing what they were supposed
to do.

One can safely assume the next generation of robots sent will be much improved.

For sure, but nothing compared to a human with billions of years of evolution and 1000s of years of culture and tens
of years of training (and a billion super computers to call on plus whatever a robot could carry).

Makes a hell of a lot more sense to keep those high value assets back
here on earth and use them do direct fancy machines that do the work.

Better if they can direct them from nearby

Nope. We dont bother doing it that way with military exploration
anymore, doesnt matter where the direction is done from.

and go out and investigate interesting stuff they find.

Just get a robot to do that investigation much better/more thoroughly than any human can.

The trassmissions delays will of course be the same, at least for now.

Yes, but its completely trivial to give the robots enough intelligence to be able to handle that fine.

Wow! 'Completely trivial', no, no, no.

Yes yes yes, we do it right now.

And not even really possible except in the most benign terrains so far AFAIK.

Wrong, as always. We do it right now in the most hostile environments
possible, with stupid rag heads trying to shoot down the robots etc.

We even do that with military systems which need to be able to
operate even when the transmissions have been compromised.

Hit this spot, that is pretty trivial.

They dont just hit spots, they do much more surveillance.

And there are hordes of complex systems that only work because
a computer and not the human is doing the most difficult work.

Of course computers and robots are better than humans at some tasks and in some ways. The thing is not to be fooled
into the thinking they are cleverer.

No one said a word about cleverer. What matters is which approach is more effective.

We hardly ever bother to send humans to attack or surveil much
anymore, much more effective to use robots. That way the
inevitable losses are just a complete yawn, make another.

Giga" "Giga wrote:
For sure, but nothing compared to a human with billions of years of
evolution and 1000s of years of culture and tens of years of
training (and a
billion super computers to call on plus whatever a robot could
carry). The
trassmissions delays will of course be the same, at least for now.

Yeah, the ability of humans to do laser-induced breakdown
spectroscopy, map the spectra of X-rays, perform X-ray
diffraction/X-ray fluorescence of minerals, do gas analysis, perform
radiation assements, determine the dynamic albedo of neutrons,
monitor atmospheric pressure, humidity, wind currents and direction,
air and ground temperature and ultraviolet radiation levels, is so
much better than purpose built machines.

As I said they can use all this as well, and robots of course (which
they can control in real time).


And humans are so good at carrying around the thousand pounds or so
of equipment it takes to do such things.

And humans don't require sleep, food, air, and can run 24/7/365 for a
couple of years.

People are not billions of years old and rovers operate
autonomously; they have no need for drivers.

Life is billions of years old and humans are alive, we have benefited
from all that evolution,

And are smart enough to use robots that are much more effective
than any human can ever be in a whole host of situations. In spades
with environments that are very hostile to human life.

No need to fart around producing food for them either,
just unclude a nuke or two to power them forever.

or did we pop up from nowhere????

Nope, the stork brought most of us, silly.

In sci.physics ericthetolle wrote:
On Jul 23, 8:41 am, David Johnston wrote:
On Thu, 23 Jul 2009 14:10:46 +0100, "Giga" "Giga"



just(removetheseandaddmatthe wrote:

Well known, pah! There were a few people with rational arguments for such
who were laughed at by the sheep like interlletuals of their time. People
much like those today who beleive faster than light travel can never be
acheived IMHO.

Your opinion is wrong. So's your history. There was no intellectual
consensus at the time that the Earth was flat and had an edge. That's
an historical myth.

It's no surprise that space colonization proponents lie like rugs.
What is surprising is that they've yet to provide a GOOD lier.
Evidently the P.T. Barnums and pyramid schemers of the world don't see
any real profit in the space biz. And if they can't see a way to make
a profit off of space colonization, I don't think anybody can.


Eric Tolle

Simple, human greed ensures that if there is a way to make a buck, someone
will be trying.

People are making a buck now off of satellites they funded.

There are some people who think they will make a buck off of tourism they
are funding.

There is no one funding anything with their own money that could even
remotely be called "space colonization".


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

In sci.physics ericthetolle wrote:
On Jul 23, 6:20 am, "Giga" "Giga" just(removetheseandaddmatthe end)
wrote:
"William December Starr" wrote in ...

In article ,
"Giga" "Giga" just(removetheseandaddmatthe said:

That to me would just the adequate life. Space could potentially
give us the resources for everyone to have their own planet!

I'm not sure that I have ever in my life seen more of a load placed
on a single word than what you just hung on that "potentially."

-- wds

: ) (true) but that is what its all about for me. Its all there just waiting
for us, shame to just settle for just one planet.

You haven't even bothered to colonize all of this one planet!

COME! COLONIZE THE ANTARCTIC OCEAN! COLONIZE THE OCEAN BOTTOM! THE
RICHES OF THE ATLANTIC TRENCH ARE WAITING FOR YOU! POTENTIALLY WE CAN
MAKE EVERY COLONIST RICH ENOUGH TO HAVE HIS OWN ISLAND!

Show me you have enough gumption to do THAT, and then I'll believe
your babble about being a big, daring colonist with foresight. But if
you aren't even willing to colonize a floating platform south of the
Cape of Good Hope, then all your rhetoric is just so much bull****.


Eric Tolle

Gumption has nothing to do with it, it is return on investment that
determines whether or not private entities do anything.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Giga wrote

I am constantly amazed (yes AMAZED) at the confidence with which people beleive that humanity can never bridge
interstellar distances (let alone intergalactic).

Only a fool believes that. Its obviously possible to have
a self sufficient colony that moves in the direction you
want to go and it will eventually get there even if that
takes a millennium or two to make it there.

Do you even know how much time the colonists themselves would experience at close to light speed velocity?

Yep.

Anyway same old lack of imaggination, light speed the absolute limit as our current woeful science is the best there
is. Pathetic.

Get back to us when you have surmounted that particular
problem and we will reconsider colonisation of space THEN.

Tad unlikely that you will find too many who want to volunteer
for one tho, and even less likely that it will survive that long.

I suppose they are the same type of people who beleived early sailors would fall of the edge of the world,

Nope, those were just the pig ignorant who didnt realise
that we had proved that the earth is roughy round LONG
before we even considered circumnavigating it.

For some clearly, until someone actual did it they were quite
convinced it was impossible, whatever the evidence or lack thereof.

Yes, there will always be some fools that dont believe the science.

There are plenty of fools that cant grasp that it isnt even possible to become
obese if you dont shovel more calories into your mouth than you burn.

I'm sure people will be saying in a hundred years, 'look the evidence
was there all along for wormholes/warps/whatever' and only the
ignorant ignored it. Hindsight is so much safer than imagination.

You can imagine you can fart your way to the moon by eating copious quantitys
of beans if you like. No one has actually demonstrated that its feasible tho.

that travelling faster than a fast horse would be impossible (on early trains),

It was always obvious that that was possible. They'd had bullets and cannon balls that had done that for a long time
before any trains showed up.

However no one thought that bullets and cannonballs needed to breath.

No reason to believe that the speed had anything to do with the ability to breath.

Even you should be able to sit in stage coach and discover that
its still easy to breath even when its going as fast as it can.

that nothing could go faster than sound and stay intact,

They'd already had bullets do that fine.

A little less delicate than an aircraft obviously (they were worried about aircraft not bullets or light rays etc).

Clearly if bullets survive fine, planes can be made as strong where it matters.

that astronauts would sink into 50 foot of dust if they dared set foot on the moon

We'd already measured the surface consistency by firing stuff at it.

Still a Nobel prize winning scientist (apparently) confidently predicted this.

Sure, there have always been plenty of fools pontificating like that.

Rutherford proclaimed that nothing useful would ever come of nuclear science. Fortunately
for him he was dead once his face got covered with egg very spectacularly indeed.

Watson of IBM proclaimed that there would never be any
need for more than 5 computers in the entire world.

Olsen of DEC proclaimed that there was no point in home computers whatever.

That fool Einstein proclaimed that god does not play dice with the universe. There
may well be no god, but something sure does, most obviously with radioactive decay.

and now that there is no financial or radiological way for men to reach Mars.

No one has ever been stupid enough to claim that.

JUST that it makes a lot more financial sense to not bother to include any humans in that.

Fair enough.

Plenty still maintain that the immense cost of putting a few humans
on the moon made absolutely no sense. It was just a PR stunt to
make up for the fact that america was second in space.

History has proven such people wrong every time

Nope.

The chinese did in fact have a decent fleet that explored quite a bit of africa
and then decided that it was too boring to bother with and scrapped the fleet.

and I'm sure that it is a wrong attitude now.

Your problem.

If you want to live someplace where survival is difficult, you
could go to someplace like Nunavut or the Sahel today. No
selection to pass. They have the additional advantage that you don't need special equipment in order to breathe.

I wouldn't wan to go for the discomfort involved, as I'm sure you are aware, but to explore and discover.

Colonizations is what comes after explore and discover.