A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Policy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Worthy of survival



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old October 3rd 06, 12:38 PM posted to sci.space.policy,rec.arts.sf.tv,alt.tv.star-trek.tos,alt.battlestar-galactica,alt.tv.firefly
Bob Kolker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 454
Default Worthy of survival

Ken from Chicago wrote:

FIREFLY, BATTLESTAR GALACTICA: TNS and much of Asimovian fiction would
dispute the inherent boredom of a human-only universe.


These universes are Business As Usual on a grander scale. But human
struggle and failure has always been interesting. Why do newspapers
sell? Because they contain bad news.

Bob Kolker
  #12  
Old October 3rd 06, 12:38 PM posted to sci.space.policy,rec.arts.sf.tv,alt.tv.star-trek.tos,alt.battlestar-galactica,alt.tv.firefly
Ken from Chicago
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 185
Default Worthy of survival


"Charles Buckley" wrote in message
...
DaffyDuck wrote:
On 2006-10-02 21:35:54 -0700, "Steven L."
said:

But now we know they don't.


Well, we do not *know* they don't, and there's still other candidates out
there, including Europe ("Attempt no landing there..."), and the old
standby being Mars - which harbors some serious hopes for there being
life there, as it has seasons, it has sub-surface water, etc..

One thing I do like about the BSG universe, is that the only life within
it, is our protagonists' - no funky aliens, no odd lifeforms (albeit
we're about to find a sick basestar, which may be an interesting arc)

Agreed on what 'turns on' people to spacetravel, and that if we find no
life, there won't be much glory and glamor in going out into space.



Do you really think that people watching the daily life of any
colony in history was particularly interesting? Most people
just went about their lives in the same daily fashion they did
back wherever they came from.

From a 400 year separation from Jamestown, we read about all the
historical events that occurred there. Grand events of seemingly
major implications, but look closer.. Landing in May. They build
a fort halfheartedly to start with. Sail around a bit. Plant some
crops. People start dying a couple months later. There is an
attack. For every historical event, there are months of drudgery
and daily chores to wade through.

The *idea* of colonization was the glory and glamor. The actual
work was the same boring blue collar stuff that is most people's
lives. 99.9% of the people of England did not immigrate to the
colonies and a largish fraction of those whose did were not exactly
going for the glory and glamor.

Maybe it is time to quit thinking of space colonization as some
mainstream thing and start considering it is the same sort of niche
market as pretty much every single activity out there. People
talk about the popularity of certain activities (say NASCAR, for
instance) and yet when you look at the numbers of people interested
in it, you find that 9 out of 10 people in America have zero interest
in NASCAR.

People will go into space because of their own reasons. I think the
newer crop (Firefly and BSG) are very good in that they are reflective
of the times as was TOS. But, in this one important way, I think Dwayne
errs. People who want to go into space want to go into space. That
is irrespective of whatever entertainment there is. TOS occurred at a
time when space travel was mainstream news. It tapped into that wave.
It was part of the fabric. B5 and BSG are operating in a time when space
is *not* really mainstream news any longer. There is no great sense of
wonder at seeing people go into space. It only makes sense that the
current art would reflect a workmanship relationship with space. It is
moving to the point where it is shifting from dreaming about a far
out future to where it is becoming with people's reach to *do* the
things they are seeing. I don't think it is an accident that the major
sci-fi shows currently on air now featuring space travel and the most
recent shows that developed a cult following have a technological base
that is barely beyond the current technical base of our society.

There is a convergence here.


EVERYTHING'S BETTER IN SPACE!

Okay, I'm thinking more of ... A montage, montage, gotta see a montage!

http://youtube.com/watch?v=sh9nE4OQ8ww

Tho I prefer high-tech space colony. Bunch of tents, even with space ships,
kinda boring.

-- Ken from Chicago


  #13  
Old October 3rd 06, 12:40 PM posted to sci.space.policy,rec.arts.sf.tv,alt.tv.star-trek.tos,alt.battlestar-galactica,alt.tv.firefly
Ken from Chicago
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 185
Default Worthy of survival


"Stephen Fairchild" wrote in message
...
Bob Kolker wrote:

Steven L. wrote:


If Mars also turns out to be lifeless, it will be hard to get Americans
excited even about sending humans there. Ironically, science fiction
has raised the bar for the average American: Alien life is now almost
taken for granted, and that's what I think that most folks to hear
about: Where are the alien life forms?


Nowhere nearby. Almost certainly not in our solar system. But that is
not sufficient reason not to go exploring. They may be other more
relevent issues such as costs and payback.

The Spaniards (for example) did not go a-sailing over the main just to
see what was on the Other Side. They had gold and converts to
Catholicism in mind. Those were the coins of their realm. The itch to
travel and explore may be motivated the captains and crews, but it was
potential profit and plunder that motivated the monarchs to fund them.

If the tax payers are going to be mugged to fund space explorations they
have every right to asked about the rewards and payback.

Apart from mining the asteroid belt I can't see much plunder out there.
--
Stephen Fairchild


That's why you should have ROBOTIC space exploration and space mining.

Tho later that could lead to human space COLONIZATION.

-- Ken from Chicago


  #14  
Old October 3rd 06, 01:31 PM posted to sci.space.policy,rec.arts.sf.tv,alt.tv.star-trek.tos,alt.battlestar-galactica,alt.tv.firefly
EricT
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 33
Default Worthy of survival


"Steven L." wrote in message
ink.net...

The big difference between the Star Trek universe and our real universe is
that the Star Trek universe assumes there is life everywhe Life forms
ranging from far more primitive than our own, to far more advanced.



I notice a long time ago that most (not all) foreign Sci Fi series (Dr. Who
is an exception) do not have "aliens". BLAKES SEVEN had only one and only
in one episode. RED DWARF had no actual aliens, but mutants and left over
genetic experiments, all originally from earth. STAR COPS had none, but had
one episode that centered around an artifact found on Mars that later turned
out to be fake.


  #15  
Old October 3rd 06, 02:17 PM posted to sci.space.policy,rec.arts.sf.tv,alt.tv.star-trek.tos,alt.battlestar-galactica,alt.tv.firefly
Bob Kolker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 454
Default Worthy of survival

Ken from Chicago wrote:
Stephen Fairchild



That's why you should have ROBOTIC space exploration and space mining.

Tho later that could lead to human space COLONIZATION.


Forget it. Except for some orbiting habitats there is no place in the
solar system for us off our own planet. Long and short: The solar system
is a bad neighborhood except for our planet.

Bob Kolker
  #16  
Old October 3rd 06, 06:48 PM posted to sci.space.policy,rec.arts.sf.tv,alt.tv.star-trek.tos,alt.battlestar-galactica,alt.tv.firefly
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 96
Default Worthy of survival

On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 11:44:12 +0100, Stephen Fairchild
wrote:

Bob Kolker wrote:

Steven L. wrote:

If Mars also turns out to be lifeless, it will be hard to get Americans
excited even about sending humans there. Ironically, science fiction
has raised the bar for the average American: Alien life is now almost
taken for granted, and that's what I think that most folks to hear
about: Where are the alien life forms?


Nowhere nearby. Almost certainly not in our solar system. But that is
not sufficient reason not to go exploring. They may be other more
relevent issues such as costs and payback.

The Spaniards (for example) did not go a-sailing over the main just to
see what was on the Other Side. They had gold and converts to
Catholicism in mind. Those were the coins of their realm. The itch to
travel and explore may be motivated the captains and crews, but it was
potential profit and plunder that motivated the monarchs to fund them.

If the tax payers are going to be mugged to fund space explorations they
have every right to asked about the rewards and payback.

Apart from mining the asteroid belt I can't see much plunder out there.


??? No imagination....

-- Roy L
  #17  
Old October 3rd 06, 07:10 PM posted to sci.space.policy,alt.battlestar-galactica
GMAN
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3
Default Worthy of survival

In article 2006100300011516807-daffyduck@spammersdiemacdotcom, DaffyDuck wrote:
On 2006-10-02 21:35:54 -0700, "Steven L." said:

But now we know they don't.


Well, we do not *know* they don't, and there's still other candidates
out there, including Europe ("Attempt no landing there..."), and the
old standby being Mars - which harbors some serious hopes for there
being life there, as it has seasons, it has sub-surface water, etc..

You meant to say Europa

One thing I do like about the BSG universe, is that the only life
within it, is our protagonists' - no funky aliens, no odd lifeforms
(albeit we're about to find a sick basestar, which may be an
interesting arc)

Agreed on what 'turns on' people to spacetravel, and that if we find no
life, there won't be much glory and glamor in going out into space.

  #18  
Old October 3rd 06, 07:13 PM posted to sci.space.policy,alt.battlestar-galactica
GMAN
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3
Default Worthy of survival

In article , Charles Buckley wrote:
DaffyDuck wrote:
On 2006-10-02 21:35:54 -0700, "Steven L."
said:

But now we know they don't.


Well, we do not *know* they don't, and there's still other candidates
out there, including Europe ("Attempt no landing there..."), and the old
standby being Mars - which harbors some serious hopes for there being
life there, as it has seasons, it has sub-surface water, etc..

One thing I do like about the BSG universe, is that the only life within
it, is our protagonists' - no funky aliens, no odd lifeforms (albeit
we're about to find a sick basestar, which may be an interesting arc)

Agreed on what 'turns on' people to spacetravel, and that if we find no
life, there won't be much glory and glamor in going out into space.



Do you really think that people watching the daily life of any
colony in history was particularly interesting? Most people
just went about their lives in the same daily fashion they did
back wherever they came from.

From a 400 year separation from Jamestown, we read about all the
historical events that occurred there. Grand events of seemingly
major implications, but look closer.. Landing in May. They build
a fort halfheartedly to start with. Sail around a bit. Plant some
crops. People start dying a couple months later. There is an
attack. For every historical event, there are months of drudgery
and daily chores to wade through.

The *idea* of colonization was the glory and glamor. The actual
work was the same boring blue collar stuff that is most people's
lives. 99.9% of the people of England did not immigrate to the
colonies and a largish fraction of those whose did were not exactly
going for the glory and glamor.

Maybe it is time to quit thinking of space colonization as some
mainstream thing and start considering it is the same sort of niche
market as pretty much every single activity out there. People
talk about the popularity of certain activities (say NASCAR, for
instance) and yet when you look at the numbers of people interested
in it, you find that 9 out of 10 people in America have zero interest
in NASCAR.

People will go into space because of their own reasons. I think the
newer crop (Firefly and BSG) are very good in that they are reflective
of the times as was TOS. But, in this one important way, I think Dwayne
errs. People who want to go into space want to go into space. That
is irrespective of whatever entertainment there is. TOS occurred at a
time when space travel was mainstream news. It tapped into that wave.
It was part of the fabric. B5 and BSG are operating in a time when space
is *not* really mainstream news any longer. There is no great sense of
wonder at seeing people go into space.




Speak for your freakin self laddie!



It only makes sense that the
current art would reflect a workmanship relationship with space. It is
moving to the point where it is shifting from dreaming about a far
out future to where it is becoming with people's reach to *do* the
things they are seeing. I don't think it is an accident that the major
sci-fi shows currently on air now featuring space travel and the most
recent shows that developed a cult following have a technological base
that is barely beyond the current technical base of our society.

There is a convergence here.

  #19  
Old October 3rd 06, 07:13 PM posted to sci.space.policy,rec.arts.sf.tv,alt.tv.star-trek.tos,alt.battlestar-galactica,alt.tv.firefly
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 96
Default Worthy of survival

On Tue, 03 Oct 2006 08:17:34 -0500, Bob Kolker
wrote:

Ken from Chicago wrote:
Stephen Fairchild


That's why you should have ROBOTIC space exploration and space mining.

Tho later that could lead to human space COLONIZATION.


Forget it. Except for some orbiting habitats there is no place in the
solar system for us off our own planet. Long and short: The solar system
is a bad neighborhood except for our planet.


But Mars, at a minimum, can be terraformed. That strikes me as an
enterprise potentially even more interesting and rewarding than the
discovery and colonization of the New World. Plus there are the
possibilities for O'Neill colonies and subsurface settlements on less
hospitable bodies like the moon, Mercury, Ceres, etc.

Life expands to fill the available niches -- i.e., sources of energy
and raw materials. Technology makes extraterrestrial bodies available
niches: there are raw materials and energy in abundance, especially
once we have useful fusion power. Are the challenges of space really
greater relative to our technology than living in the high arctic was
to Stone Age Eskimos, or settling Iceland and Greenland was to the
Vikings, or colonizing Madagascar was to the ancient Indonesians?

-- Roy L
  #20  
Old October 3rd 06, 07:53 PM posted to sci.space.policy,rec.arts.sf.tv,alt.tv.star-trek.tos,alt.battlestar-galactica,alt.tv.firefly
Eric Chomko
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,630
Default Worthy of survival


Steven L. wrote:
Kweeg wrote:
"Space Cadet" wrote in message
ups.com...
Here is an interesting article by our old friend Dwayne A. Day, about
Link between Science Fiction and the Space Program and his
interpretation of SF impact on Space exploration, particularly Star
Trek's and whether or not if the new crop of SF shows will be able to
have a similar effect in the future

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/716/1



Thanks for the link...I've also wondered the same...


The big difference between the Star Trek universe and our real universe
is that the Star Trek universe assumes there is life everywhe Life
forms ranging from far more primitive than our own, to far more advanced.

But so far, in the real world, we haven't detected any life beyond the
earth. Not even a bacterium.

Without alien life forms, Star Trek would be boring as hell. There
haven't been many science-fiction stories written about a lifeless
universe, because it's devoid of romance and adventure. And that's why
real space travel just doesn't excite people anymore. We haven't found
anything out there except lifeless worlds.

When Star Trek was first conceived by Roddenberry in 1964, some
scientists still hoped that Mars might harbor some forms of life. Even
as late as the 1980's, it was hoped that Saturn's moon Titan might
harbor life also.

But now we know they don't.

And nobody gives a flying crap about shuttling to Low Earth Orbit to man
an International Space Station. It's deep space missions to "seek out
new life and new civilizations" that turn people on.


So do I have your vote to send the ISS project, once completed, from
red state Texas (JSC) to blue state Maryland (GSFC)? And let JSC the
gallivant all over the universe. Let's set that up ASAP.

If you want people to be as excited about space travel in the real world
as they are about Star Trek, then we need to start planning to take a
real "star trek" to actually "seek out new life, and new civilizations":
Either a deep space mission, or vastly improved telescopic sensors, or
vastly improved Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence, or something
else that will give us hope of finding life beyond the Earth.


That might take 1000 years. Sorry that it might not happen in your
lifetime.

If Mars also turns out to be lifeless, it will be hard to get Americans
excited even about sending humans there. Ironically, science fiction
has raised the bar for the average American: Alien life is now almost
taken for granted, and that's what I think that most folks to hear
about: Where are the alien life forms?


Well people have to realize that life and TV are not the same (and
thank god for that as I see so much death on TV, that if it were that
rampant in daily life I'd think I was in Iraq). Anyway, the point is
that science fiction will always be more fantastic (overall, as single
examples like Apollo are exceptions) than actual science and to the
average layperson that is boring. Sorry about that! Go see a movie or
read a book...

Eric



--
Steven D. Litvintchouk
Email:
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
God's Science At Last! - Day of Wrath Survival Manual Available Now! Fusioneer Amateur Astronomy 50 March 9th 05 07:16 PM
God's Science At Last! - Day of Wrath Survival Manual Available Now! Fusioneer SETI 6 March 7th 05 03:33 AM
God's Science At Last! - Day of Wrath Survival Manual Available Now! Fusioneer Astronomy Misc 0 March 6th 05 01:48 AM
André Kuipers' diary - Part 12: Winter survival training and measuring blood pressure Jacques van Oene Space Station 0 March 12th 04 10:38 AM
Alien Review - Survival Darla Misc 136 January 14th 04 09:33 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.