Worthy of survival

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



Just my $0.02

Space Cadet


Moon Society - St. Louis Chapter

http://www.moonsociety.org/chapters/stlouis/

There is only one (maybe 2) basic core reasons for humans to go
beyond LEO, That is for the establishment of space settlements or a
space based civilization. Everything else are details.

Gary Gray 11/9/2005

"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...

--

Qapla'
Kweeg
Ten of Canadian Clubs in the Eeeevil Trek Cabal
"Half a gallon a'scotch!" Scotty (Spectre of the Gun)
1,079,252,848.8 km/h, not just a good idea, it's the law.
"So say we all!"

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.

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.

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?



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

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.

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.

"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

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.

Charles Buckley wrote:
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.

The problem with space colonization is that, unlike New World
colonization, there are absolutely no known resources out there to make
colonization even remotely worth the trouble.

The other planets/moons within our reach MUCH more hostile environments
than ANYTHING found on Earth (with the possible exception of trying to
live right beside or on top of an active volcano). And, as far as we
know, they have absolutely NO resources to exploit. No land, no gold,
no maize, no water to speak of (maybe some very sparse frozen crystals
at some of the polar regions)--absolutely NOTHING to make colonization
worth even a minimal effort, much less the hugely expensive and
dangerous endeavor that would actually be needed.

In the end, the hard harsh reality is that:

1) Space is vastly empty, sterile, and boring
2) We are alone
3) The vast interstellar distances between solar systems likely
prohibits any travel between them, much less exploration, for the
foreseeable future of humanity (even accounting for huge technological
advances in the long-term).

-Eric

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.

"DaffyDuck" wrote in message
news:2006100300011516807-daffyduck@spammersdiemacdotcom...
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.

Wow, I couldn't *possibly* disagree more. I find the idea of setting up
space colonies immensely facinating, and, if I were offered the chance to
go, I would take it in a New York minute.