January 25, 2012
— Ace It's not as daffy as it sounds.
But given budget priorities, I think it is daffy. But it is harmless, as it falls under the heading "Things Which Won't Happen."
"By the end of my second term, we will have the first permanent base on the moon and it will be American," Gingrich said to applause....
Gingrich also said he would push to develop propulsion technology that would get man to Mars.
He emphasized that it doesn't have to be expensive, exploration in partnership with private companies can lower the cost.
...
"Does that mean I'm visionary? You betcha," he said.
This is a dream of the space lobby. It's not even a new plan -- Bush talked it up in 2004.
For the first time since 1972, the United States is planning to fly to the moon, but instead of a quick, Apollo-like visit, astronauts intend to build a permanent base and live there while they prepare what may be the most ambitious undertaking in history -- putting human beings on Mars.President Bush in 2004 announced to great fanfare plans to build a new spaceship, get back to the moon by 2020 and travel on to Mars after that. But, with NASA focused on designing a new spaceship and spending about 40 percent of its budget on the troubled space shuttle and international space station programs, that timetable may suffer.
The moon base is discussed as some kind of useful midway point here. I don't believe that. I think it's some kind of make-work deliverable which can be achieved before the longer-term goal, the manned flight to Mars. They talk about construction or mining for fuel or something or other on the Moon which seems like it would cost about 1000 times more than it would cost to build a Mars ship on earth.
It's probably not all that expensive, in relative terms, given the sick, crushing cost of the government that is strangling us all; but then, why spend it at all, given how deep in debt we already are?
There are two schools of thought on this sort of thing, among conservatives. The neoconservative argument is that government may be a necessary evil, but it can do great things, and we might as well direct this necessary evil to do some of those great things.
I used to buy into that. I still do, a little, depending on the day of the week.
The other school of thought is that government is a necessary evil, but mostly an evil, and we shouldn't go adding to the evil, or creating a public relations breakthrough for it.
That's sort of a paleoconservative argument that almost comes down to "We almost want government to suck and be hobbled by inefficiency and waste, because we don't want the people wanting more of it."
Well, I'm not sure too many people buy into that Ron Paul sort of idea. I don't know if I do.
However, the whole point of a space program, really, is to give our kids something to dream about. You can talk about spin-off technology but you can get that cheaper simply by pouring money directly into the R&D of the technology you seek, rather than hoping a Mars Shot will produce some for you incidentally.
So if we want to give our kids something to dream about -- should we be telling them to dream of a government that dares enough to do big things?
Or a private sector that dares enough to do big things?
I realize they're not mutually exclusive. And yet... The real dream of every kid isn't about a massive program to go to the moon a couple of times. The real dream is that this should be an everyday, ordinary sort of thing -- like a business. You just buy a ticket, and up you go.
I gotta tell you that I had liberal tendencies as a kid, and part of the reason for that was that I associated the government with Cool Stuff -- FBI agents. The Army. Submarines. The Space Shuttle and Moon program.
The government was doing the stuff that young minds dreamed of. While "business" was something for the workaday drudges.
I don't know. Space boosters may say dreams matter.
I think I'm at the point where I'd agree -- but question the dreams.
Going Back and Forth On This: Yeah I don't know where I'd come down here.
I do like the general idea. Of all the things to waste tax dollars on, this seems among the most productive and glorious of wastes.
And yet...
If you're really serious about cutting government spending, that's going to be all the more difficult a sale if you're simultaneously budgeting in a moon base which has no economic purpose, except the intangible (and debatable) economic value of adding some vitality to a diminished American spirit.
I suppose there would be some of that. How much? Who knows.
The sad part is that I can see it going the other direction, more likely -- that screw-ups, overruns, general incompetence, and graft and corrupt contracts would wind up diminishing the American spirit you're trying to build up.
I have to admit, though, that I look forward to putting the first man on the moon, rather than "The Moon."
The HAL Problem: Minor content warning for f-bombs in a parody clip.
Posted by: Ace at
01:58 PM
| Comments (317)
Post contains 924 words, total size 6 kb.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at January 25, 2012 02:01 PM (uhAkr)
Posted by: Virgin Universe with low gravity slots! at January 25, 2012 02:01 PM (6LvlL)
Still in these days I question that any government space program will do anything. The rot is too deep. At best, give a cash prize to a goal and let private sources do the job.
Posted by: Oldcat at January 25, 2012 02:02 PM (z1N6a)
Posted by: Corky the Retard at January 25, 2012 02:02 PM (GsBJY)
Posted by: The Political Hat at January 25, 2012 02:03 PM (XvHmy)
And I thought Romney was the shameless panderer.
Posted by: Lou at January 25, 2012 06:01 PM (xp1pq)
If only Romney bothered to pander. It might help.
Posted by: Oldcat at January 25, 2012 02:03 PM (z1N6a)
Posted by: Tami at January 25, 2012 02:03 PM (X6akg)
Posted by: mugiwara at January 25, 2012 02:04 PM (KI/Ch)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at January 25, 2012 06:01 PM (uhAkr)
Everyone knows Rossem is the world...
Posted by: Oldcat at January 25, 2012 02:04 PM (z1N6a)
Posted by: Dr Spank at January 25, 2012 02:04 PM (lVGED)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at January 25, 2012 02:04 PM (uhAkr)
Why would it sound daffy? It's freakin' 2012! We got to the moon over forty years ago. We know there's water there, we just need to bring some filters and either some domes or tunneling equipment and get the ball rolling.
We're supposed to be three years away from "Back to the Future 2" for cryin' out loud.
Posted by: Sgt. York at January 25, 2012 02:04 PM (7Qqrk)
Posted by: That guy peeing in the alley at January 25, 2012 02:05 PM (BbX1b)
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Team Meteor. Now with Cheesecake at January 25, 2012 02:05 PM (8y9MW)
Posted by: dblwmy at January 25, 2012 06:05 PM (BvTwT)
Look at the trailer for the John Carter movie
Posted by: Oldcat at January 25, 2012 02:06 PM (z1N6a)
Posted by: runninrebel at January 25, 2012 02:06 PM (v2nte)
Posted by: Brennan at January 25, 2012 02:06 PM (5BiPm)
H20 is all the fuel they'd need, and there is plenty there.
The moon makes a lot of sense in that it is a solid platform, it is relatively protected compared to a space station, and it requires very little in the way of escape velocity -- velocity which can be achieved fuel-free with a solar-powered EM catapult system.
Indeed, using such a system would get you a significant way towards the velocity needed for a trip to Mars, significantly reducing the on-board fuel requirements.
Posted by: krakatoa at January 25, 2012 02:07 PM (fFZ12)
Posted by: The Political Hat at January 25, 2012 02:07 PM (XvHmy)
Posted by: Drew in MO at January 25, 2012 02:07 PM (HY/eU)
It also falls under National Defense. That, we do need even now. It is insane that we have no way of putting our own personnel in space.
Mining the moon for isotopes of I think it was helium 3 make perfect sense.
Posted by: brainpimp at January 25, 2012 02:07 PM (mwlsF)
Posted by: Major Tom at January 25, 2012 02:07 PM (EL+OC)
Posted by: weft cut-loop at January 25, 2012 02:07 PM (/jOyr)
Posted by: Joe Mama at January 25, 2012 02:07 PM (dOsjQ)
Actually, you do it on the moon (if you're going to do it land-side at all) because of lower gravity (according to sci-fi aficionados, anyway). The other idea, of course, is that you set up a base on the moon and what amounts to an orbital ship-yard right near the moon.
Not completely daffy- also not going to happen.
But, hey, he's pandering to Floridians- who really, really like the space program, as a rule.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Team Meteor. Now with Cheesecake at January 25, 2012 02:08 PM (8y9MW)
Posted by: Wheatley's Space Core at January 25, 2012 02:08 PM (4LNqW)
"Go name all the things in My creation."
You've gotta get off the planet to name the bugs living around Barnard's Star, y'know.
Posted by: Meiczyslaw at January 25, 2012 02:08 PM (bjRNS)
Posted by: maddogg at January 25, 2012 02:09 PM (OlN4e)
Posted by: sternschaden at January 25, 2012 02:09 PM (xXhWA)
Posted by: steevy at January 25, 2012 02:09 PM (7W3wI)
Posted by: Brennan at January 25, 2012 06:06 PM (5BiPm)
Lunar soil is about 15 percent iron, another 15 percent is Aluminum and Magnesium. Titanium is also present.
Posted by: Oldcat at January 25, 2012 02:09 PM (z1N6a)
Posted by: Max Power at January 25, 2012 02:09 PM (q177U)
Posted by: ABO at January 25, 2012 02:09 PM (ggRof)
the moon and it will be American.. and staffed by Mexicans" Gingrich said to applause. Posted by: Joe Mama
That there is offensive and fucking funny.
Posted by: weft cut-loop at January 25, 2012 02:09 PM (/jOyr)
We've been to the Moon. What did they find? That it's a big fucking hunk of rock. Mostly just a publicity stunt for the purpose of rubbing the Soviet's faces in it.
Now he wants to spend untold hundreds of billions (trillions?) to build a moon base and go to Mars? Why? So we can confirm there still aren't any Martians living there?
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 25, 2012 02:09 PM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: ontherocks at January 25, 2012 02:10 PM (ZJCDy)
Space is the ultimate high ground. I'd much rather this as a national goal than high speed burning money (ie, rail) or Dutch windmills and tulips.
Both Newt and Romney are pro space program.
Posted by: GnuBreed at January 25, 2012 02:10 PM (BhuDE)
Posted by: whatever at January 25, 2012 02:10 PM (O7ksG)
Posted by: Julie at January 25, 2012 02:10 PM (O/fK8)
Posted by: Newt Gingrich at January 25, 2012 02:10 PM (F6KtL)
I can see a space station as an intermediate step between here and Mars, but I'm not sure I see the moon as making sense.
A space station would allow you to loft the Mars ship piecemeal and assemble it in orbit. You distribute the cost of getting into orbit across the Mars ship pieces instead of having to do it piecemeal.
I don't see what building the Mars ship on the moon buys you.
Posted by: Anachronda at January 25, 2012 02:11 PM (xGZ+b)
Posted by: Ben Bernanke at January 25, 2012 02:11 PM (npr0X)
Posted by: Barky O'Genius at January 25, 2012 02:11 PM (3raPN)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at January 25, 2012 02:11 PM (uhAkr)
I heard an estimate of about $20B like 10 years ago, hell even if it took $100B it's still just a drop in the bucket these days. And you could invite private industry to help fund the first one. Who wouldn't want to shell out big bucks for a weekend in the Space Hilton, atop the Space Elevator?
I'm a total big government candyass RINO when it comes to Space Elevators, but no one ever indulges me.
Posted by: mugiwara at January 25, 2012 02:11 PM (KI/Ch)
Posted by: maddogg at January 25, 2012 02:11 PM (OlN4e)
<br>
I do like the idea of an America that constantly proves how much cooler we are than everyone else. National pride is, IMHO, a conservative principle.<br>
<br>
There extremely few things I think are worth government money. Space, however, ever since I was a child, was definitely one of them. I'd be for cutting out all subsidies, welfare, and Medicare, and making it happen.
Posted by: Mr. Lurky McLurkington, Esq. at January 25, 2012 02:12 PM (4LNqW)
Hey, about time Lt Jeff and I have been getting pretty lonely.
Posted by: Major Matt Mason at January 25, 2012 02:12 PM (HtUdo)
Posted by: Mr. Lurky McLurkington, Esq. at January 25, 2012 02:12 PM (4LNqW)
Posted by: krakatoa at January 25, 2012 02:12 PM (fFZ12)
Posted by: Newt at January 25, 2012 02:12 PM (uIz80)
Posted by: Tantor at January 25, 2012 02:13 PM (659DL)
Posted by: af767 at January 25, 2012 02:13 PM (Q7Lkp)
Posted by: Julie at January 25, 2012 06:10 PM (O/fK
Patience. The dealer has to put a hold on the Volt hold. If yer gonna buy a sucky car, don't go halfassed, suck like you mean it!
Posted by: maddogg at January 25, 2012 02:13 PM (OlN4e)
I don't see what building the Mars ship on the moon buys you.
Posted by: Anachronda at January 25, 2012 06:11 PM (xGZ+b)
The cost to lift the metal from its source is much cheaper if the source is on the moon rather than earth.
Posted by: Oldcat at January 25, 2012 02:13 PM (z1N6a)
Posted by: Thomas J. Whitmore at January 25, 2012 02:13 PM (6LvlL)
Posted by: Dr Spank at January 25, 2012 02:13 PM (lVGED)
Posted by: krakatoa at January 25, 2012 06:07 PM (fFZ12)
You mean He3, right?
Posted by: sternschaden at January 25, 2012 02:14 PM (xXhWA)
I tend to agree with that, and then I think of Heinlein books- and if anyone is going to be able to drop giant boulders from the moon onto the earth, I want it be us.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Team Meteor. Now with Cheesecake at January 25, 2012 02:14 PM (8y9MW)
Posted by: mugiwara at January 25, 2012 06:11 PM (KI/Ch)
You've sold out to Equadorian interests, as the elevator has to be on the equator.
Posted by: Oldcat at January 25, 2012 02:15 PM (z1N6a)
Posted by: steveha at January 25, 2012 02:15 PM (TMG3G)
Posted by: Drew in MO at January 25, 2012 02:16 PM (HY/eU)
Posted by: Passably Affable at January 25, 2012 02:16 PM (sGRXI)
****
Oh sure, building a permanent American moonbase will be super-affordable. The government will partner will private companies to make it work just as efficiently as all the other government programs that utilize private contractors. Seriously, how is this even in his top 100 priorities given the bottomless cavern of deficit spending the country already faces?
Posted by: Gristle Encased Head at January 25, 2012 02:16 PM (+lsX1)
Posted by: Newt Gingrich at January 25, 2012 02:16 PM (F6KtL)
Posted by: Peasant at January 25, 2012 02:16 PM (W2qJe)
What we need is a national program to build space supertankers to grab all the goodies just lying around on the ground up on Titan.
Posted by: Anachronda at January 25, 2012 02:16 PM (xGZ+b)
We could have a Fantasy Island on the moon.
Boss Boss! Da Spacesheep da spacesheep! Chicks boss! Look at the chicks!
Posted by: Rev Dr E Buzz at January 25, 2012 02:17 PM (iKmTn)
Posted by: Oldcat at January 25, 2012 06:15 PM (z1N6a)
¡Hay dios mio! You're onto my plot!
Posted by: mugiwara, illegal equadorian alien at January 25, 2012 02:17 PM (KI/Ch)
Posted by: Fuck me at January 25, 2012 02:17 PM (F6KtL)
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2012 02:18 PM (xojtH)
Posted by: SnowSoul at January 25, 2012 02:18 PM (eLaeq)
Because he's in Florida, talking to Floridians.
Seriously- this is like pandering 102 (second semester stuff, here): there are some issues that will perennially play well with a given audience. More space spending is one in FL.
Also, to a lesser extent, in Texas, and for much the same reason.
Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) Team Meteor. Now with Cheesecake at January 25, 2012 02:18 PM (8y9MW)
Amateurish copycat.
Posted by: Chairface Chippendale at January 25, 2012 02:18 PM (6LvlL)
Posted by: ErikW at January 25, 2012 02:18 PM (oIcB8)
****
Turn off the TV science fiction. If the Earth becomes unlivable, we die. That's all there is to it. The notion of terra-forming Mars or inter-stellar travel is pure fantasy.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 25, 2012 02:18 PM (SY2Kh)
I'm a huge nerd when it comes to stuff like this and I grew up idolizing NASA until as teenager I saw what they did to Story Musgrave, giving him the bird so John Glenn could be shot up to space as a political payoff from Clinton. I remember Musgrave coming out against NASA and its highly politicized agenda, which has only grown worse since then. NASA is a joke in my opinion, pretty much in every way. I still think going back to the moon and on to Mars would be freaking awesome, but it should be done privately with private funding. Something like this is an investment. I think it can have a profitable return technology-wise, but it's a big gamble. If we were running huge budget surpluses and had zero debt that would be one thing, but it's the opposite, so no thanks.
Posted by: Andrew at January 25, 2012 02:18 PM (HS3dy)
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2012 02:18 PM (xojtH)
Posted by: S Daniel at January 25, 2012 02:18 PM (fM4AU)
Posted by: Ken Royall at January 25, 2012 02:18 PM (9zzk+)
Posted by: maddogg at January 25, 2012 02:18 PM (OlN4e)
Posted by: Vic at January 25, 2012 02:19 PM (YdQQY)
Posted by: sternschaden at January 25, 2012 06:14 PM (xXhWA) "
No...I'm talking about the water ice at the poles.
Posted by: krakatoa at January 25, 2012 02:20 PM (fFZ12)
Posted by: Count de Monet at January 25, 2012 02:20 PM (4q5tP)
Posted by: steevy at January 25, 2012 02:21 PM (7W3wI)
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2012 02:21 PM (xojtH)
Posted by: robtr at January 25, 2012 02:21 PM (MtwBb)
Posted by: DNC at January 25, 2012 02:21 PM (F6KtL)
It's about time the word communist was used in connection with that name but the closest they'll come is "radical" or grassroots activism.
It's asif that word has been wiped from history by the media.
Posted by: ontherocks at January 25, 2012 02:21 PM (ZJCDy)
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2012 02:22 PM (xojtH)
Posted by: sternschaden at January 25, 2012 02:22 PM (xXhWA)
Even when I was a kid, the shuttle was kind of lame.
Sorry, Shuttle.
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2012 06:21 PM (xojtH)
It was an affirmative action shuttle, not the real shuttle. The real thing was supposed to be all reusable.
Posted by: Oldcat at January 25, 2012 02:22 PM (z1N6a)
Did James Rosen just say the Tea Party admires Saul Alinsky?
Posted by: S Daniel at January 25, 2012 02:22 PM (fM4AU)
Posted by: ontherocks at January 25, 2012 02:22 PM (ZJCDy)
Yes we can!
Posted by: Barack Obama at January 25, 2012 02:22 PM (2jQGY)
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2012 02:22 PM (xojtH)
Posted by: Tami - Free Jane D'oh!!! at January 25, 2012 02:23 PM (X6akg)
****
I seem to remember it being sold as something that would eventually reduce costs because it was reusable.
It didn't turn out that way, but it wasn't an implausible pitch.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 25, 2012 02:24 PM (SY2Kh)
Newt says we should build a manned station on Mars in eight years, and I am supposed to vote for this Idiot? There are no words...
Posted by: A Reasonable person at January 25, 2012 02:24 PM (hZ9YO)
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2012 06:22 PM (xojtH)
Its refreshing to see some actual pandering rather than the normal spitting in our face that seems to be the standard these days.
Posted by: Oldcat at January 25, 2012 02:24 PM (z1N6a)
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 25, 2012 06:18 PM (SY2Kh)
While I'm still waiting for flying cars, jetpacks, and a holodeck, handheld communicators were a fantasy back in '66; when phones were about the size of a breadbasket and were leased from good ol' Ma Bell. Beam me up, Scotty.
Posted by: Count de Monet at January 25, 2012 02:24 PM (4q5tP)
Posted by: Comrade Arthur at January 25, 2012 02:24 PM (goitd)
Screw the moon, it'll be there later to exploit. Let's mine the earth and get to the oil here first. That's worth spending a bunch of money on, lets find every drop of oil and put it in a barrel.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at January 25, 2012 02:24 PM (XrrP7)
I'm all for a partnership of government/private enterprise exploring space as long as private enterprise has the larger roll and I really think extrordinary things could be done. American creativity knows no bounds.
I agree with a commenter upthread that wrote that we'd have to have the government provide the basic infrastructure, but we've already got most of that built.
I think it was one of the saddest days of my life when the last shuttle touched down, never to fly again. The SCOAMT killed American space exploration with that.
Posted by: Soona at January 25, 2012 02:24 PM (IcAi1)
It's not as daffy as it sounds.
Eh. Pardon me, did you forget about me?
Posted by: DOOM at January 25, 2012 02:24 PM (0q2P7)
Posted by: Purple Fury at January 25, 2012 02:24 PM (RxdV7)
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2012 06:18 PM (xojtH)
Actually when I said "new industry" I meant things like asteroid mining and associated other industries and eventually tourism and whatnot. You are right though;figuring out how to mass-produce the carbon nanotubles, and furthermore hang the line, is what most of the money will be sunk into. Might never work. Still appeals to my big government side a hell of a lot more than national health care or other such crap.
Posted by: mugiwara at January 25, 2012 02:25 PM (KI/Ch)
Posted by: Gristle Encased Head at January 25, 2012 02:25 PM (+lsX1)
Posted by: joeindc44 - tebow's new lifting coach at January 25, 2012 02:25 PM (QxSug)
Posted by: Benson at January 25, 2012 02:25 PM (qzcNU)
Posted by: Comrade Arthur at January 25, 2012 02:25 PM (goitd)
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2012 06:21 PM (xojtH)
Yeah, there's a massive constellation of satellites up there to do the observing for us, I guess I'm still annoyed that we have to rely on the Russians to get back and forth to the ISS, which Obama has already said that he wants to de-orbit in 2015 (I think).
Posted by: ErikW at January 25, 2012 02:26 PM (oIcB8)
I'm still holding out for the goods Nancy has on him, otherwise I got nothing.
Posted by: Willard R. at January 25, 2012 02:26 PM (HtUdo)
Posted by: Hollowpoint (circa 1500) at January 25, 2012 02:26 PM (ggRof)
Posted by: Soona at January 25, 2012 06:24 PM (IcAi1)
NASA was dead man walking after the Apollo program was cut back in the mid 1970s. The next generation was just the zombie staggering around.
Posted by: Oldcat at January 25, 2012 02:27 PM (z1N6a)
Posted by: EPA at January 25, 2012 02:27 PM (F6KtL)
Sorry, Shuttle. Posted by: ace
Yeah, the whole piggy-back rides on the 747s was lame. Pussy-ville.
Posted by: Dang at January 25, 2012 02:28 PM (BbX1b)
yeah I did that from 11:30 to 1.
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2012 06:18 PM (xojtH)
Did you get the LeBaron?
Posted by: garrett at January 25, 2012 02:28 PM (RVYt5)
Posted by: LGoPs at January 25, 2012 02:28 PM (lHn6+)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at January 25, 2012 02:29 PM (bxiXv)
Posted by: mugiwara at January 25, 2012 06:25 PM (KI/Ch)
You need the elevator first to get there under your view - you can't asteriod mine from down here.
Posted by: Oldcat at January 25, 2012 02:29 PM (z1N6a)
Posted by: steevy at January 25, 2012 02:29 PM (7W3wI)
Got it.
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 25, 2012 02:29 PM (SY2Kh)
Posted by: Newt Gingrich at January 25, 2012 02:29 PM (F6KtL)
Posted by: maddogg at January 25, 2012 02:30 PM (OlN4e)
You can do a search for water ice on moon, and you should find several stories.
Agree with Oldcat... The shuttle was a failure more in funding than in design. Once the budget for it was cut, we should have bailed.
In the end, it was a waste of time, money, and intellectual resources. I love Reagan, but this was a boondoggle despite the sometimes flashy results.
IOW, a perfect example of a government-run project.
Private industry will get us there, and far sooner than most would dare hope.
Posted by: krakatoa at January 25, 2012 02:30 PM (fFZ12)
Do conservatives REALLY want to be cleaning up messes like this every day on the campaign trail?
And yes, it IS a stupid idea to throw TRILLIONS of taxpayer dollars on colonizing the moon.
Posted by: 8 Track at January 25, 2012 02:30 PM (0kf1G)
Posted by: EPA at January 25, 2012 06:27 PM (F6KtL)
While they are protesting up there, we can get rid of those damn snail darters down here.
Posted by: Oldcat at January 25, 2012 02:30 PM (z1N6a)
Posted by: Andy at January 25, 2012 02:30 PM (NtvH7)
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2012 02:30 PM (xojtH)
Ask Tom Coburn or John Boehner. Newt called them "cannibals" when they evicted his sorry carcass from the House.
Posted by: Clarence at January 25, 2012 02:31 PM (z0HdK)
Here's a snippet
"The demonstration that no possible combination of known substances, known forms of machinery and known forms of force, can be united in a practical machine by which men shall fly along distances through the air, seems to the writer as complete as it is possible for the demonstration to be. "
Posted by: MikeTheMoose Camellia Sinensis Operative at January 25, 2012 02:32 PM (0q2P7)
do you know if Pixy is working on unbanning Jane D'oh?
Welcome Back bannings let you know that you're loved.
Posted by: garrett at January 25, 2012 02:32 PM (RVYt5)
Posted by: Jean at January 25, 2012 02:32 PM (C/Pop)
Posted by: S Daniel at January 25, 2012 02:32 PM (fM4AU)
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2012 02:32 PM (xojtH)
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at January 25, 2012 06:24 PM (XrrP7)"
That's kinda the bigger point. IF we're going to spend tax money on any sort of exploration, let's do it here. Don't get me wrong, my grandpa gave me a Jason-Empire telescope when I was 11 and I've never stopped looking up but a moon base and a trip to Mars is silly at this point in time.
Posted by: ErikW at January 25, 2012 02:32 PM (oIcB8)
I welcome our new model Caprica overlords.
Posted by: Methos at January 25, 2012 02:33 PM (6LvlL)
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2012 06:30 PM (xojtH)
The use for asteroid mining would be for uses in space. Hauling stuff out of a gravity well is where the cost in energy is.
Posted by: Oldcat at January 25, 2012 02:33 PM (z1N6a)
Krakatoa- I did, I was mistaken assuming it was dry. Learned somethin new.
Posted by: sternschaden at January 25, 2012 02:33 PM (xXhWA)
Posted by: LGoPs at January 25, 2012 02:33 PM (lHn6+)
We are hitching rides from the Russkies fer cryin' out loud to get to the Space Station. How much suckitude is that?
Posted by: GnuBreed at January 25, 2012 02:33 PM (BhuDE)
Wow. Bein' confused with Yoshi.
That's just sad.
Posted by: Meiczyslaw at January 25, 2012 02:33 PM (bjRNS)
Building outside the gravity well would be the first step to affordable manned space ops of all kinds. The cost of boosting a payload into earth orbit is huge.
And we need to get off this rock before a big space rock comes along and kills us all.
Posted by: Rodent Liberation Front at January 25, 2012 02:34 PM (lgw0N)
Posted by: Newt Harkonnen at January 25, 2012 02:34 PM (RVYt5)
Posted by: Clubber Lang at January 25, 2012 02:35 PM (ZPrif)
OBAMA HAS HEATED ARGUMENT WITH AZ GOV.... DEVELOPING...
Posted by: Dr Spank at January 25, 2012 02:35 PM (lVGED)
Posted by: CoolCzech at January 25, 2012 02:35 PM (niZvt)
Posted by: Ken Royall at January 25, 2012 02:35 PM (9zzk+)
I do not believe there is any element so precious it will ever make economic sense to mine it off-world.
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2012 06:30 PM (xojtH)
Posted by: mugiwara at January 25, 2012 02:35 PM (KI/Ch)
***
Oh come on. This isn't any worse than spending your unemployment check on lottery tickets. You can't win if you don't play, right?
Posted by: Gristle Encased Head at January 25, 2012 02:35 PM (+lsX1)
Posted by: Clubber Lang at January 25, 2012 06:35 PM (ZPrif)
The UN treaties that make sure you can't make a buck in the Antarctic might have something to do with that.
Posted by: Oldcat at January 25, 2012 02:36 PM (z1N6a)
Posted by: 8 year old at January 25, 2012 02:36 PM (YrNfT)
Posted by: ace at January 25, 2012 02:36 PM (xojtH)
Posted by: Dr Spank at January 25, 2012 06:35 PM (lVGED)
I hope Jan kicked the retard in his little balls.
Posted by: really ... at January 25, 2012 02:36 PM (X3lox)
Posted by: Andy at January 25, 2012 02:36 PM (NtvH7)
Posted by: joeindc44 - tebow's new lifting coach at January 25, 2012 02:37 PM (QxSug)
Yeah, Boehner has done a hell of a job. We all should be proud.
Posted by: Not Drinking Nearly Enough at January 25, 2012 02:37 PM (HtUdo)
Posted by: garrett at January 25, 2012 06:28 PM (RVYt5)
Pretty sure he'd go for the Cordoba in rich hobothian leatherskin. Or a vintage Ford Granada.
Posted by: Count de Monet at January 25, 2012 02:37 PM (4q5tP)
Posted by: 8 year old at January 25, 2012 06:36 PM (YrNfT)
Hey kid, you busy this weekend? Wanna take a plane ride? Where is your Momma?
Posted by: George Soros at January 25, 2012 02:38 PM (OlN4e)
Posted by: Leviathan at January 25, 2012 02:38 PM (bxiXv)
Posted by: Andy at January 25, 2012 06:36 PM (NtvH7)
Ok, thanks....she just e-mailed me to say she was still banned.
Posted by: Tami - Free Jane D'oh!!! at January 25, 2012 02:38 PM (X6akg)
Newt's proposing a restructuring of NASA and incentivizing the private sector with prize money (X-prizes), similar to the way aviation was commercialized in the 20s.
Doesn't need to be a big government program.
Posted by: Purple Fury at January 25, 2012 06:24 PM (RxdV7)
Agree. A successfully functioning American space program (preferably mostly run by the private sector) would bring back some of the pride of being American. Something that many people on this thread have either forgotten or have never experienced.
Posted by: Soona at January 25, 2012 02:38 PM (IcAi1)
Posted by: Lincolntf at January 25, 2012 02:39 PM (uIz80)
Posted by: Federal Government at January 25, 2012 02:39 PM (F6KtL)
I do not believe there is any element so precious it will ever make economic sense to mine it off-world.
What about unobtainium?
Posted by: LGoPs at January 25, 2012 02:39 PM (lHn6+)
SPS has all sorts of useful advantages. Right off the bat, of course, is tons of cheap energy. Once you get past the initial infrastructure cost it produces a hell of a profit margin. You have to be in for the long haul to make it work. Second, the Greens have to get behind it because it is the ultimate in renewable carbon neutral energy. No radiation, no pipelines, etc.
You do have the loons insisting it'll cause global warming by zapping the planet but this is a highly dubious claim since it is a tiny amount of energy on the global solar exposure scale.
Once you have all of that power beaming down, you can massively reduced the cost of further launches to orbit and beyond by powering very large laser array to photonically pump a ship into orbit instead of using rockets. Again, big win from the ecological perspective. And the build-out of orbital infrastructure accelerates due to greatly reduced fuel cost and simplified ship design. The fuel and chemical rockets become solely for maneuvering out in space.
There may be problems that make this all unviable but we will never know until we try. We've had these plans since the 70s but never the will to move them forward and tap into a resource base that dwarfs anything on the planet.
Posted by: epobirs at January 25, 2012 02:40 PM (kcfmt)
A couple of notes from one of the space blogs:
Gingrich’s plan will be “very, very bold” and “very different, ” will “make some in the NASA bureaucracy uncomfortable” because it will “actually get things done” instead of “just having planning meetings.”
I believe in Strong America Now, which is Lean Six Sigma for the federal government. Junk the antiquated civil service laws. The federal bureaucracy should be modeled after the Boeing Dreamliner management process.
OK, the Dreamliner actually was and is pretty horribly managed from a SLM point of view, but we get where you're coming from.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at January 25, 2012 02:41 PM (3wBRE)
How much taxpayer money does he anticipate spending, vs. opening it up to commercial interests?
Posted by: krakatoa at January 25, 2012 02:41 PM (fFZ12)
Posted by: Oldcat at January 25, 2012 06:33 PM (z1N6a)
I've always liked the idea of putting the ore on the down elevator and using it to raise the up elevator, filled people and/or prefabricated parts to be assembled as other mining and other type ships.
Posted by: mugiwara at January 25, 2012 02:41 PM (KI/Ch)
WeÂ’ll see a base there in five years. ItÂ’ll be makeshift and skeletal, but someone will do it.
Posted by: Stephen Price Blair at January 25, 2012 02:41 PM (QF8uk)
Of course, all this just shows how ultra-pathetic the US is, to kill itself right before Man heads into space, big time, and kicks off the greatest expansion and growth that humanity has seen since the discovery of the New World. Right at one of the most important points for the coming MILLENIA, the US has decided that it has had enough and is putting itself to sleep. Great ...
Posted by: really ... at January 25, 2012 02:41 PM (X3lox)
Posted by: epobirs at January 25, 2012 06:40 PM (kcfmt)
Ah, to be so young an naive...well, actually I never was.
The Greens hate people. They don't have to get behind anything except genocide.
Posted by: Oldcat at January 25, 2012 02:41 PM (z1N6a)
Newt is fucking retard, and it's clear he will pander to ANYONE.
Yea, here's your champion of smaller government.
Posted by: 8 Track at January 25, 2012 02:41 PM (0kf1G)
Posted by: Rodent Liberation Front at January 25, 2012 02:42 PM (lgw0N)
**************************
Oh man, why would you make a comparison to the Dreamliner? Overweight and massively behind schedule ...
Posted by: Waterhouse at January 25, 2012 02:42 PM (QvjG+)
Posted by: Mittens at January 25, 2012 02:43 PM (QKKT0)
That's why I'm the candidate of small ideas.
Posted by: Williard R. at January 25, 2012 02:43 PM (HtUdo)
Posted by: Ron Paul! at January 25, 2012 02:43 PM (lVGED)
Posted by: steevy at January 25, 2012 02:44 PM (7W3wI)
Posted by: Ken Royall at January 25, 2012 06:35 PM (9zzk+)
I would like you to explain how that remark is marxist. Or are you just throwing shit against the wall.
Posted by: Soona at January 25, 2012 02:44 PM (IcAi1)
Another pull:
Gingrich takes a shot at Romney’s “practical” lack of vision. Gingrich explains that he is a romantic, which is why he introduced a bill to make the moon eligible to petition for admission as a state once it had 13,000 inhabitants. Because he wanted to fire the imagination of the young with the thought that they could be one of those 13,000.
In a related story, Gingrich fails to qualify for Moon primary. Mitt Romney and Ron Paul only names on ballot.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at January 25, 2012 02:45 PM (3wBRE)
After hours of grueling deliberation I have decided, boldly, to act.
Moments ago I dispatched Seal Team Six to the Moon to either capture or kill 'The Man'.
Gutsy call, I know.
You don't have to thank me. It's what I do.
Posted by: Barack Obama at January 25, 2012 02:45 PM (RVYt5)
Posted by: Soona at January 25, 2012 06:44 PM (IcAi1) "
Remarkable, isn't it?
Posted by: krakatoa at January 25, 2012 02:45 PM (fFZ12)
Posted by: mugiwara at January 25, 2012 06:41 PM (KI/Ch)
A solar powered motor on the cable would work just as well. The advantage of an elevator is to let you deliver the energy slowly instead of all at once.
Posted by: Oldcat at January 25, 2012 02:46 PM (z1N6a)
Posted by: rickl at January 25, 2012 02:46 PM (sdi6R)
I think we should send Calista over for Muslim outreach. We need Nasa for trips to Mars.
Really, why bother with any of this without warp?
Posted by: dagny at January 25, 2012 02:46 PM (w+PM8)
All of them.
If you want something flashy, a single smallish asteroid could easily contain more gold than has been mined in the entirety of human history. There are also the ecological aspects. The greenies are making it harder every year to do the most basic of mining that our civilization relies upon. Every time they raise the cost of obtaining the most mundane ores the more cost effective it become to do it beyond their reach.
Posted by: epobirs at January 25, 2012 02:47 PM (kcfmt)
Posted by: George Soros at January 25, 2012 02:47 PM (OlN4e)
Couple more:
I want people cutting metal—or wrapping composite. I want 1% of the current studies and 10 times the trial flights. If you keep succeeding, you aren’t trying hard enough.
Our current situation is a total mess, an embarrassment. We have a bureaucracy this big but we rely on the Russians while we watch the Chinese surpass us, and we twiddle our thumbs with no real reform.
He's right you know.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at January 25, 2012 02:47 PM (3wBRE)
Posted by: Blaster at January 25, 2012 02:48 PM (Fw2Gg)
Posted by: Mittzy at January 25, 2012 02:48 PM (Gc/Qi)
Posted by: soothie at January 25, 2012 02:48 PM (GcwH1)
If you want something flashy, a single smallish asteroid could easily contain more gold than has been mined in the entirety of human history.
*fap* *fap* *fap*
Posted by: Ron Paul at January 25, 2012 02:48 PM (uhAkr)
Posted by: nickless at January 25, 2012 02:49 PM (MMC8r)
Posted by: mpfs at January 25, 2012 02:49 PM (iYbLN)
Okay, so will this Noot Moonbase Alpha have Catherine Schell running around in miniskirts and go-go boots? Because I could get behind some of that action.
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at January 25, 2012 02:49 PM (XCHGh)
Posted by: Weyland-Yutani CEO at January 25, 2012 02:50 PM (4q5tP)
Posted by: Uriah Heep at January 25, 2012 02:50 PM (bE3kk)
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at January 25, 2012 06:49 PM (XCHGh)
Those jerks got the whole moon blasted out of the solar system. Brits!
Posted by: Oldcat at January 25, 2012 02:50 PM (z1N6a)
Posted by: soothie at January 25, 2012 02:51 PM (Y4TdB)
Posted by: Comrade Arthur at January 25, 2012 02:51 PM (goitd)
Posted by: epobirs at January 25, 2012 02:51 PM (kcfmt)
Posted by: really ... at January 25, 2012 06:41 PM (X3lox)
Agree. Well said. There's more than just a bad president corrupting the spirit of freedom in America.
Posted by: Soona at January 25, 2012 02:51 PM (IcAi1)
Posted by: mpfs at January 25, 2012 02:52 PM (iYbLN)
Posted by: Andy at January 25, 2012 02:52 PM (NtvH7)
Posted by: soothie at January 25, 2012 02:52 PM (OHhPo)
Posted by: mpfs at January 25, 2012 06:52 PM (iYbLN)
Or worse yet, the French.
Posted by: Oldcat at January 25, 2012 02:53 PM (z1N6a)
Posted by: Mittzy at January 25, 2012 02:53 PM (Gc/Qi)
easily contain more gold than has been mined in the entirety of human
history.
***
Yeah, but when Noot tows the solid gold asteroid to earth, the price of gold will drop to 8 cents/ton and he'll have wasted $50 trillion getting it.
Posted by: Gristle Encased Head at January 25, 2012 02:53 PM (+lsX1)
Posted by: maddogg at January 25, 2012 02:54 PM (OlN4e)
Posted by: soothie at January 25, 2012 06:52 PM (OHhPo)
Oh I dunno, here's a post with 200 posts and only about 5 doom and gloomey ones. Even though most don't even think it will happen.
Posted by: Oldcat at January 25, 2012 02:54 PM (z1N6a)
Posted by: CoolCzech at January 25, 2012 02:55 PM (niZvt)
I'm late to the thread but I don't think it is all that daffy. All Newt has to say is: "For the same amount the Glorious Leader pissed away on his failed stimulous, which was nothing but payola to his cronies that bought nothing, we could establish a base on the Moon and put a man or woman on Mars. Like the Apollo missions to the Moon a generation ago, the technological advances that would result from these programs would revolutionize American society."
But knowing Newt, he'll fuck it up by then saying: "Shall I mention a few advances that resulted from the Apollo program? How about . . .
1. Those tiny motors that are inside every woman's vibrator, especially the one I used to flog across the mug of my horse-faced first wife . . .
2. Medical devices that allow gay men to repair their ruptured anuses after a night imitating Andrew Sullivan (ride 'em, Cowboy!) . . .
3. Tang.
Should I go on? No, of course not, you see the value, don't you!"
Posted by: Sharkman at January 25, 2012 02:55 PM (RtpCp)
Posted by: Jean at January 25, 2012 02:55 PM (uekSI)
No, how many $Trillions? Come on, you claim to know. Tell us.
Vital clue: you don't run it like Apollo. You make it a private venture wherever possible while using federal funds to motivate where needed.
We know we can have access to orbit on a frequent basis for a far lower cost than what Shuttle dinged us for, if it is run as a business. The scale of personnel attached to any one reusable vehicle should be comparable to an airliner. A few hundred people as opposed to the 20,000 attached to Shuttle.
Posted by: epobirs at January 25, 2012 02:56 PM (kcfmt)
Posted by: CoolCzech at January 25, 2012 02:56 PM (niZvt)
Posted by: Lincolntf at January 25, 2012 02:58 PM (uIz80)
Posted by: Waterhouse at January 25, 2012 02:58 PM (QvjG+)
Posted by: Jimmah at January 25, 2012 02:58 PM (TMeYE)
Posted by: Yoshi < (ksIEn) PM 06:57 2012 25, January>
Great, the thread just got an upper decker.
Posted by: garrett at January 25, 2012 02:59 PM (RVYt5)
>> Its refreshing to see some actual pandering rather than the normal spitting in our face that seems to be the standard these days.
>> Posted by: Oldcat at January 25, 2012 06:24 PM (z1N6a)
This x 1000.
Also, I'd be in favor of moon base establishment from an iterative development standpoint. Nevertheless, the US is beyond broke and we'll likely never afford to undertake such a project in our lifetime because of it.
Posted by: Jew janitor's mop bucket at January 25, 2012 02:59 PM (YPt/x)
Posted by: Soona at January 25, 2012 03:00 PM (IcAi1)
I'm working on a SATCOM program where we had an option to use a Falcon 9 for the launch. The Government took that option away and are forcing us to use Delta IVs for at least 25% more cost.
Don't underestimate the ability of NASA to screw things up.
Posted by: Dave in Fla at January 25, 2012 03:00 PM (Why44)
******************
And as a point of reference for what this means - NASA estimated it would have cost *them* between 8 and 15 times more to develop Falcon and Falcon 9 than it cost SpaceX. 8 TO 15 TIMES !!
Posted by: Waterhouse at January 25, 2012 03:01 PM (QvjG+)
Posted by: Uriah Heep at January 25, 2012 03:02 PM (bE3kk)
Posted by: Comrade Arthur at January 25, 2012 06:51 PM (goitd)
Interesting analogy. I have no problem with private companies attempting the trip to Mars, I just don't want the gubmint to do it.
Posted by: ErikW at January 25, 2012 03:03 PM (oIcB8)
Posted by: motionview at January 25, 2012 03:04 PM (i+DU3)
------------ There's a good bit in the anime series "Banner of the Stars". The fleet of the Abh Empire is blockading a planet, but running short of water for cooling. They discuss the possibility of raiding the seas of the planet they are blockading, but decide it would be quicker and cheaper just to wait for shipments from home.
Posted by: Anachronda at January 25, 2012 03:04 PM (NmR1a)
Posted by: Uriah Heep at January 25, 2012 07:02 PM (bE3kk)
True, but space is clearly the future.
Posted by: really ... at January 25, 2012 03:06 PM (X3lox)
NASA is choked with managers who couldn't build and launch a model rocket if their lives depended on it.
The competent people left at the agency have been directed to outreach to Muslims - gaaah.
Posted by: An Observation at January 25, 2012 03:06 PM (ylhEn)
Plus do we really want the Chicoms to be able to just drop rocks on us?
Posted by: Iblis at January 25, 2012 03:07 PM (9221z)
"There are a litney of physical reasons why space exploration isnt for humans, energetically we cost to much verse machines and are less robust."
I agree completely, Dave. I have total enthusiasm for the mission.
Posted by: HAL 9000 at January 25, 2012 03:07 PM (4q5tP)
196 Once you have all of that power beaming down...
----------
Yeah, let's take energy that would normally miss the Earth and ship it here. That won't cause global warming.
Posted by: Anachronda at January 25, 2012 03:08 PM (NmR1a)
Pride in American accomplishments. Celebration of America's creative freedom. All of it is being stomped on. Makes me sad.
There used to be much more to this nation than what goes on in DC. There used to be much more to this nation than money and pop culture mentality.
Posted by: Soona at January 25, 2012 03:09 PM (IcAi1)
Posted by: An Observation at January 25, 2012 07:06 PM (ylhEn)
We just snagged Liam Neeson as a spokesmodel for our "Muslims in Space, The Endless Contributions" series. What do you think of them apples? We get invited to all the right parties, now.
Posted by: NASA Muslim Outreach ... to make them feel good about their bad, pathetic selves at January 25, 2012 03:09 PM (X3lox)
Posted by: Soona at January 25, 2012 07:00 PM (IcAi1)
From orbit. It's the only way to be sure.
Posted by: Count de Monet at January 25, 2012 03:10 PM (4q5tP)
Oh man, why would you make a comparison to the Dreamliner? Overweight and massively behind schedule ...
-------------- Indeed.
Posted by: The A380 Management Process at January 25, 2012 03:10 PM (NmR1a)
Posted by: luagha at January 25, 2012 03:12 PM (Dk9yX)
NASA is choked with managers who couldn't build and launch a model rocket if their lives depended on it.
The competent people left at the agency have been directed to outreach to Muslims - gaaah.
Posted by: An Observation at January 25, 2012 07:06 PM (ylhEn)
Who has been saying anything about bringing back NASA?
Posted by: Soona at January 25, 2012 03:13 PM (IcAi1)
Posted by: Lincolntf at January 25, 2012 03:14 PM (hiMsy)
Posted by: The A380 Management Process at January 25, 2012 07:10 PM (NmR1a)
IIRC, there are only 4 airports in the U.S. that an A380 can fly in and out of because the other runways aren't wide enough or long enough.
Posted by: ErikW at January 25, 2012 03:15 PM (oIcB8)
Posted by: Dr. Autonomous at January 25, 2012 03:15 PM (KqwSL)
Posted by: ErikW at January 25, 2012 03:17 PM (oIcB8)
First of all, it wasn't truly oriented towards its public goals. Getting to the Moon was PR. But Johnson sold it to his coalition as a Civil War reparations program. Tons of money pouring into states that still had a burning resentment in the 1960s over the events of the 1860s. Not the way to run an effective enterprise.
#266
We still have a lot of infrastructure work to do before we can send robots out to get resources for us. And having our entire existence tied to one planet is a risky proposition, especially with those kids brewing up new and better influenza bugs. It would be really good to have our species spread out a bit more as our ability to engineer our own demise increases.
Posted by: epobirs at January 25, 2012 03:18 PM (kcfmt)
Posted by: Hollowpoint at January 25, 2012 03:18 PM (X3vSL)
There's no reason we couldn't do everything Gingrich describes, in the timeframe he describes, within NASA's current budget.
NASA has a 20 billion + budget, thousands and thousands of employees, and does jack diddly squat.
Honestly, just the 10% for prizes (a little more than 2 billion a year) should probably be enough to get us a manned moon base in eight years, plus Mars not too much later, all courtesy of the private sector and the profit motive. (Which is evil when Mitt Romney does it, but otherwise is a very good thing).
Posted by: Emperor of Obama at January 25, 2012 03:19 PM (epBek)
Of course, all this just shows how ultra-pathetic the US is, to kill itself right before Man heads into space, big time, and kicks off the greatest expansion and growth that humanity has seen since the discovery of the New World. Right at one of the most important points for the coming MILLENIA, the US has decided that it has had enough and is putting itself to sleep. Great ...
--------
The whole freaking problem with this is you act like if Government doesn't do it, it can't be done.
NASA was NEVER going to put your ass in space. Unless you're an expert astrophysicist with the physique of an olympic athelete, and even then, only if you're one of the 12 or whatever who they'd send this century.
If we ever want to see people in space, it has to be private, it has to be economically justifiable. And private companies like Space X can do it if anyone can. For the reasons Newt pointed out - 100 times too much paper and not enough actual research - a government bureaucracy is not going to suceed where the market fails.
Posted by: Entropy, Racism Delenda Est at January 25, 2012 03:20 PM (Ci0JG)
I'm a big fan of the "Mars Direct" plan outlined in The Case For Mars. Go directly there. Now. A moonbase is a waste and a dead end!!!!!!!
Posted by: Tonic Dog at January 25, 2012 03:22 PM (X/+QT)
If you want more specifics about what Gingrich said, see the NASA Spaceflight Forum here:
Posted by: Emperor of Obama at January 25, 2012 03:24 PM (epBek)
No, it won't.
As I already mentioned, on the global scale of daily solar input, the amount of power needed to supply our country is a drop in the bucket. And we're the biggest power users on the planet.
On top of that, have you never heard of photonic cooling? Having the gear up in space with huge amount of power to apply allows for all sorts of geo-engineering options.
Or we can just not try anything new and just sit in the dark wondering why life sucks.
Posted by: epobirs at January 25, 2012 03:25 PM (kcfmt)
Posted by: Dennis Kucinich at January 25, 2012 03:25 PM (jiwQf)
Posted by: Entropy, Racism Delenda Est at January 25, 2012 07:20 PM (Ci0JG)
No. I was talking about the United States, as a political entity, ceasing to exist (in the state that made it "America") right before we start large-scale colonization of space, for which political systems will be fixed that will last long into the future. It is of utmost importance that the US adhering to our Constitution continues to exist to be able to seed colonies with that. Otherwise, space is going to develop like the New World did, but without the contribution of profit-making British companies and people building what would become the US. The whole of the Americas could have easily ended up like almost all of it has, as the ex-Spanish and Portugese colonies have all been disasters (even as they sit on very rich land with many huge advantages, and the long free protection of the US over this hemi-sphere). With space, even much more is at stake, politically, and for the future of space colonies. It's really starting to look like the Outer Space Treaty will end up being more the foundational extraterrestrial political document. That would be tragically sad.
Posted by: really ... at January 25, 2012 03:26 PM (X3lox)
Ace,
Aside from the benefits mentioned upthread, national prestige, vision, and the amenable launch conditions (from a flight dynamics point of view-lower gravitational force to overcome as well as no messy atmospheric drag to waste an admittedly small portion of fuel) there are many other advantages to using a moonbase as a proving ground for Mars mission systems and on-planet equipment.
The Moon is a very harsh environment. Systems that prove themselves there will easily be robust enough to handle the Martian environment. And any "unnecessary" weight penalty incurred by designing to the more demanding Lunar environment would be offset by the greatly reduced fuel mass needed to attain the proper velocity for the desired Martian trajectory). Also, if there is a problem, the astronauts testing the gear are less than 100 hrs flight time away from being rescued (maybe less, depending if you have a "lifeboat" in low Lunar orbit).
So in addition the technological, and other, benefits of establishing a permanent moonbase (mining heavy helium as well as other minerals) it would be an ideal "way station" for off world exploration to depart from.
The costs could also be minimized by involve as little of the NASA bureaucracy in the systems design as possible-starting with not writing specs that call for the discovery of the next "unobtanium" or insisting on a 99%+ saftey requirement.
just my 2 cents
My Regards
Posted by: Bob Reed at January 25, 2012 03:31 PM (L86hR)
Right.
Well that's what happened to the Romans and the Greeks. It will disappear off the face of the planet for thousands of years. Mores the better we don't start space colonies now, we'd just create space Empires and regulate the piss out of them like the British did to us.
'Cept what with us flying around with DeathSatellites with lasers that shit wouldn't fly anyway.
Posted by: Entropy, Racism Delenda Est at January 25, 2012 03:31 PM (Ci0JG)
Posted by: Uriah Heep at January 25, 2012 03:33 PM (C5JiW)
Posted by: SarahW at January 25, 2012 03:34 PM (LYwCh)
Posted by: SarahW at January 25, 2012 03:37 PM (LYwCh)
Posted by: Uriah Heep at January 25, 2012 03:42 PM (C5JiW)
Posted by: bill lumbergh at January 25, 2012 03:47 PM (i7mEE)
The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others.
A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement.
It's a Paul Nor thing. You wouldn't understand.
Either that, or you think the Founders were completely full of shit.
Posted by: Warren Bonesteel at January 25, 2012 03:54 PM (E7Z1r)
since Yeoman Janice Rand is nowhere to be found on this rock, i'm all in favor of going out there to look for her.
space exploration pays big dividends down the road.
the computer you're reading this on may never have existed if not for the Apollo program.
unless NASA is doing something big, it's just a waste of money.
Posted by: Ron Paul is the worst politician ever... except for all the others. at January 25, 2012 03:55 PM (m6OUa)
Way to go, Newt! Way to remind me of what I don't like about you. This brings back memories of his talking-up of Alvin Toffler, as Newt waxed expansive in the months after the '94 victory.
Just imagine cutting middle-class and corporate welfare at the same time as funding a run at Mars. Bad optics, as the kids say.
Posted by: Otis Criblecoblis at January 25, 2012 03:56 PM (IlZPo)
Posted by: Otis Criblecoblis at January 25, 2012 03:56 PM (IlZPo)
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at January 25, 2012 03:57 PM (r4wIV)
Posted by: Jean at January 25, 2012 03:59 PM (OfinX)
ok, it's settled then, we zero out NASA until the after the zombie apocolypse and then we go to Mars.
it's good plan.
Posted by: Ron Paul is the worst politician ever... except for all the others. at January 25, 2012 04:03 PM (m6OUa)
Don't tell that to the Weyland-Yutani corporation, my friend.
Posted by: Jeff B. at January 25, 2012 04:16 PM (hIWe1)
Posted by: epobirs at January 25, 2012 04:17 PM (kcfmt)
Posted by: Count de Monet at January 25, 2012 04:17 PM (4q5tP)
The US government has the National Nanotechology Initiative, but it needs to be revamped and made effecient. There is no cohesion, no structure; there is massive duplication, no direction, little information sharing of publically funded research between other groups in the initiative.
Likewise, sequencing technology is scaling a little over quadratically in cost reduction on it's own, yes. But that doesn't mean there isn't other related things in terms of the nuts and bolts of sequencing technology and the that could use investment and yeild huge benefits to health.
I work in neuroscience research; the government has killed off large neuroscience research from big pharma. Merk, AstraZeneca, GSK are all closing neuroscience departments -- there is no money in expensive new molecules that won't be covered under Obamacare, nor can you get your trial or research approved unless it has the new code words in it: "generic" or "prevention" -- both 'cost-effective scaling' treatments -- good luck telling the parents who bring their kid in for Schizophrenia or Autism that prevention will help.
Ohh, wait, planned parenthood... at least Obama is consistent... douchebag
Posted by: Uriah Heep at January 25, 2012 05:14 PM (C5JiW)
Posted by: Adjoran at January 25, 2012 06:09 PM (VfmLu)
Posted by: Anson Mitchell at January 25, 2012 06:46 PM (3dOug)
Posted by: Chas at January 26, 2012 03:37 AM (cYWKd)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.259 seconds, 445 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Posted by: GW Bush at January 25, 2012 02:00 PM (/jOyr)