| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Uncle Buck" |
| Date: |
13 Jul 2005 12:55:07 AM |
| Object: |
OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
From CNN main page:
The launch of the space shuttle Discovery will go ahead as scheduled
Wednesday after technicians fixed tiles damaged near the spacecraft's
tail Tuesday, a NASA spokesman said. The tiles were damaged when a
cover panel on the No. 7 cockpit window fell off as the orbiter sat
on the launch pad, officials said.
Hmmn. :-/ I'm sure they know what they're doing and all, but it
sounds a little bit strange to me. If parts are just sort of "falling
off" while it's just sitting there on the launch pad, does it _really_
seem like such a good idea to announce that you're going ahead with
the launch as scheduled anyway? Yeah, sure, there was a hurricaine,
but those winds are nothing to what it will encounter as it launches.
They probably know how reliably the damage has been fixed and all, but
you'd just think, I dunno', maybe in the interest of "good PR" or
something, they'd try to seem a little more concerned. Maybe it's
just me. :-?
--
L8r,
Uncle Buck
\~------------0-0-0-O-o*O*o*O*o-O-0-0-0------------~/
There are two main things we must concern ourselves
with in life: Our "to Do" list and our "do-do" list.
/~------------0-0-0-O-o*O*o*O*o-O-0-0-0------------~\
.
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
17 Jul 2005 09:31:00 PM |
|
|
On 17 Jul 2005 23:28:48 GMT, Enkidu the Atheist
<Enkidu.the.Atheist@gmail.com> drained his beer, leaned back in the
alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the following
However, it takes energy to climb out of a hole, and the more mass you
drag out, the more energy you will need. To drag a noticable fraction of
humanity off the planet will *always* take the same energy. Aproaching
10 billion humans before the human population is expected to level off,
how many would you need to move to make a difference? A billion, at
least. No fuckin' way! If we can move that many people, we can feed and
house them comfortably here on Earth
Beanstalks.
http://makeashorterlink.com/?P2182327B
Can't do it now, but in fifty years? Who knows!
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Enkidu the Atheist" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
17 Jul 2005 10:08:46 PM |
|
|
Douglas Berry <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in
news:905md1d0d4n75ud65p21dkl300qaco17ka@4ax.com:
On 17 Jul 2005 23:28:48 GMT, Enkidu the Atheist
<Enkidu.the.Atheist@gmail.com> drained his beer, leaned back in the
alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the following
However, it takes energy to climb out of a hole, and the more mass you
drag out, the more energy you will need. To drag a noticable fraction
of humanity off the planet will *always* take the same energy.
Aproaching 10 billion humans before the human population is expected
to level off, how many would you need to move to make a difference? A
billion, at least. No fuckin' way! If we can move that many people,
we can feed and house them comfortably here on Earth
Beanstalks.
http://makeashorterlink.com/?P2182327B
Can't do it now, but in fifty years? Who knows!
"Who knows?" is not something I'd bet on. But a kick-***** research
program would cost less than a "Gulf War" every decade, and would be much
more likely to return *something* of value, even if it isn't the intended
goal.
I'm not against a manned space program at all. I simply see it as a
challenge we should take up because it is a worthy goal, not as the
solution to any particular problem. Permenent settlements, new
technologies, mining asteroids and comets should be investigated as means
to an end, that end being manned exploration, not as solutions to
terrestrial problems.
--
Enkidu AA#2165
EAC Chaplain and ordained minister,
ULC, Modesto, CA
PGP ID: 0xC4CE8CF0
"Men never commit evil so fully and joyfuly as when they do it for
religious convictions"
-- Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "nobody" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
17 Jul 2005 06:59:47 PM |
|
|
Emi M Briet <emi@emiofbrie.cx> wrote:
nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
Care to back that nonsense with actual numbers?
(Oh, and don't foget to bring back the humans - alive if possible).
Don't need actual numbers, it's just common sense...
Too bad common sense is not so common.
An astronaut, once trained, can be used for missions indefinitely.
Gee. I should apply then. It would be nice to live forever.
The shuttles can be used over and over again, with the occasional
upgrade. The means to being the crew back is part of the cost of the
shuttle itself.
Most unmanned missions require all-new equipment for every mission, as
the equipment is rarely brought back to Earth.
I see you are thoroughly ignorant. Please save us the trouble and
yourself the humililation and research before you post if you don't
know the answer.
If at some point, we will have too many people to fit on this earth,
we will have too many people to lift off this earth. It's a catch 22.
Depends on when we get to that point...technology advancement is a
geometric curve. Compare where we were in 1805 to 1905 to where we are
today.
Simpleminded extrapolations from limited domains are almost guaranteed
to not work with complex systems.
Condoms work much better and are a lot cheaper to boot.
Yes, but human nature being what it is, humanity cannot be counted upon
to religiously (small 'r') use condoms.
If the West has managed to, while getting more prosperous, without any
pressure - and in fact with negative pressure (especially in Europe),
I doubt we are inherently wired to remain unable to stabilise our
population. Conversely, if we cannot, it will be because global
economy will go bankrupt, so humans won't be able to move anybody off
the planet under such an economy - especially the poor and starving
who would need moving in the first place.
In any case, it's all pure fantasy because of technical as well as
economic and social reasons.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
17 Jul 2005 06:58:41 PM |
|
|
Emi M Briet wrote:
In article <7g7ld1p29b9mutonm5kb2t7cfbfpkfkr8p@4ax.com>,
nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
Care to back that nonsense with actual numbers?
(Oh, and don't foget to bring back the humans - alive if possible).
Don't need actual numbers, it's just common sense...
An astronaut, once trained, can be used for missions indefinitely.
....until that astronaut dies, of course...
Condoms work much better and are a lot cheaper to boot.
Yes, but human nature being what it is, humanity cannot be counted upon
to religiously (small 'r') use condoms.
Which is not the fault of the condoms.
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "No one ever demonstrated, so far as I am aware, *
* the non-existence of Zeus or Thor - but they *
* have few followers now." Arthur C. Clarke *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lars Eighner" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
17 Jul 2005 06:36:24 PM |
|
|
In our last episode,
<emi-0D80FA.18024617072005@news-rdr-02.rdc-kc.rr.com>, the
lovely and talented Emi M Briet broadcast on alt.atheism:
In article <7g7ld1p29b9mutonm5kb2t7cfbfpkfkr8p@4ax.com>,
nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
Condoms work much better and are a lot cheaper to boot.
Yes, but human nature being what it is, humanity cannot be
counted upon to religiously (small 'r') use condoms.
Exactly. First, you cannot send enough people off in rockets to
make a significant difference in earthly population (figure how
many craft would be necessary to stablize Earth's population
now). So you can save Earth by sending off the excess
population.
And you can't save the people on the craft who are being sent to
Planet X, because they will breed until they collapse the
lifesupport systems on the craft - because they can't be counted
upon to use condoms.
You can't run away from what people are, even if you run to the
stars. And that's the problem with the First Church of Space
Jesus and Temple Beth Shuttle: they are just as irrational as
other religions.
--
Rev. Lars Eighner ULC Atheist #1965 http://www.larseighner.com/
The Mint Jelly of GodŽ -- The World's Best Atheist -- Unholier Than Thou
I don't see posts from or threads started from googlegroups.
Jesus *was* my co-pilot ... but we crashed in the Andes and I had to eat him.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lars Eighner" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
17 Jul 2005 11:14:46 AM |
|
|
In our last episode,
<emi-1EAB84.11103817072005@news-rdr-01.rdc-kc.rr.com>,
the lovely and talented Emi M Briet
broadcast on alt.atheism:
In article <slrnddkben.f00.eighner@goodwill.io.com>,
Lars Eighner < > wrote:
You want manned space craft to do what robotic space craft can
do faster, better, cheaper, and sooner. You are the luddite.
Not always....in many cases the robots cost astronomical amounts of
money to build, which is in addition to the cost of launching it into
space....far more expensive than launching humans
Like for instance?
And besides, due to massive population growth, extra-terrestrial living
will need to become a reality sooner that you think, requiring research
into civilian manned space flight.
Sorry. Try running the numbers. There is no population relief
"out there."
--
Rev. Lars Eighner ULC Atheist #1965 http://www.larseighner.com/
The Mint Jelly of GodŽ -- The World's Best Atheist -- Unholier Than Thou
I don't see posts from or threads started from googlegroups.
"I thank heaven for a man like Adolf Hitler" --Frank Buchman, U.S. evangelist
.
|
|
|
| User: "Emi M Briet" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
17 Jul 2005 06:03:45 PM |
|
|
In article <slrnddl0s5.g89.eighner@goodwill.io.com>,
Lars Eighner <eighner@io.com> wrote:
Sorry. Try running the numbers. There is no population relief
"out there."
Not with current technology....but maybe in 50-100 years....
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Enkidu the Atheist" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
17 Jul 2005 11:27:46 AM |
|
|
Lars Eighner <eighner@io.com> wrote in
news:slrnddl0s5.g89.eighner@goodwill.io.com:
In our last episode,
<emi-1EAB84.11103817072005@news-rdr-01.rdc-kc.rr.com>,
the lovely and talented Emi M Briet
broadcast on alt.atheism:
In article <slrnddkben.f00.eighner@goodwill.io.com>,
Lars Eighner <eighner@io.com> wrote:
You want manned space craft to do what robotic space craft can
do faster, better, cheaper, and sooner. You are the luddite.
Not always....in many cases the robots cost astronomical amounts of
money to build, which is in addition to the cost of launching it into
space....far more expensive than launching humans
Like for instance?
And besides, due to massive population growth, extra-terrestrial
living
will need to become a reality sooner that you think, requiring
research
into civilian manned space flight.
Sorry. Try running the numbers. There is no population relief
"out there."
Indeed. The cost and energy requirements for moving large numbers of
people off the planet and supporting them there make such a proposition
untterly unworkable.
--
Enkidu AA#2165
EAC Chaplain and ordained minister,
ULC, Modesto, CA
PGP ID: 0xC4CE8CF0
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tak" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
17 Jul 2005 12:00:23 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 16:10:39 GMT, Emi M Briet <emi@emiofbrie.cx>
wrote:
In article <slrnddkben.f00.eighner@goodwill.io.com>,
Lars Eighner <eighner@io.com> wrote:
You want manned space craft to do what robotic space craft can
do faster, better, cheaper, and sooner. You are the luddite.
Not always....in many cases the robots cost astronomical amounts of
money to build, which is in addition to the cost of launching it into
space....far more expensive than launching humans
And besides, due to massive population growth, extra-terrestrial living
will need to become a reality sooner that you think, requiring research
into civilian manned space flight.
Don't even bothe. He hates people, He does not belive in medical
technology, and he thinks the space shuttle crash was funny.
His whole belief system is part of his hatred for humanity.
He might as well be a christian and go all the way.
tak
a#344
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
16 Jul 2005 04:32:40 PM |
|
|
nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in alt.atheism
Enkidu the Atheist <Enkidu.the.Atheist@gmail.com> wrote:
It *will* happen or we will go extinct.
Who cares? You and I, and everybody we know will be worm food long
before. Do you still carry on remnants of that irrational theist
thinking?
Why should wanting to keep our species alive for as long as possible
be considered theistic type thinking? I say it's more evolutionary
thinking than it is theistic, but that's just my opinion...
I couldn't care less whether it's the heat death or a collision or a red dwarf
or something else completely that terminates humanity.
So you're a fatalistic doomsdayer, then? If humans can't live for
eternity, then there's no reason to keep ourselves alive for as long
as possible? Why don't you just kill yourself, and be done with it?
BTW, you really should think about getting a name besides "nobody."
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "nobody" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
16 Jul 2005 10:59:18 PM |
|
|
Elroy Willis <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote:
nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in alt.atheism
Enkidu the Atheist <Enkidu.the.Atheist@gmail.com> wrote:
It *will* happen or we will go extinct.
Who cares? You and I, and everybody we know will be worm food long
before. Do you still carry on remnants of that irrational theist
thinking?
Why should wanting to keep our species alive for as long as possible
be considered theistic type thinking?
Because it resonates with the idea of the sanctity of our species and
hints of an irrational form of morality and guilt. All signs of a
theistic upbringing.
I couldn't care less whether it's the heat death or a collision or a red dwarf
or something else completely that terminates humanity.
So you're a fatalistic doomsdayer, then? If humans can't live for
eternity, then there's no reason to keep ourselves alive for as long
as possible? Why don't you just kill yourself, and be done with it?
Slippery slope nonsense. I care about my well being. I care, to a
lesser extent, about my immediate neighborhood. I don't care so much
about people who are separated from me by space and time. This last
point shouldn't mean I should kill myself, unless we were living in
the bizzaro universe, maybe.
Not caring isn't the same thing as wishing them dead, of course, in
case your reasoning fails you there too.
And I am not cold, but just a regular person being honest for a
change. I don't care much about people starving in Africa. If I cared
much, I would have thought twice before buying, say, a 30" LCD for my
viewing pleasure. Of course it would be nice if they didn't starve,
but I have my priorities and those people are way down on the list.
Now, if I care so little about my contemporaries, what makes you think
I should care about people separated by time from me? I don't care
about people who died 2000 years ago. And I don't care about people
who will live 2000 years from now. There's nothing that ties us
together, if you think about it, but coincidences.
Let them fend for themselves, if they face some danger. It's stupid
for us to waste our money on expensive and useless manned space
flights with the romantic dream that one day our species may need to
lift off the planet.
BTW, you really should think about getting a name besides "nobody."
Thanks for the suggestion. But seeing that "real" names don't make
what people write sound smarter, I'll pass.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
17 Jul 2005 08:16:51 AM |
|
|
nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote:
nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in alt.atheism
Enkidu the Atheist <Enkidu.the.Atheist@gmail.com> wrote:
It *will* happen or we will go extinct.
Who cares? You and I, and everybody we know will be worm food long
before. Do you still carry on remnants of that irrational theist
thinking?
Why should wanting to keep our species alive for as long as possible
be considered theistic type thinking?
Because it resonates with the idea of the sanctity of our species and
hints of an irrational form of morality and guilt. All signs of a
theistic upbringing.
Irrational form of morality and guilt? WTF?
I couldn't care less whether it's the heat death or a collision or a red
dwarf or something else completely that terminates humanity.
So you're a fatalistic doomsdayer, then? If humans can't live for
eternity, then there's no reason to keep ourselves alive for as long
as possible? Why don't you just kill yourself, and be done with it?
Slippery slope nonsense. I care about my well being. I care, to a
lesser extent, about my immediate neighborhood. I don't care so much
about people who are separated from me by space and time. This last
point shouldn't mean I should kill myself, unless we were living in
the bizzaro universe, maybe.
Not caring isn't the same thing as wishing them dead, of course, in
case your reasoning fails you there too.
And I am not cold, but just a regular person being honest for a
change. I don't care much about people starving in Africa. If I cared
much, I would have thought twice before buying, say, a 30" LCD for my
viewing pleasure. Of course it would be nice if they didn't starve,
but I have my priorities and those people are way down on the list.
Now, if I care so little about my contemporaries, what makes you think
I should care about people separated by time from me? I don't care
about people who died 2000 years ago. And I don't care about people
who will live 2000 years from now. There's nothing that ties us
together, if you think about it, but coincidences.
Let them fend for themselves, if they face some danger. It's stupid
for us to waste our money on expensive and useless manned space
flights with the romantic dream that one day our species may need to
lift off the planet.
As long as it's a private or personal investment or venture, then you
don't have a problem with it, right? Your beef is with people who try
to force you to pay for such manned programs via taxes, right?
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "nobody" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
17 Jul 2005 01:14:31 PM |
|
|
Elroy Willis <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote:
As long as it's a private or personal investment or venture, then you
don't have a problem with it, right?
No, not really. I mean, I think collecting stamps is silly too but I'm
not about to argue against people who do it with their own money in
their own time.
Your beef is with people who try
to force you to pay for such manned programs via taxes, right?
I am in awe of your lightning quick comprehension.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
17 Jul 2005 02:20:45 PM |
|
|
nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote:
As long as it's a private or personal investment or venture, then you
don't have a problem with it, right?
No, not really. I mean, I think collecting stamps is silly too but I'm
not about to argue against people who do it with their own money in
their own time.
Your beef is with people who try
to force you to pay for such manned programs via taxes, right?
I am in awe of your lightning quick comprehension.
Thank you, Mr. nobody. Or is it Ms. nobody?
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lars Eighner" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
16 Jul 2005 03:15:40 PM |
|
|
In our last episode,
<21pid1tenj07r0932iohpkn5m51o02evtf@4ax.com>,
the lovely and talented Elroy Willis
broadcast on alt.atheism:
Douglas Berry wrote in alt.atheism
Lars Eighner < > drunkenly proclaimed the following
Larry Heath broadcast on alt.atheism:
Don't you think that it might be a good idea to get at least some of our
eggs out of the one basket they now reside in?
Why? Unless you have an escape plan for the entropy death of
the university, humanity is going down the tubes eventually.
I'm really sick of people replacing their ticket to heaven with
a ticket to outer space. You haven't really advanced at all if
you stop believing in Jesus and start believing in Capt. Kirk.
There is no pie in the sky, no matter how many parsecs into the
sky you go.
LOL! Several years ago people were arguing that there weren't any
extrasolar planets. We now know of over a hundred.
Head out to the Jovians, and you have water in abundance. You could
set up a nice civilization among the larger moons of Jupiter and
Saturn.
Mars could be terraformed, as could be Venus.
I'm not so sure about Venus...
Oh, the heat death of the universe is not going to happen for a very,
very long time. The sun will swell up and die long before the final
snuffout.
If we establish bases on the Moon and Mars, and Earth happens to get
hit by some giant asteroid or comet which wipes out 95% of life on
earth, including humans, but doesn't completely destroy it, we could
hang out on the Moon and Mars for a while, while the Earth detoxifies
itself, then send down some people to repopulate it, once things are
livable again, don't you think?
I sometimes dream about something like that actually happening, just
so people like Lars can be told "I told you it was a good idea!"
Luddite!
--
Rev. Lars Eighner ULC Atheist #1965 http://www.larseighner.com/
The Mint Jelly of GodŽ -- The World's Best Atheist -- Unholier Than Thou
I don't see posts from or threads started from googlegroups.
"It does not pay a prophet to be too specific."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
16 Jul 2005 03:55:40 PM |
|
|
Lars Eighner <eighner@io.com> wrote in alt.atheism
the lovely and talented Elroy Willis broadcast on alt.atheism:
Douglas Berry wrote in alt.atheism
Oh, the heat death of the universe is not going to happen for a very,
very long time. The sun will swell up and die long before the final
snuffout.
If we establish bases on the Moon and Mars, and Earth happens to get
hit by some giant asteroid or comet which wipes out 95% of life on
earth, including humans, but doesn't completely destroy it, we could
hang out on the Moon and Mars for a while, while the Earth detoxifies
itself, then send down some people to repopulate it, once things are
livable again, don't you think?
I sometimes dream about something like that actually happening, just
so people like Lars can be told "I told you it was a good idea!"
Luddite!
I'm generally not an alarmist and an "I told you so" type person, but
in this case, I make an exception. :)
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lars Eighner" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
16 Jul 2005 03:24:43 PM |
|
|
In our last episode,
<21pid1tenj07r0932iohpkn5m51o02evtf@4ax.com>,
the lovely and talented Elroy Willis
broadcast on alt.atheism:
If we establish bases on the Moon and Mars, and Earth happens to get
hit by some giant asteroid or comet which wipes out 95% of life on
earth, including humans, but doesn't completely destroy it, we could
hang out on the Moon and Mars for a while, while the Earth detoxifies
itself, then send down some people to repopulate it, once things are
livable again, don't you think?
Why does this make me think of Peter Sellers in a wheelchair?
--
Rev. Lars Eighner ULC Atheist #1965 http://www.larseighner.com/
The Mint Jelly of GodŽ -- The World's Best Atheist -- Unholier Than Thou
I don't see posts from or threads started from googlegroups.
Focus on your own damn family.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
16 Jul 2005 03:58:31 PM |
|
|
Lars Eighner <eighner@io.com> wrote in alt.atheism
the lovely and talented Elroy Willis broadcast on alt.atheism:
If we establish bases on the Moon and Mars, and Earth happens to get
hit by some giant asteroid or comet which wipes out 95% of life on
earth, including humans, but doesn't completely destroy it, we could
hang out on the Moon and Mars for a while, while the Earth detoxifies
itself, then send down some people to repopulate it, once things are
livable again, don't you think?
Why does this make me think of Peter Sellers in a wheelchair?
Dr. Strangelove, I presume?
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
16 Jul 2005 08:24:48 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 16 Jul 2005 19:53:44 GMT, Elroy Willis
<elroywillis@swbell.net> drained his beer, leaned back in the
alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the following
Douglas Berry wrote in alt.atheism
LOL! Several years ago people were arguing that there weren't any
extrasolar planets. We now know of over a hundred.
Head out to the Jovians, and you have water in abundance. You could
set up a nice civilization among the larger moons of Jupiter and
Saturn.
Mars could be terraformed, as could be Venus.
I'm not so sure about Venus...
At one of the last conferences I went to before I got sick and dropped
out, there was a day long symposium on terraforming Venus. Very
interesting ideas, starting with a reflector placed between Venus and
the sun to cut down the insolation by about 66%. They had plans to
break up the atmospheric CO2 with tailored algaes drifitng in the
upper atmospheres, and eventual plans to use nitrogen from Titan(!) to
balance things out. At every stage, they demonstrated how close we
actually are to being able to handle the materials end of the project.
Oh, the heat death of the universe is not going to happen for a very,
very long time. The sun will swell up and die long before the final
snuffout.
If we establish bases on the Moon and Mars, and Earth happens to get
hit by some giant asteroid or comet which wipes out 95% of life on
earth, including humans, but doesn't completely destroy it, we could
hang out on the Moon and Mars for a while, while the Earth detoxifies
itself, then send down some people to repopulate it, once things are
livable again, don't you think?
Yup. "The Earth is just too small and fragile a basket for the human
race to keep all its eggs in." --Robert A. Heinlein
I sometimes dream about something like that actually happening, just
so people like Lars can be told "I told you it was a good idea!"
LOL! Ever read "Lucifer's Hammer" by Niven and Pournelle?
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
17 Jul 2005 08:20:09 AM |
|
|
Douglas Berry <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis drunkenly proclaimed the following
Douglas Berry wrote in alt.atheism
Oh, the heat death of the universe is not going to happen for a very,
very long time. The sun will swell up and die long before the final
snuffout.
If we establish bases on the Moon and Mars, and Earth happens to get
hit by some giant asteroid or comet which wipes out 95% of life on
earth, including humans, but doesn't completely destroy it, we could
hang out on the Moon and Mars for a while, while the Earth detoxifies
itself, then send down some people to repopulate it, once things are
livable again, don't you think?
Yup. "The Earth is just too small and fragile a basket for the human
race to keep all its eggs in." --Robert A. Heinlein
I sometimes dream about something like that actually happening, just
so people like Lars can be told "I told you it was a good idea!"
LOL! Ever read "Lucifer's Hammer" by Niven and Pournelle?
No, is it believable sci-fi?
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
17 Jul 2005 09:33:18 AM |
|
|
Elroy Willis <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote in
news:2jmkd1trtkkjdstima6kmvv6u8aqeatlt3@4ax.com:
Douglas Berry <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis drunkenly proclaimed the following
Douglas Berry wrote in alt.atheism
Oh, the heat death of the universe is not going to happen for a
very,
very long time. The sun will swell up and die long before the
final
snuffout.
If we establish bases on the Moon and Mars, and Earth happens to get
hit by some giant asteroid or comet which wipes out 95% of life on
earth, including humans, but doesn't completely destroy it, we could
hang out on the Moon and Mars for a while, while the Earth
detoxifies
itself, then send down some people to repopulate it, once things are
livable again, don't you think?
Yup. "The Earth is just too small and fragile a basket for the human
race to keep all its eggs in." --Robert A. Heinlein
I sometimes dream about something like that actually happening, just
so people like Lars can be told "I told you it was a good idea!"
LOL! Ever read "Lucifer's Hammer" by Niven and Pournelle?
No, is it believable sci-fi?
Very believable. Excellent writing.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
Political correctness is a form of moral and emotional blackmail
whereby if you call a spade a spade you must
a) apologize to the spade,
b) if you live in the US, take a sensitivity training course, or
c) if you live in Old Yurp, you are taken to court for defamation of the
aforementioned spade.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
17 Jul 2005 09:57:17 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 17 Jul 2005 13:20:09 GMT, Elroy Willis
<elroywillis@swbell.net> drained his beer, leaned back in the
alt.atheism beanbag and drunkenly proclaimed the following
Douglas Berry <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in alt.atheism
Elroy Willis drunkenly proclaimed the following
Douglas Berry wrote in alt.atheism
Oh, the heat death of the universe is not going to happen for a very,
very long time. The sun will swell up and die long before the final
snuffout.
If we establish bases on the Moon and Mars, and Earth happens to get
hit by some giant asteroid or comet which wipes out 95% of life on
earth, including humans, but doesn't completely destroy it, we could
hang out on the Moon and Mars for a while, while the Earth detoxifies
itself, then send down some people to repopulate it, once things are
livable again, don't you think?
Yup. "The Earth is just too small and fragile a basket for the human
race to keep all its eggs in." --Robert A. Heinlein
I sometimes dream about something like that actually happening, just
so people like Lars can be told "I told you it was a good idea!"
LOL! Ever read "Lucifer's Hammer" by Niven and Pournelle?
No, is it believable sci-fi?
A bit dated now (written in the early 70s) but it is a very good look
at what would happen if the world was hit by a comet.
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "DianaC" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
13 Jul 2005 06:58:34 PM |
|
|
"Lars Eighner" <eighner@io.com> wrote in message
news:slrndda0lo.b3b.eighner@goodwill.io.com...
In our last episode,
<mqu9d1ho0lkdp84cp16l7s9n4dfruuc04i@4ax.com>, the lovely and
talented Elroy Willis broadcast on alt.atheism:
Does the next generation of space shuttle still have tiles in the
designs?
On no! Don't tell me there is yet another generation of manned
spacecraft. This really chaps my butt.
Putting people in space is dangerous and expensive. It is much
cheaper and more efficient to send machines. There is no reason
to send people into space now. There may never be a good reason
to do so. If there is some unobtainium on one of the planets of
this star system, machines can find it faster and cheaper.
The reasons to believe that people will ever travel faster than
the speed of light are exactly the same as the reasons to
believe in a big sky daddy. Humanity is NEVER, *never*, not
ever, going to another star system. Don't replace one
irrational religious belief system with Star Trek. They are
really both just wishful-thinking fantasies.
Uh huh. Never say 'never'. You could end up in the same ignoble company as
the head of the patent department in the nineteenth century who said that
everything that could be invented had been invented, or those idiots who
honestly believed that it was physically impossible for humans to travel
more than 30 mph....
We simply do not KNOW what we can, and cannot, do.
But I have a sneaking suspicion that if mankind does NOT get off this rock,
we will pine away and die. We are not programmed to sit still. There is a
primal need to 'go and see'. So, we will go and see. Personally.
And that is a good thing.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Elroy Willis" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
13 Jul 2005 07:27:17 AM |
|
|
Lars Eighner <eighner@io.com> wrote in alt.atheism
the lovely and talented Elroy Willis broadcast on alt.atheism:
Does the next generation of space shuttle still have tiles in the
designs?
On no! Don't tell me there is yet another generation of manned
spacecraft. This really chaps my butt.
Putting people in space is dangerous and expensive. It is much
cheaper and more efficient to send machines. There is no reason
to send people into space now. There may never be a good reason
to do so. If there is some unobtainium on one of the planets of
this star system, machines can find it faster and cheaper.
The reasons to believe that people will ever travel faster than
the speed of light are exactly the same as the reasons to
believe in a big sky daddy. Humanity is NEVER, *never*, not
ever, going to another star system. Don't replace one
irrational religious belief system with Star Trek. They are
really both just wishful-thinking fantasies.
Just because we can't travel faster than light doesn't mean that we
should give up the manual exploration of our own solar system, does
it?
Lots of people are willing to risk their lives in order to get a
bird's eye view of our own planet from space, or to explore other
planets, so why not let them, if they willingly want to do so? We can
feel sad for those who die in the process, but they knew what they
were getting themselves into when they signed up. Nobody's putting
guns to astronauts heads and forcing them to go into space, are they?
--
Elroy Willis
www.elroysemporium.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "nobody" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
13 Jul 2005 08:20:38 AM |
|
|
Elroy Willis <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote:
Just because we can't travel faster than light doesn't mean that we
should give up the manual exploration of our own solar system, does
it?
There's nothing that can be done with manual exploration that can't be
done better unmanned.
Lots of people are willing to risk their lives
Not to mention other people's money. Give me a break. There's
absolutely no reason to send astronauts in space. They are less useful
than chimps, and a lot of trouble.
in order to get a
bird's eye view of our own planet from space,
A silly reason, if I ever saw one. Have you heard of satellites?
.
|
|
|
| User: "DianaC" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
13 Jul 2005 07:03:22 PM |
|
|
"nobody" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:4v4ad11og54akk5b6kaqar70drfstqcbk5@4ax.com...
Elroy Willis <elroywillis@swbell.net> wrote:
Just because we can't travel faster than light doesn't mean that we
should give up the manual exploration of our own solar system, does
it?
There's nothing that can be done with manual exploration that can't be
done better unmanned.
This has nothing to do with present technology. Tell me, your people live
where, exactly?
Lots of people are willing to risk their lives
Not to mention other people's money. Give me a break. There's
absolutely no reason to send astronauts in space. They are less useful
than chimps, and a lot of trouble.
Too bad. We will go anyway.
in order to get a
bird's eye view of our own planet from space,
A silly reason, if I ever saw one. Have you heard of satellites?
Something tells me you would have told Columbus to stay home and build
rowboats, told the Wright brothers to stick to bicycles, and told Bert Rutan
to stick to designing gliders.
.
|
|
|
| User: "nobody" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
14 Jul 2005 10:08:06 AM |
|
|
"DianaC" <dianaiad@vernoyoudontizon.net> wrote:
"nobody" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
There's nothing that can be done with manual exploration that can't be
done better unmanned.
This has nothing to do with present technology.
Lest you forgot, we live in the present. *If* it becomes useful in the
future, I will be for it.
Tell me, your people live where, exactly?
On earth. Yours?
Lots of people are willing to risk their lives
Not to mention other people's money. Give me a break. There's
absolutely no reason to send astronauts in space. They are less useful
than chimps, and a lot of trouble.
Too bad. We will go anyway.
No, *you* won't.
in order to get a
bird's eye view of our own planet from space,
A silly reason, if I ever saw one. Have you heard of satellites?
Something tells me you would have told Columbus to stay home and build
rowboats, told the Wright brothers to stick to bicycles, and told Bert Rutan
to stick to designing gliders.
Those are privately funded (feel free to split hairs on Columbus).
Moreover, it's one thing to take risks in proportion to benefits, it's
completely another to keep on wasting money on projects that we know
are not worth implementing since better and cheaper methods that will
get us to the same outcome exist.
Why do you think have we not revisisted the moon in decades? Because
it served no practical purpose in the first place. It was a silly
macho-romantic project.
Same with the current breed of manned space flight and the Mars dream.
.
|
|
|
| User: "DianaC" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
14 Jul 2005 02:10:18 PM |
|
|
"nobody" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:d9vcd1lq85tddlkudb69kq087haormi8dg@4ax.com...
"DianaC" <dianaiad@vernoyoudontizon.net> wrote:
"nobody" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
There's nothing that can be done with manual exploration that can't be
done better unmanned.
This has nothing to do with present technology.
Lest you forgot, we live in the present. *If* it becomes useful in the
future, I will be for it.
Tell me, your people live where, exactly?
On earth. Yours?
Lots of people are willing to risk their lives
Not to mention other people's money. Give me a break. There's
absolutely no reason to send astronauts in space. They are less useful
than chimps, and a lot of trouble.
Too bad. We will go anyway.
No, *you* won't.
I will help pay for it. And if they'd let me go, I'd be first in line.
in order to get a
bird's eye view of our own planet from space,
A silly reason, if I ever saw one. Have you heard of satellites?
Something tells me you would have told Columbus to stay home and build
rowboats, told the Wright brothers to stick to bicycles, and told Bert
Rutan
to stick to designing gliders.
Those are privately funded (feel free to split hairs on Columbus).
Moreover, it's one thing to take risks in proportion to benefits, it's
completely another to keep on wasting money on projects that we know
are not worth implementing since better and cheaper methods that will
get us to the same outcome exist.
(shaking head) I don't think you will ever understand. It's all about seeing
what's on the other side of the mountain. That is, it's about US seeing
what's there, not sending a robot.
Why do you think have we not revisisted the moon in decades? Because
it served no practical purpose in the first place. It was a silly
macho-romantic project.
Same with the current breed of manned space flight and the Mars dream.
Nope, you don't get it, and if you don't get it now, it would be utterly
useless to explain it to you.
.
|
|
|
| User: "nobody" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
14 Jul 2005 09:07:50 PM |
|
|
"DianaC" <dianaiad@vernoyoudontizon.net> wrote:
(shaking head) I don't think you will ever understand. It's all about seeing
what's on the other side of the mountain.
More plains and mountains. Maybe oceans. So what?
That is, it's about US seeing what's there, not sending a robot.
Same difference. A video camera is a tool, just as good as eyes, if
not better. If you wear glasses, you are already looking through one
picece of equipment so what's so wrong with adding more layers?
Nope, you don't get it, and if you don't get it now, it would be utterly
useless to explain it to you.
All I am reading is "I have no rational explanation for my romantic
dream of manned space exploration".
.
|
|
|
| User: "DianaC" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Shuttle problems - trouble brewing? |
15 Jul 2005 08:51:06 AM |
|
|
"nobody" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:5d6ed11a3nf5tho15a3ac5p49khubdppek@4ax.com...
"DianaC" <dianaiad@vernoyoudontizon.net> wrote:
(shaking head) I don't think you will ever understand. It's all about
seeing
what's on the other side of the mountain.
More plains and mountains. Maybe oceans. So what?
And there you have it.
That is, it's about US seeing what's there, not sending a robot.
Same difference. A video camera is a tool, just as good as eyes, if
not better. If you wear glasses, you are already looking through one
picece of equipment so what's so wrong with adding more layers?
Nope, you don't get it, and if you don't get it now, it would be utterly
useless to explain it to you.
All I am reading is "I have no rational explanation for my romantic
dream of manned space exploration".
I know. To plagiarize a bit, if you understand the yearning, any excuse to
go will do. If you don't, none will. It's not necessarily a character fault
to have no romance in your soul; we need you guys to hold the world down for
the rest of us. What IS a character fault is that you seem to want to deny
anyone else the romance in theirs.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|

|
Related Articles |
|
|