View Single Post
Old 12-06-2006, 06:12 PM   #13
tw
Read? I only know how to write.
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 11,933
Quote:
Originally Posted by breakingnews
Anyway. I think a moon base would be awesome. If we have the resources to travel out there and beyond, hell, go for it. We might as well try it while we can - we could end up with the dinosaurs in another couple thousand years.
Be very careful about letting your emotions replace logical thought. Same hype created a Space Shuttle that cost the US leadership in space launching. Why? Space Shuttle was not created for science or for logical accomplishment. It was created on emotional hype that America would have a space airplane. Air Force was particularly interested in this so as to create a Space Force.

Overlooked his where mankind is accomplishing great things. Robotics is how great men have been advancing mankind. Need I cite example after example - Martian Rovers, the constellation of satellites now in orbit around Mars, Hubble Space Telescope, Chandler, Solar Max, etc. Even earth borne telescopes operate on robotics. And the future tools for this are being developed by innovators in waves. Already the Martian Rovers have been provided with artificial intelligence to change their mission based upon events they detect. Almost all NASA science is accomplished on less than 10% of its budget - in robotics and other intelligent machines.

'Grand Challenge' again demonstrates the future of who will be the world leaders. Next year, 'Urban Challenge' continues making tools that are so necessary for mans conquest of the unknown - and that means space exploration. A benchmark for whether you grasp mankind's greatest advances. Do you know about Grand Challenge and Urban Challenge?

Because a Moon Base is proposed by an administration full of political extremists - and that means low intelligence - then I am indeed suspicious. It would be illogical to not be extremely suspicious. Meanwhile, manned flight repeatedly results in the least prosperous science and at tens of times more cost. After $tens of billion on the International Space Station, ISS still does no science.

Why was the Columbia destroyed? It was carrying the only manned space experiments that we do - Space Lab. Did you know that? Then why do you think a manned moon base is good? Again, we have seen what happens when emotion and political rhetoric is reason for doing something. Do you approve of a moon base only because it feels 'cool'? Or are you doing what a patriotic American does – first learn facts?

When Ballard was doing deep ocean research, he learned something stunning. Rather than look out of portholes, his scientists were running to their instruments and cameras. That is when Ballard got the message. Robotics is the future of deep ocean accomplishment - not manned probes. Have you yet learned the future - or are you so in the 'Columbus discovered America' mode?

Use principles even from Military Science 101. What is the strategic objective? Advancement of science advances mankind. Throwing big bucks at something – ie International Space Station, Space Shuttle, etc – only permtted others to become the advancers of mankind. Need we again cite how America lost space leadership due to Shuttle?

The history of America is doing things for logical reasons. What does a moonbase do other than advance the legacy of George Jr? That question should scare you.

Last edited by tw; 12-06-2006 at 07:12 PM.
tw is offline   Reply With Quote