NASA warns two asteroids hurtling closer to Earth than the MOON in 20,000mph

What non-provable NASA double speak ?

Like I say, whenever it comes down to the wording of the article it's the tabloid that seems to be at fault. Using your most recently provided example, which bit(s) are the non-provable NASA double-speak ?

- That the moon can be seen to transit the sun ?

What peevishness ?

What you refer to as my beliefs are at least founded on years of academic study and personal observation.

Yours seem to be based on a criticism of the purple prose in tabloid coverage of science articles.

In any case, you'll be back. As I've said before, the flounce is the most difficult thread dismount to do properly.

 

What are your scientific credentials? I'll have to get back to you tomorrow because the sun's on my balcony now and I aim to make the most of it.

 

I have a degree in Physics and Astrophysics and was, for many years, a keen amateur astronomer.

Like I say, the flounce is the hardest of thread dismounts to stick....

 

In that case you ought to be able to answer a quite simple question - will it ever be possible for mankind to survive on Mars, and if not, why are you and your ilk obsessing about it? And yes, you've mentioned your 'flounce' theory a few times. I get it!

 

Why is that such an important question for you ?

What do you mean by mankind ?
- every single person ?
- large scale habitation ?
- small scale permanent or semi permanent base ?
- small research station ?

At least some of the investigations currently being made are trying to determine whether the necessary components for human life are present and accessible on Mars so that decisions regarding human habitation and/or using Mars as a source of resources for other manned and unmanned space exploration can be made.

I don't really understand what you mean by obsessing, a comparatively small proportion of overall research goes into Mars, but even if there is no permanent human presence on Mars there are a number of excellent reasons for conducting research including:

• Mars is the most Earth-like planet in the solar system. We may be able to learn things about Earth's past or likely future
• Has life formed on Mars, is it still there

And yet here you are, repeatedly promising to abandon the thread but still coming back.

 

have space force build a space wall.. and the aliens will pay for it

 

Well yes, any or all of those. And it's important (well, not so much 'important' to me as puzzling in that the venture is so utterly pointless because it's a desolate infertile planet without water, and as if that isn't bad enough, with a non-sustaining atmosphere for homo sapiens). So here's a thought: why not use that 'comparatively small (a relative term?) proportion of research funding' to find one which might serve some useful purpose if our successors should need a bolt-hole at some time in the future. The point is - when the time to escape becomes urgent, there will be nothing for them when, even if they can reach Mars, they'll have no means of survival upon arrival: I'm talking about the basics of life? Try to look at it like this: firstly, transference to Mars of all the raw materials including vast amounts of steel, together with the requisite mechanical plant - piecemeal, remember, and some earth-movers are as big as houses?? - in order to begin building infrastructures to accommodate the escapees, won't it, which then raises the question of how long would it take to get enough raw materials and plant to Mars which will obviously be needed to build towns and cities, and roads, sewage systems, hospitals, power stations, continuing fresh water replenishment, and . . . well, need I go on? The whole thing is too ridiculous to even contemplate.

I'm afraid that, as is often the case, you boffins are so preoccupied on the theorizing that you totally overlook the practicalities. You seem to be thinking that Mars is ready and waiting, when in fact it would take centuries to even begin to replicate what we already have here. And I could go on - but to be honest I really can't be bothered to; I'm just surprised that someone with your qualifications would need someone like me with none, to explain these perfectly obvious downsides. Not wishing to be rude, but you remind me of the archetypal 'absent-minded professor' who can't see beyond his theoretical equations.

• 
  
• I have nothing to add to the above.

That's because even though I've said we're done, you still keep carrying on the discussion, and I always answer questions put to me . . . so how about this? You stop asking any further questions, because despite all I've written above, there's never in a million years going to be a meeting of minds, and I'll flounce, because I've put all the time I'm prepared to spend on this thread. All I ask is that you re-read all those points I've made above and don't waste any more of your fellow-citizens' taxes on chasing this preposterous chimera?? Have a good day.

 

If you don't research Mars, how do you know what needs to be transported and what is already in place ?

The idea of a requirement for some sort of bolt-hole for the whole of humanity does seem far-fetched to me but if that's what you're into then there are two alternatives:

• Humans construct something to live on or in (a ship or habitat)
• Humans go and live on something that already exists

If it's the latter then Mars is really the only possible alternative in our solar system as every other sizeable object is even more inhospitable.

If it's the former then we'll need a source of raw materials including water and oxygen. Mars appears to be a source.

Of course then there's the wider issue of what could cause humanity to need a bolt hole, whether we'd have enough warning to put contingency plans in place and whether there'd be viable government(s) to put any plan in place but it's all in the realm of science fiction.

Only if your sole focus is in Mars providing a bolt hole for humanity.

Even if that is your focus then at least some of the investigations that are already underway are the sorts of things you'd need to do - work out what's there to be able to exploit it.

It's clear that you view scientific research as a waste of money. I think in part because you assume that anything that does not have an immediate practical application will never have one. I also think that you have no clear idea about how this research is carried out or any real understanding of many (all ?) of the subject matter areas.

Personally I think that scientific research is a good thing. Even if it does not result in practical applications in the short to medium term, the pursuit of knowledge is itself a good thing in my opinion. Then again, practical applications emerge, sometimes unexpectedly.

 

I won't be reading any more of your posts because there's nothing to be gained; we're too entrenched in our respective opinions for them to be changed.

 

Of course you are entitled to do that. I think it's a real shame that you resolutely refuse to educate yourself on a subject that clearly exercises you.

 

I'm willing to be educated by someone whom I perceive to be a wise man, but not by a stupid one nor one with an agenda. I'll end by saying this . . . from someone's body language, or by the way they use various speech subterfuges, I can tell when someone is attempting to fool me. I also know the difference between real science and quack science.

 

In this particular case not all opinions are equal.

 

I really don't think you do. I think you think you do, but you're not the best judge.

 

My inherent astuteness has been proven many many times in my life, I assure you.

 

Hardly surprising, you appear to live in a feedback loop absolutely impervious to outside influence or education.

 

It's a pity you were moved to end this hitherto polite discussion with insult wrapped in sarcasm - in fact it says something about you and what you've been posting. Take warning - any further posts from you and I'll put you on my ignore list.

 

An insult wrapped in sarcasm ?

I disagree, I think it's a fair assessment of the way that you look at science. You disregard and ignore any information that runs counter to your preconceived ideas, actively seek out articles that support your view and chose to interpret information in a way to support your views.

It's a perfect feedback loop - or echo-chamber if you prefer.

Ah, the demi-flounce - a much easier dismount

 

The Mars thing is a load of crap end of! Why have you not addressed the problems I highlighted to get it ready for human habitation? Not once did you!

 

The fact that they were just detected this week 3 days before they came

 

That's your opinion and you're welcome to it.

Other, better informed, people think there is interesting science being done and to be done on Mars.

I have not addressed those problems because there's no indication of a need to get Mars ready for human habitation.

That said the investigations into Mars' geology is a necessary step if we were to.

 

Then comment upon what I said about readying it for mass inhabitation then - say something about it.

 

As far as I know, there are no plans for readying Mars for mass inhabitation. Manned missions aren't even on the cards.

 

I've known for the last 2 decades that Mars is uninhabitable, and always will be, so why are you (the astro fraternity) still exploring it ffs? That's my main point, apart from the ridiculous brainwashing non-news NASA churns out with monotonous regularity, and which the gutter press (I'll admit) then sensationalises for their infantile and gullible readership. I'm not so small-minded as to object to worthwhile exploration and facts-gathering projects in any field of science, but this has morphed into condescending chewing-gum for the brains of anyone gullible enough to believe it. Let's get real - Mars was selected for its 'mystique', 'War of the Worlds' and all that, and so the space agencies know there's lots of funding mileage in it.

 

I'm not sure anyone is suggesting that Mars is inhabitable - it only seems to be you pushing the idea that the only reason for exploring Mars is as a future bolt-hole for humanity. You also seem to be under the misapprehension that there's a constant stream of probes on their way to Mars. If the number runs to double figures in the last couple of decades, I'd be surprised.

Mars is a popular research candidate not for the reasons you suggest but because it's the most Earth-like planet, one of the closest and one where many of the components for life have or are in place.

 

Mars ain't the best place

Trump will sell you a space condo