Time for the U.S. to Colonize the Moon and Mars.

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by AboveAlpha, Nov 16, 2013.

  1. Blasphemer

    Blasphemer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2011
    Messages:
    2,404
    Likes Received:
    53
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I am convinced that space exploration is one of the best uses of public money and every dollar spent on it will directly and indirectly return, most likely with a fat profit. Thats even more true now when private companies are going to cut costs and increase efficiency of space exploration considerably, so partnering with them would make the bang for the public buck even better.

    I think Moon is an ideal target. For the same money you can have either a limited flag and footprints mission on Mars, or a real colony on the Moon, and have it much sooner. It is high time to return to the Moon and this time, to stay. Mars should be considered when there is enough money, which probably will not happen in this economic situation any time soon.
     
  2. snakestretcher

    snakestretcher Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2010
    Messages:
    43,996
    Likes Received:
    1,706
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Where's the money coming from? NASA's funding has been cut to a trickle, America is in debt to the tune of nearly $20 trillion, and you're suggesting this? Has reality deserted you entirely-or perhaps you're hoping that you and your "TEAM" will get sent to Mars?
     
  3. snakestretcher

    snakestretcher Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2010
    Messages:
    43,996
    Likes Received:
    1,706
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Nobody is going to invest in a multi-decade programme with no guarantee of a return, and with serious potential for disaster. The risks are far too great.
     
  4. snakestretcher

    snakestretcher Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2010
    Messages:
    43,996
    Likes Received:
    1,706
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This is all guesswork so far. Are you willing to gamble on a guess? Mars' atmosphere is toxic to any life. Any idea of 'terra forming' remains in the realm of Star Trek. Have you any comprehension of the immensity of the task involved in attempting this on a planet the size of Earth?
    Furthermore any idea of Mars colonization must rely on the guarantee that successive governments over a period of perhaps many decades, is going to continue to fund such an endeavour. Right now, in our present period of global recession, we are barely able to fund ourselves let alone adventures in space. Are you willing to guarantee future funding to the tune of tens of billions?

    Then there is the very real potential for fatal accidents. Remember we're not talking here of a relatively inexpensive hop of a couple of days to the Moon which has also resulted in fatalities, but a voyage of at least a year's duration. A systems failure could very quickly lead to the collapse of the programme and the deaths of the pioneers. Back to square one...
     
  5. Shiva_TD

    Shiva_TD Progressive Libertarian Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2008
    Messages:
    45,715
    Likes Received:
    885
    Trophy Points:
    113
    While I understand the emotional appeal and inspirational aspects of space exploration much of what people believe the "benefits" are is false.

    For example safety glass was actually "accidently" invented in 1903 by Edouard Benedictus, a French scientist, working in his laboratory was developed for the emerging auto industry and had nothing to do with space exploration. The fact that safety glass was not mandated under the law for use in automobiles until decades later is a rather moot point.

    We don't use crystals grown in micro-gravity in our telecommunication devices. There was scientific knowledge gained in space related to crystalline growth in micro-gravity but there are not manufacturing plants in space producing these crystals for commercial use. Perhaps the greatest development of crystalline growth relates to "foam metals" that can be produced in space but not on Earth and someday we'll use them as they are as strong or stronger than solid metal structures at a fraction of the weight. When that manufacturing in space becomes commercially viable then private industry will do it without any need for taxpayer funding.

    Most "inventions" that people believe were developed for or by space exploration existed before space exploration. There has been very little actual innovation driven by space exploration.

    As noted we already have the technology to go to the moon or to Mars so no technical innovation is necessary related to it. The problem is that we can't do it cost effectively. For example the future designs for colonizing Mars require nuclear fusion which we don't currently have but we're working on it. Adding "space exploration" as another potential use of nuclear fusion, when providing unlimited non-polluting low cost electrical energy to all of mankind is already the driver behind the development, really has no meaning.

    What government funded space exploration really reflects is corporate welfare as the government funds private enterprise research and development programs that should be funded by private enterprise. It literally dumps billions of dollars into the already overfull pockets of the wealthy owners of the private corporations that engage in the research and development. We can even look at communication satellites that we unquestionably benefit from but originally this were subsidized when the private corporations used government launch systems and the infrastructure but were only charged a fraction of the total costs associated with the placing of the satellite into orbit. The stockholders of companies like AT&T and Sprint loved the corporate dividends and increase in their stock values due to the government subsidized satellite launches. Why would we want to make them richer when they could have afforded to pay 100% of the costs?

    Private, not publically funded, space exploration is what needs to be advocated because it is cost effective and provides the same benefits to society.
     
  6. Blasphemer

    Blasphemer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2011
    Messages:
    2,404
    Likes Received:
    53
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Then there will be no space exploration. Space exploration does not make any economic sense to private only companies, with the exception of commercial satellite market. Even hyped new space companies like SpaceX, Bigelow etc. are counting on public as their customer.
     
  7. johnmayo

    johnmayo New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2013
    Messages:
    13,847
    Likes Received:
    44
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I know, lets take what little money we have and send it to the moon!
     
  8. Wizard From Oz

    Wizard From Oz Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2008
    Messages:
    9,676
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    0
    But it is extremely early days for the privateers. For example SpaceX biggest account is delivering groceries to the ISS - Both are shooting for some sort of low orbit thrill ride that could helping expand their working capital.
     
  9. Wizard From Oz

    Wizard From Oz Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2008
    Messages:
    9,676
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Unfortunately thats the reality. High value high prestige missions are really a thing of the past. The direction NASA is taking with remote sensing robots is the perfect combination of shoe string budget and producing oodles of great science.
     
  10. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    459
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    I have read that the moon, Europa may be a better choice for exploration:

    - - - Updated - - -

    Ok. We can solve simple poverty, end the drug war and then go explore our solar system with the savings.
     
  11. johnmayo

    johnmayo New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2013
    Messages:
    13,847
    Likes Received:
    44
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Cut the budgets and magically the waste disappears. Send satellites. Not people. Satellites work all the time and dont have to eat. 3d printing looks very promising for cheap space transport of tools and parts. Maybe a few people and some manufacturing but government doesn't need to be leading the way on this except for defense purposes. Colonizing the moon or any other planet/moon with gravity makes very little sense though. We just don't have the resources at the moment we have a welfare state to run. Besides We just have to get to zero gravity or in orbit for most of the useful science they are producing.
     
  12. Wizard From Oz

    Wizard From Oz Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2008
    Messages:
    9,676
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well the long term commercialization of space had always been public policy of the US as far back as the mid sixties

    http://www.panamair.org/History/sst.htm

    And cutting the budget was not the big fix for NASA, it was a more subtle change in direction. Till the 90's NASA worked with private contractors to build and develop mission specific technologies. During the 90's NASA shifted to the concept of "off the shelf" technologies. Not because of cost, but someone had already developed the idea and ironed out the bugs. Tough to do 150 million miles from Earth in mid mission.

    At this stage we are still in the recon phase of space exploration. Zooming around checking stuff out. The latest Mars mission, due for launch any day is going up specifically to look for water. Even if they find it, that knowledge wont be exploited for at least 20 to 50 years. But the planners in that time will know what doesn't need to be hauled up from Earth.

    The Moon could be interesting. Lots of theories about exploiting H3 as a fuel source. If that works out, the Moon will have a McDonalds in 50 years lol
     
  13. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    459
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Which party is willing to solve simple poverty and end the drug war so we can go explore our solar system?
     
  14. johnmayo

    johnmayo New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2013
    Messages:
    13,847
    Likes Received:
    44
    Trophy Points:
    0
    What a waste to zoom around mars for water in my opinion. I am sorry, I don't see the point when they could be spending it on useful communications and satellite networks where people live. This is why it should be privately funded. The curious can help fund trips to wherever, look for signs of life etc... The rest can get some satellite work done, maybe some weaponization and manufacturing processes.
     
  15. nom de plume

    nom de plume New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2013
    Messages:
    2,321
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    0
    In order to escape from this planet of the apes, conservatives will be forced to colonize the moon.
     
  16. Wizard From Oz

    Wizard From Oz Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2008
    Messages:
    9,676
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    0
    But the thing is these missions are surprisingly cheap. The Mars Curiosity Rover was all up 2.6 billion spread over 5 years. Ends up with a 1 ton fully mobile probe on Mars, and enough science to last 15 years. This latest mission is 670 million over three years. So we really are not talking big money here by any extent
     
  17. johnmayo

    johnmayo New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2013
    Messages:
    13,847
    Likes Received:
    44
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Robots I am fine with. I thought we were talking about human colonization. Humans have more needs them robots.
     
  18. Wizard From Oz

    Wizard From Oz Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2008
    Messages:
    9,676
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Oh okay my bad :( And yes an real attempts at long range maned missions is straight dumb. Just the technological lead time alone makes that sort of thing pie in the sky
     
  19. johnmayo

    johnmayo New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2013
    Messages:
    13,847
    Likes Received:
    44
    Trophy Points:
    0
    They are fun to think about though and I think that is the draw. You don't become a rocket scientist because you want to manage the budget and make incremental but meaningful gains in science. You want to make a breakthrough with another species or worm hole phenomena and I think that is where a lot of these scientists would spend the money if given the chance and not reigned in by more practical accountant types.
     
  20. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    459
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    War on a for-profit basis is socialism bailing out capitalism, with those morals; thank goodness our Founding Fathers only enumerated sufficient socialism to pay the debts, and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States.
     
  21. danielpalos

    danielpalos Banned

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2009
    Messages:
    43,110
    Likes Received:
    459
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Gender:
    Male
    Only the right likes to complain about a Police State USA for all while engaging in new wars on abstractions such crime, drugs, and terror.
     
  22. PTPLauthor

    PTPLauthor Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2013
    Messages:
    2,021
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    In the long run, yes, but not until our spacefaring technology has advanced to be well beyond what we currently have. The Moon and Mars are often misaligned for efficient launch, plus, there are few things in common with Mars and the Moon, rendering its value as a training base not worth the added expense. I used to think exactly along the lines you are suggesting, then I read the book by Zubrin.
     
  23. Wizard From Oz

    Wizard From Oz Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2008
    Messages:
    9,676
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well you can see that in WW2 and the Apollo program, when the check has more noughts than you can count, science can move extremely fast. And yes humans love to dream, it is what we are really good at. I always remember when Curiosity landed, one of the controllers quipped on a live mic "Not bad for a bunch of monkeys wanted to know what was over the next hill"
     
  24. johnmayo

    johnmayo New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2013
    Messages:
    13,847
    Likes Received:
    44
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Only strong economies can fund future ventures into space. There has to be some balance.
     
  25. Wizard From Oz

    Wizard From Oz Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2008
    Messages:
    9,676
    Likes Received:
    62
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well you have to create opportunities for venture capital to emerge. The colonization of space will follow an observable pattern from the past here on Earth.
     

Share This Page