I know some of you care about this kind of thing ... but I came across this earlier and was completely blown away.
This is one of the most amazing photos I've ever laid eyes on. (http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2008/05/26/best-image-ever/)
That's the Phoenix lander descending to Mars. That's a photo of something from earth descending on another planet. Simply incredible.
Does anybody else find this as amazing as I do? Thought it might be an interesting topic to discuss.
Or not.
Has this (Edit: Enthusiasm) something to see with the fact that you were drunk chatting via messenger at 01:30 PM? ;)
On the other hand, I think there is a landing video somewhere... Browsing for it.
Yes, they are indeed incredible, and the detail is amazing. Reminds me of the photos from the Bennett/China mission of 1997 if anyone remembers that:
Lander descending on planet surface (http://www.2dadventure.com/ags/marslander.jpg)
Zoomed view (http://www.2dadventure.com/ags/marslander_zoom.jpg)
Spoiler
Ok, I'll stop being a dick now.
It's amazing that the tiny little lander has traveled all that way from us, to another planet. So yes, I would say I'm as amazed about it as you are. Going off on a tangent, I overheard a man at a cafe recently saying 'Phoenix is a conspiracy like the moon landings'. Right then and there I felt the overwhelming urge to punch his face in. >:( How anyone can believe that is beyond me.
That picture reminds me of last time I tried to take a photo of fireworks.
After all that money, time and effort spent sending the thing to Mars, and all we get is a black background with a couple of white dots. I demand a refund.
I tire of people's indifference to space missions.
http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/missions/log/
"As of the end of 2006, of 37 launches from Earth in an attempt to reach the planet, only 18 succeeded, a success rate of 49%. Eleven of the missions included attempts to land on the surface, but only six transmitted data after landing.
The U.S. NASA Mars exploration program has had a somewhat better record of success in Mars exploration, achieving success in 12 out of 17 missions launched (a 71% success rate), and succeeding in five out of six (a 83% success rate) of the launches of Mars landers."
We got this thing to travel through space, decelerate in the Martian atmosphere so that it could land. What's there to be indifferent about? This is the next logical step for humans to take. I certainly prefer this over building bigger bombs.
In memory of:
http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/missions/past/polarlander.html
The future of humanity was in space, Simpy why a terms of other type of "space". Earth is limited, the resources were going. The population is incrementing.
Maybe will far in the future; But this world has becoming little for humanity ;)
(http://www.dreammovies.net/synopsis2/Total%20recall.jpg)
Get your ass to Mars.
:)
Time and space are relative to the viewers position.
(http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/photo/2008-05/39338185.jpg)
(http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/photo/2008-05/39295270.jpg)
(http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/photo/2008-05/39264385.jpg)
Some of the comments on that blog are pretty messed up:
"Oh, my, god! I was just going to post this pic but then i though i bet bad astronomy blog post it first and omg omg you did! You're so big, fast, bad and astrnomical bad astronomy blog, come ride my milky way."
I take it im missing something here, it's a picture of a plastic space box floating onto a big earthy space planet taken by another big plastic space thing? Right? Or is my brightness too low and im missing some giant welcome sign?
On another note, i pulled a pretty cool face in the mirror the other day. I kind of wish that i had a plastic space thingy in the mirror so i could have taken a picture of my face. I think that maybe if i had i could be the one with lots of comments saying how awesome i am and then maybe someone would give me a high power green laser pointer so that i could put it on the bottom of my shed, because that is the most logical place to install a high power green laser pointer.
I think I've actually been to the place in the first picture. Isn't it near Flagstaff, Arizona (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteor_Crater)?
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cf/Meteor.jpg/250px-Meteor.jpg)
I see what you're saying, guys. It's a huge accomplishment to succesfully send something to a different planet. I just find the pictures totally unremarkable. Does NASA have some kind of rule against color cameras in space? I realize that special hi-res equipment like that used for the original landing photos probably uses grayscale for technological reasons, but I mean, those two last pictures evenwolf posted - they actually have a camera on Mars, and we can't even get to see a trace of red?
I have to be with garagegothic here... I can't really see much remarkable about any of these pics at all, no matter how awesome it is that we have our robots on another planet..!
Yeah, I'm awesomely unimpressed. Looks like a sandbox and a fly stuck in some tar.
The cool part is that they were able to take a photo of Phoenix as it was landing, from one of the other space probes we have in orbit around the planet. On that picture, you can clearly see the lander descending with the parachute unfolded.
It's cool because they were able to aim the camera at the lander as it was hurtling through the atmosphere. You almost never see photos of things happening in space (at least not human-scale things outside of our immediate neighborhood). It's all stuff like the second two pictures evenwolf posted, after all the action is over. Here you can see the most dramatic part of the mission, the moment of highest risk, as it is actually happening!
Color photos are problematic for a number of reasons, including that they often use infra-red cameras because of the lack of light (Mars being further away from the sun and all). Also, previous color photos of Mars (http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/imagegallery/image_feature_107.html) have shown that it's essentially a monochrome planet. Without life, almost everything is the same dull reddish-brown color. Just tint the photo, and you'd get a good idea of what it would look like in color.
One of the coolest astronomy related images I've seen is this:
LINK (http://s3.amazonaws.com/ciclops_ir_2006/2230_6162_1.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=14V1KFXK26R9EA1V0Q02&Expires=1212186111&Signature=gJ4045VCWz1Uq1EhvDAoWOofcYI%3D)
That's Saturn as seen by the Cassini space probe. Cassini was about 1.3 million miles from Saturn when this picture was taken. 1.3 MILLION MILES.
And it was about about BILLION miles from earth. Where is earth in that picture? On the left hand side of Saturn, above the ring about a half an inch away is a small white pixel. That's Earth. That's amazing.
Yeah ... I am not overly thrilled with the quality of the image. I had hoped that, in the year 2008, we'd have better image quality since they're spending billions of dollars on this and my 200 dollar digital camera can take better images than this. However, for me, it's not the quality of the image it's the substance of the image that amazes me. I would totally agree with the scientist(s) that the "science" (experiments) of these missions are FAR more important than the images ... however, to keep the public interested (and thus maintain their funding for the science) I would argue top-notch images are required. Meh ... I'm happy with anything really. I'm just glad we're doing it!
Something about the thought of where/what that actually is just blows my mind.
It's rather interesting to see the different levels of interest (to down-right not caring) something like this engenders.
Farl - hah! Nah I was sober and operating during normal business hours when I saw this picture! And it was drunk, chatting on msn, at 1:30 AM!!! ;)
MrC ... thank you for that link! Another one added to me "kick ass photos" collection!
Quote from: Darth Mandarb on Fri 30/05/2008 16:06:40
Farl - hah! Nah I was sober and operating during normal business hours when I saw this picture! And it was drunk, chatting on msn, at 1:30 AM!!! ;)
Bah! Silly american meridian system... ;D
Quote from: evenwolf on Thu 29/05/2008 21:14:35
I tire of people's indifference to space missions.
...
What's there to be indifferent about? This is the next logical step for humans to take. I certainly prefer this over building bigger bombs.
If bomb-making and space exploration were the only two ways to use our resources, I'd agree with you.
I also agree that space exploration is the next logical step based on what humanity's M.O. has been so far. We are consumers and we have strip-mined the earth...therefore we need to find more resources elsewhere. And to me that's a sad motivation for going.
I think this is cool but I don't think it's the answer to our earth bound problems.
I think it's amazing how much hungry african kids could be fed with the money spent to aquire that photo.
Not bad! But if they can detect and photograph "Earth II" in the nearest other galaxy to us then it feels pretty unimpressive that they can only catch a tiny lander falling on to Mars.
None the less, I'm excited to see what they find out about water under the surface. And what aliens they ressurect etc.. ;)
And if they find a new earth, first thing they'll do is build a mine and a walmart next to it.
Currently a thread about one guy trying to quit smoking is holding more interest than a mission to Mars. People are downright RESENTFUL we landed on Mars to examine its surface.
From what you hear on this forum, you'd think that all the Earth related questions could be answered on Earth. This is not so. The Moon for example, because it is a dead body from the time the Earth was created... has answered many unanswered Earth questions. There was 26,000 pages of data from one Moon mission alone. You just can't quantify the expenses to shoot a rocket into space. Not when we're dealing with the origins of the Solar System.
(http://science.nasa.gov/spaceweather/eclipses/27oct04c/Suro1.jpg)
Not Mars.... the Moon! Credits: Jose Suro
The Moon has informed us about the birth of our own planet for instance. It's taught us about the density of Earth.... that at some point a piece of the Earth's Mantle probably was hit by another planetary body and exploded off the Earth. It *possibly* became much like Saturn's ring until it condensed into one body now known as the Moon. The Moon has taught us that the Earth is riddled with craters that have since been recycled and buried by rock. It's told us that our own atmosphere has shielded us from the little impacts that are evident on the Moon. A moon %2 the size of Earth wouldn't have been hit by meteors MORE than the Earth afterall. But because ours is a living planet, our geologic records are not as well preserved as the Moon or Mars. Mars has a recorded geological history that is not preserved here on Earth. The planets were all created at the same time. Some because of their size and proximity to the blast lost certain gases. The similarities between Mars and Earth should be quite exhilarating. If humans have ANY intentions to ever colonize either the Moon or Mars, these missions play front and center to that research. We must know what ingredients are there.... one Mars rover will not cover all that information. We need many more before ever trying a manned mission.
The fact that Mars *might* have sustained life at any point in the last 4.5 billion years is of great interest to us. To indicate not only what leads to life on a planet, but also what lead to life on our planet.
Because the Earth is *alive* and our geology recycles itself, we don't see but a fraction of the meteorite craters on Earth. Whereas a dead planet like the Moon or even Mars has entombed its own planetary history in rock that has not recycled. (as much... the Moon does have some movement.. old craters are covered by new ones) In some ways, these planets hold even more information on the creation of the Solar System than our own planet. They might teach us of events in our own Solar System, such as gravitational changes, early planetary collisions, ANYTHING really would add to our views on the universe.
So anyone's comments that reflect the sentiment "Earth can answer its own questions on Earth" I find quite misinformed. Mars and the Earth are twins in the sense that they were born on the same day, figuratively. You assume that Mars, unless it has guys that look like us, is useless.
This sentiment is not very progressive. If you resent the fact that humans were responsible for Walmart... and find this a good reason not to explore space. Well what can I say. What a self destructive sentiment to live by.
Quote from: InCreator on Fri 30/05/2008 17:30:45
I think it's amazing how much hungry african kids could be fed with the money spent to aquire that photo.
You never thought that advancing is science is also a path to finish with the famine in the world?
I mean, probably going to Mars and shooting a photo isn't, but that spirit is...
Quote from: InCreator on Fri 30/05/2008 17:30:45
I think it's amazing how much hungry african kids could be fed with the money spent to aquire that photo.
Why does this have to come up, everytime a new scientific advance is made? And it's always feeding african kids. Never feeding indian kids, or finding a cure against alzheimers or protecting rainforests. Yes, there are problems in the world. But there are organisations that take care of those problems. NASA is not a charity organisation. Stop with those hippy kindergarten arguments.
Millions upon millions of dollars come from the US to go towards the fight against hunger! It's not an issue of money being spent, but rather the resources those nations (the ones receiving the money) put forth. I've heard countless stories of food rotting on the docks because the governments of those nations are just as greedy as the rest of the world's governments and the food rots and their people continue to starve.
Just because there ARE starving kids in Africa (or anywhere) doesn't mean the JPL rocket scientist, who's life-long dream is of space exploration, should be forced to use his talents to fight hunger. It's a mis-use of resources in my opinion.
I also think/agree with Nacho ... space exploration holds the key(s) to solving many of the earth's problems.
I personally think it's a HUGE tragedy that we went to the moon almost 40 years ago and have done jack-shit since. Nothing but low earth orbits (with human passengers).
If NASA came to me tomorrow and offered me a seat on a mission to Mars I would leap at the opportunity. No matter the risks.
We're stagnating on Earth ... it's time to broaden our horizons.
Isn't Barack Obama, providing he's elected President, planning to divert funding from NASA to pay for his proposed education plans?
This could be the last we see of Mars for a while.
Why he doesn't plan to divert vast sums of funding from the US military (http://www.boingboing.net/2008/05/27/we-could-have-coloni.html) remains a mystery...
Diverting funds from the US military? One sound bite that says "I'll take all the Armies money and give it to fund education" would kill him in November. This is a candidate who has been pounded again and again for lack of experience. And for being too liberal, not a good war seasoned vet like McCain. No such thing will be proposed and its no mystery. Its called *political suicide*.
Limping: http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=26647
None of the 3 candidates are highlighting Space Policies. This one issue is pretty much the only thing I disagree with Obama about. He has said that going to the moon "is no longer inspirational." It inspires me. I don't know about you. But there is a good point that space disasters put everyone off. So sending rovers is probably a good move for now.
The lackluster policies for space travel are due to present day economic woes, I feel. AGSers' negative comments show me just how uninspired people are by space travel. When I was a kid I would have DIED to attend Space Camp. It's amazing that a planet full of Star Wars nerds can say "been there, done that" when they haven't. They haven't even scratched the surface.
This fall I saw how uninspired people are about space travel. I was in Orlando the week of a launch and there was no anticipation from people. I missed it because I didn't even know about it and only saw the exhaust trail after hearing a few onlookers excited "woo!"s. There was maybe 2 minutes of local news coverage on it later that day.
I do have an apetite for science and don't lament every dollar that is spent on a space program. I recognize the positive technological off-shoots.
There is an assumption used often in science fiction that goes something like: "Any civilization advanced enough for interstellar travel must also be peaceful."
I guess I look more forward to that than I do to the actual travel.
Because of science fiction, humans are sensitive to *destroying* other planets and civilizations. That it is the overwhelming theme of sci fi. That of two alien races, one will be more threatening.
But if you ponder the "fact" that we've soiled the earth... that much is true only of certain species. An asteroid will one day wipe us out completely and all human effects on the Earth will become a blink in the left eye of the planet. Another ice age perhaps and all our toxins and greenhouse gases will be no more.
So in this sense, having a sustainable colony *anywhere* but the earth doubles humans chances of survival. And humans could hardly do much damage to a dead planet like Mars. ... not that there's sustainable life there. But it would certainly give us practice or a space port in which to further explore the Solar System.
Quote from: InCreator on Fri 30/05/2008 17:30:45
I think it's amazing how much hungry african kids could be fed with the money spent to aquire that photo.
I think its amazing the amount of hungry children in your own city could have been fed with the cost of your computer.
About a year ago, a friend asked me if I thought we could colonize Mars and my reply was: "Earth has everything going for it and we can't even sustain it."
I don't worry about us spoiling other planets. I'm fine with colonizing other worlds once we've proven we can manage our own.
Lately I've been seeing the world's problems as being social and economic but I'd like to return to a mindset that said: "Scientific discovery will provide solutions."
Maybe you're right and the key to learning how to manage earth is by studying other worlds.
Quote from: Quintaros on Fri 30/05/2008 20:49:19
Maybe you're right and the key to learning how to manage earth is by studying other worlds.
Well Mars especially is an excellent example of what can happen to a planet, scientists conjecture that Mars was once very much like Earth, We can learn from Mars, find out how it got that way, and work to prevent it on our own.
Yes, I love the idea of colonising other worlds, as soon as we figure out as much as we possibly can about our, Space Travel still excites the same way it did when I was a child, but if I die before we colonise Mars, knowing that we have spent that time trying to improve our own world I won't mind a bit.
QuoteI think its amazing the amount of hungry children in your own city could have been fed with the cost of your computer.
I think you're being a dick.
Those costly space programs come nowhere near donation a single individual. As a taxpayer, I've fed my kids alright.
If I was an American, I would be quite disappointed of getting a crappy photo for my tax money.
So let's look at the rhetoric.
"I have a budget set aside for feeding my family."
"I have a budget set aside for buying a computer." These are two separate budgets? Correct?
Great, we're making headway. First - imagine that your computer could be bought for half the price but it would not operate if you paid that price. So not a fully functional computer. Likewise, imagine that NASA set aside a budget to land a rover on Mars, but only built the thing to go halfway.
These are two totally different budgets. 1. Starving kids 2. Mission to another planet.
Not a lot of wiggle room. "We can do without milk" DOES NOT = "We can do without rocket fuel."
And there's 9 planets in the Solar System. If you think we should be focusing on a closer planet to Earth then maybe you have a point. We'll spend half the money and travel to that planet. It's a sound opinion.
But unfortunately I don't respect your opinion since your computer and internet service are denying starving children in Ethiopia. That's according to your own logic, so I'll be taking your word for it.
Reducing the space program's funding doesn't mean trying to go to Mars with no rocket fuel. It means splitting the project into phases that are executed over a longer time span.
Sure. I was just making an allegory. NASA's budget and ending world hunger are not the same
Is solving world hunger a matter of shipping Doritos to Africa? No. To solve world hunger with our existing food supplies is IMPOSSIBLE. Even if we sent all the food in the US overseas, the overall effect would not be "Yum, yum, the world is full! Thank you." It would be "More Please!" The whole idea of ending world hunger tomorrow is rather idealistic.
Instead, research should be done to double the yields of Earth's crops. There are researchers doing this. Namely Dr. Norman E. Borlaug, Founder of the World Food Prize who "struggles to integrate the various streams of agricultural research into viable technologies and to convince political leaders to bring these advances to fruition." Dr. Borlaug studies the use of genetically modified crops and he actually receives a lot of harassment because some view genetic crops as immoral. The irony?
You might see a hippy with 2 bumper stickers on his car.
"End World Hunger!"
"Organic Foods Only"
So here's a researcher trying to feed millions of people. There is a feasible means to do it. Using science. Then there's group of people saying "You can't feed them that. That's unnatural." These people are starving. Why not? Besides its food. There's a massive contradiction and its similar to this Mars conundrum.
People want to end world hunger. World hunger = lack of sustainable resources for humans. Traveling to Mars consists primarily of researching "sustainable resources for humans"
But people generalize it as "dumb pictures of a robot on Mars." Utterly naive and backpedaling.
Yes we should spend more money on researchers like Borlaug. But will doubling or tripling Borlaug's budget instantly result in the end of world hunger? No. Neither would using a time machine and giving George Washington Carver a ferrari. This is a ridiculous analogy but the point is this. Research takes a nimble mind and many many mistakes. We're working on world hunger. Should we allot more money to solving the problem? Yes.
Should we cancel all feasibe NASA missions and throw a bag of money at another group of researchers who are working steadily towards their goals? Well no. NASA is necessary for many many good reasons... including sustainability ( again, the same overall goal - different process. )
Let the two groups of researchers do their jobs without trivializing their great work.
http://www.worldfoodprize.org/about/Borlaug.htm
Quote from: evenwolf on Sat 31/05/2008 04:32:28
Let the two groups of researchers do their jobs without trivializing their great work.
I wasn't trying to trivialize their work. Your attempt at allegory seemed to mire your point. You're much more compelling when you play it straight.
Not directed at you Quint. Your comments have been well thought out IMO. You've clearly pondered what's going on rather than generalize it as stupid. That post was directed at the people who like to imagine the Phoenix Rover as an RC race car doing wheelies on Mars.
"Mission Control: Did you fucking see me GRIND the rim of that crater! Next up: Wake boarding on the methane oceans of Titan!"
(http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/0410/titan_cassini_PIA06139.jpg)
P.P.S: I <3 Titan. Possible future Earth?
Quote from: GarageGothic on Fri 30/05/2008 13:05:18
I think I've actually been to the place in the first picture. Isn't it near Flagstaff, Arizona (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meteor_Crater)?
(http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/photo/2008-05/39338185.jpg)(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cf/Meteor.jpg/250px-Meteor.jpg)
I see what you're saying, guys. It's a huge accomplishment to succesfully send something to a different planet. I just find the pictures totally unremarkable. Does NASA have some kind of rule against color cameras in space? I realize that special hi-res equipment like that used for the original landing photos probably uses grayscale for technological reasons, but I mean, those two last pictures evenwolf posted - they actually have a camera on Mars, and we can't even get to see a trace of red?
You can clearly see the lack of erosion on the Martian crater. You picked a great image to compare the Martian one too. Moon and Martian craters teach us about meteorites & Earth. That particular Flagstaff crater must be relatively young since we can still see it. Most other craters have been recycled by erosion and tectonic movement. That's why studying these *unaltered* craters on Mars is so valuable. It can't be done on Earth.
But the lack of color and quality of the picture? You're absolutely right. The idea wasn't to look cool.
NASA guy: "They're black and white pictures meant primarily to tell whether our deployments successfully occurred. "
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/phoenix/blogs/20080525.html
http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9951860-7.html
------------------------------------------------
"The spacecraft's speed relative to Mars increased from 6,300 miles per hour at 8:30 a.m. Pacific Time to 8,500 mph at 12:30 p.m., headed for a speed higher than 12,000 mph before reaching the top of the Martian atmosphere."
Shockley joked in his blog about the spacecraft's energy efficiency. "At a time when gas prices are soaring," he wrote, "Phoenix is getting good fuel economy at about 2 million miles per gallon."
"In entering the thin Martian atmosphere and heading to the surface, Phoenix faced these tribulations: "aeroshell braking" via friction with the atmosphere that would heat it to thousands of degrees, a parachute opening that would give the lander a hard jerk to slow it further, and pulsing retrorockets tasked with making a soft touchdown."
-------------------------------------------------
12,000mph to 0 mph? And you guys scoff at this? You don't realize how much smaller the Martian atmosphere is. Its not parachuting to Earth. Its going ALOT faster and the dangers are much more severe. AND IT WAS COMPLETELY AUTOMATED. The NASA team didn't even know it was a success until 15 minutes later when they got the delayed signal it was a success.
So the picture is beautiful. Just like Darth said. And I'm sorry many of you can't see the true beauty in it.
Quote from: LimpingFish on Fri 30/05/2008 18:40:17
Isn't Barack Obama, providing he's elected President, planning to divert funding from NASA to pay for his proposed education plans?
This could be the last we see of Mars for a while.
It's comments like this that, whether there is any truth to them or not, make me feel grateful that the US is not the only country doing space missions or launches. Sure it is one of only three currently doing human space flights and has a substantially larger budget than the next, but I'm kind of bothered with the unilateral perception.
While in Europe last winter I was confounded during conversations about space exploration where I heard it said that "[the United States] made it to the moon." more than once, and it was a little disturbing to hear it in national terms. Prior to that I've always heard it in the collective i.e.- mankind landed on the moon, maybe only as a side-effect of living in that country am I not used to hearing that particular milestone referred to as a national thing. It is sad really.
Just because that mission originated from and was (largely) paid for by the US, does not make it a wholly US achievement. The science, technology, etc. came from all over and was conducted by people of many different backgrounds. Why the astronauts felt it necessary to plant nothing other than a national flag up there is beyond me. :(
Quote from: Disco on Sat 31/05/2008 06:08:32
Why the astronauts felt it necessary to plant nothing other than a national flag up there is beyond me. :(
That's not true. We also left our garbage.
Flags and dedication plaques from each moon mission
video camera's at the launch sites
sensitometers
the launch legs for the lunar module
Geologic tools
The Laser Reflecting mirrors
Three golfballs
The Rovers
A gold plated extreme ultraviolet telescope
Apollo backpacks
In essence, these were the greatest acts of littering EVER accomplished. Gooooooo Team!
People! Stop talking and arguing about things. It's not productive. There's so much better stuff, you could be doing right now. You say stuff about how should be good works done. But have you actually done something good lately?
Look around you. Tell something nice to your friend/child/sex partner.
Go outside. Give some money to a bum.
Keep walking. When you see someone, who needs help, instead of pretending not to notice that, help him/her.
What are you waiting for? Go!
-----------------------------------------------------
P.L.P.S. mode off.
Had to check your age for that one. Keep the idealism to a minimum please.
One day you'll learn that debate is healthy, like eating your vegetables.
For your information I helped with a fund raiser last night. This guy lets all the neighborhood kids use his gym and teaches them how to box but he forgets to ever ask for money. So he couldn't afford rent... and would probably have to shut the gym down. We raised some good money last night for him. He's an awesome dude.
ICE ON MARS?
(http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/234082main_under-427.jpg)
The Phoenix Lander has already detected something that might be ice, 2 - 6 inches beneath the top layer of soil.
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/phoenix/news/phoenix-20080531.html
This substance, provided it is ice, is a big fucking deal. NASA estimates that if there is ice on Mars, they will gladly scoop up enough to make snowcones for all the children of Africa.
Quote from: evenwolf on Sat 31/05/2008 23:28:58
Had to check your age for that one. Keep the idealism to a minimum please.
Oh, sorry. I guess it works on girls only.
Quote from: evenwolf on Sun 01/06/2008 06:48:26
NASA estimates that if there is ice on Mars, it will gladly scoop up enough to make snowcones for all the children of Africa.
Everyone likes snow cones.
Perhaps it's not ice though. What if the soil on mars has a very low melting point and it turned into a glassy blob? (but I doubt that completely. it is also 5:40am and I for some reason I haven't slept yet, so my mind has entered 'dream state'. g'night)
(http://www.dailygalaxy.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/05/07/r7996_18457.jpg)
It's possible it's not ice. Either way, we've learned something about the Mars polar region. It is commonly thought that Mars is a dead planet. But there are those who think otherwise:
http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2008/05/the-ice-ages-of.html
http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2003/dec/HQ_03415_ice_age.html
(http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/images/2008/05/07/dicksonetal_figure3.jpg)
"After examining stunning high-resolution images taken last year by the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter, researchers have documented for the first time that ice packs at least 1 kilometer (0.6 miles) thick and perhaps 2.5 kilometers (1.6 miles) thick existed along Mars' mid-latitude belt as recently as 100 million years ago. In addition, the team believes other images tell them that glaciers flowed in localized areas in the last 10 to 100 million years - a blink of the eye in Mars's geological timeline. This evidence of recent activity means the Martian climate may change again and could bolster speculation about whether the Red Planet can, or did, support life."
Any evidence of glacier movement within the last millions and millions of years would be stunning! Remember that Mars is estimated to be 4.5 Billion years old. Ice ages on Mars! Perhaps Mars still has much life in it! We shouldn't take anything for granted so..... keep on digging, little Phoenix buddy!
Maybe if the rover finds Jesus people will at least shrug?
My attempt at an analogy:
Getting excited about ice on Mars is like getting excited about receiving an envelope in the mail that reads: "You may have already won!"
This may be another piece of a puzzle supporting that there was once life on Mars but I won't become excited until the puzzle is complete and we have some fossils or something.
And I suspect that there are others even more hard won over than me.
Fossils? Still the "I only care if there's an alien" mindset. Man you guys we're not going to find a big silver UFO up there. And don't expect to find a dinosaur on Mars. What we want are ingredients. Certain elements that might have been blown away by a solar blast billions of years ago.
Realize that science fiction by and large was created to inspire humans to reach out. What its done is made us spoiled brats. "Been there, done that. Show me an alien with 14 tentacles and I'll be impressed." The idea of a humanoid is sort of ridiculous. Think of skeletal structures during evolution. Think of there being skeletons at all. Think of the atmosphere's effect. Think of gravity's effect. Think of the chances of an alien looking remotely like anything we've ever seen. Aliens might as well be invisible clouds of dust. ( You realize we only have fossils dating back to when organisms became hard enough to leave fossils. And that's only when the organism was trapped under a certain geological feature, ie: mudslides, volcano eruption, etc.)
Ice = water.
Water = one of the fundamental elements of human life
Ice = Hydrogen and Oxygen that we could harvest
Not fucking ice skating with E.T. and the wookies.
And I'm not trying to win anybody over at this point. Clearly Science Fiction is worth our time compared to Science Fact. Again you say, "been there done that. I'll wait around until I see a wookie." If George Lucas thought like you guys there never would have been "Star Wars". Let's get creative.
Hundreds of civilizations used to worship the moon. As soon as astronauts were hitting golf balls while up there, we've all been saying, "Yawn, its just a big rock floating up there not doing anything. Yawn yawn yawn. Whens Halo 3 come out?"
Albert Enstein never lived to see this day. The things he would be fascinated by and the amount of guesses he made regarding stuff like this. It all begins with hypothesis. Here you are with ACCESS to all the information and you're farting around with your X Box.
When I was a kid I was fascinated by space travel and Santa Claus. Only it turns out space travel is real.
If we don't explore space and our solar system, we're doing a great dis-service to future generations. Honestly.
So, we might be making small strides now - but I suppose one has to learn to crawl before they run a marathon. The work done now is paving the way for things bigger than our lifespans.
Bt
This is how I look at it. I'm not a scientist. I don't read many books on space, planets, theories and the what-not.
The only way I could see Mars once being able to support life is if the Sun was once hotter than it is now. Which to me makes complete sense, it's a big fire that has been dying down for years (or at least it should be). It would make Earth a very warm and most likely an unlivable planet. Which to me also makes sense in the fact that we have a core that is molten lava. If a big ball of molten glass was to float around the sun, (if the sun was cooling down) one can only imagine the outer layers will harden and cool turning into the 'crust' area of the molten ball. And of course after a while, the center would harden and cool.
It's either that the sun was hotter, or the planets were closer. I remember hearing once that the planets (and moons) are all spreading further and further away from each other and the sun.
Perhaps we are looking at this the wrong way, maybe our next livable planet will be Venus or Mercury (if we ever live that long). I doubt it though.
Quote from: evenwolf on Sat 31/05/2008 03:18:06
And there's 9 planets in the Solar System.
Also evenwolf, I thought they said they discovered there are 11 planets now?
(http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/0608/planets_iau.jpg)
You're right about the number of planets. We have 8 planets and 3 dwarf planets by the new definition. I still think back to grade school when they stamped the number 9 into my head.
Quote from: Ryan Timothy on Sun 01/06/2008 19:06:11
the fact that we have a core that is molten lava.
That's movie science. We do not have a Core of molten magma. You're thinking of volcanic activity in the Earth's Mantle. Because of gravity, there are NO caverns in the Earth's core. NONE. You couldn't get a pinky in there. Imagine the Earth's oceans sitting on top of you.... and then realize that the oceans are only a tiny film on the surface of the planet. The Earth's core is very very very high pressure. Very dense. No holes, no caves, none of that hollywood ballyhoo. Just a huge solid mass of iron and nickel.
Here's an excerpt of a great explanation: (http://www.fi.edu/earth/core.html)
"Beneath the crust is a layer of rock called the mantle. Even deeper is the core which scientists believe is made of solid iron and nickel.
Imagine wearing a concrete bodysuit all of the time. After a while, you'd feel extremely hot because of the tremendous pressure you'd feel on your body. If you think about it, the mantle wears a huge, heavy bodysuit that is about seventy kilometers thick. It's not too hard to believe, then, that there is extreme pressure and heat in the mantle. Most of the mantle, over 99%, stays solid, but the high temperature and the push and pull forces cause some of the mantle to melt. This molten rock is known as magma.
If you were wearing that concrete bodysuit, you'd probably fight to break free from it. You'd probably wiggle your fingers and stretch your toes to try and poke some small holes. The outer layer of the earth has some weak spots and cracks in it. When the magma in the mantle pushes finds those weak spots, it pokes through, forming a volcano."(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ee/Earth-crust-cutaway-english.svg/350px-Earth-crust-cutaway-english.svg.png)
(http://plus.maths.org/issue34/features/tsunami/core.jpg)
The Red in the 2nd image is completely solid. There's simply too much density and force. No magma except in the top most layers of the Mantle.
As far as what you imagine to be the case with the Earth's distance from the Sun, you're really only factoring proximity from the Sun as a source of heat. What about the size of a planet compared to its core? Imagine that Jupiter is wearing twenty coats while Mercury is wearing just a t-shirt. And you can see there are many more factors than distance to the Sun.
I've explained a few times, but I will again. Some planets have NO possibility for life simply because they're missing certain elements. 4.5 billion years ago when the Solar System formed, a solar blast blew matter away from the planets near the Sun. The closest were the smallest planets, and they lost most of their gases. The planets farther away didn't lose as much matter (keeping most of their rare gases). In a way, this was actually fortunate for the closer planets since it seemed to be a better mix of ingredients. The combination of these elements and temperature probably lead to life. And so far it seems that having more gases does not make chances of life more likely. I guess one day we'll see.
You're also not factoring in that the planets haven't always been where & what they are. Some moons were formed by meteors, or possibly *other* planets SMACKING into the side of the bigger planet. The smaller body was either captured into the lager body's orbit, or exploded a chunk of the larger body into space... and that chunk became a moon. So yes the Sun could have been hotter, but Mars could have been a part of Earth that broke off and fell into its own orbit. ( I'm not proposing this. Simply theoretical, right? )
Over the course of 4.5 billion years a lot could happen. I enjoy the theory you put forth, and I think its that kind of creative thinking and curiosity that lead humans to the reaches of space. There are still an infinite number of unanswered questions out there, and the scientific process hasn't been around that long. But for the time it has, its kicked major pagan ass.
Quote from: Darth Mandarb on Thu 29/05/2008 18:51:13
I know some of you care about this kind of thing ... but I came across this earlier and was completely blown away.
This is one of the most amazing photos I've ever laid eyes on. (http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2008/05/26/best-image-ever/)
That's the Phoenix lander descending to Mars. That's a photo of something from earth descending on another planet. Simply incredible.
Does anybody else find this as amazing as I do?
Yes, I agree, it's so fundamentally way cool, it really cannot be put into words.
Quote from: Ryan Timothy on Sun 01/06/2008 19:06:11
The only way I could see Mars once being able to support life is if the Sun was once hotter than it is now.
As far as I know, Mars is unsuitable for life now for the escape of the thin athmosphera it had before, than has more to see with its small gravity than with the influence of the sun.
Another GREAT shot ... this time much higher resolution! (http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/0805/phoenixchute_hirise_cut.jpg)
Just incredible ...
Darth: The non-eroded rim of that crater is so super sexy to me. It leaves me fairly spellbound.
I found some more:
View of the Phoenix Lander from the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter:
(http://jpl.nasa.gov/images//phoenix/20080527/lander-topviewcolor-browse.jpg)
"Snowqueen" possible ice feature:
(http://jpl.nasa.gov/images/phoenix/collection_16/phx20080601b-br.jpg)
These movies were pieced together from B&W images & magnified x 8:
Phoenix's Panorama view of Mars (http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/videos/phoenix/phx20080530/10897.mp4)
Typical Panorama of Mars (http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/videos/phoenix/phx20080529/10761.mp4)
Quote from: evenwolf on Mon 02/06/2008 19:02:23The non-eroded rim of that crater is so super sexy to me. It leaves me fairly spellbound.
Good to know there's others out there as mind-blown by this as I am ... there's just something about the thought of that crater sittin' on Mars for longer than the span of human-kind on Earth ... just sitting there undisturbed ... I don't know. I find that utterly fascinating. I read that the diameter of that crater is over 10 km across! Makes meteor crater in Arizona look like a pimple!
Beyond cool.
I guess I used the wrong wording for 'core'. I realize the core of the earth is incredibly dense beyond anything we can comprehend. I think that horrible movie The Core has desensitized my interpretation of the word 'core'.
Also! This guy at my work was arguing with me that he believes every Element in the known universe is already on our Periodic Table of Elements. I told him he was dead wrong. Anything on our table of elements is anything that our little plastic shovels can collect in this little sand box surrounding the Earth. We haven't even scratched the surface of the Elements on our own planet, let alone the rest of the universe. (this of course isn't a proven theory, it's my theory. I have no idea what kind of elements are left on our planet to discover.).
When was the last addition to the table anyway?
No idea. Chemistry and I are not the best of friends. In fact the sciences in general cause me to become rather dyslexic.
But as far as elements go, maybe your friend argues that there are simply no new ways to combine atoms. As in: All the electron arrangements are taken. If that's his logic I could understand but seeing as how better and better microscopes have revealed deeper and deeper secrets to the universe....
I can't help but agree with you. I personally doubt new elements will be found on Mars or the planets closer to the Sun. Most likely Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and other planets with the "rare gases" would likely have any components that Earth is missing. Very very very light elements, for example. Because of the afore mentioned solar blast that created our solar system. But surely outside the Solar System and the range of our telescopes we would be naive to assume we've seen it all. If not the semantic term for "elements" there is surely something out there that makes up some tangible "thing"....
Flavors of Quarks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quark) and Leptons (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lepton) are good examples. Surely there are "concepts" that have simply missed the Solar System. There will be components, perhaps outside our 5 senses.
As for undiscovered elements I'll let someone more familiar with them take the microphone.
This is cool too
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7447942.stm
but it made me sick
Despite war, poverty and everything the human race is phenomenal!
magintz? Wow!
Hey I didn't dig this thread up.... but you can bet I have more comments!
Yeah I was thinking about this thread today, wondering if there were any updates with that land rover. <-- *cough* Evenwolf, this is where you jump in buddy.
At least from a purely visual perspective, this is one of the coolest things I've seen - in fact it just became my desktop background:
(http://www.universetoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/volcanoupi_800x531-580x384.jpg) (http://galacticcentral.org/imagebucket/volcano.jpg)
(click image for hi-res version)
No, it's not the eye of Sauron. It's a lightning storm caused by a volcano erupting in Chile. Read more about it here (http://www.universetoday.com/2008/05/07/lightning-storm-generated-by-chilean-volcano-images/) and here (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article3883087.ece).
Quote from: Ryan Timothy on Fri 13/06/2008 21:45:05
Yeah I was thinking about this thread today, wondering if there were any updates with that land rover. <-- *cough* Evenwolf, this is where you jump in buddy.
Haha, feel free to visit http://phoenix.lpl.arizona.edu/newsArchive.php for constant updates.
Right now its all about
soil stickiness.June 13, 2008 -- New observations from NASA's Phoenix Mars Lander provide the most magnified view ever seen of Martian soil, showing particles clumping together even at the smallest visible scale.
In the past two days, two instruments on the lander deck -- a microscope and a bake-and-sniff analyzer -- have begun inspecting soil samples delivered by the scoop on Phoenix's Robotic Arm.
"This is the first time since the Viking missions three decades ago that a sample is being studied inside an instrument on Mars," said Phoenix Principal Investigator Peter Smith of the University of Arizona, Tucson.
Stickiness of the soil at the Phoenix site has presented challenges for delivering samples, but also presents scientific opportunities. "Understanding the soil is a major goal of this mission and the soil is a bit different than we expected," Smith said. "There could be real discoveries to come as we analyze this soil with our various instruments. We have just the right instruments for the job."
Images from Phoenix's Optical Microscope show nearly 1,000 separate soil particles, down to sizes smaller than one-tenth the diameter of a human hair. At least four distinct minerals are seen.
"It's been more than 11 years since we had the idea to send a microscope to Mars and I'm absolutely gobsmacked that we're now looking at the soil of Mars at a resolution that has never been seen before," said Tom Pike of Imperial College London. He is a Phoenix co-investigator working on the lander's Microscopy, Electrochemistry and Conductivity Analyzer.
The sample includes some larger, black, glassy particles as well as smaller reddish ones. "We may be looking at a history of the soil," said Pike. "It appears that original particles of volcanic glass have weathered down to smaller particles with higher concentration of iron."
The fine particles in the soil sample closely resemble particles of airborne dust examined earlier by the microscope.
Atmospheric dust at the Phoenix site has remained about the same day-to-day so far, said Phoenix co-investigator and atmospheric scientist Nilton Renno of the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
"We've seen no major dust clouds at the landing site during the mission so far," Renno said. "That's not a surprise because we landed when dust activity is at a minimum. But we expect to see big dust storms at the end of the mission. Some of us will be very excited to see some of those dust storms reach the lander."
Studying dust on Mars helps scientists understand atmospheric dust on Earth, which is important because dust is a significant factor in global climate change.
"We've learned there is well-mixed dust in the Martian atmosphere, much more mixed than on Earth, and that's a surprise," Renno said. Rather than particles settling into dust layers, strong turbulence mixes them uniformly from the surface to a few kilometers above the surface.
Scientists spoke at a news briefing today at the University of Arizona, where new color views of the spacecraft's surroundings were shown.
"We are taking a high-quality, 360-degree look at all of Mars that we can see from our landing site in color and stereo," said Mark Lemmon, Surface Stereo Imager lead from Texas A&M University, College Station.
"These images are important to provide the context of where the lander is on the surface. The panorama also allows us to look beyond our workspace to see how the polygon structures connect with the rest of the area. We can identify interesting things beyond our reach and then use the camera's filters to investigate their properties from afar."
I know I should be impressed by that space picture... but I'm not.
Maybe it's because I'm not American, so the whole NASA space exploration thing isn't ingrained into me as something to be proud of (i.e. it's more like "Look at what the American's can do" rather than "Look at what we can do")
I know it's kind of hypocritical of me to preach acceptance and then draw lines between America and Ireland, but seriously -- of all the space missions conducted since NASA's inception, when has an Irishman ever left the atmosphere? It's hard to get excited when my potential of going into space is ultimately zero.
Quote from: Emerald on Mon 16/06/2008 14:22:58
I know I should be impressed by that space picture... but I'm not.
Maybe it's because I'm not American, so the whole NASA space exploration thing isn't ingrained into me as something to be proud of (i.e. it's more like "Look at what the American's can do" rather than "Look at what we can do")
I know it's kind of hypocritical of me to preach acceptance and then draw lines between America and Ireland, but seriously -- of all the space missions conducted since NASA's inception, when has an Irishman ever left the atmosphere? It's hard to get excited when my potential of going into space is ultimately zero.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93kO14AWnOk (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93kO14AWnOk)
Your chances to go to the space are still 0, the same as the rest of the world population except a little group of fortunate men and women, but not because your country does not look to the skies.
Please do not turn the Mars Phoenix mission into motherfucking Loose Change, allright?
That topic will *explode* so can you guys please take that into another thread? I find it interesting that Ireland's history of space travel rests on the shoulders of 9/11. I should ask my history teacher about the relevancy there that I had never realized. Its always aliens or government coverups. Never anything simple like the space race. No no no.
Again I ask, please start a new thread.
Quote from: Nacho on Mon 16/06/2008 14:46:21
Your chances to go to the space are still 0, the same as the rest of the world population except a little group of fortunate men and women, but not because your country does not look to the skies.
The point is that as long as you have money, American citizenship, and you're white, you could very easily buy your way onto a space craft in a few year's time. But the chances of them letting grubby foreigners touch their shiny buttons within the next century seem slim.
Quote from: Emerald on Tue 17/06/2008 22:17:29
Quote from: Nacho on Mon 16/06/2008 14:46:21
Your chances to go to the space are still 0, the same as the rest of the world population except a little group of fortunate men and women, but not because your country does not look to the skies.
The point is that as long as you have money, American citizenship, and you're white, you could very easily buy your way onto a space craft in a few year's time. But the chances of them letting grubby foreigners touch their shiny buttons within the next century seem slim.
My mom owns a sector of Moon and she's not American.
Quote from: Emerald on Tue 17/06/2008 22:17:29
The point is that as long as you have money, American citizenship, and you're white, you could very easily buy your way onto a space craft in a few year's time. But the chances of them letting grubby foreigners touch their shiny buttons within the next century seem slim.
I'm fairly sick of these generalizations Emerald. You seem to feel that American resentment and hate worldwide is a get-out-of-jail-free card to make any unfounded conspiracy you feel like. American citizenship is a trend for Space Adventures, a private company. So what does that have to do with NASA? Or are you asking that NASA send foreigners to do the USA's government missions?
http://www.spaceadventures.com/
List of Space Adventures' Orbiting Clients:
Vladimir Gruzdev - Russian-born Russian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Gruzdev)
Sergey Brin - Russian-born American (http://72.29.31.40/index.cfm?fuseaction=news.viewnews&newsid=615)
Richard Garriot - English-born American (http://www.spaceadventures.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=orbital.Richard_Garriott_)
Dr. Charles Simonyi - Hungarian-born American (http://www.spaceadventures.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=orbital.Charles_Simonyi)
Anousheh_Ansari - Iranian-born American (http://www.spaceadventures.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=orbital.Anousheh_Ansari)
Greg Olsen - American-born American (http://www.spaceadventures.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=orbital.Greg_Olsen)
Mark Shuttleworth - South African (http://www.spaceadventures.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=orbital.Mark_Shuttleworth)
Dennis Tito - American-born American (http://www.spaceadventures.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=orbital.Dennis_Tito)
Exclusively rich? yes. Its not even an issue of ethnicity or origin. This is a private company that caters to whomever pays up. Looking at the list you should see something remarkable about rich Americans. Many of our most prolific citizens aren't white southerners, but immigrants. In fact there's not one white southerner on the list. The only 2 men born in the United States were born in New York City. As space tourists, they are actually in a minority - and they make up your proposed conspiracy. So Find a new argument for hating white Americans besides space travel. Knowing you it won't take long.
Somebody explain what the hell just happened...
Nothing. I'm just putting the history of space tourism on the public record.
You have a right to say whatever you feel, but if someone comes along and agrees with you they'll also have to ignore that the *only private space tourism company* has sent two native born Americans to space. That's it. Everyone else was born outside the U.S. From looking at the history of Space Adventures alone, a non-native american has a bigger chance of going to space.
So Ireland or any other country that wishes can start their own space tourism companies. If the U.S. has convinced you that we *own* space, then that's your burden to bear. The U.S. is competitive, no one denies that. It was competition that drove Russia and the U.S. further and further out into space.
I'm speaking with foresight. Let's face it -- the Russian space administration (whatever it's called) is not going to stay liquid for very long, which is quite probably why they started renting out a seat on their shuttles to the highest bidder.
Now America, being a soldily capitalist country, will inevitably see the value in space tourism, once it becomes more affordable. Which is a completely separate point from the way America treats immigrants and foreigners as second-class citizens, which is a totally different issue (keep in mind that someone who's 12.5% Irish is not an immigrant).
Anyway, I don't "hate" America, and I rather resent your ad hominem attacks against me. What is it with taking things so personally around here? It seems like it's become this kind of signature on these forums where people finish up an argument with "P.S. Who cares what you think anyway, because you're a dumbass LOL"
And I know one of you smartasses are dying to say something ridiculously lame like "Well, maybe that's 'cause you ARE a dumbass, Emerald. WOO! ZING! YEAH! PWNED!" -- please don't, it's embarassing. What happened to civil debates where people discuss the topic at hand, rather than flailing around, lashing out at people who don't think the same way they do...
Apologies are in order. I was responding to more than your post above: http://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/yabb/index.php?topic=34497.msg450571#msg450571
Sorry. That was my fault because I just didn't see any reason for NASA to feel guilty over inclusion of Irishmen. But I mean, NASA does work in unison with other countries. NASA just last week transported a Japanese lab to the ISS. Sure these are countries with space programs but I hardly feel that we are space bigots.
All I want are facts and snippets to go along with your bold statements, that's all. Generalizations aren't always %100 harmless. I removed most of my strong rhetoric in the post above. I felt it was offbase. But at the same time "Damn you Americans keeping the Irish out of space" is something that struck me as a statement with not only little foresight, but sight in general.
Space tourism future tense?.. well let's examine space tourism present tense.
What's so uncivil and unreasonable about that. I read your statement in combination with Nacho's as "the only people who go to space are Yale or Harvard graduates"... you know the same argument that people say about 9/11 and illuminati, and about everything else evil about the U.S. So again, I apologize for lashing out but that was the image I drew in my head about your assumptions.
You're shaping the argument into something you obviously want to get off your chest, which is racism towards Americans. Which I agree is totally and utterly wrong.
The original point is that space exploration is something wholly American. Sure, the Russians tried to beat them out, but the Americans won in the end. It's one of those matters of pride, along with Dr. King, D-Day and Independence from the British. Growing up in Ireland, we were told different stories, about Wolftone, and Yeats, and... Independence from the British :P
I'm not saying the Americans should come to Ireland ('cause everyone knows how brilliant at astrophysics we are...) to pick their astronauts, I'm just saying that as an Irishman, I'm less likely to care about that stuff, because it's less talked-about (not to say it isn't talked about and that there aren't any Irish astronomers)
Quote from: Emerald on Wed 18/06/2008 00:00:47
You're shaping the argument into something you obviously want to get off your chest, which is racism towards Americans. Which I agree is totally and utterly wrong.
I just misunderstood. Your first comment was buried by nacho's youtube link.
Quote from: Emerald on Wed 18/06/2008 00:00:47
I'm not saying the Americans should come to Ireland ('cause everyone knows how brilliant at astrophysics we are...) to pick their astronauts, I'm just saying that as an Irishman, I'm less likely to care about that stuff, because it's less talked-about (not to say it isn't talked about and that there aren't any Irish astronomers)
Point taken. Again I blame Nacho :P And to those Irishmen who WOULD hope to be next in line at NASA, may I suggest a degree in either Geology or Fighter Plane Pilotology? *
*ok, not an actual a degree. But flying fighter jets gives you the best edge, traditionally.
Quote from: evenwolf on Wed 18/06/2008 00:14:52
I just misunderstood. Your first comment was buried by nacho's youtube link.
Point taken. Again I blame Nacho :P
Yeah, I didn't really get why he slipped that in there either, but I figured he was simply adding to the array of "coolest things" in parallel to the rest of the post.
It might sound terribly un-PC, but the Twin Towers collapsing was quite possibly one of the most awe-inspiring things I've ever witnessed (in a bad way, obviously). I wasn't there or anything, but just watching it on a TV screen and knowing that it really happened is enough to make me think "Wow. I wonder how loud it was... how the air tasted... what the different reactions were like"
I guess it's the writer in me, but I always have this detached fascination going on in the back of my head when something intense is happening which often gives me a pang of guilt. It's not a lack of empathy, really, but more a little voice saying "this would make such a brilliant story -- you have to memorise every detail"
OK I'm going to start a skyscraper thread but not to be a dick. I actually have googled alot of pictures recently and think there's alot of cool things to discuss, including 9/11.
Quote from: evenwolf on Wed 18/06/2008 00:14:52
And to those Irishmen who WOULD hope to be next in line at NASA, may I suggest a degree in either Geology or Fighter Plane Pilotology? *
*ok, not an actual a degree. But flying fighter jets gives you the best edge, traditionally.
Heh, anyone who does a degree in Geology in Ireland is gonna be pretty screwed. It's like, the least sought-after profession ever.
Sorry for digging up this old thread but...
WTF? I posted a link about the 9/11 "squibs" in the WTC. Sorry... I wanted to post a link about the ESA website to show Emerald that the space exploration is a thing of everybody, and not just the americans.
http://www.esa.int/esaCP/index.html (http://www.esa.int/esaCP/index.html)
Why did I post a link about the WTC? I am fighting against a group of conspiranoids (In another forums) that say that the WCT collapsed because it was a controlled demolition... I think that if you watch the "incriminative" video carefully you'll realise that it wasn' t not a controlled demolition, but that' s another discussion...
Sorry for the missunderstood.
Wow, that's ...that's quite a hilarious coincidence. Makes me blush at my overreaction. But I could imagine SOMEONE blames Skull & Bones for US domination of space exploration. Its uh... not a stetch to half expect that.
Anyways, is the video updated? the ESA one I'd like to see.
It was not a video, Evenwolf... It was just a link of the ESA website.
Emerald said "I can't like space ships because space travels are made by americans" and I posted a link of the ESA, (European Space Agency, including Ireland, as well) to prove him that he won't go to the space not because of his nationality, but because going to the space is damn difficult...
Again, sorry for the missunderstanding. No bad feelings about the people' s reactions, since they were reactions bases in a missunderstood. :)
Quote from: Emerald on Tue 17/06/2008 22:17:29
The point is that as long as you have money, American citizenship, and you're white, you could very easily buy your way onto a space craft in a few year's time. But the chances of them letting grubby foreigners touch their shiny buttons within the next century seem slim.
Did I miss the point where you retracted this statement as pure nonsense after evenwolf showed that nationality is not a precondition for buying your way into space?
Quote from: Emerald on Tue 17/06/2008 23:37:22
Now America, being a soldily capitalist country, will inevitably see the value in space tourism, once it becomes more affordable. Which is a completely separate point from the way America treats immigrants and foreigners as second-class citizens, which is a totally different issue (keep in mind that someone who's 12.5% Irish is not an immigrant).
As a foreigner living in the US, I can say that the country does not treat me as a second-class citizen. Why? Because I'm not a citizen! Not in first-, second-, or business-class! So what does that mean? I can't vote, I need a work permit for jobs I take, and unless I get immigration status I'll have to leave at some point. Other than that, from day to day I can live my life just like any American.
There are some differences in my constitutional rights (stuff like whether the government can wiretap my phone without a court order) that I'm not too happy about, and going through immigration control each time I enter the country is a minor hassle, but overall I would have to say that the US (both the government and the people here) has been pretty welcoming, and treated me with great fairness. Poor immigrants and those who don't speak English have it much more difficult, of course. That's more a matter of class than of nationality, though. And
illegal immigrants face much bigger problems still, but that's the case almost everywhere, not some special US perfidy.
Your statements do not seem to be grounded in fact, but motivated by blind anti-Americanism. (And if you don't want to attract ad-hominems, maybe you should stop posting inflammatory comments without any kind of backup.)
Becoming an astronaut is the main goal of everyone interested in space.
Saying "I don' t like that because I am not going to reach to the top" is a bit unconsistent.
I mean... Do you like football? Yes? Why? You are not going to play the final of the World Cup.
Do you like cars? Yes? Why? You are not going to win an F-1 championship.
Do you like AGS? Yes? Why? You are not going to match the sales of GTA IV.
Same with the space/astronomy. We will never reach there, but we can read the news, make models, fly rockets...
I guess there must be something hidden behind that "I am not going to reach the space, so, those mission doesn' t interest me" argument, but I am not who to dig into your mind and guess the REAL reasons... but I am here to mention that your reasons are unconsistent.
*I* find space and space exploration cool.
Hence, the US is spending some of it's wealth properly.
Really, I say that the future isn't so bleak for manned missions - China, Japan, Russia, the EU, Brazil and India (I think that's all the major ones) have space programs. And each one has the capability to make it work. Brazil, Russia, India and China are all having resurgant economies following the end of the Cold War.
Really, there should be a "global space agency", like an expanded ISS project.
- Huw
ICE ON MARS! ICE ON MARS! ICE ON MARS!
Hey, there's ice confirmed on Mars, this is easily worth half a billion dollars don't you think?
http://phoenix.lpl.arizona.edu/06_20_pr.php
Could we ever live there...
Quote from: evenwolf on Fri 20/06/2008 23:26:21Hey, there's ice confirmed on Mars, this is easily worth half a billion dollars don't you think?
I'd say that's worth
several billion dollars! I have to think there's a quite a few scientists out there right now just thumbing their noses (silently of course) at all the nay-sayers.
Amazing news. I can't wait to hear what's next.
Yay water. That's extremely alien. I bet they'll be bringing it back and study it. Melt it and boil it and all that, going all microscopic on it, and finally realising it actually is H2O, then they'll mix it in a drink with some whiskey and have some fun.
Quote from: evenwolf on Fri 20/06/2008 23:26:21
Hey, there's ice confirmed on Mars, this is easily worth half a billion dollars don't you think?
Definitively not! Same thing with the scyscrapers in your other thread. Well, it's
nice to know that there's ice on mars and perhaps some scyscrapers look stunning, but how
could all that possibly be worth billions of dollars I wonder? It's just playing around instead of concentrating on more serious issues.
holy crap holy crap holy crap.
I want only 2 things from this discovery.
1: The water has microbial life in it
2: The microbial life does not have DNA.
Please O Please O Please
It's so amazing to me to see/hear the different opinions in this thread ... I know I've commented on that before but it really does amaze me.
I can't fathom how people don't see the relevance of space exploration. To me it's just ... alien (pun intended).
How can we not see the incredible importance of the fact that there's frozen water on Mars? It's not that it's water ... it's that it's water ON MARS!
I have this saying that I live by (and an acronym for it; TETO) "to each their own" which definitely applies here. Whenever somebody/thing vastly differs in opinion on something I usually just mumble, "TETO".
So ... TETO.
Quote from: MrColossal on Mon 23/06/2008 21:21:05
holy crap holy crap holy crap.
I want only 2 things from this discovery.
1: The water has microbial life in it
...
You know what would be totally cool? That the life on Mars was actually brought to near extinction by a virus or bacteria of some sort. And in the end, the only thing the local highly advanced scientists could do about it was to freeze the whole planet. That way the virus would be immobile, and they'd flee to some far away galaxy never knowing that the dinosaurs around Earth quarters would actually develop into monkeys and come after their prison substance. Once we melt it, we'll be totally wiped out, and then I'll go njah njah.
Quote from: Tuomas on Mon 23/06/2008 21:39:08You know what would be totally cool? That the life on Mars was actually brought to near extinction by a virus or bacteria of some sort. And in the end, the only thing the local highly advanced scientists could do about it was to freeze the whole planet. That way the virus would be immobile, and they'd flee to some far away galaxy never knowing that the dinosaurs around Earth quarters would actually develop into monkeys and come after their prison substance. Once we melt it, we'll be totally wiped out, and then I'll go njah njah.
I find that statement rather ironical ... Because I got the impression by your last post that you didn't find this important (may have misinterpreted)?
Well ... those ancient life-forms would never be able to leave the planet if they didn't invest in space exploration in the first place. So what would be even cooler, in my opinion, would be to find proof of that ancient civilization that was wiped out by that virus because they listened to the nay-sayers and didn't invest in space exploration thus were trapped on their planet and promptly went extinct.
:P
Yeah I guess those theories are cool. Eric's hope is simple enough YET mind-blowing.
I'd be happy with the water reserves on Mars supporting human life. I mean, sure there's no E.T. in that scenario but its groundbreaking in every way possible and a step toward finding sustainable life on Earth.
Every pound that we send to the moon costs $300,000 so ... imagine how much that same pound costs to send to Mars. This water makes the trip a lot more feasible.
On another note: NASA announced the first child in Africa to receive his Martian Snowcone! It's South African Charles Grumbo! Grandson of American oil tycoon Dalton Grumbo! Congrats Charlie! Enjoy your snowcone!
(http://carpetblog.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/06/10/fat_kid.jpg)
Quote from: Darth Mandarb on Mon 23/06/2008 21:27:29How can we not see the incredible importance of the fact that there's frozen water on Mars? It's not that it's water ... it's that it's water ON MARS!
...and what happens then? We waste 6 bottles of water to make 1 bottle of Coca Cola. So we'll take water from mars to have enough to drink?
Don't misunderstand me, I'm quite interested in space and spacetravel. But it all seems to me like some sort of escapism with the attitude: With exploration and science we'll either solve the problems on our planet OR, if mother earth is wasted, we'll leave and colonize some planet somewhere..
Shouldn't we instead work on our problems BEFORE we explore outer space? How can it be that so many people live without healthcare, but billions are going into space-science? Of course it's the same thing with weaponscience for example...
..I think you get the point.
Quote from: matti on Tue 24/06/2008 10:17:47
So we'll take water from mars to have enough to drink?
Oh Jesus. What a hump melon. When you travel overseas do you actually carry all the water you'll be drinking on the trip? Well perhaps if you were going to Mexico...
Listen. Sadly the boat has sailed past you and you are not onboard. I think you're flailing in the water somewhere in its wake.
Quote from: matti on Tue 24/06/2008 10:17:47
Shouldn't we instead work on our problems BEFORE we explore outer space? How can it be that so many people live without healthcare, but billions are going into space-science? Of course it's the same thing with weaponscience for example...
And hereby you trivialize the entire mission with your misguided understandings. Our current understanding of the universe comes from Earth and what we see from a lens in a telescope. Understanding the universe gives us new methods of solving's earth's problems. Exploring the universe is not a waste.
The last post I made (the one about the snowcones) was for you. I hope you enjoyed my sarcasm because any further explanation I feel will fall on deaf ears. NASA doesn't need you to clap your hands and *believe* to succeed in its missions. So its your own loss and your own little snow globe of ignorance you choose to sit glumly inside. I hope one day you will open your doors to the people who are working towards solving the world's problems, and not spit in their face.
Quote from: evenwolf on Tue 24/06/2008 11:38:47
Understanding the universe gives us new methods of solving's earth's problems. Exploring the universe is not a waste.
This is actually pretty interesting. I assume, that we can, because of all this, foretell meteors and such hitting the Earth, and also predict the end of the world as sun either sucks us in or explodes, was it 2012 or something? But I really can't see the benefit of getting some guy on the moon just to discover there's nothing there. Unless it's said to have ended the cold war through political influence. Satellites and such that go around the orbit do actually work, as long as they don't spy on me jerking off on the balcony watching little children play.
Quote from: Tuomas on Tue 24/06/2008 11:48:26
But I really can't see the benefit of getting some guy on the moon just to discover there's nothing there.
I feel like a broken record in an auditorium for the School of the Deaf.
There are impact craters and marias on the Moon. If you feel that meteors alone are not important... then consider one day that all your descendants will be suffocated by the impact of one.
(http://fireball.meteorite.free.fr/2005_12_03/Fireball_perth.gif)
(http://fireball.meteorite.free.fr/2004_01_04/Fireball_leon.gif)
(http://fireball.meteorite.free.fr/2003_03_27/Fireball_park_forest.gif)
(http://fireball.meteorite.free.fr/2000_05_06/Fireball_moravka_animation.gif)
Just a tiny one (http://fireball.meteorite.free.fr/meteor1.mpg)
Anyone who feels the urge to say "spend our Earth dollars on this instead" has some perverted idea that Earth money is actually worth something. The day the first human went into orbit... everything else was merely a notion, an expression. Breaking the threshold into space is more meaningful to the human species than anything else. I find it incredible that you guys read and watch sci fi books & films go so far as to play games like Spore, and are so blind to these concepts. With all due respect, WAKE UP.
Quote from: evenwolf on Tue 24/06/2008 11:50:21
If you feel that meteors alone are not important...
I'm sorry, but where actually did I ever say that?
Lets not have another argument about if space exploration is worth doing, we had one in the moon landing/hoax thread and it was ridiculous enough there. The biggest benefits that have come from space research investment are fairly obvious (eg satellites), but if you think it's not worth the money, fair enough, that's something people could debate forever. When you consider how small an amount of money is spent on space compared to other less productive things though, perhaps it will seem less of a waste. Personally, even if nothing earthly had come out of space exploration I would still support it, on the basis of how cool it is.
I'm not really sure what you're saying about meteors though, evenwolf... how did going to the moon teach us much about that? We could see them from here just fine. The moon landings in themselves didn't teach us any really big things I can think of, but that doesn't make them pointless.
Quote from: Tuomas on Tue 24/06/2008 12:11:35
I'm sorry, but where actually did I ever say that?
You inferred that learning about meteors (ie. landing on the moon) was rather useless.
Quote from: scotch
I'm not really sure what you're saying about meteors though, evenwolf... how did going to the moon teach us much about that?
scotch: Craters are preserved on the Moon. They are victims of erosion on Earth. So the frequency and size, hell everything about impact craters that can't be observed on Earth is right up there smiling down at us.
Google Daniel Barringer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_crater)
It actually took a really really really long time for the scientific community to recognize impact craters here on Earth. And from the evidence on the Moon ( which is 2 percent the size of the Earth ) we know there is a HUGE history or meteor impacts that we can no longer see on the Earth's surface. Due to the cycling process of rocks on this planet.
Quote from: evenwolf on Tue 24/06/2008 11:50:21
There are impact craters and marias on the Moon. If you feel that meteors alone are not important... then consider one day that all your descendants will be suffocated by the impact of one.
Ah,
that's the NASA "mission" you mentioned..
1. Do you think landing on the mars and disovering ice will help us redirect or destroy deadly asteroids?
2. Do you really think the possible impact of an asteroid is a serious threat to mankind? At the moment? Yeah, perhaps in 2000 years there is one coming towards earth, and then perhaps we have devices to prevent it from crashing on the ground, but should that really matter to us now? And why?
Quote from: evenwolf on Tue 24/06/2008 11:50:21
Anyone who feels the urge to say "spend our Earth dollars on this instead" has some perverted idea that Earth money is actually worth something. The day the first human went into orbit... everything else was merely a notion, an expression.
So your point is: Money doesn't matter on earth, but going to space is important??
Quote from: evenwolf on Tue 24/06/2008 11:50:21
Breaking the threshold into space is more meaningful to the human species than anything else.
And so does it seem. But that applies only to (bored) wealthy people. A man without regular meals or education would hardly be particularly interested in space exploration. But if so, there's something going wrong I think.
Quote from: evenwolf on Tue 24/06/2008 11:50:21I find it incredible that you guys read and watch sci fi films, and are so blind to these concepts. With all due respect, WAKE UP.
Yeah, wake up. I find it incredible that you are afraid of meteor impacts by just watching sci-fi-movies..
Edit: Whole point was: The billions spent are NOT worth it (as I said before). And I haven't heard one genuine argument against that statement.
Quote from: matti on Tue 24/06/2008 12:30:21
1. Do you think landing on the mars and disovering ice will help us redirect or destroy deadly asteroids?
Yes.
Quote from: matti on Tue 24/06/2008 12:30:21
2. Do you really think the possible impact of an asteroid is a serious threat to mankind? At the moment? Yeah, perhaps in 2000 years there is one coming towards earth, and then perhaps we have devices to prevent it from crashing on the ground, but should that really matter to us now? And why?
Ah, true wisdom. "Let's wait and develop technology to save the planet 2000 years from now.... when all my descendants will be even less informed and less enthusiastic about the universe than I am."
Quote from: matti
So your point is: Money doesn't matter on earth, but going to space is important??
Money doesn't solve problems. Human ambition and collaboration does. Money just motivates.
Where did you get the impression I've even seen a disaster movie? No, sorry I took college courses. This shit is real, Mr. Nostradamus. Go consult your local scientist . You may have to wait until your neighbors are done throwing rocks at him.
Quote from: lalalalala
Edit: Whole point was: The billions spent are NOT worth it (as I said before). And I haven't heard one genuine argument against that statement.
Gee, Mr. President may we pweeeeeeeeeese go to space?
Ok, I think I will answer tomorrow or perhaps this evening for it will be a long post (and I need time to do that in English). But you could perhaps expand your first answer.
"Do you think landing on the mars and disovering ice will help us redirect or destroy deadly asteroids?" Going to space certainly will help if that's what you want, and there are projects that address this problem specifically.
"Do you really think the possible impact of an asteroid is a serious threat to mankind?"
It's a serious, but unlikely threat, it will happen again, perhaps not soon, but we should probably learn to deal with it at some point don't you think?
"So your point is: Money doesn't matter on earth, but going to space is important??"
No, I think money is important on Earth as well as in space. I think spending 0.6% of the US budget on doing enlightening and inspiring things in space is justifiable.
Listen to scotch. After all there are astronomers whose job it is to track all the meteors more than a kilometer wide that could potentially cross paths with Earth:
Near-Earth Asteroid Tracking System
Linear Asteroid Detection Project
Catalina Sky Survey
Loneos Program
Spacewatch Program
Not to mention comets. Comets are just random as hell... we wouldn't even see it coming.
Ah, Evenwolf. If you reply with such and idiotic attitude like you did to Matti, you might wonder why they keep arguing. And in the end, you'll never win anyones respect or any argument, other than the ones in your head you're apparently building up here. Anyway, I prefer telling my opinion as long as it stays civilised, but when a moderator comes and asks people to stop, you follow that with insults. And be sure, that with your comments, you're taking the whole base from your ocean of facts, simply by making everything you say seem like it comes from a jerk off. And you might want to think of that next time.
Quote from: Tuomas on Tue 24/06/2008 13:30:58
your comments, you're taking the whole base from your ocean of facts, simply by making everything you say seem like it comes from a jerk off.
Look, for those of you who think space is a waste of time, the stakes are just a couple billion dollars.
For me, the stakes are the future of mankind. I get frustrated. I get uppity. It happens. I say to ensure the safety of our species we should double the budget for NASA. But so many people want to cut it back? My reaction is rage. There's no convincing everyone of precise geological details.
I'm not going near this discussion itself, but if you want to change any portion of the public opinion, there are better places to do it than in the Adventure Game Studio forum. I realize it's easy to get involved in any discussion about a topic you care about, but sometimes you might benefit from putting the discussion itself into the proper perspective, and making a judgment of whether or not you're just wasting your time and emotional involvement. If you've done this and still think it's worth it, I couldn't care less, but I think it's worth thinking about at least twice. I'm with scotch: this has been discussed to death.
Quote from: evenwolf on Tue 24/06/2008 13:48:40For me, the stakes are the future of mankind. I get frustrated. I get uppity. It happens. I say to ensure the safety of our species we should double the budget for NASA. But so many people want to cut it back? My reaction is rage. There's no convincing everyone of precise geological details.
This is the problem as I see it too! Because so many people [seem to] have the attitude, "well it'll be long after I'm gone so why worry about it?" This is epitomized in the attitudes many in the world have today. We've become a
reactive species when we should be a
proactive one.
If an asteroid/comet
were to impact the earth (assuming it wasn't a global-killer) I think the human species would be able to react and adapt and carry on. Perhaps not in a manor that would agree with most of us these days but we are, after all, a very resilient species. However I contend; why wait to see how we'd react were that impact to occur if we can be proactive and prevent having to find out in the first place? To me, this is common sense logic.
Quote from: EldKatt on Tue 24/06/2008 14:17:55I'm not going near this discussion itself, but if you want to change any portion of the public opinion, there are better places to do it than in the Adventure Game Studio forum. I realize it's easy to get involved in any discussion about a topic you care about, but sometimes you might benefit from putting the discussion itself into the proper perspective, and making a judgment of whether or not you're just wasting your time and emotional involvement. If you've done this and still think it's worth it, I couldn't care less, but I think it's worth thinking about at least twice. I'm with scotch: this has been discussed to death.
Just because the topic has been "discussed to death" doesn't mean it's off-limits! I can't recall taking part in any conversation/debate about this topic on these boards (maybe mentioned here or there, but never debated/discussed in this fashion at least).
There might be "Better" avenues for this discussion than the AGS boards ... however, if a person/group wants to get people motivated and/or believing in their "cause" the more exposure the better. So I would argue that a general discussion board on an adventure game website is a perfectly acceptable place. It might spark an interest in somebody that would have no other way to learn of the topic.
This is, after all, the gen-gen :P
Quote from: Darth Mandarb on Tue 24/06/2008 17:31:16
Quote from: evenwolf on Tue 24/06/2008 13:48:40For me, the stakes are the future of mankind. I get frustrated. I get uppity. It happens. I say to ensure the safety of our species we should double the budget for NASA. But so many people want to cut it back? My reaction is rage. There's no convincing everyone of precise geological details.
This is the problem as I see it too! Because so many people [seem to] have the attitude, "well it'll be long after I'm gone so why worry about it?" This is epitomized in the attitudes many in the world have today. We've become a reactive species when we should be a proactive one.
If an asteroid/comet were to impact the earth (assuming it wasn't a global-killer) I think the human species would be able to react and adapt and carry on. Perhaps not in a manor that would agree with most of us these days but we are, after all, a very resilient species. However I contend; why wait to see how we'd react were that impact to occur if we can be proactive and prevent having to find out in the first place? To me, this is common sense logic.
Excuse me, but what the hell? Are we talking about using our resources to saving people that don't even exist, and for the love of God, if we carry on as we don't, most probably will never be born? The ancient Romans didn't think about people 2000 AC because they had only so much resources and their OWN problems. I'm sorry, but I'm more concerned about making sure that my own children won't have to generate means of breathing carbon dioxide with three hands a spontaneous illumination coming from their arses while they're runnign from floods. No, I'm not overreacting. If I say we're not living a status quo, I mean, that we're already headed to shit, and in my honest opinion this means a freaking meteor that might of might not collide us after me and my grand grand grand grand grand ... children are all dead, is not the thing we ought to worry about. Especially whent hey won't even be born at the time.
Man, there's plenty of time to develop a space shuttle to evacuate the Earth, but would we even have anything to evacuate? I'd rather live in the moment myself rather than really start designing jedi-lazer-swords with which to defend myself when the time comes and I wake from my timetravel tube and am the only person in the world aside from shitloads of robots.
You can't really expect people to understand, if you call them ignorant (no, not a literal quote) for not wanting to waste their OK welfare and healthcare into this. We'd be like Noah building a boat in the middle of a forest fire thinking there'd be a rain, when the last one was years and years ago. There are risks and issues, and there are real risks and issues that actually need to be dealt with. I'd rather die knowing, that because of me, some people might die at some point in the future rather than that my decisions made people who actually were born miserable or perhaps even caused the deaths of some. And I don't mean just space exploration, obviously, but this gives a fairly good example, seeing as how this whole thread is about it.
Well, that is common sense logic.
Thanks, Tuomas, you've written down what I was thinking all the time..
Let's see if we can solve the urgent social, economical and environmental problems within the next several hundred years.
If we do: Well, than let's explore space, have fun and learn about the origin of earth.
If mankind finally semi-consciously comitted suicide: A meteor impact would be nothing to worry about anymore.
Quote from: Tuomas on Tue 24/06/2008 19:17:12I'm sorry, but I'm more concerned about making sure that my own children won't have to generate means of breathing carbon dioxide with three hands a spontaneous illumination coming from their arses while they're runnign from floods. No, I'm not overreacting.
That's good to know. That's [somewhat] proactive instead of reactive as I'm sure, at present, your own children do not have spontaneous illumination coming from their arses. However, if they do, I suggest youTube ... it'd be a huge hit.
Quote from: Tuomas on Tue 24/06/2008 19:17:12Man, there's plenty of time to develop a space shuttle to evacuate the Earth, but would we even have anything to evacuate? I'd rather live in the moment myself rather than really start designing jedi-lazer-swords with which to defend myself when the time comes and I wake from my timetravel tube and am the only person in the world aside from shitloads of robots.
As I've stated previously, TETO (to each their own). To my way of thinking that's a dangerous attitude to have. This is, of course, just my opinion ... I'm not judging anybody for having their own thoughts and feelings.
Quote from: matti on Tue 24/06/2008 19:41:56Well, that is common sense logic.
Again, funny how people see things so differently. And, to my own credit, I said it was common sense logic to "ME" ... not that it was common sense logic definitively. :P
Quote from: Darth Mandarb on Tue 24/06/2008 20:34:31
Quote from: Tuomas on Tue 24/06/2008 19:17:12Man, there's plenty of time to develop a space shuttle to evacuate the Earth, but would we even have anything to evacuate? I'd rather live in the moment myself rather than really start designing jedi-lazer-swords with which to defend myself when the time comes and I wake from my timetravel tube and am the only person in the world aside from shitloads of robots.
As I've stated previously, TETO (to each their own). To my way of thinking that's a dangerous attitude to have.
I think the main problem here is not that some people don't care about the future and others do (what you called reactive and proactive). The problem seems to be that we all set different priorities of what has to be done. Some people (like Tuomas and me) think that what mankind does is a much greater threat than the possibility of a meteor hitting earth, at least at the moment. So I think that we have to focus and put our energy on these urgent problems before dealing with something that perhaps will never happen.
As for your statement about us being a reactive species: I sadly agree, especially with regard to what we do to nature. But there again: If we've destroyed the basis of existence we don't have to care about any threats anymore... it's really just a thing of priorities..
Quote from: Darth Mandarb on Tue 24/06/2008 20:34:31This is, of course, just my opinion ... I'm not judging anybody for having their own thoughts and feelings.
Yeah, evenwolf could learn a thing or two from you.
Quote from: Tuomas on Tue 24/06/2008 19:17:12
Man, there's plenty of time to develop a space shuttle to evacuate the Earth, but would we even have anything to evacuate? I'd rather live in the moment myself rather than really start designing jedi-lazer-swords with which to defend myself when the time comes and I wake from my timetravel tube and am the only person in the world aside from shitloads of robots.
? ? ? ? ?
You state that you and Matti see humans' actions as the single biggest threat to our species.... I couldn't agree more. I have the strong opinion that negligence will be our downfall. Now, this paragraph implies something about humans getting ahead of themselves with technology. I don't understand quite what you mean. Are you saying humans shouldn't seek? That humans should just wait?
I read these words to say: "Everything falls into place over time".... like we could diagram on a chart the years
2030- lightsabers invented, 2090 - time machine invented, 3040 - human killing robots arrive
What did this paragraph mean exactly? Because it seems to me that it's removing the responsibility out of humans' hands to
do anything at all. It appears to be a message about fate.
Here is a site that lists some of the things that space exploration has done for the people stuck on earth:
http://www.thespaceplace.com/nasa/spinoffs.html
fireman airtanks, solar power, and breast cancer detection are enough proof for me. I'm sure someone will make a big fuss over golfball aerodynamics.