» OLD MESSAGE ARCHIVES «
The Pop Culture Information Society...
Messageboard Archive Index, In The 00s - The Pop Culture Information Society

Welcome to the archived messages from In The 00s. This archive stretches back to 1998 in some instances, and contains a nearly complete record of all the messages posted to inthe00s.com. You will also find an archive of the messages from inthe70s.com, inthe80s.com, inthe90s.com and amiright.com before they were combined to form the inthe00s.com messageboard.

If you are looking for the active messages, please click here. Otherwise, use the links below or on the right hand side of the page to navigate the archives.

Custom Search



Subject: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: Donnie Darko on 05/27/06 at 5:14 pm

How important do you think the space program is? After all, if we screw up Earth, we're going to have to leave someday, but maybe exploring space will never be practical, and besides the idea of space colonization may be used by some as justification to destroy the planet.

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: Rice_Cube on 05/27/06 at 5:25 pm

Well, you're going on a bit of an extreme here, eh?

Firstly, you're making it sound like we're already in a Star Trek type of world where faster-than-light travel and terraformation are facts of life rather than fiction.  The fastest any of our spacecraft can travel tops out under 30000 mph, which means it would take hundreds of thousands of years to even get to the nearest star.  None of our life support systems can be expected to last more than a decade, much less the thousands of years of transit to our neighbors.  So to answer the latter part of your query, no, the space program cannot be a justification for destroying the planet because, well, that's just stupid (not you, just the idea).

Secondly, the space program is important because it provides opportunities for scientific discovery that are not readily available on the planet, and cannot be simulated except in the zero-gravity environment of space.  The space program, while it may seem only beneficial to nerds and geeks, has actually yielded inventions that we use everyday, even as obscure as the pen that can write in zero-gravity.  And because of all the innovations in spacecraft design, spacesuit design, and medicine, that benefits all of humanity in terms of employment and applications of space inventions.  So I would think it greatly important to continue our exploration of space.

And if you still don't think it's important, then maybe you haven't used a cellular/satelite phone, or the Dish network, or a GPS.  Or flown on an airplane (which uses weather/navigation satelites) or used Weatherbug to find out when you should plan that picnic.

If you're still concerned about destroying the planet, no worries...it's still got about 10 billion years of life left before the sun novas, and believe me, we'll be long gone before then.

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 05/27/06 at 7:39 pm

As Rice points out, the space program has yielded many beneficial products, and it has also contributed a vast amount of knowledge to the sciences in general.
If we are going to continue manned space exploration, we'd better take more care. No more cattlecars in the exosphere like we saw with the Space Shuttle disasters. It's also a big waste of money if scientists are going to forget which set of numbers to read. Remember that? I think it was one of the craft NASA was sending to Mars c. 1997. It crashed because they were reading miles instead of kilometers or something.
"No, Al, it's the green number not the red numbers! Awww, the orbiter just slammed into Mars at 4500 mph! That thing cost $100 million!"

As far as heading for the stars for a new home, that's always going to be a sci-fi fantasy. Nope, Earth is the only home we've got and if we wreck it, we're toast! Kaput! It's over! That's all she wrote, baby!
:o

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: deadrockstar on 05/27/06 at 10:44 pm

Its a complete and total waste.  Spending the amount of money on it we do is criminal when there are still so many problems on Earth to fix.  I say we make good with what we have before we try to spread our virus- I mean species to another planet or solar system.

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: Rice_Cube on 05/27/06 at 11:17 pm

[quote author=

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 05/27/06 at 11:17 pm

[quote author=

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: Red Ant on 05/27/06 at 11:42 pm


It's also a big waste of money if scientists are going to forget which set of numbers to read. Remember that? I think it was one of the craft NASA was sending to Mars c. 1997. It crashed because they were reading miles instead of kilometers or something.


Wasn't that the Mars Rover that cost 400 million dollars to take pictures of dirt clods?

I remember this one:

http://www.ima.umn.edu/~arnold/disasters/ariane.html

Nothing like a 500 million dollar error.

Despite that error, the Ariane rockets are reliable, and actually get into the air on a regular basis.

Oh, and this one too:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PEPCON_disaster


How important do you think the space program is? After all, if we screw up Earth, we're going to have to leave someday, but maybe exploring space will never be practical, and besides the idea of space colonization may be used by some as justification to destroy the planet.


The space program is important, however manned space missions need to be scrapped. The remaining space shuttles are all over 20 years old, which is ancient for a space bound vehicle. The cost overruns are enormous, even by government standards, and NASA has had a nasty habit of putting timetables above safety for nearly as long.

Private companies will develop planes that are space worthy/capable in the next decade or so anyway.

Like Rice Cube said, terraforming and FTL travel are Star Trek things. Even putting a single person on Mars may take 30 years or more. Building space craft to escape a spent Earth isn't going to happen.

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 05/28/06 at 12:27 am

^ So there's the future fad of "space tourism," you know, rich guys laying out a million bucks for a ride to transient freedom from this Earthly realm! No way Jose, they're going to lease those old shuttles to some retired alcoholic astronauts...you get on with Bart Howard in mind:
Fly me to the moon
And let me play among the stars
Let me see what spring is like
On Jupiter and Mars....


But end up with Lennon/McCartney:

All the way the paper bag was on my knee,
Man, I had a dreadful flight...


Hey, didja ever toss your cookies at zero gravity? You'd have to pay me a million bucks before I'd even consider a ride on the Valu-Shuttle spaceline!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/13/icon_shaking2.gif

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: CeeKay on 05/28/06 at 12:33 am

I think it's important and should continue.  Sure there will be mistakes.  And yes, those mistakes cost money.  But it's not like that money just disappears into outerspace.  The money spent on space exploration goes to.....pay the people who manufacture the various machines and instruments and such....pay the people who do the development of the programs....pay the people who clean up after the people, etc. etc.  The money is still in the economy.  ANYWAY.....

IT'S EXPLORATION!  I think it's part of our human nature to continue to explore.  And I, for one, am willing to believe that we don't know everything yet.  Which means there are things to discover....and the possibility of new discoveries out in the universe means is fabulous!  There are possibilities that we can't even think of out there and they expand every time our technology for the exploration changes.

It wasn't all that long ago when people thought there was no point sailing a ship too far in any direction because it would just fall off the edge of the earth.  And if no one ever tried it...because it was expensive or because they couldn't imagine the unimaginable....well, how dumb would that be?

JMHO.

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 05/28/06 at 10:54 am

^ The difference is there's always air to breathe in terrestrial exploration. Very important.

Our runaway sci-fi imagination vastly underestimated the difficulty of space travel. For instance, if you spend too long in zero gravity, your bones start to rot away! Didn't know that, eh, Isaac Asimov?

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: Rice_Cube on 05/28/06 at 6:22 pm


^ The difference is there's always air to breathe in terrestrial exploration. Very important.

Our runaway sci-fi imagination vastly underestimated the difficulty of space travel. For instance, if you spend too long in zero gravity, your bones start to rot away! Didn't know that, eh, Isaac Asimov?



Now that they do know that though, there are physicians and therapists who specialize in the study of zero-gravity physiology and try to apply their findings to the people on Earth.  And of course, there are those dreamers who are working on artificial gravity devices so that astronauts don't have to feel all floaty all the time :)

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 05/28/06 at 7:54 pm


Now that they do know that though, there are physicians and therapists who specialize in the study of zero-gravity physiology and try to apply their findings to the people on Earth.  And of course, there are those dreamers who are working on artificial gravity devices so that astronauts don't have to feel all floaty all the time :)

If they can replicate Earth atmosphere conditions in space craft, all they have to do next is to get us going hyper-lightspeed and we'll be all set for Kirk's Enterprise!

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: Foo Bar on 05/29/06 at 6:19 pm

The first lesson of IT is "never underestimate the value of offsite backup."  (For everyone in WTC2 who thought that WTC1 qualified as a remote backup, sorry :)

Anyone who has issues with the current political situation on Planet Earth should drop whatever they're doing and read Heinlein's The Moon is a Harsh Mistress.

If I had Gatesian wealth (or even a mere $10-50B in the bank), I'd say "The entire amount of my estate goes to the first human to land on Mars and remain alive for one Earth year.  Along with my estate goes the legal title to the planet Mars.  Any government that disputes the claim of the Mars colonist is quite free to launch its  own  danged expedition to take Mars (from its rightful owner) by force and claim it for itself."

Whether my government chooses to honor contract law (my company gets 90% of an entire planet for a $9.5B-45B  investment) or seize my assets by force, is irrelevant.  Humanity ends up with a remote backup site, and Heinein wrote the rest of thie history from that point forward. 

Divide the numbers by 10 and the timeframes by a factor of 10 if we're talking about a moonbase instead of a Marsbase.  The basic economics are the same.

But since I don't have Gatesian wealth and am therefore harmless, when Rutan has a vehicle capable of leaving earth orbit, I'll be first in line to buy a seat on it.  I want off this rock, even if it's a one-way trip.

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 05/29/06 at 9:31 pm


The first lesson of IT is "never underestimate the value of offsite backup."  (For everyone in WTC2 who thought that WTC1 qualified as a remote backup, sorry :)

Anyone who has issues with the current political situation on Planet Earth should drop whatever they're doing and read Heinlein's The Moon is a Harsh Mistress.

If I had Gatesian wealth (or even a mere $10-50B in the bank), I'd say "The entire amount of my estate goes to the first human to land on Mars and remain alive for one Earth year.  Along with my estate goes the legal title to the planet Mars.  Any government that disputes the claim of the Mars colonist is quite free to launch its  own  danged expedition to take Mars (from its rightful owner) by force and claim it for itself."

Whether my government chooses to honor contract law (my company gets 90% of an entire planet for a $9.5B-45B  investment) or seize my assets by force, is irrelevant.  Humanity ends up with a remote backup site, and Heinein wrote the rest of thie history from that point forward. 

Divide the numbers by 10 and the timeframes by a factor of 10 if we're talking about a moonbase instead of a Marsbase.  The basic economics are the same.

But since I don't have Gatesian wealth and am therefore harmless, when Rutan has a vehicle capable of leaving earth orbit, I'll be first in line to buy a seat on it.  I want off this rock, even if it's a one-way trip.

Suppose we built a viable alternative to Earth on the moon or Mars.  How do we decide who gets to, you know, go?
:o

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: deadrockstar on 05/29/06 at 10:07 pm


You're right.  Complete and utter waste indeed.

Hope you never need an imaging scan then.


I don't think that the technological benefits are enough to justify spending money on such a frivolous endeavor.  When we get the first joint in order, THEN we can start thinking about turning into a franchise.  At this point in human history space exploration is ridiculous.


IT'S EXPLORATION!  I think it's part of our human nature to continue to explore.  And I, for one, am willing to believe that we don't know everything yet.  Which means there are things to discover....and the possibility of new discoveries out in the universe means is fabulous!  There are possibilities that we can't even think of out there and they expand every time our technology for the exploration changes.


Thats all great, but I still have a deep philosophical problem with hurling money at this type of thing when basic necessities on this planet are not taken care of.  Its moronic.

We're still so undeveloped that we fight eachother and speak hundreds of languages, yet we think its time to spread our civilization into space.  I just don't get it.  Considering the huge timetable we're working with so far as when the Sun is going to go out, you think another couple of centuries to fix things up on Earth wouldn't be a big deal. 

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: CeeKay on 05/30/06 at 12:41 am

[quote author=

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: deadrockstar on 05/30/06 at 9:23 am

Sure if private companies want to throw money at it, fine, whatever.  But I don't like my tax dollars being spent on it.

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 05/30/06 at 12:35 pm

[quote author=

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: Foo Bar on 05/30/06 at 8:49 pm


Suppose we built a viable alternative to Earth on the moon or Mars.  How do we decide who gets to, you know, go?
:o

Don't ask me, ask whoever owns the colony.

But considering that money ($USD or other fiat currencies) isn't going to be terribly useful on the colony during its formative years, a rich Earthling would have less incentive to go than a poor Earthling.  Gold?  Gold ain't much good on Mars either.  The most useful things for a space colony (steel, oxygen, fuel) are pretty cheap for any Joe Sixpack to buy -- and pretty heavy to transport.  Earth money isn't going to be the determining factor.

I see three plausible scenarios:

Scenario 1:  The colony's owners remain on earth.  The price of admission is "your Earthly assets".  Gates gets to go - and the owners have a huge ROI because the ridiculously rich go to Mars, and due to a net lack of brainpower and engineering know-how, all die out.

Scenario 2:  Some of the colony's owners go to the colony, and are much more picky about who gets to go, based on more than just dollars.  They want a longer-term return on their investment, and in order to get it, they have to make sure that the colony survivies.

Scenario 3:  "We make a fortune on Earth doing Scenario #1.  Then, when everybody's dead, we sell shares to some engineers, who land, have a lovely first-night long-pig BBQ from the frozen carcasses of the first crop of rich idiots who all died out, and proceed to finish building the real colony that actually takes over the planet!"

(I couldn't afford the first flight, I couldn't qualify for the second or third flights, but it's still a nice dream.)

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 05/30/06 at 9:21 pm


Don't ask me, ask whoever owns the colony.

But considering that money ($USD or other fiat currencies) isn't going to be terribly useful on the colony during its formative years, a rich Earthling would have less incentive to go than a poor Earthling.  Gold?  Gold ain't much good on Mars either.  The most useful things for a space colony (steel, oxygen, fuel) are pretty cheap for any Joe Sixpack to buy -- and pretty heavy to transport.  Earth money isn't going to be the determining factor.

I see three plausible scenarios:

Scenario 1:  The colony's owners remain on earth.  The price of admission is "your Earthly assets".  Gates gets to go - and the owners have a huge ROI because the ridiculously rich go to Mars, and due to a net lack of brainpower and engineering know-how, all die out.

Scenario 2:  Some of the colony's owners go to the colony, and are much more picky about who gets to go, based on more than just dollars.  They want a longer-term return on their investment, and in order to get it, they have to make sure that the colony survivies.

Scenario 3:  "We make a fortune on Earth doing Scenario #1.  Then, when everybody's dead, we sell shares to some engineers, who land, have a lovely first-night long-pig BBQ from the frozen carcasses of the first crop of rich idiots who all died out, and proceed to finish building the real colony that actually takes over the planet!"

(I couldn't afford the first flight, I couldn't qualify for the second or third flights, but it's still a nice dream.)

Earth will be our best bet unless it becomes utterly uninhabitable. I propose we build a prison colony on Mars and send the people who a trashing the joint there. The entire Bush clan gets a first-class cabin on the first flight out!

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: Foo Bar on 05/30/06 at 10:31 pm


Earth will be our best bet unless it becomes utterly uninhabitable. I propose we build a prison colony on Mars and send the people who a trashing the joint there. The entire Bush clan gets a first-class cabin on the first flight out!

Worked for Australia.  Sign me up!

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: Johnny_D on 05/31/06 at 11:22 am

A picture's worth a thousand words:

http://www.zamandayolculuk.com/cetinbal/BigsportDisc.jpg

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 05/31/06 at 1:07 pm


Worked for Australia.  Sign me up!

Only after they could no longer use America to off-load Britain's "rabble." At the height of British glory, when the sun never set on the British Empire, the life expectancy for a working-class Briton was about 20 years (law of averages, mind you). IMO, the British people needed to exhile the House of Hanover and the rest of the imperial blowhards to the Australian outback.
That's where I'm going with my idea of sending the Bushes, the Cheneys, the Clintons, and all that bloody lot to Mars. At least on Mars there are no aboriginals for them to exterminate!
::)

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: Mushroom on 05/31/06 at 2:22 pm


How important do you think the space program is? After all, if we screw up Earth, we're going to have to leave someday, but maybe exploring space will never be practical, and besides the idea of space colonization may be used by some as justification to destroy the planet.


At one time, communication satellites were not practical.  It took the wealth and power of a Superpower in order to put one into space, and keep it working.  At one time, they used to announce it on the news that one was even passing overhead, because it was such a big deal to go outside and see one.

Now, we take them for granted.  There are hundreds of them, working invisibly unless one goes out (remember the fiasco a few years ago when that happened?).  In fact, now they are built and launched by provate corporations.

At one time, sending a human into space was a huge event, and people watched it world-wide.  Now, we have people living in space for extended times.  In fact, there have been humans in space continuously since 31 October 2001.  For 5

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: Johnny_D on 05/31/06 at 2:50 pm

In "normal" space-time, light-speed is indeed the Einsteinian speed-limit.  However ... theoretically, if you could generate and control electro-gravitic energy, you could create pockets of "non-normal" space-time, in which two points that had previously been separated by several light-milliseconds in "normal" space-time would now be separated by only a few light-picoseconds.  And if you then created a spaceship that generated such "non-normal" fields one-after-another in the direction you wanted to travel, those collapses of light-milliseconds into light-picoseconds would add-up into collapsing light-years into light-months, then light-weeks, then light-days ... and then the sky's the limit for intergalactic space exploration within a fraction of an average human lifespan.

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: Mushroom on 05/31/06 at 3:00 pm


In "normal" space-time, light-speed is indeed the Einsteinian speed-limit.  However ... theoretically, if you could generate and control electro-gravitic energy, you could create pockets of "non-normal" space-time, in which two points that had previously been separated by several light-milliseconds in "normal" space-time would now be separated by only a few light-picoseconds.  And if you then created a spaceship that generated such "non-normal" fields one-after-another in the direction you wanted to travel, those collapses of light-milliseconds into light-picoseconds would add-up into collapsing light-years into light-months, then light-weeks, then light-days ... and then the sky's the limit for intergalactic space exploration within a fraction of an average human lifespan.


Uhhh, can we stick to science-reality and not science-fiction?

In the Einstein-Hawking Universe, nothing can go faster then the speed of light.  While there have been some WATs and WAGs about FTL Travel, none has any basis in real quantum mechanics.  The closest you get is the time-distortion that happens the closer you get to "Light Speed".

And in fact, because of this the longer the trip takes, the even longer the trip will take.  a 4 light year trip to Alpha-Centari at .5c will take the passenger in the ship 8 years.  Because of the time dilation, it will take 12 years on Earth.  And when the crew returns, they will physically be 16 years older.  However, they will land on Earth 24 years after they left.  And that effect is noticeable at lower speeds right here on Earth.  Every time somebody flies between Europe and the USA, the time dilation is around .25 seconds.

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: Johnny_D on 05/31/06 at 3:21 pm


Uhhh, can we stick to science-reality and not science-fiction?

In the Einstein-Hawking Universe, nothing can go faster then the speed of light.  While there have been some WATs and WAGs about FTL Travel, none has any basis in real quantum mechanics.  The closest you get is the time-distortion that happens the closer you get to "Light Speed".

And in fact, because of this the longer the trip takes, the even longer the trip will take.  a 4 light year trip to Alpha-Centari at .5c will take the passenger in the ship 8 years.  Because of the time dilation, it will take 12 years on Earth.  And when the crew returns, they will physically be 16 years older.  However, they will land on Earth 24 years after they left.  And that effect is noticeable at lower speeds right here on Earth.  Every time somebody flies between Europe and the USA, the time dilation is around .25 seconds.


Mushroom, please look again at what I said.   :)    I agree 100% with everything you said about time-dilation in normal space-time in the Einstein-Hawking universe.   I'm talking about using artificially-generated gravitational energy to alter the curvature of space-time -- I'm not talking about trying to travel faster than the speed of light.

Why do you want to "stick to science-reality", anyway?  You're opening yourself up to philosophical debate on what constitutes "reality", my friend...heh heh heh...    ;)

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 05/31/06 at 5:05 pm



And personally, I do not worry about humans "screwing up the planet".  This is because we are simply the dominant species at the moment.  That in no way means that we will always be the dominant species.  In fact, it in no way means that we will always be here.


'ow bleedin' many times do I have to say it? We are not screwing up "the planet," we're screwing up the delicate membrane of the planet that allows for human life to exist! As George Carlin said, "The planet isn't going anywhere, we are! Pack up your sh!t folks, we're goin' away!"
As for this persistent denial of human activity-influenced global warming, the scientific  consensus is in, we're making a mess. I'm trying to remember where I heard the quote, "there are more scientists named Steve who believe in man-made global warming than all the scientists who deny it put together!" If I can find that quote again, I'll definitely post it.
:D

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: Foo Bar on 05/31/06 at 9:33 pm

    Something 100% natural will destroy humanity and the Earth as we know it long before anything else.  And since nothing can go faster then light, we will likely never get beyond our solar system. 

I'll have to respectfully disagree here -- on the hundred-million-year timescales you cite, although they won't be human (look at how far we've evolved over the past million years), it's still quite plausible that we end up taking over the galaxy.

The next 10 years:  Assuming we don't scrap NASA, we'll be able to find Earth-style planets orbiting nearby stars within the next ten years. Within our lifetimes, we should have a pretty good idea of how many potentially-habitable worlds exist, and how far apart they tend to be.

The first 100 years:  We're only a few breakthroughs away from fusion power sources. Those, plus a few hollowed-out asteroids, could be used to build generation ships.  We're only a few breakthroughs away from self-replicating machines.  Those, stuck on said asteroids, could solve the colonization/terraforming problem.

The first 1000 years:  Build a ship capable of a reasonable 0.01c, and assuming there's a habitable world within 10 light years, you get there 1000 years later, and start a colony on the nearest suitable world.  The goal of the colony is to build an economy sufficient to launch two colony ships.  Considering that humanity will have pulled this feat off from scratch in little more than 5000 years, I wouldn't be surprised to see our colonists pull it off within another 1000 years.

From then on, you don't use logarithms, you use exponents.  "Civilzation" expands outwards from these jumping-off points at about 1/200th the speed of light.  It doubles the number of colonized worlds every 1000 years.  Maybe 9 out of 10 of these colonies fail.  (Or their cultures change and they decide to stay on their generation ships, or they decide to scrap technology altogether for a few thousand years.)

And it only has to work wonce.  If, during the years 3000-3100, the Earthlings fire off a few dozen such  generation ships, it's pretty much all over. The Earthlings can wipe themselves (and the Martians, and the remaining inhabitants of the solar system) out - the species lives on because interstellar distances, even at 0.01c, make interstellar  war a pretty lousy proposition.  (Sure, the armies of gene-hacking drones of Wolf 359 may decide to wipe out the flower children who went to Barnard's Star and abandoned all technology, and the conflict will likely go the way of the Spaniards vs. the Incas, but it's not like the species itself was ever in jeopardy.)

At 0.005c (1000 years of travel time, 1000 years to build another colony ship), within 20 million years, the evolutionary descendants (many of whom, having had no genetic contact with each other, will probably bump into each other on the way and be very puzzled as to why most sentient life in the galaxy uses basically the same DNA), of the first settlers will be 100,000 light years from where it started. 

The good part is that it only has to happen at most once.
The bad part is that it still has to happen at least once.

But in cosmological timeframes, if it happens to any species, it'll take over the galaxy in the blink of an eye.  (And the fact that we've had at least 2-3 billion years since the first 10B years since the Universe began, during which there are enough rocky planets around for it to have already happened, but the skies aren't full of UFOs and radio transmissions, indicates that it almost certainly hasn't happened... at least not yet.)

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: Trimac20 on 05/31/06 at 9:37 pm

I think investing in the Space program is good to a point...of course governments can't get stars in their eyes and blindly and frivolously spend at the expense of other, pressing, problems, but I'm in full support of our push into the stars. Of course at the moment there's nowhere within range which would offer suitable habitation for human beings, but we have to start somewhere. Space tourism should become big, but I think will remain the domain of the rich for a long time to come.

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: CeeKay on 05/31/06 at 10:54 pm


At one time, communication satellites were not practical.  It took the wealth and power of a Superpower in order to put one into space, and keep it working.  At one time, they used to announce it on the news that one was even passing overhead, because it was such a big deal to go outside and see one.

Now, we take them for granted.  There are hundreds of them, working invisibly unless one goes out (remember the fiasco a few years ago when that happened?).  In fact, now they are built and launched by provate corporations.

At one time, sending a human into space was a huge event, and people watched it world-wide.  Now, we have people living in space for extended times.  In fact, there have been humans in space continuously since 31 October 2001.  For 5

Subject: Re: Importance of space exploration?

Written By: Mushroom on 06/01/06 at 10:07 am


'ow bleedin' many times do I have to say it? We are not screwing up "the planet," we're screwing up the delicate membrane of the planet that allows for human life to exist! As George Carlin said, "The planet isn't going anywhere, we are! Pack up your sh!t folks, we're goin' away!"
As for this persistent denial of human activity-influenced global warming, the scientific  consensus is in, we're making a mess. I'm trying to remember where I heard the quote, "there are more scientists named Steve who believe in man-made global warming than all the scientists who deny it put together!" If I can find that quote again, I'll definitely post it.
:D


Scientists say Arctic once was tropical

WASHINGTON -- Scientists have found what might have been the ideal ancient vacation hotspot with a 74-degree Fahrenheit average temperature, alligator ancestors and palm trees. It's smack in the middle of the Arctic.

First-of-its-kind core samples dug up from deep beneath the Arctic Ocean floor show that 55 million years ago an area near the North Pole was practically a subtropical paradise, three new studies show.

The scientists say their findings are a glimpse backward into a much warmer-than-thought polar region heated by run-amok greenhouse gases that came about naturally.

"It probably was (a tropical paradise) but the mosquitoes were probably the size of your head," said Yale geology professor Mark Pagani, a study co-author.

And what a watery, swampy world it must have been.

"Imagine a world where there are dense sequoia trees and cypress trees like in Florida that ring the Arctic Ocean," said Pagani, a member of the multinational Arctic Coring Expedition that conducted the research.

Millions of years ago the Earth experienced an extended period of natural global warming. But around 55 million years ago there was a sudden supercharged spike of carbon dioxide that accelerated the greenhouse effect.

Scientists already knew this "thermal event" happened but are not sure what caused it. Perhaps massive releases of methane from the ocean, the continent-sized burning of trees, lots of volcanic eruptions.

Many experts figured that while the rest of the world got really hot, the polar regions were still comfortably cooler, maybe about 52 degrees Fahrenheit.

But the new research found the polar average was closer to 74 degrees. So instead of Boston-like weather year-round, the Arctic was more like Miami North. Way north.

"It's the first time we've looked at the Arctic, and man, it was a big surprise to us," said study co-author Kathryn Moran, an oceanographer at the University of Rhode Island. "It's a new look to how the Earth can respond to these peaks in carbon dioxide."

It's enough to make Santa Claus break into a sweat.

The 74-degree temperature, based on core samples which act as a climatic time capsule, was probably the year-round average, but because data is so limited it might also be just the summertime average, researchers said.

What's troubling is that this hints that future projections for warming, several degrees over the next century, may be on the low end, said study lead author Appy Sluijs of the Institute of Environmental Biology at Utrecht University in the Netherlands.

Also it shows that what happened 55 million years ago was proof that too much carbon dioxide - more than four times current levels - can cause global warming, said another co-author Henk Brinkhuis at Utrecht University.

Purdue University atmospheric sciences professor Gabriel Bowen, who was not part of the team, praised the work and said it showed that "there are tipping points in our (climate) system that can throw us to these conditions."

And the new research also gave scientists the idea that a simple fern may have helped pull Earth from a hothouse to an icehouse by sucking up massive amounts of carbon dioxide. Unfortunately, this natural solution to global warming was not exactly quick: It took about a million years.

With all that heat and massive freshwater lakes forming in the Arctic, a fern called Azolla started growing and growing. Azolla, still found in warm regions today, grew so deep, so wide that eventually it started sucking up carbon dioxide, Brinkhuis theorized. And that helped put the cool back in the Arctic.

Bowen said he has a hard time accepting that part of the research, but Brinkhuis said the studies show tons upon tons of thick mats of Azolla covered the Arctic and moved south.

"This could actually contribute to push the world to a cooling mode," Brinkhuis said, but only after it got hotter first and then it would take at least 800,000 years to cool back down. It's not something to look forward to, he said.



Did anybody else read that the other day?  The "Global Warming" we experience now is actually right along the pattern that has been happening for the last several million years.  The polar ice caps melt (which has been happening for over 10,000 years), this causes less reflection of sunlight in the polar regions, meaning it gets warmer.  This makes the caps melt even faster.  This causes even less reflected sunlight, and it causes faster melting, etc etc etc.

This goes right back to what I said many times before.  "Modern Science" is only around 300 years old.  At the beginning of that is when some of the largest advances were made, such as tracking of temperature and weather.  That time also just happens to have been during the "Little Ice Age".  The time in the last 3-5,000 years where the temperatures were at record lows.  In fact, we have yet to even reach the temperature of the "Medieval Climate Optimum", a period from 1100-1300 where temperatures were even warmer then they are today.  Global temperatures then were an average of 2-5c higher then they are now.

Oh, and that rise in global temperatures is more then likely what lead to the "Little Ice Age".  You see, the temperature of the Earth moves in cycles.  Periods of hot, then cold, then hot again.  Since we just left a period of several hundred years of cold, it is only logical that we now enter a period of several hundred years of warmth.  And geologist, vulcanologist, or palentologist can tell you that.

Of course, if you look at things with the small-minded idea that humans are the center of the universe, then I guess the sky is falling.

And I doubt that any of you have thrown your cars away.  And you had all better stop breathing also, because every day you are releasing huge amounts of CO2.

Check for new replies or respond here...