Author Topic: Why SpaceX Are Going to Beat NASA to Mars  (Read 25173 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline tooki

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4997
  • Country: ch
Re: Why SpaceX Are Going to Beat NASA to Mars
« Reply #50 on: July 18, 2018, 02:05:22 am »
The attitude of the company and the people who work there. I'm a space geek, I've always been a space geek and the thought of a man or woman walking on Mars is enough to make the hairs on the back of my neck stand on end. NASA are however too cautious, the two shuttle failures have beaten the spirit out of the organization and now they only want to take the tiniest of baby steps. They might, maybe, make it to Mars by 2030 but it's more likely that they will piss away their time in low Earth orbit.

SpaceX are however different. Not only are they willing to make mistakes they treat those mistakes as part of the engineering process and then they try again, and again, and again until things start to work. This is what NASA did in the 1950's and 1960's until they ended up with Armstrong's 'one small step'. What's prompted this little piece? Someone sent me a link to the SpaceX Youtube channel where there are lots of cool rocket launches, and there's THIS! [...]
Sorry, but this has to be one of the most idiotic (or at minimum, profoundly uninformed) things I’ve read in a while.

NASA is “cautious” because of a) past mistakes* and b) lack of funding. NASA’s budget is half of what it was back during the Space Race. They have neither the money nor staff to perform heroic acts of engineering like they could in the Space Race.

And I’m not sure how you can see innovation and inspiration in a video showing failures as silly as “ran out of fuel”. That, to me, just plain shows poor design or planning.


What I will agree with, though you didn’t exactly say it, is that the US as a whole (both as a government and as a society) has lost nearly all ambition. Whenever any diffucult, but worthwhile, effort is suggested, it gets knocked down as impossible or impractical. (Here’s a guaranteed-to-work example: propose adopting any public policy that works in a small country, like Switzerland, to a group of Americans. I guarantee you, at least half will dismiss it off the bat, saying “the USA is bigger, it could never work here”. And it’s said not as an invitation to flesh out a way to make it work, but rather as a resigned way to shut down the avenue of exploration. It’s massively frustrating to me.)



*If you’re the space geek you claim to be, then you should know that the Challenger disaster was the direct result of management’s lack of caution, despite expert warning.
 

Offline wraper

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 11509
  • Country: lv
Re: Why SpaceX Are Going to Beat NASA to Mars
« Reply #51 on: July 18, 2018, 07:47:30 am »
And I’m not sure how you can see innovation and inspiration in a video showing failures as silly as “ran out of fuel”. That, to me, just plain shows poor design or planning.
So poor that nobody else besides them got landing working. All other space companies and most people overall were laughing about their "silly attempts" those days. Now nobody in those companies is laughing because SpaceX ate a lot of their market share. How to see inspiration? This video was created by SpaceX themselves and posted on their own channel. Those all were landing attempts before they got technology working. Once they got landing working, now it seems more like a routine operation.
Quote
silly as “ran out of fuel”.
About this I certainly can repeat your "most idiotic (or at minimum, profoundly uninformed) things I’ve read in a while."
You might not be aware, but it's extremely weight prohibitive to put any extra fuel on rocket. Especially if it's a launch to GTO. So you want to put just enough of it. And when you are still in stage when you are just trying to get very difficult technology working, it's no wonder that real world situation may require more fuel than it was simulated. Don't forget that early landings were additional test mission after rocket launch was already completed.
 

Offline wraper

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 11509
  • Country: lv
Re: Why SpaceX Are Going to Beat NASA to Mars
« Reply #52 on: July 18, 2018, 07:55:31 am »
 

Offline In Vacuo Veritas

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 319
  • Country: ca
  • I like vacuum tubes. Electrons exist, holes don't.
Re: Why SpaceX Are Going to Beat NASA to Mars
« Reply #53 on: July 18, 2018, 12:43:29 pm »
Quote
no one's going anywhere.
I find that rather mediaeval thinking.

I prefer that to child-like magical thinking.

www.distancetomars.com

Antarctica during six months of dark winter is more hospitable to human life than Mars, where's your rush to colonize that?

NASA sent a small hatchback to Mars almost 40 years ago. Who is SpaceX "beating" to Mars here?

Are you software dreamers thinking of sending people???

https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2011/10/why-not-space/

Reality is not like software; you can't just download a new reality when the old one doesn't satisfy you. Reality doesn't care about your thinking, your dreams, or where you believe you'll retire.

Grow up. We don't even have the Concorde anymore and you guys are picking out the counter finish on your Mars condos?  :-DD
 
The following users thanked this post: coldfiremc

Offline gore

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 89
  • Country: lt
Re: Why SpaceX Are Going to Beat NASA to Mars
« Reply #54 on: July 18, 2018, 01:24:09 pm »
Quote
no one's going anywhere.
I find that rather mediaeval thinking.

I prefer that to child-like magical thinking.

www.distancetomars.com

Antarctica during six months of dark winter is more hospitable to human life than Mars, where's your rush to colonize that?

NASA sent a small hatchback to Mars almost 40 years ago. Who is SpaceX "beating" to Mars here?

Are you software dreamers thinking of sending people???

https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2011/10/why-not-space/

Reality is not like software; you can't just download a new reality when the old one doesn't satisfy you. Reality doesn't care about your thinking, your dreams, or where you believe you'll retire.

Grow up. We don't even have the Concorde anymore and you guys are picking out the counter finish on your Mars condos?  :-DD

The idea is to spread humanity beyond the Earth in case of a cosmic catastrophe. No one is rushing to colonize Antarctica (located on the Earth) because it's irrelevant. It's a difficult problem to solve, but certainly not unattainable.

The same 'software' dreamers, as you call them, managed to land a rocket vertically in the middle of an ocean. Not so long ago it was considered science fiction. Give it some time and it will happen. I don't understand your point of view. What exactly do you propose? To do nothing at all?
 

Online EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31346
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: Why SpaceX Are Going to Beat NASA to Mars
« Reply #55 on: July 18, 2018, 01:26:23 pm »
Antarctica during six months of dark winter is more hospitable to human life than Mars

It has that small thing called oxygen  ;D

Quote
Grow up. We don't even have the Concorde anymore and you guys are picking out the counter finish on your Mars condos?  :-DD

Living on Mars for say the first 50 years after first settlement will still be nothing like the movies. It'll be a pathetic, cramped, bleak existence. There won't even be Johnny Cab or three boob mutants.

I didn't like Andy Weirs new book about the moon as much as The Martian, but his description of a practical colony on the moon sounds at least realistic compared to setting up a Mars colony.
We can get a lot more tonnage to the moon much cheaper and quicker, and tourists could take realistic two week long vacations there.
Mars is more hospitable to larger scale colonisation for sure, but several orders of magnitude more tricky.
 

Offline In Vacuo Veritas

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 319
  • Country: ca
  • I like vacuum tubes. Electrons exist, holes don't.
Re: Why SpaceX Are Going to Beat NASA to Mars
« Reply #56 on: July 18, 2018, 01:33:55 pm »
Antarctica during six months of dark winter is more hospitable to human life than Mars

It has that small thing called oxygen  ;D

Quote
Grow up. We don't even have the Concorde anymore and you guys are picking out the counter finish on your Mars condos?  :-DD

Living on Mars for say the first 50 years after first settlement will still be nothing like the movies. It'll be a pathetic, cramped, bleak existence. There won't even be Johnny Cab or three boob mutants.

I didn't like Andy Weirs new book about the moon as much as The Martian, but his description of a practical colony on the moon sounds at least realistic compared to setting up a Mars colony.
We can get a lot more tonnage to the moon much cheaper and quicker, and tourists could take realistic two week long vacations there.
Mars is more hospitable to larger scale colonisation for sure, but several orders of magnitude more tricky.

 :palm: You're an engineer who slams ridiculous concepts for a living, but lose your marbles over sci-fi daydreams. This space crap is a modern religion.

Why would tourists go to the Moon for two weeks? Just drop them in the desert and kick them for two weeks. I'll do it cheap!!
 
The following users thanked this post: coldfiremc

Offline ebastler

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3512
  • Country: de
Re: Why SpaceX Are Going to Beat NASA to Mars
« Reply #57 on: July 18, 2018, 01:34:22 pm »
The idea is to spread humanity beyond the Earth in case of a cosmic catastrophe.

A "human-induced catastrophe" seems like a far more likely path to making Earth uninhabitable than a "cosmic catastrophe". Maybe our human efforts should rather be directed at avoiding to mess up Earth, than at establishing a rescue pod on Mars?  :-\
 

Online EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31346
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: Why SpaceX Are Going to Beat NASA to Mars
« Reply #58 on: July 18, 2018, 01:37:32 pm »
The idea is to spread humanity beyond the Earth in case of a cosmic catastrophe.

Paraphrasing Neil Tyson:
Whatever it takes to ship a million (insert your own number) people to Mars and make them permanently sustainable in a terraformed environment suitable for continuation of the species in the absence of Earth blowing up. It would be way easier to deflect the asteroid, control the virus, or reverse climate change, or fix whatever threatened earth.
 

Online EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31346
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: Why SpaceX Are Going to Beat NASA to Mars
« Reply #59 on: July 18, 2018, 01:45:59 pm »
:palm: You're an engineer who slams ridiculous concepts for a living, but lose your marbles over sci-fi daydreams. This space crap is a modern religion.
Why would tourists go to the Moon for two weeks? Just drop them in the desert and kick them for two weeks. I'll do it cheap!!

Are you serious?
If going to the moon was safe enough and relatively cheap enough, you would have a line a mile long for people wanting to pay top dollar for the experience of a lifetime, the ultimate bucket list item.

We already have rich people paying $20M a pop for the "trip of a lifetime" just a few hundred km above our heads.
That's about to get ever cheaper and more consumer friendly with Space-X or others no doubt.

You already have 1000+ people a year shelling out $50k+ for the miserable several month expedition to climb mount Everest with a 1% chance of dying. Have that same 1% chance of dying for a moon shot at a few hundred $k for a week and you'd have to beat them off with a stick.

It's practically guaranteed that individuals will continue to pay money for "space tourism".
Heck, you wouldn't even need to land on the moon, people would be lining up to take a trip around the back side and seeing it up close and doing the thumb thing with the earth in the window. Or landing and having a day walk around could be a package option, no need for a colony.
This is the complete opposite of a daydream, a space tourism lap around the moon is practically doable right now.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2018, 01:52:17 pm by EEVblog »
 

Offline In Vacuo Veritas

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 319
  • Country: ca
  • I like vacuum tubes. Electrons exist, holes don't.
Re: Why SpaceX Are Going to Beat NASA to Mars
« Reply #60 on: July 18, 2018, 01:47:05 pm »
Quote
no one's going anywhere.
I find that rather mediaeval thinking.

I prefer that to child-like magical thinking.

www.distancetomars.com

Antarctica during six months of dark winter is more hospitable to human life than Mars, where's your rush to colonize that?

NASA sent a small hatchback to Mars almost 40 years ago. Who is SpaceX "beating" to Mars here?

Are you software dreamers thinking of sending people???

https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2011/10/why-not-space/

Reality is not like software; you can't just download a new reality when the old one doesn't satisfy you. Reality doesn't care about your thinking, your dreams, or where you believe you'll retire.

Grow up. We don't even have the Concorde anymore and you guys are picking out the counter finish on your Mars condos?  :-DD

The idea is to spread humanity beyond the Earth in case of a cosmic catastrophe. No one is rushing to colonize Antarctica (located on the Earth) because it's irrelevant. It's a difficult problem to solve, but certainly not unattainable.

The same 'software' dreamers, as you call them, managed to land a rocket vertically in the middle of an ocean. Not so long ago it was considered science fiction. Give it some time and it will happen. I don't understand your point of view. What exactly do you propose? To do nothing at all?

Who is "proposing" anything? You're the one with the quasi-religious space fever "idea is to spread humanity beyond the Earth in case of a cosmic catastrophe".

This religious drivel comes up over and over with clueless children. Evolution is happening one way or the other. There wasn't a humanity a million years ago, and there won't be one in another million, no matter how much you cry every time Elon Musk tweets some bullshit.

You have a religion complete with a doomsday scenario, the "chosen people" who have posters of rockets in their bedrooms, the mean "unbelievers" who just can't understand what you're raving about.

Any "cosmic catastrophe" would still leave the Earth orders of magnitude more hospitable than Mars could ever be.

"The same 'software' dreamers, as you call them, managed to land a rocket vertically in the middle of an ocean"

Oh well then we are protected against cosmic catastrophes for sure! Praise Elon! Hurrah! BTW, do you have titanium roof shingles over your house to protect from cosmic catastrophes? No? Why not? But you expect the rest of us to follow in your space delirium?

Look, at the peak of America's industrial might, they were able to send three people to the Moon at a time, and two of them bounced around for a bit, picked up some dust, and came back within about a week.

Right now, NO ONE has replicated this even with all your Holy Progress that you devoutly worship. We are adding 200000 more people EVERY DAY to the planet. It would take about 70000 Saturn V launches... A DAY. Just. To. Break. Even.

So tell me, who are the chosen people to "protected humanity from a Cosmic Catastrophe (tm)?" You gonna go pick a representative sample of every ethnic group, or just your close circle of fart smellers that believe the same horsecrap you do?
 

Offline In Vacuo Veritas

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 319
  • Country: ca
  • I like vacuum tubes. Electrons exist, holes don't.
Re: Why SpaceX Are Going to Beat NASA to Mars
« Reply #61 on: July 18, 2018, 01:54:24 pm »
:palm: You're an engineer who slams ridiculous concepts for a living, but lose your marbles over sci-fi daydreams. This space crap is a modern religion.
Why would tourists go to the Moon for two weeks? Just drop them in the desert and kick them for two weeks. I'll do it cheap!!

Are you serious?
If going to the moon was safe enough and relatively cheap enough, you would have a line a mile long for people wanting to pay top dollar for the experience of a lifetime, the ultimate bucket list item.

We already have rich people paying $20M a pop for the "trip of a lifetime" just a few hundred km above our heads.
That's about to get ever cheaper and more consumer friendly with Space-X or others no doubt.

It's practically guaranteed that individuals will continue to pay money for "space tourism".
Heck, you wouldn't even need to land on the moon, people would be lining up to take a trip around the back side and seeing it up close and doing the thumb thing with the earth in the window. Or landing and having a day walk around could be a package option, no need for a colony.
This is the complete opposite of a daydream, a space tourism lap around the moon is practically doable right now.

Bullshit. It's been possible for decades. It always dies on the vine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OTRAG
http://www.cnn.com/TECH/9705/25/japan.space/

"If going to the moon was safe enough and relatively cheap enough,"

Yeah and if my grandma had wings she'd be an F-15. So what? It's all just bullshit dreams, Dave.

"a space tourism lap around the moon is practically doable right now."

Going up in MiG-29 is not just "practically" doable, it is LITERALLY doable. How many do it? Did you?

https://www.migflug.com/en/jet-fighter-flights/flying-with-a-jet/mig-29-edge-of-space.html

Why not? Because you are more attracted to the dream than the reality. If everyone COULD go to the Moon, you'd want something even more exotic because this isn't about space, it's about a dream. You'd want to visit the core of Jupiter instead because THAT's unattainable.

That's fine, just don't confuse daydreams with the toxic space religiosity or sci-fi nonsense of children who grew up on TV and no critical thinking skills.
 

Offline schmitt trigger

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1695
  • Country: mx
Re: Why SpaceX Are Going to Beat NASA to Mars
« Reply #62 on: July 18, 2018, 02:01:42 pm »
As someone who was born before Sputnik, and who both lived thru some of the coldest Cold War periods and the height of the Space Race, I can tell you that the Space Race was a very essential component of the Cold War.

The Space Race objectives were not only showing the rest of the World whose system was better, but the science and technology development involved with it, had immediate and very real military applications.

I don't see an existential threat like the Cold War today, and therefore neither the government nor the public is interested as much as it used to be.
 

Offline In Vacuo Veritas

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • !
  • Posts: 319
  • Country: ca
  • I like vacuum tubes. Electrons exist, holes don't.
Re: Why SpaceX Are Going to Beat NASA to Mars
« Reply #63 on: July 18, 2018, 02:32:43 pm »
As someone who was born before Sputnik, and who both lived thru some of the coldest Cold War periods and the height of the Space Race, I can tell you that the Space Race was a very essential component of the Cold War.

The Space Race objectives were not only showing the rest of the World whose system was better, but the science and technology development involved with it, had immediate and very real military applications.

I don't see an existential threat like the Cold War today, and therefore neither the government nor the public is interested as much as it used to be.

I always saw it as: the military applications came first, and the Space Race was just the sugar-coated PR face of it. I mean some of the NASA artwork of the era was amazing in its Norman Rockwell-esque depictions of the Moon.
 

Online EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31346
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: Why SpaceX Are Going to Beat NASA to Mars
« Reply #64 on: July 18, 2018, 02:41:06 pm »
Bullshit. It's been possible for decades. It always dies on the vine.

That doesn't mean larger space tourism won't be viable in the near future, there have been a LOT of advances since then in cost reduction and specific private venture companies dedicated to it. Space tourism has already happened.

Quote
"If going to the moon was safe enough and relatively cheap enough,"
Yeah and if my grandma had wings she'd be an F-15. So what? It's all just bullshit dreams, Dave.

Except for the people who have already paid $20M a pop to go into space, it's already an industry that has had a half billion dollar customer turnover. Not to mention those who have already ponied up the money to go with Virgin Galactic.
Bullshit dreams huh?

Quote
Going up in MiG-29 is not just "practically" doable, it is LITERALLY doable. How many do it? Did you?

Thanks for bringing that up. I was actually very close to paying the $10,000 or so back in the 90's when this became a thing. I was seriously trying to decide between a Mig-29, SU-27, or even the Mig-25 "edge of space" experience. I'm not joking, I almost booked the ticket. Ultimately decided it was better to save that money at the time due to various circumstances. Sure I talked about this in a live show long ago.
It's still on my bucket list. It's not like I can now say "see you honey, I'm taking a week off to go to Russia and fly in Mig, mind the kids for me".

Quote
Why not? Because you are more attracted to the dream than the reality. If everyone COULD go to the Moon, you'd want something even more exotic because this isn't about space, it's about a dream. You'd want to visit the core of Jupiter instead because THAT's unattainable.

You don't seem to be grounded in reality.
Of course not everyone goes on these thing, majority of the population of the US for example have never even left their own country.
I would not go for a shot into space or the moon right now because I have kids I want to see grow up, and the circa 1% chance I wouldn't come back is too high for me. But in my retirement I most certainly would take that risk.


Quote
That's fine, just don't confuse daydreams with the toxic space religiosity or sci-fi nonsense of children who grew up on TV and no critical thinking skills.

I'm basing this on actual data, and the blindingly obvious psychology of human adventure.
Do you think those 1000+ people a year who pay $50k+ to be hauled up everest for bragging rights and spend a few months doing it in horrible conditions would rather do that, or take the same chance of death and fly to the moon instead that could be done in a week in far more comfort and also zero prep in comparison? FYI, there is already a zero death rate for space tourism, and it's an actual thing.
And that's just for starters. Once people see it's a "tourist thing", albeit an extreme once-in-a-lifetime tourist thing, they will flock.
And by flock I mean, a few thousand a year tops, just like other extreme things like Everest, or Mig flights, not hundreds of thousands.
Heck, once-in-a-lifetime trips to the antarctic take longer than a moon flight would.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2018, 02:59:09 pm by EEVblog »
 

Offline NANDBlog

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4644
  • Country: nl
  • Current job: ATEX certified product design
Re: Why SpaceX Are Going to Beat NASA to Mars
« Reply #65 on: July 18, 2018, 06:35:01 pm »

Look at this. People want this. These are beautiful images, because it shows how tiny we are and then suddenly entire continents are lit up, or planets changed completely for better or worse.
It doesnt matter how much it costs. Money is a made up thing.
It is human nature, to go beyond where we were yesterday. I dont know why you want to deny this.
 

Online GeorgeOfTheJungle

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2481
  • Country: tr
Re: Why SpaceX Are Going to Beat NASA to Mars
« Reply #66 on: July 18, 2018, 06:57:13 pm »
I for one hate cruise tours because you end up jailed in a ship where the only thing you can do is look at the sea which, after more than a few hours, is quite boring really. Good for drinking and fishing at the disco at night, though, for those that like that.

Now imagine being jailed in a tight capsule for days or weeks, breathing the same recirculated filtered air conditioned air all the time, jeez, no. I'd rather watch the nice scenery of somebody else's trips in 4K on youtube, with a nice background music, thanks.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2018, 08:06:43 pm by GeorgeOfTheJungle »
http://brave.com <- BETTER AND FASTER BROWSER. YOUTUBE W/O ADS/INTERRUPTIONS.
 

Offline james_s

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 11987
  • Country: us
Re: Why SpaceX Are Going to Beat NASA to Mars
« Reply #67 on: July 18, 2018, 07:44:24 pm »
I tend to agree, however there are certainly people who would jump at the chance, who am I to judge?

I've been tempted more than once to take a flight on a vintage airliner or WWII combat aircraft, a lot of people would consider that uncomfortable and boring but it sounds pretty exciting to me. If I had money to burn I'd be all over it, I'd rather take a cross country trip on a DC-3 or Lockheed Constellation than go to the moon on a rocket but that's just me.
 

Offline Echo88

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 610
  • Country: de
Re: Why SpaceX Are Going to Beat NASA to Mars
« Reply #68 on: July 18, 2018, 08:05:19 pm »
@ In Vacuo Veritas
"Dreams are for pathetic losers! Losers i say! *spits from his porch while rocking his wheelchair*
*later that day* "I really dont know why my children never visit me"

 

Online CatalinaWOW

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3591
  • Country: us
Re: Why SpaceX Are Going to Beat NASA to Mars
« Reply #69 on: July 19, 2018, 12:27:59 am »
It is easy to logically demonstrate the stupidity of living on land.  I mean there isn't any water to hold you up and keep your gills moist.  Nothing to eat there either.  And radiation from the sun will burn you. And ......

Fortunately there weren't any thinking creatures making that decision.  So their descendants eventually took over a new environment with possibilities that literally don't exist in the water.  Fire.  High speeds.  And many others.

If our descendants are to take advantage of these new environments it will have to start someday.  Why not now?  If we start now we may not even have to wait for evolution to create very different versions of us.

For those who want to remain fish forever, that is fine - the oceans actually are quite nice.  So nice that creatures like whales, dolphins and seals went back.
 

Offline james_s

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 11987
  • Country: us
Re: Why SpaceX Are Going to Beat NASA to Mars
« Reply #70 on: July 19, 2018, 05:08:49 am »
We will probably blow ourselves up here eventually anyway. If humans manage to spread to another planet it won't take long for fighting to break out there too, only if it's a completely lifeless planet that we colonize there won't be the huge diversity of other species around. I suspect at least the first several attempts at colonizing another planet will fairly quickly end in catastrophe of one sort or another. Eventually something might work out but I think we're a long way off.
 

Offline mtdoc

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 3581
  • Country: us
Re: Why SpaceX Are Going to Beat NASA to Mars
« Reply #71 on: July 19, 2018, 05:51:20 am »
The idea is to spread humanity beyond the Earth in case of a cosmic catastrophe.

Paraphrasing Neil Tyson:
Whatever it takes to ship a million (insert your own number) people to Mars and make them permanently sustainable in a terraformed environment suitable for continuation of the species in the absence of Earth blowing up. It would be way easier to deflect the asteroid, control the virus, or reverse climate change, or fix whatever threatened earth.

Exactly. I’ve never understood what makes people think that if we can’t survive here, on a planet quite literally perfectly designed to promote  our survival, we would be able to survive on another planet.

Sure, small numbers, for short time periods, in a small, environmentally controlled space, maintained and stocked with supplies from earth - but the idea of “terraforming” another planet is science fiction in its most improbable form.

Maybe we should put more effort into “terrapreserving” the one planet nearby that can support human life.
 
The following users thanked this post: apis, GeorgeOfTheJungle, schmitt trigger

Online GeorgeOfTheJungle

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2481
  • Country: tr
Re: Why SpaceX Are Going to Beat NASA to Mars
« Reply #72 on: July 19, 2018, 08:17:31 am »
Colonization ends up at war with the colonizers, most often  >:D
http://brave.com <- BETTER AND FASTER BROWSER. YOUTUBE W/O ADS/INTERRUPTIONS.
 
The following users thanked this post: schmitt trigger

Online EEVblog

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 31346
  • Country: au
    • EEVblog
Re: Why SpaceX Are Going to Beat NASA to Mars
« Reply #73 on: July 19, 2018, 11:02:54 am »
People love to argue about the little stuff, but if you look at where American taxpayer money ends up (I say American because that's where I live and what I'm familiar with, not because I'm not aware other countries exist) our military expenditures absolutely dwarf everything else. NASA, the cost of healthcare, the cost of college education, and even smaller, even more hot button issues like welfare, that's all peanuts compared to what we spend on military. That's not to say I don't support our soldiers but come on, if there's fat to trim that's the place to look! I'd like to stop blowing up other places for a bit and focus on home.

Or just do better accounting. The Pentagon lost $2.3T (Trillion)



And more has been "lost" since then.
 

Offline wraper

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 11509
  • Country: lv
Re: Why SpaceX Are Going to Beat NASA to Mars
« Reply #74 on: July 19, 2018, 11:07:54 am »
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-audit-army/u-s-army-fudged-its-accounts-by-trillions-of-dollars-auditor-finds-idUSKCN10U1IG
Quote
The United States Army’s finances are so jumbled it had to make trillions of dollars of improper accounting adjustments to create an illusion that its books are balanced.
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf