RE: NASA... why? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message


FelineRanger -> RE: NASA... why? (12/21/2013 6:30:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

I watched Spaceship One claim the X-Prize from my front yard. I've watched the space shuttle coming in to land from my deck, and saw the final arrival of Endeavor in California from 150 feet off the runway.

My feeling is that commercial/private space is going to fuel a renewed interest. Maybe we'll get a reality show about tourists getting ready for their ride, and that will do the trick.


Sadly, I think there was a series planned about civilians preparing for a trip as space tourists that was canceled due to lack of interest. I think DarkLyDesires is right about interest in space exploration of any kind vs. basic survival.




MalcolmNathaniel -> RE: NASA... why? (12/21/2013 6:48:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sweetgirlserves
Hello Master,

...and the Jews didn't help much with that btw, Master... but I still love Jews.

Sincerely,

~sgs


Where the fuck did that come from? I think you'll find that there were plenty of Jews involved in the race to the moon.




jlf1961 -> RE: NASA... why? (12/21/2013 6:55:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MalcolmNathaniel


quote:

ORIGINAL: sweetgirlserves
Hello Master,

...and the Jews didn't help much with that btw, Master... but I still love Jews.

Sincerely,

~sgs


Where the fuck did that come from? I think you'll find that there were plenty of Jews involved in the race to the moon.



I was wondering that as well, just where did that statement come from?

Besides, everyone knows who hindered the race to the moon, those crazy mice insisting it was made of green cheese.




EdBowie -> RE: NASA... why? (12/21/2013 8:26:27 PM)

I think a quick look at the posting history will prove quite 'Illuminati - ing'.




MasterCaneman -> RE: NASA... why? (12/21/2013 11:00:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: FelineRanger


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

I watched Spaceship One claim the X-Prize from my front yard. I've watched the space shuttle coming in to land from my deck, and saw the final arrival of Endeavor in California from 150 feet off the runway.

My feeling is that commercial/private space is going to fuel a renewed interest. Maybe we'll get a reality show about tourists getting ready for their ride, and that will do the trick.


Sadly, I think there was a series planned about civilians preparing for a trip as space tourists that was canceled due to lack of interest. I think DarkLyDesires is right about interest in space exploration of any kind vs. basic survival.


I think it will be the realization that the Chinese are getting ready to start developing the lunar surface, and that is what's going to kick the next phase of the space age into gear. Even back in the heady days of the early program, they all knew that it wasn't really going to happen until someone figures out how to turn a buck on it. We are now standing near the point.

As for why most people aren't more enthused, most people have the attention span of gnats I've found. That's why the Duck Dynasty guy gets more airplay that what's happening on the next frontier. And ironically enough, it revolves around money. Another reason is that people have been spoiled by the SFX and CGI of movies and TV shows, and when they're faced with the real hardware and people, they universally go "meh", and proceed to bitch about their tax dollars being better spent on other things.

Space, in the terms being used here, isn't sexy. It's a hard, dangerous place that most people don't fully understand, and those three things tend to spook people off of things. It's easier to worry about what some pop singer is doing with who, what reality show team is going to win, or some other inane shit like that. But once someone figures out how to really start making it rain, so to speak, and it'll get sexier. That's the hope, anyway.




sweetgirlserves -> RE: NASA... why? (12/21/2013 11:42:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: wanderingjew

quote:

but I still love Jews.


Well that's a load off my mind.



I suck at this Master.

Working on it.

Sincerely,
~sgs




sweetgirlserves -> RE: NASA... why? (12/21/2013 11:46:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterCaneman


quote:

ORIGINAL: FelineRanger


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

I watched Spaceship One claim the X-Prize from my front yard. I've watched the space shuttle coming in to land from my deck, and saw the final arrival of Endeavor in California from 150 feet off the runway.

My feeling is that commercial/private space is going to fuel a renewed interest. Maybe we'll get a reality show about tourists getting ready for their ride, and that will do the trick.


Sadly, I think there was a series planned about civilians preparing for a trip as space tourists that was canceled due to lack of interest. I think DarkLyDesires is right about interest in space exploration of any kind vs. basic survival.


I think it will be the realization that the Chinese are getting ready to start developing the lunar surface, and that is what's going to kick the next phase of the space age into gear. Even back in the heady days of the early program, they all knew that it wasn't really going to happen until someone figures out how to turn a buck on it. We are now standing near the point.

As for why most people aren't more enthused, most people have the attention span of gnats I've found. That's why the Duck Dynasty guy gets more airplay that what's happening on the next frontier. And ironically enough, it revolves around money. Another reason is that people have been spoiled by the SFX and CGI of movies and TV shows, and when they're faced with the real hardware and people, they universally go "meh", and proceed to bitch about their tax dollars being better spent on other things.

Space, in the terms being used here, isn't sexy. It's a hard, dangerous place that most people don't fully understand, and those three things tend to spook people off of things. It's easier to worry about what some pop singer is doing with who, what reality show team is going to win, or some other inane shit like that. But once someone figures out how to really start making it rain, so to speak, and it'll get sexier. That's the hope, anyway.



MasterCaneman,

No disrespect intended, and I'm sure I don't know enough, but I know enough to know, right now, I am more worried about what's going on on on the earth than what will be the next step on the moon.

What's that song, "One step, one step leads to an o o ther".

Sincerely,
~sgs




ShaharThorne -> RE: NASA... why? (12/22/2013 4:49:35 AM)

I am a space freak but I don't go gushing over it. For my background, I got an ice geyser on Europa with Jupiter in the back and the Sun further back. Mom thinks it is neat. My brother has a telescope.

Every full moon, we go out and watch it for a few minutes. I usually identify the planets (Mom thought it was Venus lately, had to correct it because it was Jupiter).

For either Christmas or my birthday, I want my own telescope that can hook up to my computer. I know it will probably cost too much though.




Moonhead -> RE: NASA... why? (12/22/2013 6:32:18 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: EdBowie

I am old enough. As I recall, the excitement about NASA was part of a general 'faster, higher, farther' buzz of excitement that rolled the X-15, Bonneville Salt Flats, Shelby Carroll, astronauts, and so forth into one crew cut, competitive bundle.

I don't think engineering was ever that sexy again...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

I'm told (though I'm not quite old enough to remember) that people found NASA boring during the first moon landing in '69.
If people found that dull, who's going to give a fuck about unmanned probes when X Factor's on the telly?



The X-51 wasn't NASA, was it? I always thought that one was the USAF. It was definitely a far more impressive piece of engineering than the mercury capsules, whoever it was behind it. Didn't it actually go higher than any of the earliest suborbital manned rocket flights?




MrRodgers -> RE: NASA... why? (12/22/2013 7:38:35 AM)

Maybe we (they) are just a bunch of rich hobbyists...with our money ?

Or we need to feed technology to big business or we are trying to make the millionth contact...first contact being made millennia ago.

I give up.




EdBowie -> RE: NASA... why? (12/22/2013 8:01:08 AM)

It was joint military and NACA/NASA. Several of the pilots qualified for astronaut wings upon landing, because they had officially travelled into space.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead


quote:

ORIGINAL: EdBowie

I am old enough. As I recall, the excitement about NASA was part of a general 'faster, higher, farther' buzz of excitement that rolled the X-15, Bonneville Salt Flats, Shelby Carroll, astronauts, and so forth into one crew cut, competitive bundle.

I don't think engineering was ever that sexy again...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

I'm told (though I'm not quite old enough to remember) that people found NASA boring during the first moon landing in '69.
If people found that dull, who's going to give a fuck about unmanned probes when X Factor's on the telly?



The X-51 wasn't NASA, was it? I always thought that one was the USAF. It was definitely a far more impressive piece of engineering than the mercury capsules, whoever it was behind it. Didn't it actually go higher than any of the earliest suborbital manned rocket flights?





MasterCaneman -> RE: NASA... why? (12/22/2013 8:09:34 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sweetgirlserves


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterCaneman


quote:

ORIGINAL: FelineRanger


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

I watched Spaceship One claim the X-Prize from my front yard. I've watched the space shuttle coming in to land from my deck, and saw the final arrival of Endeavor in California from 150 feet off the runway.

My feeling is that commercial/private space is going to fuel a renewed interest. Maybe we'll get a reality show about tourists getting ready for their ride, and that will do the trick.


Sadly, I think there was a series planned about civilians preparing for a trip as space tourists that was canceled due to lack of interest. I think DarkLyDesires is right about interest in space exploration of any kind vs. basic survival.


I think it will be the realization that the Chinese are getting ready to start developing the lunar surface, and that is what's going to kick the next phase of the space age into gear. Even back in the heady days of the early program, they all knew that it wasn't really going to happen until someone figures out how to turn a buck on it. We are now standing near the point.

As for why most people aren't more enthused, most people have the attention span of gnats I've found. That's why the Duck Dynasty guy gets more airplay that what's happening on the next frontier. And ironically enough, it revolves around money. Another reason is that people have been spoiled by the SFX and CGI of movies and TV shows, and when they're faced with the real hardware and people, they universally go "meh", and proceed to bitch about their tax dollars being better spent on other things.

Space, in the terms being used here, isn't sexy. It's a hard, dangerous place that most people don't fully understand, and those three things tend to spook people off of things. It's easier to worry about what some pop singer is doing with who, what reality show team is going to win, or some other inane shit like that. But once someone figures out how to really start making it rain, so to speak, and it'll get sexier. That's the hope, anyway.



MasterCaneman,

No disrespect intended, and I'm sure I don't know enough, but I know enough to know, right now, I am more worried about what's going on on on the earth than what will be the next step on the moon.

What's that song, "One step, one step leads to an o o ther".

Sincerely,
~sgs


Consider this. Picture an infant in a crib. Over time, the infant grows up some, but never leaves it for one reason or another. As long as someone cares for the infant, it lives. If something happens to that someone, or the crib starts falling apart, the infant may die.

Humanity is that infant. Everything we are now and have been is located in one place. If something happens to that one place, cosmic or mundane, we stand to lose it all. A normal infant starts to try to walk at a certain time in its life, and using that as an example, we are at the 'pre-toddler' stage. We need to begin to spread out in order to assure our survival as a species. Only now are we learning just how dangerous our neighborhood is, and if we wish a meaningful future, our best chance is to become a multi-planet species, or at least one that knows how to create off-planet habitats.

And by all means, we should work on fixing up the crib, as it were. It makes sense, and can be done at the same time as we start to extend our reach. But it's imperative that we begin expanding outward as soon as we can, if only at first for economic reasons, then for nobler ones. NASA's budget is tiny compared to what we've wasted in Iraq and Afghanistan and the hundred other fires we've been pissing on for the last half-century. It's not a matter of it 'costs too much', it's that as a nation (and to an extent, the world), we're too focused on short-term goals.

Now is the time we should be putting on our walking shoes, in a manner of speaking, and start to explore the neighborhood. There is so much out there that needs learning, and still a lot here as well. What I'm trying to say is, we (as a species), need to take a serious look at what could be our possible future. Right now as it stands, we could manage to make ourselves extinct in several ways, we could meet our ends like the dinosaurs, or how the Great Die Off (the Permian Extinction event) occurred, which is believed to have been from a nearby gamma-ray burst. Boom-90% of all species on Earth died off overnight.

We need to spread out, scatter, and continue on and the only way to do that is to really learn how to cross that immense gulf of hazardous territory we call "Space". There are things out there that can benefit those on Earth as well. Orbital power generation is one concrete item I can mention at the moment, but there are also other benefits to be gained by undertaking this task. Spin-off products (like the computer or smart phone you're using to read this), medicine, materials science, even agriculture all benefited from the space program in the past.

By all means, we need to fix up the crib to ensure the infant is safe and healthy, but the time draws near that it has to begin to make plans to at least learn what the rest of the house is like. Hopefully, this wasn't too vague.




hlen5 -> RE: NASA... why? (12/22/2013 8:15:31 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterCaneman
.....

Consider this. Picture an infant in a crib. Over time, the infant grows up some, but never leaves it for one reason or another. As long as someone cares for the infant, it lives. If something happens to that someone, or the crib starts falling apart, the infant may die.

Humanity is that infant. Everything we are now and have been is located in one place. If something happens to that one place, cosmic or mundane, we stand to lose it all. A normal infant starts to try to walk at a certain time in its life, and using that as an example, we are at the 'pre-toddler' stage. We need to begin to spread out in order to assure our survival as a species. Only now are we learning just how dangerous our neighborhood is, and if we wish a meaningful future, our best chance is to become a multi-planet species, or at least one that knows how to create off-planet habitats.

And by all means, we should work on fixing up the crib, as it were. It makes sense, and can be done at the same time as we start to extend our reach. But it's imperative that we begin expanding outward as soon as we can, if only at first for economic reasons, then for nobler ones. NASA's budget is tiny compared to what we've wasted in Iraq and Afghanistan and the hundred other fires we've been pissing on for the last half-century. It's not a matter of it 'costs too much', it's that as a nation (and to an extent, the world), we're too focused on short-term goals.

Now is the time we should be putting on our walking shoes, in a manner of speaking, and start to explore the neighborhood. There is so much out there that needs learning, and still a lot here as well. What I'm trying to say is, we (as a species), need to take a serious look at what could be our possible future. Right now as it stands, we could manage to make ourselves extinct in several ways, we could meet our ends like the dinosaurs, or how the Great Die Off (the Permian Extinction event) occurred, which is believed to have been from a nearby gamma-ray burst. Boom-90% of all species on Earth died off overnight.

We need to spread out, scatter, and continue on and the only way to do that is to really learn how to cross that immense gulf of hazardous territory we call "Space". There are things out there that can benefit those on Earth as well. Orbital power generation is one concrete item I can mention at the moment, but there are also other benefits to be gained by undertaking this task. Spin-off products (like the computer or smart phone you're using to read this), medicine, materials science, even agriculture all benefited from the space program in the past.

By all means, we need to fix up the crib to ensure the infant is safe and healthy, but the time draws near that it has to begin to make plans to at least learn what the rest of the house is like. Hopefully, this wasn't too vague.


Love this!




Moonhead -> RE: NASA... why? (12/22/2013 8:31:26 AM)

I'm not sure that shifting a tiny percentage of the infant to a far more precarious crib a very short distance away would do much to improve its survival chances in the long run if something happens to the original crib, though. I know that's an argument beloved a certain type of SF writer (mostly libertarian/right Heinlein impersonators who clearly prefer The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress to Stranger In A Strange Land or Starship Troopers), but unless permanent and self contained space colonies can be established, all the high frontier will do is spread the crib a bit thinner. At this point, that really isn't much of a survival strategy, is it?




TheHeretic -> RE: NASA... why? (12/22/2013 8:35:01 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead
The X-51 wasn't NASA, was it? I always thought that one was the USAF.



The X-51 is Boeing, actually, and the last test flight was earlier this year. They ran it from Edwards, with plenty of NASA and USAF support. It's a test bed for future hypersonic aircraft - LA to London in 1 hour type stuff.

Were you thinking of the X-15?




Moonhead -> RE: NASA... why? (12/22/2013 8:45:40 AM)

I was. Always confue those two.
Embarrasingly, the poster I was answering had it right as well...




MasterCaneman -> RE: NASA... why? (12/22/2013 6:42:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

I'm not sure that shifting a tiny percentage of the infant to a far more precarious crib a very short distance away would do much to improve its survival chances in the long run if something happens to the original crib, though. I know that's an argument beloved a certain type of SF writer (mostly libertarian/right Heinlein impersonators who clearly prefer The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress to Stranger In A Strange Land or Starship Troopers), but unless permanent and self contained space colonies can be established, all the high frontier will do is spread the crib a bit thinner. At this point, that really isn't much of a survival strategy, is it?

About 74,000 years ago, a super volcano we now call Toba erupted. As a result, there was a general extinction event that ended up with Homo Sapiens being reduced down to roughly a thousand or so individuals. There are now over seven billion of us now, all descended from that lucky thousand. Some experts postulate that as few as 150 breeding pairs is enough to ensure the continuing survival of our species without suffering the effects of inbreeding.

Better scattered thinly than concentrated on one small location. Sure, lunar or Martian colonies aren't ideal-we're more or less conditioned for one-G living, but better than nothing. A better solution would be for large-scale infrastructure colonies at the LaGrange Points (Uh haw haw haw-sorry), as postulated by O'Neill and Clarke. The technology is currently on the shelf, there needs no unobtanium or handwavium to make it happen, only the will and the money to do so. It would be in our best interests to start learning how to extract the untold trillions of dollars worth of materials flying freely around the Sun.

And for those who say it'd cost too much to send it back down to Earth, you're right. That isn't part of the equation. You use the stuff out there to build things like furnaces, factories, and habitats so we can move at least a fraction of our population off Earth and start to really get our footing in that environment. Humans need frontiers to push against. Without them, we'll begin to stagnate until ultimately entropy catches up with our species and we fade away into the geologic record. I do not like that idea one bit, and I will do what I can, however small, to prevent that.




sweetgirlserves -> RE: NASA... why? (12/22/2013 9:56:30 PM)

Master, You missed my whole post, and only commented on a few words of it.




sweetgirlserves -> RE: NASA... why? (12/22/2013 10:09:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: wanderingjew

I am not concerned with colonization of space, that will happen when the technological hurdles are overcome, what I think is far more important is understanding what is out there. The void is not empty, it has mass -- vast amounts of mass, yet there is nothing there! What gives? The universe is expanding, yet it is not slowing down, in fact it is speeding up. There is some force that is stronger than gravity that is driving everything away from everything else, and the further apart those things get, the stronger the force driving them apart gets - again, what gives?

What the Hell is going on out there in that seemingly limitless emptiness that the "nothing" has more mass than everything that exists and that forces operate in the exact opposite manner they are supposed to. Do you not see the implications of this? It means we have it wrong. No matter how well modern astrophysics explains what we see - we have it wrong, because it cannot explain what we don't see, and there is far more of whatever it is that we don't see than there is of what we do see.

Universe! Y U no follow rules?


Greetings Master wanderingjew,

(Please forgive me Master, I hope you didn't misunderstand my post above about Nasa and the jews the way one other Master here evidentally did. I hope He is open to hearing me so I can attempt to help him understand where I was coming from. It was my mistake that I didn't come back and respond to this Master's response to me, right away, as I got side-tracked.)

But Master, I wanted to say that I have been going to Dahn Yoga and it is actually helping me to be able to "feel" this energy in the "nothingness" that you speak of. I believe it has something to do with electronically charged particles, maybe ions would be a word I would want to explore, but particles, as I am beginning to understand are electronically charged, much like electricity or lightning in the sky. I also understand that something causes magnets to switch their polarization, and I luckily stumbled upon an interesting article recently which was explaining that the sun's magnetic polarization was supposed to have "switched" sometime recently, maybe even today or within the last week or two. The sun switches its magnetic poles once every 11 years. I have sensed lately that we are "going too fast" as you have explained scientifically above, and have only wondered in my mind if that was actually what the problem might be for us all, but then, that was way over my head. So I dropped it. And now, luckily, because another Master misunderstood me and made me come retrace my steps, I have found You explaining this important information. Thank You Master. I have more to go on now as well.

Sincerely,
~sgs




sweetgirlserves -> RE: NASA... why? (12/22/2013 10:15:12 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: MalcolmNathaniel


quote:

ORIGINAL: sweetgirlserves
Hello Master,

...and the Jews didn't help much with that btw, Master... but I still love Jews.

Sincerely,

~sgs


Where the fuck did that come from? I think you'll find that there were plenty of Jews involved in the race to the moon.



Dear Master MalcolmNathaniel,

Yes Master, there probably were many Jewish Men and Women involved in the race to the moon. I really wouldn't know Master, as I have never paid much attention to that level of depth.

I was talking more about experiencing being in multiple dimensions such as sensing and understanding the energy world, at the same time experiencing the spiritual world and also, simultaneously, being grounded in the physical world, here on earth, as something new I am learning how to do through meditation and related training at Dahn Yoga here in Nevada.

Sincerely,
~sgs

P.S. I am sorry Master, Please Forgive me for being so unclear, and for taking so much time to get back here. The other Master saved me this time, evidently.
Edited for spelling errors and clarity for Master's pleasure.




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875