18 Dec 13
Originally posted by googlefudgeI agree that we haven't explored it, but I don't think that explains why we need to. I can't help but feel the resources would be better spent on problems we face on earth at this very moment.
Because space is next.
We've been everywhere on Earth, and space is what's next.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
18 Dec 13
Originally posted by dryhumpAt this moment there is an asteroid or comet heading towards this planet that
I agree that we haven't explored it, but I don't think that explains why we need to. I can't help but feel the resources would be better spent on problems we face on earth at this very moment.
will wipe our species out of existence.
The fact that we have not yet found it doesn't mean it doesn't exist, it means
we don't know when it will hit.
We thus don't know how long we will have to divert it.
When we find out it might be too late. Unless we build up our space programs now.
There are any number of other potential catastrophes that could befall our species
and make us extinct if we are still stuck on this one tiny planet.
We have limited resources and space on this planet.
In space there are vast resources and lots of space.
What we learn about other planets and how they formed teaches us about ours.
And help us better model our climate and predict [and avoid] future disasters.
What we learn by putting people in space long term helps with future space exploration and
with medical programs here on Earth.
ect ect.
Spending money on space research IS spending money on problems we face on Earth.
18 Dec 13
Originally posted by dryhumpThe number of spin-off technologies resulting from space exploration more than pays for the costs.
I agree that we haven't explored it, but I don't think that explains why we need to. I can't help but feel the resources would be better spent on problems we face on earth at this very moment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_spin-off_technologies
18 Dec 13
Originally posted by googlefudgeBut we don't need a space station in particular for that....oh, hang on; right; as Soothfast said, it's a nice place to get away from all the Creationists.
At this moment there is an asteroid or comet heading towards this planet that
will wipe our species out of existence.
The fact that we have not yet found it doesn't mean it doesn't exist, it means
we don't know when it will hit.
We thus don't know how long we will have to divert it.
When we find out it might be too late. Unless we build up o ...[text shortened]...
ect ect.
Spending money on space research IS spending money on problems we face on Earth.
18 Dec 13
Originally posted by humyThey don't just float around jacking off in zero g in the space station. There are loads of experiments that can only be done properly in a weightless environment. Real important experiments that can have applications in science, industry, technology, medicine, and so on.
But we don't need a space station in particular for that....oh, hang on; right; as Soothfast said, it's a nice place to get away from all the Creationists.
Of course, I'm not surprised that a creationist wouldn't see the point of a space station, or much of anything else. Why make the world a better place if you're convinced the Messiah is coming home a week from Thursday to hand you the heavens wrapped in a bow?
18 Dec 13
Originally posted by Soothfast
They don't just float around jacking off in zero g in the space station. There are loads of experiments that can only be done properly in a weightless environment. Real important experiments that can have applications in science, industry, technology, medicine, and so on.
Of course, I'm not surprised that a creationist wouldn't see the point of a spac ...[text shortened]... vinced the Messiah is coming home a week from Thursday to hand you the heavens wrapped in a bow?
There are loads of experiments that can only be done properly in a weightless environment. Real important experiments that can have applications in science, industry, technology, medicine, and so on.
I once saw a documentary that explained in great detail why that is a common misconception -not a single one of those many commonly cited 'important' experiments and discoveries are both important and could not have been done without the space station by other much cheaper means. The space station really is a waste of money and resources whichever way you look at it. The space station isn't there for science at all but rather up there for purely political reasons with politicians, instead of informing the voters of this common misconception, preserving and exploiting it by throwing large amounts of tax-payers money at it to convince they are serious about scientific research and space exploration. In other words, they are just exploiting public ignorance to gain votes.
However, I would guess the creationists would generally reject the space station for different and completely irrational religious reasons and therefore the wrong reasons.
18 Dec 13
1 edit
Originally posted by humyUh huh. To paraphrase, "Microgravity research is a giant waste that could be done cheaper on Earth." Whatever you say. So, pharmaceutical companies (always concerned about the bottom line and making profits) are paying BIG bucks to have experiments conducted in space just for "politicians" and to "gain votes". Here, just read this random article I found after searching for 20 seconds, maybe you'll learn something:There are loads of experiments that can only be done properly in a weightless environment. Real important experiments that can have applications in science, industry, technology, medicine, and so on.
I once saw a documentary that explained in great detail why that is a common misconception -not a single one of those many commonly cited 'i ...[text shortened]... ation for different and completely irrational religious reasons and therefore the wrong reasons.
http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/science_technology/Space_firms_team_up_for_zero-gravity_research.html?cid=37012994
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
18 Dec 13
Originally posted by humyWhere else would you suggest doing research on the long term effects of zero gravity on people?
But we don't need a space station in particular for that....oh, hang on; right; as Soothfast said, it's a nice place to get away from all the Creationists.
18 Dec 13
Originally posted by RJHindsWhat you really mean deep down is you don't WANT people to advance scientifically. You want people to revert back to the 10th century when it was common to burn people at the stake for daring to suggest christianity was fake.
Propaganda.
That is your ultimate goal.
18 Dec 13
Originally posted by googlefudgeKnowing long term effects of zero gravity on people will not be important for a long time assuming the governments aren't stupid enough to waste billions of dollars sending loads of people in space long term when, right now, we need as much money spend on problems here on Earth such as world poverty.
Where else would you suggest doing research on the long term effects of zero gravity on people?