irihapeti Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 i am not quote you bc you way better than what you wrote. Yes you can be a grumpy old man sometimes but you way over the top with this what you done is grief porn using actual real grief to try make some analogy in a discussion. I dont ever want to ever again get into how a dead child affects me personally. I already been there on this forum once before and am not ever going to get into it again + but set that aside ok and look at your broader argument. Is based on the premise that the UK is poor. Is not true this the UK one of the richest (and productive in terms of wealth generation) and most prosperous societies in the world. That your Government has chosen to slash and burn social services isnt bc you havent got any money what you do have is a unwillingness on the part of the owners of that wealth the wealth generating mechanisms to share the wealth equitably + eta: change to wealth generating to make more clear what I mean Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perrie Juran Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 Phil Deakins wrote: Thank you Coby. That pretty much confirms that my objections are very well-founded. Their list of things that the project has/will achieve are:- 1. Engineering knowhow - like how to land a probe on a comet. Yeah, right. That'll be sooo beneficial to mankind. 2. Knowledge of cosmic origins and other things ( like could our water have come from comets) That's really going to benefit mankind, isn't it. 3. The inspirational value of this audacious feat in which we can all share. Truly wonderful. That's just what mankind needs - some inspiration. It does actually. It need some inspiration to actually deal with the important things and to stop spending huge amounts of money on frivolous projects like this one. 1.4 billion euros might well only buy 4 aeroplanes, but at least the aeroplanes have long lives ahead of them, during which they actually perfom a useful function for people. It may well only have cost 3.5 euros per person, but just think what that 3.5 euros per person could achieve that is truly beneficial. Things like all the needed health equipment in the hospitals, enough hospitals, etc. etc. etc. I'm sorry, Coby, but I won't change my view of this particular project as long as we are closing hospitals because of lack of funds, turning the youth out onto the streets because of lack of funds, causing families to take their children abroad to get what could be life-saving treatmen because of lack of funds, denying people medications that work because it's too expensive to be funded, and so on, and so on. As long as we are so poor as a nation that we can't afford these things, I cannot, in all good concience, support such a huge waste of money. On the subject of the value of knowledge gained actually we don't know yet the final benefit. And we won't know the value till the data is collected. We may learn nothing we didn't already know. Or we may learn things about chemistry and physics that turn out to have practical uses. I can understand the skepticism but the jury is out until we have the evidence. And if we learn nothing of value then we've learned this is a road not worth going down anymore. We don't advance with out taking risks. ETA, we could be in for all kinds of surprises. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tari Landar Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 irihapeti wrote: i am not quote you bc you way better than what you wrote. Yes you can be a grumpy old man sometimes but you way over the top with this what you done is grief porn using actual real grief to try make some analogy in a discussion. I dont ever want to ever again get into how a dead child affects me personally. I already been there on this forum once before and am not ever going to get into it again + but set that aside ok and look at your broader argument. Is based on the premise that the UK is poor. Is not true this the UK one of the richest (and productive in terms of wealth generation) and most prosperous societies in the world. That your Government has chosen to slash and burn social services isnt bc you havent got any money what you do have is a unwillingness on the part of the owners of that wealth the wealth generating mechanisms to share the wealth equitably + eta: change to wealth generating to make more clear what I mean Stated much better than I could, so I will just echo this. There is far more to the ISS research than merely finding out where our water came from, or how to land on a comet. Even the post Coby made, illustrates this and spells it out in plain English. But, a little bit of research would show precisely how we have gained far more than we have ever spent. I love these threads, and I really wish we could have them more often. Not just to discuss the postives, but because they're usually chock full of good information for anyone actually interested in learning and understanding where the money goes and what the research actually does for us, as a whole. I'm just going to bow out of the conversation now, though, because I find some of the comments that have been made are really offensive to people like myself...a parent living with a dying child. I can't wrap my mind around where one has to come from to bring that into a conversation, or why one would choose to do so. Though I respect everyone's right to have an opinion, regardless of how ill-informed it might be. I'm glad there are others who realize the benefits outshine the expense on such a large scale, it is unreal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coby Foden Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 Phil Deakins wrote: I'm sorry, Coby, but I won't change my view of this particular project as long as we are closing hospitals because of lack of funds, turning the youth out onto the streets because of lack of funds, causing families to take their children abroad to get what could be life-saving treatmen because of lack of funds, denying people medications that work because it's too expensive to be funded, and so on, and so on. As long as we are so poor as a nation that we can't afford these things, I cannot, in all good concience, support such a huge waste of money. More number crunching follows to see how much UK spent on the Rosetta mission. (I hope I got all the numbers right.) Total ESA yearly budget is €3109.5 million (from member countries and Canada). UK's yearly contribution is €300 million. That is 9.65 % from ESA's yearly budget. Total cost for the Rosetta mission is €4.2 billion (i.e. €4200 million). As UK's contribution is 9.65 %, UK has paid for the Rosetta mission total of: 9.65 /100 x €4200 = €405 million. UK's GDP is €2.110 trillion (i.e. €2'110'000 million ). UK uses on health 9.6 % from the GDP, which equals to €202'000 million. The €405 million what UK used for the Rosetta project is just a very tiny fraction (0.2 %) from what UK used on health. Would things be any better in the UK if that €405 million was added to the money spent on health instead of using it on space exploration? I don't think so. Using that €405 million on the Rosetta project by UK was a very good thing. Exploration of the unknown - out there - increases our knowledge of the universe, step by step. In the process new inventions and discoveries are made which will be for the benefit for us here on earth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madelaine McMasters Posted November 13, 2014 Share Posted November 13, 2014 Phil Deakins wrote: Thank you Coby. That pretty much confirms that my objections are very well-founded. Their list of things that the project has/will achieve are:- 1. Engineering knowhow - like how to land a probe on a comet. Yeah, right. That'll be sooo beneficial to mankind. 2. Knowledge of cosmic origins and other things ( like could our water have come from comets) That's really going to benefit mankind, isn't it. 3. The inspirational value of this audacious feat in which we can all share. Truly wonderful. That's just what mankind needs - some inspiration. It does actually. It need some inspiration to actually deal with the important things and to stop spending huge amounts of money on frivolous projects like this one. 1.4 billion euros might well only buy 4 aeroplanes, but at least the aeroplanes have long lives ahead of them, during which they actually perfom a useful function for people. It may well only have cost 3.5 euros per person, but just think what that 3.5 euros per person could achieve that is truly beneficial. Things like all the needed health equipment in the hospitals, enough hospitals, etc. etc. etc. I'm sorry, Coby, but I won't change my view of this project (any more than I will change my view of the UK's HS2) You're sounding like a grumpy ol' man, Phil! If you only explore where you expect to find something useful, you've needlessly limited your future. I have soured some on NASA, as I think it's become as self serving and wasteful as the defense establishment, but I remain a fervent believer in exploration on all fronts. If it hadn't been for the curiousity of noodlers like Newton, Lavoisier, Faraday, Maxwell and others, you'd be hunkered down for the winter in a hut heated by burning wood and lit by candles. It's only because of unfettered exploration that you're able to have arguments about unfettered exploration with people like me! In the long arc of history, I think it can be shown that searching everywhere has been pretty productive. As for spending money on airplanes, the US is going to spend $1.5 Trillion (over the life of the program) on the Joint Strike Fighter, a machine designed to fight past wars, not future or even current ones. And if the test flights are indicative, it wouldn't even do well in past wars. That's nearly $5000 per man, woman and child in the US or more than $200 for each human on Earth. If you want to cut waste, exploration ain't the place to start. ;-). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dillon Levenque Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 I've been thinking about Rosetta and Philae. About what they mean, not regarding knowledge or science or anything. Just the things themselves. We (the humans) sent something out beyond the sky ten years ago. Since then it's travelled 6 billion kilometers/3.7 billion miles through space, to rendezvous with a frozen clump of sfuff about 5 kilometers/3 miles long zipping through space at 135,000 kph/84,000 mph. Having achieved rendezvous the thing we sent launched a smaller device to actually land on the frozen clump of stuff. Humans did that! I had nothing whatever to do with any of that but it sitll makes me feel happy and glad and uplifted. I have a personal sort of link to this discussion. When I read the OP and the links, I was reminded of Voyager 1. One of my few forum threads (I just checked: 20 in a bit over 5 years) had to do with the news a few years back that Voyager 1 was about to enter interstellar space (and has, since). That was this one: General-Discussion-Forum/V-ger-1-still-on-her-way/. Voyager was, and still is, also a spectacular human achievement. I started another thread when I happened to see a news article about a photograph the Cassini orbiter (an ESA/NASA collaboration) had taken during a solar eclipse: Saturn was between the orbiter and the Sun. There was a whole series of absolutely stunning photographs, but of special interest was one in which the 'inner planets' were visible. From Saturn, Earth is one of the inner planets, and sure enough there we were. A little blue sphere in the far dark background. If you're interested: General-Discussion-Forum/Planetary-news . Funny thing is, while I was googling around to get the conversion numbers for this post I got a hit on 6 billion kilometers I hadn't expected. Took me to a photograph I'd seen before, in the 'Planetary News' thread. The photo was posted late in the thread. It's a photo of space, taken 6 billion kilometers from Earth. It's called 'Pale Blue Dot'. It was taken, of course, by Voyager 1. This one really is a must see and I won't save the pic to my PC and post it; I'll just post the link to a very good image on Wikipedia. You don't need any text. There's only one pale blue dot there. You'll find it. Pale_Blue_Dot . Earthlings, and resident Martians, I salute you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted McGregor Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Dillon Levenque wrote: I've been thinking about Rosetta and Philae. About what they mean, not regarding knowledge or science or anything. Just the things themselves. When I read the OP and the links, I was reminded of Voyager 1. This one really is a must see ... There's only one pale blue dot there. You'll find it. Pale_Blue_Dot . Earthlings, and resident Martians, I salute you! /me returns the salute. Great and beautiful post, Dillon ! Your words remind me of words by a great man once amongst us and who is, unfortunately to us, no longer with us .. :robotindifferent: ( Transcript ) From this distant vantage point, the Earth might not seem of any particular interest. But for us, it's different. Consider again that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam. The Earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena. Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that in glory and triumph they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot. Think of the endless cruelties visited by the inhabitants of one corner of this pixel on the scarcely distinguishable inhabitants of some other corner. How frequent their misunderstandings, how eager they are to kill one another, how fervent their hatreds. Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged position in the universe, are challenged by this point of pale light. Our planet is a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity – in all this vastness – there is no hint that help will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves. The Earth is the only world known, so far, to harbor life. There is nowhere else, at least in the near future, to which our species could migrate. Visit, yes. Settle, not yet. Like it or not, for the moment, the Earth is where we make our stand. It has been said that astronomy is a humbling and character-building experience. There is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny world. ( <-- there's your answer to the price / prize of astronomy, Phil ! - TDD123 ) To me, it underscores our responsibility to deal more kindly with one another and to preserve and cherish the pale blue dot, the only home we've ever known. Carl Sagan, Pale Blue Dot: A Vision of the Human Future in Space, 1997 reprint, pp. xv–xvi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coby Foden Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Rosetta mission got more interest in Twitter than Kim Kardashian's buttocks did. Science rocks! :smileyhappy: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted McGregor Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Tari Landar wrote: I can't wrap my mind around where one has to come from to bring that into a conversation, or why one would choose to do so. Though I respect everyone's right to have an opinion, regardless of how ill-informed it might be. No, no, no, Tari. I'd like to ask of you not to think that way about Phil. Knowing Phil as I do, I'm absolutely convinced it was never ever his intend to hurt you personally ! ( Phil's appetite for discussion is NOT ill-bearing or malicious. ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drongle McMahon Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Philae So glad to see you fly So far, so high, above the sky. Philae So sad to watch you die Goodbye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 irihapeti wrote: i am not quote you bc you way better than what you wrote. Yes you can be a grumpy old man sometimes but you way over the top with this what you done is grief porn using actual real grief to try make some analogy in a discussion. I dont ever want to ever again get into how a dead child affects me personally. I already been there on this forum once before and am not ever going to get into it again + but set that aside ok and look at your broader argument. Is based on the premise that the UK is poor. Is not true this the UK one of the richest (and productive in terms of wealth generation) and most prosperous societies in the world. That your Government has chosen to slash and burn social services isnt bc you havent got any money what you do have is a unwillingness on the part of the owners of that wealth the wealth generating mechanisms to share the wealth equitably + eta: change to wealth generating to make more clear what I mean You are dead worng about the UK. We are massively in debt. We borrow from the IMF to pay for things. Every year out annual budget includes the "borrowing requirement". We have to borrow massively to continue. We are well and truly broke. To everyone else who finds fault with my thinking: It doesn't matter what you say on this topic, as long as we are cutting back on the welfare of our people, because there's no money to pay for it all any more, I will be dead against wasting such huge money on a thirst for knowledge. I put the welfare of people a very long way before knowledge. It's extrememely unlikely, but it is remotely possible that the mission could turn up something of major importance to mankind, but that's not the reason it was done, and it's not going to happen. It was done in the thirst for knowledge about origins, which are things that cannot be of any practical benefit to anyone. Knowledge can wait. People have serious needs right now that we cannot afford, and yet we spend huge amounts of money on this mission. I've already privately told one contributor to this thread that I don't have friends who put the knowledge of origins before the welfare of people, ending that particular friendship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Coby Foden wrote: The €405 million what UK used for the Rosetta project is just a very tiny fraction (0.2 %) from what UK used on health. Would things be any better in the UK if that €405 million was added to the money spent on health instead of using it on space exploration? I don't think so. Would it have prevented one hospital here from closing? I think it would. Would it have paid for the necessary equipment in a few hospitals? Yes it would. So what did we buy instead of those things? We landed on a comet to find out where our water came from, and to find out what it's made of. Wonderful! Using that €405 million on the Rosetta project by UK was a very good thing. Exploration of the unknown - out there - increases our knowledge of the universe, step by step. In the process new inventions and discoveries are made which will be for the benefit for us here on earth. I'd much rather spend that money on the well-being of our people. Knowledge of the universe can wait. There's no rush. The discoveries (benefits) that have accrued from the space industry have been because of the need to invent ways of doing things and those was have been of benefit to people here on Earth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Madelaine McMasters wrote: You're sounding like a grumpy ol' man, Phil! Maybe, but I'm a grumpy old man who has the well-being of people at heart. If you only explore where you expect to find something useful, you've needlessly limited your future. If we can't afford both, and we can't at this time, then the expensive exploration should wait until we can. People first, massively expensive exporation second, when it can be afforded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coby Foden Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Phil Deakins wrote: I'd much rather spend that money on the well-being of our people. Knowledge of the universe can wait. There's no rush. The discoveries (benefits) that have accrued from the space industry have been because of the need to invent ways of doing things and those was have been of benefit to people here on Earth. How can you be so sure that there's no rush? We don't know yet what various dangers might be out there. Hostile aliens, nasty big coments on collision trajectory with earth? We do know that there are thousands and thousands of comets out there. What we don't know for sure is when the next one is about to hit the earth. We must be prepared. Surely we must do space explorations, to increase our knowledge, to make new inventions, to develop our technology, to be able to protect earth from the possible outside threats. If we wait and do nothing towards this goal one day we might sorely regret it. If a big comet was going to hit earth, new hospitals would not be able to do anything to avoid the collision; just watch and take care of hundreds of thousands injured. But if we had developed poweful space technology we would be able to avoid the cataclysmic collision. Therefore I see that developing space technology is very important. All space exploration what is done, regardless of its main goal (including Rosetta mission), will develop our general space technology to be better and and better. Of course the things what you say are very important and should be taken care of. But the money for them must come from elsewhere; not to be taken away from space exploration, slowing down development. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted McGregor Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Phil Deakins wrote: Knowledge of the universe can wait. There's no rush. Awareness and understanding of the universe cannot wait. I find it crucial to save all of us, fortunate or not, altogether and we should obtain both as soon as possible as we can as a species. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freya Mokusei Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 I've slowly drawn myself to believe that the myopic and ignorant claims made in this thread are from a minority. This realisation provides me with enough faith to post relevant information for anyone who instead would prefer to build an opinion about the significance of this event that's based in either reality or factual knowledge. Some background... Carefully constructed estimates of the future of our civilisation place the Earth's population somewhere in the 9 billion range by the year 2050 - a little over 35 years in our shared timeline. At present, no solid plan exists that can accomplish the housing, education, medical, communication or technological requirements of this many people on a single planet. Bearing in mind that every single resource that humanity uses (including drinkable water) is either in significant or radical decline, way beyond the possibility of sustaining present growth rates, or present quality of life. To detect cancer (for example), medical professionals use complex devices built from a wide array of rare-on-Earth metals (Germanium for transistors, Americium for detectors, platinum, titanium, neodynium. and a whole bundle that appear on the Periodic Table above the heaviest atomic structure that occurs naturally on Earth - Uranium). They're elements that are hard to procure in quantity on Earth, either due to their depth or sparse distribution in the Earth's crust (higher expenses to find and exploit), or their economic scarcity (due to economic competition, trade agreements, lab production or refinement limitations). These machines - and their components - cost the healthcare industry hundreds-of-thousands of dollars to produce per unit, and these prices are rising due to reduced supply of necessary components. Healthcare industry must also compete against private business for these incredibly rare minerals, which is constantly trying to convince consumers to buy ever-more technologically advanced products (this computer I'm typing on utilises many transistors), typically each being flush with rare-on-Earth metals themselves. If we expect a future with healthcare organisations (let alone the system of 'universal healthcare' a small number of people currently enjoy), advanced detection and diagnostic equipment and countless other technologies that humanity's become accustomed to - without massive population collapse, incredible wealth inequality, worldwide starvation or water shortages, the extinction of our planets earlier biodiversity, we need to do something pretty drastic. To search for an answer... Bearing in mind this incredibly complex problem (and that any solution will need to scale almost exponentially to keep up with population growth) is difficult to accomplish on Earth - our ability to extract these metals from the planets crust is even now reducing to the point where engineers, physicists and other scientists are investigating new possibilities. One example of such work - at great cost to our planets marine biology, and disproportionate return on investment - is setting up complex underwater mining facilities, ideally operated fully by automated ROVs (Remote Operating Vehicles). There are other methods, such as building these materials inside laboratories but these have drawbacks too - the most obvious of which is that a high quantity of non-renewable fuel needs to be injected into the process, and that the production methods have no ability to scale. Another possibility being investigated involves the use of unmanned probes, designed to secure themselves autonomously on to one resource that our solar system has in abundance - asteroids. Asteroids are chunks of dense ore, ice and stone measuring from meters to kilometers in scale - they have no ecology to damage and no population to displace when they're mined. Being small (compared to planets, moons), they also have very low orbital velocities and almost non-existant escape velocities (making them easy to 'capture' and then exploit). Of course there are many tricks to carrying out a deep space mining operation, most of which have been theorised - but at present, only a miniscule amount of first-hand learning has taken place. There are many pieces of the puzzle to add before this scenario becomes even slightly tangible given our present level of understanding about asteroids. It's highly plausible (assuming all goes well) that technology used to keep Philae and later projects in place while they carry out their duties, will be utilised in making this dream a reality in our medium-term future. It's obvious that Philae is one of our first tentative steps into this difficult domain, but the value of this project - in my mind anyway - can't be questioned. While some values are still speculative, some conservative estimates of the ore content inside a single asteroid less than a kilometer across (revealed easily with existing technology such as spectrometry, but limited by access to funding):- Enough iron ore to match the output for a couple of years Magnesium, Nickel, Cobalt and Platinum in quantities far above those found across the whole planet. Quantities of metals and rare elements that cannot ever be found naturally on earth. With the added bonuses of ease of extraction (after research to build efficient tools, concepts), relatively easy return trips to Earth - and of course the almost certain effect on our economy (in my dreams, making FMRIs so cheap to produce that the average household can afford one if it wanted/was necessary), I think it's nothing but disinformation to say asteroid exploration is an unnecessary use of our resources. Given our aforementioned short timespan with which to accomplish high rates of adaptation - and the end goal of trying to avoid turning our home into a lifeless dustbowl, I would say (and I'm confident that many people with higher levels of experience would agree) that asteroid mining is a concept that we can't wait any longer to explore. In conclusion... Seeing just some of the benefits listed above, it's easy to see that any claim that the techniques used during this mission so far will have little-to-no benefit to humanity - or that it lacks a focus on human well-being are either intentionally false or vastly ignorant. I am discarding all attempts to reframe the discussion to instead produce value-based judgements on individual human lives - especially considering all such claims have been made with zero evidence. Given the high rates of waste and resource inequality currently present within the UK and European economies, blaming something as promising as asteroid exploration for problems created and perpetuated by banks, politicians and corporate greed is insulting to our intelligence and our scientific community. The idea that we "cannot afford" to study this potential avenue - while continuing to waste on our current level, while exploiting our planet to dangerous and untested levels, while conducting expensive and devestating wars to secure the last of Earth's easily-procured resources - is ridiculous. At this point, we cannot afford not to look for outside-of-Earth solutions to our problems. Some of the comments made in this thread only make me more glad that space exploration is being left to those with the understanding and experience to weigh the importance of these problems, rather than relying on one-step-thinking and tabeloid-style removal of nuance to achieve short-term, selfish - and ultimately much more deadly - results. Hope this helps at least increase the educational value of this thread. NASA, ESA and others have whole sets of free PDFs available to download on this subject. They're amazing, and I will try and post links as this post is long enough already. Large multinational private companies are already seeing the value of projects like Philae. Governments and space administrations are considering things previously considered absurd beyond the realms of science fiction - a Scottish Spaceport to facilitate the hard work of thousands of highly-skilled newly created jobs, re-usable SSTO (Single Stage To Orbit) rockets with incredible efficiencies per kilo of weight launched from Earth. The rest of the planet is not waiting for an ignorant few to catch up. Enjoy your respective weekends, and thanks if you read the whole thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inara Pey Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Sour grapes over the comparative low cost of this mission aside (an annual cost per person less than that of a single visit to the cinema, for crying out loud!), if you're interested in following the project, and also in catching-up on NASA's Curiosity rover as it roams around "Mount Sharp" on Mars, I have periodic write-ups on both missions - Rosetta here, and Curiosity here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coby Foden Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Freya Mokusei wrote: Enjoy your respective weekends, and thanks if you read the whole thing. That was an interesting and informative post Freya. Thanks. :smileyhappy: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freya Mokusei Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 That you found it to have value means a lot to me - if you can project onward see the value of so much hard work being carried out by scientists and engineers (I am neither) to help solidify the dream of a sustainable future for humanity then I am doubly appreciative. You're super-welcome. I'm sure Inara doesn't need further endorsement, but I recommend the work she does on these subjects, too. Pow~! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted McGregor Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Freya Mokusei wrote what should be read in it's entirety here. Trying to live a bit of that dream right now in SL ... :robotvery-happy: Freya Mokusei wrote: Enjoy your respective weekends, and thanks if you read the whole thing. You're welcome, thank YOU and have a nice weekend yourself. :robothappy: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Coby Foden wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: I'd much rather spend that money on the well-being of our people. Knowledge of the universe can wait. There's no rush. The discoveries (benefits) that have accrued from the space industry have been because of the need to invent ways of doing things and those was have been of benefit to people here on Earth. How can you be so sure that there's no rush? We don't know yet what various dangers might be out there. Hostile aliens, nasty big coments on collision trajectory with earth? We do know that there are thousands and thousands of comets out there. What we don't know for sure is when the next one is about to hit the earth. We must be prepared. That's quite different. I already said that I'mm all for space projects in general. It's just that this one is frivolous when compared to the great needs we have down here. Surely we must do space explorations, to increase our knowledge, to make new inventions, to develop our technology, to be able to protect earth from the possible outside threats. If we wait and do nothing towards this goal one day we might sorely regret it. Very true, but this project has nothing to do with any of that. If a big comet was going to hit earth, new hospitals would not be able to do anything to avoid the collision; just watch and take care of hundreds of thousands injured. But if we had developed poweful space technology we would be able to avoid the cataclysmic collision. Therefore I see that developing space technology is very important. All space exploration what is done, regardless of its main goal (including Rosetta mission), will develop our general space technology to be better and and better. Again, this project has nothing to do with protecting the Earth. It is about trying to find out what the matter was like when the Earth was formed and about trying to get a clue as to whether comets brought our water. It isn't intended, or designed, to further space technology. Of course the things what you say are very important and should be taken care of. But the money for them must come from elsewhere; not to be taken away from space exploration, slowing down development. It's not that the money shouldn't be taken away from space stuff to cater for the needs we have, it's that money shouldn't be taken away from the needs we have (and it IS being taken away) to fund all sorts of irrelevant stuff, such as this particular mission . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 TDD123 wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: Knowledge of the universe can wait. There's no rush. Awareness and understanding of the universe cannot wait. I find it crucial to save all of us, fortunate or not, altogether and we should obtain both as soon as possible as we can as a species. I disagree. It has waited 4 billion years, and it can wait a bit longer. Let's sort out our home before we start sorting out the outside. But I haven't suggested that understanding the universe etc. can wait. I've only said that huge amounts of money should not be spent on finding out where our water came from and what the planets were made from, when there is such great need for that money here on Earth. Those things have no relevance to us now or to our future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Inara Pey wrote: Sour grapes over the comparative low cost of this mission aside (an annual cost per person less than that of a single visit to the cinema, for crying out loud!), if you're interested in following the project, and also in catching-up on NASA's Curiosity rover as it roams around "Mount Sharp" on Mars, I have periodic write-ups on both missions - Rosetta here, and Curiosity here. I don't care how much it cost each person. The total cost could have done significant good instead of being wasted like that. Roaming around Mars is completely different. We have to explore in that way if we are to ever gain the ability to leave our planet. Of course, if we have no intention of doing in the distant future, then even that sort of space exploration is a frivolous waste of money, but I believe the human race is aiming at being able to leave and go to other places. I'm in favour of that. I'm just against spending huge amounts of money on things that are irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted McGregor Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Phil Deakins wrote: TDD123 wrote: Phil Deakins wrote: Knowledge of the universe can wait. There's no rush. Awareness and understanding of the universe cannot wait. I find it crucial to save all of us, fortunate or not, altogether and we should obtain both as soon as possible as we can as a species. I disagree. It has waited 4 billion years, and it can wait a bit longer. Let's sort out our home before we start sorting out the outside. But I haven't suggested that understanding the universe etc. can wait. I've only said that huge amounts of money should not be spent on finding out where our water came from and what the planets were made from, when there is such great need for that money here on Earth. Those things have no relevance to us now or to our future. Then I find you should start pointing your finger first at Richard Branson instead of ESA. And we do need to find out exactly how the water was formed here on Earth. Should this mission conclude meteorites like this one have NOTHING to do with forming water on this earth then there's all the more reason to save and divide the water over generations to come accordingly. No water means no life. Which outweighs the importance of the distribution of wealth, even for the sake of medical care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Deakins Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 What does Richard Branson have to do with it? I don't even criticise the ESA. I criticise the governments. They are the ones that funded all this stuff. Knowing whether or not comets could have brought the water gains us nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
Flickr
Recommended Posts
Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now