• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Space programs and their support among the population [W:91]

Your stance on space programs

  • I'm an American and I consider NASA a priority

    Votes: 36 63.2%

  • I'm an American and I don't consider space programs a priority

    Votes: 12 21.1%

  • I'm an American and I want more international coop (NASA + ESA + other)

    Votes: 19 33.3%

  • I'm an European and I consider ESA a priority

    Votes: 2 3.5%

  • I'm an European and I want more international coop

    Votes: 2 3.5%

  • I'm an European and I don't care about space programs

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • I'm Russian and I want more for Roscosmos

    Votes: 1 1.8%

  • I'm Russian and I want more cooperation

    Votes: 1 1.8%

  • I'm Russian and I don't care about space programs

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • I'm (other) and herp derp, I leave comment

    Votes: 4 7.0%
  • Total voters
    57
  • Poll closed .
Ben K. said:
I have no doubt we could get there, but there's a difference between them being candidates for life-bearing (that conditions make it possible) and actually having good chances of bearing life.
Click to expand...


Latest estimates say there should be at least 100 billion planets in our galaxy... and perhaps several times that many.

If one in a thousand is life-bearing, that would be 100 million life-bearing planets...
 
Goshin said:
Latest estimates say there should be at least 100 billion planets in our galaxy... and perhaps several times that many.

If one in a thousand is life-bearing, that would be 100 million life-bearing planets...
Click to expand...

I think those are incredibly optimistic odds you're giving there.
 
Ben K. said:
I think those are incredibly optimistic odds you're giving there.
Click to expand...


Optimistic or pessimistic is a matter of opinion in that... we haven't gotten a good enough look at ANY exoplanet yet to say for sure whether it has life, so it is all speculation until we go LOOK.


I want to go look.
 
IMO, while i think space is a priority, NASA became too big to be useful. example: how many astronauts did we really need on staff?(far fewer than we kept)

while i am way into space exploration, i am also way into stopping rediculous and unfounded financial waste. when Russia, China and Richard Branson can put a module into space for significantly less, then the USA's space ventures need to be seriously reevaluated and brought to a halt until the dead weight is cut loose.
 
I consider it a priority right there with Pakistani Sesame Street and the bridge to nowhere. There are far better things that the money could be spent on. NASA is the equivalent of a family who can't pay their mortgage taking a 2 week vacation to the Bahamas.
 
If the nearest habitable planet is only 20 light years away, we have no chance of getting there....
If we could somehow attain light speed, we would probably have to destroy our own planet for enough fuel to go that fast...
 
I am of the opinion that space exploration and exploitation (the latter because we are more likely to go up there if profit is to be made, frankly) is one of the most important things humans should be worried about.

Even if the chances of asteroid strikes on earth, massive solar flares, and other natural phenomenon are low…And even if the chance of hostile alien life forms is even lower.
As I view things, they exist, and unlike almost all other possible issues we may encounter, they have the potential to completely eliminate the human race.
Thus we need self-sustaining colonies on or near other celestial bodies, or even just floating in space somewhere.

Now, I know there are issues closer to home, like economic woes the world over for one.

But none of that will matter for **** if the planet gets wiped out.


Yeah, yeah, unlikely you say...
Still possible though…


Edit: Nonetheless I'm not at all sure that any current entity is capable of successfully accomplishing such a task.

So whether funding NASA more is a good idea...I dunno.
 
Last edited:
UtahBill said:
If the nearest habitable planet is only 20 light years away, we have no chance of getting there....
If we could somehow attain light speed, we would probably have to destroy our own planet for enough fuel to go that fast...
Click to expand...
Various scientists and non-scientists are aware of and/or talk about the idea of a “generation ship”, or the like, which as I understand it basically involves a large enough ship and enough humans to procreate and thus keep the species alive on the way to this other solar system, even over the course of…several generations (as that’s what it would take to travel that far).

Not saying this is even vaguely likely to occur at this point in time, or any time soon for that matter – but it is a “workaround” for the time and distance issues.
 
Goshin said:
Latest estimates say there should be at least 100 billion planets in our galaxy... and perhaps several times that many.

If one in a thousand is life-bearing, that would be 100 million life-bearing planets...
Click to expand...
Even if it's only one in a billion, that is at least 100 such planets.
 
Ben K. said:
Space bores me. There's a whole lot of world to see here, more than any will see in their lifetime. I don't really see the point in manipulating environments not meant for humans instead of improving the environment we have that is specifically suited for us and is far more beautiful and diverse than any other landscape out there.
Click to expand...
Because while unlikely, it is still possible for this intricate weave of life we have on this planet to be at worst totally wiped out, and at best irrevocably changed.

Granted, it changes irrevocably on its own each and every day, and such is the natural order of things, but in this case I mean devastated on a massive scale, and only barely surviving.
 
UtahBill said:
If the nearest habitable planet is only 20 light years away, we have no chance of getting there....
If we could somehow attain light speed, we would probably have to destroy our own planet for enough fuel to go that fast...
Click to expand...

I'd say it would be more likely that we would blow our planet apart in the eureka moment that discovered the energy. Our best bet is probably to start shooting primordial soup probes at every conceivable target and just hope that one of them reached a safe haven long after we are gone so that life itself would continue without us.
 
Fisher said:
I'd say it would be more likely that we would blow our planet apart in the eureka moment that discovered the energy. Our best bet is probably to start shooting primordial soup probes at every conceivable target and just hope that one of them reached a safe haven long after we are gone so that life itself would continue without us.
Click to expand...
That is a bit reckless IMO.

What if one of those primordial soup probes encounters a planet inhabited by a form of life its sensors cannot recognize, and the primordial soup is as the most virulent of biological weapons to their kind?

We could start an interstellar war that is the cause of our demise millennia later…:lamo….actually it’s not that amusing…
 
The Mark said:
That is a bit reckless IMO.

What if one of those primordial soup probes encounters a planet inhabited by a form of life its sensors cannot recognize, and the primordial soup is as the most virulent of biological weapons to their kind?

We could start an interstellar war that is the cause of our demise millennia later…:lamo….actually it’s not that amusing…
Click to expand...

If it weren't for the blankets we gave the Indians, manifest destiny may never have occurred. Of course, since I do have some native-american blood, I am conflicted about all that......fine, I guess we can throw in a few cans of Lysol in case there is intelligent life on the planet to at least give them a fighting chance.......
 




This poll closes just after tax day in the US, just a coincidence?

:peace
 
The entire running budget for NASA for the past 50 years, for the moon landings, the countless rovers, the space probes, the satellites, everything NASA has done, costs less than the 08 bailouts. Just to put the money into perspective.

NASA, and space exploration should be a priority, because if we stop exploring, searching for the unknown, we will stagnate as a species.
 
Fisher said:
If it weren't for the blankets we gave the Indians, manifest destiny may never have occurred. Of course, since I do have some native-american blood, I am conflicted about all that......fine, I guess we can throw in a few cans of Lysol in case there is intelligent life on the planet to at least give them a fighting chance.......
Click to expand...
I mean they might counterattack.

FFS we shouldn't launch what might be WMD's to some unknown life form randomly into the void.
 
Personally I think that the whole world (ie all countries) should co-operate and help with space exploration. Not just to help defray the costs but because such cooperation would help humanity in itself. Who knows, it might even bring about understanding and peace.
 
The Mark said:
Because while unlikely, it is still possible for this intricate weave of life we have on this planet to be at worst totally wiped out, and at best irrevocably changed.

Granted, it changes irrevocably on its own each and every day, and such is the natural order of things, but in this case I mean devastated on a massive scale, and only barely surviving.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure it would be far easier to adapt to a changing Earth biosphere than to travel en masse and adapt to a foreign planets biosphere (or more likely have to create one from scratch).

There may be a time when space exploration is a pressing concern - but there are plenty of resources still to extract on Earth, plenty of ways to develop a more efficient relationship with the Earth and really big oceans where we know new species exist that we have not yet encountered.
 
Space is the final frontier. It holds the promise that, one day, we will no longer worry about our species ending with the death of Earth. To look up to the heavens is to know unlimited potential.... boundless promise. The resources that could be taken, the lands that could be discovered, and the adventures that may unfold... Truly, it is assurance of our survival.
 
Ben K. said:
I'm pretty sure it would be far easier to adapt to a changing Earth biosphere than to travel en masse and adapt to a foreign planets biosphere (or more likely have to create one from scratch).

There may be a time when space exploration is a pressing concern - but there are plenty of resources still to extract on Earth, plenty of ways to develop a more efficient relationship with the Earth and really big oceans where we know new species exist that we have not yet encountered.
Click to expand...

Eventually we will wear out this ole' Earth. Fossil fuels will eventually go the way of the dodo on this planet. It is better to prepare now than to wait until we no longer have the resources to spread out into space. If we wait that long then it will be assured that we will become extinct far faster than we would if we spread out into space.
 
I think the Human species thrives on challenges, the bigger the better.
In striving to overcome the obstacles ahead, we learn the answers to questions,
we don't know we need to ask.
The actual destination is not as important as the journey.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Eventually we will wear out this ole' Earth. Fossil fuels will eventually go the way of the dodo on this planet. It is better to prepare now than to wait until we no longer have the resources to spread out into space. If we wait that long then it will be assured that we will become extinct far faster than we would if we spread out into space.
Click to expand...

I have more faith in the idea of renewable energy and more and more efficient usage of fossils than at least 8 billion pilgrims feasibly setting up space colonies and actually finding their existence meaningful out there.
 
This is Neil deGrasse Tyson in front of the Senate in 2012.

 
Goshin said:
Latest estimates say there should be at least 100 billion planets in our galaxy... and perhaps several times that many.

If one in a thousand is life-bearing, that would be 100 million life-bearing planets...
Click to expand...

Carl Sagan in his book COSMOS estimated that the odd of intelligent life out in the COSMOS based on the possiblities of planets existing that could support it were 1x10 to the 9th
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom