View Poll Results: Do you support the continuation of the US space programme?

Voters
65. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    56 86.15%
  • No

    3 4.62%
  • Only the continuation of the research

    5 7.69%
  • Other

    1 1.54%
Page 10 of 17 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 170

Thread: Space travel. Is it necessary? Do you support it?

  1. #91
    Sage
    Bodhisattva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    New Zealand
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 03:30 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    48,643

    Re: Space travel. Is it necessary? Do you support it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Yeah. Just retarget a missile designed to reach sub-orbital velocity and return to a target on earth to hit a target that requires escaping earth's gravity to reach. Yeah, just pushing a few buttons ought to do the trick....not.
    So you throw out the idea simply because it is difficult? Alrighty then...
    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    The Supreme Court can't interpret The Constitution. They don't have that power.

  2. #92
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Space travel. Is it necessary? Do you support it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    So you throw out the idea simply because it is difficult? Alrighty then...
    No, you're rejecting the use of a lunar base as a national defense asset, not I.

    I answered your objection with solid fact.

  3. #93
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    40,485

    Re: Space travel. Is it necessary? Do you support it?

    One of the reasons space is a strategic asset, and WILL be whether some want it to or not, is the energy superiority of higher orbital positions. Anyone familiar with the Flying Crowbar concept?

    Take a bunch of crowbars. Put a small retrorocket on each, guidance fins, a simple computer, radio and sensors. Stick a little patch of ablative stuff on the leading edge. Put them in orbit.

    You can drop them almost anywhere on the globe, and the sheer kinetic energy of their impact (absent any nukes or explosives!) will shred tanks, sink ships, smash bases, and so on.

    Higher orbit, higher potential kinetic energy. Cheap too.


    G

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  4. #94
    Sage
    Bodhisattva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    New Zealand
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 03:30 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    48,643

    Re: Space travel. Is it necessary? Do you support it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    No, you're rejecting the use of a lunar base as a national defense asset, not I.

    I answered your objection with solid fact.
    I am talking about that one specific issue, re-routing missiles to the moon. It is absolutely possible and you ignored it... I also can and have used solid fact... so? Taking nukes to the moon is a bad idea, not to mention that nobody owns the moon, unless you are using the whole "finders keepers" smoking gun of an argument.
    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    The Supreme Court can't interpret The Constitution. They don't have that power.

  5. #95
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Space travel. Is it necessary? Do you support it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    I am talking about that one specific issue, re-routing missiles to the moon. It is absolutely possible and you ignored it... I also can and have used solid fact... so? Taking nukes to the moon is a bad idea, not to mention that nobody owns the moon, unless you are using the whole "finders keepers" smoking gun of an argument.
    No, it's not possible, they don't have the ability to get there. They're not even designed to achieve low earth orbit, let alone go past that.

    And what's wrong with the notion that someone that pays to discover an asset should be the one, and the only one at that, who gets to exploit it and profit from it?

    Did Uruguay subsidize Neil Armstrong and the other astronauts?

    No.

    So why should they have a single word of input on what the United States does with whatever it can find on the Moon?
    Last edited by Scarecrow Akhbar; 06-21-09 at 06:44 PM.

  6. #96
    Sage
    Bodhisattva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    New Zealand
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 03:30 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    48,643

    Re: Space travel. Is it necessary? Do you support it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    No, it's not possible, they don't have the ability to get there. They're not even designed to achieve low earth orbit, let alone go past that.

    And what's wrong with the notion that someone that pays to discover an asset should be the one, and the only one at that, who gets to exploit it and profit from it?

    Did Uruguay subsidize Neil Armstrong and the other astronauts?

    No.

    So why should they have a single word of input on what the United States does with whatever it can find on the Moon?
    It is about getting missiles to the moon, and that does not include only ICBMS, this is your thing, not mine. Nations can and would get missiles that could get to the moon.

    We have enough nukes and there is no logical reason that we need to take some to the moon. We could blow up the Earth enough times without ****ing up the moon and planets beyond.
    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    The Supreme Court can't interpret The Constitution. They don't have that power.

  7. #97
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Space travel. Is it necessary? Do you support it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    It is about getting missiles to the moon, and that does not include only ICBMS, this is your thing, not mine.
    Yeah, that's because that's what the arsenals contain at this time.

    How cost effective is it for nations to maintain an arsenal of lunar attack missiles when the effectiveness of those warheads is minimal, the location of the launch site can be presumed hidden, and the act of launching an attack at those bases would be presumed by the owner of those bases as the first strike attack of a nuclear war and will retaliate long long before the attacking missiles can arrive, that being the nature of having the orbital high ground in the first place?

    Let's, the rockets to attack a lunar base will be liquid fueled, since solids just don't have the power to do the job, and that adds all sorts of problems.

    The avenging missiles will be out of their silos and dropping towards earth DAYS before the attacking missiles arrive. That's an issue of concern, I'd say.

    And yet those avending missiles can be routed so that it could take weeks to reach their targets, if desired, giving the defenders a long time to negotiate the surrender of the attackers.

    What is clear that a nuclear missile base on the moon holds all the advantages, none of the disadvantages in this exchange.

    So why not do it, when it would contribute to other, commercial successes?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    Nations can and would get missiles that could get to the moon.
    Only Russia has demonstrated the ability to launch such weapons to date.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    We have enough nukes
    Not really, that bumbling ass that left office reduced the number of warheads to two thousand or so, the ignorant Kumbaya Messiah that took his place is talking about dropping the number to a thousand. No where near enough for strong deterrence.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    and there is no logical reason that we need to take some to the moon. We could blow up the Earth enough times without ****ing up the moon and planets beyond.

    We can't blow up the Earth, not once. Maybe we should build a Lexx, the issue is debatable, since we lack the technology. We probably don't have the ability to even destroy the human race any more. (I bet that pisses PETA off.)

  8. #98
    Sage
    Bodhisattva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    New Zealand
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 03:30 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    48,643

    Re: Space travel. Is it necessary? Do you support it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Yeah, that's because that's what the arsenals contain at this time.

    How cost effective is it for nations to maintain an arsenal of lunar attack missiles when the effectiveness of those warheads is minimal, the location of the launch site can be presumed hidden, and the act of launching an attack at those bases would be presumed by the owner of those bases as the first strike attack of a nuclear war and will retaliate long long before the attacking missiles can arrive, that being the nature of having the orbital high ground in the first place?

    Let's, the rockets to attack a lunar base will be liquid fueled, since solids just don't have the power to do the job, and that adds all sorts of problems.

    The avenging missiles will be out of their silos and dropping towards earth DAYS before the attacking missiles arrive. That's an issue of concern, I'd say.

    And yet those avending missiles can be routed so that it could take weeks to reach their targets, if desired, giving the defenders a long time to negotiate the surrender of the attackers.

    What is clear that a nuclear missile base on the moon holds all the advantages, none of the disadvantages in this exchange.

    So why not do it, when it would contribute to other, commercial successes?
    It might be the best course of action, at this time though, I think that weapons on the moon would create more problems than solutions, though I am reading up on China and its threat regarding the use of laser beams at our satellites. MAybe it would be a good idea, though how do we stop others from doing the same... Russia or China, both with the ability to do so?


    Only Russia has demonstrated the ability to launch such weapons to date.
    And that will change...


    Not really, that bumbling ass that left office reduced the number of warheads to two thousand or so, the ignorant Kumbaya Messiah that took his place is talking about dropping the number to a thousand. No where near enough for strong deterrence.


    I decided to look up the numbers and was shocked to see how low we let our "strategic" stockpile get, I assumed it was still around ten thousand or so. That being said, we still have an estimated 9,400 nuclear weapons of strategic and non-strategic, or tactical, grade, of which about 2,700 are operational.



    We can't blow up the Earth, not once. Maybe we should build a Lexx, the issue is debatable, since we lack the technology. We probably don't have the ability to even destroy the human race any more. (I bet that pisses PETA off.)
    That is obviously just a figure of speech. Like I said, I was shocked to see how few nukes we have now, that is not good. MAD was a really sound doctrine and with the potential threat of the Chinese, as remote as it might be, we should not relinquish our dominance in the nuclear arena.

    If all weapons were used in an all out war, the human race would be hurt heavily... not wiped out, we are too technilogically advanced for that, even if we had 1960's numbers of nukes.
    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    The Supreme Court can't interpret The Constitution. They don't have that power.

  9. #99
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 06:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Space travel. Is it necessary? Do you support it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Water on the Moon would be the most valuable solar system resource ever. It would make lunar colonization possible,
    A) There is no actual evidence that water on the moon even EXISTS. B) It would be much cheaper to terraform Mars than to terraform the Moon.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar
    and yes, men will always be able to do what robots and telerobotic gadgets cannot.
    No they won't. There is not a single thing that can be accomplished by astronauts on foreign worlds that cannot be accomplished by robots on those same foreign worlds. The only difference is that the robots can do it more cheaply, safely, and efficiently. And as technology improves, that gap will just continue to increase.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar
    If there's enough water, it can be used directly as fuel, otherwise, it's used to supply the colony and the ships passing through.
    There is no evidence that there is ANY water on the Moon. Wouldn't it be worthwhile to actually learn the answer to that question before getting so worked up about the concept of lunar colonies supplied by lunar water?

    Furthermore, even if there is water ice on the Moon, why do you care so much about colonizing it right now? What's so important that it can't wait a while until we have solved some problems on Earth and we have the technology to actually make a lunar colony less-than-ridiculously-impractical? The Moon is still going to be there in 20, 50, or 100 years.
    Last edited by Kandahar; 06-22-09 at 11:50 PM.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  10. #100
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 06:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Space travel. Is it necessary? Do you support it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    I've talked to a lot of those foolish people. Their opposition to Man taking his rightful place among the stars are based on:

    The government should be spending that money on Earth, not in space.

    I guess they never figured out that NASA doesn't actually take that money up in crates and scatter it among the aliens.
    And money spent on health care and education doesn't just disappear into a black hole. So what's your point?

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar
    The money should be spent on something useful, like welfare.
    At least government is providing society with SOMETHING in that case, even if it's inefficient. In the case of pointless stunts like sending humans to other worlds, the taxpayers get absolutely nothing for their money. Nada.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar
    I've never had a use for burdens living at the expense of others, outside of votes, I'm not sure what the Left gets from them, either. Probably guilt, for which they need my money to assuage.
    You're a ****ing idiot. You bitch and moan about "socialists" voting themselves access to "your money," then you turn around and do exactly the same thing when it's YOUR pet program on the chopping block.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

Page 10 of 17 FirstFirst ... 89101112 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •