• 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 Goals For America: What Next?

What's next for the United States?


  • Total voters
    33

Scarecrow Akhbar

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 22, 2005
Messages
11,430
Reaction score
2,282
Location
Los Angeles
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Well, today is the 40th anniversary of the most monumental occasion in the history of life on earth: The landing of men on the moon.

What should the next generation do for an encore, since the generation following Armstrong's decided to waste their time and resources on a frivolous pursuit of socialism and hedonism?

Should the next generation of young continue to lie to themselves and continue root in the mud trying to rescue the failed socialist experiment, or should they raise their heads and aim for the stars?

I say to aim high.
 
Well, today is the 40th anniversary of the most monumental occasion in the history of life on earth: The landing of men on the moon.

What should the next generation do for an encore, since the generation following Armstrong's decided to waste their time and resources on a frivolous pursuit of socialism and hedonism?

Should the next generation of young continue to lie to themselves and continue root in the mud trying to rescue the failed socialist experiment, or should they raise their heads and aim for the stars?

I say to aim high.

I see. So you want to spend taxpayer money on frivolous stunts, instead of on things that are actually useful to people. Got it. ;)
 
Well, today is the 40th anniversary of the most monumental occasion in the history of life on earth: The landing of men on the moon.

What should the next generation do for an encore, since the generation following Armstrong's decided to waste their time and resources on a frivolous pursuit of socialism and hedonism?

Should the next generation of young continue to lie to themselves and continue root in the mud trying to rescue the failed socialist experiment, or should they raise their heads and aim for the stars?

I say to aim high.

Ok so, instead of attacking you like Kandahar did, I will humor you with my opinion.

I don't think the younger generation has been frivolous, its just that there have been a wave of newer and bigger problems. However, I think ignoring the exploration of the moon and Mars is ridiculous. There should be more of that. The more research we put into this kind of thing, the closer we are to finding other planets and galaxies that can sustain life.
 
I see. So you want to spend taxpayer money on frivolous stunts, instead of on things that are actually useful to people. Got it. ;)

I see.

You can't wait the scant minutes needed for the poll options to be posted.

IMO the moon should be claimed as US territory, if the natives don't protest, and used as a military installation for national defense and subsequently developed into an civillian commercial industrial playground.

Your assumption that space isn't useful is illustrative of your ignorance, and not a reflection of reality.
 
Last edited:
Ok so, instead of attacking you like Kandahar did, I will humor you with my opinion.

I don't think the younger generation has been frivolous, its just that there have been a wave of newer and bigger problems. However, I think ignoring the exploration of the moon and Mars is ridiculous. There should be more of that. The more research we put into this kind of thing, the closer we are to finding other planets and galaxies that can sustain life.

There is nothing that human astronauts can do on other worlds, which robots can't do more efficiently, cheaply, easily, and safely. Space colonization will eventually become technologically feasible...several decades from now. There is no need we need to send humans to other worlds right NOW, when we have pressing concerns here at home.
 
We should focusing first on making it cheap to get into space. Any space related activity from benefit from such research, so it should be top priority.

Manned space activities should be phased out whenever possible using robots. The logistics of getting people into space and keeping them functional are far too high. We managed to send robots to mars without a huge problem, and but we are decades away from being able to send people.

Finally, we should look at some commercial activity in addition to research. Observing asteroids for valuable materials and investigating microgravity manufacturing would be good first steps.

Space technology certainly has its uses, but we have to remember its not the cold war anymore. We aren't trying to one up the soviets, we are looking at practical uses. We all talk about putting a man on the moon, but satellite technology was actually the most important thing our space program ever brought.
 
Last edited:
I see.

You can't wait the scant minutes needed for the poll options to be posted.

IMO the moon should be claimed as US territory, if the natives don't protest, and used as a military installation for national defense and subsequently developed into an civillian commercial industrial playground.

Your assumption that space isn't useful is illustrative of your ignorance, and not a reflection of reality.

I didn't say that space wasn't useful. But it's certainly not very useful right NOW. Your fantasies about using the moon as a military base and industrial playground are a LONG way from being a reality. Until we have workable nuclear fusion and mature nanotechnology, there is really no point sending people to the moon or any other world. It's just too expensive and impractical.
 
Anyway, my vote is for:


More pure research. More unmanned missions to other worlds.

Nothing. Abandon space to the robots.

This should be our nation's attitude toward manned exploration, at least in the short term.
 
Either go for the moon or leave it to the robots. Without the excitement of racing the Soviets to the moon there is little justification for undertaking a mission on the scale of a manned mission to or precursors for a manned mission to Mars. There's no way to get the necessary support for an endeavor of that kind of budget. The moon would be a good way to ease America back into serious space missions

There is nothing that human astronauts can do on other worlds, which robots can't do more efficiently, cheaply, easily, and safely.

Except get themselves off of a lump of dirt

rovers060409LG.jpg


IMO the moon should be claimed as US territory, if the natives don't protest, and used as a military installation for national defense and subsequently developed into an civillian commercial industrial playground.


There are already treaties banning claims of ownership over territory in space, and that's the way it should stay. Until it is possible for people to genuinely reside on some celestial body space should remain in the realm of science and belong to all mankind
 
I don't really see a purpose in lunar colonies, and think claiming it for the US and putting military stuff up there is beyond dumb. Mining asteroids and such is a pipe dream. While there can be interesting science found by probing space and looking at planets, manned flights for the time being aren't quite as useful.
 
Except get themselves off of a lump of dirt

It would still be more efficient, cheaper, easier, and safer to send a replacement robot instead of a manned mission...or to just send a better robot in the first place.
 
Like Rathi, I think we need to work on better propulsion systems, and cheaper means of getting to orbit.

Research into Metahelium propellants looks promising, and advancing materials technolgies (carbon nanotubes in particular) could make a skyhook/beanstalk practical in a few decades.

The scramjet and/or Delta Clipper concepts need to be revisited.

And yeah, somewhere along the way I want us to return to the Moon, and I'd like to see a man set foot on Mars in my lifetime.

Dream big, or go home.


G.
 
Mining asteroids and such is a pipe dream.

Why is it a pipe dream? Asteroids exist, they have valuable material we need and we have been able to reach them for decades. The only unsolved questions are how to use robot miners and how to make the whole process cost effective. There is nothing to suggest that either is impossible or even unlikely.
 
There is nothing that human astronauts can do on other worlds, which robots can't do more efficiently, cheaply, easily, and safely.

Tell that to Skylab. And that was only in LEO.

Tell it to the Hubble Space Telescope, and oh, gee, that was only in LEO, too.

Tell that to the Huygens Titan atmospheric probe and lander. Oops....noboby told the robot to turn on the super-stable oscillator, so an entire experiment dependent on that was useless.

Space colonization will eventually become technologically feasible...several decades from now. There is no need we need to send humans to other worlds right NOW, when we have pressing concerns here at home.

Yes, our pressing concerns right now are killing socialism so we will be free enough later to be able to afford to colonize the solar system. Ingsoc and it's real world equivalents aren't all that hip on freedom or even satisfying the needs they're promising to satisfy, if only they had enough POWER over you to make it happen.
 
We should focusing first on making it cheap to get into space. Any space related activity from benefit from such research, so it should be top priority.

Orion.

Manned space activities should be phased out whenever possible using robots.

Robots should be phased out because it's cheaper and more entertaining to make people.

The logistics of getting people into space and keeping them functional are far too high. We managed to send robots to mars without a huge problem, and but we are decades away from being able to send people.

You mean outside of the fact that we keep making mistakes here on earth and wrecking them?

Finally, we should look at some commercial activity in addition to research. Observing asteroids for valuable materials and investigating microgravity manufacturing would be good first steps.

Space technology certainly has its uses, but we have to remember its not the cold war anymore. We aren't trying to one up the soviets, we are looking at practical uses. We all talk about putting a man on the moon, but satellite technology was actually the most important thing our space program ever brought.

No, now we should be trying to one-up the Chinese.
 
Lunar colony and increased exploration of Mars with the possibility of colonizing.
 
I didn't say that space wasn't useful. But it's certainly not very useful right NOW. Your fantasies about using the moon as a military base and industrial playground are a LONG way from being a reality. Until we have workable nuclear fusion and mature nanotechnology, there is really no point sending people to the moon or any other world. It's just too expensive and impractical.

Is there some alteration in the physical laws of the universe that strictly prohibit using fission reactors to power facilities on the moon when the sun is down? Explain why "fusion" is the only solution you see.

Why should we waste time on the sci-fi concept of nano-tech when what's needed to build a colony on the moon are electric earth movers, a good supply of aluminum faced honeycomb sandwich panels, glass, and other materials, shipped from earth to begin with but built on the spot fairly soon after the colony is started?
 
Space exploration and exploitation is a long term goal that should be underpinned in the short term by pure research on the ground.

Make the technological leap before we make the ultimate leap into space...

hubble-heico305-desk-1024.jpg

shatner_kirk11.jpg
 
There are already treaties banning claims of ownership over territory in space, and that's the way it should stay.

Abrogate them.

If the people of the United States invests a hundred billion dollars to exploit the only deposit of water found on the moon (if we ever find one) there's no logical reason why some upstart who didn't pay the cost should have any sort of claim to it.

Until it is possible for people to genuinely reside on some celestial body space should remain in the realm of science and belong to all mankind

"Belong to all mankind".

Dog vomit socialist collectivist nonsense. The territory and resources should belong to the people paying to exploit them, for their own profit.
 
Tell that to Skylab. And that was only in LEO.

Tell it to the Hubble Space Telescope, and oh, gee, that was only in LEO, too.

Skylab and the Hubble Telescope are not on other worlds. They were/are in space, a few hundred miles above the earth's surface.

Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Tell that to the Huygens Titan atmospheric probe and lander. Oops....noboby told the robot to turn on the super-stable oscillator, so an entire experiment dependent on that was useless.

It would be several orders of magnitude cheaper to send a replacement probe than to send astronauts to Titan. With our present technological capabilities, it probably isn't even POSSIBLE to send astronauts to Titan (except on a suicide mission that may not even produce the desired results anyway). Furthermore, pointing out a design flaw in a robot does nothing to further your argument that human astronauts would be more reliable.

Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Yes, our pressing concerns right now are killing socialism so we will be free enough later to be able to afford to colonize the solar system. Ingsoc and it's real world equivalents aren't all that hip on freedom or even satisfying the needs they're promising to satisfy, if only they had enough POWER over you to make it happen.

Yes, yes. We get it. You don't like liberals. Now then, as for space exploration...
 
Last edited:

You do realize that the Orion project involved setting off nuclear bombs right? It wouldn't work in the atmosphere, and even if it did, you would have to be alunatic to use it. I was thinking of something practical like white knight 1 from scaled composites.

Robots should be phased out because it's cheaper and more entertaining to make people.

I agree its more fun to make people, but its a hell of lot cheaper to make robots. Astronauts are filthy expensive.

You mean outside of the fact that we keep making mistakes here on earth and wrecking them?

Would you rather people die when we screw up?

No, now we should be trying to one-up the Chinese.

Thankfully post cold-war foreign policy is based on something other than childish competitiveness (sort of).
 
Abrogate them.

If the people of the United States invests a hundred billion dollars to exploit the only deposit of water found on the moon (if we ever find one) there's no logical reason why some upstart who didn't pay the cost should have any sort of claim to it.



"Belong to all mankind".

Dog vomit socialist collectivist nonsense. The territory and resources should belong to the people paying to exploit them, for their own profit.

Would you be okay with russia or china owning the moon?
 
Why is it a pipe dream? Asteroids exist, they have valuable material we need and we have been able to reach them for decades. The only unsolved questions are how to use robot miners and how to make the whole process cost effective. There is nothing to suggest that either is impossible or even unlikely.

Mining asteroids is stupid right now. While we can get to some, the best place to do so would be in the asteroid belt which is on the other side of Mars. The energy necessary to get there, mine things, load them up, send them back will far outweigh any "benefit" of mining out there. Not to mention the immense technological mountain of I guess building robots according to you, getting them there, and successfully being able to mine on some scale which makes it worth while. There has to be so much more research, advancement, and created technology to come into existence before we can even start to think about entertaining the idea of mining asteroids. This isn't Armageddon, we can't just land things on an asteroid and say "mine this". There's huge problems with chaotic orbits, control of the robots I guess we're using, mining, collection, transportation, etc. And no matter what, we sit at the bottom of a gravity well, we'll always need to overcome that. It takes a lot of energy. What are we wasting vs. what are we getting, these things have to be analyzed and worked out. Maybe in the distant future, mining the asteroid belt will be feasible; but for now it remains a pipe dream and completely unnecessary. The money is best spent on other research.
 
The energy necessary to get there, mine things, load them up, send them back will far outweigh any "benefit" of mining out there.

Solar panels are immensely more effective is space, and would be more than capable of generating enough energy.

Not to mention the immense technological mountain of I guess building robots according to you, getting them there, and successfully being able to mine on some scale which makes it worth while.

As opposed to building a robot that can drive around on mars? Robotics is one of the fasting progressing technologies we have. Its an unknown to be sure, but sayings its impossible has no basis.

This isn't Armageddon, we can't just land things on an asteroid and say "mine this".

Why not? Mining is being able to separate the stuff you want from the stuff you don't. Telling a robot to collect chunks of asteroid with say a high platinum density isn't unrealistic.

There's huge problems with chaotic orbits, control of the robots I guess we're using, mining, collection, transportation, etc.

None of those are insurmountable problems. They are well known issues we have dealt with for years.

And no matter what, we sit at the bottom of a gravity well, we'll always need to overcome that. It takes a lot of energy.

The nice thing about the asteroids is that they are already out of our gravity well. It takes zero energy to send mined materials back down.
 
Skylab and the Hubble Telescope are not on other worlds. They were/are in space, a few hundred miles above the earth's surface.

And that close to home, and still the damned machines couldn't do their job until a human came along to fix their little tin guts.

It would be several orders of magnitude cheaper to send a replacement probe than to send astronauts to Titan. With our present technological capabilities, it probably isn't even POSSIBLE to send astronauts to Titan (except on a suicide mission that may not even produce the desired results anyway). Furthermore, pointing out a design flaw in a robot does nothing to further your argument that human astronauts would be more reliable.

Right. Develop your arguments about capabilities tomorrow with expostulations about what we can't do today.

What a human has that no current feasible extrapolation of robot can provide is creativity.
 
Back
Top Bottom