RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,421
Posts: 5,506,557
Members: 25,129
Currently online: 434
Newest member: Talosian1978

TrekToday headlines

Retro Review: The Emperor’s New Cloak
By: Michelle on Dec 20

Star Trek Opera
By: T'Bonz on Dec 19

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18

IDW Publishing March 2015 Comics
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Paramount Star Trek 3 Expectations
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Star Trek #39 Sneak Peek
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Star Trek 3 Potential Director Shortlist
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Official Starships Collection Update
By: T'Bonz on Dec 15

Retro Review: Prodigal Daughter
By: Michelle on Dec 13

Sindicate Lager To Debut In The US Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Entertainment & Interests > Science and Technology

Science and Technology "Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known." - Carl Sagan.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old April 24 2014, 06:53 PM   #46
RAMA
Vice Admiral
 
RAMA's Avatar
 
Location: NJ, USA
Re: NASA chief touts deep space exploration: We can only survive if we

Yminale wrote: View Post
RAMA wrote: View Post
It is obvious if you energetically direct a depopulation program you could undo what is happening, but humans naturally are developing this way. I don't see a directed depopulation program anymore do you??
UN population figures have always been wrong. Europe and Japan are depopulating. Many countries have birth rates under the replacement rate. The largest birth rates occur in Sub-Saharan Africa which sadly will be dealt with by global climate change. We are already moving in that direction. We just need to remove the few remaining obstacles (like the Catholic Church and right wing conservative Christians).

Marginal survival is better than none.
Not if you factor in the cost. We deal with this in medicine all the time. If I increased your chance of survival by 1% but it cost you 1 million dollars would you do it.

A Singularity can also encompass human derived artificial intelligence. Obviously you haven't been paying attention.
HAL is a human derived AI. If you are talking about transcendence/uploading the human mind than no offense but you are talking fantasy that may never occur. Your argument is no better than saying we should explore space because the magic space ponies tell us to.
HAL is not human derived AI, he is completely machine, and no human brain emulation is very real and progressing all the time. I believe I recently posted some links that give a likely timeline for this, last time was in the Transcendence thread in SF forum. Far from being in the realm of fantasy, it's basically just a matter of time and mathematics at this point.

Um..cost is exactly what goes down as it become more common...more development=more access. Commercial space initiatives are already proliferating, and the first SLS will be tested soon, making interplanetary travel more common.

No the UN population figures are accurate:

http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_roslin...u_ve_ever_seen

As for population rates, they will go up before they go down. See the link I posted in the last comment.
__________________
It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring. Carl Sagan
RAMA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 24 2014, 11:52 PM   #47
Chilli
Commodore
 
Chilli's Avatar
 
Location: Monaco (on the Isar)
Re: NASA chief touts deep space exploration: We can only survive if we

I learned by reading this thread that NASA is directly responsible for what budget it's assigned. Neat.

2takesfrakes wrote: View Post
Mars is already littered with our defunct robots. The moon landing sites are littered with bags of urine, junked cars and torn up platforms ... not to mention a couple crashed probes.
For how cynical you are about humanity, you've got an absurdly anthropocentric idea of "littering". Humans have left a negligible amoung of waste on the moon, yes. To the universe, that's pretty irrelevant: a bit of inanimate matter on a huge chunk of inanimate matter, and nobody there to care about it one way or the other. To a civilization way more advanced than ours, these'd be some fascinating artefacts on an otherwise boring world. It takes a human to go "eww, astronaut poop".

Nothing less intelligent than us would know to be offended or bothered by anything humans have left on the moon, and to anything more intelligent than us, bitching about human artifacts on the moon would kinda be like finding a single feather, or speck of moss, on an otherwise lifeless rockface, and thinking the rockface forever ruined.

And this is what annoys me about people that run around bitching about how rubbish humanity is, often while wearing t-shirts reading "people=shit" and whatnot. It's not even that I disagree with the sentiment. It's that the people voicing it often seem to think they can disavow any connection to the unwashed masses of rubbish people simply by being sufficiently dickish. But in doing so, they will often end up exhibiting some of the worst human characteristics, with their dickishness often aimed at people exhibiting the best human characteristics - like the folks over at NASA in this case. If there's any single organization that's done more to expand our knowledge of the universe we live in over the last few decades than NASA, I'd really like to hear it.
Chilli is online now   Reply With Quote
Old April 25 2014, 12:46 AM   #48
2takesfrakes
Commodore
 
2takesfrakes's Avatar
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Re: NASA chief touts deep space exploration: We can only survive if we

Chill, Chilli! I'm O.K. ... You're O.K. ...

Your missive is rambling, I'm not sure exactly how much of what you're saying is actually directed at me "personally," or just a tirade. But be assured that I do not - I say again, NOT - wear T-shirts with slogans, logos, messages of any kind. I do not believe that "People Are Shit." I happen to love people - especially women people.

Yet, I have dissed the Head of NASA's speech and sentiments, regarding Humanity setting up shoppe throughout the Cosmos. And, apparently, you take exception to that. What can I say? I am an American. I know full-well what NASA is, what it's done and what it does. Perhaps you believe I should be grateful and supportive of the agency? Perhaps, you find some duplicity in a STAR TREK fan not supporting the notion of Humanity spread throughout the Galaxy?

Yes, there are stewards of the environment. Yes, there are individuals who don't want to contribute to Global Warming, or deforestation, or any number of things affecting the Natural World. But those noble sentiments have yet to reach full swing. There is a very long way to go. And we are very capable, and in fact, very likely, of polluting the worlds we visit. Because that, too, is part of the Human Condition. We've already started, in a way ... and all in the name of exploration. As noble and worthy as The Quest for Knowledge is, however well-intentioned, the act of pursuing it is neither passive, nor necessarily benign, for that matter.
__________________
"― And she brought forth her firstborn Son, and wrapped Him in swaddling clothes, and laid Him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn." (Luke 2:7)
2takesfrakes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 25 2014, 04:46 AM   #49
scotthm
Rear Admiral
 
Location: USA
Re: NASA chief touts deep space exploration: We can only survive if we

Yminale wrote: View Post
gturner wrote: View Post
Um, no. The Sahara is shrinking.
Uhm yes. Every resource I looked up states that Sahara is expanding.
National Geographic

New Scientist

---------------
scotthm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 25 2014, 05:08 AM   #50
Dukhat
Commodore
 
Dukhat's Avatar
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
Re: NASA chief touts deep space exploration: We can only survive if we

Yminale wrote: View Post
Dukhat wrote: View Post
Yminale wrote: View Post

When have you last been in a Walmart store. Every store literally is a mountain of trash.
Which has nothing to do with the point I was trying to make.
Actually you supported instead of refuted the previous poster. Hence I mentioned the average size of Walmart.
I did no such thing. What one personally feels that Walmart sells has nothing to do with the point that the amount of artificial objects on extraterrestrial surfaces can be placed into one supermarket-sized building on Earth. The poster mentioned that this amount constitutes "littering" of these extraterrestrial surfaces, which is nonsense. But since then we've established that his point was nonsense to begin with, so there's really no reason to belabor this.
__________________
“Don’t believe everything you read on the internet.”
– Benjamin Franklin

Last edited by Dukhat; April 25 2014 at 06:34 AM.
Dukhat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 25 2014, 06:14 AM   #51
gturner
Admiral
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: NASA chief touts deep space exploration: We can only survive if we

The largest objects we ever landed on a body was the Apollo lunar lander. With the legs retracted the lunar lander was about 14-feet by 13.3-feet. We left six landers on the moon, which would take up about 1,117 square feet. The lunar rover was 10-feet by 6-feet, and we left three of them, bringing the total to 1,297 square feet. The two Russian rovers were about 5-feet by 7, bringing the total to 1,367 square feet. The average Walmart is 102,000 square feet, so we'd have to do 75 more Apollo programs just to fill up a Walmart. (It would take 550 Apollo landers to fill an average store). The moon's area is about 400 trillion square feet, so it would take 2 trillion landings to cover it, so to cover the moon with landers, every single person on Earth would have to fly 750 Apollo missions (since each mission takes three people).

And yet someone thinks six missions have ruined the place.
gturner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 25 2014, 06:33 AM   #52
Dukhat
Commodore
 
Dukhat's Avatar
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
Re: NASA chief touts deep space exploration: We can only survive if we

gturner wrote: View Post
The largest objects we ever landed on a body was the Apollo lunar lander.
Not quite. Several Saturn V third stages had crashed on the Moon post-mission, not to mention the Centaur upper stage from the LCROSS mission, which were significantly larger than the landers. Which was why I upped my estimate of the size of a building on Earth that would house all the artificial objects on extraterrestrial surfaces. And I'm probably being extremely generous in my size estimate as well, as you've rightly mentioned.
__________________
“Don’t believe everything you read on the internet.”
– Benjamin Franklin
Dukhat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 25 2014, 10:04 AM   #53
YellowSubmarine
Rear Admiral
 
YellowSubmarine's Avatar
 
Re: NASA chief touts deep space exploration: We can only survive if we

Chilli wrote: View Post
For how cynical you are about humanity, you've got an absurdly anthropocentric idea of "littering". Humans have left a negligible amoung of waste on the moon, yes. To the universe, that's pretty irrelevant: a bit of inanimate matter on a huge chunk of inanimate matter, and nobody there to care about it one way or the other. To a civilization way more advanced than ours, these'd be some fascinating artefacts on an otherwise boring world. It takes a human to go "eww, astronaut poop".
It's fascinating. I used to joke about it, because I thought it was awesome, when I suddenly realised people were taking this extraterrestrial littering thing seriously.

If there's ever a settlement, human or otherwise, anywhere near a crashed rocked stage, the wreck will be a monument, you wouldn't be allowed to touch it, I'd reckon you wouldn't even be allowed to put it inside the pressurised part of your habitat or step anywhere near it. Cleaning it is what would be tantamount to littering and contamination.

Not only there is no biosphere or natural wonders there to disturb, but these objects are so rare and unique that they wouldn't disturb anything even if there was. It would be no different if ancient aliens crashed a spacecraft inside a present-day rainforest, we'd cut the trees around it to expose it, and it will be the polar opposite of waste. And if it was buried under a house in Pompeii, we'd disturb part of the ruins to open access to it precisely because it was more unique and rare.

On an semi-related note, even exaggarated end-of-the-world fictional works can show appreciation for technological junk in a middle of a rainforest.
__________________
R.I.P. Cadet James T. Kirk (-1651)
YellowSubmarine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 25 2014, 11:13 AM   #54
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: NASA chief touts deep space exploration: We can only survive if we

scotthm wrote: View Post
Yminale wrote: View Post
gturner wrote: View Post
Um, no. The Sahara is shrinking.
Uhm yes. Every resource I looked up states that Sahara is expanding.
National Geographic

New Scientist

---------------
Supports my opinion that there is nothing absolutely bad about climate change. It's just different than we are used to, and that will cost a bit of money in some regions, but other regions will profit from it.
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 27 2014, 10:40 PM   #55
publiusr
Commodore
 
Re: NASA chief touts deep space exploration: We can only survive if we

When you burn fossil fuel, you are essentially returning bio-mass to the surface. When Earth had no icecaps, it was a bit more lush. Supercontinent are bad news--the Gobi desert is the result of the Eurasia proto-Supercontinent.


Brolan wrote: View Post
Don't dump on NASA, they only have the money to spend that congress gives them. Once we got to the Moon congress has never allocated the money to do anything else amazing. It's just not a priority with the American people. We need to figure out a reason to make it one.
I'm for cancelling F-35 and giving that money to NASA.
publiusr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 27 2014, 11:13 PM   #56
USS Triumphant
Rear Admiral
 
USS Triumphant's Avatar
 
Location: Go ahead, caller. I'm listening...
Re: NASA chief touts deep space exploration: We can only survive if we

publiusr wrote: View Post
I'm for cancelling F-35 and giving that money to NASA.
Revise that to give a THIRD to NASA, along with a third to public primary education, and another third to reinforce our food aid programs, and I'm with you wholeheartedly. But if neither of the other two were feasible for some reason, then heck yes - give it to NASA. Better than the waste of money the F-35 program is now, either way.
__________________
As the brilliant philosopher once said... Everybody, have fun tonight. Everybody, Wang Chung tonight.
USS Triumphant is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:38 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.