This sums up the pointless public space race
Discussion
Talksteer said:
I think his point is super weak, space exploration was and to a degree still is effectively a spin off from military requirements. The golden age Apollo programme was effectively showing off and had no long term integration into a vision to do something societally useful.
The ultimate goal of the new space race is to getting millions of people into space and to get ourselves a substantial distance down this pathway within a human lifespan. I wouldn't bother to go to Mars but that is beside the point.
I would argue that this a laudable goal.
I would also argue that the new space movement is making the cost of launch for governmental payloads substantially cheaper thus allowing NASA and ESA to do more with less.
Ultimately the application of space flight to mass travel and living in space requires much cheaper launch and manufacturing. This requires increased volumes of spaceflight, which at each stage unlocks a new application which then increases the volume and unlocks another application.
Tourism is a good first step because it has a high degree for price elasticity. As the price comes down, more people will want to go into space than the % price reduction hence the total value of the market will go up as prices fall.
At a certain point tourism wil unlock space mining, once we have in situ utilisation of spaces resources the average wealth of humanity goes up by orders of magnitude.
If you don't like the new space movement I'd ask two questions:
1: Are you opposed in general to space travel being a widespread phenomenon?
2: If not, then what is your road map to making it happen?
Space tourism is literally a road to nowhere and serves no purpose. You may as well go and lock yourself into a dark room and play video's for 6 months with your mates. Ecologically you are burning up earths resources for nowt but a cheap Saturday night thrill. There are 7.5 Billion Humans on the planet all wanting a smart phone, a Bling ICE or electric car and people think we should invest in space tourism sigh....... If it really happens the human race is truly fThe ultimate goal of the new space race is to getting millions of people into space and to get ourselves a substantial distance down this pathway within a human lifespan. I wouldn't bother to go to Mars but that is beside the point.
I would argue that this a laudable goal.
I would also argue that the new space movement is making the cost of launch for governmental payloads substantially cheaper thus allowing NASA and ESA to do more with less.
Ultimately the application of space flight to mass travel and living in space requires much cheaper launch and manufacturing. This requires increased volumes of spaceflight, which at each stage unlocks a new application which then increases the volume and unlocks another application.
Tourism is a good first step because it has a high degree for price elasticity. As the price comes down, more people will want to go into space than the % price reduction hence the total value of the market will go up as prices fall.
At a certain point tourism wil unlock space mining, once we have in situ utilisation of spaces resources the average wealth of humanity goes up by orders of magnitude.
If you don't like the new space movement I'd ask two questions:
1: Are you opposed in general to space travel being a widespread phenomenon?
2: If not, then what is your road map to making it happen?
ked.p1stonhead said:
All tourism is pointless in terms of Earths resources.
Why are you singling out space tourism? Do you think it uses less of the planets resources than Earth based tourism and the millions of flights a year? You fool.
You pose a different question, the core of this is about Space tourism not terrestrial tourism. I agree with your point about that all tourism is pointless in terms of the Earths resources. Space tourism takes the waste to another dimension.Why are you singling out space tourism? Do you think it uses less of the planets resources than Earth based tourism and the millions of flights a year? You fool.
Atomic12C said:
Your response to being a troll is to call others a troll.... haha... I will happily troll your threads if that's what you wish.
First fall how can I be a troll when I started the thread! the second part is that whilst 98% of posters do not agree with both the stand point of the publisher and one I agree with does not make me a troll, the posters here only make up a tiny portion of views held to in the real world. If you going to contribute, contribute to the topic, you can agree, disagree or add another few point. But attacking the person for having a strong view against the public space tourism debacle when you consider there are far more things to spend money on. The UN has warned that there is only 12 years max to mitigate the effects of Climate change before we are all f
ked. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EupPa9RjNOg So with that in mind do you spend the billions on Space tourism or Science and strategies to save the climate, and ultimately us and our families, I do hope I am not in the tiny majority that would prioritise that against space tourism. p1stonhead said:
Selling your sports car then?
Now your assuming I only have the one sports car, selling them doesn't solve the issue they exists as do the other vehicles I have so what to do? Crush them? that would be a gross waste, maybe consume them and repair them to they become truly unusable. if we all did this the car dealers would go out of business, most will anyway with EV's and with EV's and AI maybe we wont all own a vehicle (or many) just click an app and a shared mode of eco transport arrives. Just don't kick off space tourism, space tourism isn't being demanded by the masses, its a SiFi ideology being pushed Atomic12C said:
Toaster said:
First fall how can I be a troll when I started the thread! the second part is that whilst 98% of posters do not agree with both the stand point of the publisher and one I agree with does not make me a troll, the posters here only make up a tiny portion of views held to in the real world.
If you going to contribute, contribute to the topic, you can agree, disagree or add another few point. But attacking the person for having a strong view against the public space tourism debacle when you consider there are far more things to spend money on. The UN has warned that there is only 12 years max to mitigate the effects of Climate change before we are all fked. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EupPa9RjNOg So with that in mind do you spend the billions on Space tourism or Science and strategies to save the climate, and ultimately us and our families, I do hope I am not in the tiny majority that would prioritise that against space tourism.
I don't know if you've realised or not, if you follow the political standpoint on a scientific issue then you will always be in a position where by in 8-12 years time the world is about to end. If you going to contribute, contribute to the topic, you can agree, disagree or add another few point. But attacking the person for having a strong view against the public space tourism debacle when you consider there are far more things to spend money on. The UN has warned that there is only 12 years max to mitigate the effects of Climate change before we are all f
ked. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EupPa9RjNOg So with that in mind do you spend the billions on Space tourism or Science and strategies to save the climate, and ultimately us and our families, I do hope I am not in the tiny majority that would prioritise that against space tourism. Fear is a primary tool in use for political agenda.
So even 30 years ago in the early 80's when global warming became a political agenda (prior to which there was fear of global cooling), the time scale for 'action' via the use of fear, was always around 10 years.
It always around 10 years before doom.
So if your basis for advocating the hindrance of science is upon what is an anti-capitalist left wing political agenda then you are very much in fail land.
My trolling comment however was more based towards the point that you made regarding how you view cars in one of your previous posts.
Why join a forum called pistonheads if you come across as anti-car ?
Given the comment you made stating
Toaster said:
It’s as wasteful as any other vehicle out there. It’s just a means of transport
If that is your viewpoint on cars then you are clearly in the wrong forum, and given that one can presume you are here to troll.Toltec said:
Old news Matey https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/hqlibrary/pathfinde... still doesn't make it rightEric Mc said:
It's all pointless - I tell ya. What the hell does NASA know about spaceflight anyway.
Your wrong Eric I have never said NASA doesn't know about space flight and my comments and the article are about a pointless public space race, nothing to do with Scientific exploration of space. Edited by Toaster on Saturday 24th November 07:26
Einion Yrth said:
I'm sure that trollster will be rubbing his hands with glee that you give his opinions so much weight.
Probably unwise.
Wise words except how can I be a Troll when I agree with an article, now it may not be the popularist view held by the few on this forum but it is a valid perspective happy for you not to agree with it. It would be an odd world if everyone agreed the same thing.Probably unwise.
Edited by Toaster on Friday 23 November 23:08
Eric Mc said:
I'd love to hear your opinions on Spice Science.
Not on this thread as this is about the pointless public space race. The Spice Science should appear under food Science, I suggest you put this on your Christmas reading list: SPICE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (FOOD SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY) BY KENJI HIRASA, MITSUO TAKEMASA Talksteer said:
http://uk.businessinsider.com/nasa-sls-replacement...
NASA will retire SLS once the next private super heavy launcher flies.
So NASA will be using those pointless privately funded rockets.
The grand sweep of technology wants us to leave the planet and venture forth into the solar system. If the easiest path is through leisure so be it.
The funding from those rockets come from NASA budgets and investors looking to mine asteroids etc NASA will retire SLS once the next private super heavy launcher flies.
So NASA will be using those pointless privately funded rockets.
The grand sweep of technology wants us to leave the planet and venture forth into the solar system. If the easiest path is through leisure so be it.
Eric Mc said:
I was after your views, not somebody else's.You are so erudite and well versed in the pointlessness of things, I thought your opinions would be enlightening. When it comes to pointless topics, you're the expert.
Ah Eric your such a contradicktion you say you won't engage with my posts yet continually comment. You say pointless topics but the evidence was at the very start of this thread. my view aligns with the Guardian reporter summing up the pointless public space race. I know it doesn't align with your view so you decide to deride me and make it personal. Well guess what, there are many people who hold the view that the current public space race is pointless.
Eric Mc said:
I'm wondering if the OP has a mental health problem. His spelling and punctuation is all over the shop and I don't remember it being so bad in the past.
He also seemingly wilfuly misunderstood comments I made in the "First Man" thread.
I genuinely think he might need help.
Because of that, I'm not going to engage in a debate with him for the reasons mentioned above.
He raised a pretty similar topic a while ago in respect of Virgin Galactic. He's obviously broadened his attack now to include every wealthy entrepreneur who fancies putting their own money into spaceflight technology.
I won't be saying anything else on this specific thread.
Eric, I have lost count of the times you have said you are not going to respond, each time you do respond you make it more personal and spitefull what on earth is that about. He also seemingly wilfuly misunderstood comments I made in the "First Man" thread.
I genuinely think he might need help.
Because of that, I'm not going to engage in a debate with him for the reasons mentioned above.
He raised a pretty similar topic a while ago in respect of Virgin Galactic. He's obviously broadened his attack now to include every wealthy entrepreneur who fancies putting their own money into spaceflight technology.
I won't be saying anything else on this specific thread.
I do not have a mental health issue and even if I did your not qualified to comment, having an alternate opinion to yours does not make anyone mentally ill. Space flight technology and scientific space exploration is a worthy endeavour for mankind. Space Tourisem whatever that is, is like farting against the wind it serves no purpose.
If you go through piston heads and look at spelling and punctuation you will find a life time of English language errors maybe you would like to spend time correcting spilling errors an punctuation. This does not make for mental health issues. Dislexia and other conditions maybe.
I will again stand by my view and the article written by the journalist of the article I assume from your comments that makes the journalist mentally ill as well. Thank goodness we are all different.
So Eric my friend I look forward to when you respond again but just don’t make it personal.
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff