If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Only Robots Should Be Allowed To Climb Mt. Everest
We need to stop human exploration and physical enjoyment of the Earth.
Robots can do it cheaper! Only robots should be allowed to climb Mt. Everest and go on other such adventures. There is no practical reason to climb mountains. "Because it's there" is ILLOGIC of the type us STUPID HUMANS are always coming up with! Let's stop allowing humans to explore the earth, first! That will open the way to leave the rest of the solar system (and beyond) to robots, only, also! In fact, next time you are tempted to take a walk in the woods, put a transmitting webcam on top of an RC model car instead, and look at the woods on your TV or PC! Stop this "personal exploration" stuff, NOW! |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Only Robots Should Be Allowed To Climb Mt. Everest
"giveitawhirl2008" wrote in message ... We need to stop human exploration and physical enjoyment of the Earth. Robots can do it cheaper! Only robots should be allowed to climb Mt. Everest and go on other such adventures. There is no practical reason to climb mountains. "Because it's there" is ILLOGIC of the type us STUPID HUMANS are always coming up with! Let's stop allowing humans to explore the earth, first! That will open the way to leave the rest of the solar system (and beyond) to robots, only, also! In fact, next time you are tempted to take a walk in the woods, put a transmitting webcam on top of an RC model car instead, and look at the woods on your TV or PC! Stop this "personal exploration" stuff, NOW! You're mixing the issues of personal liberty, with how taxpayers money should be spent. I have no problem at all with someone going to the moon and mars. But if they're going to spend my money to do it, they better use it wisely. Manned missions to Mars will take fifty years and cost trillions of dollars. While a robotic mission can take as little as three or four years, and cost millions instead of trillions. I want to know more about Mars, but I don't want to wait FIFTY YEARS! When I could find out 99% of the same information in FIVE YEARS! What do you want? A glorious gilded safari for a handful of people that'll only serve to discredit, if not ruin NASA, from the costs and lack of benefits? Or the data? What do you want, and what's the best way to get it??? s |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Only Robots Should Be Allowed To Climb Mt. Everest
On Aug 17, 7:24*pm, "Jonathan" wrote:
"giveitawhirl2008" wrote in message ... We need to stop human exploration and physical enjoyment of the Earth. Robots can do it cheaper! Only robots should be allowed to climb Mt. Everest and go on other such adventures. There is no practical reason to climb mountains. "Because it's there" is ILLOGIC of the type us STUPID HUMANS are always coming up with! Let's stop allowing humans to explore the earth, first! That will open the way to leave the rest of the solar system (and beyond) to robots, only, also! In fact, next time you are tempted to take a walk in the woods, put a transmitting webcam on top of an RC model car instead, and look at the woods on your TV or PC! Stop this "personal exploration" stuff, NOW! You're mixing the issues of personal liberty, with how taxpayers money should be spent. I have no problem at all with someone going to the moon and mars. But if they're going to spend my money to do it, they better use it wisely. Manned missions to Mars will take fifty years and cost trillions of dollars. While a robotic mission can take as little as three or four years, and cost millions instead of trillions. I want to know more about Mars, but I don't want to wait FIFTY YEARS! When I could find out 99% of the same information in FIVE YEARS! What do you want? A glorious gilded safari for a handful of people that'll only serve to discredit, if not ruin NASA, from the costs and lack of benefits? Or the data? What do you want, and what's the best way to get it??? s " You're mixing the issues of personal liberty, with how taxpayers money should be spent" No, I'm not mixing up personal liberty with spending taxpayer money. It is a symbolic statement about human, in person exploration, vs. machines-only. I know the public has a choice in a free society; that's why this would have to have the support of significantly more than fifty percent of the citizens in participating countries. So the idea is to sell it to the public. Admittedly, the public may never "buy" it. But it's worth a shot. Why did we go to the Moon? From the government's POV, it was essentially a military expenditure as part of the Propaganda/Prestige/ Psychology Front in the Cold War. Beating the Russians was the main idea. The American public, and possibly some of the public in other Western nations, was glad for this beat-the-Russians objective. And the Apollo program is majorly responsible for technological advances such as the computer chip, used today all over the world, including in life-saving medical equipment. The public is glad about that. The Apollo program created 400,000 jobs. The public, at the time, probably did not think too much about that but might have been glad for it, if it had. But what do most people think of when they remember the first Moon landing? At least those who are old enough to remember watching it, live? What makes many gladly celebrate that event? NOT: We beat the Russians! NOT: We invented the microchip as a spinoff of this! NOT: We created 400,000 jobs to get this done! But rather: WOW! HUMAN BEINGS ARE WALKING ON ANOTHER WORLD!!! For many, if they are very glad that someone landed on the Moon and would look forward to things like that happening again, the prospect of ever further exploration would be at least as thrilling. And there are those side benefits! Technological advance, etc. I realize this may never sell to a large enough part of the public. But it's worth a shot. --------- jobs, etc.] http://groups.google.com/group/sci.s...thread/thread/... http://groups.google.com/group/rec.t...hread/thread/4... http://groups.google.com/group/sci.s...thread/thread/... |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Only Robots Should Be Allowed To Climb Mt. Everest
"giveitawhirl2008" wrote in message ... No, I'm not mixing up personal liberty with spending taxpayer money. It is a symbolic statement about human, in person exploration, vs. machines-only. Ya know the thing about the Mars rovers, is that we got to see the pictures the same time everyone else did. That was so exciting. It felt as if I was going along. And the difference between manned and robotic missions to me is that the amazement of manned missions in the accomplishment of getting there. While robotic missions the excitement is what they'll find. I guess it depends if your into the engineering or the science. I want to know if there's life on Mars, and I want to know yesterday. So for me robots are the way to go. I know the public has a choice in a free society; that's why this would have to have the support of significantly more than fifty percent of the citizens in participating countries. So the idea is to sell it to the public. Admittedly, the public may never "buy" it. But it's worth a shot. But what I see is that they're trying to take a goal, manned missions to the moon and mars, which have limited public support, and trying to force people to like it with contrived or weak reasoning. Why not start from a clean slate and design a goal with the express purpose of being as popular as possible? So the question of NASA's goal becomes..." find the goal that has the maximum tangible benefits to the most people possible...which also intersects with NASA's capabilities. When I go down that route, it keeps settling on one kind of goal. Space Solar Power. Which has the potential to do the following.... End the planet's reliance on fossil fuels. Turn America's into the next energy "Saudi Arabia" Replace American's greatest single weakness into it's greatest strength. Provide govt paid bulk cargo needed to jump start commercial launch industry. Force us to build low cost to orbit vehicles. Provide energy to the third world where it's not possible today. Change our energy future from steadily increasing costs decreasing supply, and more and more coal. Into a future trend where energy get cheaper, more plentiful and cleaner over time. And just as an aside.... SOLVE GLOBAL WARMING! Cheap, clean and abundant energy benefits EVERYONE on the planet. And in many direct ways. And I haven't even mentioned how it would provide power for larger satellites and even colonies someday. Not to mention the military has callled Space Solar Power a potential 'game-changer' when it comes to military capabilities and supply lines. Now, please list how a moon shelter for six or so, used only once in a while, compares to that? Why did we go to the Moon? From the government's POV, it was essentially a military expenditure as part of the Propaganda/Prestige/ Psychology Front in the Cold War. Beating the Russians was the main idea. Right, but what few seem to appreciate is this time it's about beating the Chinese. The Chinese military budget, in real dollars, is approaching our own level of spending. It would be a crying shame if the next forty years was just a wasteful repeat of the last forty. But rather: WOW! HUMAN BEINGS ARE WALKING ON ANOTHER WORLD!!! Right, in the words of Tom Hanks, one of NASA's most avid fans. "And it is meant to make people think, 'How in the world did we do that? And isn't it a marvelous thing that we did,'" says Hanks. "And maybe we should do it again?" Axelrod asks. "Well," Hanks says, "the question would be why?" "Once humankind has been some place and found it entrancing, they always go back," says Hanks, the film's producer. "I think in the history of the human race, the moon has been the first place we've gone to and said, 'OK, we don't need to go back there again.'" http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/...in881421.shtml For many, if they are very glad that someone landed on the Moon and would look forward to things like that happening again, the prospect of ever further exploration would be at least as thrilling. And there are those side benefits! Technological advance, etc. I realize this may never sell to a large enough part of the public. But it's worth a shot. But if we really want an active space future, we need to build the kind of lasting infrastructure that makes it possible. Another Apollo isn't the answer. Space Solar Power would give us low cost to orbit plentiful energy sources and most importantly, a strong economy that makes such grand visions possible. Ya know, if Bush didn't cancel the program below, we'd already have a gigawatt class solar power satellite in orbit right now. Executive Summary NASA'S SPACE SOLAR POWER EXPLORATORY RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY (SERT) PROGRAM http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10202&page=1 s --------- jobs, etc.] http://groups.google.com/group/sci.s...thread/thread/... http://groups.google.com/group/rec.t...hread/thread/4... http://groups.google.com/group/sci.s...thread/thread/... |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Only Robots Should Be Allowed To Climb Mt. Everest
Never heard of Dante, eh? -- Looking for an H-912 (container). |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Only Robots Should Be Allowed To Climb Mt. Everest
On Aug 17, 8:44*pm, "Jonathan" wrote:
"giveitawhirl2008" wrote in message ... No, I'm not mixing up personal liberty with spending taxpayer money. It is a symbolic statement about human, in person exploration, vs. machines-only. Ya know the thing about the Mars rovers, is that we got to see the pictures the same time everyone else did. That was so exciting. It felt as if I was going along. And the difference between manned and robotic missions to me is that the amazement of manned missions in the accomplishment of getting there. While robotic missions the excitement is what they'll find. I guess it depends if your into the engineering or the science. I want to know if there's life on Mars, and I want to know yesterday. So for me robots are the way to go. I know the public has a choice in a free society; that's why this would have to have the support of significantly more than fifty percent of the citizens in participating countries. So the idea is to sell it to the public. Admittedly, the public may never "buy" it. But it's worth a shot. But what I see is that they're trying to take a goal, manned missions to the moon and mars, which have limited public support, and trying to force people to like it with contrived or weak reasoning. Why not start from a clean slate and design a goal with the express purpose of being as popular as possible? * So the question of NASA's goal becomes..." find the goal that has the maximum tangible benefits to the most people possible...which also intersects with NASA's capabilities. When I go down that route, it keeps settling on one kind of goal. Space Solar Power. Which has the potential to do the following.... End the planet's reliance on fossil fuels. Turn America's into the next energy "Saudi Arabia" Replace American's greatest single weakness into it's greatest strength. Provide govt paid bulk cargo needed to jump start commercial launch industry. Force us to build low cost to orbit vehicles. Provide energy to the third world where it's not possible today. Change our energy future from steadily increasing costs decreasing supply, and more and more coal. Into a future trend where energy get cheaper, more plentiful and cleaner over time. And just as an aside.... SOLVE GLOBAL WARMING! Cheap, clean and abundant energy benefits EVERYONE on the planet. And in many direct ways. And I haven't even mentioned how it would provide power for larger satellites and even colonies someday. Not to mention the military has callled Space Solar Power a potential 'game-changer' when it comes to military capabilities and supply lines. Now, please list how a moon shelter for six or so, used only once in a while, compares to that? Why did we go to the Moon? From the government's POV, it was essentially a military expenditure as part of the Propaganda/Prestige/ Psychology Front in the Cold War. Beating the Russians was the main idea. Right, but what few seem to appreciate is this time it's about beating the Chinese. The Chinese military budget, in real dollars, is approaching our own level of spending. It would be a crying shame if the next forty years was just a wasteful repeat of the last forty. But rather: WOW! HUMAN BEINGS ARE WALKING ON ANOTHER WORLD!!! Right, in the words of Tom Hanks, one of NASA's most avid fans. "And it is meant to make people think, 'How in the world did we do that? And isn't it a marvelous thing that we did,'" says Hanks. "And maybe we should do it again?" Axelrod asks. "Well," Hanks says, "the question would be why?" "Once humankind has been some place and found it entrancing, they always go back," says Hanks, the film's producer. "I think in the history of the human race, the moon has been the first place we've gone to and said, 'OK, we don't need to go back there again.'"http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/09/23/eveningnews/main881421.shtml For many, if they are very glad that someone landed on the Moon and would look forward to things like that happening again, the prospect of ever further exploration would be at least as thrilling. And there are those side benefits! Technological advance, etc. I realize this may never sell to a large enough part of the public. But it's worth a shot. But if we really want an active space future, we need to build the kind of lasting infrastructure that makes it possible. Another Apollo isn't the answer. Space Solar Power would give us low cost to orbit plentiful energy sources and most importantly, a strong economy that makes such grand visions possible. Ya know, if Bush didn't cancel the program below, we'd already have a gigawatt class solar power satellite in orbit right now. Executive Summary NASA'S SPACE SOLAR POWER EXPLORATORY RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY (SERT) PROGRAMhttp://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10202&page=1 s --------- jobs, etc.] http://groups.google.com/group/sci.s...thread/thread/... http://groups.google.com/group/rec.t...hread/thread/4... http://groups.google.com/group/sci.s...thread/thread/... ------------------------------- I want to know if there's life on Mars, and I want to know yesterday. So for me robots are the way to go. I'm for robots and humans, both. And the difference between manned and robotic missions to me is that the amazement of manned missions in the accomplishment of getting there.... "And it is meant to make people think, 'How in the world did we do that? And isn't it a marvelous thing that we did,'" says Hanks. To me, it is not about the amazement of getting there, even if "getting there is half the fun." It's about walking on another world, in person. The next best thing to doing it myself is to find out all about someone who did do it. We can vicariously experience it ourselves, knowing other humans did it. I don't disagree with solar power, nor other alt. energies, such as geothermal. http://groups.google.com/group/alt.p...904a1?hl=en&q= Admittedly there is a problem of X number of people want to do X number of things. But I hope the public can agree on several very good options, and the hopefully one of those very good options is walking on Titan. (Etc.) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
CLIMB KILIMAJARO | Annya[_3_] | Travel Marketplace | 0 | May 2nd, 2007 03:53 PM |
gear for trekking in everest (everest base camp trail) region in december? | [email protected] | Asia | 2 | November 4th, 2005 02:55 PM |
Climb Mt Fuji | John W. | Asia | 1 | January 20th, 2005 10:07 PM |
Bridge climb | Anonymous | Australia & New Zealand | 4 | August 3rd, 2004 01:18 AM |
Climb Mt. Kilimanjaro | Stefan | Africa | 1 | June 10th, 2004 01:22 PM |