Didn't W say we were going to Mars? How's that coming along? Anyone know?

:juggle:

The Rev

Are we really going to Mars? Shows you what I know. (or don't). I thought it was just a ploy by the administration to divert everybody's attention from Iraq. :think:

Personally I wouldn't want one penny of my money to pay for a trip to Mars while we're still in Iraq. We do have to tidy up the place before we leave it, you know, and nobody even knows when we're leaving Iraq, if ever.

Now that I think about it, maybe we can get the South Koreans to foot at least part of the bill for a trip to Mars. I'll bet they'd love the attention, and they got that Samsung thing going. That company would make a lot of money if they were involved in a space voyage...

I don't think we should go. What have the poor martians ever done to us? :bow:

Too expensive, it'll never happen. We'll send more robots, which is great (love them robots), but we won't be sending people.

I believe the plan was to set up the moon base first, then go to Mars later?
I would rather see Bush II going to Mars than on some new crusade to another godforesaken country here on earth.
(And maybe he could take his administration with him, too? :p)

They should just fake it.

Too expensive, it'll never happen. We'll send more robots, which is great (love them robots), but we won't be sending people.

i think eventually it will happen, provided we don't kill each other first. as of this time, it's on the cutting edge of our technology, if expense wasn't an issue.

30 years from now? possibly. 100 years from now? probably.

getting materials into space cheaply via a space elevator will go a long way toward making this happen. how close are we to a space elevator? here's an interesting link.

http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/space_elevator_020327-1.html

i'm all for it :)

I would rather see Bush II going to Mars than on some new crusade to another godforesaken country here on earth.
(And maybe he could take his administration with him, too? :p)

My thoughts exactly! :up:

How do you believe expense won't be an issue?

How do you believe expense won't be an issue?

of course it will be an issue. at some point, it won't be THE issue.

read up on the space elevator, for example. this technology promises to dramatically lower costs of getting materials to space. if we're sending up tons of materials to space every few days, then a lot more becomes feasible.

in 20 years this could be well be a reality, and a mars mission not such a great leap. now, if you want to talk impossible, talk about space travel to destinations that are light years away.

mars is, all in all, a small goal.

Mmm, hmmm.

Not going to debate you on this, because I can tell from the way you post that you really really believe it in a sort of religious way - Onward and Upward! but I have reasons to believe there won't be a space elevator in 20 years, or ever.

Mmm, hmmm.

Not going to debate you on this, because I can tell from the way you post that you really really believe it in a sort of religious way - Onward and Upward! but I have reasons to believe there won't be a space elevator in 20 years, or ever.
i don't know too much about the space elevator but why do you believe it will never happen?

i don't know too much about the space elevator but why do you believe it will never happen?

Because I think there's going to be a worldwide economic collapse, from which our society won't recover.

But that's another topic!

http://www.veggieboards.com/boards/showthread.php?t=37956

Because I think there's going to be a worldwide economic collapse, from which our society won't recover.

But that's another topic!

http://www.veggieboards.com/boards/showthread.php?t=37956
lol, ok i get it

Because I think there's going to be a worldwide economic collapse, from which our society won't recover.

But that's another topic!

http://www.veggieboards.com/boards/showthread.php?t=37956

i do agree there's a possibility of an economic collapse that will derail such a project as a space elevator, but i'd think it would have to do more with a terror event (such as a nuclear bomb in a major city) than oil. if it gets down to it, we could produce VAST amounts of liquified coal at considerably less than oil is currently selling for. the billions of dollars in investment capital required to do this is sitting on the sidelines waiting to see if the price of oil is going to remain high. if it does, we'll be liquifying coal (which is still a dirty technology, and disappoints me) long before social collapse.

i have no doubt that oil production will peak, but i don't believe it will be a catastrophic event.

Mmm, hmmm.

Not going to debate you on this, because I can tell from the way you post that you really really believe it in a sort of religious way - Onward and Upward! but I have reasons to believe there won't be a space elevator in 20 years, or ever.

other than the peak oil doomsday scenario (which you apparently really really believe in a religious sort of way), would you care to debate the feasability of a space elevator, technologically or economically?

That should be debated in another thread, Medic. You can believe all you want, but your beliefs aren't necessarily based on complete knowledge of the issue, which other people have studied for decades and come to another conclusion. But I don't think we should continue this off-topic discussion here.

Sorry, posted when you were posting.

No, there's no point in me discussing the "feasibility" of the space elevator, because I don't think it's feasible, due to my religious beliefs. :stinkeye:

That should be debated in another thread, Medic. You can believe all you want, but your beliefs aren't necessarily based on complete knowledge of the issue, which other people have studied for decades and come to another conclusion. But I don't think we should continue this off-topic discussion here.

and i suppose your beliefs are? and these "other people" are the correct group of experts? can you please tell me how you know that?

and i do agree that we should stick to the topic. so i understand that due to a huge social economic collapse, the space elevator will never be a reality. so then we'll be stuck trying to fly to mars the conventional way, and it will be too expensive. so we'll never get to mars.

why wouldn't you say at the beginning that we'll never get to mars because there will be a worldwide economic collapse from which society will never recover, rather than saying it's "too expensive"?

you're telling me that my argumentation skills are suspect. is this a demonstration of how one should argue and present evidence?
perhaps you could teach me to think logically?

I have never claimed to think logically or to be a good debator.

I have never claimed to think logically or to be a good debator.

if you are not able to think logically or debate well (in other words, if you're telling me you aren't competent), then how would you be in a position to judge the competence of others?

Oh, I think I'm in a position to judge all kinds of people. Doesn't mean my judgments are accurate, of course.

This is cute, you've totally derailed the thread into a criticism of me. :lovesign:

Oh, I think I'm in a position to judge all kinds of people. Doesn't mean my judgments are accurate, of course.

This is cute, you've totally derailed the thread into a criticism of me. :lovesign:


heh. i love that guy with a sign!!!!! very cool!

anyway, i feel i had a little help in derailing it. besides, i'm sure it's not taxing the board's storage capacity :)

i'm perfectly willing to discuss how a mission to mars would be much more feasible being launched from space as opposed to earth. the space elevator is an essential component in being able to explore space in a cost effective way. and i'm willing to discuss it's viability.

and we're not just talking about a space elevator on earth. we could build one on mars, or any other planet we explore. it's a great concept.

Technologically speaking this is doable. We got to the moon using pencil and paper calculations. I think the most recent Space Shuttle explosion has certainly hurt public support for the space program (which I don't see as a bad thing).

Don't we still lack a actual method of creating a ribbon for the space elevator, though?

That seems like the biggest whole. It is pivoting on the ability to create the ribbon (probably from nanotubes). Not that we can't make one, but it seems like it is currently speculation that it could be made.

Even without it, we could still get to Mars. It is just a far more effecient method of doing it.

Too expensive, it'll never happen. We'll send more robots, which is great (love them robots), but we won't be sending people.
Right. The problems involved in going to Mars are probably 1000 times greater than getting to the moon. I don't think people realise just how lucky we were, pulling that one off. I admit, I was excited when it happened, but in retrospect, I don't see how the event has really benefited us, except, perhaps, as very high-priced entertainment. I'd like to see everybody here, on the "red star," fed, housed and educated, before we jump back into the galactic wide world of sports. Funny thing is, it would probably take less money to do that, than another trip to a barren planet.I heard last week that the first Voyager probe finally left the solar system. It's carrying detailed instructions on how to find us, and where all our weak spots are.... :stinkeye: