It is? I thought it was growing as the Sahel became desertified.Originally posted by ainwood
Interestingly, and just a little off-topic, the sahara desert is receding....
Moon Colony within 20 years!
- Thread starter Mr. Dictator
- Start date
G-Man
A One Man's War
It doesn't matter. There's still plenty of desert and it would be environmentaly good as well if some of it will have some houses and plants.
.:KNAS:.
Civfanatic
Why build a colony on the moon? Well, for one the information gained would be very valuable when it comes to establishing colonies on other planets. It would give you a chance to test theories without having the once-in-a-year chance to get resupplied if something goes wrong.
Bozo Erectus
Master Baker
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2003
- Messages
- 22,389
Why build a colony on the moon? One might as well ask, Why try to prove the Earth is round and find a passage to India? Why colonise the New World when Europe is so nice and cozy? Dont worry about the naysayers, we're going to spread out over the whole solar system soon enough. Thats what humans do and in fact, its the secret to our success as a species.
tctatheel7
Running Silent, and Deep
we need to begin colonizing other planets, because eventually earth will die. if any of you read popular science, and have seen this month's issue, you know how vulnerable we are to astroid impact. also, the spirit of exploration is always alive in humans, and we need to vent some of that curiosity by exploring the universe around us.
G-Man
A One Man's War
What kind of information can be gained from living on the moon that can't be found using robots? I remind you that nearly all tests in space are made with either special instruments made especially for them or with all sorts of animals. Both of these types will still need to be specially delivered to the moon, and we'll save nothing.
G-Man
A One Man's War
The passage to India and the proof that the world is round were both driven by the economy. Immigraqtion and colonization are results of looking for a better place to live in. The moon has nothing the economy is looking for (and even if it did sending robots would still be more efficient) and it certainly doesn't have any better conditions than those on earth.
G-Man
A One Man's War
The greatest danger from astroids is the dust it'll cause. Even if one hits us soon, which is very unlikely, it would still be cheaper to build a facility with enough food and water for people to survive in it. And you'll be able to support a lot more people this way.
DvR
½ man, ½ amazing
If we don't build a lunar base, then how are we going to find that big-black-stonelike thing you see in 2001: a space odyssee?
Seriously though, I think such matters are beyond economy.. Earth does not 'loose' money.. Building a lunarbase like that is investing as I see it...
I think it's inevitable that humans will one day be colonising our solarsystem.. Can you imagine a movie about the year 2200 (or so) in which humans still only occupy Earth?
Why wait a hundred, or even fifty years... Why not start just now? We have most of the technology we need for such an operation, and I'm sure it'll be a great impulse in science..
Maybe a bad comparison, but still: If it weren't for the cold war we wouldn't have a probe heading for mars right now, or even have the ISS.. Not only did the spacerace provide lot's of scientific research on rocketpropulsion and other such things, it also provided us with the computers we're now using.. We've even got materials which are now quite common such as kevlar and teflon to thank for it..
If you keep saying: what's the use in going to the moon? "The moon has nothing the economy is looking for" then expect that part of science to sit on it's arse..
I think economy isn't the drive for the human race, it's technology and exploration..
Seriously though, I think such matters are beyond economy.. Earth does not 'loose' money.. Building a lunarbase like that is investing as I see it...
I think it's inevitable that humans will one day be colonising our solarsystem.. Can you imagine a movie about the year 2200 (or so) in which humans still only occupy Earth?
Why wait a hundred, or even fifty years... Why not start just now? We have most of the technology we need for such an operation, and I'm sure it'll be a great impulse in science..
Maybe a bad comparison, but still: If it weren't for the cold war we wouldn't have a probe heading for mars right now, or even have the ISS.. Not only did the spacerace provide lot's of scientific research on rocketpropulsion and other such things, it also provided us with the computers we're now using.. We've even got materials which are now quite common such as kevlar and teflon to thank for it..
If you keep saying: what's the use in going to the moon? "The moon has nothing the economy is looking for" then expect that part of science to sit on it's arse..
I think economy isn't the drive for the human race, it's technology and exploration..
DvR
½ man, ½ amazing
tctatheel7
Running Silent, and Deep
to add to DvR's post, wireless communication would not exist as we know it today without space exploration. who knows what other useful technology could be invented because of a new interest in space colonization/exploration.
kudos to the Chinese, for at least trying to do something constructive with a space program. Maybe this will make NASA get off its fat as* and get to work efficiently and with purpose.
kudos to the Chinese, for at least trying to do something constructive with a space program. Maybe this will make NASA get off its fat as* and get to work efficiently and with purpose.
G-Man
A One Man's War
That's just a vision of the future based on movies. Can you imagine a 50s movie where mars isn't inhabbited with big bad monsters?
Because in a hundred years making a colony on the moon will be economical. Right now you might as well burn dollar bills. And I can't see what good will it do to science.
Both technology and exploration will be in 99% of the cases significantly cheapr and quicker being done by robots. Sending people to the moon and letting them live there is an operation that'll cost huge amounts of money - nearly all of which will be used in order to support the humans rather than the experiments.
G-Man
A One Man's War
I'm not against space exploration. I'm against wasting the money intended for space exploration on things that'll do very little to push it forward.
DvR
½ man, ½ amazing
G-man, it seems as though you're very much economy minded..
I think in matters such as international space exploration economics is a whole diffrent story then a countries national economy..
When working with an international team, there is no competition.. Money spent in this sort of programs is not lost or burned, it's merely changed it's position..
And as for what good it will do to science: Do you think people back in the fifties would have thought they'd have computers, wireless communication and other such stuff in the next few decades?
One cannot predict what new technology it will bring.. Which is rather logical, since if one could then it wouldn't be 'new technology'..
I agree with you robots are a better choice for now, as they don't need the lifesupport humans do.. Though I do think robots are merely the building blocks for new civilizations.. Be it on the moon or on mars.. What else are they sending robots to other planets for?
I think in matters such as international space exploration economics is a whole diffrent story then a countries national economy..
When working with an international team, there is no competition.. Money spent in this sort of programs is not lost or burned, it's merely changed it's position..
Where do you think the money is in a hundred years from now if such a spaceprogram is started?? Exactly: right where it was in the first place, in our global economy.. This is not burning money, it's opening alot of new jobs and creating alot of new companies..
And as for what good it will do to science: Do you think people back in the fifties would have thought they'd have computers, wireless communication and other such stuff in the next few decades?
One cannot predict what new technology it will bring.. Which is rather logical, since if one could then it wouldn't be 'new technology'..
I agree with you robots are a better choice for now, as they don't need the lifesupport humans do.. Though I do think robots are merely the building blocks for new civilizations.. Be it on the moon or on mars.. What else are they sending robots to other planets for?
Again: It's not waisting money, it's investing (at least, IMO).. And as the example above, you do not know what advances it will bring..
Hygro
soundcloud.com/hygro/
Here's one economical reason why a space colony could be good in a not so distant future:
You could have huge, incredibly toxic factories without needing to worry about hurting the Earth.
Let's just move all them heavy industries over to the moon
You could have huge, incredibly toxic factories without needing to worry about hurting the Earth.
Let's just move all them heavy industries over to the moon
G-Man
A One Man's War
First of all, a lot of money will be lost - materials for the projects, food for all the people working for the many companies involved. And in any case this wasn't my point. My point was that this money could've been much better used had it been invested in robots. In the price of such a colony you can send dozens of robots to check the moon from dozens of angles and aspects.
There are technologies invented in the space program. But while robots use a new technology nearly every time, in a colony nearly all the money will be based on keeping the humans there alive and on supplying them with materials. There's very little we can learn from transporting tons of materials to the moon.
They're sending robots to there in order to study it. People will move to other planets only when they'll have a reason to.
You do not know what advances robotics will bring as well, and when investing in them a lot more of the money will be used for new technologies.
Flak
vBülletin Förum
There is an absolutely vitale piece of information that will never be attained using robots. That is the effects that ventures, such as planetary colonization and deep space travel, will have on humans. Sure the Apollo program helped advance our general technology by huge leaps. But this wasn't the only result of that program. We gained huge amounts of information on human psychology, physiology, sociology, and anthropology. Even the SETI project has contributed to these fields in unforeseen ways.
NO robot will ever be able to simulate a human explorer. We can never hope to simply 'guess' what it will really be like socially or psychologically for the individual, group, or colony to permantly leave their home and travel huge distances, in radically different environments. We simply must have this expereience personally, hands on. Sure the dollar cost will be higher now. But the cost later on in inexperience would probably not only be far more expensive, it would likely be tragic many preventable times over.
What we pay for now, by getting up and out there, will pay off in huge ways when the time comes to truly make our move into deep space for immigration and commercialization.
