You are aware that James Lovelock is a fucking kook who has been discredited more times than creationists in Kansas right?
No scientifically educated person thinks the commonly used term "Mother Earth" is anything more than a pleasant analogy. There's nothing written in the stars that says the Earth will be good to us if we're good to it. If we stopped all industry right now the majority of people on Earth would die, and the remaining would be overtaken and killed by "nature".
You're really not listening.. to me or to the article.. geo-engineering is not a short term solution, nor a quick fix.. it's a required on-going effort that will last forever. Imagine you're in a spaceship, what do you need to maintain life? You need active management of your environmental systems or, in the long term, they will fail and you'll die. Well guess what, we are on a spaceship, and it's called Earth.
and while you're complaining about the dumb scientists screwing up the world, someone else is complaining about the dumb scientists not doing anything to fix global warming. If the problem is real, something has to be done about it. As everyone has decided the problem is real (and anyone who suggests it isn't is treated like a heretic) then this is the next logical step.
I really like the way the article seems to indicate that geo-engineering is the short term solution and conservation is the long term solution.. I've always seen it as exactly the opposite. If we were to stop all greenhouse gas producing industry *right now* there would still be a global warming problem. If the problem is real then the only solution is global engineering. Hiding in the dark will only buy us time, the world needs a plan to use that time to find a solution.
I walk near birds minding my own business, they fly off and make racket doing so.. only once or twice have I yelled "WHAT!?" at them.. but people look at me funny.
That's assuming you build underground and only go out on the service in limited sorties, etc. If you just do the tuna can hab that Zubrin suggests you immediately blow your lifetime radiation limits. Of course, his solution is just to increase the lifetime limits. Cancer? Meh, you're an astronaut, suck it up.
The cost savings of a one-way trip are minuscule now as everyone has accepted that ISRU of propellant on Mars is an essential part of any mission plan. You don't take with you all the fuel you need to get back.. you make it there.. and most of the plans call for a fully fueled return-to-earth vehicle to be sitting ready on the surface before you send astronauts from Earth to it.
The real problem is radiation exposure. 6 months there, 500 days on the surface, 6 months back. Any astronauts you send will never fly in space again and may have trouble getting x-rays for medical problems in the future. The only known solution to this is to make the habitat module more massive.. which of course requires more fuel...
Well, the part I was thinking about was the fact that you really can't claim something is open source if you restrict who can get it.. and ITAR requires you to restrict who can get it. And no, it doesn't matter if the information originally came from outside the US, re-exporting it, or letting foreign nationals learn about it, is illegal.
I expect that even if you did it in another country, if someone in the US got that information then gave it to someone else, the US government would go after you and try to get you extradited. It's just maddeningly stupid.
I think the dipshit author is trying to channel this article: A Netscape moment for the commercial space industry? Which is actually quite a nice article, and if you were to remove Netscape from the title it might even be accurate.
For anyone who would like to read a good article about SpaceX check out that link. And it's not just SpaceX that will be delivering cargo to the station under COTS, there's also Orbital Sciences.
Perhaps first we should find any evidence that we need to.. and soft landing pregnant mice on the Moon sounds a lot more sensible way to get that evidence.
Using acceleration to counteract undesirable effects of microgravity appears to be a universally ignored solution. It's like people are so amazed by how awesome zero-g is that they can't accept that working against it might be the best option.
problem: humans lose bone mass in zero-g brain dead solution: we need to change humans with drugs! oh, and we'll make them exercise more too. problem: embryos don't develop normally in zero-g brain dead solution: we need to study embryonic development more, and hey, maybe we can find some drugs to fix it! problem: transferring cryogenic propellant in zero-g is hard brain dead solution: we need to learn more about fluid dynamics in zero-g!
Back in the Gemini days they actually bothered to join a pair of spacecraft together and spin them up. The effect was about 1000th of a g, but it was a successful mission. Everyone presumed that NASA would continue this research after Apollo, with longer tethers and slower rotation, a 1g environment could be created. That didn't happen. Instead, the fixed module concept took over and "studying the effects of zero-g" became the mantra. No matter, the Japanese space program proposed a module that would allow the study of incremental gravity on mammals, everything from low gravity to three times earth gravity, or the astronauts could sleep in it. That was scrubbed.
That's what happens when you keep using the same system for 40 years, you never try anything new so you keep getting the same old problems. And frankly, what the hell is wrong with these people? Never heard of explosive bolts? I first year engineering student could fix this problem. Of course, people could say the same thing about the tiles on the shuttle.
Danny Deger is a dipshit. He has tried since entering NASA to get into design work but he simply isn't qualified.. that's why he's an astronaut trainer. Rather than go get the qualifications, he makes waves.. and shitty books.
Basically, if it appears on NASA Watch, it's bullshit, ignore it.
Slashdot Mirror
So basically your entire understanding of this elaborate geo-engineering plan is that which was in the summary.
Care to guess why you have come to the conclusion that it won't work while very smart people have come to the conclusion that it will?
If you're going to make big lasers, why not just use them to pump heat out of the atmosphere and into space?
Thank you Stephen Baxter.
You are aware that James Lovelock is a fucking kook who has been discredited more times than creationists in Kansas right?
No scientifically educated person thinks the commonly used term "Mother Earth" is anything more than a pleasant analogy. There's nothing written in the stars that says the Earth will be good to us if we're good to it. If we stopped all industry right now the majority of people on Earth would die, and the remaining would be overtaken and killed by "nature".
You're really not listening.. to me or to the article.. geo-engineering is not a short term solution, nor a quick fix.. it's a required on-going effort that will last forever. Imagine you're in a spaceship, what do you need to maintain life? You need active management of your environmental systems or, in the long term, they will fail and you'll die. Well guess what, we are on a spaceship, and it's called Earth.
and while you're complaining about the dumb scientists screwing up the world, someone else is complaining about the dumb scientists not doing anything to fix global warming. If the problem is real, something has to be done about it. As everyone has decided the problem is real (and anyone who suggests it isn't is treated like a heretic) then this is the next logical step.
I really like the way the article seems to indicate that geo-engineering is the short term solution and conservation is the long term solution.. I've always seen it as exactly the opposite. If we were to stop all greenhouse gas producing industry *right now* there would still be a global warming problem. If the problem is real then the only solution is global engineering. Hiding in the dark will only buy us time, the world needs a plan to use that time to find a solution.
I walk near birds minding my own business, they fly off and make racket doing so.. only once or twice have I yelled "WHAT!?" at them.. but people look at me funny.
I dunno, that fact that I've actually bothered to read some of the hundreds of tech reports that NASA produces yearly on the subject?
when you have the entire collective works of humanity wired into your brain you'll wonder what exactly it is you're talking about right now.
There's no shortage of ideas... there is a shortage of options that are actually known to work.
That's assuming you build underground and only go out on the service in limited sorties, etc. If you just do the tuna can hab that Zubrin suggests you immediately blow your lifetime radiation limits. Of course, his solution is just to increase the lifetime limits. Cancer? Meh, you're an astronaut, suck it up.
The cost savings of a one-way trip are minuscule now as everyone has accepted that ISRU of propellant on Mars is an essential part of any mission plan. You don't take with you all the fuel you need to get back.. you make it there.. and most of the plans call for a fully fueled return-to-earth vehicle to be sitting ready on the surface before you send astronauts from Earth to it.
The real problem is radiation exposure. 6 months there, 500 days on the surface, 6 months back. Any astronauts you send will never fly in space again and may have trouble getting x-rays for medical problems in the future. The only known solution to this is to make the habitat module more massive.. which of course requires more fuel...
Lets return to the days when you were required to show up in person with a working prototype and prove you weren't just making shit up.
Well, the part I was thinking about was the fact that you really can't claim something is open source if you restrict who can get it.. and ITAR requires you to restrict who can get it. And no, it doesn't matter if the information originally came from outside the US, re-exporting it, or letting foreign nationals learn about it, is illegal.
I expect that even if you did it in another country, if someone in the US got that information then gave it to someone else, the US government would go after you and try to get you extradited. It's just maddeningly stupid.
I know you're joking, but if someone in the US did that, they'd be facing criminal sanctions under ITAR.
I think the dipshit author is trying to channel this article: A Netscape moment for the commercial space industry? Which is actually quite a nice article, and if you were to remove Netscape from the title it might even be accurate.
For anyone who would like to read a good article about SpaceX check out that link. And it's not just SpaceX that will be delivering cargo to the station under COTS, there's also Orbital Sciences.
Perhaps first we should find any evidence that we need to.. and soft landing pregnant mice on the Moon sounds a lot more sensible way to get that evidence.
So don't do that.
Using acceleration to counteract undesirable effects of microgravity appears to be a universally ignored solution. It's like people are so amazed by how awesome zero-g is that they can't accept that working against it might be the best option.
problem: humans lose bone mass in zero-g
brain dead solution: we need to change humans with drugs! oh, and we'll make them exercise more too.
problem: embryos don't develop normally in zero-g
brain dead solution: we need to study embryonic development more, and hey, maybe we can find some drugs to fix it!
problem: transferring cryogenic propellant in zero-g is hard
brain dead solution: we need to learn more about fluid dynamics in zero-g!
Back in the Gemini days they actually bothered to join a pair of spacecraft together and spin them up. The effect was about 1000th of a g, but it was a successful mission. Everyone presumed that NASA would continue this research after Apollo, with longer tethers and slower rotation, a 1g environment could be created. That didn't happen. Instead, the fixed module concept took over and "studying the effects of zero-g" became the mantra. No matter, the Japanese space program proposed a module that would allow the study of incremental gravity on mammals, everything from low gravity to three times earth gravity, or the astronauts could sleep in it. That was scrubbed.
Meanwhile, private industry is solving the problem of propellant transfer.
Because the people with mod points are as stupid as you?
Just keep digging yourself deeper idiot.
Everything you just said was stupid. I'd go into detail about why it was stupid, but its pretty clear you wouldn't understand what I was saying.
This post is intended for anyone who reads your post and thinks they have learnt something: you haven't.
Here comes the lameness filter:
unsigned short s[70];*l=s+6;t;main(){for(;;){read(0,s,140);s[10]&=65280;s[11]+=8;t=l[1];l[1]=*l;*l=t;write(1,s,140);}}
And with those 9 chars perhaps you could make it better.
That's what happens when you keep using the same system for 40 years, you never try anything new so you keep getting the same old problems. And frankly, what the hell is wrong with these people? Never heard of explosive bolts? I first year engineering student could fix this problem. Of course, people could say the same thing about the tiles on the shuttle.
Danny Deger is a dipshit. He has tried since entering NASA to get into design work but he simply isn't qualified.. that's why he's an astronaut trainer. Rather than go get the qualifications, he makes waves.. and shitty books.
Basically, if it appears on NASA Watch, it's bullshit, ignore it.