HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » We should have been colon...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 06:37 PM

We should have been colonizing the solar system by now.

In 1969 when Armstrong and Aldrin landed on the Moon everyone expected that we would keep going farther. But then in the mid 70s NASA got mauled by the small-minded deficit hawks who thought they did not need to keep up NASA's funding because we beat those Evil Commie Russians and that's all that mattered. It seems like all of a sudden nobody cared anymore, some even started bashing space exploration using the equally small-minded "we have more important things to do here on terra firma" argument.

I wonder if the Vietnam War and Watergate are to blame, destroying the belief in Big Government doing Big Things, making NASA a victim of the same rise of selfish Individualism that lead to the late 70s "tax revolts" in California and the election of Reagan in 1980. I suspect that also, among us on the Left that the strain of technophobic misanthropy found among many Green types who believe in the philosophy of Deep Ecology has something to do with it, thus the posts here on DU decrying space exploration as spreading the "cancer" of humanity.

According to astrophysicist Robert Zubrin a 3-year manned mission to Mars would cost $30 billion per mission and is perfectly feasible with today's technology. That is chump change compared to the "Defense" budget, and we would not have to pay all of that if it is set up as a multi-national mission. The problem is a lack of will. people either dogmatically assert that such a mission is either impossible, too expensive, or immoral, and all of those assertions are bullshit.

809 replies, 74728 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 809 replies Author Time Post
Reply We should have been colonizing the solar system by now. (Original post)
Odin2005 Aug 2012 OP
xchrom Aug 2012 #1
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #2
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #3
xchrom Aug 2012 #5
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #6
randome Aug 2012 #8
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #16
Nevernose Aug 2012 #47
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #60
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #137
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #138
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #141
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #140
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #146
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #174
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #185
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #200
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #206
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #213
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #217
Keefer Aug 2012 #247
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #413
navarth Aug 2012 #694
klook Aug 2012 #353
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #355
klook Aug 2012 #377
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #382
klook Aug 2012 #398
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #399
navarth Aug 2012 #699
klook Aug 2012 #722
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #732
klook Aug 2012 #734
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #742
navarth Aug 2012 #743
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #747
navarth Aug 2012 #762
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #765
navarth Aug 2012 #764
krispos42 Aug 2012 #737
LongTomH Aug 2012 #72
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #73
xchrom Aug 2012 #75
Bernardo de La Paz Aug 2012 #90
hunter Aug 2012 #115
Bernardo de La Paz Aug 2012 #120
Egalitarian Thug Aug 2012 #341
Hugabear Aug 2012 #796
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #801
drokhole Aug 2012 #339
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #357
drokhole Aug 2012 #383
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #386
EOTE Aug 2012 #490
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #491
EOTE Aug 2012 #494
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #513
EOTE Aug 2012 #521
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #530
EOTE Aug 2012 #617
drokhole Aug 2012 #619
EOTE Aug 2012 #664
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #526
EOTE Aug 2012 #618
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #630
EOTE Aug 2012 #631
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #632
EOTE Aug 2012 #663
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #670
EOTE Aug 2012 #681
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #687
EOTE Aug 2012 #692
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #697
EOTE Aug 2012 #700
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #703
EOTE Aug 2012 #705
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #708
EOTE Aug 2012 #715
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #716
EOTE Aug 2012 #718
EOTE Aug 2012 #688
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #690
EOTE Aug 2012 #695
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #701
EOTE Aug 2012 #704
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #707
EOTE Aug 2012 #709
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #711
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #714
EOTE Aug 2012 #719
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #720
EOTE Aug 2012 #721
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #726
EOTE Aug 2012 #739
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #741
EOTE Aug 2012 #717
tama Aug 2012 #746
EOTE Aug 2012 #750
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #753
EOTE Aug 2012 #754
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #756
EOTE Aug 2012 #757
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #759
EOTE Aug 2012 #760
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #763
tama Aug 2012 #761
EOTE Aug 2012 #768
tama Aug 2012 #778
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #779
tama Aug 2012 #780
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #782
EOTE Aug 2012 #781
tama Aug 2012 #784
EOTE Aug 2012 #786
tama Aug 2012 #789
Mojorabbit Aug 2012 #606
Zalatix Aug 2012 #95
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #103
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #104
Zalatix Aug 2012 #111
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #207
xchrom Aug 2012 #105
Zalatix Aug 2012 #110
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #121
Keefer Aug 2012 #253
xchrom Aug 2012 #166
baldguy Aug 2012 #118
DRoseDARs Aug 2012 #173
xchrom Aug 2012 #188
sofa king Aug 2012 #362
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #392
kentauros Aug 2012 #571
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #572
kentauros Aug 2012 #599
eqfan592 Aug 2012 #559
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #4
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #7
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #9
Warpy Aug 2012 #13
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #17
kentauros Aug 2012 #122
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #128
kentauros Aug 2012 #152
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #154
kentauros Aug 2012 #176
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #190
kentauros Aug 2012 #194
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #209
kentauros Aug 2012 #243
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #205
kentauros Aug 2012 #227
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #19
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #20
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #53
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #79
jtuck004 Aug 2012 #88
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #92
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #101
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #109
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #203
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #211
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #10
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #12
eqfan592 Aug 2012 #560
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #563
Warpy Aug 2012 #11
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #14
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #18
Gregorian Aug 2012 #37
PavePusher Aug 2012 #131
Warpy Aug 2012 #242
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #350
Warpy Aug 2012 #376
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #379
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #380
bhikkhu Aug 2012 #15
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #22
Cleita Aug 2012 #23
cthulu2016 Aug 2012 #63
PavePusher Aug 2012 #157
Cleita Aug 2012 #21
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #27
Cleita Aug 2012 #192
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #204
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #29
Cleita Aug 2012 #34
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #117
Cleita Aug 2012 #178
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #277
PavePusher Aug 2012 #159
Cleita Aug 2012 #181
PavePusher Aug 2012 #202
Cleita Aug 2012 #219
PavePusher Aug 2012 #228
Cleita Aug 2012 #234
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #278
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #303
Cleita Aug 2012 #327
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #358
Cleita Aug 2012 #424
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #425
Cleita Aug 2012 #433
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #434
Cleita Aug 2012 #447
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #464
Cleita Aug 2012 #495
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #514
tama Aug 2012 #225
hunter Aug 2012 #133
avebury Aug 2012 #24
Cleita Aug 2012 #26
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #31
LongTomH Aug 2012 #77
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #87
PavePusher Aug 2012 #163
Cleita Aug 2012 #187
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #198
Cleita Aug 2012 #221
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #226
Cleita Aug 2012 #231
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #233
Cleita Aug 2012 #237
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #241
Cleita Aug 2012 #251
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #279
Cleita Aug 2012 #284
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #288
Cleita Aug 2012 #290
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #292
Cleita Aug 2012 #294
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #298
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #257
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #260
4th law of robotics Aug 2012 #640
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #641
Cleita Aug 2012 #642
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #643
4th law of robotics Aug 2012 #644
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #645
tama Aug 2012 #650
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #653
tama Aug 2012 #660
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #661
tama Aug 2012 #662
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #672
tama Aug 2012 #698
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #702
tama Aug 2012 #712
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #725
tama Aug 2012 #736
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #740
tama Aug 2012 #744
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #745
tama Aug 2012 #748
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #749
tama Aug 2012 #790
Cleita Aug 2012 #651
Cleita Aug 2012 #183
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #195
PavePusher Aug 2012 #197
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #28
avebury Aug 2012 #33
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #40
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #91
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #41
avebury Aug 2012 #62
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #85
Codeine Aug 2012 #51
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #30
Codeine Aug 2012 #35
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #42
bananas Aug 2012 #321
avebury Aug 2012 #52
Codeine Aug 2012 #64
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #96
avebury Aug 2012 #168
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #177
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #179
Confusious Aug 2012 #59
Codeine Aug 2012 #61
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #66
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #98
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #108
Dash87 Aug 2012 #367
Confusious Aug 2012 #71
lumberjack_jeff Aug 2012 #394
AverageJoe90 Aug 2012 #669
Cleita Aug 2012 #25
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #32
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #36
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #43
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #49
2on2u Aug 2012 #67
LongTomH Aug 2012 #82
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #124
LongTomH Aug 2012 #134
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #136
A HERETIC I AM Aug 2012 #127
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #142
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #149
A HERETIC I AM Aug 2012 #158
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #161
A HERETIC I AM Aug 2012 #180
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #189
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #193
A HERETIC I AM Aug 2012 #150
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #144
A HERETIC I AM Aug 2012 #155
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #160
A HERETIC I AM Aug 2012 #172
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #182
A HERETIC I AM Aug 2012 #215
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #222
A HERETIC I AM Aug 2012 #258
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #262
jsmirman Aug 2012 #273
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #280
A HERETIC I AM Aug 2012 #296
jsmirman Aug 2012 #314
jsmirman Aug 2012 #316
A HERETIC I AM Aug 2012 #320
jsmirman Aug 2012 #340
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #359
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #102
Occulus Aug 2012 #426
TheKentuckian Aug 2012 #565
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #567
kentauros Aug 2012 #145
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #151
kentauros Aug 2012 #162
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #167
kentauros Aug 2012 #191
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #201
kentauros Aug 2012 #224
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #229
kentauros Aug 2012 #240
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #184
kentauros Aug 2012 #196
LongTomH Aug 2012 #506
kentauros Aug 2012 #569
Dr. Strange Aug 2012 #713
kentauros Aug 2012 #723
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #728
kentauros Aug 2012 #731
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #733
Dr. Strange Aug 2012 #738
spanone Aug 2012 #38
Warren DeMontague Aug 2012 #39
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #45
Warren DeMontague Aug 2012 #80
stopbush Aug 2012 #44
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #46
Codeine Aug 2012 #48
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #106
Liberal_Dog Aug 2012 #132
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #169
friendly_iconoclast Aug 2012 #439
struggle4progress Aug 2012 #50
Codeine Aug 2012 #54
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #56
Codeine Aug 2012 #69
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #139
BOG PERSON Aug 2012 #57
struggle4progress Aug 2012 #65
Confusious Aug 2012 #93
BOG PERSON Aug 2012 #55
Codeine Aug 2012 #58
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #129
bhikkhu Aug 2012 #68
Warren DeMontague Aug 2012 #86
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #97
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #99
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #113
WinkyDink Aug 2012 #70
Dash87 Aug 2012 #76
Alduin Aug 2012 #74
Confusious Aug 2012 #78
Alduin Aug 2012 #311
Confusious Aug 2012 #325
Warren DeMontague Aug 2012 #81
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #89
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #107
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #119
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #125
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #126
Alduin Aug 2012 #309
Nevernose Aug 2012 #199
heaven05 Aug 2012 #83
NYC Liberal Aug 2012 #84
Motown_Johnny Aug 2012 #94
roamer65 Aug 2012 #100
bvar22 Aug 2012 #112
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #114
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #116
bvar22 Aug 2012 #143
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #165
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #171
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #239
kentauros Aug 2012 #248
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #259
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #261
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #263
tama Aug 2012 #364
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #369
tama Aug 2012 #372
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #375
tama Aug 2012 #437
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #440
friendly_iconoclast Aug 2012 #444
tama Aug 2012 #455
friendly_iconoclast Aug 2012 #459
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #467
tama Aug 2012 #470
friendly_iconoclast Aug 2012 #446
tama Aug 2012 #465
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #471
friendly_iconoclast Aug 2012 #442
Taverner Aug 2012 #123
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #130
valerief Aug 2012 #135
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #147
valerief Aug 2012 #153
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #156
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #164
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #170
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #175
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #186
fxmakeupguy Aug 2012 #148
kentauros Aug 2012 #208
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #216
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #218
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #235
Cleita Aug 2012 #210
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #212
Cleita Aug 2012 #214
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #220
Cleita Aug 2012 #223
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #232
Codeine Aug 2012 #236
Cleita Aug 2012 #245
Codeine Aug 2012 #249
Cleita Aug 2012 #255
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #268
Cleita Aug 2012 #274
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #286
Cleita Aug 2012 #289
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #291
Cleita Aug 2012 #330
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #300
Cleita Aug 2012 #332
friendly_iconoclast Aug 2012 #448
Cleita Aug 2012 #450
friendly_iconoclast Aug 2012 #456
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #472
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #306
PavePusher Aug 2012 #335
Cleita Aug 2012 #338
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #349
Cleita Aug 2012 #454
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #460
Cleita Aug 2012 #498
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #517
Cleita Aug 2012 #527
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #531
Cleita Aug 2012 #534
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #535
Cleita Aug 2012 #538
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #543
Cleita Aug 2012 #546
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #548
Cleita Aug 2012 #549
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #551
Cleita Aug 2012 #553
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #555
tama Aug 2012 #496
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #515
tama Aug 2012 #536
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #542
tama Aug 2012 #573
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #575
tama Aug 2012 #591
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #594
tama Aug 2012 #598
friendly_iconoclast Aug 2012 #449
Cleita Aug 2012 #452
Ikonoklast Aug 2012 #342
Cleita Aug 2012 #343
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #360
Cleita Aug 2012 #427
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #428
Cleita Aug 2012 #505
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #519
tama Aug 2012 #595
Cleita Aug 2012 #603
tama Aug 2012 #605
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #430
tama Aug 2012 #499
Cleita Aug 2012 #502
tama Aug 2012 #509
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #272
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #238
Cleita Aug 2012 #250
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #265
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #276
Cleita Aug 2012 #293
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #297
drokhole Aug 2012 #345
Cleita Aug 2012 #275
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #281
Cleita Aug 2012 #282
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #285
Cleita Aug 2012 #493
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #287
NCTraveler Aug 2012 #468
Cleita Aug 2012 #492
NCTraveler Aug 2012 #611
Cleita Aug 2012 #621
NCTraveler Aug 2012 #622
Cleita Aug 2012 #623
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #283
PavePusher Aug 2012 #331
Cleita Aug 2012 #334
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #537
Cleita Aug 2012 #541
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #547
jsr Aug 2012 #230
sabrina 1 Aug 2012 #244
coalition_unwilling Aug 2012 #246
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #267
coalition_unwilling Aug 2012 #370
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #371
coalition_unwilling Aug 2012 #390
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #391
bobthedrummer Aug 2012 #252
entanglement Aug 2012 #254
LeftyMom Aug 2012 #256
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #266
LeftyMom Aug 2012 #295
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #299
kentauros Aug 2012 #315
AnnieBW Aug 2012 #264
ellisonz Aug 2012 #344
Marrah_G Aug 2012 #269
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #270
Cleita Aug 2012 #271
Trillo Aug 2012 #301
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #302
Trillo Aug 2012 #363
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #368
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #307
Trillo Aug 2012 #366
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #374
Trillo Aug 2012 #396
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #397
tama Aug 2012 #501
leveymg Aug 2012 #304
David__77 Aug 2012 #305
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #310
MStuart Aug 2012 #308
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #313
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #319
Warren DeMontague Aug 2012 #322
kentauros Aug 2012 #323
Warren DeMontague Aug 2012 #324
kentauros Aug 2012 #328
Warren DeMontague Aug 2012 #326
kentauros Aug 2012 #333
Warren DeMontague Aug 2012 #336
PavePusher Aug 2012 #337
Rowdyboy Aug 2012 #312
Sick of the GOP Aug 2012 #317
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #318
Warren DeMontague Aug 2012 #329
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #352
lumberjack_jeff Aug 2012 #393
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #395
tama Aug 2012 #539
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #544
tama Aug 2012 #550
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #552
tama Aug 2012 #580
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #581
LunaSea Aug 2012 #346
CaptPicard Aug 2012 #347
JHB Aug 2012 #348
Codeine Aug 2012 #351
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #354
Odin2005 Aug 2012 #356
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #361
Efilroft Sul Aug 2012 #378
GeorgeGist Aug 2012 #365
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #373
Romulox Aug 2012 #381
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #384
Romulox Aug 2012 #385
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #387
Romulox Aug 2012 #388
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #389
4th law of robotics Aug 2012 #436
Romulox Aug 2012 #525
4th law of robotics Aug 2012 #529
Romulox Aug 2012 #629
4th law of robotics Aug 2012 #638
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #639
Romulox Aug 2012 #666
Romulox Aug 2012 #667
4th law of robotics Aug 2012 #668
Romulox Aug 2012 #671
4th law of robotics Aug 2012 #676
Romulox Aug 2012 #680
4th law of robotics Aug 2012 #686
Romulox Aug 2012 #689
4th law of robotics Aug 2012 #693
Romulox Aug 2012 #673
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #675
Romulox Aug 2012 #679
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #683
4th law of robotics Aug 2012 #678
Romulox Aug 2012 #682
4th law of robotics Aug 2012 #685
Romulox Aug 2012 #691
4th law of robotics Aug 2012 #696
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #674
Romulox Aug 2012 #677
caraher Aug 2012 #400
Liber T. Anjustis Aug 2012 #401
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #406
janlyn Aug 2012 #402
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #407
BOG PERSON Aug 2012 #403
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #408
BOG PERSON Aug 2012 #411
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #412
BOG PERSON Aug 2012 #415
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #416
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #421
librechik Aug 2012 #404
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #409
librechik Aug 2012 #414
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #417
librechik Aug 2012 #419
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #420
librechik Aug 2012 #422
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #423
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #418
Jeff In Milwaukee Aug 2012 #405
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #410
Jeff In Milwaukee Aug 2012 #429
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #431
tama Aug 2012 #451
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #462
tama Aug 2012 #482
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #484
tama Aug 2012 #443
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #457
tama Aug 2012 #478
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #480
tama Aug 2012 #488
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #489
tama Aug 2012 #503
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #518
tama Aug 2012 #528
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #532
XemaSab Sep 2012 #809
jberryhill Aug 2012 #432
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #435
jberryhill Aug 2012 #445
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #458
jberryhill Aug 2012 #461
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #463
MyUncle Aug 2012 #438
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #441
patrice Aug 2012 #453
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #466
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #469
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #476
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #477
patrice Aug 2012 #479
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #481
patrice Aug 2012 #486
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #487
Puregonzo1188 Aug 2012 #473
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #474
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #475
LongTomH Aug 2012 #508
tama Aug 2012 #511
Johonny Aug 2012 #510
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #524
Johonny Aug 2012 #540
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #545
demosincebirth Aug 2012 #577
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #730
demosincebirth Aug 2012 #785
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #787
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #788
kentauros Aug 2012 #797
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #798
kentauros Aug 2012 #805
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #806
demosincebirth Aug 2012 #795
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #800
patrice Aug 2012 #483
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #485
patrice Aug 2012 #627
tama Aug 2012 #504
patrice Aug 2012 #512
tama Aug 2012 #522
patrice Aug 2012 #554
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #557
patrice Aug 2012 #568
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #570
tama Aug 2012 #585
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #586
tama Aug 2012 #592
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #597
tama Aug 2012 #604
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #608
tama Aug 2012 #610
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #613
patrice Aug 2012 #593
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #596
tama Aug 2012 #602
tama Aug 2012 #600
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #614
tama Aug 2012 #652
CubicleGuy Aug 2012 #497
randome Aug 2012 #500
LunaSea Aug 2012 #516
sibelian Aug 2012 #507
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #533
Proles Aug 2012 #520
LunaSea Aug 2012 #523
Art_from_Ark Aug 2012 #556
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #558
Grave Grumbler Aug 2012 #561
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #562
Grave Grumbler Aug 2012 #564
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #566
Grave Grumbler Aug 2012 #574
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #576
Grave Grumbler Aug 2012 #579
Kolesar Aug 2012 #578
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #583
LongTomH Aug 2012 #601
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #635
fascisthunter Aug 2012 #582
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #584
fascisthunter Aug 2012 #587
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #588
fascisthunter Aug 2012 #589
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #590
McGee from Muskogee Aug 2012 #607
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #609
Coyotl Aug 2012 #612
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #615
Coyotl Aug 2012 #620
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #628
cpwm17 Aug 2012 #616
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #633
cpwm17 Aug 2012 #646
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #648
Zorra Aug 2012 #624
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #634
Jim__ Aug 2012 #625
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #637
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #751
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #752
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #755
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #758
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #766
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #767
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #769
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #770
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #772
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #773
LongTomH Aug 2012 #626
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #636
LongTomH Aug 2012 #647
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #649
LongTomH Aug 2012 #655
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #656
LongTomH Aug 2012 #658
Posteritatis Aug 2012 #774
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #775
Taverner Aug 2012 #654
EvolveOrConvolve Aug 2012 #657
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #659
kentauros Aug 2012 #724
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #727
kentauros Aug 2012 #729
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #783
kentauros Aug 2012 #791
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #792
kentauros Aug 2012 #793
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #799
kentauros Aug 2012 #804
GliderGuider Aug 2012 #665
David Zephyr Aug 2012 #684
tama Aug 2012 #706
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #710
ck4829 Aug 2012 #735
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #771
kentauros Aug 2012 #794
patrice Aug 2012 #776
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #777
Iggy Aug 2012 #802
a geek named Bob Aug 2012 #803
Iggy Sep 2012 #807
a geek named Bob Sep 2012 #808

Response to Odin2005 (Original post)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 06:39 PM

1. we can't clothe the naked. feed the hungry, comfort and support the widow.

Last edited Mon Aug 27, 2012, 06:21 AM - Edit history (1)

we can't care for and bury the dead.

i might agree with the sentiment -- but....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Reply #1)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 06:41 PM

2. There is plenty money to go around.

It's just that the M-I Complex is hoarding it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Reply #1)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 06:43 PM

3. Sure we can. What Odin's talking about is couch-cushion stuff compared to the defense budget. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Posteritatis (Reply #3)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 06:46 PM

5. perhaps taking me too literally?

i still want to see the hungry fed, the naked clothed, the widow and her children cared for before, blah, blah blah -- but yes there is enough money.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Reply #5)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 06:48 PM

6. Assuming it's one or the other is silly. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Posteritatis (Reply #6)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 06:56 PM

8. Agree with you in general but right now we have accomplished neither.

So maybe we SHOULD pick one, do it right and then move on to the other.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #8)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 07:12 PM

16. That's assuming it's one or the other, which remains silly. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Reply #1)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 07:47 PM

47. NASA has made advances towards all those things

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_spin-off_technologies

Spend a few minutes. Even stuff they didn't invent, like MRIs, they improved in. We have the money for lots of things; we just spent more in military air conditioners last year than NASA's while budget, and one year's military budget is more than NASA's budgets combined since it's inception. It's frigging obscene.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nevernose (Reply #47)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 08:00 PM

60. It bugs me how few people get how miniscule NASA's budget is.

The way people react to it pricewise it's like they all think it's on par with the defense budget.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Posteritatis (Reply #60)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 09:37 PM

137. It's part of a piece of rhetoric

 

it started with the %^$^# New Wave SF bastards (may they roast in a Baptist hell).

They equated the Space program with the arms race. Also, certain types of academic didn't like losing the limelight, so they joined in.

When you point out the price discrepencies, they ALL chime in with one of things:
1.) It's not the money, it's the principle!
2.) That money could fund (name cause celebre of the speaker here)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #137)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 09:38 PM

138. +1,000,000,000,000

I love old school sci-fi. Give me Asimov, Clarke, and Brin any day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Odin2005 (Reply #138)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 09:40 PM

141. 1 Trillion???

 

I'm game...

But I thought the yearly budget was in the billions...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #137)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 09:40 PM

140. Heh, there is that, yeah.

Most of the time when I point out the price discrepancies the standard responses are either thundering silence or continuing to claim the budget's what they think. Auughwilfulignorance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Posteritatis (Reply #140)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 09:45 PM

146. I usually figure

 

Most of the nay sayers, when you get down to it...

Want the pro-space crowd to stay here, so there can win us over with their "superior rhetoric."


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #146)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 10:03 PM

174. They are the "small minds" I hate.

They are incapable of imagination, they are incapable of transcending their own petty concerns and think of the big picture.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Odin2005 (Reply #174)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 10:13 PM

185. to them...

 

their petty concerns ARE the big picture.

I had a near zen moment, when I dealt with some "friends" in the SF bay area.

I was working on some rocketry calculations, and they kept saying I "really needed to attend this party" they were going to.

The party turned out to be a fund raiser for a rather snotty poet for low ability.

Sigh...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #185)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 10:24 PM

200. That reminds me of an old saying:

Great Minds discuss ideas
Average Minds discuss events
Mediocre Minds discuss people

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Odin2005 (Reply #200)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 10:26 PM

206. interesting...

 

something to that...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #206)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 10:30 PM

213. And is why the popularity of the Kardashians is depressing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Odin2005 (Reply #213)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 10:32 PM

217. I don't envision ever getting in touch with them

 

As I don't watch TV, I don't what they actually look like...

But I saw a youtube clip satirizing them once...

EWWW

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Odin2005 (Reply #213)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 10:54 PM

247. Huh?

I don't understand. Maybe you left a word or 2 or 3 out???

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Keefer (Reply #247)

Mon Aug 27, 2012, 01:21 PM

413. Made perfect sense to me...

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Odin2005 (Reply #200)

Wed Aug 29, 2012, 04:24 PM

694. that is good stuff.....any idea who said it?

mind if I use it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #137)

Mon Aug 27, 2012, 08:07 AM

353. The reason we're not colonizing the planets is because Michael Moorcock and Samuel R. Delany

stopped us?

It's Harlan Ellison's fault? And Norman Spinrad??

Okey-dokey, then.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to klook (Reply #353)

Mon Aug 27, 2012, 08:11 AM

355. nice try

 

It's a little more complicated that that.

Mikey and his buddies kept harping on "mature" (read non-space) themes. Anybody arguing got followed and harrassed. (sp, no coffee yet).

collectively, they formed the voice of what I call the "idiot brigade." People quoted these authorial turds like they were Socrates at the Agora.

Does that help your screed?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #355)

Mon Aug 27, 2012, 10:29 AM

377. Doc Smith and Judith Merril Fist Fight in Heaven

Um, yes -- it's a whole lot more complicated than that.

The point of my post was that I found it amusing that you chose to single out the so-called "New Wave" (or "New Thing," as some called it at the time) movement within science fiction as directly responsible for the lack of interstellar colonization. Those authors' effect on public policy is apparently overrated in some circles.

Before I go further, let me clarify that I am a huge supporter of NASA, of science, and of space travel. Have been since I stood in the back yard as a little kid and saw Sputnik overhead. OK?

I'm aware of the internecine warfare in the SF community over "hard science" fiction vs. "speculative" fiction. At the heart of this conflict was between old-line conservatives and newer experimentalists. Zealots on either side depicted the other as either BEMs, damsels in distress, and cowboys with rayguns; or navel-gazing hippies who couldn't put a coherent plot together to save their life and disdained anything remotely scientific. Again, the reality was slightly more complicated.

Sure, 90 percent of the sub-genre represented by Michael Moorcock and J.G. Ballard was crap, just as 90 percent of the John W. Campbell school of science fiction was crap. You're aware of Sturgeon's Revelation, I imagine? (More important is Sturgeon's Law as originally stated: "Nothing is always absolutely so.")

So, sorry pal, no screed from me. I fly no literary flag and have read widely and enjoyed many types of imaginative fiction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to klook (Reply #377)

Mon Aug 27, 2012, 10:47 AM

382. klook

 

1.) I just finished writing my thesis, on SF.

2.) New Wave WAS crap. Any style should at least tell an interesting story, catching the reader's attention. The Fan population didn't like it. It only survives in the discourse of soggy English profs.

3.) personally, I can make a case that New Wave, and the earlier Futurians were a cheap attempt to convert SF into a vanguard group of (spitting on the ground here) socialist conversion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #382)

Mon Aug 27, 2012, 11:28 AM

398. "Consies," they were called

in Gravy Planet by two of the greatest Futurians, Frederik Pohl and Cyril Kornbluth. (To your point #3.)

Yes, the conflict between conservatives and progressives (sometimes accused of "socialist conversion") was central to the New Wave brouhaha. Funny that this still stirs such emotions 42 years after Harlan Ellison claimed the controversy had been "blissfully laid to rest."

As I say, I'm no flag-waver for the so-called "New Wave" or any other sub-genre, but Samuel Delany's three Hugos seem to be some evidence of fan enthusiasm. (Or is he not a member of the New Wave in your book? Sorry, I don't pay much attention to categories sometimes....) I'm not aware of what turns on "soggy English profs," but I'm guessing it's not Nova. (Zelazny? Frank Herbert? Silverberg? Spinrad? All have been lumped in with the "New Wave," and the fans made them all Hugo award winners.)

Time will tell whether the socialist agenda of Futurians such as Don Wollheim, Damon Knight, and Isaac Asimov comes to pass.

Bob, I suggest we both take a deep breath, realize we're not going to see eye to eye on this issue, and join forces in defeating Republicans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to klook (Reply #398)

Mon Aug 27, 2012, 11:31 AM

399. Defeatig republicans

 

Is something we can agree on...

If the socialist take over (ala John Michels' speech), my ass is off to Mars, and bringing all that want to travel with.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to klook (Reply #398)

Wed Aug 29, 2012, 04:34 PM

699. This is really fascinating to me

I've been totally unaware of this warfare inside the SF world. I've always just read what I liked. This is really a surprise to me. New Wave, Old School, whatever, I've enjoyed reading all the names mentioned here. The only 'new' author I've read a lot of would be David Brin.

Oh, and thanks for mentioning Kornbluth. Didn't he write The Marching Morons? I work with people half my age who will, from time to time, wax rhapsodic about this movie 'Idiocracy'. I always hasten to point out that they really should check out it's granddaddy, The Marching Morons. I consider it to be as important and prophetic as 'Make Room! Make Room!' (Soylent Green).

Thanks for a most interesting discussion.

Oh, to get back on topic, I fully support NASA and anybody that thinks it takes money from widows or poor people hasn't really thought things out IMO.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to navarth (Reply #699)

Wed Aug 29, 2012, 05:38 PM

722. Thanks!

This tempest in the teapot of science fiction is interesting on various levels: science vs. art (as though they're incompatible!), conservative vs. progressive, men vs. women (some of the early sliderule-toting "hard science" fiction fans thought SF should remain a boys' club), methodical craft vs. intuitive freedom, socially conscious vs. escapist fiction, etc.

And, as my sparring partner noted, in the 1930s there was a real rift between a few of the early fans (the Futurians from New York) and most of the rest of the tiny SF fan world at the time over a) the role of science fiction in society (pure entertainment or serious literature -- including, some would say, childishness and pretensions on both sides) and b) whether the SF community should support the leftist uprisings in Europe. (This, of course, coincided with the Spanish Civil War as well as the ascent of the National Socialist German Workers' Party -- the Nazis. So there were SF fans who sympathized more with the communists than with the fascists, as in the rest of American society; allegiances for which they were often castigated either at the time or later.)

There's more on the history of SF fandom here: http://fancyclopedia.wikidot.com/

Excellent point about "The Marching Morons." I was thinking the other day I need to re-read that one in light of recent discussions of Ayn Rand.

Like you (and as I noted in my previous posts), I've never felt like a member of one "club" or another within the SF universe. There is much to enjoy from many brilliant writers in the field.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to klook (Reply #722)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 12:49 AM

732. hmmm...

 

I'm beginning to think that I ought to organize a mass reading of my thesis...

As a (somewhat) gracious host, I'd have to provide pizza and beer (geek soul food).

1.) I've grown up with Makers and rocketeers in my family and extended family (and my family of choice), since birth.
2.) The question is one of ultimate motivations. What was the underlying reason for the evangelizing of the socialists in Fandom. It's pretty clear that Sykora's bid was destroyed in a fractious takeover bid. The question there is: was the takeover bid an attempt to create a front organization? Or were Wollheim and Michels attempting to save Sykora's faltering group?
3.) Sam Moskowitz's book The Immortal Storm, and Damon Knights's answering The Futurians both point out that the Rocketeers (those of us obsessed with seeing things fly into the air with a mighty WHOOSH) left immediately after the first Worldcon. I attempted to find out why they would do that, by taking the emotional pulse of modern Rocketeers. There are no surviving Rocketeers fro the time period in question, so primary sources are a little hard to come by.

Pizza and beer, in a neutral location.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to navarth (Reply #699)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 07:34 AM

734. Hey, Navarth --

Just found another thread you might want to check out:
I have a hard time with RW SF.

It's about right-wing & libertarian SF authors, not the fan conflicts, but perhaps of interest. (Personally, I'm much more interested in science fiction than in science fiction fandom...)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to klook (Reply #734)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 12:13 PM

742. klook

 

Thanks for the link.

Mind you, I disagree with the basic premise. (Heinlein wasn't right wing.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to klook (Reply #734)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 12:39 PM

743. wonderful, wonderful. thank you so much

I must read both those links now.

I was somewhat disappointed when Thom Hartmann pointed out that Jack Vance is very conservative. (Thom is good friends with Mr. Vance and has read him widely....how about that Thom Hartmann?? What a guy) It doesn't keep me from saying that of all the authors I've read, Mr. Vance is the most enjoyable. Knowing that Mr. Vance is like that, I can never read Emphyrio again without noticing the strong anti-union thread throughout.

And Heinlein...well I add anything to what's already been said about him in this thread.

If Robert Silverberg is considered this 'new wave' that Bob doesn't like, I guess I have to strongly disagree with Bob. 'Dying Inside' is one of the best books in the genre IMO.

This discussion is fun. Apologies to the main thread, we really need to protect and nurture NASA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to navarth (Reply #743)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 01:15 PM

747. Silverberg

 

seems to belong to everybody.

I've heard him called Space Opera, New Wave, Slip stream, and proto-cyberpunk.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #747)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 02:03 PM

762. wow.

well, I must have missed a lot of parties; I've never heard any of these labels.

Silverbeg's 'Up The Line' is one of the best time travel stories ever IMO, and 'Dying Inside' was a straight-up groundbreaker. One of the most memorable stories I have ever read. Ah, the 70's.....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to navarth (Reply #762)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 02:10 PM

765. SF seems to generate a new label every 5 or so years

 

Cyberpunk has pretty been absorbed completely, by the background culture.

Slipstream never really took off. The reasons for the failure to launch depend on the questioned person.

One of these days, I'll be straightening out the books...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to klook (Reply #734)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 02:05 PM

764. That list really knocked me out....

there were quite a few on the pro-war side that really disappointed me...

I guess I shouldn't have been surprised by Fred Saberhagen, but still.....ouch....

But Jack Vance can do no wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Posteritatis (Reply #60)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 09:42 AM

737. Wall Street executive bonuses are 1% of the US economy, about $150 billion

They're also 8x NASA's budget, which is about $18 billion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Reply #1)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 08:26 PM

72. Quoting the late, great Bill Hicks:

“Take all that money we spend on weapons and defenses each year and instead spend it feeding and clothing and educating the poor of the world, which it would pay for many times over, not one human being excluded, and we could explore space, together, both inner and outer, forever, in peace.” – Bill Hicks 1993

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LongTomH (Reply #72)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 08:28 PM

73. Hicks was a fucking genius!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LongTomH (Reply #72)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 08:30 PM

75. Thank you. Nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LongTomH (Reply #72)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 08:56 PM

90. Beautiful sentiment but unilateral disarmament doesn't work. Sorry. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bernardo de La Paz (Reply #90)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 09:18 PM

115. We could cut our military 90% without getting close to "unilateral disarmament"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hunter (Reply #115)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 09:22 PM

120. I don't know about 90%, but I agree that a huge amount could be cut. 50%?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hunter (Reply #115)

Mon Aug 27, 2012, 02:46 AM

341. If we modernized and implemented General Butler's plan for an actual Dept. of Defense

 

we would be right in that 90% ballpark and still have completely adequate security. And then we could save the world, again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bernardo de La Paz (Reply #90)

Fri Aug 31, 2012, 12:11 AM

796. How many times has the United States been attacked in its entire history?

I'll give you a clue...you can count the times on one finger.

That's right...we've only been directly attacked ONCE, that was in WWII.

Twice, if you accept the Hearst explanation for the USS Maine.

But that's it. Every other war we've been in has been because we chose to get involved, either to support our allies, or to support the expansion or maintenance of American interests.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hugabear (Reply #796)

Fri Aug 31, 2012, 07:50 AM

801. so?

 

What's your point?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LongTomH (Reply #72)

Mon Aug 27, 2012, 02:13 AM

339. One of the key words that shouldn't be overlooked there...

..."inner". As in, "inner space". Hicks was talking about the informed use of psychedelics. I'd love to see a national "space" program on par with NASA - in both budget and afforded prestige - dedicated to exploring consciousness.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to drokhole (Reply #339)

Mon Aug 27, 2012, 08:33 AM

357. That's pretty much...

 

J.G Balard's route...

The LAST thing we need, as a culture, is more 'heads "turning on" the populace.

Prestige for taking drugs????

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #357)

Mon Aug 27, 2012, 10:49 AM

383. Only fools and knaves can't discriminate between "drugs"...

"The first thing I think we must be clear about is that the word 'drugs' is very misleading." - Alan Watts




Informed use of psychedelics - meaning, taken under proper and prepared set and setting - has been thoroughly demonstrated to bring about positive changes in personal well-being, which includes an intrinsic understanding of a deeper connection with not only other people but the whole of nature itself. In other words, an ecological awareness. People with a deeper ecological awareness tend not to treat each other and the world - in ravaging it for every last resource - like shit.

Not only that, but under said conditions - and by shifting intent - it has been shown to be wildly beneficial in technical problem solving:

Brilliant article on Psychedelics covers creative-breakthroughs, transcendent experiences, and more

So, there's the potential - if some of our "best and brightest" took it under these conditions - that it would lead to even better and more intuitive scientific breakthroughs. After all, psychedelic users/culture from the '60s largely influenced the personal computer you're using to type your tripe.

Meanwhile, here's a short lecture from a doctor from Johns Hopskins who began some of the first clinical studies of psilocybin mushrooms in decades. His results have shown "magic mushrooms" to be effective in treating depression, cluster headaches, and anxiety - not to mention the aforementioned increase in general well-being:



Now, does that mean psychedelics haven't been used wantonly and carelessly? Obviously not. One of the problems is the lack of understanding of proper reverence and usage. Plenty of indigenous cultures treat these kind of substances as either a sacrament or a medicine, or both. And when it comes to ecological awareness, Alan Watts put it well when he said that they can easily offer "ecstasy without the insight." It's a matter of bringing them out of the dark and being honest about their potential benefits. And, ideally, allowing and providing for safe and secure usage.

One's attitude towards the world informs the way you treat it. Maybe, if people had a more overall sense of well-being, were more compassionate and mindful towards each other and the world - and actually experienced their connection - they'd more willingly divert funds from shit like war and greedy endeavors into stuff like education and the space program.

Judging from your other posts, your juvenile derision, callous disregard and misunderstanding wasn't unexpected. But, you know - hahaha drugs!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to drokhole (Reply #383)

Mon Aug 27, 2012, 10:57 AM

386. yup... okay...

 

dude...

remember the old rule, when handling drugs:

"All cars are real, and you can't fly."

You seem to be upset, regarding my "juvenile derision" towards your drug promotion.

I'll put it out there: I don't trust drug users. If someone says they've been using drugs, I escort them out of my workspace.
"drugs gave us the computer..." Tell that to the guys building Altairs.

Please, put down the Bardo and other hip-humanities books, and go learn some science.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #386)

Mon Aug 27, 2012, 03:48 PM

490. Tell Francis Crick to "go learn some science".

As he was under the influence of LSD when he discovered the double-helix structure of DNA. Or the founders of the internet, many of them on a veritable melange of psychoactive substances. Yeah, you're so much more scientific because you distrust drug users. You do know that one of the most powerful psychoactive substances ever discovered, DMT, exists inside of each and every one of us, in every mammal on the planet and in hundreds of plants and trees, right? Yeah, it's clear that humans shouldn't dare explore what exists inside us all. If scientists in general were as close minded as you, we'd still be dying en masse from the plague, forget about ever having left the planet.

Please, for the love of all that is good, go learn some science.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #490)

Mon Aug 27, 2012, 03:51 PM

491. oh boy...

 

I see that I've tweaked the new shaman crowd...

Would you trust the design mechanisms built by someone who "had a vision?" Why?

You're not talking about science, you are talking about personal histories involved in science.

Please learn the difference.

"Exploring inside" using drugs, sounds a lot like glorified day-dreams.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #491)

Mon Aug 27, 2012, 04:02 PM

494. Whether someone "had a vision" or not would not be a factor in whether I trusted their design or not

Because I'm not so incredibly ignorant as to believe that experimenting with psychoactive substances makes someone unqualified for design. And yes, we're definitely talking about science here, are you really unable to see that? Crick said that he used small doses of LSD to boost his observational powers and said in no uncertain terms that LSD helped him to visualize the double helix structure of DNA. But I guess Crick wasn't to be trusted. He was clearly a dirty hippie with no true scientific ability. Apparently you're one more victim of Nancy Reagan's idiocy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #494)

Mon Aug 27, 2012, 05:59 PM

513. No, I'm a victim

 

Of seeing people take drugs and dying. Or becoming clinically insane. I certainly wouldn't trust the design work of an acid head, unless proven by at least four other sources. (Remember, in the 60's, there used to be a belief/urban legend, that taking enough acid rendered you immune from radiation.)

"Small amounts" of a substance measured in micro-grams clearly has the capacity for all too easily getting an overdose.

Inspiration is nice. Sober thought and verifiable design work is better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #513)

Mon Aug 27, 2012, 06:27 PM

521. For a fan of science, you think in an incredibly UNscientific manner.

So you discount all drug users because of a few of your burnout friends, then you use a stupid urban legend to further your agenda. Bravo. Once again, Nancy would be very proud. Then, to further demonstrate your ignorance, you talk about LSD's capacity for providing overdoses when the LD50 for LSD is so high that it's not even known. When a substance is active at micrograms, yet people have taken dozens of milligrams with no ill effect, that speaks very positively to its benign nature. You claim to be pro-science, yet are completely oblivious to the fact that without drugs, we'd be centuries behind technologically. Go on, give me more proof of how utterly uninformed you are of which you speak. You should be very clear on this: You're not pro-science, you're a fundamentalist.

Needless to say, I wouldn't trust your design work unless I was certain that you copped the blueprints from someone else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #521)

Mon Aug 27, 2012, 07:11 PM

530. okay then...

 

1.) I find your post personally abusive, so I must have touched a nerve.
2.) You made this personal, so here we go...
2a.) I'm not a fan of Nancy Reagan (sp?). The fact that you automatically assume I'll agree with her, just because I won't trust those taking drugs.
2b.) Science is all about testable hypotheses, based on observable data, yes? I've traveled a whole lot. I figure I've met (on average) at least 1 person per day, for over 30 years. That gives me a population of over 10,000. Given that I used to work with a rather suspect crowd, I met a lot of acid heads (roughly 1 in 10.) ALL of them though reality was "malleable." Not a good idea, if you want to create a safe design. ALL of them
2c.) Overdose doesn't only mean "cause of death." It can also mean (in this case) "cause of insanity."
2d.) as in all things of the street, Know Your Dealer is the useful credo. Can you trust the product in question? Any strychnine? Speed? PCP? If you can't rule those out, you are taking your life in your hands, or at least your mind.
3.) The FACT that science would be "hundreds of years behind?" As the burden of proof is on the accuser, you need to prove that one. Goddard dropped acid? (pretty much impossible.) Shrooms? unlikely, as New England doesn't have much of a crop, and he would have lost his job. Grass? (possibility, but again... you need to prove it...) How about Galileo? Got proof for that one? Newton? Vannevar Bush? (the guy who built the first computer.) How far you want to go with that one? It's like saying DaVinci was gay... Fact not in evidence.
4.) You're projecting... as to me, it looks like you are a drug evangelist.
5.) I stand behind each and every design I've worked out, and construction that I've built. Have you had your work checked by profs? cops? BATF? I have.

Personally, your flaming on this issue suggests that you are threatened by somebody (me) disparaging drug use.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #530)

Tue Aug 28, 2012, 10:18 AM

617. Once again, you think that anecdotes are science.

Something that anyone remotely interested in science should know to avoid. You disregard genuine scientific breakthroughs because you've encountered some burnouts in your life. What you're doing is not science at all, it would make most high school students embarrassed. Let's see, what other ridiculous urban legends are you putting out as fact? LSD makes people go insane? Where's your proof for that one, Bill Nye? You seem to be all about proof, yet I'm the only one who has offered anything objective in this conversation, you've only gone on tirades about these people you supposedly know.

Know your dealer? Speed? PCP? Strychnine? Are any of these substances active at microgram levels? Really? You're going to trot out these drug warrior myths again? The LD50 for stychnine is a few mg/kg, you really need to go back to school if you think you can fit that on a tiny blotter. If you're going to play drug warrior, you should at least educate yourself in the slightest before you do so. Otherwise, you're just like the fundies, making up whatever comes into their mind to denigrate the gays, not because of something they know, but because they're ignorant and fearful.

You want me to prove that science would be hundreds of years behind? I'm the one who actually provided concrete examples of what drug experiences have provided us, you've simply told horror stories about your burnout friends. Give me a fucking break.

Really, I'd strongly suggest educating yourself in the slightest before further demonstrating your ignorance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #530)

Tue Aug 28, 2012, 11:24 AM

619. Don't flatter yourself...

If you want another high profile example to go along with Francis Crick, take Kary Mullis - developer of the PCR technique. Mullis has repeatedly and emphatically stated that taking LSD was essential to his work. So much, in fact, that he simply couldn't have done it without it. PCR is "now a common and often indispensable technique used in medical and biological research labs for a variety of applications." Also got a Nobel Prize for it.

You might also be interested in Paul Stamets - one of the world's foremost mycologists. His work on the wide-array of uses of mushrooms is breathtaking. Look up "mycoremediation" some time. Here's a speech of his at TED, where he details that and more:



He also happened to enter the field because of his experiences with psychedelic mushrooms.

I'm also certain that you haven't read the article I linked to in my second post, which detailed how professionals in various fields - such as mathematics, engineering, and architecture - were given LSD in a safe and secure setting with their focus attuned to creative problem solving. They were asked to bring in at least one problem they had been mulling over for months, but were making absolutely no progress on. Actually, the "one problem" thing was for earlier trials. They had been so successful, later participants were asked to bring in at least three. And they, in fact, had spectacular (not to mention practical) results:

"But here’s the clincher. After their 5HT2A neural receptors simmered down, they remained firm: LSD absolutely had helped them solve their complex, seemingly intractable problems. And the establishment agreed. The 26 men unleashed a slew of widely embraced innovations shortly after their LSD experiences, including a mathematical theorem for NOR gate circuits, a conceptual model of a photon, a linear electron accelerator beam-steering device, a new design for the vibratory microtome, a technical improvement of the magnetic tape recorder, blueprints for a private residency and an arts-and-crafts shopping plaza, and a space probe experiment designed to measure solar properties. Fadiman and his colleagues published these jaw-dropping results and closed shop."


It was one of the last clinical trials of the '60s before all research was irrationally halted. One of the key features of their experience, if nothing else, was that the "drug" helped jar them out of the ruts of their preconceptions and see things from a different point of view.

Let's be clear, no one said anything about taking street drugs. The entire point of my original post was safe, secure, and informed use. One of the steps needed to ensure that is, first of all, "legalizing" them. Sure, something like mushrooms might be more reliable because it's grown naturally, but I wouldn't even recommend someone taking that without a sitter or guide. I'd most certainly stress a safe and secure setting. Even then, whomever was undergoing the experience should be well informed/prepared in their own right.

Someone once said that, if you're gonna smoke grass, you should have the equivalent of a driver's license, and if you're going to take psychedelics, you should have the equivalent of a pilot's license. I'm of a similar opinion. You don't just hand someone off the street the keys to a 747 and say, "Here ya go, have at it!" Your "abstinence only" approach simply doesn't work. The point is, then, a more open and informed understanding - precisely so people don't end up using them recklessly.

People have most certainly been taking these substances - or some derivative of a consciousness changing agent - for thousands of years. Tens of thousands, even. Hashish (in the Middle East), opiates/"seed of the poppy" (in China and the Far East), mushrooms, cannabis. Reason being, these things grow naturally. Just as much back then as they do today. It takes a governing body, or some type of "authority," to suppress them. Who knows how much they influenced thought - both ancient and modern. The Founding Fathers were a bunch of dope smokers. They loved that shit so much George Washington wanted people to take the hemp seed and "sow it everywhere."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to drokhole (Reply #619)

Wed Aug 29, 2012, 12:12 PM

664. Very interesting post. That TED talk is amazing.

I'll be sharing that far and wide, thanks!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #513)

Mon Aug 27, 2012, 06:37 PM

526. Actually...

 

It was being a kid whose mom couldn't afford a sitter. She took me to work...

An ER ward.

Like I said:

Inspiration is nice. Sober thought and verifiable design is better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #526)

Tue Aug 28, 2012, 10:23 AM

618. Talking to yourself now?

And you didn't even need drugs to do it. I'm impressed. Your verifiable designs will never even approach the genius of many contributions to science brought about by inspiration from psychedelics. Drugs obviously aren't for you, you'd be wise to stay well away from them. But for you to denigrate the contributions of others who use them is the height of hubris. Learn some humility and maybe then you'll be able to add something to this dialog.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #618)

Tue Aug 28, 2012, 04:59 PM

630. If you aren't listening, why did you respond?

 

I seem to have touched a nerve...

1.) Look, if you want to expound on the glories of drugs, be my guest. I think it shows your hang-ups, more than it shows mine.

2.) Science in based on testable hypotheses, from observable data. So far, YOU are the one with the anecdotes of the glories of drug use, and I am the one with anecdotes that they are a bad idea.



As I've said earlier, inspiration is nice. Sober design is better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #630)

Tue Aug 28, 2012, 05:04 PM

631. Still refusing to address any salient points?

Want to throw out any more urban legends? Everything you've said has been laughable and thoroughly disputed. Want to talk some more about how I'm going to poison myself with strychnine by taking blotter? Your knowledge of both drugs and science is incredibly lacking, to say the least.

To save you the trouble, I've trotted out your next talking points for you:

1) Thousands upon thousands of hippies went blind in the 60's after ingesting acid and staring into the sun.

2) You know at least a few dozen heads who put their children in the microwave during an acid trip because they thought they were sandwiches.

It takes a lot of work to pretend to be that ignorant. You're welcome.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #631)

Tue Aug 28, 2012, 06:27 PM

632. sigh

 

okay...

You're enlightened, and the rest of us are dupes for nancy reagan.

It must be nice to ignore observable fact, and go with pro-drug propaganda.

You too are welcome. Just not in my lab.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #632)

Wed Aug 29, 2012, 10:03 AM

663. So apparently you think anti-drug propaganda is observable fact.

So let me see here...

Marijuana causes blacks and latinos to rape white women.
Acid causes its users to go crazy and blind from staring at the sun.
Acid and ecstasy creates holes in one's brain and drains your spinal fluid.
Baby sitters have placed babies in the oven while under the influence of acid.
Acid causes genetic mutations.
People who take LSD run the risk of strychnine poisoning.

Or is it just the ridiculous urban legends you choose to believe which are facts?

Yes, all your bullshit drug propaganda is far, far more believable than the objective fact that I presented. You'll notice that I've demonstrated clearly your propaganda to be lies, but you can't respond to the facts that I've presented with anything less than more propaganda. It's not a good thing to believe anything that any idiot drug warrior tells you (yes, including Nancy Reagan). I'd really try to be more selective about the information you choose to accept as truth. Gullibility is not something to strive for. Nor is playing scientist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #663)

Wed Aug 29, 2012, 03:52 PM

670. Wow

 

1.) You're not a very good mind-reader. May I suggest that you don't give up your day job? (If you have one...)

2.) I thought you weren't responding to me anymore.

3.) You have posted anecdotes, without sources. You seem to think your anecdotes constitute.

4.) One of your statements read something like "without drugs, science would have been set back hundreds of years." As the proponent/acusser, the burden of proof is on YOU to prove the the only way those advances happened is via drugs.

5.) What is this thing you have for Nancy Reagan?

6.) When you want to post FACTS, instead of rhetoric, feel free.

7.) "inspiration" isn't design work. Nor is it construction.

8.) I hadn't heard the one about acid and ecstasy draining spinal fluid...

I HAVE heard of these
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1129381/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1502618/?page=1
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1923615/?page=1

9.) I know you'll likely say these are all nancy-inspired propaganda. Feel free. I expect no less from someone evangelizing drugs. NIH at lest cites their sources.

10.) Any time you want to have a contest with criteria to determine the better inventor/builder, let me know. It'll have to be a neutral location, as there is no way I'm letting a potential junkie into my house.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #670)

Wed Aug 29, 2012, 04:13 PM

681. So, are you going to provide any proof for the urban legends you've been touting as fact?

Once again, are you going to provide a shred of evidence for any of it? I assume if you weren't talking out of your ass you'd at least have attempted to by now. Or are you going to be content to post something saying if you take thousands of times the active dose of LSD some bad things can happen? As talking out of your ass has been pretty much all you've done here, I'm going to assume the latter.

Do you have anything to disprove the contributions due to drugs that I and others in this have provided or are you simply going to tell me more of the bullshit you learned in DARE as a kid? Once again, I and others have provided proof, the discovery of the structure of DNA is absolutely enormous alone. Do you think the myriad professionals who were able to overcome obstacles in their respective fields of research are full of shit as well? You seem to be a stunning example of the Dunning Kruger effect. You are utterly ignorant in these many areas, yet it's your ignorance (and perhaps a large dose of hubris) that leads you to believe that you're actually capable of making educated remarks about these things which you know absolutely nothing about (worse than that, you believe you know several things which are incredibly far from the truth). Fuck the professionals who worked their whole lives to get to where they are, surely your amateurish (to be kind) knowledge trumps that, right? Nope, you can't address any of that. All you can do is post ridiculous propaganda and then when I call you out on it and ask you to provide something with scientific basis, you simply post common sense that any moron could provide. Congratulations, you're a stunning representative of the drug warrior crowd.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #681)

Wed Aug 29, 2012, 04:18 PM

687. I posted 3 sources from NIH

 

Were you not able to understand them?

Or are you playing the "It doesn't agree with my drug mythos, so I don't have to listen to it" game?

When you'd like to post facts for your drug theories, feel free to post them.

Once again, I seem to have touched a nerve.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #687)

Wed Aug 29, 2012, 04:22 PM

692. You posted three sources from the NIH which had NOTHING to do with our discussion. That's called a

STRAWMAN. Or a non-sequitor if you will. Do you know what those are? Probably not considering the previous conversations we've had. So, to play your game, here are some more random links from me which surely prove my point.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_at_the_Crossroads
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1437425

In the future, you might want to post something with some, um, you know, actual relevance to the discussion at hand? You might find you'll look a whole hell of a lot less stupid when you do so. Enjoy your reading.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #692)

Wed Aug 29, 2012, 04:29 PM

697. Wow

 

1.) Those sources listed only SOME of the problems with LSD, in particular. So much for safe reactions.
2.) You want the USA to pay for your drugs... I get that. Sounds sad, but I get it.
3.) the fact that those articles listing adverse reactions... were something you felt had nothing to do with the conversation says more about your issues, than mine
4.) Those articles show your drug of choice is not as safe as you imply
5.) The thread is about going into space. You started up with "spend it on drugs." Sounds more like I'm trying to correct an erroneous poster (that would be you) and get back to the topic of the thread. Are you envious of astronauts and probes, perhaps?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #697)

Wed Aug 29, 2012, 04:36 PM

700. Once again, they had NOTHING to do with our conversation.

1) Yeah, LSD is one of millions of substances which aren't 100% safe under all conditions, especially when taking thousands of times a normal dose. Thanks for the education, Einstein! I can't wait for your next brilliant insight. I suppose you look down upon everyone who has ever touched or imbibed a substance which can be dangerous under certain circumstances (that would be 100% of the population, Hawking).

2) Uhhh, no. I've said nothing of the sort. Must have been a momentary lapse of your typical genius.

3, 4 and 5 is just more of your mental masturbation and not really even worth addressing. Especially considering you won't even provide a single source that backs up the numerous urban legends you've posted as fact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #700)

Wed Aug 29, 2012, 04:45 PM

703. sounds like you can't argue against those articles

 


EOTE, it really sounds like you want to be told you are right, and artistic, and brave...


for taking drugs.

I called you on it, and you've YET to produce FACTS that verify your position.

Hmmm...

your anecdotes are facts, where mine are just stories?

The conversation was about space, you came in with a plea to have your drugs subsidized, and I called you on it.

When you have PROOF that drugs were the only way to advance science, please feel free to post them here.

Otherwise, you sound a lot like just another junkie, looking to feel heroic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #703)

Wed Aug 29, 2012, 04:53 PM

705. You have absolutely nothing but non-sequitors. Nothing but putting words in my mouth.

"The conversation was about space, you came in with a plea to have your drugs subsidized, and I called you on it."

No, I said nothing of the sort. You're just a liar and lies are all you've got.

"When you have PROOF that drugs were the only way to advance science, please feel free to post them here. "

Once again, you're full of shit. I said nothing of the sort. You are far worse than a junkie, you're 90% hubris and 10% intellect, a very scary combination. You HAVE said a number of things which I've proven to be false.

Oh, and by the way, even those articles you submit which pretty much only assert common sense are loaded with inaccuracies right off the bat. First of all, in the article "Unfavourable Reactions to LSD" a spotted a number of errors in the first fucking paragraph. In the first few sentences, the author misspells "psilocybin" and then goes on to say that both psilocybin and dimethytryptamine are synthetic drugs. Bzzzzt, wrong. Just about anything can be synthesized, but those are not synthetic drugs. It seems as if the author is displaying the same kind of intellectual laziness that you have been.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #705)

Wed Aug 29, 2012, 05:01 PM

708. Let me know when you've got

 

proof against those articles, and I'll post more.

This is fun!

And you have yet to prove anything false. You've used bombast, and personal attack, but that's about what I'd expect...

Once again... The conversation was originally about space travel. You chimed in with your pet project of getting your drugs subsidized, and I called you on it.

Keep going, please. I find your attempts fascinating.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #708)

Wed Aug 29, 2012, 05:12 PM

715. Are you slow or something? What in those articles is contrary to anything I've said?

I have a feeling I'll be waiting a really fucking long time to get an answer to that. And once again, I found numerous errors in the first fucking paragraph, that's really sad. I've yet to prove anything you've said false? OK, here you go champ:

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_there_strychnine_in_LSD
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080129182210AARm267
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_misconceptions_about_illegal_drugs#Strychnine

http://www.snopes.com/legal/lsdcrazy.asp

And before you reply with more idiocy and mention that MY links don't come from the NIH, keep in mind that I'm trying to prove a negative here. You're not going to find any articles on the NIH which say that LSD DOESN'T contain strychnine, that would just be stupid. Got it, Chachi?

And once again, I never even remotely mentioned getting drugs subsidized. I've called you on that multiple times. So now you're not just a liar, you're a moron too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #715)

Wed Aug 29, 2012, 05:14 PM

716. Wow

 

emotional attacks...

no reputable sources...

Yup... I touched a nerve...

Look, if you want to take your sacrament. Go ahead. Just don't expect a lot of people to admire you.

LSD doesn't INHERENTLY contain strychnine. It is often cut with other things (hence the adage, know your dealer.)

Wow, you are really defensive about your drugs, aren't you...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #716)

Wed Aug 29, 2012, 05:17 PM

718. More urban legends and refusing to address even the simplest of issues.

It is often cut with other things? What things would it be cut with that are active at a few micrograms? Once again, you think you're going to get a harmful dose of strychnine in blotter? With every post, you impress me more and more with your density.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #670)

Wed Aug 29, 2012, 04:19 PM

688. And by the way, thanks for showing how incredibly safe LSD is.

You post a report about a number of individuals incredibly foolishly consuming many thousands of times an active dose of a mind altering substance and then all of them being released from the hospital within 48 hours with all of them experiencing a complete recovery. How many pharmacologically active substances can you say that about? If only big pharma made anything that safe. Your attempts at logic are hilarious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #688)

Wed Aug 29, 2012, 04:20 PM

690. And your attempts to evangelize are funny

 

Together, We have a comedy routine...

Bob, and his semi-erudite slap toy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #690)

Wed Aug 29, 2012, 04:25 PM

695. So that's a big, fat no.

You think facts are evangelism and urban legends and non-sequitors bolster your argument. Anyone with half a brain can see through your bullshit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #695)

Wed Aug 29, 2012, 04:38 PM

701. When you are willing to post FACTS then we can talk

 

I posted articles showing your drug of choice ISN'T as safe as you imply. You seem to have a problem with the idea of FACTS (those articles) contradicting your beliefs. Seems you might be "overly emotionally invested" in you drug opinions.

As LSD (which seems to be your thing) causes changes in perceptions and ideation... Is that safe wihen doing design work? Inspirations are nice. Don't confuse them with actual calculation/construction.

Also, As this topic was about space flight...

Why should our culture look up to people who want to take drugs?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #701)

Wed Aug 29, 2012, 04:47 PM

704. Your facts are that LSD can cause clinical insanity and that people get strychnine poisoning from

what they believe is LSD. You've provided absolutely nothing in terms of proof for any of your "facts" however.

Just how safe did I imply LSD is? I simply said you're spreading ridiculous misconceptions about it. It's pretty damned safe, but it's certainly not 100% safe as any idiot could tell you. Hell, one told me fairly recently.

My facts are that a number of extremely important scientific discoveries have been made with the aid of LSD. That's something you haven't even attempted to disprove, rather you simply ignore it.

I'll tackle another of your non-sequitors: "Is that safe wihen doing design work?" Well, is it safe to use LSD when making schematics, blue prints and such? Of course it is. I designed and made a portable electric guitar amp while on an acid trip. I use it to this day and it sounds fucking fantastic. Now, would it be safe to INCORPORATE those designs afterward, in cases where people's lives would be on the line? Well, it would obviously depend on the designer now, wouldn't it? And anyone who isn't an utter moron would know to test out the design in the real world before putting it to actual use. I shouldn't have to address such a poorly worded and utterly inconsequential question, but I've got some free time today.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #704)

Wed Aug 29, 2012, 04:57 PM

707. yup... As I thought

 

let me know, when you can argue against those articles. I'll then post more...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #707)

Wed Aug 29, 2012, 05:05 PM

709. Why the fuck should I argue against those articles (even though I already have)?

I've told you numerous times that those articles really don't address anything pertaining to this conversation. And I've already found errors in the first paragraph, that's pretty pathetic. Not that it matters, because once again, none of those articles disprove a damned thing that I've said. So try again, Quixote.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #709)

Wed Aug 29, 2012, 05:07 PM

711. except...

 

Those article...

1.) are from a reputable source
2.) demonstrate your drug of choice is not as safe as you imply


you REALLY want to be admired for your drug use, don't you...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #714)

Wed Aug 29, 2012, 05:19 PM

719. Are these about hemmoroids?

If so, I'm guessing it is far more pertinent to this conversation as the last bit of pablum you've provided. Oh wait, maybe these intend to prove that the sky is, in fact, blue? It must really, really hurt realizing that you are nowhere near as smart as you once thought you were. If the poor spelling and grammar weren't a dead giveaway, the constant repetition and inability to learn from a discussion surely are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #719)

Wed Aug 29, 2012, 05:26 PM

720. nope

 

Just your articles on the subject from a reputable source.

I really have to go.

I promise to come back and talk to you, later tonight.

Have fun with your drugs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #720)

Wed Aug 29, 2012, 05:34 PM

721. So, I guess you gave up on telling me how safe I implied LSD is?

It's really hard for you to talk without lying, isn't it? First you said that I think that drug use should be subsidized (big fucking lie). Then, you tell me that I implied that LSD is incredibly safe, when my comments regarding the safety of the drug came in response to the error-filled articles that you provided. It's YOUR articles that you've linked to which imply how incredibly safe LSD is. Here's a little clue, champ, if you need to lie numerous times in a conversation just so you don't have to admit defeat, you've already lost. If you had an actual argument to make, you wouldn't need to lie your ass off. I'd like to say that those weren't lies, but just one of your many bouts of ignorance, but I called you on it numerous times and you continue to use them. So I have no choice but to recognize that you're a chronic liar. Few things are sadder than one who needs to lie about others in order to make their point. So, tell me again why you're not a liar? I know I won't get an actual response to this, but I thought I'd try.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #721)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 12:14 AM

726. Hey there buddy

 

I'm back from teaching kids...

In your honor, we talked about the dangers of drug induced delusions.

Those earlier articles show rates of trouble, including medium duration psychosis

Got a few more articles for you...
Crick didn't want to be known for Acid use
http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=22271

Crick did most of his work before he supposedly took acid
http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/6835/was-francis-crick-high-on-lsd-when-he-discovered-dna-structrure

1.) You state that science would be far less advanced, without drugs. As the person making that statement, the burden of proof is on YOU, to show that science wouldn't have advanced without drug use. I've already shown (via these articles, that your example is faulty. Got some others?

2.) you need to stop projecting. It makes you look a bit like a whinging addict.


Over to you, for more frothy goodness!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #726)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 10:16 AM

739. You have been proven to be a liar numerous times on this thread.

It's one thing to be called out on spreading false information, it's entirely different when you continue to lie after the fact. I don't give a damn if Crick didn't want to be known for his acid use, he's said that it was acid that allowed him to visualize the structure. So, you move the goalposts yet again and then use some idiots chatting online to prove your point? Your hubris is only matched by your ignorance. You keep demanding evidence when I'm the only one who's provided evidence this entire thread. I've called you out on your urban legends and outright lies and you have no defense for them at all. You're a damned liar and I've proven it numerous times. Only mental midgets need to rely on lies to make a point. Good thing that there are very few here who fall for your bullshit.

When someone calls you out on spreading false information, that is your chance to prove that you were only ignorant rather than an intentional liar. You've proven that you're not only incredibly ignorant, but a willful liar as well. It must hurt to be called out on your lies, do yourself a favor and try honesty for once. You haven't proven a damned thing with the exception of what a liar you are and how poorly you can make an argument. The fact that you can't put together a sentence properly, much less make a cogent point should have been a good clue. You are an ignoramus and not worth anyone's time. I will not waste one more minute trying to get a willful liar to attempt honesty. Your behavior is pathetic, you belong nowhere near malleable minds. I will not waste one more minute trying to get a willful liar to be honest. I'm through with you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #739)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 11:59 AM

741. and thank you for your exit speech

 

You couldn't refute those papers, and you're feeling defensive...

so you hurl bombast.

You might want to consider drying out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #711)

Wed Aug 29, 2012, 05:15 PM

717. How safe have I implied LSD is? I can guarantee you won't provide an honest answer to that question

Because I've said very little about how safe LSD is. And the funny thing about it is that the articles you've provided say that LSD is pretty damned safe. For the most part, they simply confirm what I've already known about this. But go on, tell me how safe I've implied that LSD is and then provide a quote of me saying so.

My god, it's so hilarious getting lectured from someone who can't even put a paragraph together without myriad grammar mistakes. Your long life of sobriety has done very little for your brain.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #717)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 01:14 PM

746. Dude

 

Better to drop more acid than lose your cool . Difficult to remove irrational whole-body fears with rational angry sounding arguments.

I assume you have opened some doors to inner spaces. Why not share with us what you have found exploring those?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tama (Reply #746)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 01:40 PM

750. I'm not sure what "whole-body fears" you're referring to.

And you're very right that I've recently engaged in some rather angry arguments (not just angry sounding). That tends to happen when the poster I'm arguing with refuses to engage in anything approaching honest debate. It's one thing to be ignorant, but to be called out on spreading out and out falsehoods and then continue to spread them shows that one is a willful liar, and that's what I refuse to deal with.

Yes, I've had a number of very enlightening experiences with a number of different substances, but I don't think this thread is the appropriate place to discuss them. I fear that would move this thread even further off track. Rather, I'll be content to let the discussion stay as it is and allow observers to draw their own conclusions from the contents.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #750)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 01:47 PM

753. Dude...

 

The lady suggested that you chill...

Just because you can't refute those articles...

Is no reason to get so pissed off.

So go calm down, refute those articles, and relax!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #753)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 01:52 PM

754. Leave me the fuck alone.

Now your behavior has become stalkerish and it's beyond creepy. I want to have nothing to do with a POS liar. Your behavior is beyond childish, it's sociopathic. I want nothing to do with you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #754)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 01:54 PM

756. I thought you weren't talking to me...

 

I'll take your comments as a meltdown of an addict, and chalk it up as a win.

But you really shouldn't let yourself get this upset. It's unhealthy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #756)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 01:56 PM

757. That's certainly understandable.

As you're fucking dense as a brick. But if you're capable of reading, you'd find that's not the case. Sorry if I get upset dealing for extended periods of time with sociopathic liars. Now kindly fuck off.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #757)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 01:59 PM

759. hmmm

 

Still talking to me.

I guess you are looking for some kind of shocked response.

Kid, go dry out, grow up, and then maybe you can refute those articles.

As for your hubris comments...try looking in a mirror.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #759)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 02:02 PM

760. "Grow up" says the creepy stalker who won't stop responding to posts not addressed to him.

Are you going to follow me to other threads as well? You've not only proven yourself to be a liar (numerous times), but now a stalker and sociopath as well. I'm quite sure you have no idea what hubris means. So go fuck yourself again, gramps. And stop pretending to be a scientist. Scientists know how to put together sentences. Enough, go creep out some children or something.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #760)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 02:05 PM

763. And here

 

I thought you were "done with speaking to me..."

I don't mind conversing with you, as you've proved you have nothing but empty rhetoric.

As to the sociopath thing...

As in all things you post, you have YET to show proof.

Must be that addictive personality of yours.

Over to you, chew-toy, for more frothy goodness.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #750)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 02:03 PM

761. Fears

 

First that fears are whole-body phenomena. After antilope flees from attacking lion, it trembles and shakes the fear away from the body. We humans often nurture and feed our fears with our thoughts and let them infest our bodies.

Our self-images are mostly defense mechanisms that create various narratives for their self-preservation and protection.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tama (Reply #761)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 02:43 PM

768. Sorry, I'm still not very certain to what you're referring.

This was a conversation about what drug experiences have contributed to the furthering of science. Fairly concrete and not abstract at all.

I'm aware that humans are fearful creatures by nature, but don't really see what that has to do with the discussion at hand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #768)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 03:30 PM

778. Very general level - on purpose

 

There are many kinds of fears associated with psychoactive drugs and generally alternate states of mind that often make rational discussion about them hard or impossible. Also, if we accept that anger arises from fear, we can let them guide to their source.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tama (Reply #778)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 03:32 PM

779. I figure that fear

 

is a sometimes useful survival trait...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #779)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 03:54 PM

780. Yep

 

As biological instinct. And then there are more and more abstract layers of emotional, psychological and intellectual fears. To tie with the topic, also fears of abstract concepts such as various spaces, closed spaces (claustrophobia), open spaces (agoraphobia), etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tama (Reply #780)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 04:04 PM

782. mind you, most abstract fears

 

tend to have a triggers of some sort.

Such as the fear of losing a habituated substance, for some...

Crowds for others...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tama (Reply #778)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 03:59 PM

781. So, what are you trying to suggest, exactly?

Yes, fear is certainly something associated with most powerful psychoactive drugs. If we're to mature, that fear must be confronted.

None of that changes the fact that I'm going to call bullshit wherever I see it. It's one thing for someone to pass off myth and legend as fact, it's entirely another to continue to do so once that someone has been called on it. I provided a number of sources exposing a number of lies and the lies continued. I don't suffer fools gladly and I don't believe any drug is going to change that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #781)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 04:26 PM

784. Art of Persuasion

 

Long time ago I was active in drug policy debates. The opponent very seldom if ever yields and says that I was wrong and you are right no matter how strong and convincing the arguments are - fear of losing face alone is enough to prevent that in most cases. So when you are having public debate on public forum such as Internet, it's not convincing the other guy and getting him admit he's wrong that matters - if you are campaigning for some policy change and favor of public opinion. And not even the arguments themselves are that important, how ever rational.

The audience of "undecided" with no strong prejudice to either side is who you are really talking to. They may get and remember some of the rational arguments more or less wrong, but what they go with is emotion. People looking guidance and leadership in issues where they are undecided and have open mind choose the side that appears emotionally more stable, affirmative and reassuring, because that's how we are socially and psychologically wired and for good reasons.

In short - you lose your cool, you lose the debate. Politics 101.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tama (Reply #784)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 05:11 PM

786. Makes sense, but I wasn't really aiming to convert a mass audience.

I was aiming to educate one person who is apparently unable to be educated. Yes, that then devolved into something else entirely, but I'll admit that I have limited patience.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EOTE (Reply #786)

Thu Aug 30, 2012, 05:37 PM

789. The ego thing

 

I wouldn't have a whiff of what I'm talking about if I hadn't done what you were doing couple billion times. Practicing patience takes lot of patience and self-forgiving.

There are also other kinds of tactical maneuvers when two ego's start pushing against each other in the classical Art of Being Right. As eastern marshal arts teach, instead of pushing one can draw and use the power of the opponent... for common good. Every fight can be turned into dance of flexibility, intuition and compassion, and we learn that art mainly from losing to our respected opponents, not from winning. Respected because they are our best teachers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to drokhole (Reply #339)

Tue Aug 28, 2012, 12:47 AM

606. I'd love it too. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Reply #1)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 09:02 PM

95. Considering the number of jobs that space colonization would generate...

 

we could in fact do ALL of the above.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #95)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 09:08 PM

103. THAT'S the spirit!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #95)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 09:08 PM

104. Hell, Curiosity's employed about 4,400 people so far.

I'm not sure if that includes janitors and the like. About 400 of those are in the "dealing with the mission right now" group while most of the rest were in at other stages of the project.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Posteritatis (Reply #104)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 09:14 PM

111. Any new facility must have janitors.

 

It must also be constructed by people with hard hats.

And it must have caterers, or cafeterias, nearby restaurants, all that jazz.

It's a job creation halo effect.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #111)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 10:27 PM

207. Definitely - what I meant is I don't know if that number included them or not. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #95)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 09:09 PM

105. So who starves and goes naked between here and there?

Right now - we aren't close to doing both.

It is not that there isn't enough - but we are not going to do it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Reply #105)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 09:13 PM

110. Who says we do nothing between now and the next rocket that gets built?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #110)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 09:23 PM

121. I wish people...

 

would look at the actual numbers...

How much are we spending on NASA?
How much are we spending of DOD?
How much are we spending on Social programs?

NASA gets FAR less than any one of the social programs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #121)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 11:00 PM

253. FAR less,

yes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #110)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 10:00 PM

166. My bad. Must be being done. Some where. Not on planet earth.

I'm not in touch with those Others.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Reply #1)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 09:21 PM

118. That's a false choice of the worst kind.

It's not only disingenuous, considering the history of the last 40 yrs and the obvious lost opportunities we've frittered away, it's actually harmful. Especially to those you pretend to be most concerned about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Reply #1)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 10:03 PM

173. To quote SMBC: "Sorry, can't hear you. I only listen to noises that might save babies."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DRoseDARs (Reply #173)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 10:15 PM

188. Cynical but oh so right on. Nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xchrom (Reply #1)

Mon Aug 27, 2012, 08:50 AM

362. We clothe the the poor in space-age fiber.

We reduce their power use with LED lights. We keep them alive with heart pumps. We take accurate temperatures with IR ear thermometers. The war-torn use effective artificial limbs. They peer through scratch-resistant glasses. We keep them safer on the highway and in the air, and accurately test the environment to keep it cleaner, and clean it up. We fight fires. We make baby food more nutritious. We freeze-dry food for the hungry. We purify water, generate electricity with solar power, make engines.

We do all of those things better than we did as a direct result of putting humans into space, because the technology that made all of the above possible had to first be invented and perfected so that humans could venture into space.

Doing so gave the United States a technological and manufacturing edge that kept it the most powerful and innovative nation the world had ever seen--for thirty years.

Human space travel means progress for all humankind.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sofa king (Reply #362)

Mon Aug 27, 2012, 11:13 AM

392. I remember reading somewhere about the spin-off payout

 

Being something like 40:1

40 dollars returned, on each dollar spent

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #392)

Mon Aug 27, 2012, 08:38 PM

571. I've seen as low as 8:1

and as high as 22:1. I think 40:1 may be a little high

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentauros (Reply #571)

Mon Aug 27, 2012, 08:40 PM

572. huh

 

okay...

But 8:1 is still good.

How many investments (legally) can make 8:1 year over year, buy you ennobling PR, AND are fun to watch on TV?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #572)

Mon Aug 27, 2012, 11:17 PM

599. Due to NASA seemingly being the only agency I ever see

lauding their financial and material benefit to society, I can't think any other place that could offer such a good return on your investments. Perhaps the Pentagon could match and/or surpass that, if they didn't ever classify anything for three decades at a time

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sofa king (Reply #362)

Mon Aug 27, 2012, 08:11 PM

559. Best. Post. Ever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Odin2005 (Original post)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 06:45 PM

4. Odin...

 

Too many people got hooked on "the good life." (mostly, it seems to mean a good recliner, 500 channel cable TV, and quick take out service).

Zubrin's good, but I keep thinking we can do it cheaper, and have a LOT more missions...

How about we set up exploring Mars as a run? Think "By the time we got to Woodstock" mixed with geekdom.

Cheap magsails and solarmoth engines would get us there, with very little mass fraction needed for fuel.

(Fair Warning: I grew up around rocket scientists, absorbed a fair amount, and am a *tiny* bit obsessed with spaceflight. To the point I made some rural police very nervous.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #4)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 06:49 PM

7. That last paragraph sounds like a "storytime!" cue. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Posteritatis (Reply #7)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 06:57 PM

9. Let us gather 'round the heat of a fuming Neo-con (as he comtemplates FOUR MORE YEARS)...

 

and I'll tell you a story.

Down in the land of VERY rural maryland, my wife and I were living quietly in a sleepy little town.

When I get bored, I build. After building a wind tunnel (which the neighbors brought out the lawn chairs to watch), I started work on some (relatively) small "model" rockets.

A friend of mine was over at my house, working on his car. For some reason, he didn't bother to read the sign on a barrel that read:

HYDROGEN PEROXIDE!
NO HYDROCARBONS!

He walked into the storage shed, opened the barrel, and dumped his oily rags in.

Needless to say, the original contents weren't happy. The shed "went away."

I had a long talk with the local police that day. (They only thought I was trying to make moonshine.)
The talk with the ATF was more problematic. (they were wondering about explosives.)

The upshot was, the locals asked me to be more careful, and the ATF stated it wasn't there problem.

Did I mention that I want to play with 40 foot model rockets?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #9)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 07:08 PM

13. Oh, my.

You can't make anything foolproof, fools are just too ingenious.

Likely "Hydrocarbon" was too big a word for him to lipread and he didn't know what H2O2 was. Locking the replacement shed is probably your best bet in order to keep the locals away from all the potential danger inside.

My rockets were much smaller when I was a kid. Besides, I preferred things that went boom. Fortunately, it was a more innocent time and the government was a lot less stuffy about geeky kids with strange hobbies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warpy (Reply #13)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 07:13 PM

17. I've had to re-design the engines

 

as my place here in CT is FAR too close to my neighbors.

In Maryland, the distance to the next neighbor was about 600 yards. Here, it's about 6.

The trick to doing anything that the government might get involved in, is to do it in a way that they say "not on my list."

If I had used straight APCP, the ATF would have fined the bejeebers out of me. The local cops would have "had a talk with me."

As I was (mostly) being safe, and I kept mentioning that I thought the USA should shine again, my local officers put me down as "crazy, but a great American!" (also, one asked me to help his kid do a science fair project.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #17)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 09:23 PM

122. You could always go with non-orbital

and build one of these:





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentauros (Reply #122)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 09:27 PM

128. cool vid! thank you!

 

I was planning on using a high optimized Ion engine. Keeps everybody happy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #128)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 09:52 PM

152. You're welcome :)

And, in looking up some info on Polywell fusion the other day, I came across this:


http://www.weirdwarp.com/2009/08/nuclear-fusion-and-its-future-uses-in-spacecraft/

And while I love all this fascinating technology, science isn't my background, so I may be lost on some of the jargon. I might point out, too, that you may want to edit one of your posts where you mentioned "CHON" as I don't think most people know it means "Carbon Hydrogen Oxygen Nitrogen" and are the building blocks of food (I learned that from Robinette Broadhead in the Heechee Saga books by Frederick Pohl.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentauros (Reply #152)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 09:53 PM

154. whoops!

 

sorry about that...

I want a Heechee 13 ship...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #154)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 10:05 PM

176. Who wouldn't?

And we now know how to navigate them, too

Or to be copied to the Dyson Sphere (Cuckoo) and have your body changed to accommodate the lower gravity

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentauros (Reply #176)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 10:15 PM

190. I'll stick with this body

 

It's hard to deal with the idea of some future warez pirate illegally copying me...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #190)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 10:18 PM

194. Then you better hope we never find John Varley's Titan

or you'll end up as an opera-singing centaur

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentauros (Reply #194)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 10:27 PM

209. That book is best read while high.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Odin2005 (Reply #209)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 10:51 PM

243. I can get pretty high meditating.

Maybe I'll reread it and make sure I meditate for a hour before delving in

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentauros (Reply #152)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 10:26 PM

205. I love Pohl's Heechee books!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Odin2005 (Reply #205)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 10:38 PM

227. I haven't read them in a long while.

I'll have to see if there are ebook copies available.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #9)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 07:17 PM

19. "Went away" is the best euphemism when applied to buildings.

Also, once they're that big, I think they stop merely being model rockets.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Posteritatis (Reply #19)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 07:18 PM

20. Hey! It's a model...

 

The scale is 1 to 1...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to a geek named Bob (Reply #9)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 07:53 PM

53. "Went Away" BWAHAHAHAHA!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Odin2005 (Reply #53)

Sun Aug 26, 2012, 08:39 PM

79. Perhaps I mispoke...

 

Chemically, a lot of it was still there...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink