Space... the final waste of money.

[Sir Saladin]

I'm willing to believe that the moon landings were real and not filmed and directed by Stanley Kubrick but when they make a big orbitting satellite and call it a space station or spend thirty years in low earth orbit in so called space shuttles I wonder if the rocket technology was more advanced in 1970 then it is today, maybe Von Braun was a huge genius and his drawings got burned up in a fire.

 

[Kobrag]

The station is only temporary, Its orbit is decaying slowly.as all satellites do.

 

[Archonsod]

Well, establishing a space station outside of Earth's orbit is pretty impractical at the moment. Rocketry isn't the problem, gravity is.

 

[Buxton]

It'll give us an early warning for transformers 

 

[Yoshiboy]

agreed, space is the ultimate waste of money and flaunting from the west "Hey we can afford to spent BILLIONS on space travel when you guys can't even afford food when it would cost you about a cent per day".

 

[Ancientwanker]

Its one of those things that if you dont invest something in, you can never get to the next level.

There are two real problems with getting anywhere. Gravity and Radiation. The lack of gravity is going to really f up the body of anyone you send on extended trips in space. Ditto for radiation. The astronauts who come back from a mars mission using todays technology would likely have serious health problems for the rest of their lives (and forget about having children). And thats just Mars.  The ultimate science rationale of the station from the US perspective was zero-g experience. The russians had way more of it than we did and this was a way to get more. Until we can find a way to slow the damage done by zero-g, we arent going anywhere.

The current US space program is gearing up to return to the moon. The shuttle will be gone in just a few more years. Then they are planning to rebuild the lunar program. The idea being to get more practical experience for a Mars trip.  Who knows if it will survive but in just a few years, the US will have no active manned space program (using our ships) and we will be hitching rides with the russians. At least until our new moon rockets come online.. but the shuttle is dead in 3 years.

Im 50/50 on Mars. Overall, we get way more return from non-manned space travel. We learn more from telescopes, probes and landers and the money is better spent there. But we could learn a lot from a manned trip to Mars. Beyond that though, there is nowhere to go without a substantial technological leap.

 

[Archonsod]

Well, the hope is that the experience of getting to Mars will give us that leap. Eventually we might make the asteroid belt.

Of course, Venus could tell us a lot more if we could survive there.

 

[ArabArcher35]

The space robots will protect us from the terrible secret of space by shoving us down the stairs.

 

[Sir. Velmu]

Of course, Venus could tell us a lot more if we could survive there.

Yeah, I would also prefer Venus instead of Mars

 

[An4Sh]

Why would you prefer Venus?

 

[Ilex]

It rhymes with anus.

 

[Dryvus]

Why would you prefer Venus?

That's where the chicks are.

 

[An4Sh]

That sick bastard!
First he says that he likes to touch dogs and now he's excited about touching little chicks?!

 

[Grunwalder]

There is really only one place in 'space' that you could establish a space station truly in 'space'. It would have to be located precisely between the Moon and the Earth- I believe these areas are called 'La Grange Points', or something else French or German-sounding. It's an area where the gravity of the two negates one another, and things can remain stationary.

But like the Space Elevator, if it's not at the precise spot, it would drift out of orbit, floating away into space or crashing into either the Earth or the Moon.

Well, the hope is that the experience of getting to Mars will give us that leap. Eventually we might make the asteroid belt.

Of course, Venus could tell us a lot more if we could survive there.

Indeed. I've always believed that if there was life anywhere in this Solar System, it must have been on Venus. It's virtually our clone.

 

[Morbo]

There is really only one place in 'space' that you could establish a space station truly in 'space'. It would have to be located precisely between the Moon and the Earth- I believe these areas are called 'La Grange Points', or something else French or German-sounding. It's an area where the gravity of the two negates one another, and things can remain stationary.

But like the Space Elevator, if it's not at the precise spot, it would drift out of orbit, floating away into space or crashing into either the Earth or the Moon.

Lagrange points, aye.
Though every orbital configuration (like sun-earth, or earth-moon) has 5 (I think) different such points.

Indeed. I've always believed that if there was life anywhere in this Solar System, it must have been on Venus. It's virtually our clone.

Pffff unlikely. Venus' atmosphere most likely went bad a bit too soon for any kind of life of life to have ever developed.
Mars however is likely still able to support at least some kind of primitive life in certain optimal locations.

 

[Dryvus]

That sick bastard!
First he says that he likes to touch dogs and now he's excited about touching little chicks?!

Uhhh... what? 

 

[Archonsod]

There is really only one place in 'space' that you could establish a space station truly in 'space'. It would have to be located precisely between the Moon and the Earth- I believe these areas are called 'La Grange Points', or something else French or German-sounding. It's an area where the gravity of the two negates one another, and things can remain stationary.

Not necessarily. If you can spin an object of sufficient mass fast enough, you can cause it to orbit the Sun in the same way as the rest of the planets. Also solves the problem of needing artificial gravity. Costs would be astronomical though. The other alternative is to use a solar sail or similar propulsion based on an on-site renewable fuel source. The big problem with either is that it would be pointless. Unless you could synchronise it with Earth's orbit, then you're only going to be reachable for a couple of weeks every year.

Indeed. I've always believed that if there was life anywhere in this Solar System, it must have been on Venus. It's virtually our clone.

Life on Venus would be interesting, though in order to survive the conditions it would need to be completely different to anything we know about at the moment (unless of course it lived deep enough to avoid the surface conditions, but then how would you find it?). In the main though Venus should be a bonanza of planetological information.

 

[Chilly5]

I wholly support the drive for astronomical research.
I believe it to be the biggest calling in human life.
Heck, I believe that we are not spending nearly enough money on space-studies, but that's just me.

 

[Stonewall382]

Wouldn't the pressure from Venus' atmosphere crush anything larger than a single-celled organism?

 

[Jawalt]

It saddens me to think that first colinization of space or first contact may be very many lifetimes after mine  They definately should spend *alot* more money on space.