Select to expand quote

ThinkaBowtit said..

That is what this is probably about, getting support for a hugely expensive and mostly pointless and probably suicidal escapade into space.

+1
US don't have means to access International space station just a hundred something km above the ground , didn't repeat landing on the Moon a day trip away in half a century, but getting fascinated by suicidal one way mission.
The point is that such expensive suicidal mission is the worst PR anybody could imagine.

While spending public billions dollars and killing several people in terrible disaster will further delay any rationale space exploration by another half century.
Moon and Moon colony is only viable target for now.
Prove it, make it works and there is open road to Mars and the rest of the cosmos.

Select to expand quote

Macroscien said..

ThinkaBowtit said..

That is what this is probably about, getting support for a hugely expensive and mostly pointless and probably suicidal escapade into space.

+1
US don't have means to access International space station just a hundred something km above the ground , didn't repeat landing on the Moon a day trip away in half a century, but getting fascinated by suicidal one way mission.
The point is that such expensive suicidal mission is the worst PR anybody could imagine.

While spending public billions dollars and killing several people in terrible disaster will further delay any rationale space exploration by another half century.
Moon and Moon colony is only viable target for now.
Prove it, make it works and there is open road to Mars and the rest of the cosmos.

NASA doesn't have human-lift capabilities, Space-X, Boeing will soon.
It's a three-day trip.
Mars One is a joke, not taken seriously anymore.

Assuming you mean NASA, the spending is less than a penny on the tax dollar. Remember, a month in Afghanistan for the military, or 50 years of NASA...

Moon is a good idea. But not sexy enough for the public...

If there is water...

....there might be boats....

www.theshovel.com.au/2015/09/29/water-on-mars-australia-to-check-for-illegal-boats/

^^ Ooh yeah. It sounds like failure even scammy:

medium.com/matter/mars-one-insider-quits-dangerously-flawed-project-2dfef95217d3

Select to expand quote

Kamikuza said..

Moon is a good idea. But not sexy enough for the public...

Lets do it sexy,
Do you know that having good telescope you could theoretically see Moon every night, then lady baking in bikini by the one of so many seas on the Moon.Nothing similar could happen with spying the Mars. If you beam your laser pointer you may see it on the Moon or from the Moon (we do so in Australia everyday almost beaming laser onto mirror left by Apollo mission) .

Or beam internet directly.

Beside space should be matter of business venture , technology and science not TV show.

I bet that first private companies coming to the Moon could earn plentiful money.

Hopefully money will be tax free here on Earth otherwise independent state must be proclaimed instantly on the Moon, free of our Earthly problems.

Practically I could not see any advantages of conquering Mars, instead of the Moon at this stage.

Mean while how many little kiddies went hungry today, we're killed by bombs dropped on them..?

Nice distraction NASA, announce some hypothesis that was first mooted in the seventies. .

Who cares
Its all irrelevant

^^^

The point of today's announcement was to present observations that support (and provide detail on) the long standing hypothesis.

I reckon everyone would benefit from a basic understanding of the Scientific Method.


Plenty of people do care, the results of scientific inquiry are relevant to everything we do.

Select to expand quote

Mastbender said..

Mobydisc said..

Gazuki said..

The movie the martian was actually a biopic?

Yeah the announcement probably has something to do with this movie.

May be onto something there~

Did NASA time its Mars announcement to coincide with 'The Martian'?
news.yahoo.com/mars-announcement-the-martian-movie-matt-damon-193248452.html

I guess no different to the Pentacon and it's ties to Hollywood and state run media to push there propaganda on the masses.

www.newsweek.com/2015/10/02/why-nasa-faked-mars-landing-374214.html

Yet NASA employees have spent more energy on The Martian than possibly on any other Hollywood collaboration. Staff from many NASA departments consulted on the film, from script development through principal photography, and are now helping with marketing timed to the theatrical release. Ulrich says NASA’s collaboration on the design and technical details was “more intense” than on other films.

Both the NASA and 20th Century Fox Twitter handles are using the hashtag #JourneyToMars to promote the fictional mission to the planet and the real potential one. In October, NASA will host a workshop to choose 10 possible landing sites on Mars for human missions. The workshop is intended to help connect the movie The Martian with actual Mars exploration progress.

Select to expand quote

azymuth said..
^^^

The point of today's announcement was to present observations that support (and provide detail on) the long standing hypothesis.

I reckon everyone would benefit from a basic understanding of the Scientific Method.


Plenty of people do care, the results of scientific inquiry are relevant to everything we do.

I disagree

We spend billions on exploration which showed there was some water.

That excites all the "once there may have been life on Mars" crowd...... but if there was once bacteria there or an intelligent being, that matters not one tiny bit to our existence here and now.

Exploration may give us a new home one day, or more resources one day, yes. But at the moment all we are doing is getting scientists in a lather about what they think may have existed once, and it is not relevant.

"The bounties of space, of infinite outwardness, were three: empty heroics, low comedy, and pointless death"

Kurt Vonnegut, The Sirens of Titan

Select to expand quote

Macroscien said..

Practically

Who cares? Science for science's sake!

Select to expand quote

theDoctor said..
Mean while how many little kiddies went hungry today, we're killed by bombs dropped on them..?

Nice distraction NASA, announce some hypothesis that was first mooted in the seventies. .

Who cares
Its all irrelevant

Tosh. It's not a zero-sum game, there's money for both/all.

http://www.universetoday.com/31470/8-ridiculous-things-bigger-than-nasas-budget/

Select to expand quote

Mark _australia said..

... matters not one tiny bit to our existence here and now.

Exploration may give us a new home one day, or more resources one day, yes. But at the moment all we are doing is getting scientists in a lather about what they think may have existed once, and it is not relevant.

Tosh again. It's short-sightedness like these comments that vote for cocks who shut down pure science research cos they don't see how it benefits them directly.

But who cares! The rugby's on mate. Now THAT'S important!

Whatever the mind of man can conceive and believe, it can achieve.

I do believe that in the future, man will live on both the Moon and Mars and that is a worthy goal for mankind to aspire to.

Those with certain religious beliefs would most likely not agree as achievement of that goal will blow their belief structures into outer space.

Select to expand quote

Kamikuza said..

Mark _australia said..

... matters not one tiny bit to our existence here and now.

Exploration may give us a new home one day, or more resources one day, yes. But at the moment all we are doing is getting scientists in a lather about what they think may have existed once, and it is not relevant.

Tosh again. It's short-sightedness like these comments that vote for cocks who shut down pure science research cos they don't see how it benefits them directly.

But who cares! The rugby's on mate. Now THAT'S important!

Did I talk about shutting down science or any research?
No

All I said was in the scheme of all the things we could discover in the universe, water on Mars is probably about the least relevant.

Select to expand quote

Mark _australia said..

Did I talk about shutting down science or any research?
No

All I said was in the scheme of all the things we could discover in the universe, water on Mars is probably about the least relevant.

"We spend billions on exploration": nicely captures the tone of those who insist there are better things to spend ALL THAT MONEY on. Whatevers...

Least relevant?! If there is liquid water elsewhere in our solar system, like Mars or the moons of Jupiter, the odds of there being life increase exponentially. Life in the solar system that didn't originate on earth...! That's pretty ****ing exciting, and the implications are far-reaching.

Select to expand quote

Kamikuza said..

Life in the solar system ...! That's pretty ****ing exciting, and the implications are far-reaching.

or anywhere else....
I wouldn't be so excited yet. Suppose that aliens are watching our TV news . A shame to be human at least, for now.If we turn tables and capture similar transmission from Alpha Centauri about cosmits constantly slaughtering themselves....
should we post them greetings with our return address now , or rather wait a bit...

I am all for science, and the endeavors to search for truth, facts and discoveries. Hopefully, all those efforts translate into a better life for all, and a better environment for the future generations.

So potentially there is water. Equally possible is that there may be living organisms. Very interesting indeed.

But hang on a minute, please...Here on earth, we have water in abundance. Trees, animals, breathable air, etc. All the ingredients to sustain lives. Above and beyond mere existence, we the clever humans even have crazy things like windsurfing and kiting to keep us entertained. Bloody marvelous I reckon.

Unfortunately, all of these positives things we inherited are, to an extent, being taken for granted. Sewage pumped straight into the sea. Mine wastes flow into the rivers. Then the mines that will disturb the water tables potentially lowering them. What about the "Fracking" for gas ?

Yes, we are a clever bunch. But are we clever enough to foresee the f-ups we are going to create ?

Potentially life on Mars because of water ? Perhaps we need to focus on what we already have so far and try to keep it sustainable for a bit longer ?

Select to expand quote

Jupiter said..
Perhaps we need to focus on what we already have so far and try to keep it sustainable for a bit longer ?

Still not a zero-sum game -- we can do both equally well.

Hey Milsy, welcome back. Bono left, he was missing you.

Select to expand quote

Holidaybliss said..

how has your life been enriched by the last Mars rover. .....

How is your life enriched by anything you don't experience first-hand? Why does it have to enrich my life for it to be of any utility...?

0.003% of my posts are in this thread... 100% of yours are. What was that about grandstanding? I even got more green thumbs than you.

Thanks for signing up just for me though, nice to know I've got a fan.

Select to expand quote

japie said..
Hey Milsy, welcome back. Bono left, he was missing you.

The answer is -- political will.

Should we start a book on how long till milsy starts hurling drunken abuse and gets banned again?

/oh hang on, it's started.

Select to expand quote

Kamikuza said..

japie said..
Hey Milsy, welcome back. Bono left, he was missing you.

The answer is -- political will.

That's a AM radio shock jock meme if I've ever seen one - makes sense so long as you move along within 5 seconds.
If you start thinking about it, it just gets dumber and dumber.

If one believes in evolution, why is water necessary for life?

Would not the little creatures have evolved to suit there environment?

That is why I am bemused

Select to expand quote

Mark _australia said..
If one believes in evolution, why is water necessary for life?

Would not the little creatures have evolved to suit there environment?

That is why I am bemused

Because chemistry, whether you believe or not.

Select to expand quote

Mark _australia said..
If one believes in evolution, why is water necessary for life?

Would not the little creatures have evolved to suit there environment?

That is why I am bemused

All life as we know it utilizes water. We don't know of any life that doesn't.

Evolution just deals with the development of life after it's genesis. It would appear to be an essential concomitant of life.
No one can say with certainty (as far as I know) that life can't be based on some waterless system but it seems like a long shot.

"Would not the little creatures have evolved to suit their environment?" Yes, but they have to survive in the first place.

That is bloody hilarious. We all came from the big bang but there just can't be life on a planet that does not have water. Surely you can see the incongruity of making statements like that.

BTW plenty of evolutionary types who are into their alien theorising, talk about silicon based life. Why not waterless?

I am not belittling ANY scientific discovery/ies at all nor whinging about cost. I just suggest that this is not a particularly earth shattering discovery. I can't think of one single way it changes our lives here on earth apart from it increasing the chance there was once bacteria on Mars. And even then, it could have been covered with water for a million years, yet still had no life all on it. That is just as likely isn't it?
Well, more likely that it didn't have life

Select to expand quote

Mark _australia said..
That is bloody hilarious. We all came from the big bang but there just can't be life on a planet that does not have water. Surely you can see the incongruity of making statements like that.

BTW plenty of evolutionary types who are into their alien theorising, talk about silicon based life. Why not waterless?

I am not belittling ANY scientific discovery/ies at all nor whinging about cost. I just suggest that this is not a particularly earth shattering discovery. I can't think of one single way it changes our lives here on earth apart from it increasing the chance there was once bacteria on Mars. And even then, it could have been covered with water for a million years, yet still had no life all on it. That is just as likely isn't it?
Well, more likely that it didn't have life

What you're asking about is actually the origins of life, not evolution per se.

It is possible that life can arise without liquid water, but we don't know how. We DO know about life and liquid water, so the odds are just better that we go investigating where there are dribbles.

Life (so far) is carbon-based because carbon is a whore. Chemistry again, which others can answer better than me. Silicon is a possibility but the chemistry is tougher, making it less likely.

It's already changed your life -- wouldn't be posting in here without it, eh

It's likely that we are the only life in the entire universe, but given that life burst forth here in such abundance and such different climates, odds are very good that we're not. If we don't find life on Mars, or Europa, it doesn't mean much -- given the odds.

Select to expand quote

Kamikuza said..

japie said..
Hey Milsy, welcome back. Bono left, he was missing you.

The answer is -- political will.

case in point!!

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Manmade_River

another seabreeze poster brought thisto my attention, can't remember who sorry - but very impressive feat of engineering if you research beyond the wiki-link