Posted on 04/18/2002 9:36:38 AM PDT by RightWhale
Sure we would...as we carved its image into the cave wall with a chunk of sharp rock before turning back to the roast beast that is spitted on the fire.
Tuor
Location: Guizhou
What a shock.
Look, where there are resources, there will be development of those resources. On earth, areas of land are "set aside" for "protection" and "recreation" but that is just another form of development. Such areas are a sign that a society or civilization is so otherwise rich in resources that they don't have to use these areas. It is called economics.
Space will be developed when it economically feasable to do so. The organization with the biggest guns will ultimately be the ones in control of any such resources.
Deal with it.
despoil another celestial object?
Its all ready a barren, lifeless, inhospitable, airless, gray desert, bombarded continuously by radiation!
Were going to go up and decorate the poor thing. Add a little color.
We'll even bring art and music up there. We humans good.
My book says go forth and multiply. What book are you using?
Space is TOTALLY there to explore AND exploit. Heck, this will probably be the first time where we don't inconvenience or endanger any other people or animals or plants in doing so. The moon belongs to the earth (she trapped it fair and square) and God gave the earth to us.
The nuclear shuttle though---there's a dumb idea, unless maybe you assemble it in space and only fly it around from the space station to wherever. No one needs that blowing up over their city or town.
I expect even less resistance from the barren moon.
The moon is not there to be worshipped (a particlarly large and dangerous religion already does that, incidentally). It's a great place from which to stage other missions. If it has plentiful and easily mined resources, all the better!
If people want to build houses there, who are we to stop them? I can't wait for such developments. See the first 4000ft homerun! Opening day, 2020.
Whoever gets there first, claims it. Frankly, I don't care if the UN or anyone else gets annoyed (let's see them come and evict people from the "pristine wilderness".)
Andrew
member since April 18, 2002.
Sounds good to me!
Nothing up there but a lot of sterile rock and rock dust anyway.
Time to defund NASA and put our tax dollars to better use.
If some private-sector lunatic (pun intended) wants to pi$$ away their money going to the moon, that's they're choice.
It's ours, we are the caretaker. There is no one else out there and it is our job to get out there and make something out of the wastelands that make up outer space. That's what we do. We build. Should we be stuck on this dust particle forever?
NASA will be concentrating on developing a nuclear interplanetary shuttle, yet another White Elephant to go with its ISS International Orbiting Black Hole.
I disagree with you about the interplanetary shuttle. This country needs a solar system cruiser to establish our space dominance, although I agree with your assessment about the White Elephant.
-Priorities in the US are generally detemrined by the free market which direct resources to where they are most useful and most highly valued. This is the best way to eliminate waste. To claim that "we" can re-prioritize has little basis in the reality of how resources are allocated.
-"We" have not despoiled the earth. Humanity of times past has used earth's resource to the best of their ability and often the limits of their technology resulted in some filthy situations. Today the US is among the world's leaders in the development of cleaner technologies. Today, and in the pasat, the most dirty and wasteful economics systems are those that attempt to dictate priorities to the consumer (the Soviet Union remains the most polluted country in the world!!).
What makes you think that the moon would be "despoiled"? Doesn't this assume that there's some pre-existing condition that is not supposed to be changed? Nature has a tendency to despoil things with abandon.
For that matter, how can you possibly determine how much metal we need. Do you realize that limiting our dependance on metals requires using either different materials or none at all? Different materials have to be manufactured all the same, often from resources derided as being "dirty" such as plastics. To use none at all returns us to a more wasteful way of life where only the elite can prosper.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.