[Liberator]

After reading, and posting in this thread: http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,11006.0.html  I had a question form:

How far into space should the Human Race have spread by now?
The Moon?
Mars?
Should we have a massive terraforming project in the open phases for Venus?
Orital Space Colonies a'la Mobile Suit: Gundam?

Personally, I believe we should have at least one lunar colony with a couple of hundred thousand permanent residents.  Also, we should have asteroid mining facilities and a dozen or more cloudscoops in close orbit of Jupiter to provide the hydrogen and HE3 required to power it all.  But's that's just me.  Tell what you think?

[Stunaep]

whaddya mean by should. Could we get clarification on that?

Should have, if it weren't for the dark ages? Should have, if we hat met the Vulcans, in say 1966? Should have, if the moon mission would have been in 1869? Because, it's obvious, that in the current timeline, in the year 2002, we should have gone on the moon a few times, built space stations, building the biggest SS yet, and possibly going to Mars in 16  years.

[NeoHunter]

Seriously speaking, we are too caught up in civil wars, terrorism and politics that people over look the space exploration program or something like that.

[mikhael]

I'd say that given current technology and knowledge, we could have a permanent dwelling (albeit small) on the moon. It wouldn't be even remotely self sufficient, and would thus be cost prohibitive.

We should have also stuck a station (or two) at each of the Earth/Moon Lags.  Having a permanent installation there could help lower Moon transit costs a huge amount.

[diamondgeezer]

Well, if Kennedy had really been interested in the science or the exploration, NASA probably would have built permanent structures on and orbiting the Moon. Instead, they flew there, stuck their fingers up at the Reds and then forgot about it when they realised how expensive nuclear weapons are

But having said that, have you seen the reports on that private enterprise thingy they're launching next summer? It'll take uber-detailed orbital surveys of the Moon, in an attempt to determine the most suitable site for commercial landings - we're talking about passenger trips to the Moon in our lifetime, people.

I've always said that private enterprise is humanity's best hope for space exploration. When you look at stuff like the X-Prize, you realise there is hope. And apparently, that rich beardy twat Branson is looking in to the cheapest contractor for a Virgin space travel service.

The second they open the Moon for holiday makers, I'm there - and I'm taking me clubs

Fore!

[vyper]

There is no way we are going to expand to extra-terrestrial colonies until we find a good enough reason: and our dreams of a the GTVA/Federation/Earth Alliance are not good enough for most people. What will cause a colonisation program or whatever, is when we find something out there thats worth money. a la Total Recall style.

[Knight Templar]

What do you mean? Should have? I think we are right where we "should" be, not where i'd like to be, or where we could or couldn't be, but we are where we have been.

Wtf to should've. Say that we are replacing some event in history... say WWII. without it we should/could have been somewhere else right now. Not nessaserly in a better position then we are now, but we could be anywhere right now if things happened differently. We are exactly where we should be.

[Galemp]

Originally posted by diamondgeezer
Well, if Kennedy had really been interested in the science or the exploration, NASA probably would have built permanent structures on and orbiting the Moon. Instead, they flew there, stuck their fingers up at the Reds and then forgot about it when they realised how expensive nuclear weapons are

Precisely. If the Cold War had never ended we probably would have a moon base by now. But everyone seems to think domestic and international affairs are more important than pumping huge amounts of money into a space program.
Granted, they have a point, but we need to be concerned about the future, nto just the present. We might end up with a Krypton (not quite as drastic) situation where forward planning would save thousands of people.
And space exploration brought us fantastic advances in technology and other things; look at the computers they used. Nowadays NASA is on such a tight budget they can't be bothered to check the difference between Imperial and Metric systems in their spacecraft.
This is really a sore spot for me. We should have kept going to the moon.

[Stunaep]

Originally posted by GalacticEmperor


Precisely. If the Cold War had never ended we probably would have a moon base by now. But everyone seems to think domestic and international affairs are more important than pumping huge amounts of money into a space program.
Granted, they have a point, but we need to be concerned about the future, nto just the present. We might end up with a Krypton (not quite as drastic) situation where forward planning would save thousands of people.
And space exploration brought us fantastic advances in technology and other things; look at the computers they used. Nowadays NASA is on such a tight budget they can't be bothered to check the difference between Imperial and Metric systems in their spacecraft.
This is really a sore spot for me. We should have kept going to the moon.

yeah, and keep the Soviet Union running 'till today. I'd rather have freedom than some base on the moon, I don't really give any damn about, thank you very  much.

[CP5670]

What do you mean? Should have? I think we are right where we "should" be, not where i'd like to be, or where we could or couldn't be, but we are where we have been.

Very good point here. Whatever has happened is exactly what "should" have happened, since the only reason it "should" have happened is precisely because it did happen.

But everyone seems to think domestic and international affairs are more important than pumping huge amounts of money into a space program.

Exactly, and practically speaking, they are quite right. As vyper said, there is little point in pouring billions of dollars in setting up a large moon colony when there are almost no practical benefits involved. (if we want scientific information, unmanned/robotic satellites and surface probes are a far, far more efficient solution, which NASA has been doing a pretty good job on recently)

[vadar_1]

The problem with diverting money into space travel is that, that money is tax money, and space travel is no more then a nerd's wet dream. So Nasa is not getting nearly enough money as it needs to launch these kinds of projects. That and the government sucks... just because they do.

[diamondgeezer]

When I look at today's politicians I see people trying to cope with such everday things as the economy, diplomatic relations with other countries, defense budgets, and so on.

How many politicians and world leaders ever spare a thought for the future of the human species? How often does the leader of your country stop to think about the next rung on the evolutionary ladder, and how that will affect his or her citizen's descendants?

Is there one single government worker out there thinking 'hold on, this world can't support us for ever - we need to get out in to space, or modify our genes so we eat less or feel less of an urge to kill each other'?

The answer is probably no, none, or never (which ever seems most gramitically pleasing). Unfortuantely, we're al too busy trying to stop ourselves getting stabbed in the back to concentrate our efforts on advancement. If the British government took the money it spent on building nukes and spent it on cold fusion research, we'd probably have the bugger up and running and lighing our homes by now. If the Americans didn't feel they needed such a huge defense budget, they could have found the money to complete the ISS long ago... the list goes on.

John - We're not gonna make it, are we? People, I mean...

T800 - It's in your nature to destroy yourselves...

[wEvil]

This species NEEDS to get its arse in gear and get over nation-state divisions.

Because there ARE other sentient lifeforms out there and if they have gotten to the level where they can pull together and work as a species we wont stand a chance, because you can bet your bottom dollar they'll be stomping us for colonial space or resources, or both.

[Mr. Vega]

If us Americans hadn't been such lazy people after Apollo we would be on Mars by now and have the first space hotels orbiting Earth in a few months.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

Originally posted by vadar_1
The problem with diverting money into space travel is that, that money is tax money, and space travel is no more then a nerd's wet dream. So Nasa is not getting nearly enough money as it needs to launch these kinds of projects. That and the government sucks... just because they do.

there's a rather simple (not really but hey ) way to make people aware of what space-travel has done for them:

take away all technology developed because of space travel. You'll see them shouting for it soon enough

[Kellan]

Go, non-stick pans! Go!

[diamondgeezer]

See all that fuss about the zero-g pen the Merkins developed? Cost them millions of dollars, but they did it - a pen that writes in the zero gravity of space.

The Russians used a pencil.

[Knight Templar]

Good ol' Russian ingeunuity...

Maybe the Soviets weren't as bad as we made them out to be?

[Kellan]

They couldn't afford the pen. At one point Russia ploughed 50% or more of it's GDP into defence spending. Basically, the USSR is viewed as a costly social failure because they tried to compete with the US in a system designed by capitalism and for capitalism; and because through military competition they diverted masses of money that could've been put to good use elsewhere, like healthcare.

You see, Communism works - in theory. It's just the damn people who mess it up.

[diamondgeezer]

The system does not fail - only people fail.

Buggered if I'm living in a society with that kind of attitude