Show of HandsShow of Hands

Praetorianus August 10th, 2016 1:45am

Do you prefer more time, manpower and money would go into manned or robotic space exploration (probes, rovers). This covers both NASA and private enterprise. If you think both is a waste, explain in comments or feel free to skip.

11 Liked

Comments: Add Comment

SamSoup Christian, voluntarist
08/10/16 4:12 pm

Manned is way more cool, so manned.

Reply
WorstGooEver Nuke the Hurricanes
08/10/16 10:11 am

Definitely manned. The whole point long term is to get human colonies off planet. Manned missions will force us to develop the technology we will eventually need.

Reply
Liberty Lets Use Logic
08/10/16 9:16 am

I have no preference whatsoever. It's completely up to the company and their customers.

DoctorWasdarb Marxist Leninist Maoist
08/10/16 8:06 am

We don't need to expand into space. Just let it be.

Reply
FarmerManE djent
08/10/16 5:27 am

Waste. What do we have to gain?
"Ooooo. We used our billion dollar telescope to take a picture of some planet that's irrelivent to us"

Reply
Praetorianus Fair enough.
08/10/16 7:58 am

You use it to find some new frontier to get to 😏

FarmerManE djent
08/10/16 5:56 pm

Anything we find we couldn't reach without the people on board dieing

beckabee Ohio
08/13/16 7:43 am

Everything in space is relevant to the earth and its inhabitants.

beckabee Ohio
08/13/16 11:08 am

Because at the moment of the Big Bang everything that is and will be came into existence. All the building blocks from one origin. Also making everything relevant to everything else.

FarmerManE djent
08/13/16 1:58 pm

Still fail to sew why need to spend billions to take picture of stuff well never be capable of visiting

beckabee Ohio
08/15/16 2:48 am

How much of the world have you only seen in pictures? Those pictures that you see educate you and make you aware of your own place in the world. Same is true for space.

FarmerManE djent
08/15/16 5:19 am

Yeah. But I could hop on a plane and be on the other side of the world in a day.
Whereas anything outside our solar system, heck anything outside mars and venus, we couldn't reach without a huge leap in technology. And you can't exactly land on a planet made of gas unless I missed something in science class

beckabee Ohio
08/15/16 7:24 pm

Just because you can't go there doesn't mean it's not important. You can't reach the deepest depths of the ocean either. Doesn't mean there's not anything worth knowing about down there. Your ability to experience something firsthand should not hinder others quest for knowledge.

FarmerManE djent
08/16/16 5:11 am

OK. So what exactly do we have to gain by taking pictures of a far off planet then?

beckabee Ohio
08/16/16 5:51 pm

Please watch Cosmos. Carl Sagan's or Tyson's. Small scale systems mimic larger ones. Pictures of distant objects teach us how they form and what they're made of. And in turn teaches us humans what we are made of and how we form. Don't you ever look up there and think "I wish I could see that more closely?" And more to the point there isn't much in space that can be safely seen by the naked eye. Cosmologists realize the danger by the pictures that have already been taken.

FarmerManE djent
08/16/16 7:53 pm

Really I have no interest in space. I understand the whole galaxies are interconnected and related thing. I still don't see what difference it makes to us

beckabee Ohio
08/16/16 7:59 pm

I'm sorry you can't. But please do not let that limit the funding for exploration. Space really, truly is the final frontier.

FarmerManE djent
08/17/16 5:24 am

If we had a choice between funding space exploration, or something else on earth, let's say research in medicine, then from a business perspective, investing in medicine would have a better return on investment because there is a higher probability that someone could make an advancement in technology, wereas space exploration seems to be like playing the lottery. There's a chance we could make a major breakthrough on something, but it's so miniscule that the probability of getting a return on your investment is almost 0

beckabee Ohio
08/17/16 7:37 pm

But there is no choice. There was no choice made throughout the last 100 years. Humans did both. Penicillin and a moon landing!

bluerum29 optimistic idealist
08/10/16 5:27 am

Neither damn it. Unless we are blowing up asteroids headed for us or putting satellites in orbit to use, avoid space.

Reply
catpillow Florida West Coast
08/10/16 12:44 am

First robotic until we know as much as we can about what we're dealing with. Then manned, after we can support human life.

Reply
RoDe Latinus wordsus
08/09/16 11:14 pm

I don't look at it as an either or, but as complementary elements serving the same enterprise. Send probes, then send a human. Granted we've been focusing more on the former, but that's to provide for the later. NASA has a manned mission to Mars on their books. It's not leaving any time soon, they still need to gather more info and develop tech, but they're laying the groundwork.

Reply
AmericanWolf For the Benefit of All
08/09/16 8:41 pm

Currently, probes. But I'd like to see a Mars colony before I'm old.

Reply
DoctorWasdarb Marxist Leninist Maoist
08/10/16 10:26 am

I don't want to see humans destroying something else.

Guyman
08/10/16 11:06 am

If the planet is already barren, what is the harm in setting up shop there? I could see not wanting to severely affect a pre-established ecosystem but Mars has none that we're aware of at this point in time.

AmericanWolf For the Benefit of All
08/10/16 11:11 am

It's a cold, dead rock and we're going to make it beautiful.

DoctorWasdarb Marxist Leninist Maoist
08/10/16 12:00 pm

I just don't like advancing into space. In fact, I think we should scale back the shit we have no.

Guyman
08/10/16 2:31 pm

Many innovations are stemmed directly from the space program. If anything I think more funding should be allocated to space agencies in order to further these developments.

beckabee Ohio
08/13/16 7:45 am

Make Mars great again! 😂

knetzere Illinois
08/09/16 7:40 pm

Robots for a while. But I think we could have a manned moon base by now

Reply
HoosierFan
08/09/16 7:31 pm

The scientific ROI is better for robotic missions, but manned missions are just more damned exciting.

CoffeeNow Fiery but peaceful rioter
08/09/16 7:13 pm

Both, but until tech is better probably robotic

PrinceOberyn Io Himeros
08/09/16 7:07 pm

I want NASA's budget quadrupled and both options pursued and technology researched and developed for coming generations. Imagine what NASA can do with $74 Billion.

Reply
CoffeeNow Fiery but peaceful rioter
08/09/16 7:13 pm

I agree as long as we cut entitlement programs and the military to do it

PrinceOberyn Io Himeros
08/09/16 7:17 pm

Cut medicare to the bone, and merge some military development programs with NASA, and I agree.

Praetorianus Fair enough.
08/10/16 2:02 am

That's rad. I kind of like it 😹

Praetorianus Fair enough.
08/09/16 6:48 pm

Since I support eventual settlement and terraforming of Mars, it's time to bring manned missions past near Earth orbit back. Robots have already covered a lot but eventually we should go in person if you accept my goal.

Reply