Should any country in the world be spending money on Space Exploration?

Jesus Hitler raises some very good points:

Do you think that if NASA was shut down their budget would be re-allocated to organizations that feed the poor? The money would just go into other scientific agencies or into weapons research. Technologies developed for the space shuttle have gone into development of military aircraft and vice versa. Do you want us to shut down all research that doesn't provide immediate benefits for mankind? Many problems in society aren't there because there isn't enough money; they're there because people just don't give a fuck. Anyway, it's not as if there were regions of the US who can't maintain paved roads because NASA wanted to send a shuttle up for a joyride. Why don't you bitch at the military for wasting countless dollars every day on useless endeavors? How much more does the militart suck up every year in money and manpower?

People here seem to have the idea that the Earth is that the population density in any inhabited area is the same as downtown Beijing. Overpopulation would not be alleviated by moving surplus humanity to another planet, where the habitat would be much smaller than their original territory and the demand for food would be exactly the same, the only difference being that the new environment would be extremely dangerous. Overpopulation would best be controlled by increased exploitation of unused farmland (and there is plenty of that) which would feed the extant population while simultaneously encouraging contraception and increasing the quality of health care thus eliminating the need for large families.

Of course the great majority of people would never go along with this because they are fucking animals.

Large-scale colonization of other planets would be extraordinarily difficult and expensive. Making a ship capable of carrying 1 - 5 thousand people to another star would require technical knowledge that we don't have and won't have for generations (if ever). If you want cheaper colonization of other planets you'll have to prepare for unusual families: fifty women and ten men along with hundreds of fertilized embryos which would be implanted into the women at the destination. Voila! You have a new population of people on a new planet and it only cost the fraction of the cost of the massive ship carrying a small town.

But it's not as if creating a viable population of people on another planet was absolutely urgent. Regardless of what you all seem to think, global warming, although a real and urgent threat, is not a threat to the survival of mankind. The only thing that could kill 100% of humanity would be full-scale nuclear warfare, the kind we feared during the Cold War.

Normally I wouldn't post something written by a banned member, but he raises some pretty good points!

GO JH

Wisdom is not bound by age my friend.

That isn't what I implied. I think teenagers who say 'I'M NOT A KID I'M X-AGE' are silly and obviously insecure about their age. Which is in turn silly in it's own way.

I say go for the exploration. God gave us mountains to climb, we should climb them.

God gave us space, why not explore it? Learn a thing or two about the place we live in.

DON'T FORGET OUR GRACIOUS AND LOVING GOD ALSO GAVE US A DEEP, DEEP OCEAN OF LOVE FOR US TO DIVE IN!

Lol, well for one I did the whole X-age thing because of my username, which is the same username I have had since I was 5, and I see now that there are alot of benefits to space exploration.

JH might return one day.

Let's get back on topic. I was excited about this thread. Somebody say something concerning space exploration.

I would, but I can't think of anything at the moment.

When are thye going to replace the Hubble Space Telescope? I heard a few months ago NASA was planning on it. Any one know? I find the Hubble Space Telescope interesting.

There's been work done on Hubble as recently as 2002, so I don't think that NASA would be planning on a replacement any time too soon, especially if they spent that kind of money sending a crew up to service it.

When are thye going to replace the Hubble Space Telescope? I heard a few months ago NASA was planning on it. Any one know? I find the Hubble Space Telescope interesting.

That's because the Hubble Space Telescope is the coolest thing in the world (or off it, as the case may be).

I don't think the are planning on scrapping it just yet, next repair mission supposed to keep it on till 2013 (http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/releases/2006/53/)
(http://hubblesite.org/servicing_mission_4/)
(http://hubble.nasa.gov/missions/intro.php)

As for the topic: YES. Space Exploration will the the greatest outward endeavor mankind had yet to embark on; exploration (outward and inward, but that is for another topic) is always a good thing.

Yeah, isn't there only supposed to be one working gyroscope by 2008? Sounds reasonable that they'd send out a repair mission then.

I admit telescopes bring in some very great research, about planets far out of are solar system.

I feel that Space Exploration is not needed, and money that is used on it could really be going to other things.

 

Like what? Finding homes for all the lost puppies? Space exploration is great.

No, no, I didn't mean that. CK was just saying something contradictory to what he said earlier.

I actually wasn't replying to your post, but his LOL.

I suppose I should've quoted his post.  Sorry for the confusion.

Like what? Finding homes for all the lost puppies? Space exploration is great.

Yes, we should be spending trillions on animal shelters around the world.

Okay good thing the Hubble Space telescope thing was clarified.

As much I think space exploration is usefull, the idea of colonizing other planets is irrational and would never work. I see the use of space exploration as learning what is outside our solar system, in an effert to understand this little rock flying through space that we live on a little better.

As much I think space exploration is usefull, the idea of colonizing other planets is irrational and would never work.

How would it never work, and how is it irrational? People said the same thing about flying, I bet.

Because the distance. There is no way we could get to a habitable planet in a feasable amount of time, it's just too far.

There's this thing, I bet you've heard of it. You know, technology? Yeah, it's pretty progressive

Just because we can't do it now doesn't mean that we won't be able to ever.

We're more likely to blow ourselves up before we can figure out how to get that far in a reasonable amount of time.

"Blow ourselves up"? How?

So we could produce an explosion that'd take out the whole world, but not faster rockets? Yeah, that makes sense.

OH NOES MAYB WILE WE MAYK FASTR ROKTS WE BLOW OWRSELFS UP!!!11

Well time slows down in space, so it doesn't matter how fast you can go, the problem is finding longer-lating fuels.

Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't there a theory that if you move fast enough in space your body doesn't have time to age? It would probably be totally impossible to actually REACH this speed, (I think it's faster than LIGHT) but just the same, am I thinking correctly?

Well time slows down in space,

...whaaaaaaaaaaat?

Correct me if I am wrong, but wasn't there a theory that if you move fast enough in space your body doesn't have time to age? It would probably be totally impossible to actually REACH this speed, (I think it's faster than LIGHT) but just the same, am I thinking correctly?

Well, theoreticly if you catch up with time, it can't pass you.

But you can't pass it either, so you would probably freeze in time. WOOT.

My theory? If you really don't want to age, you must reach the speed of light and be suspended in time.

@Djangonator - You didn't know that?