Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Poll

How many people can fit in a space dinghy?

Less than a thousand
9 (31%)
From a thousand to a million
1 (3.4%)
Several million
2 (6.9%)
Several billion
2 (6.9%)
I do not know
8 (27.6%)
Null
7 (24.1%)

Total Members Voted: 28

Author Topic: Space colonization  (Read 22748 times)

GoSouthYoungins

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1262
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 83
  • Likes Given: 109
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #150 on: July 25, 2019, 04:22:46 PM »
I did mention that the moon landings denialism was tarnishing your credibility. Then you denied being a denier, and immediately proceeded to list the denier talking points. Oh well.

I said the whole thing was suspect, and then I made claims showing why.

You can't even make a point other than a link (which I showed proves NOTHING), but instead have a predetermined belief you are unwilling to question. This sort of intellectual weakness is common but sad. Oh well.
big time oops

SteveMDFP

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1463
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 196
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #151 on: July 25, 2019, 04:25:59 PM »

So Apollo 11 only had robots to set up the Laser Ranging Retroreflector?  It's been in use since then.  You can still aim a laser at it to determine the distance to the moon, within centimeters.

Laser Ranging Retroreflector
https://www.lpi.usra.edu/lunar/missions/apollo/apollo_11/experiments/lrr/

The reason nobody has sent people there again is simply that the task is hideously expensive.  Much of the expense cannot be reduced much, despite technological advances, as long as chemical rockets are used.  And then, there's not much of importance for a human to do there any more.  We already have the rocks and soil.  Robotic probes are better and cheaper for anything else.

Unmanned crafts can collect rocks. Unmanned crafts can drop off a reflector. Do you honestly disagree?

They can today.  In 1969?  No, robotics weren't sufficient then.  A 25 lb rock?  And then return to earth, with nobody knowing there were no people in the reentry vehicle?  Utterly absurd.

SteveMDFP

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1463
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 196
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #152 on: July 25, 2019, 04:29:15 PM »

From 4:25-5:00

"Today we have with us a group of students, among America's best. To you we say, we have only completed a beginning. We leave you much that is undone. There are great ideas undiscovered. Breakthroughs available to those who can remove one of truth's protective layers. There are places to go, beyond belief."

Really sounds to me like a guy subtly hinting that we never went to the moon. Anyone have any other guesses at what he could be referring to as "one of truth's protective layers"?

In the context of students and scientific discovery, the meaning is clear.  Science proceeds by discovering previously unknown truths about the universe.  Until such inquiry, these hard-won truths are indeed hidden by nature's "protective layers."

Or, one could indulge in paranoid thinking about the text, and extrapolate to the utterly absurd.

GoSouthYoungins

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1262
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 83
  • Likes Given: 109
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #153 on: July 25, 2019, 04:31:53 PM »
They can today.  In 1969?  No, robotics weren't sufficient then.  A 25 lb rock?  And then return to earth, with nobody knowing there were no people in the reentry vehicle?  Utterly absurd.

This is rich. A 3 million kilo machine can fly to the moon, but a machine can't pick up a 25 lb rock. Ya, utter absurdity is correct.
big time oops

GoSouthYoungins

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1262
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 83
  • Likes Given: 109
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #154 on: July 25, 2019, 04:34:04 PM »

From 4:25-5:00

"Today we have with us a group of students, among America's best. To you we say, we have only completed a beginning. We leave you much that is undone. There are great ideas undiscovered. Breakthroughs available to those who can remove one of truth's protective layers. There are places to go, beyond belief."

Really sounds to me like a guy subtly hinting that we never went to the moon. Anyone have any other guesses at what he could be referring to as "one of truth's protective layers"?

In the context of students and scientific discovery, the meaning is clear.  Science proceeds by discovering previously unknown truths about the universe.  Until such inquiry, these hard-won truths are indeed hidden by nature's "protective layers."

Or, one could indulge in paranoid thinking about the text, and extrapolate to the utterly absurd.

ONE of truth's protective layers.

Seriously, just take a stab at it. What do you think he is referring to?
big time oops

SteveMDFP

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1463
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 196
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #155 on: July 25, 2019, 04:39:53 PM »

ONE of truth's protective layers.

Seriously, just take a stab at it. What do you think he is referring to?

Paranoid ideation aside, science is a process that typically proceeds one major finding at a time.

oren

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4532
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 909
  • Likes Given: 1305
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #156 on: July 25, 2019, 05:27:03 PM »
I do not normally argue with deniers. It is a useless endeavor as they never listen. DNFTT is my policy. I will give you one shot though.

So to understand your position:
* Were there any manned Apollo missions? Or were they all unmanned? Or maybe they were never launched? Which of these.
* Were there any moon landings at all? Or there were but unmanned?
* Did a computerized autopilot fly the landing craft to the moon surface, and took off back to the lunar orbiter?
* Did a robot install the laser reflector and collect the rocks?
* Is it impossible to send manned missions beyond Earth orbit? Or just expensive? Or technically difficult? Which of these.
* As everything according to you can be done by unmanned missions; and yet you cite the fact that no more manned missions were sent to the moon after Apollo as proof that Apollo was a hoax; what in your opinion would be the reason for other countries or the US to want to send manned missions to the moon?

GoSouthYoungins

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1262
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 83
  • Likes Given: 109
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #157 on: July 25, 2019, 06:09:20 PM »
I do not normally argue with deniers. It is a useless endeavor as they never listen. DNFTT is my policy. I will give you one shot though.

Let's start with this: the epithet "denier" is only relevant if you mean I deny that humans definitely went to the moon. I'm not arguing that the earth is flat and that the moon is a disc, or that the american flag flapped in the wind. I'm just saying that the whole thing is very suspicious for many GLARING reasons. Most people are unwilling to engage with these issues cuz they will be labelled a denier or they just can't handle the intellectual complexity of the societal implications of a fake moon landing.

So thanks for at least engaging is semi-good-faith.


* Were there any manned Apollo missions? Or were they all unmanned? Or maybe they were never launched? Which of these.
* Were there any moon landings at all? Or there were but unmanned?

I think people almost definitely went into low earth orbit during the Apollo missions. Did anyone ever orbit or land on the moon? I'm not sure.

* Did a computerized autopilot fly the landing craft to the moon surface, and took off back to the lunar orbiter?
* Did a robot install the laser reflector and collect the rocks?

I think installing a laser reflector is totally possible for a robot, even back then. And same with collecting rocks. I'm also not convinced that the "moon rocks" are from the moon, although they probably are.

* Is it impossible to send manned missions beyond Earth orbit? Or just expensive? Or technically difficult? Which of these.

My guess is that humans can't survive beyond low earth orbit.

* As everything according to you can be done by unmanned missions; and yet you cite the fact that no more manned missions were sent to the moon after Apollo as proof that Apollo was a hoax; what in your opinion would be the reason for other countries or the US to want to send manned missions to the moon?

Well no, I do not cite anything as proof of a hoax.

As for why anyone would want to go:
-everyone makes declarations that they will try to go to the moon.
-it makes sense to build a base there for many reason: science, industry, low-gravity launchpad for space exploration, tourism.
-human desire to explore.
-feminism: a woman should walk on the moon.


Now can you respond to some things?

-is it not suspicious that despite enormous improvements in all the relevant fields, no other country or company has put a man on the moon?
-is it not suspicious that all the moon landings happened during the Nixon administration?
-is it not suspicious the way Niel Armstrong speaks about the moon?
-is it not suspicious that NASA lost/taped over the original moon landing tapes?
big time oops

kassy

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 859
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 360
  • Likes Given: 377
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #158 on: July 25, 2019, 09:42:55 PM »
I think one of the reasons why this meme popped up is that the US actually lies about a lot of stuff all the time. And they actually wage their own war on science which does not help either.
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 15890
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 233
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #159 on: July 25, 2019, 11:21:00 PM »
GSY wrote:
Quote
I think people almost definitely went into low earth orbit during the Apollo missions. Did anyone ever orbit or land on the moon? I'm not sure.

NASA engineers had to shed every possible ounce to get the Apollo ships (in full view of the world before launch) to the moon.  There certainly was not an additional lunar lander in the stack.  In-flight broadcasts showed astronauts in the capsule, the command model, and the lunar lander.  In weightlessness.  Which cannot be faked within the 45 seconds of weightlessness a Vomit Comet plane can provide. 

Second launch?  No.  Remember, this was during the cold war.  All the major powers were keeping constant watch for unexpected launches — they might mean an ICBM attack!   And, military and astronomers tracked every item in space even back then.  The sudden appearance of a spacecraft in low earth orbit would be front page news!  Was everyone in NORAD in on the conspiracy??  And no one has ever said anything??

Re-entry from lunar orbit is much different than re-entry from low earth orbit.  Astronomers would not be fooled.  And they would have been following the spacecraft since it launched.

Why bother with all those Apollo space-rendezvous-practice and around-the-moon missions?  They could have simply made Apollo 8 a fake landing mission.  Done!

Were the Apollo 13 astronauts — close to death for five days — really in near earth orbit, but NASA wouldn’t let them land, because they had to pretend to complete their lunar orbit, else it would “ruin the plan”? ? ?   

And everyone at every network and all aeronautical journalists and astronomers and sky trackers AROUND THE WORLD were tricked for years, and NOT ONE realized it, or revealed the hoax?

No.
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

DrTskoul

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1451
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 210
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #160 on: July 26, 2019, 12:50:59 AM »
Oy vey... what's next, contrails ???

Tom_Mazanec

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1705
    • View Profile
    • Planet Mazanec
  • Liked: 392
  • Likes Given: 67
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #161 on: July 26, 2019, 01:01:42 AM »
Well, I have to admit that 50 years later we can’t go back.
SHARKS (CROSSED OUT) MONGEESE (SIC) WITH FRICKIN LASER BEAMS ATTACHED TO THEIR HEADS

GoSouthYoungins

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1262
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 83
  • Likes Given: 109
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #162 on: July 26, 2019, 02:00:42 AM »
I'm impressed that I ask a series of questions about whether or not people find certain things suspicious and no one touches it. Cuz you can't say it isn't suspicious, but you also can't admit there are suspicious things, cuz then POOF: you are a denier.
big time oops

Shared Humanity

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3979
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 429
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #163 on: July 26, 2019, 02:08:19 AM »


Let's start with this: the epithet "denier" is only relevant if you mean I deny that humans definitely went to the moon. I'm not arguing that the earth is flat and that the moon is a disc, or that the american flag flapped in the wind. I'm just saying that the whole thing is very suspicious for many GLARING reasons. Most people are unwilling to engage with these issues cuz they will be labelled a denier or they just can't handle the intellectual complexity of the societal implications of a fake moon landing.

So thanks for at least engaging is semi-good-faith.


Congratulations. You have just earned the quickest ignore decision That I have ever made...

wili

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2599
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 171
  • Likes Given: 305
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #164 on: July 26, 2019, 02:12:21 AM »
SH, what took you so long!  :D
"A force de chercher de bonnes raisons, on en trouve; on les dit; et après on y tient, non pas tant parce qu'elles sont bonnes que pour ne pas se démentir." Choderlos de Laclos "You struggle to come up with some valid reasons, then cling to them, not because they're good, but just to not back down."

Shared Humanity

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3979
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 429
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #165 on: July 26, 2019, 02:14:10 AM »
SH, what took you so long!  :D

Wasn't paying attention?

GoSouthYoungins

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1262
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 83
  • Likes Given: 109
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #166 on: July 26, 2019, 02:14:17 AM »
In-flight broadcasts showed astronauts in the capsule, the command model, and the lunar lander.  In weightlessness.  Which cannot be faked within the 45 seconds of weightlessness a Vomit Comet plane can provide.

There is no reason the videos of the astronauts could not have been taken ahead of time in low earth orbit.

All the major powers were keeping constant watch for unexpected launches — they might mean an ICBM attack!   And, military and astronomers tracked every item in space even back then.  The sudden appearance of a spacecraft in low earth orbit would be front page news!  Was everyone in NORAD in on the conspiracy??  And no one has ever said anything??

The astronauts have gone up in a planned low earth orbit flight a year before Apollo 11, and taken videos then. There would not be any need for an unexpected spacecraft.

Re-entry from lunar orbit is much different than re-entry from low earth orbit.  Astronomers would not be fooled.  And they would have been following the spacecraft since it launched.

No reason to re-enter from low earth orbit. An unmanned spacecraft could have made the flight around the moon.

Why bother with all those Apollo space-rendezvous-practice and around-the-moon missions?  They could have simply made Apollo 8 a fake landing mission.  Done

Buy time. Get footage for the fake. Add to the public's acceptance of the plausibility of going to the moon.

Were the Apollo 13 astronauts — close to death for five days — really in near earth orbit, but NASA wouldn’t let them land, because they had to pretend to complete their lunar orbit, else it would “ruin the plan”? ? ?

How do you know they were "close to death"? Everything might have gone perfectly according to plan.

And everyone at every network and all aeronautical journalists and astronomers and sky trackers AROUND THE WORLD were tricked for years, and NOT ONE realized it, or revealed the hoax?

No.

A significant number of people questioned the veracity of the whole thing right from the beginning, so the idea that NOT ONE person "realized it" is silly.

Everything that every astronomer and sky tracker thought they observed they probably did observe. I'm not familiar of any astronomers who through a big telescope saw people walk on the moon.

It is all super suspicious. Just admit it. Doesn't mean you know it was a fake or anything of the sort.

Yes.
big time oops

GoSouthYoungins

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1262
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 83
  • Likes Given: 109
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #167 on: July 26, 2019, 02:15:55 AM »


Let's start with this: the epithet "denier" is only relevant if you mean I deny that humans definitely went to the moon. I'm not arguing that the earth is flat and that the moon is a disc, or that the american flag flapped in the wind. I'm just saying that the whole thing is very suspicious for many GLARING reasons. Most people are unwilling to engage with these issues cuz they will be labelled a denier or they just can't handle the intellectual complexity of the societal implications of a fake moon landing.

So thanks for at least engaging is semi-good-faith.


Congratulations. You have just earned the quickest ignore decision That I have ever made...

As the old saying goes, "He who questions the least, is the wisest!" Maybe I have that backwards...
big time oops

Shared Humanity

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3979
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 429
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #168 on: July 26, 2019, 02:25:50 AM »
It is not my preference to ignore someone. All learning occurs when a person encounters information that is currently unknown. This can be from a book or a discussion where views distinct from your own cause you to reconsider something you consider to be true.

That said, I have no interest in discussing the merits of abiogenesis, that life can spontaneously emerge from nonliving matter on a time scale of minutes, weeks, or years despite that a man as brilliant as Aristotle had developed the theory and that it was generally held to be true for a couple of millennia.

GoSouthYoungins

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1262
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 83
  • Likes Given: 109
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #169 on: July 26, 2019, 02:48:11 AM »
Can someone ask SH how life does begin, please? Or can he see my comments? (I don't really understand the whole "ignorant" "ignore" thing.
big time oops

oren

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4532
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 909
  • Likes Given: 1305
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #170 on: July 26, 2019, 03:54:03 AM »

I will try to respond to your points, just this once. TBH, I have no hopes of reaching the target audience, but here goes.

"I think people almost definitely went into low earth orbit during the Apollo missions. Did anyone ever orbit or land on the moon? I'm not sure."
Apollo 8 was a manned mission that orbited the moon in December 1968, one month before Nixon was inaugurated as president. So was Lyndon Johnson's administration part of the hoax too?

"I think installing a laser reflector is totally possible for a robot, even back then. And same with collecting rocks. I'm also not convinced that the "moon rocks" are from the moon, although they probably are."
I am 1000% certain that designing an auto-pilot capable of landing a spacecraft on the moon and taking off with it to rendezvous back with a lunar orbiter was a technically impossible task back then. Should I remind the state of computerization? Punch cards? A whole room for a computer? The use of human "computers" to make calculations?
It was certainly much cheaper to use experienced test pilots, willing to risk their lives for glory and a thrill and their country. The same applies for all stages of the lunar mission. Humans were simply much better, lighter and cheaper than computers or robots back then. The cost and difficulty of tanks of oxygen and a good vacuum-tight pressure suit were certainly bearable.

"My guess is that humans can't survive beyond low earth orbit."
This is the most preposterous "doubt" of the whole list. Any special reason why they cannot? Need oxygen and protection from vacuum, actually easier than diving the deep oceans.
If you might claim that radiation could kill humans beyond Earth, radiation is a long-term killer. why would the lying administration care about the radiation dangers for a few expendable humans, compared to the risk of someone discovering the purported hoax?
Maybe you might claim that lack of gravity could kill them? Or maybe you don't realize a reason is needed for humans being unable to survive somewhere.

"As for why anyone would want to go:
-everyone makes declarations that they will try to go to the moon.
-it makes sense to build a base there for many reason: science, industry, low-gravity launchpad for space exploration, tourism.
-human desire to explore.
-feminism: a woman should walk on the moon."
All are important reasons, but would you vote for a president that would offer to spend $250B to fulfill one of these goals, taking the money away from fighting poverty, providing education to children, rebuilding the country's infrastructure, or fighting climate change? In reality, once the prestigious goal was achieved, the public pressured to spend the money elsewhere.
In reality, the overarching desire to get to the moon was to get there first. If you check the history of South Pole expeditions, once Amundsen reached the pole in 1911, and Scott immediately after him, and Shackleton's aborted mission in 1914, there were no south pole surface missions until 1956! I can imagine the south pole "doubters" having a field day in 1952 claiming that Amundsen was a hoax, citing as proof that no one repeated a South Pole visit for over 40 years despite all the advances. Admit it - it's highly suspicious!
Do you seriously believe that the Soviets would admit losing the moon race just because Nixon was good at lying and photoshop?

"-is it not suspicious that despite enormous improvements in all the relevant fields, no other country or company has put a man on the moon?"
No. It was an extremely expensive endeavor, still is. Launch costs beyond earth orbit have not come down that much, with the most major advance (SpaceX's reusable rockets, which you claim are a hoax as well) only achieved in the last few years. Governments are notoriously short on budgets, and the advent of electronics and robotics enable sending unmanned missions at a fraction of the cost.
Companies would not do it without a commercial reason, which there isn't or wasn't until recently (maybe tourism could be a future reason). But the whole private undertaking is only made possible by the existence of crazy and filthy-rich billionaires willing to throw money away at the problem. These billionaires did not exist in the 70s and 80s and even 90s, before economic inequality shot through the roof.

"-is it not suspicious that all the moon landings happened during the Nixon administration?"
No. Apollo 8 happened during Johnson's administration, and the whole program was put together many years before 1969. the people on the program would not have cooperated with a hoax just because the president was changed. A better "doubter/denier" claim would have been that the Johnson administration set up the program as a hoax in the first place. But there's also what Sig wrote - hundreds of thousands of people watched the launches,  every capable country tracked them, a lot was televised, the contents of the spacecraft were analyzed, the hoax would have been discovered in near real time. There were so many powerful countries with an interest to uncover such a hoax, are you not suspicious that no rival ever came forward with the accusations?
Of the huge number of people that were part of the program, aren't you suspicious that no one ever came forward and confessed the "hoax"?

"-is it not suspicious the way Niel Armstrong speaks about the moon?"
What, this: "Breakthroughs available to those who can remove one of truth's protective layers."? Seriously, Neil Armstrong knows the truth and is trying to signal the public secretly? No, he is just using a metaphor that to make discoveries you have to break through walls around the scientific truth. And as the main "hero" of the Apollo program, the one who gained the most from the "hoax", why would he of all people hint at its fake-ness?

"-is it not suspicious that NASA lost/taped over the original moon landing tapes?"
No. The "master tapes" were an afterthought, and no one ever looked for them. At some point, such tapes were hard to come by, and someone decided to reuse a heap of tapes, including those from Apollo 11 (only these are missing AFAIK).
Read this. https://www.quora.com/Is-it-true-that-the-original-moon-landing-footage-is-missing-or-was-erased-If-this-is-true-isnt-this-a-gold-mine-for-conspiracy-theorists

"I'm not arguing that the earth is flat and that the moon is a disc, or that the american flag flapped in the wind. I'm just saying that the whole thing is very suspicious for many GLARING reasons."
I am not arguing that you are gullible beyond belief. I'm just saying that the whole hoax claim/"doubt" thing is suspicious for many glaring reasons.

etienne

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 771
    • View Profile
    • About energy
  • Liked: 54
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #171 on: July 26, 2019, 11:37:43 AM »
National Geographic Apollo 11 birthday t-shirt in organic cotton if you look for a present for somebody born in 1969 https://rapanuiclothing.com/collection/mens-national-geographic-x-rapanui/

GoSouthYoungins

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1262
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 83
  • Likes Given: 109
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #172 on: July 26, 2019, 03:22:09 PM »
Most of your response consists of red herrings, which I will ignore rather than wade through.

Any special reason why they cannot? Need oxygen and protection from vacuum, actually easier than diving the deep oceans.
If you might claim that radiation could kill humans beyond Earth, radiation is a long-term killer. why would the lying administration care about the radiation dangers for a few expendable humans, compared to the risk of someone discovering the purported hoax?
Maybe you might claim that lack of gravity could kill them? Or maybe you don't realize a reason is needed for humans being unable to survive somewhere.

Maybe the thalamus needs earth's electromagnetic field. Maybe scientist still don't understand a lot of what is required for humans to survive. (Or is that over and done, the learning new things part of science?)

"-is it not suspicious that NASA lost/taped over the original moon landing tapes?"
No. The "master tapes" were an afterthought, and no one ever looked for them. At some point, such tapes were hard to come by, and someone decided to reuse a heap of tapes, including those from Apollo 11 (only these are missing AFAIK).

"No, it is not suspicious that the most important tapes ever were just discarded or destroyed."
(seriously, can you suggest any more worthy tape for humanity to save? i doubt it)

I am not arguing that you are gullible beyond belief. I'm just saying that the whole hoax claim/"doubt" thing is suspicious for many glaring reasons.

Yes, the moon hoax thing is super suspicious. So is the the moon landing thing. Not fully accepting incomplete explanations is the definition of NOT being gullible.
big time oops

etienne

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 771
    • View Profile
    • About energy
  • Liked: 54
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #173 on: July 26, 2019, 03:45:31 PM »
GSY I believe the biggest hoax is the american independence. Why do you think Trump is so happy with Johnson? Because he has a prime minister he likes. If facts can't be facts anymore, than we better stop discussing. Do you remember Galileo and the question of what falls faster? Well, check the facts and leave your feelings on the side.
------------
Added: I agree that history is not physics, but walking on the moon is like the roman empire, the french and the american revolutions, the gas chambers in Auschwitz, Christopher Columbus, the chinese empire, the world colonisation by european countries, slavery, apartheid..., nobody should have doubts that it once was true. These are milestones in human history and if you don't accept it, you're probably trying to support some weird non democratic ideology.
« Last Edit: July 26, 2019, 04:50:34 PM by etienne »

oren

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4532
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 909
  • Likes Given: 1305
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #174 on: July 26, 2019, 03:54:05 PM »
GSY, I suspected in advance you would not listen, so no surprise there. But the least you could do was to relate to the Apollo 8 timing and whether you believe LBJ administration was also part of the hoax or not.

etienne

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 771
    • View Profile
    • About energy
  • Liked: 54
  • Likes Given: 1
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #175 on: July 26, 2019, 05:25:56 PM »
Believing that man could not have walked on the moon is somehow believing that something (some god?) puts a brake on what man can do. Only physics are the limit. This was already known a long time ago, it is the story of Adam and Eva, they received the earth and the knowledge of good and bad. We who inherited of it are still in the same situation, fully responsible with no one else as ourselves to solve the problems. No god stopped the fight between Cain and Abel, no god is going to stop climate change. Lets face reality and go to work. We don't need a guide, we are all fellows on earth (and in front of God if you are a believer). Don't forget the apocalypse, to be saved doesn't require to be a believer, but to be good.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 15890
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 233
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #176 on: July 26, 2019, 08:59:20 PM »
Quote
Quote
Quote from: Sigmetnow on July 25, 2019, 11:21:00 PM
Re-entry from lunar orbit is much different than re-entry from low earth orbit.  Astronomers would not be fooled.  And they would have been following the spacecraft since it launched.

No reason to re-enter from low earth orbit. An unmanned spacecraft could have made the flight around the moon.
And followed to touchdown, where the capsule would be opened and... no astronauts inside!

Quote
Quote
Quote from: Sigmetnow on July 25, 2019, 11:21:00 PM
Were the Apollo 13 astronauts — close to death for five days — really in near earth orbit, but NASA wouldn’t let them land, because they had to pretend to complete their lunar orbit, else it would “ruin the plan”? ? ?
How do you know they were "close to death"? Everything might have gone perfectly according to plan.
How do you know they weren’t?  All the evidence we have says they were — including the astronauts themselves.  To ignore that is to ignore reality — which is exactly what you are doing.

The plethora of contortions you cite to create a moon landing hoax would have been more expensive, and less likely to succeed, than the real thing.  And your rejection of the science, and grasping at “suspicions” to support the theory, clearly illustrates your lack of knowledge about space travel.  You admit you are not sure.  Research the science, rather than the conspiracy videos, and see what you find.
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 15890
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 233
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #177 on: July 27, 2019, 01:48:58 PM »
For those who are interested in what’s actually happening, these days, to get us closer to space colonization:  SpaceX just completed a successful first free flight of its Starhopper test vehicle for its new, most-powerful Raptor rocket engine.  Previous test firings have shown the Raptor can provide enough thrust to get their future Starship (with a Superheavy booster) to the moon, and Mars — with payload capability of up to 100 people.

Starship is the spacecraft (currently under development/ being built) that is most likely to take humans back to the moon, and on to Mars, within the next decade.  The recent Starhopper test (liftoff just 20 meters, hover and translate to the side 6 meters and land) is much like the early flights of the Grasshopper test bed for the Falcon 9 rocket, which developed its ability to land and re-launch.  Two Starship prototypes are being built today; Starship prototype test hops/flights are expected before the end of the year.

From Reddit:
Quote
< This is the first flight of a full-flow staged combustion engine. Not only is the most challenging rocket cycle, they've managed to get it throttling (and gimbaling) so that it can hover a water tower with precision :-O
Well done SpaceX, the reason all us engineers across the world are cyber-stalking you is that you're doing the coolest goddamn engineering we've ever seen.

SpaceX’s Starhopper nails first untethered flight as CEO Elon Musk teases next test
https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-starhopper-nails-first-untethered-flight-elon-musk/

Starhopper test, annotated: 

Historical Grasshopper test: 

« Last Edit: July 27, 2019, 02:18:51 PM by Sigmetnow »
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

oren

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4532
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 909
  • Likes Given: 1305
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #178 on: July 27, 2019, 06:02:43 PM »
Beautiful, though wrong thread...

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 15890
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 233
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #179 on: July 27, 2019, 06:39:25 PM »
Beautiful, though wrong thread...

Simply wanted to catch people up on the most likely colonization program out there, and provide a historical baseline for future developments.  Of course, most details will be in The Rest > SpaceX thread.  Although Musk’s upcoming update on Starship will probably also be relevant here....

Just realized the Starhopper article I posted had no good photos to show scale.  So here’s the hopper in a more quiet time, plus the two sections (so far) of the Starship being constructed in Texas. Click to see the entire photo.
« Last Edit: July 27, 2019, 06:52:21 PM by Sigmetnow »
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Shared Humanity

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3979
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 429
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #180 on: July 27, 2019, 07:57:54 PM »
Maybe Elon could ship a fleet of Tesla's and a boring machine to Mars. Want to get that high speed underground mass transit up and running for the masses that are sure to follow.

kassy

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 859
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 360
  • Likes Given: 377
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #181 on: July 27, 2019, 09:37:09 PM »
There is a really good colonization program in THGTTG.
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5423
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 526
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #182 on: July 27, 2019, 09:53:13 PM »
Why would any sane person even consider moving to a different planet?
How could such an undertaking be looked upon with approval?
Terry

oren

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4532
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 909
  • Likes Given: 1305
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #183 on: July 28, 2019, 12:36:19 AM »
For adventure? To get away from it all? To be first?
Not for me, but I can see how for some it could be desirable.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 15890
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 233
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #184 on: July 28, 2019, 03:31:08 PM »
Let’s see what NASA, Blue Origin, and China, have in the works for getting humans to the moon and Mars.

NASA to Mars:  Maybe in the late 2030’s?
Independent Report Concludes 2033 Human Mars Mission Is Not Feasible [for NASA]
https://www.space.com/human-mars-mission-is-not-feasible.html

——
So, how about NASA’S moon ambitions?
EM-1 is NASA’s uncrewed moon mission;  EM-2 is to be crewed.  The plan, to use an Orion space capsule and the yet-to-be-flown big Space Launch System (SLS) rocket has been sped up due to the current president’s wish to go back to the moon by 2020. (Which is not likely to happen.)  NASA has long envisioned a three-stage approach, using a big rocket to reach a small “Lunar Gateway” space station in a (weird) HALO orbit around the moon, plus a separate lunar lander.

Here’s a long read on NASA’s desperate attempts to get back to the moon using Orion and… a big rocket of some sort.
< tl;dr: Orion is big and fat, for reasons better not remembered
NASA Launch Services Program outlines the alternative launcher review for EM1
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2019/04/nasa-lsp-studies-alternate-orion-options/

Concerning Orion – Amid SLS push, Orion requires Life Support testing
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2019/04/concerning-orion-sls-push-orion-eclss-testing/

NASA looking at SLS certification schedule changes in ‘Drive to EM-1’
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2019/05/nasa-sls-certification-schedule-changes-drive-em-1/

NASA Moving Ahead with Return to the Moon, with or without SLS
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2019/05/nasa-return-moon-with-without-sls/
Considering inflatable habitats or even a single-stage earth-orbit-to-moon-landing craft like the SpaceX Starship.

—-
From 2018
Blue Origin: Jeff Bezos' Space Firm Targets Moon Colony First Step in 2023
https://www.inverse.com/article/46697-blue-origin-jeff-bezos-space-firm-targets-moon-colony-first-step-in-2023

—-
50 years after US moon landing, China is catching up in the space race
Quote
The architect of China's lunar exploration program, Wu Weiren, said in March that the Chinese government would launch a Mars probe in 2020. Beijing is also planning to launch a permanent space station by 2022.
There are even preliminary plans to become the second country in the world to put a person on the surface of the moon, possibly in the 2030s.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/19/asia/china-apollo-us-space-race-intl-hnk/index.html
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

GoSouthYoungins

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1262
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 83
  • Likes Given: 109
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #185 on: July 30, 2019, 05:16:57 PM »
Why would any sane person even consider moving to a different planet?
How could such an undertaking be looked upon with approval?
Terry

There are plenty of people who are competent but not sane. Very useful for stupid endeavors.
big time oops

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5423
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 526
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #186 on: July 30, 2019, 06:11:17 PM »
Why would any sane person even consider moving to a different planet?
How could such an undertaking be looked upon with approval?
Terry

There are plenty of people who are competent but not sane. Very useful for stupid endeavors.


 ;D


Terry

vox_mundi

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1735
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 723
  • Likes Given: 114
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #187 on: July 30, 2019, 09:23:14 PM »
Humans Will Never Colonize Mars
https://gizmodo.com/humans-will-never-colonize-mars-1836316222

The suggestion that humans will soon set up bustling, long-lasting colonies on Mars is something many of us take for granted. What this lofty vision fails to appreciate, however, are the monumental—if not intractable—challenges awaiting colonists who want to permanently live on Mars. Unless we radically adapt our brains and bodies to the harsh Martian environment, the Red Planet will forever remain off limits to humans.

Mars is the closest thing we have to Earth in the entire solar system, and that’s not saying much.

... many people today fail to appreciate how difficult it’ll be to sustain colonies on the Red Planet.
“There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see.” ― Leonardo da Vinci

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 15890
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 233
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #188 on: July 31, 2019, 03:12:39 AM »
... many people today fail to appreciate how difficult it’ll be to sustain colonies on the Red Planet.

We have sustained a small “colony” on the International Space Station for 20 years, and it has NO in situ resources (except solar power).  The surface of Mars is bountiful in comparison.  Mars even has gravity, and a day-length not too different from earth.

No one has said space colonization would be easy!  It will be our biggest challenge, and perhaps our biggest achievement.
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

karl dubhe2

  • New ice
  • Posts: 23
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 4
  • Likes Given: 8
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #189 on: July 31, 2019, 03:41:13 PM »
... many people today fail to appreciate how difficult it’ll be to sustain colonies on the Red Planet.

We have sustained a small “colony” on the International Space Station for 20 years, and it has NO in situ resources (except solar power).  The surface of Mars is bountiful in comparison.  Mars even has gravity, and a day-length not too different from earth.


Ummm, Really the ISS is an outpost, not a colony.   Nobody lives there permanently, nor will someone do something like that for quite a while.   No one has been born up there, nor has anyone died of old age (or violence from warfare).   There's no local foodstuffs up there, nor is there on Mars (that we know of, I suppose it's possible there some kind of divine Manna there.).

The gravity on Mars isn't really enough gravity for our species to live there, not comfortably anyhow.   We'd do better to terraform Venus.   (If we're allowed to speculate wildly, that is.)   If we could develop 'artificial' gravity, I'm thinking we'd do better to stick to space ships rather than a very hostile glorified moon.   :) 

SteveMDFP

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1463
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 196
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #190 on: July 31, 2019, 04:10:24 PM »
... many people today fail to appreciate how difficult it’ll be to sustain colonies on the Red Planet.

We have sustained a small “colony” on the International Space Station for 20 years, and it has NO in situ resources (except solar power).  The surface of Mars is bountiful in comparison.  Mars even has gravity, and a day-length not too different from earth.

No one has said space colonization would be easy!  It will be our biggest challenge, and perhaps our biggest achievement.

In addition to what Karl said, low-earth orbit has several advantages over Mars.  Chiefly, shielding by earth's magnetosphere.  But also, quick transit time from earth--hours instead of months.  Also much cheaper to get to.  Also, no toxic soil full of perchlorates.

Any Mars "colony" should be limited to AI-controlled autonomous robots.  They don't need food, water, or air.  They don't mind radiation.  Perchlorates won't kill them.  They can mine and produce rocket fuel, even grow food to send to a space "colony" if Earth breaks down and can't supply help.

Shared Humanity

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3979
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 429
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #191 on: July 31, 2019, 06:12:34 PM »
... many people today fail to appreciate how difficult it’ll be to sustain colonies on the Red Planet.

We have sustained a small “colony” on the International Space Station for 20 years, and it has NO in situ resources (except solar power).  The surface of Mars is bountiful in comparison.  Mars even has gravity, and a day-length not too different from earth.

No one has said space colonization would be easy!  It will be our biggest challenge, and perhaps our biggest achievement.

And those no in situ resources necessitates regular resupply from earth in order to function.

https://blogs.nasa.gov/spacestation/2018/04/30/what-does-it-take-to-keep-the-station-stocked-with-supplies/

Good luck making toilet paper on Mars...

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 15890
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 233
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #192 on: July 31, 2019, 06:16:32 PM »
Quote
Good luck making toilet paper on Mars...

At least there’s no need for a zero-gravity toilet! ;)
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

DrTskoul

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1451
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 210
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #193 on: July 31, 2019, 06:19:01 PM »
A vacuum toilet with washing jets... (hate those but what can u do)

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 15890
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 233
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #194 on: July 31, 2019, 06:42:39 PM »
A vacuum toilet with washing jets... (hate those but what can u do)

Making more advanced options like this more available, socially acceptable, and less expensive... here on earth... is an excellent example of how efforts for life in space can make life better and more sustainable here.
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

SteveMDFP

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1463
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 196
  • Likes Given: 19
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #195 on: July 31, 2019, 07:43:25 PM »
A vacuum toilet ...
Just make sure you're not sitting there when the vacuum turns on.

DrTskoul

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1451
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 210
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #196 on: July 31, 2019, 07:45:23 PM »
A vacuum toilet ...
Just make sure you're not sitting there when the vacuum turns on.

In space I think they are sitting with vaccum on ...

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5423
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 526
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #197 on: July 31, 2019, 08:31:12 PM »
Recall that an oxygen mask will only keep one alive for ~75 seconds on the surface of Mars. A full body pressure suit, or a pressurized cabin is the only way to evade the Armstrong Limit or Armstrong Line. When water boils at body temperature, you lose consciousness rapidly, you're dead in less than a minute and a half.


A colony at the bottom of the Marianas Trench is pretty far fetched, but compared to permanently colonizing Mars it seems almost reasonable. When Maye and Errol were envisioning vicariously ruling Mars by giving birth to their very own Elon, atmospheric pressure on Mars was assumed to be much higher than it was later found to be. Wernher even envisioned his spacecraft's landing ships flying in a thick Martian atmosphere!


It was decent science fiction - for the time, but probably not the kind of thing to use as a lullaby to implant dreams into the head of a baby.


or is it all just a very unlikely coincidence?
Terry

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 15890
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 500
  • Likes Given: 233
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #198 on: July 31, 2019, 09:51:21 PM »
Quote
2021 - Surface habitats/In Situ Propellant Production
“Initially, [we’ll use] glass panes with carbon fiber frames to build geodesic domes on the surface [of Mars], plus a lot of miner/tunnelling droids. With the latter, you can build out a huge amount of pressurized space for industrial operations and leave the glass domes for green living space.”
- Elon Musk
Boring Company tunnels...?

Quote
The whole closed-cycle idea may be closer than you would think. The ISS has effectively been a nearly two decade long experiment in making resources last as long as possible. They have effective air and water recycling to say the least.
- Reddit comment

New article/discussion in Reddit on the SpaceX timeline revealed so far.
https://www.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/ck91az/starship_plan_coming_together/

The Russian Progress spacecraft that launched and docked to the ISS this morning (!) has ensured Station food supplies (the shortest item on the consumables list) to February 2020.  NASA has two decades of experience managing supplies in space.  Starship has the cargo capacity of an Airbus A380 (so, orders of magnitude larger than current supply ships); SpaceX is already making two of them, and Musk has mentioned making hundreds of Raptor engines a year. 

Progress MS-12 docks with ISS to restock Station supplies through early-2020
https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2019/07/progress-ms-12-restock-station-through-early-2020/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Tom_Mazanec

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1705
    • View Profile
    • Planet Mazanec
  • Liked: 392
  • Likes Given: 67
Re: Space colonization
« Reply #199 on: August 01, 2019, 02:25:11 PM »
Will Antarctica be colonizable with AGW?
SHARKS (CROSSED OUT) MONGEESE (SIC) WITH FRICKIN LASER BEAMS ATTACHED TO THEIR HEADS