BrainMeta'   Connectomics'  

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> big budget blow to nasa
Trip like I do
post Jan 30, 2010, 06:20 PM
Post #1


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5156
Joined: Aug 11, 2004
From: Earth^2
Member No.: 3202



kaku
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Trip like I do
post Jan 31, 2010, 04:51 PM
Post #2


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5156
Joined: Aug 11, 2004
From: Earth^2
Member No.: 3202



life on the moon

let's not evoke unpleasant memories of european settlers by saying that the moon has been colonized.... instead we could refer to 'habitation bases'

What would life look like on the lunar surface.... will it be governed by a democratic political system?

as the human species has yet to set up home on another world.... the sheer logistics of such a move are far from understood and no one really knows if we could afford it anyway! Well, we now know that it will not be financially supported by the american government

nasa does, however, intend to boost its use of nuclear power in crafts designed to fly to hard to reach parts of the solar system, and to also power robotic exploration (aviation weekly)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rick
post Jan 31, 2010, 05:22 PM
Post #3


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5916
Joined: Jul 23, 2004
From: Sunny Southern California
Member No.: 3068



A hundred billion for the ISS in 20 years. We spend that much in Iraq every year. We could be to Mars by now if we hadn't invaded Iraq to the tune of a trillion bucks.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Trip like I do
post Jan 31, 2010, 05:45 PM
Post #4


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5156
Joined: Aug 11, 2004
From: Earth^2
Member No.: 3202



is it morally justifiable to expend a large share of global financial and technical resources to ensure the genetic survival of a few human specimens and their descendants?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
maximus242
post Jan 31, 2010, 08:44 PM
Post #5


God
******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1755
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Member No.: 4768



There is no good or evil, no right or wrong, things just are. Whatever they may be. The universe is the universe, neither good nor evil, it just simply is what it is.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rick
post Feb 01, 2010, 08:31 AM
Post #6


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5916
Joined: Jul 23, 2004
From: Sunny Southern California
Member No.: 3068



Wrong. There is an ethics. Humans can judge right and wrong. Trip asks an ethics question.

It's not clear what Trip is asking. Are you saying that a few will be saved at the expense of all the others who will not be saved? That would clearly be wrong unless it was possible to save only a few as in the case of imminent planetary destruction.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Trip like I do
post Feb 01, 2010, 10:58 AM
Post #7


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5156
Joined: Aug 11, 2004
From: Earth^2
Member No.: 3202



QUOTE(Rick @ Feb 01, 2010, 11:31 AM) *


It's not clear what Trip is asking. (yes it is!)

Are you saying that a few will be saved at the expense of all the others who will not be saved? That would clearly be wrong unless it was possible to save only a few as in the case of imminent planetary destruction.

yes, and agreed.... but do you seriously think that humanity will simply ever acquire the ability to transplant human for human every member of the species to another sustainable and livable platform. The more likely scenario is that a select number of human creatures will be given the opportunity to 'habitate' and multiply while the rest of the species succumbs to whatever ending the future has in store for the planet earth
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rick
post Feb 01, 2010, 03:03 PM
Post #8


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5916
Joined: Jul 23, 2004
From: Sunny Southern California
Member No.: 3068



The Repugligan answer would be that salvation is only for those who can buy the stairway to heaven.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Trip like I do
post Feb 01, 2010, 03:44 PM
Post #9


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5156
Joined: Aug 11, 2004
From: Earth^2
Member No.: 3202



Obama budget would cut moon exploration program
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Trip like I do
post Feb 01, 2010, 03:51 PM
Post #10


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5156
Joined: Aug 11, 2004
From: Earth^2
Member No.: 3202



250 million lost in space
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
maximus242
post Feb 01, 2010, 09:46 PM
Post #11


God
******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1755
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Member No.: 4768



QUOTE(Rick @ Feb 01, 2010, 09:31 AM) *

Wrong. There is an ethics. Humans can judge right and wrong. Trip asks an ethics question.

It's not clear what Trip is asking. Are you saying that a few will be saved at the expense of all the others who will not be saved? That would clearly be wrong unless it was possible to save only a few as in the case of imminent planetary destruction.


Ethics is a mental construct, it does not exist in external reality, you cannot trip over a hunk of ethics on a sidewalk.

What is right to one is wrong to another. Who decides what is right and wrong?

Does the good of the many always outweight the good of the few or the one? As a scientist you know perfectly well this world works based off of survival of the fittest. It is not about saving every person, that is the ideal, but it is not the reality. This is life. Nature weighs and measures the strongest from the weakest, allowing the strongest to survive. It is how our race came into existence. It is the source of our very origins. Survival of the fittest.

There is no ethics to nature, it simply allows the strong to survive and the weak perish. It is the nature of things. Neither good nor bad, it is what it is. Whoever is succeeds at surviving, survives, whoever fails, dies. That is the way of the world.

Im not saying its the nicest way, just that is the way life and death work. You survive and live or you dont and die. Thats all there is to it. For one to live another must die. For the deer to live the plant leaves must die. For the plant to live the soil and water must "die". For us to live many other things die. Its just nature, a cycle of life and death.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Trip like I do
post Feb 01, 2010, 09:49 PM
Post #12


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5156
Joined: Aug 11, 2004
From: Earth^2
Member No.: 3202



"cannot trip over a hunk of ethics" .... that's a good 1.... but couldn't you!?


The answer, in this case, would seem to be.... Obama
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
maximus242
post Feb 01, 2010, 10:02 PM
Post #13


God
******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 1755
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Member No.: 4768



Lol I admire Obama and I do believe strongly in Ethics, however I dont think that it means distorting the vision of the way the world and life itself works.

We are not gods, nature allows us to live because we are the strongest. Or at least among the strongest. Its the reason half of us are not running away from saber toothed tigers right now.

We were stronger, the tigers died, we survived. Its nature. If some of us survive and others die, its natural selection. Nature is a weighing machine, it does not have ethics. So trying to impose ethics onto nature to me is kind of funny.

And who decides what is right and wrong? Not that I dont agree on many points but really, who decides? And how do you know they are right? And how do you know that?

We are alive because we are stronger, we enjoy the benefits we do because of it. If some of us survive planetary destruction it will be because they are stronger. Whether mind or body or strategy for survival. Its about who can stay alive, thats really the game we play in life. Survival and replication. Natures game. The game of life.

If we can save everyone, then of course save everyone. However expecting that human beings will act contrary to the survival instincts which has allowed this race to thrive for thousands of years is unrealistic.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Trip like I do
post Feb 01, 2010, 10:46 PM
Post #14


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5156
Joined: Aug 11, 2004
From: Earth^2
Member No.: 3202



Well, thankfully I am very fit and extremely strong as well as mentally agile.... and especially thankful that I am not currently employed by NASA because a lot of them jobs are about to become extinct!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rick
post Feb 02, 2010, 12:48 PM
Post #15


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5916
Joined: Jul 23, 2004
From: Sunny Southern California
Member No.: 3068



You wouldn't trip over a mathematics on the sidewalk, but you can have right or wrong answers to mathematical questions. Same with ethics.

To say that there is no ethics is to say that you could never be blamed for any wrong behavior. If someone harmed you out of malice, would you blame him? Forgiveness is not automatic.

Suppose the stronger person takes your wallet using a gun. Is that just the way it is? Shrug it off and go on your way? Should you prosecute him to get him off the street to protect others from robbery if not for revenge? Maybe deter others from taking up a life of crime?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Trip like I do
post Feb 02, 2010, 02:49 PM
Post #16


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5156
Joined: Aug 11, 2004
From: Earth^2
Member No.: 3202



In place of Constellation, the Obama administration calls for "a bold new course for space exploration and scientific research" that will extend operation of the International Space Station (ISS) to at least 2020 and rely on commercial launch services to ferry astronauts to the station. According to NASA administrator Charles Bolden, NASA will "invest in critical and transformative technologies [that] will enable our path beyond low Earth orbit through development of new launch and space transportation technologies, nimble construction capabilities on orbit."

To encourage those initiatives, the administration's proposed budget gives NASA an extra $6bn over the next five years. For FY 2011, which starts on 1 October 2010, the proposal provides $11bn for NASA's research budget an increase of 18.3% over the FY 2010 figure. Obama's request calls for NASA's budget to increase to $19bn for FY 2011 and calls for future increases that will take the agency's budget to $21bn in 2015.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Rick
post Feb 02, 2010, 04:04 PM
Post #17


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5916
Joined: Jul 23, 2004
From: Sunny Southern California
Member No.: 3068



70 billion a year for Afghanistan! We should take all that money too and we would have 90 billion a year for space exploration.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Trip like I do
post Feb 02, 2010, 06:24 PM
Post #18


Supreme God
*******

Group: Basic Member
Posts: 5156
Joined: Aug 11, 2004
From: Earth^2
Member No.: 3202



nasa chief takes heat for not shooting for the moon

Officials also increased the budget by $6 billion to begin developing technologies for space exploration, to expand the International Space Station and for other science programs.

"When you have a program that's going to cost a fortune to resurrect ... you pick a new course," Bolden said in a news conference Tuesday at the National Press Club. "And that's what we've done."

and here's the key....

Bolden, a former astronaut and retired Marine Corps major general, highlighted seven companies Tuesday that will receive a combined $50 million in funding to develop private spacecraft and components.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 29th April 2017 - 07:38 AM


Home     |     About     |    Research     |    Forum     |    Feedback  


Copyright BrainMeta. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use  |  Last Modified Tue Jan 17 2006 12:39 am

Consciousness Expansion · Brain Mapping · Neural Circuits · Connectomics  ·  Neuroscience Forum  ·  Brain Maps Blog
 · Connectomics · Connectomics  ·  shawn mikula  ·  articles