Space Shuttle Launch from a Plane

[MMATycoon]

[Krimzn]

Man, that is really something. Hopefully one day, space travel will become a normal thing. I'd like to see what else is out there. Great post. +1

[Guest]

That's awesome. Must have been shitty for the people sitting on the left side of that plane.

 

 

Man, that is really something. Hopefully one day, space travel will become a normal thing. I'd like to see what else is out there. Great post. +1

Who knows, with the rising oil prices it's only a matter of time.

[Guest]

That's awesome. Must have been shitty for the people sitting on the left side of that plane.

 

 

 

Who knows, with the rising oil prices it's only a matter of time.

 

 

yea, at the current rate it costs $450 MILLION bucks to get the fucking thing in the air

 

 

space is cool and all, but we have problems here at mission control that need our attention before we try chasing our dreams through the hallows of space.

[GripGambler]

Sweet video.

 

 

Space travel is the only possibility of saving the human race in any number of doomsday scenarios. I believe it to be far more important than any issues we may have at home.

[Guest]

Sweet video.

 

 

Space travel is the only possibility of saving the human race in any number of doomsday scenarios. I believe it to be far more important than any issues we may have at home.

 

 

homelessness

starvation

public education is slipping and getting worse

 

those 3 things alone are more worthy than shooting people into space. Do you honestly think that even the population of the US can fit on ships and launch into space? You read too many sci-fi novels if you do. The only people that will be in space in your doomsday will all be billionaires.

[MMATycoon]

You do have a very black and white outlook on life, DIDM. It's all about getting the right balance.

 

Space travel is damn expensive but it's one of the most important things we do, when it comes to advancing the human race. Just the existence of satellites has been incredibly benefitial in terms of furthering education, information, globalisation, the spread of democracy etc. It has been and will continue to be massively important.

 

 

 

edit - by the way, I came across this vid because Dr Karl was on the plane (it might be his vid, I'm not sure). Check out the podcasts, they're good.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/drkarl

http://www.abc.net.au/science/k2/stn/podcast.htm

[PBR]

its a conspiracy theory -- they were never launched into space -- its a fake video

 

 

 

 

oh wait wrong thread -

[Guest]

You do have a very black and white outlook on life, DIDM. It's all about getting the right balance.

 

Space travel is damn expensive but it's one of the most important things we do, when it comes to advancing the human race. Just the existence of satellites has been incredibly benefitial in terms of furthering education, information, globalisation, the spread of democracy etc. It has been and will continue to be massively important.

 

 

yes in some things I do

 

 

I live in a city where most every corner you go by has someone asking for money. NASA has almost been shut down many times because it just bleeds money. All I know is since at least the US is run like a business then not throwing away money should be of utmost importance. maybe there needs to be a world space program where every country takes part and pays for it, but then that would just be retarded.

 

I just don't see the need to spend countless dollars we could spend on helping the people of earth. Imagine some point in the future an advanced race comes to earth to find it in rambles. The one thing the do find is remnants of our space program and they realize that we wasted our time chasing the stars and just let where we were go to shit.

 

feed the hungry, clothe the cold and naked, shelter the homeless. if you do this who knows what could happen. maybe one of them is the next Einstein

[MMATycoon]

Homeless -------|------- Space Program

 

It seems like you're viewing those two things like a Tycoon World Slider but really they have nothing to do with each other.

 

For me, there will always be a certain amount of homelessness. If you spend vast amounts of money on housing the homeless, you're managing the problem instead of trying to solve it. There will always be more homeless people coming along because of unfortunate circumstances. If it's particularly bad in your area, that's more than likely a local government issue. We need to spend an appropriate amount of money on issues like that and look after them as best we can.

 

On the other hand if you spend money on scientific advancement then you have the potential to eradicate problems, often in a way which is financially viable, so istead of running out of money you start making it. Again you can use satellites as an example of that. Their existence must be responsible for billions and billions of dollars of revenue flying about all over the place. Plenty of that will trickle down into research and development, which technically advances our species.

 

The thing to remember is that everything is interlinked. Stuff from the space program helps stuff on earth. Just a whackier example. The space program were some of the first people to look at creating artificial meat (i.e. growing it in a lab). If we carried on as a species just breeding and surviving, maintaining what we have as you would suggest, we'd run low on food pretty soon because of the crazy rate that the world population is increasing. We need the most complex scienctific research to help us grow more food through artificial food or GM food, to produce more power in more advanced ways, to conserve water, to dispose of more waste... All that is at the cutting edge of scientific invention and that's the sort of thing we do on the space program or in the Large Hadron Collider.

 

I mention that as well because people say that's a waste of money in the same way they say it about the space program but it costs the same to run as one US aircraft carrier and what they're doing could revolutionise everything.

 

They're looking understand mass. What causes something to have mass and what it means. If we get a grasp of mass and potentially understand how to overcome mass, that will lead to unfathomable changes in how we produce power, how we travel... just how we live in every way. It'd mean you could theoretically travel at near the speed of light, or power your house off some magical gizmo the size of a penny. I mean, look at what you're reading this on. This box of light didn't come about because people prioritised keeping the status quo, it came about because people were adventureous and ambitious and whilst the computer is used more for looking at pictures of boobies and telling each other what assholes we all are than anything else, that 20 or 30% that it's used for productive matters has had a greater positive impact than anything else in the history of mankind.

 

Anyway, I'm digressing... the point is that if you looked to maintain life as it is now, we'd be fucked because human beings are muliplying like crazy. So unless you want 10 times more homeless and the chance of that apocalypse you're talking about, then we need to keep doing that crazy science stuff that you and me can't possibly understand but will benefit massively from for the rest of our lives.

[PBR]

well you can give the homeless a brand new home but how are they gonna keep it -- maintain it -- they for the most part cant and wont then back bailing and spending more for new programs ----- you want to know the worlds main problem and issue --- OVER POPULATION --- millions and millions over population - no jobs no money no food -- if we woke up with 2 billion less people most world issues would be fixed -- lmao -- as stupid as i made it sound it is true to a point

[Guest]

wow, holy shit

 

so in order to end homelessness you need to give everyone a house? That is just stupid thinking. When the agencies, public and private, keep running out of money they can't help. Advocacy groups are bankrupt, all a lot of people need is a chance, a simple chance. There will always be homelessness, but it doesn't need to be widespread. Imagine what $450 million dollars looks like in bagged lunches and cheap pairs of shoes. When you compare maybe 50-100 million people eating and having a new pair of shoes compared to a few people flying into space to "learn" new things, it really makes no sense.

 

there are also new low income housing projects that look nice and don't make poor people feel like they are in prison. $450 million would build a lot of those types of housing units. and that is just 1 shuttle getting off the ground, not to mention all the training and then the whole trip into space.

[CardiffWanderer]

Probably worth pointing out the difference here between the UK and USA when it comes to homelessness (using the latest figures I could). UK has an overall population 62 million with around 380,000-500,000 considered homeless however only 3-5% of these are on the street and this number could be lower as of the next report.

 

USA has a population of 310 million with around 3.5 million considered homeless, proportionally not to dissimilar a figure. However only around half are temporarily homed in the USA which is a big difference. Off point but interesting especially as Britain is 31 times smaller and this is what I believe leads on to this.

 

Progression is needed to help with population pressure and space and colonization is one of the few options left. Other alternatives are the Chinese one child policy or world war 3.Space though expensive may well be a good choice

[GripGambler]

I never said anything about saving an entire country.. I said saving the human race. This doesn't have to be a giant population.

 

 

Also, accommodation isn't the answer to homelessness and starvation, it hasn't worked in the past and won't work in the future. If you want to control those you have to do it at the source. Find a way to keep the low income baby factories to a minimum. We can't spend all government income on charity work, and lower class populations are multiplying the fastest (birth rates, not class reduction) spreading those dollars far too thin. I'd prefer finding a way off this rock permanently than spending tax dollars on accommodating a few people who have the possibility of detracting from the problem eventually, and many people who add to it and and take advantage of it, and couldn't care less.

[Guest]

Probably worth pointing out the difference here between the UK and USA when it comes to homelessness (using the latest figures I could). UK has an overall population 62 million with around 380,000-500,000 considered homeless however only 3-5% of these are on the street and this number could be lower as of the next report.

 

USA has a population of 310 million with around 3.5 million considered homeless, proportionally not to dissimilar a figure. However only around half are temporarily homed in the USA which is a big difference. Off point but interesting especially as Britain is 31 times smaller and this is what I believe leads on to this.

 

Progression is needed to help with population pressure and space and colonization is one of the few options left. Other alternatives are the Chinese one child policy or world war 3.Space though expensive may well be a good choice

 

 

 

seriously, you can try and stop comparing most anything when it comes to England and the US. I don't want to hear about the ruffians tipping over dustbins.

 

The homelessness epidemic in the US is alarming. Go to any place that is sunny for most of the year and you will find you have to step over them on the sidewalk. Hell in Portland it rains enough that I wouldn't want to stay here without a house, but there are thousands of homeless here. We have a shit ass employment rate, there isn't a lot of chances left for some people. Are they supposed to just die because life sucks right now? Have you jumped a train lately? That is about as safe as playing Russian roulette.

 

 

I'm sorry, I just really feel for a lot of homeless folks. Sure there are the ones who are pieces of shit, but the vast majority these days are honest good people. If you don't realize this you need to stop and look around. Maybe talk to some of these people.

 

no matter how you were brought up, random acts of kindness mean the same thing. smiling at someone who no one else even looks at can make a day.

[CardiffWanderer]

Comparisons, whether favourable or not are the way to look at a problem.

 

You may not want to hear comparisons but I will give you one anyway as it scales particularly well. Portland has unemployment at 10% according to figures from March 2011, below the 11% here in Cardiff. The cities scale amazingly well as Portland as a central populous of 600,000 and overall on of 2.2 million and Cardiff 300,000 and 1.1 million. Land mass is a little different, Portland is 3 times the size of Cardiff. Investment in homeless support is also proportional.

 

Homelessness is also comparable with Portland having 17000 homeless and 20000 in temporary accommodation, while Cardiff numbers 18500 in temporary accommodation (of which I am one) and a big increase of homeless people to 452. Significantly more than 2008 numbers where there were 71.

 

On the subject of rain, Portland has a 950mm a year and Cardiff has 11000mm.

 

What this amounts to is priorities, Portland has invested serious money in keeping some of its manufacturing business, something that Cardiff has not which is increasing pressure on many of the outlying regions with unemployment expected to explode. Something that many here would want and have used other cities in the US as examples to get their points across.

 

We all have our own white elephants with the UK losing a net budget of 15 billion dollars running the EU each year and then giving then handing those already supported for the last 30 years more multi billion packages to get out of fiscal trouble as they fail at running a country. Makes NASA look like a bargain

[Guest]

Comparisons, whether favourable or not are the way to look at a problem.

 

You may not want to hear comparisons but I will give you one anyway as it scales particularly well. Portland has unemployment at 10% according to figures from March 2011, below the 11% here in Cardiff. The cities scale amazingly well as Portland as a central populous of 600,000 and overall on of 2.2 million and Cardiff 300,000 and 1.1 million. Land mass is a little different, Portland is 3 times the size of Cardiff. Investment in homeless support is also proportional.

 

Homelessness is also comparable with Portland having 17000 homeless and 20000 in temporary accommodation, while Cardiff numbers 18500 in temporary accommodation (of which I am one) and a big increase of homeless people to 452. Significantly more than 2008 numbers where there were 71.

 

On the subject of rain, Portland has a 950mm a year and Cardiff has 11000mm.

 

What this amounts to is priorities, Portland has invested serious money in keeping some of its manufacturing business, something that Cardiff has not which is increasing pressure on many of the outlying regions with unemployment expected to explode. Something that many here would want and have used other cities in the US as examples to get their points across.

 

We all have our own white elephants with the UK losing a net budget of 15 billion dollars running the EU each year and then giving then handing those already supported for the last 30 years more multi billion packages to get out of fiscal trouble as they fail at running a country. Makes NASA look like a bargain

 

 

 

you want to know what is sickening? Not only Portland, but most all of Oregon does this. If you are a big company, like Nike or hell the power company, then you pay No taxes. The person making minimum wage pays more in taxes each year than Nike does. We bribe them to stay here by basically letting them operate for free, so that they will provide some jobs.

[Guest]

I'm with DIDM for the most part. I have no idea what life would be like without satelites, but for most part the cost/usefulness ratio of their projects doesn't hold up. The great majority of NASA's useful discoveries and inventions had little to do with their objective. Imagine what the world would look like if all the NASA money went to stimulating the economy, healthcare, housing and so on. What if all the great minds at NASA would be focused on earthly problems instead of floating around in space all the time. Or look at India, more than five million children in India die each year of malnutrition, that's half of the world's total. Half of the people in India live under the poverty line of $1.3/day, don't have access to sanitation, clean water, waste disposement and so on, but thank God their country is sending rockets into space. I know that some of you are going to accuse me of missing the bigger picture, but I believe it's the other way around.

 

I also find it a bit funny when people talk about space colonisation as if it's a real option. Obviously there's zero chance of human survival when earth dies.

[GripGambler]

Err space colonization is a very real possibility, just not with current technology. That's why R&D is important.

[Guest]

I'm with DIDM for the most part. I have no idea what life would be like without satelites, but for most part the cost/usefulness ratio of their projects doesn't hold up. The great majority of NASA's useful discoveries and inventions had little to do with their objective. Imagine what the world would look like if all the NASA money went to stimulating the economy, healthcare, housing and so on. What if all the great minds at NASA would be focused on earthly problems instead of floating around in space all the time. Or look at India, more than five million children in India die each year of malnutrition, that's half of the world's total. Half of the people in India live under the poverty line of $1.3/day, don't have access to sanitation, clean water, waste disposement and so on, but thank God their country is sending rockets into space. I know that some of you are going to accuse me of missing the bigger picture, but I believe it's the other way around.

 

I also find it a bit funny when people talk about space colonisation as if it's a real option. Obviously there's zero chance of human survival when earth dies.

 

 

it is strange steeve, but about once a year we agree on something, heh

 

 

it's just like say, the war machine. if we took our money and focused on life instead of death and space then who the hell knows what we can actually do? When you look at what has and is being spent, and what good it has done, it is really not funny. If you don't think there is a value to human life than I feel sad for you. I would rather see hungry people fed than see a rocket shot into space. Once we have our problems figured out, then we can go police the universe.

[Guest]

Err space colonization is a very real possibility, just not with current technology. That's why R&D is important.

 

 

when exactly? maybe in 1000 years, but seriously not anytime soon. like I said, fix the problems where you live before you go exploring other places. It seems you are all for destroying this planet and living in a space station. Can you imagine 6 Billion people in spaceships? yea, we don't have the money to feed the poor, but we can somehow build enough shuttles to launch most of the world's population into space?

 

 

How about we explore the ocean, that is actually on earth, and still unexplored, fuck maybe we can live under water!!!!

[Guest]

Err space colonization is a very real possibility, just not with current technology. That's why R&D is important.

Indeed, not with current technology and neither is there any reason to believe that it'll be possible with future technology. You could just as well have said "divine intervention is the only possibility of saving the human race in any number of doomsday scenarios."

[Guest]

cool vid.

 

And Interesting discusson following.

 

My personal belief is that we need to space program money on exploring The oceans and Developing " Stations" down there.

 

The reality of a population of people actually living and exploreing, settling, exisiting in Space for extended perionds of times is 100+ yrs away.

 

If a catastrophe should ever happen on earth. yes space would be the safest place to be. As one of the fellowers posters said already.

 

Only VIP's and Billionaire's will be on that shuttle.

 

there are underwater hotels as we speak, that were relatively undamage by hurricanes passing thru. Just my opinnion.

 

Good thread

[MMATycoon]

I have no idea what life would be like without satellites

Why not think about it for a bit? It's crazy how far back you have to set yourself.

 

I think you guys are a bit too keen to see immediate, direct benefits from things, whereas the greatest developments come from long-term thinking or just general theoretical thinking without a specific purpose.

[Guest]

a shuttle can probably hold 10 people with minimal supplies as long as there is no equipment for anything.

 

that costs 450 million to get off the ground, just imagine what a shuttle that holds 100,000K people would cost to get off the ground. People living in space is a hoax as of right now