Robotic vs manned exploration
Posted: Fri Dec 15, 2006 12:55 am
![Arrow :arrow:](./images/smilies/icon_arrow.gif)
APOD and General Astronomy Discussion Forum
https://asterisk.apod.com/
My point was that the resources could be better used here to solve many of the problems you yourself fear…we just have a different approach to these problems.Orca wrote:Martin, if you think that trying to achieve sustainability on the only planet that isn't horribly destructive to life as we know it constitutes "ignorance," well, I am just not sure what to tell you.
Many threats to our future generations are due to our behavior and choices right now. For instance, human-induced climate change is a threat to future generations. I would argue that reducing our ecological footprint should be one of our first priorities. The point being, a relatively small amount of prevention now can make a big difference for future generations.Martin wrote: Are you under the impression that our government doesn't waste money on a myriad of things less important than the continuance of our species?
Do you have any children? If you do or if you are going to have children, hell even if you won't have children; are you capable of realizing that there exist a vast number of people on this planet that desire a life that our children can live?
Hundreds of billions…perhaps trillions…of dollars spent on getting a couple of people to Mars…as opposed to using that money to develop alternative fuels, work on making healthcare more affordable, decreasing the cost of education and making it more readily available, ect. Yes, at this point in time, a manned mission would be a wasted expenditure of resources.Martin wrote: I don't know what kind of Disney dream trip your imagining for a crew going to Mars but I get the impression that you think it will be a wonderful and joyful trip full of cartoon characters and pictures of the crew sitting at the pool bar? A wasted expenditure of resources, eh? However, many would argue that currently entertainment is the #1 motivator. You may be on to something here Orca.
I don’t know what you mean by this statement. If it’s another rude joke, you have no need to explain further.Martin wrote: Don't worry Orca, I will still somehow respect you in the morning
Thank you for clarifying! 8)Martin wrote:Please do not be insulted by my sarcasm Orca. I try to mix in a little "light-hearted" humor with my posts. It's nothing personal I just enjoy a good debate.
I agree that in the long run, manned missions are the goal. But I think that every robotic mission prepares us for that eventual goal. As BMA0NE pointed out, Each mission gives us data with which we can overcome the...'astronomical'...heh...obstacles to human expansion into space.Martin wrote: If we are to continue down this path of robotics it will delay/stop what we as a species must accomplish.
Agreed. New types of propulsion, artificial gravity...as you said from acceleration or rotation, and shielding from radiation are among the many challenges that lie ahead. Using robotics we develop and test these new technologies before we risk a crew.BMAONE23 wrote:We will need to be able to travel without the use of chemical propellants to have any hope of potential colonization of other worlds. Traveling in constant ZERO G is detrimental.