Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
NASA - 1968 Science Fiction is Today’s Reality
nasa.gov — The futuristic epic 2001: A Space Odyssey influenced many to fall in love with the limitless possibilities of space exploration. The movie sparked imaginations and provided a realistic preview of what our future in space might look like.
SirPopper- 114 diggs
- digg it
- AussieCynic, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2very cool....
I guess its only a matter time when technology catches up with our imagination
just brillant - roosevans, on 05/09/2008, -2/+2I love science and scientific achievements but with all the pressing problems we have on "Mother Earth", I think mankind should take a "moratorium" on space exploration until after we have adapted to global warming and eliminated food and water shortages.
- SirPopper, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2I am sad too what happens to Mother Earth, but as child I have felt, that we will leave the planet.
A few moths ago I have read an article.
It was about Steven Hawking and his first weightlessness trip.
After he came back to mother earth he said, that the human being destroy the earth and he will help, that we can leave the planet.
I repeat myself, but the best example of Science Fiction became reality is "Around the World in Eighty Days" (written in 1873) by Jules Verne
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jules_Verne
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thum ... - starmanjones, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2>I love science and scientific achievements but with all the
>pressing problems we have on "Mother Earth", I think mankind
>should take a "moratorium" on space exploration until after we
>have adapted to global warming and eliminated food and water
>shortages.
this is something you can prove to yourself but probably won't. technology gained from
the space program is essential for any solutions to mother earths problems. many of the
measurements that tell us things are going wrong were from orbit. the technology to solve
it will likely be created in the space program. it probably already exists. small
fuel cells... thats just in the short run.
in the long run, i'm talking a couple hundred years, we could easily find ourselves in a
position where we can't afford to get off the planet. we will die a slow death fighting over
deminishing resources. along the way... mother earth is still not cared for or fixed.
here's the bet. you are gambling that we might develope, afford and implement some new
technologies that make us polite citizens of earth. that hasn't happened. most humans
are not as lucky as you and living in the first world. we use almost all of everything.
maybe you might consider lowering your standard of living to something closer to the third
world but most won't. i understand what you are saying but its never happened. you can't
describe to me exactly what could be done. how it could be implemented. how it helps
humans and mother earth.
i could however describe to you how we can save mankind from ourselves, save earth... and
raise the standard of living of all humans to first world standards or above. thats because
"my"... "our"... solution is an engineering problem. yours is a social problem.
there are the equivalent of many earths and limitless energy in space for the gathering.
100 miles up.
i would say to you- i know you mean well. your heart is in the right place. but your
prescription is a death sentence for earth and humans. its a bet with everything riding
on technologies we don't have and social cures we've never seen work before.
you might think that our efforts and the reeally, really, small amount of money we spend
is a waste and should be spent else where but our plan needs no new technologies to
complete. i can be demonstrated exactly how we can solve all the problems. there is
no gamble. its a sure thing. and space activists are the ultimate enviromentalists. the
earth is too precious to destroy with our clumbsy ways. lets live off the dead stuff. lets
us the energy from the sun.
we know how to do this. bet on sure thing. as a bonus we'll be able to avert
that asteroid that you couldn't do anything about.- SirPopper, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2Great reply I appreciate it and vote you up!
- RogerStrong, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2By the same logic, we should have had a moratorium on developing electricity in the 1880s until we eliminated food and water shortages. And a moratorium on aviation in the 1920s.
Of course, we'd still have food and water shortages, and they'd be worse. And we wouldn't have electricity, electronics, all the medical advances etc. made possible by electronics, and we would't have aviation.
America's human space flight programs cost around $7 billion a year.
In 2006, according to the USDA, Americans spent more than $154 Billion on alcohol. Video Games, nearly $18 Billion. Gambling,$300 Billion. Bottled Water, $15 Billion. Pets, $41 Billion
There's more effective, more deserving things ot have a moratorium on.
- SirPopper, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2I am sad too what happens to Mother Earth, but as child I have felt, that we will leave the planet.
- BadAstronomer, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2Actually, I found this article to be ironic; comparing NASA now to what 2001 predicted only shows where we *aren't*. I wrote about this incidentally, on my blog: http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2008/05/08/when ...
- wonderchemist, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1We're not there until we have homicidal computers.
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by