The main benefit for going OUT THERE is obvious. The continued survival of
our species. To put it simply, if you put all of your eggs in one basket
(the Earth) all it takes is one rock (a medium sized asteroid) to destroy
all your eggs (us). I for one kind of like the fact that humanity exists.
I would like us to continue existing. We must go OUT THERE. It is our
manifest destiny, as much as some people hate that phrase.
Peter Horton
DJ DDX KXUA 88.3
www.kxua883.com every Friday night from 10 to Midnight central
members.tripod.com/djddx/djddx
----- Original Message -----
From: Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2000 6:07 PM
Subject: RE: The Space Station
> "Crystall, A.L." wrote:
> >Andrea wrote:
> >>I'd like to think that we can use this experience, of living in >>space
> >>for extended periods, to move on to better things; a return to the Moon,
> >>and someone on Mars. I'm twenty-four, and nobody in >>my lifetime has
> >>gone beyond Earth orbit. I find that unutterably >>sad. Maybe,
hopefully,
> >>this is the start of something.
>
> Andrea, is there any reason for this besides the romantic factor. I think
> that going to the moon and mars is an exciting idea, and has great
emotional
> value. But, from a scientific standpoint, I cannot see much benefit in
> manned missions. In short, my only reasons for favoring the missions are
> their entertainment value for me.
>
> >
> >There are teams out there developing commercial reuseable launch
>vehicles
> >that will probably be ready before NASA's efforts. And how >long will it
be
> > before some of those multinations decides to >establish, say, a Mars
> >base.
>
> I'd guess 500 years. What commercial value can a mars base have?
>
>
>
> >They can afford it, and it would probably pay itself off in pure
> > >scientific research before long.
>
> Real scientific research is rarely done by companies now. In my field,
> practically all the big oil companies that use to fund research
> have reduced their efforts to a small fraction of what they use to be.
Drug
> companies do R&D, but with definite goals in mind. Its not really pure
> research.
>
> >Not to mention the shere PR value!
>
> But what company will shell out the cost for the PR value. What would the
> cost be, 100 billion? That's a big investment in PR to make back.
>
> >
> >As much as I hate the idea of the big companies cashing in on space, >I
> >think they will, and sooner rather than later!
>
>
> Communications has been profitable from close to the beginning. Is
anything
> else in space profitable if you factor in the whole cost of the
satellites?
>
>
> Dan'm Traeki Ring of Crystallized Knowledge.
> Known for calculating, but not known for shutting up
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
>
> Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
> http://profiles.msn.com.
>
>
