Re: The Space Station

[Peter Horton]

Much more efficient for what?  Mechanical surrogates can't LIVE for me.  If we don't get our genepool off this dirtclod then eventually, we will become extinct.  Space is the only hope for continued survival of a species.   Forget short term economic benefits.  I am talking about the long term survival of our species.  How do you put a cost on that?   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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2000 7:12 PM Subject: Re: The Space Station In a message dated 11/1/00 10:33:41 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 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. There is a very good case to made for us going out their with mechanical surrogates. Much more efficient. Much more likely to yield real economic benefits. Sending humans along is a huge waste if for no other reason than you have to bring them back.