First Chuck, by leaving the “>” symbol at the head of a new post, some of your ideas are not showing up on the web interface…a method many of us use to access the group. I advise that when you reply to posts to assure that your reply does not start out with the “>”
Now some more responses to your rather tenacious posting style: Yes, there are ‘countermeasures’ to what I’ve presented. (In fact, there is an argument for the reverse of almost any argument, no?) However, again, what you asked me to do was :” “ …It is also known based on today's science that 'we' can't make it in outer space nor on most other planets. “ - OM “Can you provide some supporting information for this statement?... “ – Chuck I provided “some supporting information for” the statement. You didn’t ask to provide irrefutable information and, as I suggest, about any claim can be refuted. As interesting as a back and forth … refuting everything someone else has said can be, I’m not interested in such a fundamentalist skeptic’s approach…FYI. You added that your ‘countermeasures’ “are within our technological capability. Well, if you mean that we are capable of doing things but haven’t yet done them, then I stand by my perhaps not very well stated view that “based on *today’s science*” we can’t make it….meaning that today we can’t (read: do not) do these things *today*. Yes, shielding against cosmic radiation is possible…at least to some degree. And, you do point out the issue of mass as well as the possibility of digging in on other heavenly bodies. However, even here, you support the view that we do not terraform nor do we live in any type of habitat on another planet…at least not *today*… your arguments to the future notwithstanding. So, overall, until all of these projections into the future actually take place, they remain fantasies. Period. Don’t get me wrong, in no way am I against such attempts nor am I anti- science! I just differentiate between possibilities and actualities. What is, is. What can be just hasn’t happened. Now to your claim that: “We've already sent 'average' human beings on long orbits around the earth. Do a google search on russian space tourists.” - Chuck If you consider ‘long orbits’ to be 15 days, the longest time that a known Russian tourist has been ‘up there’, fine. I don’t consider it long at all considering the length of time necessary to travel to some as yet untried ‘home’ planet. Again, the universal and progressively devastating effects on the human body have already been demonstrated and are known ‘scientifically’…and have been so known for many many years. Do note that even here they – the ‘tourists’ - are given rigorous physical training: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/11/science/space/11space.html Oh, and it is interesting that the “Russian tourists”, a misnomer if ever there was one, do not include one Russian! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_tourism#List_of_flown_space_tourists On Apr 8, 9:50 pm, Chuck Bowling <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 11:32 PM, ornamentalmind > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > “ It is also known based on today's science that 'we' can't make it in > > outer space nor on most other planets. “ – OM > > > “Can you provide some supporting information for this statement? AFAIK > > the only thing stopping us from establishing bases on everything > > except the gas giants is money. The technology is there it just the > > funds that aren't.” – Chuck > > > OK, first for the ‘we’ (read: body) part, I’ll post only a few of the > > Google hits from the first page when one searches for “body decay > > during space flight”. > > >http://journalofcosmology.com/Mars148.html > > >http://www.asc-csa.gc.ca/pdf/educator-microgravity_science_stu.pdf > > >http://www.nutritionjrnl.com/article/S0899-9007(02)00930-9/abstract > > >http://library.thinkquest.org/03oct/02144/text/travel/body.htm > > > There are countermeasures to all of the links you provide and all of those > > countermeasures are within our technological capability. > > > Now for the ‘outer space’ part... when one Googles “effects of > > radioactivity in space travel” a few of the first ‘hits’ include: > > >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_adaptation_to_spaceflight > > >http://www.dnaindia.com/health/report_astronauts-could-face-heart-pro... > > >http://www.nature.com/embor/journal/v4/n11/full/embor7400016.html > > >http://www.nukes.org/alien/alienlinks.html > > > It's fairly easy to shield against cosmic radiation. Current technology > > allows lead shielding and if mass isn't an issue - the case in permanent > cycling transport systems - you can use lunar basalt. A 3' thick layer can > shield better than the atmosphere of earth. > > > Now for the last part of my post: “most other planets” (are not able > > to support human life) > > > One would think that this is obvious just on the surface of it, no? > > I’m not talking about a movie, I’m talking about actually getting to a > > planet and then trying to live there. > > Mars and possibly Venus are the only two planets with even a vague chance of > terraforming. But, it's pretty much a given that we would live in artificial > habitats no matter where we were. > > > > > All I was claiming…and accurately so, was that today, human beings > > could not survive the long journey to a planet that could support > > human life. And, that there are so few…if any such planets that to > > dream about space travel and similar adventuring is pure fantasy. By > > all means, if it is what turns you on…go for it. Just be advised that > > such ruminations are not reality today. > > Actually, what you were claiming was that we don't have the technological > capability to do so. That was, and still remains incorrect. > > > > > Oh, and I haven’t even addressed what we both already knew…the funding > > issue let alone that those who have been sent up for short periods of > > time have been some of the most carefully selected humans on the > > planet. Don’t try sending our ‘average’ human being even on a long > > orbit around the earth let alone the light years necessary to travel > > to a planet that *possibly* could support human life. > > We've already sent 'average' human beings on long orbits around the earth. > Do a google search on russian space tourists. > > > > > > > >
