3 ms·

Many Americans think cloud storage involves actual clouds. The prevailing view in the 60's among the public was that moon landings were a waste of money. Thes

Many Americans think cloud storage involves actual clouds. The prevailing view in the 60's among the public was that moon landings were a waste of money. These decisions should be taken by scientists and experts. I think it's important to have these advancements. Not to mention, asteroid hunting will be a lot more effective from the moon anyway, since it has high visibility due to a lack of atmosphere and a low gravity which makes escaping the orbit a lot easier.

tredre3 3y ago
> These decisions should be taken by scientists and experts. Who decides which expert to listen to? Because we have experts on both sides of this issue. > Not to mention, asteroid hunting will be a lot more effective from the moon anyway, since it has high visibility due to a lack of atmosphere and a low gravity which makes escaping the orbit a lot easier. This is just futurism-level techno babble used to justify imposing YOUR desires onto the population by making your goal a mandatory step before we get to do what the majority of the population actually wants. The reality is that building anti-asteroid orbital defence is cheaper, faster, more versatile, and plain easier than building a base on the moon.
- RugnirViking 3y ago
  > This is just futurism-level techno babble Is it? It seems pretty understandable to me. No atmosphere means easier to spot rocks Less gravity means easier to launch rock deflection mission with more mass. > Who decides which expert to listen to Right now? Our democratically elected officials do, by way of appointing a head of NASA, and also each time NASA wants to approve budget items
  - okdure 3y ago
    Democratically elected once vetted by the donor class
- notRobot 3y ago
  > Who decides which expert to listen to? Because we have experts on both sides of this issue. The representatives you elect. If you're not happy, you can try to hold them accountable or elect someone else. I acknowledge this isn't perfect, but it's what the system is right now. > The reality is that building anti-asteroid orbital defence is cheaper, faster, more versatile, and plain easier than building a base on the moon. Since I provided reasoning for my opinion, would you care to do these same, as opposed to stating it as fact?
- Kerb_ 3y ago
  You think asteroid missiles are legit but telescopes on the moon unaffected by atmospheric effects and orbital objects are fantasy techno-babble?
redeeman 3y ago
> These decisions should be taken by scientists and experts. How about letting the people who pay for it decide?
- notRobot 3y ago
  We live in representative democracies, not direct democracies. Those representatives, in turn, hire experts and scientists. My entire point is most people know nothing about science, why should they be making these decisions? Many people believe Covid-19 is a hoax and that the earth is flat and that vaccines cause autism, should we really be taking their opinions on matters they don't know about seriously?
  - redeeman 3y ago
    we live in representative democracies, supposedly because it is(was?) unfeasable to have everyone vote on every little thing. The idea then is, that people elect those who have the policies THEY want, as a whole. This is what representative democracy is sold as, but in reality its about who can promise most braindead shit, cherrypick the exact experts that can be paid to agree with them, and then probably do something different than what they got elected on. Representative democracy where it actually did as promised, would be that the elected people would do what the ones who elected them wants. >My entire point is most people know nothing about science, why should they be making these decisions? Many people believe Covid-19 is a hoax and that the earth is flat and that vaccines cause autism, should we really be taking their opinions on matters they don't know about seriously? So... should we let them vote? and also, I dont give anything for this argument. The so called experts lie and get shit wrong all the time aswell.. How about when the experts and talking heads said "sars-cov2 is only gonna be a thing in places without healthcare, its scaremongering to say anything else, you have more to worry about from the common cold!!!". or "masks dont work!!". Or along the same topic, 100 years ago in new zealand during an outbreak, the so called experts decided that everyone should open their mouths and inhale some zinc sulfate as it was believed by the experts to stop virusses. Whoops! Oh, and lest we forget, it was the leading experts at the time that believed the earth was flat, and would enforce it on the populace with an iron fist. Lets think, what has recently been enforced on people with an iron fist by experts?
bsder 3y ago
And most people think the asteroid belt looks like Star Wars instead of 4 big rocks and a bunch of dust with a whole lot of nothing in between. > Not to mention, asteroid hunting will be a lot more effective from the moon anyway But, why? There are science reasons to study them, but not much more. We're not short of any of the compounds they contain. Mining them would take enormous amounts of energy and time because they are way the hell out there. They're too small to provide stability for a manufacturing base. We need to inhabit the Moon and Mars long before we inhabit the asteroid belt.

tredre3 3y ago

> These decisions should be taken by scientists and experts. Who decides which expert to listen to? Because we have experts on both sides of this issue. > Not to mention, asteroid hunting will be a lot more effective from the moon anyway, since it has high visibility due to a lack of atmosphere and a low gravity which makes escaping the orbit a lot easier. This is just futurism-level techno babble used to justify imposing YOUR desires onto the population by making your goal a mandatory step before we get to do what the majority of the population actually wants. The reality is that building anti-asteroid orbital defence is cheaper, faster, more versatile, and plain easier than building a base on the moon.

RugnirViking 3y ago
> This is just futurism-level techno babble Is it? It seems pretty understandable to me. No atmosphere means easier to spot rocks Less gravity means easier to launch rock deflection mission with more mass. > Who decides which expert to listen to Right now? Our democratically elected officials do, by way of appointing a head of NASA, and also each time NASA wants to approve budget items
- okdure 3y ago
  Democratically elected once vetted by the donor class
notRobot 3y ago
> Who decides which expert to listen to? Because we have experts on both sides of this issue. The representatives you elect. If you're not happy, you can try to hold them accountable or elect someone else. I acknowledge this isn't perfect, but it's what the system is right now. > The reality is that building anti-asteroid orbital defence is cheaper, faster, more versatile, and plain easier than building a base on the moon. Since I provided reasoning for my opinion, would you care to do these same, as opposed to stating it as fact?
Kerb_ 3y ago
You think asteroid missiles are legit but telescopes on the moon unaffected by atmospheric effects and orbital objects are fantasy techno-babble?

redeeman 3y ago

> These decisions should be taken by scientists and experts. How about letting the people who pay for it decide?

notRobot 3y ago
We live in representative democracies, not direct democracies. Those representatives, in turn, hire experts and scientists. My entire point is most people know nothing about science, why should they be making these decisions? Many people believe Covid-19 is a hoax and that the earth is flat and that vaccines cause autism, should we really be taking their opinions on matters they don't know about seriously?
- redeeman 3y ago
  we live in representative democracies, supposedly because it is(was?) unfeasable to have everyone vote on every little thing. The idea then is, that people elect those who have the policies THEY want, as a whole. This is what representative democracy is sold as, but in reality its about who can promise most braindead shit, cherrypick the exact experts that can be paid to agree with them, and then probably do something different than what they got elected on. Representative democracy where it actually did as promised, would be that the elected people would do what the ones who elected them wants. >My entire point is most people know nothing about science, why should they be making these decisions? Many people believe Covid-19 is a hoax and that the earth is flat and that vaccines cause autism, should we really be taking their opinions on matters they don't know about seriously? So... should we let them vote? and also, I dont give anything for this argument. The so called experts lie and get shit wrong all the time aswell.. How about when the experts and talking heads said "sars-cov2 is only gonna be a thing in places without healthcare, its scaremongering to say anything else, you have more to worry about from the common cold!!!". or "masks dont work!!". Or along the same topic, 100 years ago in new zealand during an outbreak, the so called experts decided that everyone should open their mouths and inhale some zinc sulfate as it was believed by the experts to stop virusses. Whoops! Oh, and lest we forget, it was the leading experts at the time that believed the earth was flat, and would enforce it on the populace with an iron fist. Lets think, what has recently been enforced on people with an iron fist by experts?

bsder 3y ago

And most people think the asteroid belt looks like Star Wars instead of 4 big rocks and a bunch of dust with a whole lot of nothing in between. > Not to mention, asteroid hunting will be a lot more effective from the moon anyway But, why? There are science reasons to study them, but not much more. We're not short of any of the compounds they contain. Mining them would take enormous amounts of energy and time because they are way the hell out there. They're too small to provide stability for a manufacturing base. We need to inhabit the Moon and Mars long before we inhabit the asteroid belt.