Yup. Right. And the resources we use to do that won't be available for other, maybe more important projects and the pollution created in the process will tip our Earth just a bit more towards the edge. Towards the edge of becoming inhospitable to humans, that is, i'm not worried at all about the planet as a whole.
Besides, given humankind’s (read: moslty Europe’s and America’s) truly fantastic record of colonization we probably shouldn’t attempt to fuck up yet another place, even if it is a barren one and we can’t slaughter or enslave a couple of million natives and kill their cultures in the process.
Ok, as i said already: It's your money. If you think sending people to Mars gives you a strategical advantage, go for it. I'm Swiss, i don't give a damn whether you can watch me undress in my bedroom from 50 km above.
Given recent events one would think that the gathering of intelligence is not the problem, but processing it is.
Sorry, that’s boys stuff. My dick’s longer than your dick. Go for it, if you can’t find a better way to spend your money.
Uh huh. Kinda like the chicken or egg question, isn’t it? In order to be able to colonize space to get at the resources we need to get at the resources so we can colonize space.
Or did i get that wrong and it was that the other way round?
Yup, good reason. Can be perfectly done without sending anybody into orbit. And much cheaper, because Austronauts are heavy and they need a lot of stuff while up there, thus making it expensive. Oh, and don’t tell me that Austronauts where needed to repair Hubble. For the same amount of money who was spent to do that (all costs included, not just that one flight) several Hubbles telescopes could probably have been built.
That could all be done without going to space. IF there were the right incentives. If all the brainpower spent on sending 80kg human bone and flesh in orbit would be spent on researching, say, new materials for prosthetic devices would have a much larger spin off. In the meantime, most countries drastically cap their spending on basic research, thus capping also the basis for future practical research.
Yup, good reason. Do it, but don’t send people. Personally i don’t care too much about the survival of the human race. Any survival is just temporary anyway.
I doubt that. And if we do, they’ll probably not recognize us as intelligent, mwahahaha....
Furthermore, with our record of dealing with other beings, we’ll probably fuck it up as usual. I guess it would be better for everybody and –thing involved if we didn’t find intelligent life.
We wouldn't miss a thing if it hadn't been invented. For example, the web (which originated at the CERN, if i’m not misstaken)
And people do still die in hurricanes, just because they have no means of building houses that can withstand a hurricane. Even more lives could be saved if cars were banned, by the way.... Or some money spent on fighting malaria. Or money being spent to provide children with clean drinking water. Or. Or. Or. The list goes on....
As for the war in Iraq: All your fancy satellites haven’t prevented you from entering a useless war in the first place. But of course that is just my humble opinion.
Given human nature as it is, this is not whimsical at all. In fact, this is the only point i completely agree with you
I’d just say: Leave the astronauts on the ground for the time being, just because sending them up is extremely expensive and not really necessary, care about other problems first, and if and when they are solved, think about it all again.