I also think that we need to get humankind off off this rock to ensure any serious long-term viability. (Hawking has a pretty hot nurse, too!)
The survival of the human race depends on its ability to find new homes elsewhere in the universe because there’s an increasing risk that a disaster will destroy the Earth, world-renowned scientist Stephen Hawking said Tuesday.
The British astrophysicist told a news conference in Hong Kong that humans could have a permanent base on the moon in 20 years and a colony on Mars in the next 40 years.
“We won’t find anywhere as nice as Earth unless we go to another star system,” added Hawking, who arrived to a rock star’s welcome Monday.
Considering his Rock-Star welcome over there, when was the last time someone was lauded for their brains in this country? Is it symptomatic of the feeling of anti-science currently in the air?
Who do you think will found the first off-planet colony?
I’ve been preaching the gospel of Gerard K. O’Neill since the eighties. Boingboing lately mentioned the L5 O’Neill era in passing as a crazy period. I can’t find any web pages or Wikipedia entries on the L5/Powersat concept that would have enabled us, eventually, to colonize free space and power the planet via geosync orbit powersats beaming power to collectors on the ground.
It’s good to know that the brightest among us understand and remember the work done in the early seventies.
As the planet heats up, I can only groan and think of what could have been, in a sane world.
Is that his hot blonde bombshell nurse in the photo?
Stephen Hawkings for President!
Neal Saferstein
Back when the Americans were in a space race with the Russians, it was national pride that was the motivation. Today, Americans show their national pride by displaying and using weapons. Congress rather spend money on the military or bridges to nowhere than on space.
The private sector will have to do what the American government will not. For a government solution, take 2 percent of the annual military budget and apply it to the annual space budget.
other than prevenging the human species from becoming extinct in case of some earth-wide disaster, there is really no compelling reason to colonize other planets.
oh, you say, that’s a good enough reason in and of itself?
yes it is, but try getting governments to think in those terms when deciding where the money goes.
Who needs science when your waiting for the rapture? I think there are a whole bunch of great things we could do for the human race, solar energy, colonize other planets, find a cure for cancer, help humans live longer and even create flying cars. Too bad god doesn’t want us too. I think China will found a colony on the moon. They don’t allow for religious expression so they have got nothing to stand in their way.
When was the last time we lauded brains? Come on, we’ve lauded Bremer, Brownie, Tenet…
Who will be first to move off planet? I’d bet on the Chinese.. they have the best of both worlds, strict government control fueled by a focused, brutal form of capitalism and a love of science and technology… an unbeatable combo.
One of the primary themes that circulate in various blogs is how NASA destroyed the dream of manned space exploration. But from where I sit, the Destroyer of Dreams was the citizens of this country who: 1) believed the money should be spent to cure poverty, 2) believed NASA’s budget was a huge waste of taxpayer resources, or 3) became bored with the whole moon-landing scene.
(Argh!! We actually became BORED with moon landings! Now I wonder if my children and grandchildren will ever see a man walk on the moon.)
What made NASA special during the sixties and early seventies was that it was the only government agency given a dream for a goal, and then demanded by the Nation to make it real.
When the Nation no longer cared, all that was left were dreamers.
Do we really want the human race on other planets?
My father in law just got diagnosed with ALS and he thinks he needs a nurse like that too..
Did you loose my post?
Put me down for the Rapture.
Where in the hell are we going to go?
#11…the real question is…..do other planets REALLY want humans on them!!!
I thought of China right away….or Japan or even possibly India.
If you told Pat Robertson that he could get closer to God up there he would lead a nice parade.
The problem is most people don’t think its worth it. What, afterall, are the returns of this kind of stuff?
But we have to do it, for no other reason than we can’t NOT do it. And we will get something out of it: knowledge from experience.
Space flight requires innovation. We’re pushing the very edge of engineering. That innovation trickles back to the rest of the nation, and whether it turns into money or not, it fuels progress. What if in the process of developing compact food processors in space we create technology that will drastically reduce the cost of food production on Earth? The same medical technology we need for astronaughts coping with zero gravity could find its way back to landside hospitals to treat arthritus. Having the sharpest minds in America attack technical issues in new ways WILL lead to breakthroughs.
NASA,
Space, by the losest bidder, with the biggest profit margin.
By the time they ,ake a proposal and get the OK, to use NEW TECH, Ten years have past, IF not more.
the Shuttle, was a 15 year old IDEA, before it was even THOUGHT of being used, and they had the money to do it.
An agency, that is at the Whim of government procrastinators, government IDEALS, and Gov money..
governements FIRST cut is NASA…
wonder WHY the space shuttle didnt get pushed UP to a better orbit?? and the RUSSIAN craft DID???
If NASA had 1/2 the money they WANTED, they could have a space station on the MOON…If they got 1/2 the money the MILITARY GETS or even WRITES off as JUNK, or even got the SURPLUS supplies to SELL, they would be on the moon.
People want immediate gratification. This requires long term planning and consistent financing, almost an impossibility with our form of government. The majority of the public doesn’t care. They had to be manipulated for our grand adventure to the moon. After a few snowy videos from the moon, and some sticker shock, they promptly lost interest. Besides we really need decades of hard core R&D before this can happen. We need technologies that hasn’t been thought of yet. No one has yet to adequately explain how a wet bag of organic molecules can survive in hard radiation, including cosmic rays.
For all the fun poked at religious beliefs here, it sure is a hoot to see the so called “scientific mind” display it’s inanity here.
You guys watch too much Star Trek of do you not interact with people of different opinions enough?
Forget it, I’m going to the holodeck to relax for a while.
(ECA, thanks for not procreating)
we’re already spending more than 2% of our military budget on NASA, and that should be cut. The private sector can do a better job. The only thing is the lawyers here are going to make it certain that it will be another country that does it first. I don’t want the US govt spending hundreds of billions if not trillions on this.
I, for one, have always thought that we humans should be exploring and colonizing space. The universe is infinite. There is plenty of room for everyone. By limiting ourselves to this planet, we put ourselves in danger of extinction. A natural or man-made disaster could wipe out all life on the earth. We increase our chances of survival as a species by having more than one target.
As for those who believe that the money would be better spent by helping the poor, what exactly do you think would happen to the poor if that money were spent on space exploration and colonization? In the past, exploration to undiscovered parts of the earth produced massive wealth and lifted many poor out of poverty. Of course, one could also argue that native peoples were subjugated, but I would think that we are more enlightened today.
It’ll never happen for our country. We will in the end leech off someone elses brilliance…China, Japan and the likes. The reason….well how many people do you know that will live without TV, Target, Starbucks, Taco Bell, Tivo, and all the other “necessaties” of life. I cant believe people will back continous welfare programs and not space initiative programs. Strange what has become important to us…or important to the most of the public. Most people probably dont even know who Hawking is but they can tell you where and what time “Brangelina” was born. Irritating!!!
I’m sure that the late Carl Sagan would agree with Dr. Hawking. As do I.
We should get off this rock as soon as possible. It’s in the Human Spirit to explore. We should have had colonies twenty years ago, soon after the Apollo project, but noooooo.
I think that people listen to Dr. Hawking, because he can make complicated terms understandable by the regular Joe.
I also believe that any astrophysicist worth his or her salt would say the same thing as Dr. Hawking.
This requires long term planning and consistent financing, almost an impossibility with our form of government.
Agreed.
We “commit” to an International Space Station [anyone remember that?] and then decide that it isn’t “glamourous” enough – that what we really need are bases on the Moon, as a first step to sending men to Mars…
Maintaining & upgrading the Hubble space telescope…? nah, we need the money to go to Mars… and besides, we can’t risk sending our Shuttles up unless they go into the same orbit as the space station – in case the shuttle is damaged on launch, and can’t return to Earth.
The majority of the public doesn’t care.
Agreed.
After the rush of watching Neil set foot on the Moon, and watching them drive that dune-buggy around, what was the average person supposed to get excited about – when the missions became just another rock-collecting trip?
How many times can we watch people futzing-around in zero-G before we ask: Is that it?
What technology does the average person recognize as trickle-down from NASA, other than tempur-pedic mattresses, and -maybe- those Peltier-junction mini-refrigerators?
The Moon is the bast location,
to setup a base.
To FARM for metals to USE to create a Space station.
NO air polution, as there IS no air. Lots of Hydrogen mass which we can USE, but we need OXYGEN…and to learn how to crack CO2, back to Oxygen.
they are going to create Mono Fabric, they have already decided on it. But we STILL need a station and metal, and forging ability in space. WHY take metals up, when we have the moon sitting up there. It would force the prices of metals HIGHER(if it came from the earth) as well as the cost to take it up(1 piece at a time).
Being on the moon, we can make Craft that is NOT Earth worthy, as it DONT need to fly in atmosphere, and the moon is 1/6 gravity takes about 1/100 the rocket power to get OFF the ground.
With a REAL space only SHIP, we could REALLy check out the astoriods for metals, and RARE substances, NOT 1 at a time with a PROBE that costs as much as a FULL ship.
20,
you are welcome.
You can have the poopy diapers, the Preteens, the teens, The small accidents(hopefully) that you think MAY kill them, and the 1 in 10 chance of having a child with a handicap/birthdefect…
Life is a crap shoot, and we will go into space, but only after we get our own house in order, quit killing people (or even creatures) for the hell of it, achieve much higher levels of both technology and social responsibility, and dodge the potential extinction events such as big ass asteroids, volcanoes and some idiot touching off a global, nuclear exchange.
Keep your fingers crossed.