You could argue about that all day.
One of the things holding back manned space exploration is all the trouble and strife going on in the world, and until we sort that out, we aint going anywhere - trust me.
So, you could argue that we will only be able to travel deep space when we have all learned to live peacibly together. This is also why I believe that if there are alien super-races they won't be aggressive towards us.
In 150 years, we have gone from shooting every elephant we can see, every whale and seal that swims the ocean, lions, tigers, etc etc. Now we preserve them, because we have gained a little more civilisation and revererence for all life.
Extending that argument, super-aliens would find us fascinating and the last thing they would want to do is harm us. That is just a logical argument that extends from the notion that they would not have reached their level of super-civilisation if they did not have a high reverence for the sanctity of life.
And in reality, it takes so much vast resources to build a starship, that small bands of "baddies" could never conecievably produce a pirate space ship - it just does not make any sense at all.
Apollo basically was cancelled because there were too many priority things to take care of in the world. Many younger people not around at that time wonder why if we could go to the moon in 1970 we can't do it now. Well the fact is, in a world of peace and equality the world could get together and do it easily, but it would still take a massive consortium, not some back street workshop - that's the stuff of sci-fi. heck, private individuals couldn't make a Jumbo jet, let alone a starship.
Basically, we will continue planetary manned space shots when we have more peace on this planet, and this points to space travel as being a peaceful enterprise (note here that the space station has brought together old enemies, USA and Russia).
There will always be a few "bad apples" in the human tub, but it is inconceivable that a private band of people could make a star ship, just as it is only giant enterprises that build our airliners.
2007-05-14 16:53:27
·
answer #1
·
answered by nick s 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
Sadly, itdoesn't look like the human race is going to matue enough in the next 50-100 year sto prove you wrong. But its an interesting question.
I suspect law enforcement in large settlements (e.g. on Mars) would much like it is herre and now on Earth. But the rest--in space aand (if these develop) smalle communities in space/near-Earth Asteroids, etc.? Hijacking--or other wise stealing a spacecraft, smuggling, etc. imply some sort of an analog to the Coast Guard to countr it. Given that some sort of search aand rescue servicce will also be needed, I'd guess that would be a likely model for a future law enforce system.
All of which sounds like I've watched one too many "Star Trek" episodes. But--granting your premise--easy and reliable transportation in space--something along those lines is nnot only logical, its probably inevitable. And I don't think its at all "far-fetched." If recent developments in technology bear fruit, we are on the verge of having reliable and cost-effective launch vehicles to get into orbit (say, 20-30 years). And what many people don't realize is that that's the hard part. That's where most of the risk--and cost--of space travel is--for the simple reason that we are at the bottom of the deepest gravity well in the solar system, except for the gaas giant planets. Upp to now, its been all we could do just to climb out of that hole (get into earth orbit). Yet we've alredy sent spacecraft to every planet in the solar system (or have oneon the way)--using the little bit of payload that's left over when a rocket reaches orbit.
And here's an interesting thought for you. There are over a thousand known "near-Earth asteroids"--many of which will have valuable mineral deposits. And, because they have almost no gravity, they are actually easier to reach than the mmoon is (because of the moons gravity)--even though they are further away. In fact, the difference is great enough, NASA is considering such a mission even before they return to the moon--simply because it IS so much easier and cheaper (the scientific lure is obvioous). So picture a situation in which fortune hunters spread out from earth orbit to mine those asteroids--it could happen! Talk about the Wild West reincarnated!
2007-05-14 18:36:04
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Hmmmm.... I don't believe the pros outweigh the cons. If that were true, we'd be doing better, not getting progressively worse. Get rid of the tv and other things that take up all your time and attention. Don't buy processed foods. Only buy bio-degradable items. Remember there is a real world out there and visit it often. These are things we all have control of and can do something about. Medical research has saved lives... maybe that is true, but what many don't realize is how many lives it has taken as well. Mass distribution of food... is it really food and healthy for you? By the time you eat half that crap, you will need that wonderful medical research. Mass production cheapens a product. You have choices, what you do with them is your own choice. Change what you can. It all makes a difference. Global village... can we compare that to places like Yahoo? How about all the crap you see on the internet? I have never seen so much filth, hatred, prejudice, etc... as I have seen on the internet. I no longer use the internet nearly as much as I use to. We don't need to use most of the modern technology available... we CHOOSE to. It makes us lazier in many ways... physically and mentally... even emotionally. What people do... a lot can be undone, but too many like "convenience". Why plant a garden when the store has food? Why walk to the bank when you're computer will allow all transactions online? Why meet your real neighbors when the internet is full of people? Why eat healthy and cook nutritional meals when there are fast food joints on every block? Why should we exercise when there is a good movie on the tv or a game to be played? Why do anything we positively don't have to?
2016-05-18 04:01:44
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think the answer to ur question can be found by discovering if men can lactate or not!!!!
2007-05-14 16:48:47
·
answer #4
·
answered by What! 2
·
0⤊
2⤋