its not about conquering the solar system its about advancing transport tech and opening potential to new tech that can improve the material conditions of humanity overall. no one gives a shit about actually living on space for the same reasons as to why no one gives a shit about living in the ocean its just stupid
also >inb4 starlink shills, ps musk is a faggot thats never made an innovation and all of his companies live off coroporate welfare
We have this thread every month.
Zizek is such a midwit.
Then I guess it’s that time of month
imagine the cost just to build the foundation of that fucking thing and how long itd take just to reach a seperate planet
The purpose of a space elevator is not to reach a separate planet. It is for moving cargo into space without using rockets.
Put the cost aside for a moment.
It would be scary to live on a planet with a space elevator.
Imagine the destruction it would wreck would it be destroyed in an explosion or 9/11 style attack
doesn't affect you, didn't ask, don't care
okay but first how would the foundation even be built much less the top of that elevator to reach another planet, we cant even build bridges between continents how tf would one between planets work?
retard, it isnt connecting planets
>>525171>foundation>>525187>foundation>>525183>Imagine the destruction it would wreck would it be destroyed in an explosion or 9/11 style attack
Apple TV marketing thread. Sage
>>525109>There is no FTL
Space time streches faster than light. Thats why universe is bigger than 13,8 billion light years.
reminder that anti-spaceers are short minded and creative
>>525109>Only two planets in the entire solar system can even be hypothetically settled by humans (Mars and Mercury) because anything else would kill a fully suited human that’s standing in their atmosphere
You realize there's thousands of moons and asteroids to land on, right?
>>525199>>525202>Imagination is immune to actual physical constraints
I see someone is a fan of The Expanse
What's the point? Why colonize cold, lifeless rocks?
the question is why not ?, why don't strive to try to do these things.
>>525255>Why colonize cold, lifeless rocks?
umm annon, achuchoule we should all strive to be couch potatos and achivning anything is achuli reachinary
Retarded PR from a failed attempt at socialism.
Tech has arguably gotten as good as cold, hard physics permit and it is not socialism's task to try making it more fantastically advanced.
Incredible how you tiped alot to say nothing at all
Oh yes let's forget about establishing worker control and instead masturbate all day to star trek like some pathetic virgin nerd.
Spacefags deserve the rope.
Scifi was my favorite genre most of my life, but I won't be reading that.
I'm biased against American authors to such an extent, that even if the series is supposedly left-leaning, if there's any chance that a trace of American lib optimism has crept in; that space exploration will be done by americans, or even that america still exists in the future, I'm absolutely not interested.
And when I say optimism that includes things like "corporate dystopia on Mars", because that still assumes burgerpunk will survive in some form.
Best if it's not set in our solar system, or like the Culture series only visits earth to take a shit on america.
There absolutely can't be a galactic empire or federation of planets that's obviously a thinly veiled "America but in space".
If cybernetic planning was viable then SOME socialist country would have done it by 40 years ago.
Another retarded cope.
You will never stablish nothing except your ego on the internet and space will go nowhere you dumb liberal, stop trying to play high and mighty you dumb retard.
Every capitalist firm uses cybernetic planning from Amazon to General Motors to General Mills.
Liberalism is demanding a life in fantasy lands like outer space or wanting more contrived and wasteful technologies instead of being happy with the world's capabilities as it really is.
The series deals with an iss style mission where the whole world unites to try and escape earth. The first 100 or so travelers are scientists selected from their countries, and a stowaway.
Yes, corporate structures still interfere with the Martian colony, but the stowaway ends up leading a jihad-esque revolution and building his own form of socialism with worker co-ops and stuff.
Yeah, the author is a modern Jacobin and due paying DSA member, but thats hardly a reason for a self respecting socialist to avoid these books. If anything, the long dry passages filled with science jargon you have to look up every 5 minutes was more offputting than the politcs imho
I think anyone interested in space colonization should look at these books, as they're more possible and realistic than any other books I've tried reading.
You have a contradiction in expecting the masses to embrace a better world after capitalism yet imposing limits to human progress and saying space is just too far fetched while communism is not. The reason for Soviet futurism in general was that the optimism that communism was unstoppable and even the gravity well of Earth couldn't contain communism from spreading throughout the stars.
Communism is the idology of scarcity
thanks to prove yourself as a brainlet cosplaying as someone with a brain, all tech helps on earth in some way, and all tech that is perceives as wasteful is because it is use only make fucking money, but go on big comunist man that denies even Cybernetics because its wasteful
Point out where Marx and Engels state scarcity has to exist in the final stage of communism.
They never said it but communism has existed only in times of crisis, it's a crisis measure rather than a coherent politicial economy
Communism is a limit we approach by advancing the class struggle, not a real destination we actually reach unless somehow conservation of mass-energy can be violated.
what is this neocon bs?
>>525316>its a crisis measure
what you pseudo intellectual brain is talking about
Primitivists get pushed out the airlock.
War communism and primitive communism exist, peacetime industrial communism never has
>>525327>communism in 1 country
can you atop derailing threads with your small brian takes? Maybe go read a book before attempting to enter leftist discourse
Primitivists are equally yet oppositely retarded.
Get it through your head Reddit. Technology has hit its maximum, all that's left to do is socialize it.
Technology advance has slowed down because the Comecon no longer exists to advance the low return sciences. All capitalists have done in recent decades is refine and evolve cold war era tech because the army of scientists and engineers in the Soviet bloc no longer exists.
Capitalism will capitalize on anything worth developing, it's only to what purposes it puts anything that is wasteful and inefficient.
>>525333>Le tech advancement and primitivism are Le diferent points in Le horseshoe
Fuck off and yourself Cavemonkey
Can you tell me how planned obsolence is a good development ?, because capital loves that.
My apologies for living in the REAL WORLD instead of fantastical drivel.
The real world is trash if you don't wanna change it go to R/Neoliberal, where your type resides
Your missing the point by not understand how progress happens. You don't know before hand if research will be worthwhile especially when you move beyond proven tech, this is why every major technological advanced in recent US history has been done by DARPA and not the private sector as at least the military industrial complex has a some means to blue sky research.
>another world is possible
<no, your wrong, all we can do in the future is just maintain the modern way of life
Increases profits which under capitalism (the economic order we live under) will increase funding for research.
With these profits will go to a) propaganda to buy b) more research to cheapen the prosses of production c) research to for more planned obsolence, as these pursuits have almost no risk of losing profits, sorry sweet cheeks but this le capitalism brings inovation is a meme
Who do STEMlets even attmpt to talk about things they have negative autism score in regard to lmao
Sending robots is worthwhile, humans in space is useless at this point in history.
The idea behind space elevators is them being long enough that they have a counter-weight above stationary orbit thus being pulled up into space by their counter-weight while being held down to the ground.
A permanent moon base could launch cheap rockets if you can fuel them.
>There is no FTL
Use an Alcubierre Drive.
>If we can only manage to terraform our planet AWAY from habitability there is about a snowball’s chance in Hell for terraforming a planet that hasn’t been able to support life in hundreds of millions of years for human usage
Genetic editing to adapt humans to live on hostile planets.
>Dyson Spheres are nonsense that ignore where we would get the resources from to even build one when the Sun alone is 99% of the solar system’s entire mass
Agreed, though they are not the only rich source of energy in the universe.
>The only thing worth doing in space is checking to see if multicellular life exists on Europe, Titan, or Enceladus
Something like that shouldn't be taken so lightly. The implications could be earthshattering.
>>525432>The implications could be earthshattering.
How so? Other than slightly tilting the Drake equation, and causing a few religiontards to have a an existential crisis.
nta, but wouldnt it mean moar genetic testing, which leads to moar genetic splicing, which leads to moar bioweapons? How would you develop a vaccine for space COVID if the only samples are in space and US laboratories
>>525456>which leads to moar bioweapons?
In space Bio weapons are stupid next to nuclear weapons as the sun already pumps out radiation so fall out is not an issue so most weapons engineers think space combat would be nothing but space ships lobbing tactical nukes at each other as it would be the most effective. Also colonies would be sealed with ridged decontamination making bio-weapons not that effective in space.
no no, I mean if we found a multicelled lifeform living in the vacuum of space on Europa or some shit, humans will certainly bring it back to earth
Why bring it to Earth, labs can exist on O'Neil cylinders that would already have infrastructure to monitor the air?
If the organism has entirely different chemistry from earthly organic life then any kind of biological interaction between the two is not possible.
>>525432>just use these fantastical science fiction technologies and it’s possible!
you people are so fucking retarded
What if they're like those tardigrades that can just withstand everything? Regardless, you would have to bring it back just to see if it will survive, right? And if all else fails, America will just create the bioweapon on a spacestation like >>525474
Regardless, it would be reality shattering for every nation on earth, including tptb as well as the common folx
I misunderstood, I thought you meant the lifeform wouldnt survive on earth
But you're saying the chemical components of an alien lifeform would be physically incapable of interacting with earth's carbon based life? This just sounds very presumptuous to me.
>>525124>When the fuck will people comprehend that (living in) space is literally the stupidest thing that there is? no one gives a shit about actually living on space for the same reasons as to why no one gives a shit about living in the ocean its just stupid
Until those people are free of their bluepill and start acting rationally. You see, today's world is in a war of information.
This place is filled to the brim with retarded pseuds confidently talking out of their own ass, and nothing really illuminates this fact quite like science/space discussions. I mean hell, this OP is just obsequiously basing their entire opinion on the subject off a misinterpreted little slice of a zizek quote. Just because space is disorderly, arbitrary, and hostile to all life doesn't mean that space travel and exploration are useless endeavors. Yeah obv star trek isn't gonna happen, so I guess that means we should all hang up our coats and resign all of mankind to be eternally imperiled on a single planet?
What's the opposite of hopium? Doomium? Whatever it is, some of you faggots are guzzling it while ignoring that AES states have themselves had massive space programs. Do you think you know better than them?
It's like you have this pseudo-religious fixation on human tech having hit its physical limits - which is only true in some fields, yet you repeat it because you heard smarter people saying it. does the idea that humanity might see higher successes scare you?
It's a stupid narcissism, a lib-tier 'end of history' rerun really, fucking yawn. 'The end of technological progress'. You'd like to be part of such an important generation, wouldn't you? But science doesn't give a shit and will keep churning long after you're dead.
It's just a dicksucking contest of who can pretend to be the most virtuous and 'down-to-earth'. nevermind practical applications for tech, that's hopium!! REAL socialism must ONLY be done with dirt and paper and ink !!!
Who will be the ultimate retard purist? Which one will drink so much luddite pragmatism that they burst at the seams?
>>525522>But you're saying the chemical components of an alien lifeform would be physically incapable of interacting with earth's carbon based life? This just sounds very presumptuous to me.
Not really, maybe non-organic life could be toxic in itself but it could not possibly transmit diseases to us. Think of it as a form of security through obscurity.
>>525531>AES states have themselves had massive space programs. Do you think you know better than them?
no aes state has landed people on the moon.
China has their own space station though
maintaining a space station in low orbit 250 miles from earth is quite different from sending a manned ship to the moon 240000 miles away, landing, and coming back intact.
the moon landings are still an unmatched technological achievement.
Hence why I made this thread
It’s funny how his first suggestion is one that the people who made it up claim would require all energy in the universe lmao
>>525531> I mean hell, this OP is just obsequiously basing their entire opinion on the subject off a misinterpreted little slice of a zizek quote.
Lmao not at all, I just think the quote is valid
My OP comes from my personal interest in astronomy, therefore actual knowledge of what the cosmos is like and why all this admitted hopium bs you’re slinging is mostly sci-fi nonsense
Like, look at how your response is some nothing, feels over reals argument about how accepting the actual likely limitations of what technology can really do is actually not hopeful and wow Humans Are Fucking Awesome enough to be real
What is this adolescent babbling about how communism is some fantasy world where suddenly technologies that can break the laws of physics come into existence and pointless and likely suicidal outer space endeavors become prioritized?> It's a stupid narcissism, a lib-tier 'end of history' rerun really, fucking yawn. 'The end of technological progress'. You'd like to be part of such an important generation, wouldn't you? But science doesn't give a shit and will keep churning long after you're dead.
You’re literally arguing from the standpoint of your own emotions, stop doing that
How you feel about something doesn’t determine the truth, ironically you’re just doing bizarre liberal optimism about the future and the abilities of tech
I see people here ranting about humans doing shit that’s a waste of time that requires technology that has energy constraints that we couldn’t even build on Earth, it’s like, why would people do this shit and how would they do it if they wanted to?
Ok what fact back up your claim tech can't advance anymore to the point that we can explore space ?
The fact that there likely isn’t some magical machine that eliminates the fact that an object with mass cannot move at light speed or that “bending spacetime” seemingly requires more energy than is available in the known universe and would likely trigger such a massive release of energy as to destroy both the starting point and destination
That’s just interstellar travel
For the problem of colonizing one of the only planets you can in our solar system, you either do dome cities on a rock with no value like Mars or you try “terraforming”, a process that always conveniently ignores that Mars’ lack of an atmosphere mostly boils down to its lack of a magnetic field due to a solid core
Generation ships bear the problem of a hypothetical mission where no problem arises over potential thousands of years, that such a ship as to enable several generations of people is even possible (as in reality it has required an entire planet) is still a big question
I feel like so many of you people really don’t know shit about what space is actually like and it shows by your own inability to see the most easily conceivable problems with all these hypothetical nonexistent technologies that can supposedly solve all of our problems
you still did not show how it is impossible for tech and science to advance enough to fix, mitigate or even know if it really is impossible these problems, no one believe that making even coparably small advancements like a moon base, but coutries like China has repeatedly said they will start poursuing, all you saying is that the scientific speculations of today are absolute truth, incapable of change based on new discoveries, heck the shit about the mass of the universe shit has recieved critics because it is based on quantum inequalities and is kinda meaningles in the quantification of mass, but hey if you want to keep your end of history, politics and science,you do you.
I don't think you have a clue. Development would be significantly regressed from where it is now if the US and USSR didn't dump stupid amounts of money into their space programs. Just because actually colonizing space is scifi nonsense at the moment doesn't mean research isn't useful.
>>525692>”Mass of the universe”
Like I said, you don’t have a fucking clue what you’re talking about
woops i mean energy as in your poind about "bending" the universe, but if you want to mantain this nitpic its ok, i'm not mad as i'm not religious follower of science.
As a STEM lord science nerd, I can confirm >>525652
has many valid points while >>525692
is unfounded speculation. Space exploration beyond earth's orbit has no economic value. It has some scientific value, but this scientific value can be realized using small scale robotic probes like we are already doing.
Energy and mass are two separate things
In fact I thought you were talking about the fact that an object with mass cannot reach the speed of light, the whole idea of bending spacetime sufficiently to do (things) is even worse since the only things we know that CAN do that and definitely exist in the universe are black holes which we can’t produce and can’t really use for travel anyway
The deal is
Everything I’ve said here stems from my personal interests in astronomy and physical sciences in general
I didn’t infer that most of this tech is unfounded sci-fi nonsense because some based high I Q STEM master told me this, I used to believe all the hype from investment firms, scifi writers, and pop sci shills too; the thing is, as I studied more and more about how the universe actually functions solely out of interest I realized how silly these predictions actually sound
Like, most futurologists are now admitting shit like intergalactic travel will never happen due to cosmic expansion, people here get mad when I talk about how we could focus on making a paradise on Earth, but they don’t understand that what I’m getting at is that the future of useful tech that can make meaningful changes in people’s lives center around biotech and subatomic physics, it’s not going to goddamned Mars it’s bio-engineering our way out of this mass extinction clusterfuck
Yep agreed. Much more investment of people and resources needs to be made into technologies that will enable life and importantly industrial human civilization to survive the next 100 years. Unfortunately, I don't see that investment being made by capitalists.
space travel is as useful to humanity as pure mathematics. you've been psyopped by technocrats into believing naked monkeys somehow have a higher destiny to spread their filth to other planets. if we want finer manipulation and analysis of materials for research purposes drones and robots are more apt. cease your hubris stupid primate>>525905
maybe our problem is our understanding of energy. i plan on one day reading this book which might offer a new approach:https://www.google.ca/books/edition/Hegel_s_Energy/HyQvEAAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0
>>525333>Technology has hit its maximum, all that's left to do is socialize it.
I know this board shits a lot on "STEM-fag brain rot". But I think we should not forget to also adress humanities brain rot like this one
You know we have like millions of years to exist if we unfuck ourselves from problems like global warming, we can do anything we want and try anything we want really
>>525984>research purposes drones and robots are more apt. cease your hubris stupid primate>dumbass think we are not gonna change our forms when the tech arives like we are from fucking star trek.
you really are limited huh, humanity in 5000 years will probably not look human at all, maybe in appearence but that is all.
Manned space exploration is an imperialist, white supremacist construct. Read Settlershttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=goh2x_G0ct4
>living on planets
Another thread for retarded groundoids to yell at shit they can’t even comprehend. Why the fuck would anyone try terraforming when orbital structures supported by drone mining is billions of times easier?
fuck off you prolapsed anus fuck.
>>525109>noooo stop trying to colonize space we must save this gay earth!!
lmao get fucked,
>>526277>Thinking existence in a lifeless void that kills humans on contact is easier than life on the planet we evolved on
Isn't this an 18+ board?
>>526281>thinks that just because he's a retard and cant figure out ways to survive in space or foreign planets then nobody can
Yeah, it's +18 board
what are you doing here?
>or even america still exists in the future
It probably will. America is so culturally similar that even a socialist america would be the same boundaries minus PR and maybe hawaii.
>>525984>space travel is as useful to humanity as pure mathematics. you've been psyopped by technocrats into believing naked monkeys somehow have a higher destiny to spread their filth to other planets. if we want finer manipulation and analysis of materials for research purposes drones and robots are more apt. cease your hubris stupid primate
it costs next to nothing to leave Earth, and their are a lot of people who want to leave, what are you gonna do, shoot down their ship
Human evolution has literally stopped.
Look up punctuated equilibrium.
this is the level of education and intelligence of anti-space dumbfucks: thinking you make a space elevator for the sake of getting to another planet
>>525109>Dyson Spheres are nonsense that ignore where we would get the resources from to even build one when the Sun alone is 99% of the solar system’s entire mass
A it's not a solid shell it's a swarm of solar energy collector satellites that surround the sun, you can build by disassembling mercury.
You can do it in phases, build a small array of energy collectors and then use that energy to build more collectors, scale up the production until it's so big that it can convert the entire planet. By the way you can get matter out of the sun too. Most of that matter is in form of plasma which has an electric charge. That means you can use magnetic fields to manipulate it. You have to heat parts of the sun to make it eject plasma that you can catch with huge ass electromagnetic ring funnels. You need at least a partially constructed dysons sphere to build and power this thing. The good news is that if you take matter out of the star it will last much longer and make more energy.
you are literally describing magic
Thats extremely bold claim.
We literally went from endurance hunters to farmers right to sedentary lifestyle in just couple of 1000 of years. Its quite naive our body will not adapt.
I mean people in Himalayas have already very distinct respiratory system from other human just by living in the oxigen poor enviroment.
>>527035>you are literally describing magic
No, all the physics involved in this is very basic, the only remarkable thing about this is scale.
Also even them people did change, humans before the creation of farming where taller and more muscular than most people today, but what i was saying is that with the creation of human edition technologies from prostetics to genetic engineering, humans in the future will be mostly changed to the point of being almost unrecognizable, at best there will be some that look like modern day humans but you know how people are.
>>527060>the only remarkable thing about this is scale.
So magic then.
even if its possible to genetically engineer humans to be *magically* resistant to the perils of space, why do that? the only reason i can think of is that organisms might be better at detecting unforeseeable discrepancies than robots. still, you are going to send people to be stranded off in some fuck off rock to study rocks. but you really only care about space colonization for your shitty science fantasy fuelled technocratic religion. it's not grounded in any material reality>>526608>costs next to nothing to leave Earth
you are delusional>and there are a lot of people who want to leave
doesn't mean they will get to leave>what are you gonna do, shoot down their ship
the hell which will be experienced by the few the alpha apes permit to be lab rats will experience in space would be enough. exposed flesh bipeds glitch their circuits after being quarantined on earth where we actually have the internet to interact with other people and stay in touch with the outside world. yet locking yourself in a steel death chamber is somehow better because you get a spiritual experience looking into the black hostile void of space. it's funny as you could get a far more comfortable view if we managed to just reduce the light pollution, but no. primates need to spread their shitty concrete hives everywhere that exists. once more, the cold war was a mistake
Don't care, gonna upload my mind into a robot, seethe meatlet
Only biology can accommodate intelligence.
>>527528>you are delusional
no I'm not, the cost of launching to space has fallen considerably in the past few decades, at ti will fall further, space is filled with free plentiful resources, and its vastness offers the chance to build a new world to all who wish to do so, space is just as inevitable as the new world. >primates need to spread their shitty concrete hives everywhere that exists
its simple natural selection https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Psz42TkcUrQ
if it make you feel better about your biological form, sure go with that.
Show me a robot with general intelligence.
if robots can be intelligent enough to not need humans then that's more reasons to cut naked monkeys out of the equation. ofc we are assuming here that "mind uploading" such that you have an actual continuity of consciousness in a materialist atheist metaphysic is possible>>527566>the cost of launching to space has fallen considerably in the past few decades, at ti will fall further
sure, it will fall, but how cheap is it going to reach? that graph showing the price of low earth orbit groups a fucking space shuttle with
space elevators. this isn't even to mention the cost of maintenance. most people aren't going to sustain that. note that most people don't just own their own private jets despite reducing costs. the prices of air travel is reduced since you travel with a shit ton of people, the craft is reusable in a way that meaningfully cuts costs, and you are only paying for the trip. more people means more fuel. not only to carry those people, but also the the essential supplies they would need. the longer the journey, the more supplies needed, the more precious fuel required, the more expensive. spacex says they have reusable rockets but they barely cut prices. certainly not enough for mass scale commercial use. maybe in the future the production costs of reusing equipments somehow reduces, but im not seeing it currently. lastly you are only paying for the trip. the people traveling are either willing lab rat consumers and voluntary serfs. all of this is dependant on the whims of billionares. if it isn't profitable, it's unlikely to happen. currently space travel isn't btw. all of these private companies are government contractors. things are thus naturally geared towards a) research which most likely doesn't need to ship pollution apes to distant rocks b) reconnaissance satellites c) military shipment which seems like something spacex is looking towards: https://www.businessinsider.com/musks-spacex-partners-us-military-to-deliver-weapons-by-rockets-2020-10>space is filled with free plentiful resources
see: >>525099 it isn't free. rockets require resources to construct and large amounts of non-renewable fuel>space is just as inevitable as the new world
it's not even comparable. it's a vague analogy obscuring the fact that you really didn't need any real technological advancements to get across the atlantic. columbus as not the first. there was no magical planetary terraforming that needed to be done. i dont get why futurists act as though anything they say is realistic even though it is all contingent on technological advancements we neither have or there being any hint of us having.
this isn't to mention the fact that the settlers of the new world had a little disease called prarie madness. they were able to look at nature, work the land and have fresh air!
>>527843>most people don't just own their own private jets despite reducing costs
most people do however, use air travel >spacex says they have reusable rockets but they barely cut prices. certainly not enough for mass scale commercial use.
Vertically launched and landed spacecraft, are actioully a lot cheaper to launch then tradition rockets, the only reason why it looks like they aren't is because of the way the American gov procures launches from SpaceX they end up getting a high markup. Also keep in mind that this tech is less then a decade old, and a lot of rocket manufactures have plans in mind for rockets that will be a lot cheaper. >all of this is dependant on the whims of billionares
No, China and Russia have reusable rockets in development, the patents for the Falcon9 and Starship will expire. >rockets require resources to construct and large amounts of non-renewable fuel
You only have to pay for a rocket once to set up mining and automated manufacturing on an asteroid, in the long term it is orders of magnitudes cheaper then having earth based mining which needs constant cost inputs. >it's a vague analogy obscuring the fact that you really didn't need any real technological advancements to get across the atlantic.
This is false. Deep sea navigation, sturdy ship hulls, astronomy based star navigation, food and water storage, etc are all technologies that were necessary for cross Atlantic navigation and trade. >even though it is all contingent on technological advancements we neither have or there being any hint of us having.
Every technology we have was thought to be impossible before it was invented. Seance 1500 their has been constant technological growth, their is little sign that it will stop anytime soon.
>>527889>most people do however, use air travel
not an argument. i spent the time outlining the technological requirements for such usage>the only reason why it looks like they aren't is because of the way the American gov procures launches from SpaceX they end up getting a high markup
please elaborate>No, China and Russia have reusable rockets in development
only billionaires are give the pretensions of planning to colonize space. i already pointed out they are more realistically married to state interests which i outlined>You only have to pay for a rocket once to set up mining and automated manufacturing on an asteroid
where the fuck are they going to get the fuel from? from space alien fossils?>This is false. Deep sea navigation, sturdy ship hulls, astronomy based star navigation, food and water storage, etc are all technologies that were necessary for cross Atlantic navigation and trade
obviously you needed a boat and and way to navigate. this wasn't stuff europeans didn't already have for centuries. it wasn't a situation where europeans were high on blind hopium for some manifest human destiny>Every technology we have was thought to be impossible before it was invented
religion. i can dream up whatever insane technological advancement i want. it doesn't mean it will come true. people easily say this bullshit about things like faster than life travel. just because a proposition is true doesn't logically imply the inverse is true>Seance 1500 their has been constant technological growth, their is little sign that it will stop anytime soon
yup i am really enjoying the iphone 15
Lmao kinda wild to see a sci-fi writer join the DSA which is based though, sci-fi is a left wing genre
DSA isn't left wing. Its filled with AOC foot worshipers.
>>527929>only billionaires are give the pretensions of planning to colonize space. i already pointed out they are more realistically married to state interests which i outlined
and all great powers have geopolitical incentives to colonize space>where the fuck are they going to get the fuel from? from space alien fossils?https://www.nasa.gov/isru
>>527962>being horny means right wing
idk man I'd assume it depends on which chapter you're apart of. Its not like the DSA WANTS to remain the AOC party forever, they want more and more members to run for and win electiona, just like any other political party.
It just so happens they're the biggest one in town. I dont blame any comrade for joining the DSA, because at least they're joining a party. Thats so much more than leftcomfag could ever accomplish
>>527964>and all great powers have geopolitical incentives to colonize space
interesting. at least on mars they are speculating about someway to do this. none of this has actually been implemented however, but whatever. maybe it's less fantastical than terraforming another planet
the dsa isn’t a party
burger politics are dumb
OP, not only do you misuse that Zizek quote but you're essentially assuming that future technoscientific advancements and discoveries are impossible. Eventually humanity will have to venture into space, if only because most natural resources on Earth are finite.>>525124
Living in space will could have advantages to society if space travel becomes common.>>525135
You underestimate the evil and stupidity of bureaucrats.
Because it’s valid, space is a meme who knows if it’s even real. Have you seen space? Didn’t think so.
>>528045> but you're essentially assuming that future technoscientific advancements and discoveries are impossible.
I disagree with Whig history, this nonsensical idea that humanity’s “destiny” (wtf is Marxist about “destiny”?) is in space of all fucking places, that tech allows for godly powers, and that you can definitely predict the world hundreds of years from now>>527039
The changes to the human body in the past 10,000 years are extremely minimal
Not much “adaptation” was needed for a planet where we can breathe the air without assistance, can walk around many if not most places with little clothing and feel fine, had an abundance of food even prior to agriculture, and provides all recourses we’ve ever used for our technological advance and crafting.
You’re pretending like space is an extension of Earth when it actually isn’t.>>527029
It’s funny how step one for your stupid fucking Dyson Sphere techno-woo involves dismantling an entire fucking planet
>>528393>I disagree with Whig history, this nonsensical idea that humanity’s “destiny” (wtf is Marxist about “destiny”?) is in space of all fucking places, that tech allows for godly powers, and that you can definitely predict the world hundreds of years from now
Most of the "easy" resources are in asteroids and the biggest power source is the sun, the prediction that people will go to space is just the assumption that people will go where the energy and resources are. Once a technology is developed it will not appear as a godly power.
>The changes to the human body in the past 10,000 years are extremely minimal
Yes people mostly haven't changed in the last 30.000 years, even people from 70.000 years ago would probably still appear as indistinguishable from people of today.
People will eventually use science to modify their biology, that is not going to happen in the near or medium term future, because the tech isn't there and if you do bio modification in class society, the ruling class becomes biologically different from humans, and then they will get killed off as a rival species. But once class society has evaporated and the anti science subjectivity of class societies has given way to a more materialist and objective world view, it would be rational to do self bio modification, and over hundreds or thousands of years that could change humanity. It's really difficult to predict what direction the changes would go, but consider that technology has allowed humans to live in more environments as well as living longer and healthier lives, so my guess is that future biomod people would have bodies that can survive in more hostile environments, be healthier and live for longer. Technology also has made human lives less fragile, the environment is less likely to kill humans so if we mirror the same trends to bio modding, human biology would also become more robust that makes it harder to inflict injuries and render people able to recover from more severe damage. We also have used technology to increase our ability to derive sustenance, so we could get better digestion organs. We have used technology to improve our senses and our ability to manipulate matter, so better sensory organs and stronger more precise appendages. I don't know if we can make people more intelligent. If I'm continuing with the external technology to internal technology reflection thesis, we could get better memory and better maths skills because we have build calculators and data storage.
>Not much “adaptation” was needed for a planet where we can breathe the air without assistance, can walk around many if not most places with little clothing and feel fine, had an abundance of food even prior to agriculture, and provides all recourses we’ve ever used for our technological advance and crafting. You’re pretending like space is an extension of Earth when it actually isn’t.
Earth is essentially just a big space-station, so we are already living in space, and it's only natural that we would eventually try to build more space stations to live on. The big promise of building stuff in space is that you can have pedal to the metal mega industry and pristine untouched nature at the same time. A few hundred years into the future, earth could be a perfectly clean unpolluted paradise if we move industrial systems into space. Even People living in space would live in artificial gravity cylinders that has an earth-like ecology that provides better quality of live than most people have today, that floats next to a zero G industrial plant of titanic proportions.
>It’s funny how step one for your stupid fucking Dyson Sphere techno-woo involves dismantling an entire fucking planet
Nobody is using mercury, it's very close to the sun and it's way too extreme temperature wise (-170°C / -300°F to 450°C / 800°F ) for basically anything other than being a dead rock. It also doesn't have an atmosphere which means there would be no protection from meteorites, why would you care if it gets mined ? It's composition is 2/3 metal which makes it an ideal source of building materials for a Dyson Sphere. And It's got low gravity so it's relatively easy to remove material.
space science is a worthwhile thing. but believing we will settle any other celestial body is fucking retarded. we haven't even settled the Antartic yet
asteroid mining could be a useful thing to get at certain materials like rare earth metals and maybe gold and platinum. mining the moon for Helium-3 could also be useful
Close enough for burgerland.
We need support from our comrades in space. Humans are too primitive species to achieve FALGSC.
based and posadas pilled
People believe in voting, that's for from the dumbest fantasy and from the list, it's that doesn't do any harm.
>>528045>assuming that future technoscientific advancements and discoveries are impossible
They would've happened by now if they were possible.
>>529648>They would've happened by now if they were possible.
you could say the same about airplanes in the 1800s
how do these things get us communism what the point?>>528529> because the tech isn't there and if you do bio modification in class society, the ruling class becomes biologically different from humans, and then they will get killed off as a rival species.
sounds like a good reason NOT to
>>531394>how do these things get us communism what the point?
they don't harm, besids its inevidable
Retard can’t even spell the word “inevitable”
Dyson spheres are more or less Dyson swarms. You can acquire the material by mining asteroids.
where did zizek say this?
I used the image because it suited my argument, it’s a meme, context is irrelevant
I wasn't replying to you, anon. Relax
thanks for the source and context>>531942
i wasn't trying to suggest anything bad about the quote or its relevance
Capitalism has to modify humans using drugs and surgeries to suit itself as it is centered around profit, not human wellbeing.
The fundamental goal of communism is to maximize human wellbeing, so no biological modification is necessary. It's changing the rules of the game instead of just giving everyone tommy john surgery.
>Dyson Spheres are nonsense that ignore where we would get the resources from to even build one when the Sun alone is 99% of the solar system’s entire mass
You answered your own question
Investing in space is good but it should be for the benefit of science and discovery (which will ultimately benefit the masses), not billionaire egos. It should be 100% publicly funded, in fact privately owned rockets should be shot down on sight.
>>537451>Investing in space is good but it should be for the benefit of science and discovery (which will ultimately benefit the masses), not billionaire egos. It should be 100% publicly funded, in fact privately owned rockets should be shot down on sight.
space should be devloped so people can leave this gay earth
>>536814>We will go mine the massive ball of literal plasma (not solid material for the non-retards in the audience) that will certainly destroy every piece of material we send towards it to make le heckin Dyson Sphere!
You realize you’re a moron, yea?
anon your assuming space flight doesnt cost so much that billionaires wouldnt be able to afford it without the support of capitalists
Well even if you did manage to make a Dyson Sphere how are you going to prevent the Sun from going Red Giant thus destroying the Sphere. Like you wasted all that time building it only to have it get destroyed. I know its like in a billion years and whatever but god damn.
Yea Dyson Spheres are inherently retarded boyo
bruh that is billions of years in the future why you care ?
everyone spewing that shit obviously believes we’ll have interstellar travel and more spheres by then
Those people can lick my taint
Lets be honest, building a giant frame around the Sun is not a good idea, instead wouldn't it make more sense to harvest the energy like we already do with mirrors and a swarm.>>537652
Look man I am just stating a point alright. Not that we still be alive when it happens. But I think I bring it up because I don't know was thinking about this shit. Not that is a good reason but just dawned on me.>>537653
Well I think the first thing is first is we would need to have a way to get into space where we can figure out how to create artifical gravity before even thinking about interstellar travel. Like the moon bases and mars bases, well that's cool and all so we just going have weaker humans then that be unable to return to Earth? Because their bones and muscles would be destroyed from Earth's normal Gravity. Its stuff like this that goes through my mind thinking about space. It be cool to travel but we have to solve so many issues first before we can even remotely leave the Earth if we wanted too even. Also the fact that we would have to be a interstellar Species of a K3 to K4 Civilization if we are already harnessing the power of our own star.
That is estimated 5 billion years from now and with star lifting it is theoretically possible to remove matter from the sun to put it back in a more controlled manner given the sun's fusion reaction is far from optimal.
To be real whole push for "space exploration" these days sounds like a psyop to me. As as if we are in any position now as a civilization to be engaging in such wanks as the world faces unprecedented crises and the species could well face extinction this century. Space exploration has always been idealized as aspirational . But do you know what is more inspirational? Keeping civilization from collapsing or improving it :) Or preventing mass extinction so that the priceless, unique, and irreplaceable biological treasures of evolution might be preserved :) or developing a more rational, utilitarian, and prosperous society for everyone :)
Space exploration by the likes of Musk, Bezos and Branson etc is the most obscene form of conspicuous consumption because it symbolizes the billionaire's arrogance to wish to escape earth itself as beneath them, while the filthy earth-scum beneath us, human, dog, fly, ant, bacteria all, remains fully and definitively beneath them. It's a sick god complex, whether it is nation states vying for power or nation-state level net worth individuals narcissistically trying to outperform each other. In either case humanity suffers. Fix earth's problems first.
There are real benefits to space technology, given the system of satellites that provides monitoring and communications globally.
Moreover, cheaper transportation into orbit provides the possibility of zero-G manufacturing that can produce products otherwise impossible within a gravity well., as well as control pollution by keeping dangerous byproducts out of the atmosphere.
Space exploration is whittled down to nothing more than private corporations sending people to the moon and mars and creating space colonies. The golden age of space exploration has ended. Every benefit we could get from space like satellites for GPS or tracking weather or communication has ended. There is not a single company trying to pursue asteroid mining nor any space agency trying to pursue it. They are only focused on sending people into the outer edge of the atmosphere and celebrating doing something we have been able to do since 1960.
The future of space exploration will be NASA getting defunded and replaced by space x. Space X will do barely anything while subsisting on huge government subsidies.
I hate musk shills and i hope they all get shot.
You do realize it's possible to synthesize heavier elements from lighter ones right?
we are all already in space
It's a massive waste of money and resources that could be used to actually better humanity and life on earth.
Name literally one benefit to space exploration, you can't, it's a useless field and rockets accelerate climate change, so it's activeky harmful
>>556291>NO YOU CAN'T EXPLORE THE ONLY FRONTIER LEFT FOR HUMANY, YOU HAVE TO SPEND ALL THE MONEYS ON THE POC SO WE STAY ON THIS ROCK UNTIL THE SUN EXPLODES
You anti-space luddites are completely worthless.
The deep ocean is less explored than outer space, stop watching Star Trek it's ruined your brain
It doesn't matter, the space question is religious in nature, spacers embody the pioneer spirit of humanity while antispacers embody the worst impulses of humanity, prefering stagnation. You have the same mindset as the confusian beaurocrats that ordered the destruction of the great Ming fleet.
No it isn't, that's a pop-sci myth.
What a load of shite. Nobody has gone back to the moon on a manned mission because manned missions are relatively pointless compared to robotic ones, robot missions can gather more data much more cheaply and with minimal risk to anyone. The point of sending men to the moon was a propaganda victory, not really a scientific one. So why would anyone do it again at an enormous expense without really impressing anyone?
So we need to keep pumping rocket fuel into the air to satisfy your ego, ok
>>537647>it's pointless to build anything if it will be destroyed in a billion years
The costs and invorentmental impact of spaceflight today are ridicoulusly miniscue in the grand scheme of things. The only think you have to do is not get in Elon's way while he colonizes Mars
>>556520>The space question is religious in nature
Exactly why outer space is the stupidest thing that there is
Tesla will go under in five years and take Elon with him
I mean we have explored a lot more of the deep ocean than we have of the entirety of space, obviously, but we probably know more about the area directly surrounding Earth (ie low Earth orbit) than we do about the deep ocean.
Tesla is making billions in profit right now and there is zero indication it will stop. Even bears say 10 million vehicles per year by 2030. And most of Elon's networth is SpaceX, so even if Tesla magically goes bankrupt, it can't take him down.
Not much stuff in LEO besides really thin air and some passing asteroids, orbital matter at this elevation tends to loose speed ending up burning in the atmosphere.
We know a lot in cosmological terms though, about objects like galaxies, stars, black holes… We also know quite a lot on how this stuff happens. What we don't know about is the stuff there is in other solar systems aside the stars themselves, and it is quite big: exoplanets, exolife, other civilizations etc. But the James Webb Space Telescope launching soon will help us to know this stuff better.
fuck space, space is for stupid nerds who watch star trek
the ocean it's superior to it in every way
Bad take, friend. Star trek is cool af. Except Discovery. Trash show.
This. Space travel and environmentalism are part of the whole reactionary obsession with "universe" and "nature", which is both irrational and fascistic in its core.
There is literally no point in space travel, we should be focusing on helping humanity here on earth instead.
I honestly wish I could condemn you to an early-phase martian hellscape bubble-"habitat" for the rest of your life. Literally a worse poster than eugene because you don't even have the apparent excuse of being a schizo.
>>557205>Nature is fascist
It’s amazing how many people here should be straight up imprisoned for criminally retarded opinions
Humans and society/culture are nature. The obsession with the difference is fascist.
Okay based if you’re realizing the difference between humanity and Nature is purely philosophical
>>557205>There is literally no point in space travel, we should be focusing on helping humanity here on earth instead.
Space does help people on Earth. This is an objective fact. https://spinoff.nasa.gov/
This must be stressed out. And there's still a lot to be done for direct gains:
We need infrared satellites in Lagrange 1 between the sun and the earth to do an inventory of hazardous asteroids, we can't prevent earthquakes or volcano eruptions, but we can save millions if not the whole human race with it by knowing spatial borne threats.
We need more weather sats that can monitor the current global warming, fires etc. This can help us to organize a better response to those problems.
We need high tech big ass telescopes shielded from the sun to detect other civilizations and study them to better understand ourselves an gain technological insights.
For the rest, we need to push forward, most scientific endeavors don't have immediate gains, some things unimaginable today could eventually better our lives and societies, but we have explore and be curious for these things to happen.
Which didn't happen.
>>556527>w-we don't go to the Moon anymore because we just don't want to!!!1
Dude, just go read Wikipedia and see the insane amount of coping those guys produce towards USSR's space achievements. Whenever there are talks about ANYTHING space-related in US media, it's always in relation to Soviets. American rockets of the time were supposedly better designed? Well, why is it then they are all in museum, their super-duper-moon-reaching engines completely forgotten, despite being more high-tech and better efficiency that Soviet engines? How come NASA has lost all the telemetry data of their Moon landings? Why all the blueprints for working and totally efficient and better-than-Soviets rockets, engines, moon landing modules, all of those blueprints gone because of "lol we didn't have enough space so we burned the papers"? Why the hell were americans going into space while shit was flying around the astronauts, because only Soviets somehow managed to design a working space toilet? How the hell did americans go to the Moon in their space suits, if present day designs of everyone's suits are based off Soviet designs?
It's fucking dumb how much NASA needs to defend itself against such logical inconsistencies. Russia/USSR doesn't go through this shit, as their documentation is full and non-contradictory, their rockets are still in use, their tech is still relevant. China's similar, everyone else is like that as well. But oh, only USA has an insane amount of "conspiracy" theories regarding space, because of USA having incomplete data of their own space exploration.
And the funniest shit is, despite NASA literally having a department for combatting unbelievers in Moon Landing, they don't spare any real amount of resources on actually providing present day quality photos of their landings.
>>525370>Boris: Comrade Ivan, there is terrible news today: the Yankee imperialists have beaten us to the Moon. What should we do?>Ivan: Let’s just shit-can our entire space program.>Boris: But comrade, we are so close to success! And we have so much invested in the effort!>Ivan: Fuck it! If we can’t be first, we aren’t going at all.>Boris: But I beg of you comrade! The moon has so much to teach us, and the Americans will surely not share with us the knowledge they have gained.>Ivan: Nyet!
That's a pretty accurate description of USSR's reasons for not sending a man to the Moon - presented in liberal russian media. And thus the official political line of capitalsit Russia.
They've lost the original Armstrong's landing? Fucking lol
>As it turns out, however, NASA doesn’t actually have all of that Moonwalking footage anymore. Truth be told, they don’t have any of it. According to the agency, all the tapes were lost back in the late 1970s. All 700 cartons of them. As Reuters reported on August 15, 2006, “The U.S. government has misplaced the original recording of the first moon landing, including astronaut Neil Armstrong’s famous ‘one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind’ … Armstrong’s famous moonwalk, seen by millions of viewers on July 20, 1969, is among transmissions that NASA has failed to turn up in a year of searching, spokesman Grey Hautaluoma said. ‘We haven’t seen them for quite a while. We’ve been looking for over a year, and they haven’t turned up,’ Hautaluoma said … In all, some 700 boxes of transmissions from the Apollo lunar missions are missing.”
>>557701>As it turns out, however, NASA doesn’t actually have all of that Moonwalking footage anymore. Truth be told, they don’t have any of it. According to the agency, all the tapes were lost back in the late 1970s. All 700 cartons of them. As Reuters reported on August 15, 2006, “The U.S. government has misplaced the original recording of the first moon landing, including astronaut Neil Armstrong’s famous ‘one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind’ … Armstrong’s famous moonwalk, seen by millions of viewers on July 20, 1969, is among transmissions that NASA has failed to turn up in a year of searching, spokesman Grey Hautaluoma said. ‘We haven’t seen them for quite a while. We’ve been looking for over a year, and they haven’t turned up,’ Hautaluoma said … In all, some 700 boxes of transmissions from the Apollo lunar missions are missing.”https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iR3oXFFISI0
Actual footage on ass-old films, not digitalized stuff. They upscale old movies today via using old films, for example - that tech has higher resolution than digital cameras.
Also, lol'd at like-dislike ratio and comments. If when those videos were first shown on TVs had third of US population having doubts they actually landed on the Moon (according to polls), today it must be close to 50/50. Believers in Moon Landing are actually a dying breed.
So NASA faked us all and the "one small step for a man" is BS?
The Moon landing was real, they Soviets would have called them out on faking it.
No they didn’t, they confirmed the Lunar Landing then simply maintained there was never a race to the Moon and the Soviets were always pursuing other objectives
if they actually did i don’t think this would be the first time i’m hearig about it
I (can)t believe this dogshit OP got this many replies. What a stupid fucking pretentious fucking set pf claims to make from some boring ummackshually Poindexter. You should have been bullied more and maybe you would learn some humility. Space is fucking awesome and all this fantastical technology human beings dream up is awesome as well. Will any of us be around when it is implemented? Probably not. But it's cool and enjoyable to think about. I hate you close minded wet blankets the most that think you are smart just for telling someone something is unfeasible. And your pseud daddy Slavoj Zizek is dogshit as well. He says some kind of funny and laconic autistic shit every now and sandwiches it in between dogshit ignorant pseudoscientific assumptions and magical thinking of his that is excused just because he acts like a loose slob and speaks in vagueries. Is he as shit as Jordan Peterson? No. Does he excuse your whiney gnat behavior from a well earned swirly? Also no.
Or Soviets were covering up Americans for economic and political reasons. You know, khruschevites sabotaging socialism through the picture of superior capitalist system. Think about it: how are you going to transition to capitalism, seizing public property into your private hands, if population will consider socialism superior due to space supremacy of communists? I mean, there's only three countries in the world that have sent men to space on their rockets, them being USA, USSR (Russia inherited this tech) and China, 2 out of 3 were communists. Even DPRK sends satellites into space, a feat impossible for other third world countries of similar wealth.
USA didn't send anyone to the Moon, since they don't have the tech for it even today. Uncertain proof of that is zero of 1960-70s USA rocket tech - or descendants of it - being in use today. USA has to invent and produce ALL the required tech from the ground up - from space toilets and space suits (both Soviet/Russian derivatives) to engines (USA bought up a lot of Soviet engines in 1990s), while the old tech is both lost (or so NASA claims) and discarded.>>558989
See? That's the funniest part about it. Soviets had all the technology ready - for example, present day Russian (and ISS's) cargo rockets were created with Moon mission in mind. Once Korolyov has died, his engineers were fired, rocketry was artificially placed into development hell with them ditching Korolyov's design in favor of the new guy's designs, resulting in going over already covered ground but for new rockets, etc. At the same time, Americans were touring Soviet space objects every fucking day, and who the hell knows what they were doing there.
>>559310> I (can)t believe this dogshit OP got this many replies. What a stupid fucking pretentious fucking set pf claims to make from some boring ummackshually Poindexter
You fucking retard, the reason your dogshit counter begins with calling me a nerd is because you know I simply know more than you do and my argument does not center around treating dogshit science-FICTION stories as reality.> You should have been bullied more and maybe you would learn some humility.
You should’ve been shot, because you are cattle> Space is fucking awesome and all this fantastical technology human beings dream up is awesome as well
Don’t care bitch, superpowers, the Force, and fucking lightsabers are also cool, doesn’t make them real you moronic faggot.> Will any of us be around when it is implemented?
They will likely not be “implemented” mouth breather> But it's cool and enjoyable to think about.
Again, don’t care
If your only rebuttal is that I hurt your feelings you should honestly just go back to kindergarten or enroll in special ed you stupid monkey
It's kinda weird with moon-hoaxers today, while the space race was happening, each side congratulated the other when they achieved something noteworthy, like fair play sportsmanship. The moon landing was a cool thing the US did, it was pioneer-work and peaceful exploration. It was one of the few shared goals that existed in the cold war.
Most people who uphold the legacy of the Soviet Union will also defend the fact that the moon-landing happened, because the Soviet Union did technically score more points overall in the space race, even if they didn't win the big ticket item. Also it was an awesome achievement and it would be kinda petty to not give credit.
The inexplicable phenomenon is the people who are really pro capitalists politically that are trying to erase the moon landing from memory, despite that it was a victory for the capitalist block.
The thing I don’t get is, the Soviets explicate that their ultimate goal was a space station, which is something they accomplished, so I don’t know why a pro-Soviet would feel a need to deny the Moon Landing anyway. I’m guessing they must be Yanks or Anglos working from the purely Yank/Anglo perspective that the “Space Race” was all about the Moon and thus whoever got their first “won”.
Shouldn’t the Space Race be seen as one of the few times the US and Soviets competed to do something that bettered mankind?
Hypothetically why does “who won” even actually matter?
all prose no substance nor argument
>>567034>The moon landing was a cool thing the US did, it was pioneer-work and peaceful exploration. It was one of the few shared goals that existed in the cold war.
Back then most of americans were saying something along the lines of "it would be better if the state spent this money on the people", and up to a half of US population having doubts that Moon landing happened. In the Third World, MAJORITY OF PEOPLE POLLED responded in regards to the questions of Moon landing that Soviets landed on the Moon, that's how unprobable American lead was in their eyes.
>The moon landing was a cool thing the US did, it was pioneer-work and peaceful exploration. It was one of the few shared goals that existed in the cold war.
is the effect of gaslighting propaganda that happened over the past half a century that made you believe that Moon landing is an unquestionable fact. Similar shit to French opinion shifting from majority thinking that USSR won the WW2 to thinking that USA contributed the most. Pure unadulterated propaganda, unsubstantiated in reality.
Like, look at this shit https://news.gallup.com/poll/3712/landing-man-moon-publics-view.aspx
Even when polls clearly say that half the population don't even know american astronauts, that's how insignificant they are, they can't help but try to gaslight you:
>Alan Shepard (who was the first man into space)
They ALWAYS try to undo the damage USSR did to USA's prestige through propaganda efforts, from trying to erase Gagarin to claiming various falsehoods about USSR's space program. In 1960-70s, USA's press was choke full of outright DENIAL that USSR sent Sputnik into space, or that Gagarin was the first man into space. Hell, there was a whole plethora of fakers like those italian brothers who have claimed to be receiving radio signals of Soviet cosmonauts crying in agony, lol.
See this shit?
>One assumes that it is young Americans who are least likely to remember Armstrong, since they were not alive at the time of the historic mission. Is this true?
No, exactly the opposite is true. Those who are now 18-29 years old, and thus who were not yet born in 1969, are most likely to be able to name Neil Armstrong. The older one gets, the less likely he or she is to name Armstrong, culminating in the fact that only 29% of those 65 and older can name him. It can be assumed that the youngest Americans are most likely to have run across the Armstrong name in their history classes, while older Americans, who may have watched on television, have fading memories when it comes to specifics.
Older folks have lower knowledge of American pride. Because, you know, GASLIGHTING and PROPAGANDA.
In Russia and former USSR, it's exactly the opposite, with state propaganda throughout 1990s and 2000s trying it's hardest to portray USA as the winners of space race, and only when conflicts with the West started state machine backing down from trying to deny and falsify Russia's own space history.>>566988
What the fuck are you talking about?
Because the search for truth demands you to see Moon landing for what it actually is - a hoax.
>A July1970 poll found 30% of Americans declaring Apollo 11 to be a fake. That number remained relatively high throughout the '70s, when several books were published and a 1978 film about a phony mission to Mars, Capricorn One, convinced many that a moon landing was also a scripted piece of high-technology bunk.
Oh wow, the people who had the lived experience of seeing the broadcasts from the Moon live had a very high percentage of doubt over the reality of Moon landing. Huh.
>>536247>The fundamental goal of communism is to maximize human wellbeing, so no biological modification is necessary
This argument is predicated on the false assumption that bio modification can't be used to maximize human wellbeing.
THe most insane thing about the moon landings is that the astronauts managed to RETURN from the moon. When only a couple of years before they had INSANE difficulty in putting people in orbit.
And seriously people read that wagging the moon doggie article. A lot of people have don't believe the 9/11 narrative but believe something even more ridiculous like the moon landings.
>>582846>NOOOOOOOOOOO 9/11 TRUTHER>NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO WE DID LAND ON THE MOON!>NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO TAKE THE VAX YOU CATTLE
Imagine being a slave-brained liberal.
What's really crazy is how they did it, with a shitty and buggy computer in a fucking tin can, this took real courage.
But the people who are really mad (and scientifically illiterate) are those who think it could have been faked with 60s tech:https://youtu.be/_loUDS4c3Cs
Too bad the soviets fucked up the N1, it would have been cool to have a red flag up there.
>>582876>It's more likely that they went to the moon, landed, and returned safely than faking footage with low quality video and strings.
It's not that it's more likely. It's that it would have been impossible to fake it unless the US government somehow hid a 20 to 30 years advance in computers and video recording technology. The USSR also would have to be in on it.
I can't follow your logic. Explain in detail your thinking, how fakes are more improbable than real Moon landing. I mean, Americans were filming Moon landing movies before and after the supposed Moon landing, and they had big ass Moon globes with painted on craters and such waaay before supposed Moon landing. Laser ranging to the Moon was done by both USA and USSR before any kind of retroreflectors were put onto the Moon as well.
>>582882>It's not that it's more likely. It's that it would have been impossible to fake it unless the US government somehow hid a 20 to 30 years advance in computers and video recording technology. The USSR also would have to be in on it.
Yeah that's true video technology from the 60s was not capable of doing that, but people all have the experience now that really convincing CGI exists, so you have to preface this argument with a lecture on the history of film making.
>>582876>What's really crazy is how they did it, with a shitty and buggy computer in a fucking tin can, this took real courage.
So, here's new stuff you have to debunk, baka.https://zen.yandex.ru/media/id/6070dcbbd930ca190fa75c8c/polety-vo-sne-i-naiavu-614064064ab4711bd2ef4ca3?&utm_campaign=dbr
In short, russian cosmonauts, and american ones today, have to be carried out of their landing vehicles, while in 1960s american astronauts just waltzed out with huge smiles on their faces. Because, you know, Soviets didn't want to look weak, so they hid the real state of their cosmonauts when they landed, so it was secret informantion, and americans had no clue how the astronauts would feel themselves after leaving the vehicles. This idea is also supported by the lack of centrifuges in US space program, by the way, because US technology lacked the precision required for centrifuges.
>>582893>Yeah that's true video technology from the 60s was not capable of doing that
Not capable of doing what? What was it that people couldn't fake on camera, lol? What the fuck am I reading, even? Dolls, strings, overlapping photos and clips>>582897
Doing fucking what, you imbecile?
It's all in the video I posted
Most important point is they did hours long live streaming, we know it's live because no film artifacts.>>582896>US technology lacked the precision required for centrifuges
lol no I could build a centrifuge in my yard so I guess a nuclear power could easily assemble a motor a beam and a seat.
>>582899>Not capable of doing what?
60s video tech was incapable of creating a convincing fake moon-landing, you didn't get that from context ?
>>582897>>582902>In 1969 there was no slow motion!
Oh yes, the technology of copying and pasting existing cadres into the film is total impossibility. You had 10 FPS supposed Moon footage, for fuck's sake. To convert to 30 FPS they had to copy paste cadres TO BEGIN WITH, you imbecile. To represent that footage on TV, it had to be converted to 30 FPS format, and it was done supposedly via shooting a video of a special TV-set that played 10 FPS original footage.
Moreso, look at this shit from wikipedia:
Slow motion can also be used for artistic effect, to create a romantic or suspenseful aura or to stress a moment in time. Vsevolod Pudovkin, for instance, used slow motion in a suicide scene in his 1933 film The Deserter, in which a man jumping into a river seems sucked down by the slowly splashing waves. Another example is Face/Off, in which John Woo used the same technique in the movements of a flock of flying pigeons. The Matrix made a distinct success in applying the effect into action scenes through the use of multiple cameras, as well as mixing slow-motion with live action in other scenes. Japanese director Akira Kurosawa was a pioneer using this technique in his 1954 movie Seven Samurai. American director Sam Peckinpah was another classic lover of the use of slow motion. The technique is especially associated with explosion effect shots and underwater footage.
Yet your genius filmmaker says it was impossible technologically for NASA to fake slow motion on the Moon, LOL. What kind of an imbecile you have to be to seriously think that it's practically impossible to slow down the footage with 1960s tech?
>lol no I could build a centrifuge in my yard so I guess a nuclear power could easily assemble a motor a beam and a seat.
And yet they didn't use centrifuge for astronauts. Because of lack of tech required.>>582911
Dude, it wasn't a convincing fake to begin with >>582786 >>582780
30% americans and majority of Third World didn't believe it.
>>582897>b-but when you do fakes you'll have to avoid scrateches, waves, specks of dust, or else everyone'll know it was edited!
Oh gee, as if NASA sceptics weren't waiving landing denialists', who point to artifacts of footages as the proof of fakery instead of real proofs, by pointing out that those artifacts are just that, edition mistakes, LOL.
>shooting footage at 60 FPS and running it at 30 FPS is harder than going to the Moon
What an absolutely retarded statement.
Still no artifacts so it's live, no film reel, no slow mo.
They built a centrifuge and trained the astronauts on it by the 50s btw, it's the Johnsville Centrifuge, it even got a museum nowadays https://nadcmuseum.org/about/
took me 5 seconds to find, at least I got to find out interesting stuff about space race history because of your delusions so thanks I guess
the movie a space odyssey was shot around that time, and it had the best scifi special effects quality of the time, it's still very watchable today, but none the less i can see that it's a movie, the moon landing footage looks real. If you look at most other 60s scifi footage this story falls apart. And basically you are contradicting the Soviet government which had no incentive to lie, which puts your moon hoax story to rest.
Integrated circuits didn't exist till 1969 and DARPA refused to allow NASA to use them till 1971 as they were primary only used by the US Airforce that refused to share. Thus NASA could not rely on computers to do slow-mo thus need high speed cameras that has the problem that the faster you run the film the higher chance of a jam along with the logistics of changing out film magazines far more frequently. Meanwhile the USSR landed probes on Venus by this time as rocketry had matured greatly by that point.
>>582942>Still no artifacts so it's live
What the fuck are you talking about. There were artifacts, just fucking look at the footages. There could not be NO SPLICES as, how NASA explains it, it was all retranslated by normal camera from a special TV set at NASA, which received the actual footage.
>>582964>Thus NASA could not rely on computers to do slow-mo thus need high speed cameras that has the problem that the faster you run the film the higher chance of a jam along with the logistics of changing out film magazines far more frequently
Oh yes, it was marginally harder, therefore it was impossible to do slow motion!>>582961>the moon landing footage looks real
10 FPS slow mo jumps looks so real I can't believe it's fake!
Marginally harder? Even today nobody has broken 48 frames a second for a feature length film (on actual film). High speed cameras burn through film mags at a insane rate thus why everyone switched to digital quickly when they needed a high frame rate.
>>582971>There were artifacts
no there weren't, there was a centrifuge tho
Apollo 11 had 30 hours of footage from the moon. Even at 24 fps that is 86,400 frames a hours for a total 2,592,000 frames just for 24 frames a second.
Did they, though? NASA has lost all of their original footage, as you surely remember from their explanations as to why they can't show it :)
The vast majority of TV broadcasts are lost to time, it is why lost media is a thing. This is especially true when you are talking about the period before VCRs.
Did you even watch the Mythbusters episode??
Oh yes, proving astronaut could be this much lighted on a photo by silently changing shirts from black to white. Or putting in the improperly calculated coefficient for the astronauts jumping footage, resulting in desync. Or doing the laser ranging experiment without the "control group" - you know, sending the signal NOT to the retroreflector to see if it returns, because, you know, Soviets and Americans both did laser ranging even before the retroreflectors were put in place.
Mythbusters episode was busted. Deal with it.
Lmao do people here actually believe that the moonlanding is fake? How do you cope with the fact that the Soviets tracked the rockets?
Yo bro we landed on the moon. Video evidence? Ugh, it all got flushed down the toilet, here, have this "remake" of the footage bro. Trust me dude.
Your logic is basically, find 100% of the JFK assassination broadcast or it is fake and JFK is still alive. Until VCRs were a thing most broadcasts would not be saved. Why would a capitalist TV station waste money archiving live footage when for far less money they can just create more live content?
They still have SOME footage of the JFK assassination though. They literally have ZERO footage of one of the MOST IMPORTANT MOMENTS IN HUMAN HISTORY.
We have the highlights that is logical when you realize capitalist TV stations are who archived them. NASA didn't see any point in archiving as the point of Apollo 11 was the Saturn V to keep DARPA happy (as the Saturn V could put nuke launches in Earth Orbit) and the moon landing was just public relations.
>>583456>We have the highlights
But we don't though, that's the thing. ANY piece of footage you see of the moon landing is not of the actual landing but was "redone" in a studio after. The ORIGINAL footage, ALL OF IT, is gone.
Wrong, we do have what was shot on film from NASA but what was broadcasted from the moon is lost except for what TV stations saved. https://archive.org/details/flight_of_apollo_11
Your theory of it being redone has the flaw that even the USSR could point their antennas at the moon and receive the 30 some odd hours of video from Apollo 11 that is why the USSR didn't challenge NASA on the moon landing.
>>583489>USSR could point their antennas at the moon and receive the 30 some odd hours
How do you turn your antennas towards Earth's crust and receive 30 some odd hours of video, lol?
>>583456>moon landing was just public relations.
Oh yes, spending every third science dollar onto the Moon program was just public relations thing. And neither did American presidents talk to the entire nation about being first to the Moon!>>583376
Did they, though? It's amazing how rumours, more precisely, a theoretical proof of NASA's Moon landing, becomes the "solid" proof of Soviets actually tracking the rockets. You see, Soviets didn't track them, it's just NASA defenders' idea that Soviets COULD do that getting transformed into Soviets DOING that, because of a "broken phone" phenomena. Soviets DIDN'T receive any Apollo footage - what they had was a retranslation/video footage from Europe. Soviets DIDN'T track Apollos - again, it was on the other side of globe, lol. Soviets DIDN'T prove that retroreflectors are on the Moon - Soviet observatory in Crimea, which supposedly had the coordinates, was doing ranging experiments way before retroreflectors were put on the Moon.
Soviets for NASA are a fucking blessing, I swear. They don't exist, so there's noone to disprove USA's bullshit about Soviets' proving them. Today, we have China, and Americans tried real hard to portray China's Moon photos as if they proved that Apollos' tracks are on the Moon. The thing is, though, Chinese themselves didn't report anything of like! Again, a HYPOTHETICAL OF A PROOF is presented as a proof. And even then they just can't help themselves to portray Chinese as technologically inferior, even if it hurts their own proving potential. They just had to say that Chinese have a worse camera than theirs, don't they?
Funnily enough, there should actually be an easy enough way to prove it.
Apollo 11 should still be in orbit of the moon.
Proving it is kinda pointless, the delusion is rooted so deep in their minds they would just find ridiculous explanations and excuses. "Well they put it there recently" "It's obviously CGI" etc.. Like those flat earthers who do a perfectly valid experiment proving the earth is round so they reject their results on a bullshit reason because it would shatter their core dogma and maybe redefine their personality.
Me I believe at least in less wild conspiracies, like the hypothesis of a part of those moon landing deniers being bad actors doing money on schizo morons or even being part of some sort of alphabet soup agency psyop.
The USSR had powerful antennas on ships and in space by 1969>>584309>Oh yes, spending every third science dollar onto the Moon program was just public relations thing. And neither did American presidents talk to the entire nation about being first to the Moon!
Notice how shortly after the average person stopped carrying about the moon the USA stopped going to the moon while the USSR and PRC sent probes to the moon long after the USA stopped going.
Every big trader in a stock exchange uses OGAS now. They are also the ones with the fastest internet connections as every nanosecond matters.
Your reply is a massive cope and you lack critical thinking skills lmao. The soviets tracked all NASA missions, otherwise they would have no reason to trust them. They also had massive espionage programs going on at the time. The soviets would have easily found out about this eventually (remember there was more than just one Apollo mission). Also can you post proof for those ranging experiments being the same as the ones done with the reflectors?
>>584821>The soviets tracked all NASA missions, otherwise they would have no reason to trust them. They also had massive espionage programs going on at the time.
Post proof lmao.
Soviets believed the word of USA. Just like with Moon's surface being declared solid by an order, similarly, higher-ups decided that Americans were to the Moon. That's it. Korolyov's folks were fired from their jobs for denying Moon landing, even, and this shit happens even today in Roskosmos - firing people for disbelieving the official line. "All scientists think that USA was to the Moon, akshually" is a carefully maintaned propaganda.
>The soviets would have easily found out about this eventually (remember there was more than just one Apollo mission)
Or they were in on it and benefitted from it. Google up when the sale of grain to the Soviets happened, lol. And it's not like USSR/Russia didn't ever admit to bullshit foreigner claims, like with Katyn. There's no reason to believe that it's impossible for USSR/Russia to cooperate with American Moon lies.
>Also can you post proof for those ranging experiments being the same as the ones done with the reflectors?
What do you mean "the same"? Same Crimea observatory of USSR was doing ranging experiments, because lasers capable fo ranging experiments are multipurpose.
Haven't read this https://www.researchgate.net/publication/257528298_About_the_difference_in_performance_of_twin_retroreflector_arrays_mounted_on_the_Lunokhod_rovers
but the author says that it's possible that ranging experiments, American ones included, could have been locating random Moon surface instead of Soviet Lunokhod retroreflectors for the past 40 years.
>>584821>>584967>They also had massive espionage programs going on at the time.
And while we talk about this, what about American astronauts leaving their landing vehicles on their own two feet, while Soviet cosmonauts, as well as modern American astronauts, being carried out by rescue teams out of those vehicles? It was a classified Soviet info, which Americans had no access to, so, they showed movie-level physics in news and media
are you seriously arguing the moon's surface isn't solid
The Moon’s surface is covered in a layer of dust accumulated over billions of years
No, when Soviets were planning Lunokhods, there was no proof that the surface was solid - because, you know, it could have been like sinking sands or shit. To stop the debate and to start developing some concrete designs, Korolyov decided that the Moon surface was solid.
Neither the porkies nor the Zizekfags will be able to take this fact away from us
the first human to leave the planet was a peasant from a worker's state
A kolkhoz boi who joined an aviation club one day.
The USSR send Luna 2 to the moon in 1959 that gave scientists some idea of the surface. Luna 9, 11 and 13 (along with the American probes) confirmed that surface was solid with the only question of how soft it was outside the range of the landed probes and engineer siding on caution and going with vehicles with very low ground pressure.
It was a Russian documentary that I watched that claimed that Korolyov chose one theory over the other, giving out an order that the Moon is solid, making a decision to make Lunokhods geared for solid ground. Maybe I'm explaining it wrong/incoherently, but oh well.
People like Zizek should be used as human experimentation in space.
Out of 3 biggest space powers, 2 are/were communist, and only the strongest capitalist nation can reliably into space out of them all. Isn't that the proof that "Muh Space" belongs to communists?
space belongs to those who occupy it, for occupation is control
If they spent months in space in Salyut or MIR before the time we understood how to counter the effects of micro-gravity on bones and muscle tissue they probably exited in a stretcher yeah. A mission to the moon and back is between one and two weeks so the astronauts were mostly fine. The Russians also landed sometimes very roughly while the Americans used the sea to return on earth.
>>584967>Haven't read this
Yeah you clearly haven't lmao
The first man-made probe to orbit the planet was made by workers who wanted to help bring humanity together in the search for a better future.
So too was the first lunar probe to reach our only natural satellite, so too was the first man in space one of the workers who wished to see the entire planet coming together in unity.
Even the American crews have reported that they want to see the whole world brought together as one after seeing the whole world at the same time. Space belongs to communists.
It's an Frankenstein project made to justify the shitshow that is SLS and that will likely be rendered obsolete by starship. There will not be a permanent crew and I think they recently decided they won't even use it to go on on the moon because it would add to delta v requirements. Having a lab around the moon is certainly cool but it's far from being one of the most important projects of this decade, let alone this century.
its gonna teach us about stellar radiation and health affects
>>586911>that will likely be rendered obsolete by starship
What are you on, I hate capitalists and Musk is one, doesn't change the fact that Starship will offer the possibility to send 100T anywhere in the solar system cheaply, But hey maybe if you plug your ears, close your eyes and cry a lot it will make it go away.
>>587621>doesn't change the fact that Starship will offer the possibility to send 100T anywhere in the solar system cheaply,
It won't. SpaceX merely has unsubstantiated claim about those weights on their website, and knowing Americans, they always lie about their rockets' stats. Say, you can take random American rocket model and it's characteristics, mainly how much weight it can carry, and then check out launches this rocket had and with what weight. They NEVER hit the target they claim for those rockets, lol. In case of Starship and other SpaceX shit, they can send like half the supposed weight at most.
>During a daily briefing today, US State Department Spokesman Ned Price said the test had created more than 1,500 pieces of trackable debris and hundreds of thousands of pieces of un-trackable debris.
>"The Russian Federation recklessly conducted a destructive satellite test of a direct-ascent anti-satellite missile against one of its own satellites," Price said. "This test will significantly increase the risk to astronauts and cosmonauts on the International Space Station as well as to other human spaceflight activities. Russia's dangerous and irresponsible behavior jeopardizes the long-term sustainability of outer space."
What the fuck. Russia wants to destroy the space stations?
Shockingly capitalists lie in the marking material. What Production for sale does to information systems in an economy.>>600556
For the last few years Russia has been proposing new more restrictive space arms control treaties, that the US keeps ignoring. They might be doing this to force the US back on to the negotiation table. There is another angle to this as well, to date so called commercial space flight is a publicly subsidized meme industry but some of it might turn into a real industrial sector in the future, and based on that another interpretation is Russia deterring US capital from attempting to monopolize economic activity in space.
Prove me that they lie, it just sounds like biased wishful thinking. From what I saw the US military takes starship very seriously and Falcon 9 sent stuff up to 85% of its theoretical capability in weight. Predictions for Starship go up to 150t btw. Granted they didn't demonstrate orbital refueling yet but there's no major engineering barrier that prevent them to eventually succeed.>>600579
Even with those hypothesis it strikes me as a really stupid move, they took a gamble that could have very well destroyed the ISS and the Chinese space station, maybe killed people, while heavily polluting LEO. All this to demonstrate a technology everyone knew they had? Then again maybe it's a desperate move because Rocosmos is falling apart.
>>600605>Rocosmos is falling apart.
Roscosmos is cooperating with China, which is winning the new space race. USA only has conman to show for it's investments.
>>600605>From what I saw the US military takes starship very seriously
Oh no, this means they are totally top of the line and super efficient! Jesus christ, why do burgers by into this make-belief thinking?
>Falcon 9 sent stuff up to 85% of its theoretical capability in weight
No, it did not.
>>600605>Even with those hypothesis it strikes me as a really stupid move, they took a gamble that could have very well destroyed the ISS and the Chinese space station, maybe killed people, while heavily polluting LEO. All this to demonstrate a technology everyone knew they had?
I would have to know technical details to either corroborate or refute these claims.
>Then again maybe it's a desperate move because Rocosmos is falling apart.
Russia nationalized it's entire space industry between 2013 and 2018, that ought to have helped them become more cost effective.
Damn, stop dismissing evidence that displeases you and trying to make everything about Musk, it's childish. Believe it or not there's a team of very competent scientists, engineers and workers doing breakthroughs after breakthroughs in this company. >>600620
Here's an article that goes in technical depth about this eventhttps://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2021/11/russia-anti-satellite-missile-debris/
There's also the problem of sustainable use of LEO and how this kind of event can cause a cascadehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome
I think Rocosmos was in bad shape and the Russian state somehow fucked up its nationalization, making it even more a corner cutting, bloated and corrupted organization. Recently they grounded proton quite while, had a hole in soyuz (they accused astronauts of sabotage while it was an assembly fuck up), sent the ISS tumbling because of an error with the Nauka module. Now Putin cut its budget Rogozin is seething badly, a bastard probably being as autistic as Musk if you can believe it.
On RT they are saying that Russia did this as a warning shot against US and French plans to weaponize space. What is your spin, what are their motivations ? Because you seem to imply that they are doing this for funsies and don't care about the consequences. Which would be very uncharacteristic for Russia's usually very calibrated geopolitically relevant actions.
Maybe it's time to get in front of this problem and start inventing something for LEO cleanup.
The existing space trash collector systems are uninspiring though. The most economical way seems to be using a big solar incinerator. If enough sunlight is redirected and concentrated, small fragments can be vaporized and big fragments can be pushed into the atmosphere, by causing super-heated material on object surfaces to bleed off for a small amount of thrust.
>>600628>Believe it or not there's a team of very competent scientists, engineers and workers doing breakthroughs after breakthroughs in this company.
>>600670>US and French plans to weaponize space
Honestly I'm all for a total demilitarization of space and that includes not launching missiles in it so I find perplexing the motivation presented by Russia. Obviously what we absolutely don't want are space to earth weapon platforms with kinetic or nuclear strike abilities, but this is covered by the Outer Space Treaty. The french military space budget is 2 times less than Russia even after they ramped it up (partly because a Russian spy sat intercepted communications), they don't have real plans to put sat to sat weapons in orbit. The US? Probably, their payloads are quite secret but I'd wager on spy and com stuff rather than "weapons".
Maybe what the Russians are doing is warning their competitors they are ready to blow shit up, to the point of rendering LEO unusable, rather than loosing the strategic battle for space their current trajectory inevitably leads to since its space program is lagging behind. I don't see them mass producing sats and launching mega constellations anytime soon for example.
But I think it's a shitty gamble because I don't think it will deter anyone and it will probably make the current UN work on space legislation, which could prevent weaponization of space, more difficult, see https://www.un.org/disarmament/topics/outerspace-sg-report-outer-space-2021/
Wait so they want the polluted world that the ultra Rich are making worse for themselves and have humans live in space? This is like the opposite of the crazy shit I hear where the Ultra Rich want to go into space and leave everyone else to die.
I'm never coming back to a site like this, jesus christ there is no hope, all the bots come here and ruin any chance for meaningful discussion
Wait so they want the polluted world that the ultra Rich are making worse for themselves and have humans live in space?
They'll live in the thousands of still pristine miles while letting trash build up outside their communities in an out-of-sight out-of-mind scenario while forcing us to continue to produce them megayachts from space if we want the crypto-protected oxygen generators to continue running.
At some point I guess they realized that a ton of people are going to die going to space and didn't want to be the ones there doing it, but there's plenty of Earth that hasn't been wrecked yet for the select 1%.
At this point this is a pipe dream but maybe Bezos liked the Expanse which depicts a society where earth is the imperial core, mars its antagonist and the belters are the third world proletariat being exploited for cheap resource production and industry.
lol you guys are retarded the moon landing isn't fake
the moon is fake
but what about the tides, are these holograms???
Big wave machine underwater
magnetic dust from chemtrails. thats how obama caused hurrican belinda>>604570
>>525109>There is no FTL
Under CURRENT models. Remember that modern physics is not a fact, but just the best explanation we have. We might discover that the universe works in weird ways that can make FTL easy and a "duh! Should have been obvious" moment.
tfw too dumb to properly understand the tachyonic antitelephone scenario.
I realize this sounds similar to tachyons, but tachyons have negative mass, and so far it seems like we can't have negative mass either. If can you have negative energy/mass, FTL, wormholes and a hole bunch of other science fiction ideas become easy to make.
Unique IPs: 114