Neil deGrasse Tyson: How Space Exploration Can Make America Great Again

mookiemookie · 03-06-12, 05:20 PM

Quote:

No one wants to die, and no one wants to die poor. These are the two fundamental truths that transcend culture, they transcend politics, they transcend economic cycles. So, once you recognize that a healthy moving frontier in space stimulates the kind of mindset that fosters innovations in science and technology, then you'll realize that of course we need to go in space because that's just the kind of society you'll want to live in.

http://www.theatlantic.com/technolog...-again/253989/

Pretty inspiring interview. I think it's a shame that we're letting NASA wither on the vine. It's myopic and short sighted to try and save the comparatively minuscule amount of money that NASA funding entails and forego all of the innovation and advancement that goes along with space exploration.

soopaman2 · 03-06-12, 05:44 PM

I hold this man in the same Brilliance as Dr. Michio Kaku and Dr. Carl Sagan. I find Dr Kakus string theory very interesting.

True visionaries, who I wish had control on our space funding, rather than fat beaurocrats who used to be bankers and lawyers.

I love stuff like this. Science would have been my calling, had I not been so lazy as a youth.

Takeda Shingen · 03-06-12, 05:50 PM

If space exploration will bring back our heavy industry and manufacturing sectors, reverse the trend of economic globalization, re-invigorate the dollar and change our disasterous foreign policy, then I am all for space exploration. If, as I actually suspect, we are going for hundred-trillion dollar sightseeing tour of the cosmos, then I am not for space exploration. Much of Dr. deGrasse-Tyson's rhetoric smacks of doing this because it is 'neat'. I think that this money is better spent at home, regardless of the promise of a utopian Star Trek-style future. You can't eat a fiberoptic cable.

/neo-luddite mode

soopaman2 · 03-06-12, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

If space exploration will bring back our heavy industry and manufacturing sectors, reverse the trend of economic globalization, re-invigorate the dollar and change our disasterous foreign policy, then I am all for space exploration. If, as I actually suspect, we are going for hundred-trillion dollar sightseeing tour of the cosmos, then I am not for space exploration. Much of Dr. deGrasse-Tyson's rhetoric smacks of doing this because it is 'neat'. I think that this money is better spent at home, regardless of the promise of a utopian Star Trek-style future. You can't eat a fiberoptic cable.

/neo-luddite mode

No luddite. Simply a concerned American. No harm in being a partriot.

I am blinded by my interest in men and women like this. So yes, I am biased.

I feel we truly need to get back to science and industry to prosper.

The consumerism, and re-sell my house for double thing is not working.

Skybird · 03-06-12, 06:49 PM

Escapism...!

Anyhow, what remains to be the weakest part in fantasies about space exploration and longtime stays in space, is this: the human body.

To what degree roboits can make the need of human presence on location obsolete, remains to be seen. Some scientists claim it is the weakness of biologic tissues that makes them assume that the overwhelming majority of civilisations still living in the galaxy will be found to be robot-run civilisations, machiones, computers - or "their" "technical" equivalent of these human inventions.

Onkel Neal · 03-06-12, 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

http://www.theatlantic.com/technolog...-again/253989/

Pretty inspiring interview. I think it's a shame that we're letting NASA wither on the vine. It's myopic and short sighted to try and save the comparatively minuscule amount of money that NASA funding entails and forego all of the innovation and advancement that goes along with space exploration.

Great article. I agree 100%, Mookie, we should keep social programs funded but some focus should be shifted to national priorities like NASA. That program has given so much in research, knowledge, and glory.

Two areas I support will always be NASA and cancer research.

And, we should possibly encourage recipients of social spending to become organ donors. That way they could "give back". I'm one, I think everyone should be.

mookiemookie · 03-06-12, 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens

And, we should possibly encourage recipients of social spending to become organ donors. That way they could "give back". I'm one, I think everyone should be.

gimpy117 · 03-06-12, 08:13 PM

well, we need to really rethink our spending: starting with the 500 pound gorilla which is our enormous defense budget. We can then start to fund projects like this, revitalize our roads and balance our budget.

TLAM Strike · 03-06-12, 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens

And, we should possibly encourage recipients of social spending to become organ donors. That way they could "give back". I'm one, I think everyone should be.

At least donate your self to an actual science.
Medical science? You might as well donate your remains to Sociology... or Voodoo...

Quote:

Originally Posted by gimpy117

well, we need to really rethink our spending: starting with the 500 pound gorilla which is our enormous defense budget. We can then start to fund projects like this...

Personally I think we should combined the Defense Department and NASA. Imagine what NASA could do with the DoD's budget, and imagine what weapons the DoD would be able to put in to space...

... while we are at it why not throw in the Department of State as well; we can call it:

03-06-12, 10:52 PM

Why does it always have to be about "making America great" Why can't we work to further humanity.

Exploring space should be a Terran endeavor not a nationalistic endeavor.

Torplexed · 03-06-12, 11:22 PM

Just to help put things in perspective, the money spent on the last bank bailout was more than the entire 50 year budget of NASA.

Out of a budget dollar, how much do folks think NASA gets? Thirty cents? Twenty cents? Try again, less than half a penny....I think we should actually spend more. I'd hate to see where the US is in 10 years if we take away all of the science, exploration, and education NASA provides. However, they need to find a focus or set a goal. Something they've been sorely lacking since the Apollo program ended.

TLAM Strike · 03-07-12, 12:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rilder

Why does it always have to be about "making America great" Why can't we work to further humanity.

Exploring space should be a Terran endeavor not a nationalistic endeavor.

Because frankly, there are things you can do in/from space that I'm not comfortable in giving the sleazeball Dictators, Theocrats and Komrades that make up most of the UN access to.

Today the Non-militarization of space is enforced by good will. How long will that last when we start to invite the Grand Poo-bah of Stoneage-a-stan to work with our rockets?

03-07-12, 12:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

Because frankly, there are things you can do in/from space that I'm not comfortable in giving the sleazeball Dictators, Theocrats and Komrades that make up most of the UN access to.

Today the Non-militarization of space is enforced by good will. How long will that last when we start to invite the Grand Poo-bah of Stoneage-a-stan to work with our rockets?

Exactly, until humanity gets past this age of petty nationstates, where sleazeball dictators like the US Congress exist, we will never be able to truly unite and explore the solar system and beyond.

kraznyi_oktjabr · 03-07-12, 02:41 AM

Funding exploration is nice - a lot potential technology innovations there. What I don't think is that it would make America great as I don't see how you could keep work in USA. In case you decide to go on with this please remember to ask National People's Congress to send you Christmas card.

stew278 · 03-07-12, 05:53 AM

We need more scientists like Neil deGrasse Tyson. He does such a great job of explaining science in a way that is clear and interesting.

When Dr. Tyson was on the Daily Show a week or so ago he pointed out that the Apollo program only got the amount of funding it did because of the Cold War competition with the Soviets. We spent tons of money to beat them to the Moon, then when we figured out they weren't going, we stopped going.

He made the comment that if the Chinese decide to build a base on the Moon, we'd be back there in under two years.

I am a scientist and, not surprisingly, I'm all for spending more on space exploration. I also think basic research (what some people call "blue sky research") is vital to the advancement of science. Applied science and engineering is what converts discoveries into useful things for humanity, but you can't plan out a breakthrough discovery. Breakthroughs don't necessarily happen by accident, but they do happen by pushing the current boundaries of what is known. Oftentimes this requires doing research for the sake of doing research, as some people would put it. "Blue sky" research is what keeps science and technology growing. It's also what helps inspire young people to go into those fields.

At a time when the President (and others) regularly talk about how the US needs to encourage more children to go into science, math, and engineering, it seems foolish not to increase the funding of one of the highest profile, most advanced scientific organizations in the world (that being NASA).

Unfortunately, most of those making the decisions in the government don't have any appreciation for the value of science. They only see it as another metric to compare how we're supposedly superior to other countries. Until some other nation develops a space program that might be more advanced than the US's, they're not going to start sinking big money into NASA again.

03-06-12, 05:44 PM	#2
soopaman2 Der Alte Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: New Jersey, USA Posts: 3,316 Downloads: 61 Uploads: 0	I hold this man in the same Brilliance as Dr. Michio Kaku and Dr. Carl Sagan. I find Dr Kakus string theory very interesting. True visionaries, who I wish had control on our space funding, rather than fat beaurocrats who used to be bankers and lawyers. I love stuff like this. Science would have been my calling, had I not been so lazy as a youth. __________________ If Hitler invaded Hell I would make at least a favourable reference to the devil in the House of Commons. -Winston Churchill- The most fascinating man in the world.

03-06-12, 06:49 PM	#5
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,624 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	Escapism...! Anyhow, what remains to be the weakest part in fantasies about space exploration and longtime stays in space, is this: the human body. To what degree roboits can make the need of human presence on location obsolete, remains to be seen. Some scientists claim it is the weakness of biologic tissues that makes them assume that the overwhelming majority of civilisations still living in the galaxy will be found to be robot-run civilisations, machiones, computers - or "their" "technical" equivalent of these human inventions. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

03-06-12, 08:13 PM	#8
gimpy117 Ocean Warrior Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Kalamazoo, MI Posts: 3,243 Downloads: 108 Uploads: 0	well, we need to really rethink our spending: starting with the 500 pound gorilla which is our enormous defense budget. We can then start to fund projects like this, revitalize our roads and balance our budget. __________________ Member of the Subsim Zombie Army

03-07-12, 02:41 AM	#14
kraznyi_oktjabr Sea Lord Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Republiken Finland Posts: 1,803 Downloads: 8 Uploads: 0	Funding exploration is nice - a lot potential technology innovations there. What I don't think is that it would make America great as I don't see how you could keep work in USA. In case you decide to go on with this please remember to ask National People's Congress to send you Christmas card. __________________ You talk to God, you're religious. God talks to you, you're psychotic. - Dr. House

03-06-12, 05:50 PM	#3
Takeda Shingen Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2000 Posts: 8,643 Downloads: 19 Uploads: 0	If space exploration will bring back our heavy industry and manufacturing sectors, reverse the trend of economic globalization, re-invigorate the dollar and change our disasterous foreign policy, then I am all for space exploration. If, as I actually suspect, we are going for hundred-trillion dollar sightseeing tour of the cosmos, then I am not for space exploration. Much of Dr. deGrasse-Tyson's rhetoric smacks of doing this because it is 'neat'. I think that this money is better spent at home, regardless of the promise of a utopian Star Trek-style future. You can't eat a fiberoptic cable. /neo-luddite mode

03-06-12, 10:52 PM	#10
Rilder Stowaway Posts: n/a Downloads: Uploads:	Why does it always have to be about "making America great" Why can't we work to further humanity. Exploring space should be a Terran endeavor not a nationalistic endeavor.

03-06-12, 11:22 PM	#11
Torplexed Let's Sink Sumptin' ! Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 5,823 Downloads: 43 Uploads: 0	Just to help put things in perspective, the money spent on the last bank bailout was more than the entire 50 year budget of NASA. Out of a budget dollar, how much do folks think NASA gets? Thirty cents? Twenty cents? Try again, less than half a penny....I think we should actually spend more. I'd hate to see where the US is in 10 years if we take away all of the science, exploration, and education NASA provides. However, they need to find a focus or set a goal. Something they've been sorely lacking since the Apollo program ended.

03-07-12, 05:53 AM	#15
stew278 Loader Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Akron, OH Posts: 81 Downloads: 55 Uploads: 0	We need more scientists like Neil deGrasse Tyson. He does such a great job of explaining science in a way that is clear and interesting. When Dr. Tyson was on the Daily Show a week or so ago he pointed out that the Apollo program only got the amount of funding it did because of the Cold War competition with the Soviets. We spent tons of money to beat them to the Moon, then when we figured out they weren't going, we stopped going. He made the comment that if the Chinese decide to build a base on the Moon, we'd be back there in under two years. I am a scientist and, not surprisingly, I'm all for spending more on space exploration. I also think basic research (what some people call "blue sky research") is vital to the advancement of science. Applied science and engineering is what converts discoveries into useful things for humanity, but you can't plan out a breakthrough discovery. Breakthroughs don't necessarily happen by accident, but they do happen by pushing the current boundaries of what is known. Oftentimes this requires doing research for the sake of doing research, as some people would put it. "Blue sky" research is what keeps science and technology growing. It's also what helps inspire young people to go into those fields. At a time when the President (and others) regularly talk about how the US needs to encourage more children to go into science, math, and engineering, it seems foolish not to increase the funding of one of the highest profile, most advanced scientific organizations in the world (that being NASA). Unfortunately, most of those making the decisions in the government don't have any appreciation for the value of science. They only see it as another metric to compare how we're supposedly superior to other countries. Until some other nation develops a space program that might be more advanced than the US's, they're not going to start sinking big money into NASA again.