- #36
enorbet
- 481
- 85
It seems to me that the number one reason that the odds may be higher that we don't put a man on Mars by 2040 or even 2075 for that matter is public will to fund the research needed. Whenever I see words like "eaten up resources" especially when applied to the exploration of space, I can't help it, I bristle. If we look at any graphic of government spending it should be obvious the odds are those funds wouldn't have been "eaten up" in any better endeavor, but more likely to go to another useless tank or bomber that will rust away without ever having been used or to be shuffled off the board into some Classified area so no records need be kept
... and the public as a whole applauds this and uses the Moon Landings not as a positive high water mark, a thing of pride that incidentally had many offshoots and benefits into wildly varied fields but as some embarrassing reductio ad absurdum lever usually in the form of "If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we (insert mundane goal here) and whatever did happen to Tang?" :P
I suppose it is impossible to extrapolate but I'm betting the odds are we wouldn't even be having this discussion as we are, lacking the technology, had not the moon landing been undertaken. I also can't help but wonder what the world would look like if say Wilbur had been very convincing in arguing that glorified kites were eating up the proceeds from the bicycle shop.
I'm glad that private enterprise is now somewhat involved but I'm frustrated and angry that we dropped the ball after Apollo 17 because to me it reveals a misguided set of priorities and a lack of education and understanding of the value of research and exploration.
On a positive note I sincerely hope SpaceX recovers quickly and continues to strive for lofty goals. I really dislike being pushed into sounding like Alan Rickman doing Marvin from Hitchhiker's Guide to the Universe.
... and the public as a whole applauds this and uses the Moon Landings not as a positive high water mark, a thing of pride that incidentally had many offshoots and benefits into wildly varied fields but as some embarrassing reductio ad absurdum lever usually in the form of "If we can put a man on the moon, why can't we (insert mundane goal here) and whatever did happen to Tang?" :P
I suppose it is impossible to extrapolate but I'm betting the odds are we wouldn't even be having this discussion as we are, lacking the technology, had not the moon landing been undertaken. I also can't help but wonder what the world would look like if say Wilbur had been very convincing in arguing that glorified kites were eating up the proceeds from the bicycle shop.
I'm glad that private enterprise is now somewhat involved but I'm frustrated and angry that we dropped the ball after Apollo 17 because to me it reveals a misguided set of priorities and a lack of education and understanding of the value of research and exploration.
On a positive note I sincerely hope SpaceX recovers quickly and continues to strive for lofty goals. I really dislike being pushed into sounding like Alan Rickman doing Marvin from Hitchhiker's Guide to the Universe.